New chemises

It seems each year I say this: I need new chemises. Petticoats are apparently on the thin side too but I have enough to get by.

Sometimes they appear; sometimes they don't. I've given up hope that they will magically appear and with all my projects going on I just end up wearing the same ones that are in need of replacement. I have one sturdy antique one that gets worn occasionaly but I'd rather make my own. One year when we drove to Palm Desert to use up a week of our timeshare we were going to lose if we didn't, I used that time by bringing my sewing machine with me and cut out and sewed two chemises on my "Assembly Line", while hubby was golfing. Hmm, methinks we need another week to burn up, don't we dear?
I just got Jennifer Rosbrugh's Historical Sewing newsletter this morning and it reminded me that yes I did need new ones. Especially after my more recent ones were shredded in front by my new corset after they got caught in the front hooks. Granted, I had used a very very thin cotton; what was I thinking? But that's how you learn, by your mistakes.
And what did I do on the first day of the New Year? I started cutting out two new 1830s dresses. No chemises on the cutting table.

Until I got that newsletter in my email box this morning. Thank you Jennifer. The newsletter contained information on fabrics to use for them. http://historicalsewing.com/fabrics-for-undergarments
Hmmm, now that I'm reading it, she's announcing a Victorian undergarment online class in a few weeks. She's on Facebook too. https://www.facebook.com/HistoricalSewing
For the most part I haven't had any problem wearing the various ones I have for any time period as long as the neckline didn't show above the dress I was wearing. But in the last couple years I've made a lot of square neck dresses that those don't really work for, except my 1770s one. Even the ones that can be pulled down on the shoulders still show above that low square neckline.
In the past I've made ones from Kanicks Korner for my 1770s dresses, and they have a very wide open neckline that can be pulled in tighter with a ribbon, although that ribbon always seems to get lost inside its channel.

For my Victorian dresses the first ones I made were from Truly Victorian. The neckline and armholes were just finished off with beaded eyelet trim. At that time the split drawers were a foreign animal to me, and didn't come into my life until almost 10 years later.

Next I made a couple from Laughing Moon's pattern, which after I made it I found out the armholes had a tendency to be too narrow, and that's a major problem with me. But the neckline is really sweet.

Over the years I started collecting patterns for the underpinnings for all the eras I make. One of my favorites was for a bodiced petticoat for my Regency dresses, using LaMode Bagatelle's drawstring neck dress. It's a great replacement for the stays of that period. 

And here's where I found out I had a LOT of these patterns while digging around this morning for this blog. 

 Have yet to make corset covers but should.

When I first mentioned I needed a square neck pattern, I bought a pair of the TV combinations but the length from neckline to crotch was too short and uncomfortable so I'm waiting for a new pair. So someone suggested using an earlier time period pattern that had a very wide square neckline, Simplicity 2621. I bought it on sale and its sitting here next to me, ready to go on the pile to be cut. 

As I continued digging in my pattern stash I found this Past Patterns #002 that was given to me. The neckline isn't as deep as I'd like but it's for 1840 and is a little closer to the time period I want. I think I'll pull that out and take a closer look at it too. 

Now I'll go read Jennifer's article and see what I have in my fabric stash for them. 

While searching on Pinterest for pattern ideas, I can across this and had to share. 

Happy New Underpinnings Year to you!