One of my biggest pet peeves about admiring reproduction historical clothing is being able to tell where there is a shocking lack of petticoats. A woman may have the most beautiful gown, the correct silhouette, and fabulous accessories – but it can all fall flat if she doesn’t have enough (and I do mean that) petticoats. One petticoat usually doesn’t cut it.
The worst offense is when a hoop skirt is worn. Have you ever seen a Civil War or 1860s skirt where a distinct wire row is visible about 6″ to 12″ above the hem? (yikes) Sometimes the row is seen even with a petticoat. Sometimes that one petticoat is not enough. Obviously.
It really IS ok to wear multiple petticoats!
They won’t hurt and will make your costume that much better. If you don’t want several waistbands under your skirt, set the petticoat panels onto a yoke or set them all together onto one waistband.
The two early-1850s skirts below would not have that gentle bell shape without the use of multiple petticoats supporting them underneath.
I just cringe when I see a fantastically made 1890s gown only to notice the skirt falling limp against the wearer’s legs. Even if the skirt has all the proper panels and hem width. And simply adding horsehair or other stiffener in the hem won’t cut it.
The problem is NOT ENOUGH PETTICOATS.
Our ancestors knew the secret to a fashionable silhouette. They knew that you won’t look the same with just a skirt about you, over your chemise and drawers. They knew the extra foundation skirts, cut just so, would show the world your fashionable eye.
So many problems can be solved by adding an extra petticoat – that airy ball gown skirt will stay put; the bell shape you desire will form; the cold air you feel will be dispelled; that train will lay flat.
Plain, corded, ruffled, trained, gored, tucked, paneled, shaped, tied – you name it. That extra petticoat or two could be the missing element of your costume. Give it a try!
What are your thoughts on petticoats? Please leave a comment below.
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
I am making a dress for Dickens’ fair. What petticoat pattern would you recommend for the right fullness?
What time period are you making for Dickens? Most often you can simply use your skirt pattern, reduced and shortened a bit, to give your skirt support.
It’s interesting you should mention this. It’s my biggest pet peeve about costumers, not just historical ones, but lolitas and anime cosplayers too. It just looks SLOPPY!
However, if you look at period photography, not the fashion plates, like the pictures in Dressed for the Photographer and American Victorian Costume in Early Photographs you’ll actually see the same issue, where a woman has just worn a cage crinoline without enough petticoats over it to support the entirety of her skirt, and you can also see the lines of the caning in the hoop. I have to assume that it was a) too hot to wear an extra 2-3 layers, b) acceptable to show off that you’re wearing the newest fashion (the cage), or c) these women were too poor to afford sufficient extra padding.
I have to wonder (re: not enough petticoats in period photographs, if this comment doesn’t nest) if it’s not a fourth option: d) some people don’t dress well. We see it all the time today – for example, some women’s bras show awkwardly through their shirts because they don’t have on the right color or style or are wearing the wrong size. Our ancestors knew plenty of sewing and dressing techniques we’ve forgotten, but they weren’t infallible.
Love this train of thought! Yes, “fashion victims” exist in every time period. ha! Makes it a little easier to not judge others in their creative work as poor dressmaking skills and awful (to our eyes) fabric and trim selections were demonstrated often.
Haha! I have that book and noticed the same thing! I guess people made fashion faux-pas in every time period. I am going for an 1840s look because I like the more fitted sleeve rather than pagoda. Ugh. Right now I am trying to figure out how to make a straight fitted sleeve, since my pattern is for the pagoda. Am I making this too difficult? Shouldn’t straight sleeves be one of the simplest things to make? I’ve just never drafted my own pattern before (for a petticoat OR a straight sleeve!) Any help is greatly appreciated! I am using Simplicity 3727.
The long, tight 1840s sleeves were cut on the bias. You’ll have a hard time making it look right by taking in a pagoda sleeve.
However, in the late 40s a very small pagoda sleeve started to appear and be worn with an undersleeve. You *could* go for that look with the pattern you’re using and simply take in the width of the sleeve pattern.
As for petticoats (and you’ll need at least 2 for 1840s), simply use 2-3 panels of basic fabric (e.g. muslin) cut to the length you need and gathered or pleated to a waistband that is your size. You can also cut strips of fabric to make ruffles for your plain petticoat.
Thanks for the petticoat help! I am actually trying to create a whole new straight sleeve pattern to just attach to the existing bodice. It’s not going well at the moment… perhaps cutting on the bias like you suggested will help. Double ugh.
I’ve just gotten by with one petticoat for different time periods, and one flouncy one over my caged crinoline but I’m listening to “teacher” and working diligently on my petticoat wardrobe now.
I agree that you’ve got to have the right petticoat to get the right look. Years ago I made Past Pattern’s 1905 Muslin Gown and while I made a beautiful petticoat to wear underneath I always though something was missing. I do believe it is an additional petticoat, simpler in construction but someing to give it some extra body. Thanks for sharing all your thoughts, Jennifer.
I tend to just wear one – sort of. My Edwardian has two layers of skirts attached, and I wear one petticoat underneath. With my 18th c, I wear my bum pad, one under petticoat, the over petticoat, and then the polonaised gown. And so far, with both my Dickens and my Ren gown, I just wear my hoops, which have built in ruffles on them. (Though the Ren has an underskirt, with detachable forepart, on top of the ruffly hoops and underneath the velvet skirt.) I don’t think I’ve been showing the hoop wire through my skirts!
However, I will soon be making an elliptical cage crinoline, and I know I’ll have to make a ruffled petticoat to go over that. Do you know what would be the best sort of shape to accomplish that?
I have a petticoat dilemma that I’m not sure how to solve. I bought a very nice striped cotton walking skirt, and I have a lovely floofy petticoat for underneath it… but it is also cotton. The two tend to stick together. Should I take the skirt apart and line it? Make some kind of silky slippery petticoat to wear inbetween… out of what material? What do you think?
(also… is there a rule of thumb about how long petticoats should be? X inches short than skirt? equal to skirt?)
thanks!
Does your walking skirt stick so much to the petticoat that it rides up or hangs weird? The petticoat may actually be too wide/much wider than the skirt. If you wanted a smooth hang, reduce the width of your petticoat OR add another petticoat of China silk or flatline the skirt with the silk. I don’t recommend a polyester or nylon fabric for petticoats.
As for length of petticoats – there isn’t a definite number length in historical garments like there is in today’s modern fashions. You want the petticoat long enough to support the lower few inches of the skirt, not be too short to produce a line or break under the skirt, and not too long to show from under the skirt – unless that is the look you want (which does exist in periods of the 19th Century).
Thanks very much! I’ll check the petticoat width before I proceed.
I find even today’s dresses need several slips because you can see through the dresses. I have worked several time period. Ie 1916, 1880, and 1760′s to 1790′s and i find that sometimes you have to just put on more. Even back then there was a time and place for comfort. And, if you were having a photo made, it was a big deal so those faux pas were just that. An nothing to worry over, you just learn for next time.
Petticoats are great things to have. I don’t wear period clothing however I have made long modern Regency dresses and worn them with petticoat and without. When I went without, despite wearing tights and regular underwear, I hated how the dress clinged to my body and it felt hot.
Then I made a simple long cotton slip and the dress looked and felt much better.
While wearing multipe petticoats does give the desired effect, here in Texas it’s too hot to wear them 8 to 9 months of the year. However, as a long time RenFaire fan, as well as a lover of 19th century garb, I hate-hate-hate to see a lovely dress spoiled because the “bones” of the farthingale or crinoline are showing.
My solution was to sew ruffles over each hoop in my crinoline. This, of course, does not work with a cage-style crinoline, however if you have yours made out of fabric with the hoop channels sewn in, it will help considerably. You can use the pre-cut commercial ones, (the eyelet ones are especially pretty), make your own or visit your nearest Salvation Army thrift shop and look for a ruffly bedspread you can cannibalize.
If all you have is a cage crinoline, make a fabric skirt large enough to cover the cage loosely, sew on your ruffles (as many as will fit from hips down, the fluffier the better), place it over your cage and watch those unwanted hoop lines disappear.
For my Renaissance gear, since I can’t make a new farthingale until I can find some way to store it where the cats won’t find it, I’ve been using petticoats all double-starched. I have four attached to a yoke that’s attatched to a single waistband. Every time I go to wear it, I faithfully re-iron and re-starch it. It’s about four hours’ worth of ironing. But it’s so WORTH it when I wear it to the Faire! (The farthingale for my Lady costume was, too, but my cats also felt that way, apparently, and it had to be tossed. ;_; And after I hand-made all my own bias tape for the boning channels on that thing…)
Someday I plan to remake them in linen, when I can afford it…
{ 1 trackback }