Apr 2, 20239 min read

The Pocket: Fashion, Functionality & Freedom

Updated: Apr 3, 2023

Did you know that every woman would have worn a pocket or two under the dress she wore, every day? Some were big enough to carry a loaf of bread!

By Sofie Pedley

Image: Sir William Beechey 1753-1839, Portrait of Sir Francis Ford's Children Giving a Coin to a Beggar Boy, T06734, © Tate Britian.

The pocket is arguably one of the most forgotten items in the history of women’s dress. Hidden to the casual observer, tucked away under skirts and over shifts, pockets were an essential element to women’s dress in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.

Today, women often react with joy and surprise in finding a pocket(?!) in a dress or skirt, but did you know that every woman would have worn a pocket or two under the dress she wore, every day? Not only that, but that women usually wore the same, often personalised, pockets day in, day out? These handy garments enabled women to carry around whatever she needed for her day-to-day tasks, without the burden of a bag. What did the pocket mean for early modern women? What can pockets tell us about the lives of women who wore them?

A woman reaches for her pocket . Image: Henry Walton, A Girl Buying a Ballad, 1778, T07594, © Tate Britian.

What was the early modern pocket?

From around mid 17th century to the late 19th century, women wore detachable pockets. Pockets were a separate clothing item in early modern women’s clothing. Two panels of fabric, cut into an oblong, almost pear shape and sewn together, with the upper panel sliced open near the top to make an opening. These pockets were sewn onto a waist band. The band would tie around the waist, and the two pockets would sit on each hip.

These weren’t the small pockets we’re used to today. These pockets could hold all manner of things, from books (so called ‘pocketbooks') and money, to scent bottles and every other quotidian item you’d need to carry around with you. Anything we’d put in a bag today, would go in a pocket (if you ask me, its much more practical and hands-free solution).

Pockets were usually made of cotton, dimity cotton or linen. However, silk, wool and leather were sometimes used.

A pair of pockets made around 1740. The second image shows how the pockets would sit underneath the top layers of the dress, and over the petticoat.

Images: Pair of Pockets,1740s (made), T.87A&B-1978, ©Victoria & Albert Museum, London.

Functionality: Pockets & Everyday Life

Understanding women’s experience in the early modern era has many challenges. Unlike men, whose voices have always been front and centre in the archive, women’s voices have traditionally been ignored. As a result, evidence of their experiences, were sometimes subject to being disposed as they were not thought important enough to keep (1).

On top of these relatively limited survivals in the archive, women's limited access to education, equipment and even the time to produce written documentation has led to a significant dearth of evidence to understand women's thoughts and everyday experiences. Even if she did have an education, was wealthy enough to have the time to write (perhaps servants looked after the household and children) and to buy paper, pen and ink, there was a cacophony of social conventions which would prevent her from publishing anything at all. To write anything publicly would be to risk becoming a social pariah. Initially, Jane Austen famously published under ‘A Lady’ for this reason.

Therefore, material evidence can be a very useful source in understanding women's lives. By understanding their 'material lives' we can understand a whole other dimension of their lived experiences, which is especially important for those women who weren't literate (2). Furthermore, in the early modern era, women's material literacy (the ability to sew and have a comprehensive knowledge of fabrics) was often far more important than written literacy.

So what can pockets say about women’s lives that may fill in the gaps of evidence in the archive? Through the lens of examining the pocket, we can understand women’s relationship to their possessions, themselves and those who surrounded them.

Spot the pocket!

For the elite, middling, and lower sorts, pockets were an everyday essential of women's dress - can you spot them?

Images: Edward Frances Burney, The Waltz, c.1810, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, P.129-1931, © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

Thomas Rowlandson, Rag Fair, c. 1800, RCIN 913692, Royal Collection Trust / © His Majesty King Charles III 2023.

Carington Bowles, Cobler's Hall, Lewis Walpole Library, © Yale University Library.

'Sophia, Honour and the Chambermaid', by James Gillray,1780, Reference Collection, NPG D12286, © National Portrait Gallery, London.

David Wilkie, The Refusal, 1814, FA.226[O], © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

Freedom: Pockets, Possessions & Privacy

In a time when women did not own any property themselves and in fact women were property, being owned by their fathers and then their husbands, the pocket presented a unique, private space to hold items. These small items held within their pocket could be seen as ‘proxy possessions’. The ability to hide, keep and carry these items, represented a unique type of freedom for women in the early modern period. Different from a drawer in a chest, or a space underneath a floorboard, pockets were always with them (3).

Anything we could but in a bag, women would carry in their pockets. Keys, pocketbooks, snuffboxes, money, and even food was put in your pocket. In 1682, when accused of stealing a tankard, Rebecca Handcock declared she kept a similar sized loaf of bread in her pocket which people mistook for the tankard. Clearly this was not an unusual item to keep in a pocket, as she was found not guilty (4).

The eighteenth century saw an explosion in consumption, and the pocket enabled women to take part in this new aspect of fashionable society. Snuffboxes, seals, etuis and scent bottles were all objects carried around in the pockets of an elite woman. Eliza Haywood in 1745 stated that, ‘the snuffbox and smelling bottle are pretty trinkets in a lady’s pocket’ (5).

Collection Highlight:

The pocket scent bottle! All of these scent bottles could easily fit into the early modern pocket, each measuring from 3 to 3.5 inches high

Images: Patch-box and scent-bottle combined, 1749-1760 (circa)(circa), Charles Gouyn's Factory (formerly the Girl-in-a-Swing Factory), 1887,0307,II.173, © The Trustees of the British Museum; Scent-bottle, 1755 (circa)(circa), Charles Gouyn's Factory (formerly the Girl-in-a-Swing Factory), 1887,0307,II.108,© The Trustees of the British Museum; Scent-bottle, 1755 (circa)(circa), Charles Gouyn's Factory (formerly the Girl-in-a-Swing Factory), 1887,0307,II.121, © The Trustees of the British Museum; Scent-bottle, 1755 (circa)(circa), Charles Gouyn's Factory (formerly the Girl-in-a-Swing Factory), 1887,0307,II.147,© The Trustees of the British Museum; Scent-bottle, 1756-1758 (circa)(circa), Chelsea Porcelain Factory, 1887,0307,II.131, © The Trustees of the British Museum; Scent-bottle, 1755 (circa)(circa), Chelsea Porcelain Factory, 1887,0307,II.151, © The Trustees of the British Museum.

However, if you put all your processions belongings in one place, they were highly prized items for thieves.

There are many, many reports of pockets being stolen. Pick-pocketing was rife in early modern England.

Such was the judicial system at the time, that stealing someone's pocket could result in transportation or death.

In 1694, the 12 year old Diana Lawrence was accused of, 'stealing 40s. privily out of the Pocket of one Sarah Foster , Wife of Ben Foster , in Honey-lane Market'. Sarah was hearing a ballad being sung in the Market, and whilst she was distracted, her pocket was stolen. Diana denied stealing Sarah's money after being found with the money Sarah declared was hers. Diana said she found the money in the Market, but, 'she was known to be an old Gamester in the Art of Legerdemain, tho but a young Girl', and was found guilty of the charge. She was sentenced to transportation. Most likely, Diana would have been transported to North America or the West Indies, and probably never came back (6).

Others, weren't so lucky. James Hornsby in 1717 and John Ryley in 1718, were both found guilty of pick-pocketing and were condemned to death by hanging (7).

Image: The Lottery Contrast, published by Bowles & Carver, after Robert Dighton 1794, Reference Collection

NPG D47050, © National Portrait Gallery, London, https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw285762/The-Lottery-Contrast?.

Pockets were not only functional spaces to keep your everyday items, but also private spaces to keep your most precious items. In 1994, a pocket with a baby's cap, business receipts and money was found in an attic cavity in a house in Abington in Oxfordshire. The pocket dates from the mid 18th century, however the receipts date from the 1670s, and the oldest coin from 1573-77. It is thought that the pocket was hidden around 1800. To me, this represents a woman hiding important documents or family heirlooms with sentimental value within a place she knew would keep it safe, something of her own that was made, maybe by her, to protect her most valued items - her pocket. We can never know why she hid these items, it has been suggested that this was a ritual to protect the house's inhabitants, but we can infer that they were important, and held meaning to the owner.(8)

Pockets, as a private space, could also function as spaces to hide secrets...

One heart-wrenching story, which highlights the pocket as an intimate, secret space, is the story of Elizabeth Warner.

In 1770, Elizabeth was charged with infanticide, by strangulation. She was an unmarried, former servant and was staying in a London lodging house. After only being there for 10 days or so, the occupants noticed Elizabeth was looking extremely ill, and suspected her of giving birth to a child.

A midwife, one Mrs. Smith, was called to investigate the situation. Elizabeth flatly denied giving birth to a child at first, but after more questioning admitted that she had miscarried a few days before in the privy. When no body could be found, they searched Elizabeth’s room, and found a locked box. Elizabeth refused to open the box, and only gave Mrs Smith the key when she threatened to break the box open.

Mrs Smith stated,

‘I opened the box, and found a parcel of dirty things. I found the after-birth in a leather pocket. I looked farther, and found the child wrapped up in one of the prisoner's shifts and petticoats, dead.’

After further investigation by the midwife and the doctor, they concluded that the child was probably full-term, and Elizabeth had not miscarried at 3 months as she then declared (9). The challenges that faced an unmarried women who had a child, were sometimes too much to bear. However, Elizabeth was found not guilty.

Elizabeth chose to conceal part of this dangerous secret in her pocket. The pocket represented a space that was hers, a space that was private.

Fashion: Pockets & Memory (Not Just A Pretty Pocket)

Embroidery was a fundamental part of women’s daily experience in the early modern period. Whether sewing names onto clothing, or elaborate designs onto tapestries, working with a needle and thread was seen as a woman’s pastime and job. From a very early age, girls were trained in embroidery and sewing to enable them with this fundamental skill, which was seen as a necessity for married life (all those clothes need repairing, right?).

But many pockets of the period were not solely functional items, they were lovingly embroidered with beautiful patterns, and were imbued with sentimental value. For something that was rarely seen, pockets were elaborately decorated.

For many women, pockets were given to them by a family member or a friend - they were a reminder of a loved one. Some pockets were embroidered with their hair, some were made out of their clothes, and others had their names embroidered on them. For others, the pocket may have been one of the few items in their possession they could personalise, or bear their own name. Something personal and unique to them.

Images: Pockets, pair, early-mid 1800s, NWHCM 1935.53, P15.1, P15.2, © Norfolk Museums and Archaeology Service, Carrow House Collection; Pockets, pair, 1841, HHS 5449, © Hereford Museum and Art Gallery.

For the reasons discussed above, pockets meant much more than just a practical place to put items. They represented privacy and ownership, secrets and safety, monetary and personal value. They were, as Barbara Burman and Ariane Fennetaux argue, ‘makers and carriers of meaning and memory’ and 'an index of women's...sense of self'. (10)

Footnotes:

(1) Serena Dyer, Material Lives: Women Makers and Consumer Culture in the 18th Century, (2021), pp.1-21.

(2) Ibid.

(3) Barbara Burman and Ariane Fennetaux, 'The Pocket', p.136, pp. 193-197.

(4) Rebecca Handcock, Old Bailey Proceedings, Crime: theft, grand larceny, 6th September, 1682,'The Proceedings of the Old Bailey London's Central Criminal Court, 1674-1913', https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t16820906-6&div=t16820906-6& (Accessed: 26th March 2023).

(5) B. Burman and A. Fennetaux, 'The Pocket', p. 143.

(6) Diana Lawrence, Old Bailey Proceedings, Crime: theft, pick pocketing, 24th May 1694,'The Proceedings of the Old Bailey London's Central Criminal Court, 1674-1913', https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t16940524-8&div=t16940524-8& (Accessed: 27th March 2023).

(7) James Hornsby, Old Bailey Proceedings, Crime: theft and grand larceny,1st May 1717,'The Proceedings of the Old Bailey London's Central Criminal Court, 1674-1913', https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17170501-34&div=t17170501-34&(Accessed: 27th March 2023; John Ryley, Old Bailey Proceedings, Crime: theft and grand larceny, 30th May 1718,'The Proceedings of the Old Bailey London's Central Criminal Court, 1674-1913', https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17180530-8&div=t17180530-8& (Accessed: 27th March 2023). (8). B. Burman and A. Fennetaux, 'The Pocket: A Hidden History of Women's Lives, 1660-1900', p.134.

(9) Elizabeth Warner, Old Bailey Proceedings, Crime: killing and infanticide, 24th October 1770,'The Proceedings of the Old Bailey London's Central Criminal Court, 1674-1913', https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t17701024-51&div=t17701024-51&(Accessed: 27th March 2023); Burman and A. Fennetaux, 'The Pocket', pp.187-188.

(10) B. Burman and A. Fennetaux, 'The Pocket', p.14, p. 21.

curated history