19th Century Shirt for Bellied Man

[Greger]

That book, of what I read, seems a bit too homespun. The way he wrote is like there was no industries at all. Even Jesus learned an industry about 2,000 years earlier. Practically all those people are European decent, which had many guilds. No doubt not everyone had a skill or trade or other education. But still, there were people moving to America with these, which would surely have influence, not to mention the ones already living here. Read part of a book where small boys were taken to old tailors to live there and learn, spending hours sitting on the bench learning how to make clothes in America. This is before the sewing machine. While sure, lots of women made clothes, preserved food and so on. Preserving food, the knowledge for that came from the old country. Out west in rural areas you couldn't run to the store, so self sufficient was very important. And then there were all the laws, which is why Americans rebelled, anyway.

Another matter. Tailoring and business are two entirely different subjects. The purpose of business is bringing in the money. The purpose of tailoring has nothing to do with business. And yet the two need each other. Bills need to be paid. And, who can sew for a living for free? House styles help keep businesses afloat. I would hardly call house styles tailoring. But they are good for dumb customer's and keep the business out of the red. Once heard (maybe youtube) or read on Henery Poole website, that they didn't have a house style. Last time I was looking there they said they do. Think it was Henery Poole, but at one time this company had three shops. One on SR for the wealthy. Another, somewhere else for the middle class. The other place was for young people. How do you have a house style for young people?

[jeffrey]

Hi Greger,
Will you be willing to show all of us on the forum some examples of your fine tailoring art?

[jruley]

That book, of what I read, seems a bit too homespun. The way he wrote is like there was no industries at all.

You need to read more than the first few pages, or the first paragraph of an online review. 

The chapter titles give an idea of the scope of the book:

- A Homespun Ideology (I think this is where you stopped reading)

- A Clothing Business

- The Re-Invention of Tailoring (many on this board would find this interesting)

- Dressing for Work

- Ready-Made Labor

- The Seamstress

- A Fashion Regime

Getting back to the original subject (period shirts).  Before he took up gun making, Oliver Winchester owned a shirt factory in Connecticut.  Here are some statistics (quoted from a post on a reenactment discussion forum):

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-5541.html

Some additional information on Winchester and his shirt factory:

In 1860, Winchester stated that his factory in New Haven, Connecticut, produced 800 dozen shirts/week. These shirts were machine-sewn on 400 sewing machines and operators. Prior to the introduction of the sewing machine, it would take 2,000 hand sewers to produce the same amount of work. [In 1861, a study done by the Wheeler and Wilson company compared the production of four hand sewers and four sewing machine operators. The average hand sewing time for a gentleman's shirt was 14 hours, 26 minutes; for a machine sewn shirt 1 hour, 16 minutes.] Winchester stated that the wage for hand sewing at that time was $3/week; this equates to labor costs of $6000/week. The 400 machine operators received $4/week, making the labor costs $1600/week. The average cost of a factory sewing machine was $150/each. The sewing machines paid for themselves in less than 14 weeks, increased the operators pay by $1/week, and drastically reduced manufacturing costs and retail prices. Source: "Argument of [George] Gifford in Favor of the Howe Application for Extension of Patent", U.S. Patent Office, 1860.

This factory made 9,600 shirts per week using sewing machines.  Average sewing time per shirt was 1hr and 16 min.  Just how much artistic license and innovative freedom do you think the women running these sewing machines had?  For this kind of mass production the fabric was probably cut several layers at a time using band knives, with layouts carefully controlled to minimize wastage.  Just like a modern factory except the only computers were between the cutter's ears.  In an environment like this the operator's task is to put the seam exactly where it belongs.  If the operator can't cut it there are hundreds more immigrant women waiting for openings in these relatively well-paid jobs.

This is the reality of mid-19th century clothing production.  And it's just one factory in one city.  Do you really think the "little village tailor" happily handsewing under the big shade tree is any competition that Winchester needs to worry about?

And if you are dressing someone to represent a "plain, everyday, and common" mid-19th century citizen (which is what the guy who ordered the pattern wants) -- shouldn't he be in something like a Winchester shirt, and not some 19th century inspired "folk art" piece?

[Greger]

This has to be a type error. "The average hand sewing time for a gentleman's shirt was 14 hours, 26 minutes; for a machine sewn shirt 1 hour, 16 minutes." Instead of "14 hours, 26 minutes" it would be 4 hours, 26 minutes.

"Just how much artistic license and innovative freedom do you think the women running these sewing machines had?"
Women tailors?  These women are Seamstress. Besides, you must have overlooked what I said about Hostek demanding that tailors make his way. Which means, tailors are taught how to work for other tailors. Then there is also the fact, if working for yourself, you have to make what the customer is paying for, or you won't get paid. Since many captains of industry go to custom tailors these tailors are not making folk art. They are making industrial business art. If you are making clothes for teenagers they want a different kind of art. After work clothes, other kinds of art. Etc.

Throughout the centuries there have been many squabbles. Business men, some are very flamboyant. Others just stick with what works. Some really don't understand business at all. And they each have their own personality. There are honest to dishonest business men. The list of reasons goes on and on for squabbles and new sells attempts. He seems to be a fast moving writer.

[Greger]

This is what somebody else posted in another forum from California. Though others here would like to see it.

Here's a pure linen late 18th/early 19th century tailcoat I saw at the museum a while back. Talk about unstructured! It has no lining or padding of any kind. It's very different from a modern jacket.

[Henry Hall]

Is it not just a test-coat? Or probably for some plantation owner.

[jruley]

Is it not just a test-coat? Or probably for some plantation owner.

Actually no.  Unlined coats of all styles (dress, frock, and sack) were popular North and South for summer wear.  They were often white or off-white so they could be laundered like shirts, although colored examples exist.

That coat appears to have a waist seam, which would date it post-1820.

[jruley]

Women tailors?  These women are Seamstress.

That's the point.  Shirts at this time were made by seamstresses, not tailors.  So there is no innovation and no artistic freedom at this level.  The shirts are made according to pattern in standard sizes in large quantities.

This eventually applied to unstructured coats like the one you posted as well.  Although shaped, they were not individually fitted; and the construction techniques are identical to shirts, with felled seams and no ironwork or padding stitches required. 

[Henry Hall]

It also seems to have an actual pocket under that back flap.

[Greger]

This is interesting, and two or three links.
http://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2016/01/how-many-hand-sewn-stitches-in-18thc.html
There is a lot more here at this website that is interesting.

Tailors generally are not interested in making shirts. They are basically interested in making coats that have pad stitching. Some will say, if not all tailors, that pants and vest are not tailored garments at all. A few tailors made shirts.

[Schneiderfrei]

That there, in that blog, is my boatman's shirt !

[jruley]

This is interesting, and two or three links.
http://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2016/01/how-many-hand-sewn-stitches-in-18thc.html
There is a lot more here at this website that is interesting.

Yes.  Notice they calculated the time required to hand stitch a "plain shirt" at 11-1/2 hours.  So maybe the 14 hr 26 min in post #47 is right after all.

Tailors generally are not interested in making shirts.

So why did you go off in #37 about the shirt system being nothing but a "bunch of hints", not to be taken seriously?  Why did you say the shirt maker is supposed to create his own ideas?  Don't you realize these were mass-produced garments, made in a set pattern?  If tailors are not interested in making shirts, why did you bring tailoring into the discussion at all?

[Henry Hall]

These images of a late 18thc shirt (acquired from those links) show excellent finishing. Enclosed seams and entirely hand-sewn. Puts the newer 'hand-sewn' examples to shame really.














The rest are here

[Greger]

Tailors generally are not interested in making shirts.

So why did you go off in #37 about the shirt system being nothing but a "bunch of hints", not to be taken seriously?  Why did you say the shirt maker is supposed to create his own ideas?  Don't you realize these were mass-produced garments, made in a set pattern?  If tailors are not interested in making shirts, why did you bring tailoring into the discussion at all?

The book I posted is 40-50 years after square-rectangular shirts went out of fashion. When you look at the many changes in men's garments over a couple thousand years how could the shirt not change for 500-1,000 years? Were shirt makers brain dead? Or, just a different mind set? Why the beginning of curved armholes? Did tailors step in and reinvent the shirt? There clearly are custom shirt makers, so not mass-produced with these. The book is bunch of hints. The modern day shirts are more complicated than the square-rectangular shirts.

The shirring in the link Henry Hall posted is very much like how my grandad sewed his shirt sleeves into the armholes all the way around. I'd like to see a button hole. An easier way to sew a shirring is stick the needle in and with the other thumb, or index finger, push one shirring into place, then bring the point up. The shirring is done without the needle ever slowing down. The moment the very tip of the needle pokes up through you grab it and pull it out. Short lengths of thread certainly speeds up the process. Also, pre-threaded needles helps keep the rythum.

[jruley]

The book I posted is 40-50 years after square-rectangular shirts went out of fashion.

What makes you think mass production was limited to sqaure and rectangle shirts?  Indeed shaped shirts are easier to mass produce, just like today, because there is less gathering and shirring.

Here is Oliver Winchester's patent from 1848, (from the same source I took the factory statistics) which makes clear that curved seams were introduced before that date.  The shirts he was mass producing in 1860 were clearly not "square and rectangle" style:

I thought that I had a copy of the patent, and it dates much earlier than you thought. Feb. 1, 1848, #5,491 (sic - actually #5,421). Here are the specs

Be it know that, I, O. F. WINCHESTER, of the city of Baltimore and State of Maryland, have invented new and useful Improvements in the Method of Cutting and Fitting Shirts, and that the following is a full, clear, and exact description of the principle or character which distinguishes them from all other things before known and of the manner of making, constructing, and using the same, reference being had to the accompanying drawings, making part of this specification, in which---

#1 shows a general outline of the neck and shoulders of a man and the different modes practiced in fitting a shirt: #2 is a representation of the French yoke; #3 is the improved style.

The methods of cutting shirts heretofore and at present practiced is accompanied with a disadvantage which all have more or less experienced, viz: that of pulling on the neck band. Attempts to remedy this evil have been made; by one plan a gusset is let in on the shoulder and next to the neck band, the shirt then forming a straight line from the gusset to the tip of the shoulder, the effect of which is to hang the whole weight of the shirt aided by the tension of the suspender, to the neck band. By another method, called the French yoke, the seam is made diagonal from the tip of the shoulder to the neck band which only remedies the evil in part, but this does not give the proper support, for the shoulder being a hollow curve. When the suspender is applied it bears on the hollow part of the shoulder and of necessity pulls down the shirt and draws on the neck band.

The object of my invention is to remedy this evil, and this I effect by making a curved seam on the top of and corresponding with the curve of that part of the shoulder which extends from the arm to the neck so that the shirt shall be supported on the shoulder and thereby avoid a pull on the neck band. The bosom is also curved out on each side which aids the effect produced by so cutting the shirt and also serves to make it fit better.

The ordinary mode of cutting shirts is shown in the diagram #1 by red dotted lines (a,a); in this method it will be seen there is no attempt made to fit the form, but the whole of the upper part of the shirt is suspended by the collar which is buttoned around the small part of the neck tight enough for that purpose; this produces a very unpleasant sensation and the shirt bosom is always, out of place on account of the great quantity of loose cloth upon the shoulder which allows it to drag down.

The French yoke is shown in #1 by the black dotted lines (b,b) and it is likewise represented in #2 This plan it will be perceived only partically removes the difficulty - it approaches somewhat nearer the form but still the two points of support are the tight collar around the small part of the neck and the point of the shoulder (c) at the end of the yoke the intermediate space is above the shoulder and when the suspender is brought over it is obvious a drag is produced upoin the collar downward producing a similar sensation to the other.

To obviate all these objections I cut the neck of the shirt of the yoke which I prefer to use with a curve on the shoulder making a seam on the center of the shoulder as is shown in diagram #3, and by the black lines #1, (d) by which it will be seen that I cut the parts so as to bring all the pressure upon the shoulder at the points (e) easing choke, but still fitting the neck sufficiently well. By this mode I suspend the shirt upon the shoulder and preserve a perfect fit around the neck and upper part of the bosom: to fit more perfectly I cut away the bosom on each side where it joins the yoke in the curved line (f,f) this draws back the edges of the bosom and fits it to the body.

What I claim as my invention and desire to secure by Letters Patent is_
Constructing the neck of a shirt or yoke in the manner described by having a curved seam on the top of the shoulder, substantially in the manner and for the purpose set forth."

Back to the book you posted.  Why would a shirt cutter working in 1893 bother re-inventing the wheel if patterns for the styles of shirts desired were right there in the book?  Just take a table of standard proportions, plug in the numbers for the sizes you want and you're good to go.  Why would anyone publish such books if people weren't buying and using them?

This is not to say that a master cutter wouldn't make changes to suit his particular needs (or more importantly, save material).  But surely apprentices and journeymen learned to cut from just such books.  It's a textbook, not just a "bunch of hints".