We’ve all seen it.
A beautiful period gown spoiled by a limp, dragging skirt. Besides good flatlining in that skirt, the use of petticoats can take that loose mess and make it a beautiful reproduction worthy of a fashion plate.
This is one of my biggest pet peeves (and one of the Biggest Mistakes) when admiring reproduction historical clothing – 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.
(I’ll let the “one” slide during the Bustle Era as a wired bustle with ruffles covering the wires is like the first petticoat. Throw just one more petticoat on top and you’re good to go in many instances.)
The worst offense is when a hoop skirt is worn. Have you 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. That one petticoat is not enough! Obviously.
So I’ll shout: It really IS ok to wear multiple petticoats!!!
- They won’t hurt.
- Multiple petticoats are period correct.
- They make your costume SO much better.
If you’re worried about adding to your waistline with several thick waistbands under your skirt, set the petticoat panels onto a yoke or set them all together onto one waistband. Brilliant!
The two early-1850s skirts below would not have that gentle bell shape without the use of multiple petticoats supporting them underneath. Like, several of them.
I just cringe when I see a fantastically made 1890s gown only to notice the skirt falling flat against the wearer’s legs (I’m guilty of this too.). Even if the skirt has all the proper panels, the full hem width, and stiffened hem facing, it won’t cut it for achieving that beautiful flared 1890s silhouette we love.
The problem is, simply, NOT ENOUGH PETTICOATS.
Listen. 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.
And isn’t that what we are striving for? The fashionable silhouette?
So many problems can be solved by adding an extra petticoat – I challenge you to try it!
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.
P.S. I love petticoats and have given you more resources to make them up. Take a look at my post on good fabrics to use for them and then how to starch petticoats when finished. If you’re new to historical sewing, my list of patterns will help – including many for you to create petticoats with. 🙂
I’ve had this question for a while… when you have a trained skirt, you need a trained petticoat, so do you wear the trained petticoat over top of the normal petticoats? Underneath? Or do all the petticoats need to be trained? I have not yet made any, so I can’t experiment… What order do they go in?!?
You build the silhouette from the body out with the trained petticoat as the top underlayer just under the dress skirt to support it. I’ve attached little ties to both trained petticoat and skirt to hold them together while wearing. (I probably needed to simply make the train of the petticoat heavier with trims to hold it in place and it would have worked.) Generally, in my research, you need only the top layer to be trained. However, the petticoat(s) right under it could have a sweep.
I wear 2 corded and 1 plain as a finisher between my dress and the corded ones–I love the way that feels! 🙂
I am nearly finished with my natural form fishtail skirt TV 225. I have also made the split pannier overskirt TV 328 and the petticoat with detachable train TV 125. This is my first time to ever make a Victorian dress and I made tons of mistakes that I hope I have hidden in a passable fashion. I am wondering if I need an additional petticoat under this skirt for this time period? Is that usually done for fan tails? I am wearing a bustle pad too.
I would dress up in the layers you already have and see if it needs more to give you boost to the silhouette. You might only need a balayeuse (removable petticoat ruffle for the train part only) to support that fan tail.
This article is timely since I am working on my very first 18th century costume for Comic-con and my friends are shocked when I tell them I need at least 3 petticoats for my costume AND the skirt. All I can think is “Is three petticoats enough?” Perhaps I should share your article?!
Please do! 🙂
I have a lovely early Edwardian skirt that’s see-through with sewed-down pleats from waist to hips. I understand this is the type of skirt that had either a black or colored silk petticoat under to show off the pleating. OK, what pattern would give me the smoothness over the hips and the flair at the bottom? Maybe try Truly Victorian’s trumpet skirt? Or is there a petticoat pattern that would do the job? Thanks.
It’s hard to find good Edwardian petticoat patterns! Yes, you can indeed use a skirt pattern to make a petticoat. Make sure it’s narrower than the actual skirt. Look at the Past Patterns one too. I love it but it may be too full for you. There’s also one in Century Patterns. And Ageless Patterns may have something that will work, but remember those patterns are taken straight from period patterns with seam allowances added; you might have to alter.
I’m very intrigued by the idea of setting multiple petticoats onto one waistband. But would it be a good idea for Natural Form ensembles? (That’s my favorite.) I love my TV 171 petticoat, but sometimes I feel like it’s not enough. If I sewed two of them and set them on one waistband, is that going to ruin the straight front of my walking skirt?
For Natural Form Era you want to keep the skirt front slim as possible. I’d suggest adding a ruffled overlay to the back only on the 170 base and stitch it either into the same waistband or gather the top of the overlay to stitch the back panel of the main petticoat. You could also do like a half petticoat of the back ruffled overlay and attach to a narrow yoke that goes all the way around the waist. This could have a straight front & side panels attached too.
This is great info. I am going to look at doing this for my Edwardian walking skirt. Do you have any samples that you have made for this era. Your blog is a great inspiration to me. Thanks for all you do. Costuming in Saskatchewan
Not a true Edwardian petticoat, but I’ve made the Truly Victorian 170 for 1890s skirts. I’m really wanting to make up the Edwardian petticoat from Past Patterns.
Jennifer, thanks so much for all your helpful advice! I wear the TV elliptical cage crinoline with 1 plain petticoat and 1 ruffled petticoat over it. My hoop wires do not show- yay! Since I changed from cotton to flannel drawers, I have not had too much problem getting cold underneath in the winter. Should I be wearing another plain petticoat under the hoops? Thanks so much for your input!
The plain petticoat under the hoop is for modesty (to disguise the drawers) and can also be for warmth. You decide what’s comfortable for you.
And yay! No hoop line. 🙂
I read your petticoat article. I it very helpful. I wear 1860’s era, prairie skirt, depends on what function I am at. I get different suggestions on how long should my hoop skirt and my petticoat be? I am in Prescott, AZ and do most functions there.
The hoop can be about 6″ to 8″ higher than your skirt hem with your petticoat about 1″ to 2″ shorter than your skirt. You want the bottom wire in the hoop to be far enough off the ground so you don’t trip but not too high. A ruffle at the hem of your petticoat will help keep that “break” to a minimum (where your skirt hangs lower than the bottom wire).
So I debuted my Victorian caroling costume last night, a dress with a 170″ hem circumference made with Simplicity pattern #1818. I followed your advice and wore a hoop skirt with a very full bridal ball gown petticoat between the hoops and the dress. But the weight of the petticoat made the hoop skirt slide down as I was wearing it! The hem of my hoop skirt was sticking out beneath my floor length skirt in some picture, and I kept stepping on it and even tripped a few times. I thought of sewing it onto some kind of undershirt to hold it up, but I can’t drive in a hoop skirt so I need a solution that will still let me step in and out of the hoop skirt when I get out of the car, already wearing the rest of my costume. Any suggestions greatly appreciated!!! I have another caroling gig tomorrow afternoon and I don’t know what to do. I DEFINITELY need the petticoat AND the hoops to hold that big, full skirt out properly.
Sounds like you need to take a couple of simple tucks all around the hoop. Are you wearing a corset? A corset will help hold the hoop in place whether you dress before or after you drive to the event. Also, if the bridal hoop is sliding down, look at what you are wearing underneath it. Bridal hoops are made with slippery nylon – not period correct at all and not good at working well with other fabrics for historical ensembles. You might think to add a flannel petticoat under or even right on top of the hoop to keep it from sliding down. A proper hoop (with enough wire) should not collapse under the weight of petticoats. But the sliding down seems to be from the nylon fabric. You might also try tacking in ties or hook & eyes to attach the hoop to your petticoat and/or skirt waistband. Good luck!
What if you stitched a channel to top edge of your slippery petticoat (you may have to stretch it out as you sew) or even a few well-placed buttonholes around the top to run a drawstring through? Then you could cinch it in tight and it won’t slide down. As my weight fluctuates from year to year, I’m a big fan of drawstring waistbands – it even gives me some versatility as to where the gathers are on my underskirts. Not historically correct, but neither am I….
I used to be incredibly lazy with my undergarments until I found this site. Since I was mostly doing costuming for (very) amateur stage productions, or non historical dress-up events, I figured that the details like petticoats didn’t much matter. Sometimes I wouldn’t even bother with an actual bustle – I’d just fold up my most worn and battered tutu from ballet class, and pin it to the bottom of my corset! It looked okay and kept the silhouette, but if a wind caught my skirt, you could tell that all was not historically right. Then I made my first real petticoat (Truly Victorian, TV170), and now I am a petticoat fiend. I can’t make enough of them! I like flouncing about my apartment in them, just because. And I think I’ve figured out the trick for multiple petties in hot summer weather. I’ve got three that I made of a very lightweight cotton gauze. The inner one I leave limp, for something soft against the legs, and then I starch the hell out of the outer two, to make up for their lack of substance. I also put a few tiers of super-stiff lace around the hems, for some extra support at the bottom of my skirt. It works! This winter I’m looking forward to making myself some warm flannel petties and matching underthings as part of an experiment – how the hell did my 19th c. ancestors survive Canadian winters without the luxury of pants?
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…
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.
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.
Dear Gail, I don’t do any reenactment stuff either, but I make all my long slips double-layered in white cotton. I would rather buy them, but finding undergarments in natural fabric is nearly impossible. It really vexes me how the fashion [police] have demoralized women , over the past several decades. It’s natural for women to like long dresses and layers underneath. Lord Jesus help us!
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.
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 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 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’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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I am making a dress for Dickens’ fair. What petticoat pattern would you recommend for the right fullness?