What Kind Of Purse?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 2:51 am

Harry and I were wondering today what kind of purse or *pocketbook* Lizzie may have carried in the 1920's as *Lizbeth?*
Does anyone know what was in style?

mbhenty · Post by **mbhenty** » Sat May 13, 2006 3:15 am

Could not resist Kat, my feminine side.

http://henriettashandbags.com/victorian_purses.html

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:09 am

I'm sorry, but the page wouldn't load.

Is there a particular style there she would have preferred?
What would anyone think seems to suit her?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:24 pm

I tried the link again but it won't load.

I actually have to force quit the Internet to get out of the site.

Anyone- can you go get a picture of what you think might be a type of bag Lizbeth would use?

It's not just a site I'm after- it's an opinion.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:40 pm

finding vintage purses from the 1920's is very difficult. They were usually small, beaded bags with short fabric handles one would wrap around their wrist. Nothing like the purses of today!

http://www.michellesvintagejewelry.com/ ... urse1.html

Here is a link to the history of purses..

http://searchwarp.com/swa1444.htm

Of course nothing competes with a Hermes Birkin bag! (Which I am convinced Lizzie would carry if she was around today!)

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:02 pm

I yearn for a Birkin.

Tracy...

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:19 pm

Here you are Tracy... It's PINK!

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/DREAM-PINK-HERMES ... dZViewItem

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:38 pm

For hell sakes...that is divine ! Just a wee bit TOO divine for my wallet. Whew...I still want it though...

Tracy...

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 9:16 pm

They are very expensive---and not likely to ever come down in price. That bag on Ebay is cheaper than they are retail!

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 9:17 pm

Back to Lizzie's bags...

I do wonder what she kept in them. Probably gloves, a compact of powder and a comb? I wonder if she carried cash?

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sat May 13, 2006 9:30 pm

I see her with a small black beaded purse. I agree on the articles you said he may have inside, in addition...maybe some rouge and some kind of 'lipstick' ?

Tracy...

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 9:34 pm

Thanks!

Oh I didn't think of makeup!
Do you think Lizbeth wore makeup?
About when would that be common enough for someone like her to try that?

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 9:50 pm

She probably began using face powder when she was a young woman, perhaps at 16 or so. It was ghastly stuff made from starch and clogged those poor women's pores terribly!

By the time she was middle aged she had more options...

http://pinksatin4.tripod.com/1900s.html

( from http://pinksatin4.tripod.com/topbar.html )

Lizzie was a bit more progressive than some-- being socially involved with actors... She may have been a bit more experimental in her make up. I do wonder if she wore more of it when in the company of Nance and her set than she did going about F.R. in her limo.

It makes sense where the one article explains how movies made makeup more acceptable and appealing to the masses.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 9:52 pm

I bet she had a favorite perfume and I bet it wasn't from the five and dime!

DWilly · Post by **DWilly** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:06 pm

This was in Rebello on page 320, talking about Lizzie's stay at Truesdale Hospital:

" Nurses who knew Miss [Lizzie] Borden as a patient at Truesdale Hospital two years ago mentioned to their friends, it is said, that she was a woman of decided opinions and will, more masculine in appearance and ways than feminine"

Now of course this next one is one of those " I know I read it, but now I can't find it" things in Rebello, but somewhere there's a quote about Lizzie wearing men's hats and shoes. My point being that Lizzie wasn't all that feminine to begin with so, I doubt by the time she hit her 60s she was going to suddenly go girlie girl and start wearing make up. In my opinion she may have started to become even more masculine as she got older. Not less. Maybe she carried cigars in her purse?

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:25 pm

I have known many mannish women who wore makeup and scent.

Lizzie took good care of herself and liked fashionable, even feminine clothing. The dress displayed at the B&B is delicate and feminine. (is that skirt pink?) Lizzie had her clothing made for her-- she didn't buy off the rack and could have ordered simple designs. She seemed to favor long trains and lace and expensive fabrics. Nothing no nonsense and serviceable for her!

Lizzie may or may not have been a lesbian but I believe she was always a lady.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:29 pm

This is all very interesting. I hadn't thought of perfume either. It's a wonder we have no reports of how she smelled.

Here is the purse I would choose for Lizbeth. But it's subjective. Got it from the site you listed, Audrey.
But it's c. 1940.

Do you think she bought European products?

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm

Although I tend to sway towards Lizzie being gay, it does stand to reason that she was certainly not at her very best when in the hospital prior to her death. The comments made by those nurses were certainly unkind, unprofessional and uncalled for.

In this case, I think one must seriously consider the source.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:32 pm

I never heard about men's hats and shoes, sorry.
I think makeup, maybe light makeup and most certainly perfume.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:32 pm

Kat @ Sat May 13, 2006 9:29 pm wrote:This is all very interesting. I hadn't thought of perfume either. It's a wonder we have no reports of how she smelled.

Here is the purse I would choose for Lizbeth. But it's subjective. Got it from the site you listed, Audrey.
But it's c. 1940.

Do you think she bought European products?

She may have.. she did travel to Boston and New York and had both the money and time to make use of their shops!

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:35 pm

Kat @ Sat May 13, 2006 9:32 pm wrote:I never heard about men's hats and shoes, sorry.
I think makeup, maybe light makeup and most certainly perfume.

I would bet good money on perfume!

Lizzie seems the long bath, with luxurious soaps and bubbles type. followed by a spritz of her favorite scent!

she herself stated she didn't hurry in the things she did. I can easily imagine her making her bath an event.

If she had breakfast downstairs in a dressing gown I bet her hair was combed too!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sat May 13, 2006 10:36 pm

Oh Goddess! Now I have to wonder if she liked:
SHOES!!

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sat May 13, 2006 11:03 pm

I bet Lizzie had shoes for every ocassion and outfit.

I would also think her shoes were well made and expensive.

This whole thread is growing very dear to my heart!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:02 am

I had heard it said that the reason women love shoes so much is because it's one thing about them that is not too influenced by weight and age.
Meaning, a woman can get older and plumper but her fabulous shoes will still fit!

I can now picture Lizbeth shopping in New York. I wonder if she had more than one mink coat!?

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:08 am

Shoes were an Angel's wish for women!

I can easily imagine Lizzie with multiple furs-- and no fears of having paint thrown on her in them!

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:15 am

We have her jewelry accounted for in her will, right?
If one knows jewelry, do the pieces sound good, or gaudy?

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:23 am

Oops.
I mean Probate records:

Rebello, pg. 331-2:

"JEWELRY (SCHEDULE B)

Lady's Yellow Gold Tiffany Diamond Ring
1 Diamond about 3 carats
$1,500.00

Lady's Yellow Gold 3-Stone Diamond Ring
1 Diamond about 1 1/2 carats
2 Diamonds about 1 1/4 carats each
900.00

Lady's Yellow Gold Twisted 2-Stone Diamond Ring
2 Diamonds about 1 1/4 carat each
6 small diamonds
500.00

Yellow Gold Diamond, Pearl and Sapphire Brooch
1 Diamond about 1 carat
2 oval-shaped Sapphires
12 Small Genuine Pearls
200.00

$3,100.00"

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:23 am

Audrey @ Sun May 14, 2006 12:08 am wrote:Shoes were an Angel's wish for women!

I can easily imagine Lizzie with multiple furs-- and no fears of having paint thrown on her in them!

Well we know she had multiple sealskin saques. I posted this back in January. Lizzie's Inquest testimony (p91).

"Q. Have you sealskin sacques?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where are they?
A. Hanging in a large white bag in the attic, each one separate.
Q. Put away for the summer?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you ever use prussic acid on your sacques?
A. Acid? No, sir, I don't use anything on them."

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:34 am

They sound tasteful and lovely.

Of course there is no mention of carats or what quality settings her jewelry was in...

But the diamond and amethyst ring must have had a purple stone in it-- pansy colored?

This is a photo of a 'vintage diamond and amethyst' ring. I think it is lovely.

Here is a 'vintage diamond and sapphire brooch'. Stunning...

Of course we do not know what Lizzie's looked like.

She also leaves rings simply described as diamond rings... They could be anything from simple settings with diamond ships to cocktail rings.

This is a vintage diamond cocktail ring. Who wouldn't want this?

The vast majority of my own jewelry is vintage, belonging to as far back as my g-g-g-grandmother. I ADORE it. The quality of the stones and settings surpass most of what you can buy today unless you go to a very well known and very expensive jeweler.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:41 am

I wish we knew if that 3k diamond ring from Tiffany was one stone or several...

either way--- Nothing to sneeze at.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:43 am

I need to back away from the computer... I am starting to get a little shakey!

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun May 14, 2006 1:29 am

From what I remember of the testimony, Lizzie favored blue dresses at the time of the murders. I can't remember whether it was from the trial or from the inquest but there is testimony that the biggest part of Lizzie's wardrobe was blue. From the actual pictures of Lizzie, especially the later ones, she doesn't look all that girlie to me. Many of the descriptions of Lizzie do not sound all that feminine, in my opinion. There are no descriptions of her wearing make up as far as I have read. Flushed cheeks maybe, but no make up. She was already 32 years old at the time of the trial. If she didn't start before then, why would she after? My money is also on her not looking all that girlie.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 1:43 am

Once she was out on her own.. She was her own boss. She had the nice house and more money to spend.

Each and every photograph we have of Lizzie shows her well dressed, hair neatly done and in some cases she is wearing jewelry.

I certainly dressed differently once I was out from under my mother's influence and rules. Granted, I was still young when I left home but I do not think we should discount Lizzie having a feminine side and enjoying looking nice.

DWilly · Post by **DWilly** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:00 am

Kat @ Sat May 13, 2006 10:32 pm wrote:I never heard about men's hats and shoes, sorry.
I think makeup, maybe light makeup and most certainly perfume.

Rebello page 500, "Centenarian Recalls Lizzie Borden," New Bedford Standard Times, October 6,1975:17

"Mrs. Alice Dean, ' She [Lizzie] was a perfect lady, She was very religious. She was wonderful to us. She recalled Lizzie as being 'Very mannish looking person...she always wore men's hats and shoes, totally unlike her sister, who was very ladylike...it should be a closed business. Whether she did it or not is a big mystery. I don't know.' Mrs. Dean was a friend of Lizzie Borden and visited the Borden household.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun May 14, 2006 6:14 am

Well good you found it!
But- that says the person recalling is 100 years old, right?

My experience in reading memoirs of people who were 80, 90, 95 etc., or of people who were very young back then and are relying on memory in the 1970's and 1980's- sorry- they have just been wrong. Even the lady who was at the trial and covered it in the newspaper, E. Jordan. Even Louis Lyons who wrote a history of the Boston Globe. Even Abby Potter was probably mistaken in her memories. Even Arthur Phillips, Lizzie's own attorney. Some even think 85 year old Ruby was wrong in her memories.
Sorry, but that doesn't convince me nor should it convince anyone.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 7:59 am

My thoughts on the matter are that if Lizzie actually wore men's hats and shoes it would have been in the papers at some point.

Every single move she made was scrutinized.

DWilly · Post by **DWilly** » Sun May 14, 2006 9:36 am

Kat @ Sun May 14, 2006 6:14 am wrote:Well good you found it!
But- that says the person recalling is 100 years old, right?

My experience in reading memoirs of people who were 80, 90, 95 etc., or of people who were very young back then and are relying on memory in the 1970's and 1980's- sorry- they have just been wrong. Even the lady who was at the trial and covered it in the newspaper, E. Jordan. Even Louis Lyons who wrote a history of the Boston Globe. Even Abby Potter was probably mistaken in her memories. Even Arthur Phillips, Lizzie's own attorney. Some even think 85 year old Ruby was wrong in her memories.
Sorry, but that doesn't convince me nor should it convince anyone.

I agree. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything. Only showing what was said by one person. Whether it was true or not I don't know. I never met Lizzie Borden so, I don't know. Personally, I'm glad you're questioning the women's recollections. I only wish you'd do it when posters bring up things on David Anthony, Gramma and Ruby.

DWilly · Post by **DWilly** » Sun May 14, 2006 9:39 am

Audrey @ Sun May 14, 2006 7:59 am wrote:My thoughts on the matter are that if Lizzie actually wore men's hats and shoes it would have been in the papers at some point.

Every single move she made was scrutinized.

I agree. Which makes me wonder how it is Ruby can claim David Anthony made trips to Maplecroft to visit Lizzie and yet, there's no mention of that in the papers nor do we have quotes from those close to Lizzie talking about any such visits.

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sun May 14, 2006 10:59 am

The David Anthony/Ruby/Gramma story has been questioned, and questioned, and questioned again about whether Ruby's memory was clear when that story was told. Here is one of the threads:

viewtopic.php?t=202&highlight=cameron

Tracy...

theebmonique · Post by **theebmonique** » Sun May 14, 2006 11:14 am

Plus, Kat did a great article titled "The Ruby Cameron Story". Wasn't it published in The Hatchet ?

Tracy...

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun May 14, 2006 11:53 am

Audrey points to the fact that in the pictures we have of Lizzie she is always dressed nicely, her hair done up, and in some she is even wearing jewelry. Weren't most of these photographs professionally done? Even today when you get your photographs taken by a professional you do not normally wear what you would wear around the house. Yet, even in the professional pictures she appears a little less feminine than one would expect. To me anyway.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:10 pm

Allen @ Sun May 14, 2006 10:53 am wrote:Audrey points to the fact that in the pictures we have of Lizzie she is always dressed nicely, her hair done up, and in some she is even wearing jewelry. Weren't most of these photographs professionally done? Even today when you get your photographs taken by a professional you do not normally wear what you would wear around the house. Yet, even in the professional pictures she appears a little less feminine than one would expect. To me anyway.

Of course one would dress well for a professional portrait...

But why would Lizzie even OWN such things as pretty jewelry or clothing if she was half a step away from joining the Sisters of Sappho?

A woman can have masculine physical features, she can even be a lesbian but still have a feminine demeanor!!!!!!!!!!!!! Looks can be deceiving. I may look like a total priss but nothing could be further from the truth!

Likewise--a woman can be rumored to be a lesbian, friends with known lesbians and appear very mannish and still be straight.

IMHO Lizzie probably was a lesbian, but I doubt she was a practicing one. Nor do I think she was aggressively sexual with men or women. But even if she was I do not think it would preclude her from being feminine, taking care of herself and liking feminine clothing and jewelry.

I think that categorizing Lesbians as masculine, unattractive creatures with little interest in clothing, jewelry or other feminine vices is small minded and giving into stereotypes.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:51 pm

Audrey @ Sun May 14, 2006 11:10 am wrote:
Allen @ Sun May 14, 2006 10:53 am wrote:
I think that categorizing Lesbians as masculine, unattractive creatures with little interest in clothing, jewelry or other feminine vices is small minded and giving into stereotypes.

I never said a word about Lizzie being a lesbian. I said from the pictures, which I can see, and from descriptions of people that actually saw her, which I can read. I never said a word about her being a lesbian, so that whole rant to me was pointless. What I did say is she didn't look all that feminine and girlie to me. You don't have to be a lesbian to not dress feminine or girlie. So who is applying the stereotypes? Evidently she didn't look all that feminine or girlie to a good many people who actually saw her either.

Audrey · Post by **Audrey** » Sun May 14, 2006 1:00 pm

Very lovely.... Not masculine at all.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun May 14, 2006 1:01 pm

Yes I've seen it. I said I looked at the pictures.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun May 14, 2006 1:05 pm

These look a little less feminine, in my opinion.

Smudgeman · Post by **Smudgeman** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:37 pm

I am not stereotyping, but I was a bartender in a Lesbian Bar for 3 years back in the 80's. Let me tell you that Lesbians come in all shapes and sizes. Yes, there are those that like to dress manly with short haircuts, and there are "lipstick lesbians" as they are called, who dress very femininely with jewelry, make-up, etc. Then there are those that look as normal as anyone else.
I believe Lizzie was probably a lesbian, and I don't see her carrying a purse around unless she had to for appearance sake. Alot of my lesbian friends carry a wallet just like a man would.

DWilly · Post by **DWilly** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:41 pm

[quote="Audrey @ Sun May 14, 2006 12:10 pm
I think that categorizing Lesbians as masculine, unattractive creatures with little interest in clothing, jewelry or other feminine vices is small minded and giving into stereotypes.[/quote]

Could you, please, point out where someone said that in this thread? Speaking for myself I am well aware of the fact that there are beautiful and feminine lesbians out there. One only has to remember the late Super model Gia Carangi to know that.

Anyway, I just simply posted about Lizzie being seen by some people as having been just a tad masculine and I joked about it. But, like I said, I never met the woman face to face so I really don't know. Btw, simply pointing out that she may have been masculine was not intended to be an insult to Lizzie. It also wasn't intended to be tied in with Lizzie's perceived sexuality. They're two separate things.

william · Post by **william** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:47 pm

The fact remains that after all is said and done, there is absolutely no concrete proof, no basis in fact, that Lizzie, or Nance, were lesbians.

NOT - that there's anything wrong with that.

DWilly · Post by **DWilly** » Sun May 14, 2006 2:49 pm

william @ Sun May 14, 2006 2:47 pm wrote:The fact remains that after all is said and done, there is absolutely no concrete proof, no basis in fact, that Lizzie, or Nance, were lesbians.

NOT - that there's anything wrong with that.

I agree. There's also no proof she was heterosexual.

Not-that there's anything wrong with that