what did kids look like in 1700s?

Answer 1

they had deep black eyes big great fangs and the growled like a dinosaur.

Answer 2

They looked like kids do today, except they were treated like little adults, so they dressed the same way as adults in their class did. (From about the age of 2.) They were probably all really dirty too, since both the rich and the poor didn't bath a whole lot.

Answer 3

Your question made me think. Obviously children of those times looked like us, except that most of them would not have been well nourished and would not have had access to doctors and dentists in the way we do now, with results I shall leave to your imagination. Some of them would have been scarred by smallpox and some would have had rickets (bandy legs) as the result of vitamin D deficiency. They were much smaller than modern western children on account of their diet. One answerer had the very good idea of referring to portraits of the period, but remember that the children portrayed there came from rich families (you had to be very wealthy to commission a portrait!) and would have been rather better fed than the vast majority of children about them. All too many children had to fend for themselves (I attended a school originally founded to take in waifs and strays of this period off the streets of London) and many children were forced to work from a painfully early age, with disastrous effects on their bodily development. They might well have been pale and wan with stunted growth. Children in the country would have fared better than town children, as there would have been more food available, of a more nutritious kind, and they would have benefited from fresh air.

Here are some portraits of well fed and healthy children from privileged backgrounds:

http://www.artunframed.com/images/artmis60/reynol50.jpg
http://www.artunframed.com/images/compressed10/reynolds395.jpg
http://www.artunframed.com/images/reynolds55/reynol128.jpg (this is a boy!)
http://www.artunframed.com/images/1gainsborough/gainsb178.jpg
http://www.artunframed.com/images/1gainsborough/gainsbo79.jpg

Answer 4

Mostly either dead (as the death rate was huge for infant mortality) or grubby (as the poor were indeed very poor).

As ever - it depended on their social status.

In the absence of photography, we have to rely on paintings and the links below will take you to some. These children would have all been from well-off families as pretty much no-one painted the poor.

Answer 5

They painted racing flames on the side of their horses. Their horse also had spinners for horse shoes it's tail was made to look like spoiler. They also put green laterns under the horses' belly to give a glow underneath.

Answer 6

I'd imagine they look just like kids do know, only in the appropriate clothing of their class, culture, and nationality.

Answer 7

like kids? what does it matter ask your parents they have to know lol.