It is disappointing but not surprising to discover the lack of
descriptions pertaining to early bathing costume. This simple gown was
utilitarian, not decorative. Thus it deserved little attention in the
eyes of the contemporary bather.
No doubt it is due to the importance of the original owner that the
following example has survived. In the collection of family memorabilia
at Mount Vernon, there is a chemise-type bathing gown that is said to
have been worn by Martha Washington (fig. 6). According to a note
attached to the gown signed by Eliza Parke Custis, and addressed to
"Rosebud," a pet name for her daughter, Martha Washington probably wore
this bathing gown at Berkeley Springs as she accompanied her daughter,
Patsy, in her bath.
This blue and white checked linen gown has several construction details
similar to the chemise, a woman's undergarment, of the period. The
sleeves were gathered near the shoulder and were set in with a gusset at
the armpit. The skirt of the gown was made wider at the bottom by the
usual method of adding four long triangular pieces--one to each side of
both the front and back. The sleeves, however, are not as full as those
one would expect to find on a chemise of the period. Also a chemise
would probably have had a much wider neckline gathered by a draw-string
threaded through a band at the neck edge. Instead, this bathing gown has
a moderately low neckline made wider by a slit down the front which is
closed by two linen tapes sewn to either edge of the front. Although
less fabric was used for the bathing gown than was normally required to
make a chemise, it was probably not because of functional considerations
as one might like to think, but because of the scarcity of fabric. Close
examination reveals that the triangular sections of fabric used to add
fullness to the skirt consist of several pieces. In fact the two
sections used in the back are made from a different fabric, although it
is still a blue and white checked linen. Frugal use of scraps in linings
and hidden sections of decorative costume was common practice in the
18th century. The piecing of the bathing gown is further evidence of the
fact that it was a garment that had no ornamental purpose.
[Illustration: Figure 6.--LINEN BATHING GOWN said to have been worn by
Martha Washington. (_Courtesy of The Mount Vernon Ladies'
Association._)]
Of particular interest are the lead disks which are wrapped in linen and
attached near the hem next to the side seams by means of patches. No
doubt these weights were used to keep the gown in place when the bather
entered the water.
The following account of bathing in Dover, England, in 1782 suggests how
the bathing gown might have been used at Berkeley Springs:
The Ladies in a morning when they intend to bathe, put on a long
flannel gown under their other clothes, walk down to the beach,
undress themselves to the flannel, then they walk in as deep as
they please, and lay hold of the guides' hands, three or four
together sometimes.
Then they dip over head twenty times perhaps; then they come
onto the shore where there are women that attend with towels,
cloaks, chairs, etc. The flannel is stripp'd off, wip'd dry,
etc. Women hold cloaks round them. They dress themselves and go
home.[27]
[27] _Diary of John Crosier_, 1782, as quoted in C. WILLETT and
PHILLIS CUNNINGTON, _Handbook of English Costume in the
Eighteenth Century_ (London: Faber and Faber, 1957), p. 404.
The earliest illustration showing costume worn in the United States for
fresh water bathing is dated 1810 (see fig. 2). Unfortunately the
painting reveals only that the bathing gowns were long and dark colored
in comparison with the white dresses of the period.
An 1848 article which described, in detail, the fashionable dress called
for by each activity at summer resorts, concludes with the following
tantalizing paragraph:
We have no space for an extended description of suitable
bathing-dresses. They may be procured at any of our town
establishments for the purpose. Much depends upon individual
taste in their arrangement, for uncouth as they often of
necessity are, they can be improved by a little tact.[28]
[28] Loc. cit. (footnote 19).
This is the only reference to American bathing costume of the second
quarter of the 19th century that the author has found at this time.
Nevertheless, an English source describes what must have been a
transitional style between the chemise-type bathing gown and the more
fitted costume of the 1850s.
The _Workwoman's Guide_, published in London, 1840, included
instructions for making both a bathing gown and a bathing cap. Health
and modesty were the main considerations that influenced the choice of
color and type of material.
Bathing gowns are made of blue or white flannel, stuff,
calimanco, or blue linen. As it is especially desirable that the
water should have free access to the person, and yet that the
dress should not cling to, or weigh down the bather, stuff or
calimanco are preferred to most other materials; the dark
coloured gowns are the best for several reasons, but chiefly
because they do not show the figure, and make the bather less
conspicuous than she would be in a white dress.[29]
[29] A LADY, _The Workwoman's Guide_ (London: Simpkin, Marshall, and
Co., 1840), p. 61.
The following details reveal that, in general, this 1840 bathing gown
starts as an unshaped garment similar to the gown attributed to Martha
Washington [brackets are mine].
As the width of the materials, of which a bathing gown is made,
varies, it is impossible to say of how many breadths it should
consist. The width at the bottom, when the gown is doubled,
should be about 15 nails [1 nail = 21/4 in.]: fold it like a
pinafore, slope 31/2 nails for the shoulders, cut or open slits of
31/2 nails long for the armholes, set in plain sleeves 41/2 nails
long, 31/2 nails wide, and make a slit in front 5 nails long.[30]
[30] Loc. cit. (footnote 29).
The instructions for finishing this gown, however, show that the sleeves
were worn close around the wrists and that the fullness of the skirt was
secured at the waist by a belt.
In making up, delicacy is the great object to be attended to.
Hem the gown at the bottom, gather it into a band at the top,
and run in strings; hem the opening and the bottom of the
sleeves and put in strings. A broad band should be sewed in
about half a yard from the top, to button round the waist.[31]
[31] Loc. cit. (footnote 29).
By the addition of the above details this type of bathing gown more
closely approximates the style of the long-skirted blouse of the 1850s
to be described later.
In regard to the bathing cap we are told that,
These are made of oil-silk, and are worn, when bathing, by
ladies who have long hair.... It is advisable, however, for
those who have not long hair, to bathe in plain linen caps, so
as to admit the water without the sand or grit, and thus the
bather, unless prohibited on account of health, enjoys all the
benefit of the shock without injuring the hair.[32]
[32] Ibid., p. 68.
The "Scene at Cape May" (fig. 3) shows women wearing long-skirted,
long-sleeved, belted gowns as well as head coverings similar to the type
described in _The Workwoman's Guide_.
Thus during the period when bathing became popular as a medicinal
treatment, women wore loose, open gowns perhaps patterned after a common
undergarment, the chemise. Although this chemise-type bathing costume
must have been very comfortable when dry, its fullness was restrictive
when wet. The bather could only immerse herself in water which was all
that was necessary for the treatment. As the recreational possibilities
of bathing began to overshadow its health-giving properties, women's
bathing dresses also became more fitted, following the general
silhouette of women's fashions.
[Illustration: SCENE AT CONEY ISLAND--SEA BATHING ILLUSTRATED.
Figure 7.--SEA BATHING AT CONEY ISLAND, from _Frank Leslie's Illustrated
Newspaper_, September 1856.
(Smithsonian photo 58437.)]