Victorian Corsets

Khazarkhum

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
725
Reaction score
100
I have to admit, though, I find photos like these a little unsettling. Just when I think I have a high tolerance for things that can happen to the human body, I get a little squeamish knowing what can happen sometimes while wearing corsets. I think it's more the extreme part of the fashion that bothers me, in the sense that I get sad thinking about all the health risks (I have the same reaction to seeing dangerously thin people who I suspect have anorexia nervosa).

this topic is both fascinating and sobering.

If you look at the picture Gilloghly posted, you'll see something at the base of the ribcage.

The bottom ribs are "floating ribs"-- ie, they aren't attached to the sternum. When you lace the corset, they simply move inwards. That gives the sleek waist shape.

Secondly, people aren't flat. They have a third dimension. The corset simply shifts guts into that dimension, usually towards the front. That's why the skirt is fuller in front for most 19th C fashions.

I've worn corsets while riding, both sidesaddle & astride; while driving horsecarts & cars; while teaching classes full of students horrified by the concept. People are ready to believe all sorts of nonsense about the past. I get asked if women had ribs removed (NO), if it will cause pneumonia (no),
if it prevents pregnancy (?) and so on.

Maternity corsets had little elastic pocket baglike structures for each breast, so it could be slipped off for nursing.

There are so many costuming sites out there...here's a good one:
http://costumes.org/

Warning--you can find yourself wandering for days through the costume porn. I wish to be absolved of all blame if you find yourself sewing at 3 AM instead of editing! :D
 

Gillhoughly

Grumpy writer and editor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
5,363
Reaction score
1,761
Location
Getting blitzed at Gillhoughly's Reef, Haleakaloha
Actually, the Victorians were into piercings and tattoos, they were less in-your-face about it though!

Lady Churchill was supposed to have a tat of a snake on her wrist. Bracelets and gloves could cover it up. Members of the royal family also sported discreet tats.

I read about nipple rings in a Lovejoy novel.

Nothing new about those or...

The Prince Albert ring.

Prince Albert, future husband of Queen Victoria, is said to have gotten the penis piercing that is named after him in order wear the tight-fitting trousers so popular at the time. The ring could then be attached to a hook on the inside of one pant leg, tucked safely away between the legs for a neat, trim look. Although we have no record of Victoria’s response to the piercing itself, there is ample evidence she was wildly in love with her husband and almost never left his side after their marriage!

I had a roomie with one of those rings. (shudder-- His favorite shirt read: "I'm not playing with myself, I'm adjusting my jewelry!"

He offered to show it to me but my horrified shriek of NO!!! broke one of the windows. Thankfully he changed the subject and never went back to it.

Oh, yeah, I'm squeamish, too!
 
Last edited:

Tburger

Wahoowa
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
788
Reaction score
144
Location
Deep South
Website
tcmccarthy.com
Actually, the Victorians were into piercings and tattoos, they were less in-your-face about it though!

Lady Churchill was supposed to have a tat of a snake on her wrist. Bracelets and gloves could cover it up. Members of the royal family also sported discreet tats.

I read about nipple rings in a Lovejoy novel.

Nothing new about those or...

The Prince Albert ring.

Prince Albert, future husband of Queen Victoria, is said to have gotten the penis piercing that is named after him in order wear the tight-fitting trousers so popular at the time. The ring could then be attached to a hook on the inside of one pant leg, tucked safely away between the legs for a neat, trim look. Although we have no record of Victoria’s response to the piercing itself, there is ample evidence she was wildly in love with her husband and almost never left his side after their marriage!

I had a roomie with one of those rings. (shudder-- His favorite shirt read: "I'm not playing with myself, I'm adjusting my jewelry!"

He offered to show it to me but my horrified shriek of NO!!! broke one of the windows. Thankfully he changed the subject and never went back to it.

Oh, yeah, I'm squeamish, too!


I just threw up a little. Curse you Gillhoughly!!!! :)
 

Pup

.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
374
Reaction score
75
The Prince Albert ring.

Prince Albert, future husband of Queen Victoria, is said to have gotten the penis piercing that is named after him in order wear the tight-fitting trousers so popular at the time. The ring could then be attached to a hook on the inside of one pant leg, tucked safely away between the legs for a neat, trim look. Although we have no record of Victoria’s response to the piercing itself, there is ample evidence she was wildly in love with her husband and almost never left his side after their marriage!

Off topic for corsets, before assuming that's true, I'd want to see the documentation other than what's all over the internet in an urban-legend sort of format. I'd wonder, how did it first become known? A confession from his doctor or tailor or servant in a letter or by word of mouth? Or was it royal gossip in period porn, which means it might or might not have been true, but was at least believed at the time?

Any of those things should be findable in support of the claim, and that's what I'd look for. For what it's worth, I've not seen erotic piercings mentioned in mid-century pornography or sold in period porn catalogs, though lots of other things were, so it doesn't seem to have caught on that widely soon after his death.

I wouldn't start out skeptical because it's something odd, but more because of the urban legend way its disseminated. Ask me about the historic facts "all over the internet" about peanuts that are just plain wrong. :)
 

Gillhoughly

Grumpy writer and editor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
5,363
Reaction score
1,761
Location
Getting blitzed at Gillhoughly's Reef, Haleakaloha
I did only a surface search on that because I don't have the time to spare for detailed documentation delvings. I spend too much of my writing time here as it is!

Maybe Prince Albert's ring is only urban legend, but I do know the tats and nipple rings were around as a friend of mine who DOES do the deep research found plenty of documention for her series of Victorian mysteries. She gleefully shared some of it with me.

Maybe someone got hold of an old pair of of Albert's trousers and found evidence sewn in that there was truth to him tying Albert Jr. down. But it's much easier--according to a female impersonator I know--to just tuck the goods under for the duration.

I tend to doubt that tying thing. It'd be a real bitch to untie things so the man could take a leak!
icon10.gif


Now if he had a fetish thing going--well, then the more insane the better. Some folk get up to some danged silly things on that road.
 
Last edited:

clara bow

Li'l Rug Bug
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
2,046
Reaction score
474
Location
Arkham Asylum
Delurking to say this has been a fasciating discussion. Thank you!

*wonders how to use this info for a minor character*

I second that. I was surprised there hadn't been one here earlier, unless it was so long ago it got deleted or lost.
 

Khazarkhum

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
725
Reaction score
100
I would question the penis-piercing myself because of the way piercing was done.

Until very recently, the usual method was to use a hot potato on one side and pass a hot needle through the flesh & into the potato. It had to be red-hot to cauterize properly.

Victoria had fallen hard for Albert when they met--he was handsome, witty, intelligent, everything she wanted in a man. She was in love with him long before they were married.
 

Khazarkhum

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
725
Reaction score
100
I own two corsets and I love them. Although I do have trouble putting them on by myself.

Lack of practice maybe.

Get someone to lace you into it so it's where it should be--tight but not choking. Once you're tied in, undo the busk at the front. Carefully untie the lace so you can reach it for retying(the tricky part).

Now slide it back on, fasten the busk, and see if you can tighten the lace. If you can't reach the waist for tightening, tighten it where you can reach--the bottom or top. Once you can get it drawn tight, tie it off. You can do it.
 

Khazarkhum

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
725
Reaction score
100
Husbands are very useful. You can train them early & often. Mine taught me how to sew.:)
 

Edwardian_Novelist

Registered
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Location
Planet Earth
Website
edwardianpromenade.wordpress.com
If there's another thread on this topic, I failed to locate it.

I'd like to know if anyone is aware of a site/online articles that describes corsets/Victorian women's clothing circa 1890-1900, give or take. I visited wikipedia but it didn't go into the depth I'm needing.

Anything with pictures and detailed description of things like different styles, stays/hooks, chemises, various undergarments etc. would really help.

Thanks!

I just blogged about this! :)

http://edwardianpromenade.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/edwardians-unbuttoned/

And about the piercings and tattoos. *g*

http://edwardianpromenade.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/punk-rock-edwardians/
 
Last edited:

Lazy_eyed_Lola

Registered
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I am a female Re-enactor... Going from about 1856-1920... I was scanning over this and wondering When is this set?(an exact year is prefered cause womens fashion changed year to year) Women even wore Corsets during their pregnancy... only a floosy would "shed" her corset, and go with out one...

they did have working corsets which allowed the working women to bend over and have almost full range of mobility...

The stays were usually Bone of some kind, metal didn't come out till a bit later... the corsets themselves were usually lace up in front and back for working class, and button and eye for upper class...you would have your basic under chimise, usually going up to your neck, thigh high "socks" your bloomers.. usually crotchless, your corset, 7 or so peddicoats, your Bustle, your underskirt, your overskirt, and then your "top" for accesories you usually saw proper high class with gloves a handbag, parisol, hat with hat pin (not just to hold your hat but a formidable weapon as well) and usually some sort of male or other female escort, or children... a "proper" woman never walked alone if she could help it... her dress would always cover her ankle, her sleeves always covered her wrists, a Woman did not show limbs... a fan would also be apropriate.... http://www.ideco.com/fans/language.htm language of the fan, it was not mearly for cooling oneself off... they would also carry sachels of lavander or some other potperi because they could maybe bathe once a week...


a working woman such as a maid cook or laundress would have had a bit shorter sleeves and a shorter hem on her dress so as not to catch fire... but had pretty much the same undergarments, her corset would start underneath her breast and finish just above her hips, or others would be the same length but... would have lacing near the hip to loosen it, so that the woman could bend over and work...
 
Last edited:

2Wheels

Anachronista
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
549
Reaction score
53
Location
Shores of the Solar sea
I would suggest Googling "corset training". You'll find a whole subculture of women out there involved in this. I think the world leader right now has a waist of only 14.5 inches when corsetted, or something ridiculous like that (don't look at me, never worn one, no particularly desire to wear one either).
 

Farver

Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm really big on corsetry.

Depending on when you decide to settle down era-wise, the shape of the corset can really vary. Here's a link to Jo's corset timeline: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_njxYs6YNZ_Y/TPQJ4YZLMOI/AAAAAAAABM8/aGgSEZWJBuA/s1600/timeline.jpg

This is hands down one of the best corsetry websites. Jo's brilliant. There are some great pictures of original corsets. I go for the tutorials and the pictures of her own reproductions.
http://bridgesonthebody.blogspot.com/

If you get your hands on any of these books (via an interlibrary loan, perhaps), you'll find it well-worth your time. Norah Waugh includes useful information on the fabrics, designs, and histories of corsets. Jill Salen's book is not as good, giving only information on specific corsets. I haven't read Underwear: Fashion in Detail, but I have read a different book in the series. It's great costume porn with lots of interesting tidbits in the notes.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0878305262/?tag=absowrit-20
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0896762610/?tag=absowrit-20
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1851776168/?tag=absowrit-20

For basic info on getting dressed, here's Katherine's guide:
http://koshka-the-cat.com/eugenie_3.html
The guide's pretty specifically 1850s, so many of the shapes have changed between that and the advent of the Edwardian era. The crinoline was dropped and remains specifically 1850s and 1860s, and the number of petticoats declined, but the dressing order is still the same.

Separate chemises and drawers were still worn in this era, although the shapes changed. They were also sometimes sewn together into one garment, known as "combinations":
http://www.pastpatterns.com/107.html

Note the closer fit of the chemise and the wider shape of the drawers.

Over either the combinations or the chemise, we would get our corset. The corset would always go over a layer to help protect it from the wearer's skin. The oil and sweat would necessitate washing, which could have disastrous effects on the corset. The metal components could rust with exposure to water. The starch on the fabric that serves to stiffen it could also be washed out.

Over this, a camisole/corset cover (shapes here varied, sometimes were gathered, sometimes fitted, and sometimes sewn with ruffles to enhance a small bust: http://www.flickr.com/photos/charmainezoe/5540175157/) and a petticoat. Petticoats during this period were gored, and often flounced: http://www.vintagevictorian.com/images/1902_petticoat2.jpg.

And then finally, your character can put on her dress!

To answer your question, yes, most dresses of this era need proper support to look right. But not all. This reform dress by Liberty and Co. is one of my very favorites. Because of the smocking, it would not need to be worn with a corset. I don't know too much else about dress reform for this era.
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O108865/dress/
 
Last edited: