English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

12 answers

What an interesting question! During the early part of the 19th century dresses actually looked quite different with no visible waist, long lean lines and few petticoats (Empire or Regency style -- click here for a gorgeous example: http://www.mauritia.de/en/empire/regencydress2.html). The dresses were inspired by the classical era (Greek and Roman antiquity) and corsets were not needed, because the waistline was so high. If you are a fan of Jane Austen ("Emma" or "Sense & Sensibility) you probably know exactly what I am talking about :-).

During the 1830s, the silhouettes changed -- inspired by a post-Napolenic Wars prosperity and the industrial revolution that created a new wealthy class, the bourgeoisie. These women were virtually required to display that their husbands could "afford them" and they did so with gusto: lots of expensive fabrics, very full skirts, puffed sleeves, etc. The corset (actually a much earlier invention) also came back to create a tiny waist that appeared even narrower because of the voluminous skirts.

As skirts got fuller, women had to layer more and more petticoats - sometimes stiffened with horsehair. All this fabric was of course quite uncomfortable and very heavy. Eventually fashionable skirt fullness reached a point that could no longer be achieved with petticoats and the hoop skirt was invented. It was hailed as a wonderful invention, and I can imagine that women whose movement had been hampered by six or seven petticoats indeed praised this garment that finally allowed them to move their legs again without sacrificing the latest styles. In my opinion, tt was a beautiful and very feminine fashion. Here are some lovely examples:
1. http://www.mauritia.de/de/bieder/bourdettcoutts.html (no hoop skirt)
2. http://www.mauritia.de/de/bieder/sissi.html and http://www.mauritia.de/de/bieder/alexandrowna.html

While the corset cinched the waist to give the desired slenderness and fashionable figure, it also served a - dare I say it? - more practical purpose by distributing the weight of the skirt fabric more evenly and by providing some back support.

In the 1870s fickle fashion changed again, the hoop skirt was forgotten, and the latest style was the bustle and the S-shaped figure with a very pronounced bosom and bottom: http://www.mauritia.de/de/gruender/gruender2.html

The floor length skirt or dress remained the only acceptable garment for a woman well into the 20th century (hemlines rose during and after World War I). The reasons were - as some people already indiciated - modesty and fashion. A well-bred lady's legs and feet should never be seen, and even "athletic" attire (e.g., riding costumes and later tennis dresses) was designed to cover her legs.

I hope this helps. I have some wonderful links I would be happy to send you if you are interested.

2006-11-26 12:10:16 · answer #1 · answered by sipplek 2 · 3 0

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
Why did women wear hoop skirts, floor length dresses, and corsets in the 1800's?

2015-08-09 04:27:20 · answer #2 · answered by Brande 1 · 0 0

Hoop Skirt Dresses

2016-12-14 17:15:47 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Hoop Dress

2016-10-29 21:45:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It was inappropriate for women to wear anything but that. Hoops were added to the dresses to make them wider and more fancy. I think I heard once the bigger the hoops, the wealthier the woman -technically it would be her husband would be the wealthy one...-. Corsets were used to pull in the waist and make women look petite, delicate, and above all thin. Floor length skirts were just the style, and it was considered un-modest if the dress were above the ankles.

2006-11-24 07:12:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

I don't really know, but other than the simple fact that fashion does change, I would guess that perhaps whalebone, which was the material of choice in making the stays which gave corsets and hoops their shape, became much scarcer and much more expensive, due to over killing of the whales.

2006-11-24 07:15:48 · answer #6 · answered by pessimoptimist 5 · 2 0

It was the "Victorian Era", and considered quite improper for a lady to show any of the curves of her figure, especially the lower portion of her body. To see any hint of a woman's legs or even her ankles would be considered positively shocking!

2006-11-24 07:15:47 · answer #7 · answered by Feathery 6 · 2 0

That's like asking why women wear "Butt floss" thongs for underwear now? It's fashion. It is determined by what people found or find to be appropriate and attractive.

2006-11-24 07:13:39 · answer #8 · answered by Doc 7 · 3 1

Well, the women looked much better than most of them do in this era. Lots of work and maintenance, but oh so lovely!

2006-11-24 07:12:03 · answer #9 · answered by Lucia 3 · 3 1

for the same reason they wear minis and belly button studs today. "Fashion" I believe it is called.

2006-11-24 08:34:01 · answer #10 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers