I frequently get questions from our many readers about patterns that call for both an underlining/interlining fabric as well as a full lining fabric for a bodice and even skirts. They range from “So that makes three layers, right?” to “How in the world do I add all those layers of fabric?” and “Won’t all those lining layers make you hot?”
The answers are a bit more in depth than a quick response, so in this article let’s explore more about these various inner layers and if you really do need them all.
When doing a bit more research, I came across this excellent article by Sandra Betzina. Her approach is with modern sewing and fabrics, but the points expressed can carry over into our historical projects. (One of those being that “interlining” is an underlining fabric that adds warmth.)
Underlining
Underlining is a fabric that is mounted to the back of the fashion fabric to support it. Depending on what you choose, underlining can boost the sewing performance & ease of use of a particularly difficult fabric, and can aid in supporting the overall fit of the design. (A guide on appropriate underlining fabrics to use for costuming is listed at the end of this post.)
You know from reading the How to Flatline post that you really can’t sew 19th century clothing without adding an underlining layer. It does SOOO much to the structure that is period clothing. (please… don’t sew historical without it)
Underlining fabric can be thin like organza or heavy like twill. It all depends on what the fashion fabric and design calls for. Too much or too little underlining support can also affect the final garment’s appearance.
Lining
Lining in a garment is cut & sewn from the main garment pattern pieces and added at the end of construction. You will see exceptions on how the pieces are cut as the sewing industry in the 20th century developed separate, unfitted lining pieces. In my research, in the 1800s the linings, if put in at all, were cut from the same bodice or skirt pattern.
Linings are put in to cover the inner garment construction. They make for a nice finish on the inside. They also make it easy to put on & remove the garment over the undergarments.
You may have heard of “bag lining” a garment. This process involves sewing a full bodice using a lining-type fabric and cut from the same garment pattern.
To apply the bag lining: the lining garment is placed right sides together with the bodice; the neckline, center front or center back opening, and lower edges are sewn together leaving an opening somewhere. It is then turned right side out and the opening closed by hand or machine. The lining remains loose on the inside.
Another method to add a lining to a bodice is to make up the full lining, then press under the seam allowance on all edges and hand whip into the bodice. This is a period correct way to add a lining. Do Not Bag Line if you want to remain true to historical form. Whip it in instead.
For a loose skirt lining, the lining garment is made up same as the skirt and only attached at the waist. Sometimes it will be enclosed with the skirt hem.
Most, and I’ll guess 80% here (if not more), of the existing 19th C. bodices you find will have fashion fabric mounted to underlining pieces and nothing else. The ‘guts’ of the garment are fully exposed like the above 1880s bustle bodice. Separate linings were simply not used in this time.
One reason full linings were not used was to keep the seams exposed for easier alterations. People didn’t own dozens of clothing articles; they had to mend and make do with what they had. And those garments were frequently passed to others and re-fit and re-styled. Not having to deal with a lining made it a whole lot easier to do this.
So why do historical dress patterns call for adding a lining if it wasn’t frequently done? Well, I’d say it stems from wanting a nice, finished (to our modern eyes) inside. That, and the prevalent use of linings in the 20th century indicating a higher quality garment.
But that doesn’t mean that the Victorian Worth gowns you see with all the seams & boning exposed wasn’t high quality either. Right? Like this one:
But when making your own Victorian reproduction do what you feel comfortable with. Yes, linings cover the messy innards, but they also add that extra layer – which means weight and heat (usually). If you are in the American South you probably don’t need the lining for warmth.
Even if you are in the European north, you might not need the lining either. If you need warmth, sandwich an interlining layer between the fashion fabric & underlining layer during the flatlining process.
The key to remember is that underlining fabrics are cut and mounted to each garment piece separately (aka. flatlining). The two-layer piece is then treated as one throughout construction.
The lining pieces are sewn as a full garment then set into the finished garment at the very end of construction.
The underlining is nearly always required; the lining completely optional.
Do find yourself putting in separate linings or do you just leave the insides exposed just like our ancestors did?
Underlining Fabric Suggestions:
Fashion Fabric: Underlining:
Sheer/ lightweight Silk organza, lightweight cotton, organdy, muslin, linen
Medium weight cottons/wools Muslin, calico, lightweight flannel for warmth, sturdy linen, cotton broadcloth, twill, poplin, coutil, flannel
Heavy weight cotton/wools Stiff muslin, twill, poplin, organdy
Velvet/Velveteen Muslin, twill, poplin, coutil if a very structured garment
Puff Sleeves Cotton organdy, bridal net, silk or poly organza, nylon net
Keep your underlining fabrics light colored, e.g. white, off-white, ecru, tea-dyed, etc. However, if you are sewing with black or dark fabrics where the underlining may show, use darker colors.
More on Flatlining:
Thank you for clarifying that underlining and flatlining are the same thing!
It seems that the historical community tends to call it flatlining, and contemporary sewists call it underlining. (I’ve just made a jacket, underlining the bodice pieces, the instructions said to interface all the bodice pieces using woven cotton fusible, which I did, but it came out a bit stiff, so second iteration I flatlined the pieces in a plain woven cotton. Same outer fabric, better result. “Speed tailoring” has a lot to answer for). My sewing is contemporary, but with some historical techniques.
Yes – same idea with different terms. I picked up the term “flatlining” around 2001 when I plunged heavily into historical sewing. Then it seemed others picked it up. I had to research (much later) what underlining was and realized it was the same idea but in a modern setting.
I, too, have made a modern jacket pattern that called for fusible interfacing on the full fashion fabric pieces. It’s indeed a modern (last half of 20th century) thing. But I agree it just makes the garment too stiff. I’d prefer now to mount the fashion fabric to non-fusible innerlinings specifically designed for tailoring. SO MUCH BETTER of a result! Glad your second version turned out well.
I’m sharing this with a lady on Truly Victorian’s FB group. She wanted to do both.
Val
Thanks for sharing, Val!
I understand the lining process for the bodice bot how do you line the sleeves if the lining is all one piece?
To add a separate lining to sleeves you’d sew up the lining sleeve separately then press under the seam allowance at the top and hand whip to the bodice armhole over the bodice seam allowances. The hem can be loose, pressed up and hand whipped to the bodice sleeve hem or flatlined down and finished with the sleeve in a bias or other facing finish.
Whenever I make a gown, I always flat line it. For one, flat-lining makes it so much easier to fix any problems that may arise, and two, I get lazy and once I’m done, I just want to wear it. Linings also get really hot to wear, so I tend to stray from them. Even when I made my wedding gown, inspired by the 1890’s, I only flatlined it. It was already such a heavy bridal satin, and I felt like the cotton underlining was enough.
Right now I’m copying a 1890’s ball gown. Still working on the pattern and a well fitting mock up (if you have ever made your own patterns from a photo, you know how long it takes.) When it’s fitted well, I’m going to use a thicker cotten to underline the satin. If you don’t underline, you have no place to sew the boning onto and such. It is needed.
I am working on a project which I could use some advice regarding the interlining. My current project is an 1880s bustle made mostly of black machine dupioni. My previous go to for interlining is a higher quality quilters cotton in extra wide widths. However I notice your love of silk organza. I’ve never used organza for lining of any kind. Do you think this would be a project worthy of the extra cost? Does the organza behave dramatically different from cotton options? Thanks!
Although I mention silk organza frequently, I LOVE using cottons for underlinings and do most of the time. Organza is naturally stiff due to the way it’s woven. If you are familiar with cotton organdy it’s a similar thing but in silk (or modern polyester or nylon – yuck! Don’t use for historical as underlining.) The stiffness gives body and form. But it’s also light.
I’m currently making a 1873 silk dupioni evening gown and flatlining the bodice and overskirt in silk organza. Sort of as a test. It has made the bodice super light but supportive without the bones added yet. The overskirt will have body but stay really light with the organza underlining. You can see my 1875 Scotch & Soda Dress where I flatlined the plaid overskirt with organza and it still has a nice supported line. The current bodice is a test to see what happens with just one layer of organza. I’ll be posting on that in the next couple of months so watch for it.
I’m about to begin work on the Truly Victorian TV490 Evening Bodice from 1892, and have been surprised that the instructions call for a lining. I’d been under the impression that underlining alone was the usual thing in bodices throughout the nineteenth century. If it was good enough for Worth to leave the guts of the garment showing, it’s good enough for me too!
But where I’ve really had an unpleasant surprise is in noticing that the pattern instructions suggest I use a cotton twill or denim for the underlining. Eek! I know I’ll be wearing a corset, and the bodice will be boned, so the fact that it’s not made with an especially soft or malleable underlining fabric shouldn’t trouble me; but it does not sound easy to sew, or very graceful or pretty! I had been planning on using a cotton poplin for the underlining…
What would you do?
Thanks!
Anna
Hi Anna,
I see you found a good answer in another post. I’ve known Heather, the owner and designer of Truly Victorian, for many years. In the early 2000 many of us costumers were all about sturdy underlining fabrics. My own early stuff was underlined in denim and even coutil (!). But then more research came to light and we know better now. I believe Heather’s instructions on this early pattern of hers reflects the community’s construction techniques at the time. Your use of cotton poplin is a good choice. Good luck with your bodice!
Jennifer
Great article. But I’m curious how far back this construction method is valid for. Is it the same for mid victorian dresses and earlier ? Say, to the romantic era or even regency? Most of the regency dresses I’ve looked at are’t lined . I haven’t done any research into romantic era yet.
The earlier back you go the less you’ll find lined bodices. As you said, Regency to mid-century is often left with seams exposed. I have seen more outerwear like spencers & redingotes lined on the bodice part. And there’s always the occasional 1860s bodice you’ll find with a full lining. But in my research the linings really started to become “popular” in the 1880s and continued on til now (in higher-end clothes).
Thanks for this article! Very timely since I’ll be cutting out a polonaise pretty soon and I wanted to try a more historical bodice construction (as in, not using my serger). I always thought that unless the fabric was sheer I was supposed to use twill (like the wrinklease twill at JoAnn). Most of my dresses so far have been quilter’s cotton weight fabric. I never thought to use muslin for an interlining fabric because I thought that bodices had to be heavily structured, at least for the torso. Well, now I know what I can do with some of my mockups!
Mockups were used historically as the linings for bodices. Turn of the 20th C. sewing manuals talk a lot about making the bodice in polished cotton or other good lining fabric then fitting it. Afterwards you sew it into the finished bodice.
I was wondering about the possibility of using a mockup as the lining for the finished bodice. It seems a frugal way of testing the pattern AND lining the bodice.
It is definitely a historically accurate method of fitting and finishing a bodice. However, in the nineteenth and early 20th centuries where this was done, people had already been fitting clothes to their figures so knew the exact alterations needed. They probably made up a lining and did a quick test fit just to verify their initial alterations. I think modern costumers who are doing mockups for a historical garment may have more alterations than expected which in turn creates for a messy mockup. (I know it’s easier to write adjustments on the actual mockup fabric for help in altering the pattern.) Also, mockups can stretch easily. I personally do not and would not recommend using them as a lining. Unless, of course, you’ve made the pattern before and simply want to see if everything is still ok with it. (Check out my Inventing the Wheel post on this.)
This is in discussion of using the mockup as the LINING as you can manipulate a stretched lining a bit. I do not recommend fitting a mockup then ripping it apart to then flatline to fashion fabric. That’s cause for other issues and problems with good dressmaking techniques and effects of the final garment. Underlining fabric supports the fashion fabric. Fabric that’s been sewn up, worn, then ripped apart will not support as well as “new” fabric. And mockup fabric should reflect the hand of the fashion fabric; lining fabrics are generally different. But everyone has their methods and personal favorites to get the end result they are seeking. If you find using mockup fabric as lining an attractive technique then go for it. For me, my mockups are pinned, sliced, cut off, and drawn on so would not make for good linings.
I often use 100% cotton drapery lining fabric as underlining in bodices and skirts. It can be purchased quite inexpensively at even the chain fabric stores, comes in 60″ widths which is nice for those big skirts, is durable and has a nice stiffness to it. Some brands are even stain and/or water resistant – not that a lady would ever sweat. Remember that underlinings and linings are great for keeping perspiration stains from filtering through to the fancy fashion fabric too. Another tip: I cut the fashion fabric pieces first, then lay them on and pin to a bigger piece of interlining with grain lines matching. The bigger piece of interlining gives you more to hold on to and you won’t stretch out all those curvy bias seams on bodices. Cut away the borders on the interlining fabric after sewing around all edges. Then use this finished piece of fashion fabric/interlining as the pattern to cut the lining fabric. This seems to guarantee that the lining will be an exact fit to the garment when the two are sewn together.
Great tips! Thanks for sharing.
I’ve used the drapery lining and Rain No Stain for projects in earlier years of historical sewing. Although now I would consider other options as it can get rather heavy depending on the overall project – how much trim and weight of fashion fabric. But I definitely recommend it as an option to consider.