Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Asia Booth Clarke

Those that know me know that, while I love studying the actual American Civil War, my main fascination is in the Lincoln Assassination and Conspiracy. That being said, I'm always on the lookout for new information, whether it be photographs or newspaper accounts, that I've never seen before.

Last night, I stumbled on this photo of Asia Booth Clarke, John Wilkes Booth's older sister.

 
There is a sketch of her full body as seen here.
 
 
However, that picture I have not yet found.
 
I only photo I have seen of Asia that is similar to the first is this one.
 
 
The photo is a vignette, meaning it is cropped to show only her face. If you look closely, you'll notice that her hat and dress are the same. Same buttons, same collar, same flower looking thing on the collar. However, and this might just be me, but her facial expression looks different when you compare the two images. She looks more serious in the second, cropped version. The most likely explanation is that these are two different images taken during the same photography session. If you look at images of her young brother, John Wilkes, you will find quite a few different images from the same set.
 
Anyway, I was excited to find a new, very cool image and wanted to share it with you all. Tomorrow I visit Edwin Booth's Players Club to conduct some research. Maybe I'll find the photo of Asia that the sketch was taken from on display there. Wish me luck :)
 
Until next time.
 
XOXO, Kate 

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

The Sun: Public Enemy #1

I just noticed that I don't have a post on Civil War fashion yet. So while home from class due to snow, I decided to compare clothing for women in the Civil War and clothing for women now.

In all seriousness, I have no idea how women wore all those layers without fainting or suffering from heatstroke every single day. Women probably lived for the winter months when the air was blanketed with chill. Summer, when it could reach about 100 degrees, must have been brutal. And unlike modern women who change their wardrobe with every season, female clothing in the Civil War didn't alter much from spring through winter.

The sun must have been the worst enemy of all women. I know that parasols were supposed to keep the sun off and fans provided some (SOME) bursts of cool air. However, I have personally used both options and can tell you that parasols will not block every single ray of sun, fans will make you hotter once your wrist is sore and you stop moving. It's simple math even I can understand. Layers + more layers = trapped body heat.

Now, I know there are many women who wish to go back in time just to wear all the amazing clothing. And I will admit that I am one of them (although I reenact as a soldier). But while I love hoops, bustles, and all the dresses Rose wears in Titanic, I wish I could have them all in my closet so I could wear them in front of my air conditioner.

So, without further ado, here is my "Clothing Comparison." It will make you glad you don't live in the Civil War era in August.

2014:

Wore: Short (mid-thigh), one shoulder dress from Mandee and sandals.

Time to dress: 3 1/2 minutes

Verdict: Almost died in summer heat.


1865:

Stockings: Before the time of ankle socks or going sockless in flats, almost every woman wore stockings. The lone exception was being too poor to afford them. Stockings were usually made of silk or cotton depending on the wealth and status of the woman wearing them. Black stockings were commonly used for everyday and white stockings were usually found at balls. Yes, there were specific colors for specific occasions.

Chemise: The chemise resembled a plain nightgown that was short sleeved and about mid-calf length. It was the basic undergarment that served the purpose of barrier between body oils and the corset. Most were made of cotton and white in color. Because this garment got the dirtiest, it was washed the most often. Laundry was horrible on fabrics since there were no special detergents or fabric softeners. Colors would bleed off the fabric and white didn't show the wear caused by washing.

Drawers: Think of this as the cousin to modern day underwear. However, underwear in 1865 is not the same as underwear in 2014 that you buy at Victoria's Secret. Drawers were tied around the waist with a drawstring and fit like baggy pants. Remember those gaucho pants all the girls used to wear? (I bought a pair after the trend fell by the wayside so I wouldn't be in the same pants as every other girl at my school). Anyway, the difference between drawers and modern underwear was that drawers were crotchless. (Although I think they still sell similar styles at all the hooker shops in Hollywood). The reason for this design feature was that women did not remove clothing to go to the bathroom. They would just lift their dress. These were also made of white cotton. Some might have had some lace around the hem of the legs.

Shoes: Yes, shoes had to go on early since, once corsets and hoops were on, a woman could not bend over enough to put on shoes. You could try but it would be really uncomfortable. Ladies shoes consisted of either boots or slippers depending on the occasion. Boots were worn during the day and fastened with buttons on the side. Lace up boots came later. (Take notes, Robert Redford. Robin Wright's shoes in The Conspirator were totally not authentic). Boots had little to no heel so there would be less strain on the ankles and back when walking. Unless you were going somewhere by carriage, train, or horseback, you were walking. Slippers resembled modern day ballet shoes and were worn to formal events as they were easy to dance in. They were very delicate and were not made to be worn everyday. But because it was not proper for women to lift the hems of their dresses very high, shoes were rarely seen.

Corset: When I say corset, I do not mean the Barbie pink one from Frederick's of Hollywood. Those are not constructed in the same way because they are meant to look pretty, not to achieve a certain body shape. A corset was one of the most important structural foundation pieces that a woman would wear because it helped achieve that famous silhouette you see in Civil War era pictures. Most women wore corsets on a daily basis.

Corset Cover: Because it was difficult to wash a corset, the corset cover did what the title states. It prevented color or dirt from rubbing off onto the corset. There were many different variations. For example, some buttoned in the front and some bore a resemblance to the modern tank top.

Petticoats: There were a few layers of petticoats. First was the under petticoat. It was worn over the chemise and drawers and under the hoop. This was useful for keeping warm during the winter. Another petticoat was worn over the hoops. Then there were the over petticoats. One or two over petticoats would be worn on top of the hoop so that the boning and lines wouldn't show. These too were petticoats made of white cotton. However, quilted petticoats made for better warmth in the winter.

Hoops: The staple of the Civil War era look. Most hoops were not a perfect round shape. There was a bigger part in the back to give dresses the appearance of having trains. Yes, hoops could be rather large. However, most were widened due to the number of petticoats underneath them. And despite the myth that only rich women could afford hoops, most women owned at least one.

Corded Petticoat: This is not another layer. However, it can be interchanged with the hoop. Working women who didn't have servants or volunteered in camps could not wear hoops. They were a serious fire hazard and hard to work in. Corded petticoats were stiffer in order to give dresses some shape but were not a danger around open fires or in the chaos of base hospitals. However, corded petticoats were not worn in the presence of company. If someone were to visit, a hoop would be worn. Think of it as the modern version of those "working sweats."

Dress: Finally. The dress. Most came in two pieces, bodice and skirt, because it was easier to put on two pieces and not one giant piece. Like modern women, Civil War era women had dresses for different occasions. A work dress would just be worn around the home since no one wanted to stain their best gown. Nicer dresses would be worn out. The fanciest garments would be shown at formal events. Ball gowns usually laced up in the back and required some assistance to put on. Yes, there was some assembly required. Day dresses tended to button in the front. And "Civil War era" didn't mean women had no fashion sense. Just like today, there were trends, magazines, and an overwhelming sense of style. Because the basic shape of dresses did not differ from woman to woman, decorations, embellishments, and fabrics choices all showcased personal style.

Outerwear: No matter the season, women always wore a hat or bonnet, a pair of gloves, and some kind of shawl or cloak. The season didn't matter. Being modest in public did. Summer shawls were usually thinner and cloaks in the winter were heavier to keep out the cold. Fur was also a popular winter choice and many women owned at least one piece that featured it. Remember that there was no PETA.

Time to dress: Depending on what you were wearing, it could take maybe 15 to 20 minutes to dress.

Verdict: I'll go with WTF for 300, Alex. Seriously, how woman survived wearing all these clothes is beyond me. While soldier uniforms aren't much cooler, they are not as restrictive and I've learned a few tricks for keeping cool. So even though I love Civil War era clothing for women, I also love my air conditioner to keep me from passing out :)






Until next time.

XOXO, Kate

Thursday, January 9, 2014

You Are Looking for Who?

While looking on eBay to see if there were listed items connected to the Lincoln Conspiracy, I found someone selling an authentic John Wilkes Booth Wanted Poster. For those familiar with the TV show Pawn Stars, you may remember the episode it was featured on.

However, there were a few different versions of the poster printed in 1865. The one being sold now does not have the pictures of Booth, John Surratt, and David Herold at the top. I'm not sure if any of those still exist, but that's the one I would purchase.

Viewing the poster, I noticed that the description of Herold was changed once again. Although the descriptions of Booth and Surratt remained almost unchanged, the one for Herold was rewritten for each new printing. (His name was also spelled wrong. It was David E. Herold but written as David C. Harold). I started searching around for images of the different posters and comparing each description. (Yes, that is what I do for fun).

I realized that without the photos that were added to later posters, the descriptions given of the men might not have been as helpful as the Union thought.

When I was younger, I used to love watching the show Cyberchase on PBS Kids. In one of the episodes, the three main characters go looking for the main villain. They were in this monster town and asked if anyone had seen a man with green skin wearing a cape. They ended up finding Dracula due to using general words to describe the person they were searching for. In a similar sense, many men were, and continue to be, mistaken for Booth because they have the same characteristics as those listed on the wanted poster.

Here are a few different versions of the John Wilkes Booth Wanted Poster.

 
 
 
The first was one of the original posters. It offered a $30,000 reward and was designed by Lafayette Baker, not Secretary of War Stanton. This version gave a longer description of Booth and one of the still unknown Lewis Powell. He had attacked Secretary of State Seward. The other two gave the same description of Booth and listed the full $100,000 reward. Also note that most of the description space went to John Surratt and not Booth. The last one featured pictures.
 
However, there was a problem with the earlier posters because they used descriptions alone. This was one of the reasons innocent men were lynched after being mistaken for Booth. Unless someone had met Booth, it was hard to locate him based only on those descriptions. Yes, Booth was a famous actor. That didn't mean everyone in the country knew him or had seen him. Furthermore, lots of men had the same build or hair color as Booth.

Here is the description of Booth on the Stanton designed poster without the pictures. The one written by Baker was not around for very long since, among other issues, it failed to produce leads.

"Booth is five feet 7 or 8 inches high, slender build, high forehead, black hair, black eyes, and wears a heavy black moustache."
 

That is not John Wilkes Booth. However, Herman Mudgett (alias H.H. Holmes) was five feet eight inches tall, had a slender build, wavy black hair, and a black moustache.
 

 
Samuel Arnold was one of Booth's co-conspirators. Notice that he had almost all the same characteristics as his boss. 
 
 
The seller of this image claims it's of Booth. It's not. However, this man also had similar features to the actor turned assassin.

 
And depending on how heavy a person thought a heavy moustache was, the description even described Robert Todd Lincoln, President Lincoln's eldest son.
 
Sometimes descriptions can be too general. In the case of Booth, they were. It wasn't until patrolling Union soldiers started showing photos of Booth that they got answers. In the end, it was Booth's picture, not his written description, that helped lead the 16th New York Cavalry to him. Maybe that's why they say a picture is worth a thousand words.
 
Until next time.

XOXO, Kate