Journal of the History of Collections ( ) pp.  doi:10.1093/jhc/fhn017 © The Author . Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. FROM  to , the London Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum (V & A) made unprece- dented efforts to acquire collections of historical dress from private donors. Both museums had previously collected the decorative and applied arts, 2 including textiles, needlework and lace, but this was the first time they sought out items of anonymous, fashionable dress. 3 Items in the collections represented a chrono- logical, rather than biographical history – provenance ended at the collector, rather than tracing the dress of multiple generations of a (prominent) family. In both instances, the acquisitions were widely publicized, even though they marked a major and shift in the atti- tude of museum directors as to what constituted his- torically valid aspects of material culture. Significantly, the donors, John Seymour Lucas, Edwin Austin Abbey, Ernest Crofts and Talbot Hughes, acknowl- edged the historical importance of dress much earlier than did the institutions they patronized, and as this study will argue, this was due to their professional training as painters. These four genre painters all collected dress, and within a space of four years were able radically to transform museum attitudes to dress with the acces- sion of their collections. It is posited that the painters’ class, gender and artistic affiliations made dress an acceptable artefact; in addition, the museal presenta- tion of dress was carefully manipulated to appeal to existing values, such as empire and pageantry. The history of museums, the theory of artistic practice and the rise of private collecting all had a role to play in the changing interpretation of dress. The investiga- tion of these collections illuminates not only the his- tory of the formation of a part of the collections of two important English museums but also the changing attitudes towards dress as a historical artefact, the shifting meanings, significances, representations and interpretations afforded to it, as well as the collectors’ personal tastes and motivations that guided what has since become cultural canon. Sources A book entitled Old English Costumes, 4 published to commemorate the  gift of the Talbot Hughes collection of English historical dress by Harrods to the V & A, began the explorations that follow. It is a slim volume, beginning with a preface by the then- Director of the museum, Sir Cecil Harcourt Smith, and general descriptive notes reprinted from the ‘The habit of their age’ English genre painters, dress collecting, and museums, 1910–1914 Julia Petrov In her recent books, Lou Taylor has highlighted the connection between the collecting of dress by late-Victorian and Edwardian genre painters and the later inclusion of their collections in museums of decorative arts such as the Victoria and Albert Museum (V & A) and the London Museum in the early-twentieth century. Drawing on this preliminary work, and using contemporary periodicals and archival sources, the histories of four specific collections are highlighted: at the London Museum the John Seymour Lucas, Edwin Austin Abbey and Ernest Crofts collections and at the V & A the Talbot Hughes collection, all acquired in the period 1910–14. The investigation aims to explain why dress, so often at that period derided as ephemeral and frivolous, was finally accepted as a legitimate subject for museum collections and focuses on the changing meanings of the dress object as it moved from the private to the public sphere. If we would bring back to the imagination the spirits of the past, we must clothe them in the habit of their age, and neglect no detail, however slight, which would help to complete the picture. 1 Journal of the History of Collections Advance Access published August 13, 2008