OOC: The Victorian Underworld

   

                  1810’s                            &nbsp
;         1860’s                                                               1880’s

Women’s underwear of the Victorian era evolved as the look did.  Coming out of the Regency, defined by the high-waisted Empire gowns, by 1884, the huge crinolines had come and gone and the fullness remained in the back, in the form of the bustle. 

But our story begins a bit closer to the skin that that…  Victorian undergarments were composed of two parts – underlinens and structure garments.

A good Victorian woman of 1885 would begin with underlinens.  In an era of hand-washing, underlinens would serve to protect the clothes from the skin; and the skin from the clothes.  They were a lot easier to launder, and of course, much more economical.  Her mother or grandmother would have dressed in a two-parter combination of drawers and chemise, like this:

From the TMI department:  yes, the drawers were open, as a matter of simplicity – when nature called, it was a lot easier to not have to remove layers upon layers.  In the first half of the century, there would be little in the way of lace, ruffles, and frills – it was thought to be a bit decadent if not outright -wicked-.  😀

But as the waist became the focus of a woman’s figure, any added bulk was sheared away, and by 1870 the two piece had merged into one, which smoothed the lines for the flat front that came in around that time. 

Also as the century went on, those who could afford it would add lace, embroidery, and all sorts of fun ruffles.  Even a working-class girl might splurge on a scrap of lace to add a bit of feminine grace to an otherwise utilitarian wardrobe. 

Then comes petticoats… matierial varied by season, but the point was to fill out the large expanse of the skirt.  In the 1880’s they would feature layers of ruffles in the back that would help support the bustle.  Around the same time that chemises went one-piece, petticoats did as well, this is sometimes called “princess” style, after the overall cut of the garment.  Fabrics were geneally muslin in warm weather, and woolen material in the winter.  Cotton grew in popularity over the century, and silk was the choice of those who could afford it. 

The top piece that the princess petticoat replaced was called the corset cover.  Which went -under- the corset.  From the 1870’s onward these became less common as the trend for small waists continued.  This layer was also where a woman lacking in the bust department might wear a corset cover or p
etticoat with extra layers of ruffles over the breasts. 

Now we start to get to the parts that added structure… starting with the infamous corset.

Now take a deep breath… having worn a corset before for costuming purposes, they really aren’t fun.  They restrict breathing and movement… but my oh my, I look smashing.  And the reality was that a woman in the Victorian era, a corset just wasn’t fashionable, but no respectable woman would leave her bedroom without one. 

The corset served several structural functions: first it cinched the waist, empathizing the hips and bust.  By mid-century they were strapless.  They were constructed from a combination of fabric, usually muslin, and the “boning” was made from actual bones, usually whalebones but steel became more popular.  By the 1870’s corsetmakers had mastered the art of starching and steaming, so that an “off the rack” corset would fit a woman beautifully. 

As we see with Scarlet above, lacing was done in the back and one cannot do this without help.  The reality for most women was the busk, which was a line of hooks down the front of the corset, allowing the woman to dress herself.  She would still need help with the initial fitting of the corset (and then again as the laces loosened with daily wear) but for everyday dressing, it was much simpler.

Wealthier women who had personal servants also tended to be more fashionable, and were able to engage in tighlacing, like Scarlet trying to get down to that 16 inches. 

As with the rest of the undergarments, corsets became increasingly decorative and elaborate during the era.  Everything from plain white to shocking colors; plain to covered in lace and ribbons.  Only a lady’s sense of fashion and budget could limit her. 

 
        Back view, note lacing     Front view, note busk closure

In the 1880’s the bustle reigned supreme.  Humor of the day had it that they were so large and flat that a tea-tray could be set atop it!  While this is most likely an exaggeration, bustles came in many sizes.  Like tightlacing, the more extreme examples would be for the most formal and fashionable occasions – dances, presentations, etc. 

Bustles could be made from padded fabric to wire cages, usage of which varied to the situation. 

 

Could a woman sit in a bustle?  Yes… -carefully-.  It ex
aggerated the overall look of a woman, giving her a large bustline in the front, a small waist in the middle, and the back with the look of a large rump.  After looking like a column and then a bell, a woman’s backside was now an object of attention. 

And not forgotten in all of this is the stockings… in the 1870’s the French fashion for stockings held up by suspenders had caught on.  A belt went over the corset, with suspender-like fastenings to the tops of the stockings.  This look continues today in thigh-high stockings, and fancier/”special occasion” stockings that still are attached to the main undergarment via suspenders.

The finished look:

Hide:  *looks over all of it slowly, pokes at the bustle cage*  *nods*  Indeed…  *pokes it again*  But it may not be all bad… *runs off with the second corset*

Links:

An Overview of Underwear
Victoria and Albert Museum
Antique Corset Gallery