CRINOLINE In the mid-nineteenth century, the ideal
feminine figure was an hourglass above a broad base of
full skirts. Wide skirts, which made the waist look smaller
and were thought to give women dignity and grace, were
supported by layers of petticoats, some made of crino-
line, a stiff fabric woven from horsehair (the name de-
rives from the French crin, horsehair, and lin, linen).
Crinoline, however, was expensive, heavy, crushable, eas-
ily soiled, and could not be cleaned. To enable women’s
skirts to become as immense as fashion desired, a more
effective skirt support was needed. Petticoats were dis-
tended with cane and whalebone—and even with inflated
rubber tubes—but with limited success.
In 1856, a new support was introduced, made of
graduated, flexible sprung-steel rings suspended from
cloth tapes. The names for these structures included
“hoopskirts,” “steel skirts,” and “skeleton skirts”; they
were also called “crinolines,” since, confusingly, this term
was applied to all skirt expanders, and sometimes referred
to as “cage crinolines” or “cages.”
Indeed, some have perceived hoopskirts as cages im-
prisoning women. The hindrance of hoops reflected the
ideal, cloistered social role of women of the time, who
were, as a male commentator in Godey’s Lady’s Book of
August 1865 (p. 265) put it, “unfitted by nature and con-
stitution to move easily or feel in their place in the bus-
tle of crowds and the stir of active out-door life.” To
many Victorian women, however, hoopskirts promoted
“a free and graceful carriage” and were hailed as a bless-
ing. In contrast to numerous hot and heavy petticoats,
hoopskirts were lightweight, modest, healthful, econom-
ical, and comfortable.
Hoopskirts were a marvel of contemporary technol-
ogy and manufacturing, with many possible variations in
construction. Most hoopskirts were made using tempered
sprung steel, which had an incredible ability to return to
shape. This was rolled into thin sheets, cut into narrow
widths, and then closely covered in cotton tubular braid
finished with sizing to give a smooth surface. To make a
hoop, a length was cut and the ends secured, usually with
a small piece of crimped metal. Graduated hoops were
then arranged on a frame in the desired shape and sus-
pended from cotton tapes, secured either by metal studs
or put through specially made double-woven pockets in
the tapes. At the top, partial hoops left an opening over
the stomach so the hoop could be put on and secured by
a buckled waistband. The entire hoop weighed a mere
eight ounces to less than two pounds.
The large skirt supports of earlier centuries, such as
the Elizabethan farthingale and the eighteenth-century
pannier, had been the preserve of the upper classes; by
the mid-nineteenth century, however, more women
could participate in fashion. Middle-class women and
even maids and factory girls now sported hoopskirts, al-
though their cheaper versions had twelve or fewer hoops
while more expensive models with twenty to forty hoops
gave a smoother line. The pretensions of the “lower or-
ders” was one of the many aspects of hoops that inspired
caricaturists. Also ridiculed—and exaggerated—was the
balloon-like appearance of overdressed ladies in immense
hoops and flounced skirts. (At the extreme, hoopskirts
could be up to four yards in circumference, although
three yards or less was more common.) More risqué car-
toons highlighted the tendency of springy hoops to fly
up revealingly; for modesty’s sake, many respectable
women now adopted long loose underpants or drawers.
The demand for hoopskirts was so great that facto-
ries flourished across the United States and Europe.
Harper’s Weekly of February 19, 1859 (p. 125) claimed
that two New York factories each produced 3,000 to
4,000 hoopskirts per day. As production continued to in-
crease throughout the 1860s, the hoopskirt industry em-
ployed thousands, consumed vast quantities of raw
materials, and utilized the latest technologies. As nu-
merous patent applications show, great ingenuity was ap-
plied to creating improved hoop machinery and
specialized features. Advertisements touted the superior-
ity of their products and gave them impressive names,
such as “Champion,” “Ne Plus Ultra,” and one brand
named after the fashion icon of the time, the French em-
press Eugénie.
During the era of the hoop, skirt silhouettes gradu-
ally evolved. The dome-shaped skirts of the 1850s gave
way to tapered skirts that flared from waist to hem, so sup-
ports were correspondingly smaller on top and often had
hoops only below the knee. Hoopskirts similarly re-
sponded to the fluctuations of fashionable skirt lengths.
When the hoop was first introduced, women’s skirts
touched or nearly touched the ground, but shorter skirts
increasingly became the rage in the 1860s, and skirts also
began to be looped up over a shortened underskirt for
walking, causing what some claimed was an “unseemly dis-
play of ankle.” In the same period, trained skirts, dragging
nine inches or more on the ground, also became increas-
ingly fashionable; by the mid-1860s hoopskirts were spe-
cially designed with extra fullness at the bottom back to
gracefully support and keep the train away from the feet.
The demise of the hoop skirt was forecast by fash-
ion arbiters from the time of its introduction, yet hoops
remained indispensable to most women throughout the
1860s. By the very late 1860s, attention shifted to the
back of the skirt and emphasis was on the bustle which
now augmented the hoop. As bustles became more pro-
nounced, the hoop was definitively declared out of fash-
ion by the early 1870s. However, even into the 1880s
some women wore small hoops—as little as eighteen or
even sixteen inches in diameter, which must have been a
hindrance when walking—to keep their skirts clear of
their legs.
Marvels of technology, industry, and ingenuity,
hoopskirts perfectly suited the societal and aesthetic
needs of their time. In the November 1861 issue of
CRINOLINE
317
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CLOTHING AND FASHION
69134-ECF-C_211-332.qxd 8/16/2004 2:31 PM Page 317