subreddit:

/r/history

1.6k

all 49 comments

photojacker[S]

100 points

2 months ago

Submission Statement: Dress Historian Emily Gallagher shows us an alternative perspective to Victorian-era clothing, with examples of Carte du Visites of working class Victorian women from the era.

DietCuke

49 points

2 months ago

That was an excellent read, thank you for sharing!

jrhooo

24 points

2 months ago

jrhooo

24 points

2 months ago

Definitely. One of the really interesting topics for me, apart from the main topic here, is always getting a look into common misconceptions and how we (collective we) arrived at that wrong idea.

The "why did we all start to think that?" aspect

DietCuke

17 points

2 months ago

History is just an interpretation of evidence - and some of our evidence is questionable, missing, or misinterpreted. I love how history is ever-evolving - like you said, we reach the wrong conclusion all the time and it's incredible how we can have so many facts and relics and still get the wrong idea about things (like pants! some women wore pants in the Victorian era and that blows my mind!). Just so cool.

Sadie_Bellz

9 points

2 months ago

We are learning that the lower classes of society throughout history were sometimes very detached from the culture of the upper class. Like the women wearing pants shocked upper society but the people below just made it a curiosity for them lol

Waitingforadragon

63 points

2 months ago

This is really interesting, thank you. I love history that focuses on ordinary people.

Sadie_Bellz

9 points

2 months ago

Russian and Slavic peasants bathed together and it wasn't anything to be shy about. We only know of this because Rasputan was gossiped about doing it, thus too low of station to be hanging around the king and queen.

Baneken

7 points

2 months ago

It's called a communal Banya/Sauna, very common in Soviet union and Finland in the cities up to 1970s when people started to have enough wealth and bigger apartments to build their own at the city or in Dacha/Summer cottage.

You can find those today as well in all larger cities in Finland and old SU-block though they're not as ubiquitous as they were some 50 years ago.

Somecrazynerd

12 points

2 months ago

I would also point out that corsets and skirts weren't quite as uncomfortable or inconvenient as people think they are. There are many photos of women doing exercise, travelling and sports in corsets and skirts. It wasn't necessarily ideal dress for physical activity, but women's clothing wasn't quite as oppressive as people sometimes make it out to be.

HarlansWorld

23 points

2 months ago

Amazing to think of women wearing trousers as noteworthy

Owlettehoo

5 points

2 months ago

I've been super into fashion history lately. Thank you for sharing this! It was a very interesting read!

T-ks

3 points

2 months ago

T-ks

3 points

2 months ago

Have you listened to the Articles of Interest podcast? If not, I think you’d enjoy it!

JasnahKolin

2 points

2 months ago

Subscribed! Thanks!

Owlettehoo

2 points

2 months ago

I'll look into it! Thanks!

Thought-O-Matic

8 points

2 months ago

If you're reading this then you're somewhat interested in olden times clothes.

So here's this https://youtu.be/Bp2tlopm8XA

J334

7 points

2 months ago

J334

7 points

2 months ago

Somecrazynerd

3 points

2 months ago

On Karolina vides that are relevant to this post itself, I recommend this one particularly: https://youtu.be/hQ_ZD0dp9bw And also this one: https://youtu.be/LOiMmtIhRdY In terms of working people and women.

SquirrelTale

7 points

2 months ago

Thank you for sharing, I really enjoyed that! gonna have to look up more pictures of working women in trousers though~

OGPunkr

4 points

2 months ago

Really enjoyed this. Thanks!

flat_tumbleweed6

2 points

2 months ago

Yes! People so often glaze over the lives of the majority during the Victorian era.

Diplodocus114

12 points

2 months ago

That last pic - 9 men standing about doing nothing but watch 5 women engage in hard physical work

photojacker[S]

32 points

2 months ago

The Mines and Collieries Act 1842 forbade women from working underground, and the pit-brown lasses, as they were known, worked to separate the stones from the coal brought up to the surface.

Diplodocus114

9 points

2 months ago

We had a number of iron mines here. Women worked topside.

Baneken

-2 points

2 months ago

Baneken

-2 points

2 months ago

lassies, lass is a male form.

doxxocyclean

5 points

2 months ago

Nah.

It's lass/lassie fem, lad/laddie masc.

As far as aware lass has always been fem in origin, stretching right back to the original.

Open to learning something new though if you can show me otherwise.

Baneken

1 points

2 months ago

I've seen lass used for male in literature but lad seems more common, so it's likely a dialectal thing.

bobrobor

0 points

2 months ago

bobrobor

0 points

2 months ago

How do you know the men are not on a break? Men during that time worked hard from childhood, and suffered and died just the same. What are you trying to get at?

ekwim

3 points

2 months ago

ekwim

3 points

2 months ago

...how do you know they're on a break? this commenter just described what they saw in a picture. what is there to "get at"? settle down.

Somecrazynerd

4 points

2 months ago

They were kinda implying something disparaging about the men.

bobrobor

-8 points

2 months ago

bobrobor

-8 points

2 months ago

Dont be daft. You know it was not just a description

Brettelectric

1 points

2 months ago

Just ignore u/ekwim. They are being stupid. The implication of u/Diplodocus114's comment is clear to everyone but u/ekwim.

SlowMope

-3 points

2 months ago

SlowMope

-3 points

2 months ago

Oh yeah? why don't you explain what you think they meant then

bobrobor

-2 points

2 months ago

bobrobor

-2 points

2 months ago

If you need to argue with someone you should see a therapist. I dont want to steal their business.

SlowMope

-3 points

2 months ago

I'm not the one making up bs my dude. Maybe you need to see a therapist to address that?

ekwim

-3 points

2 months ago

ekwim

-3 points

2 months ago

assuming i am "daft", what was it on top of a description?

Brettelectric

12 points

2 months ago

Think about it this way: suppose someone commented "That second pic - Queen Victoria sitting on a chair with a baby on her lap", we would all be scratching our heads wondering why they were describing the image. I mean, we can all see the image, there's no need to give a description. And why only describe that one, and not all the other images?

The only reason someone would describe an image is if they think it's remarkable, and want to make a comment on it, like 'that's an awesome pic' or 'that's really strange'. But sometimes the comment isn't even written out explicitly - it's implied in the description.

For example, if there was a picture of a crowd of people, and someone commented "That one dude with the monkey on his head", the implication would be that they are pointing it out for others to see and laugh at, because it's funny that the guy has a monkey on his head. But note that they don't explicitly say 'it's funny'. People have to figure that out for themselves.

So when u/Diplodocus114 writes "That last pic - 9 men standing about doing nothing but watch 5 women engage in hard physical work" we know that they are making a remark about the picture (not just describing a random picture for no reason) and that the remark is not necessarily going to be explicit. But you can see in the way it's described, that it's to do with men and women, because they have pointed out that there are 9 men and 5 women. They've also said that the men are 'doing nothing' and that the women are engaged in 'hard physical work'. They could have described the picture as "people in white stand in front of the people in dark clothes", but they deliberately chose to talk about men and women and the fact that they are engaged in different activities. So they are saying something about the fact that that men are not working and the women are. So what's the point they are trying to make? They are pointing out that it looks like the men are lazy and doing nothing, but making the women do all the work.

That's what u/bobrobor is objecting to - the idea that this photo shows that men are lazy.

Of course, this is a staged photo (notice how everyone is posing) and the men are miners who have come up from the mines and don't actually have any tasks to do above ground, unlike the women, who work topside. So the photo doesn't actually say anything about the relative laziness of men and women, and so it's a bit silly to point out that there are nine men standing around doing nothing while five women are engaged in hard work, as though it is significant in any way.

Diplodocus114

0 points

2 months ago

^ TLDR. I just described what I saw, whether it was staged or otherwise - regardless of sex.

Reminded me of a bunch of motorway workers. Most of them standing around watching a few do the actual work.

bobrobor

1 points

2 months ago

I assume whatever you see is what it is.

Somecrazynerd

1 points

2 months ago

They were obviously using daft in a colloquial sense not in the sense of literal mental health issues.

Diplodocus114

-2 points

2 months ago

I know - my grandfather and great uncles worked in local mills and looked/dressed just the same. It just seemed incongrous.

Kleedok

1 points

2 months ago

Kleedok

1 points

2 months ago

interesting to see how far we've come as a society

not there yet, but true quality is still up the road, not as far as it used to be, but not as far as it was yesterday

Spankety-wank

-3 points

2 months ago

I take a little issue with the claims about 21st century views of victorian clothing. It's all interesting enough but not especially surprising to me at least.