2021 was all about the 18th century, and I carried this theme all the way to the end of the year and made a 1790s ensemble. Granted, this was for an event that I ended up not attending in December, but I've wanted a gown with chintz fabric for a while now.
I doubly like this gown because it's one of the only projects in the last few months that hasn't needed altered because of my recent weight loss. The bib-front does all the work.
I really had such high hopes for my hair, I mean you can't go wrong with the 1790s, right? Turns out you can by using rollers that are too small. The smaller ones were fine for the front, but I should've used looser ones at the back. It turned out very 1780s does 1800s. The damp day also didn't help, and by the end of what was probably a 30 minute shoot, some of my hair was straight, even though I'd used the smallest rollers. And yes, I did use setting spray. My hair just doesn't like curling. Ironically, my attempt at Halloween (when I wasn't trying to go HA) would probably have been better.
Apart from that I really like this ensemble. The Spencer has a few issues, but nothing that I care to fix, and I finally have a proper fichu! All in all, a really great end to the sewing year.
 |
| Did I know I wasn't in the frame? No, and there's a few of these... |
The Making of...
Do you have fabrics saved on your wishlist, hoping one day you'll get the excuse to buy it and make a gown from it? Me too! I have a few really, but one long-time love of mine is Dutch chintz. Chintz fabric is just a special kind of print fabric that rose to prominence in the 18th century. Think of most of the 18th century caraco jackets and matching skirt sets, and that's essentially Chintz.
Luckily for me there is a seller of reproduction Dutch chintz fabric in the UK, and almost all of their selection has been on my favourites list for years. This year, thanks to an event (plague willing), I finally got to buy some for a project, although not the one you're probably thinking (spoilers in the title).
As you probably know, since you're here, fashions changed quite considerably in Europe after the French Revolution in 1793. It went from the tight, form-fitting structured monstrosities of the 18th century to the empire-waisted, looser more relaxed styles of the 1790s, which would continue on until the 1820s. If you've been around here before, you'll know I'm obsessed with transitional periods of fashion. I find them the most interesting periods in fashion history. My latest foray was the 1820s, but I've always liked the 1790s as well. I have made 1.5 1790s gowns before from Indian blocked cotton before but they haven't aged well, and most recently I altered my first chemise a la reine into a 1790s gown.
Now, I could've worn my most recent one to the event (a lunch and historic house tour), but it was so summery (white with brown floral pattern) and made out of the thinnest cotton lawn you've ever seen. The event was in December in England. I had some time on my hands, and thought why not make another more wintery version? Enter the chintz fabric.
Very wintery, I know. I was going to go for red or a navy, but the patterns were very bold, very much earlier in the century, and I just thought they were a bit too busy even for the 1790s. I know women remade earlier gowns from these busy fabrics in the 1790s, but there was just something a bit...too much for me. This particular fabric comes in ecru (an off white) and a rosy-red, which was too pink for my liking (which might have gone better with the green velvet spencer I'm planning to make as well, but I'm not that big a fan of pink, hence why there's no pink costumes in my portfolio). I preferred the blue over the off-white, because then what would be the point in making another 1790s gown?
I had a plan. I was going to get the pattern from the original altered chemise a la reine, and just do the same thing again, with some improvements as the construction of the original wasn't that great. Then I made the mistake of looking at my pinterest board and saw another option.
 |
| Is it just me, or is this very similar to the fabric I bought, just darker? |
A waistband. Well, chintz the bed. I really liked that style. That was how I got away with my 1820s gown. I think flat waistbands are so flattering, especially with the "is she pregnant or not?" look of the empire-waisted fashions. Yes, I'm not that big a fan of anything between 1800 and 1820. The only reason I can stomach the 1790s is because of the full skirts.
How to engineer this waistband, though, if I wanted a gathered bodice front? So much for this gown being an easy two drawstring and you're done kind of gown. There were a few options I could think of.
1.) Bib front. Mainly gowns like this would've been bib-fronted. This was a style very popular for the next decade or do, and it essentially means the entire bodice front is attached by buttons, pins, or hooks at the shoulders, and the full front of the dress falls away to reveal a fitted lining. Google images will do a better job of explaining it. This complicated things, and I was very aware I had the exact right amount of fabric and that was it. I couldn't afford to get it wrong.
2.) Centre front opening. Hear me out. If you look at the 3rd picture (the lovely sea foam silk gown) you can definitely see on the front waistband (which I'm not convinced goes all the way round, btw) has a CF seam where the waistband appears to fasten with hooks, and a dark shadow down the skirt that looks like the opening. I love this gown, but I think the CF fastening looks...clunky? And I'm also not big on that waistband only being in the front.
3.) False waistband. Make the gown up the original way I had planned - fastened with two drawstrings at the centrefront. Make a waistband out of the same fabric as the dress, sew to one side, put hooks and eyes on the other, and then fasten it across the waistline. I was really tempted by this option. The only thing that put me off was the bulk. Drawstring gowns have bulk where the drawstrings are, obviously. The waistband wouldn't really lie as smoothly as it could because it'd be going over the gathers.
I pondered, I planned, I engineer-ed, and decided on the bib-front. It was mostly the challenge. I have yet to successfully pull off a bib-fronted gown, so may as well try when the stakes were high.
I wasn't actually sure how wide the bib was supposed to be, whether it was to go all the way to the armscye, just be on the edge of the neckline, or somewhere in between. I got a large square of an old bedsheet that has been condemned for mock-up fabric and played around with it until I thought it looked right. Then cut out the fashion fabric.
Oh, yeah. I made it super low. What I did notice about the 1790s gowns above was the low necklines, and in some cases I mean super low. Lauren from American Duchess recreated the last gown pictured and rightly pointed out that it had to be worn with a fichu or a chemisette as the neckline actually dipped below her stays. My stays are pretty low, so I think the lowest point of the neckline is level with the top of my stays. I could, technically, get away with having the ladies on display, but I went the same route as Lauren from AD and decided this gown would always be worn with something underneath.
I did have a slight problem in that the lining is showing at the corners of the neckline, so I'll have to go and alter that. The reason I did the bodice first was to make sure everything lined up, mainly the belt at the waistband. The belt itself is a straight piece fo fabric folded down 1/2" on each side, which is quite happily the seam allowance I always use. The belt is in two pieces, like the bodice itself. I machine stitched the one on the back, but I decided to applique stitch the belt on the bib as I wasn't confident I could keep it in position as it went through my sewing machine. When you need precision, it's better to hand sew. I lined the bib as well with some white cotton lawn(?). It's all in one drawer and sometimes I have no idea what is just a flimsy poplin or a sturdy lawn.
Then it was onto the skirts because who wants to do sleeves (I also hadn't patterned the sleeves because I'm a heathen)? I have a few sleeve patterns from the 18th century, but for some reason I've had issues with the previous 3 attempts I've made, and I still can't quite figure out why. This bodice is also shaped a bit differently, the armscyes in the back are deeper, so it was easier just patterning a sleeve from scratch.
I did toy with the idea of doing a 1790s bustle pad but where my bodice waistline lies, and the waistband on the gown, it was just weird. It doesn't appear from some of the fashion plates I used as research that it was as common as I thought it was.
Now we're onto skirts. I measured from the waistline to a few inches below where I wanted the hem to be (I always add extra inches becuase it's difficult measuring on yourself and I'm not always that accurate). I didn't know how wide I wanted the skirt to be, or if I even had enough fabric to make it wide. The other issue was that the cotton is quite sturdy, proper good quality cotton, which meant there would possibly be some bulk at the waistline if there was too much fabric in the skirts.
Then I had an intrusive thought. That waistband's too wide. Thankfully it was relatively easily fixed as I could just take it up at the bottom where the skirts would be attached.
I couldn't decide how to attach the skirts; gathering or pleating. Pleating is neater, but I preferred the volume of the gathering. Not that volume was a problem. I decided it'd be a good idea to use 2 full panels of the fabric for the skirts, and oh boy was that a mistake. There was so much fabric that the gathers turned into the world's smallest cartridge pleats. I was going to applique stitch the skirt onto the bodice, but I ended up having to do a weird, and very unsightly, whipstitch. Just don't look too closely and it'll be fine.
I took my time with the sleeves due to the aforementioned reasons of having some problems with the current patterns I have. I think it took me a few attempts to figure out it was the depth of the sleevehead on the pattern. The problem I was always getting was that the sleeve would always pull down the shoulder straps, or there would be some tension there. I'm 90% confident it was that the sleevehead on the pattern wasn't deep enough, but I'll have to re-test the pattern on an earlier style gown to see if it's possibly because this gown pattern was different. The sleeves are a bit baggy at the top, but whenever I tried to alter it something else would go wrong, so I ended up just leaving it.
Since I'd made the skirt a bit longer, I had the wee-est of trains, and I pondered over what to do with it. What costumer doesn't love a good train, but practically speaking they're kind of a pain in the arse. I've not attended many events, but the ones I have gone to I've never had a train. This outfit's intended first outing was to a stately home, which was relatively clean, but still.
Yet, despite these practical arguments, I kept the train, but I took a leaf from the Victorians and installed a duster....floor duster....train-keep-clean-thingy? I can't remember what the official name is, but it's usually some fabric that Victorian ladies used to be able to attach to the insides of their trains (the bit that connects to the floor/ground) to keep the expensive fabric clean. They could remove it to replace or wash it. I'm not sure if this was in practice in the 1790s, but I don't care, I love this gown.
I had some weird pleated trim I think I may have used for the same purpose for my Natural Form Era ball gown, and had quite a lot left over. I also faced the hem at the back, so doubt protection. The front is suitably up off the ground to prevent me tripping.
I eventually attached hooks and eyes at the bib and the waistband, but left it till quite late as I kept losing weight and I didn't want what happened to my Halloween 2021 gown to happen to this one too. A week before the event I had to quickly alter my 1790s stays because they'd become too big.
I ended up not attending the event, but at least I have an awesome 1790s/regency outfit that I can whip out whenever the need arises, which is always handy.
I also made a Spencer to go with this, but didn't really document the process. I made a Spencer years ago but eventually ripped it apart because I never liked it. I had some green cotton velvet leftover and thought it would be the perfect outerwear for this ensemble, I even had a green velvet regency beret that I bought years ago! I made my first reticule with the scraps.
This project was probably my favourite, but I don't know if that's because of how it turned out, or because I worked on it when I was on a much-needed career break. I definitely saved the best till last.
