I made it

@@sewthroughtime oh wow! That’s amazing!

It is 😊 the stained glass window in the animation

a) Split drawers b) Maternity corsets

Rich women wore shawls too in this era as they were a highly fashionable item 😊

Onaya

Not bunched but covered. This way even if you'd fall with your skirts up you wouldn't flash people with privates

Black was a fashionable color definitely not only for mourning and this fabric is all wrong for mourning as it's a smooth wool with slight sheen to it. Simply for fashion

riiiight. Corsets and petticoats are something your ancestors definitly wore, unless they were dirtpoor and lived on the streets. Both weren't that expensive.

@@loverofteaandspice What do you mean by "that expensive"? My ancestors were very poor and lived on farms, so yes, they were what is called "dirt-poor". They had to hand-sew clothes from cheap cloth and probably could not afford to buy new shoes for their children so they had to wear used shoes their older siblings outgrew or went barefoot. They were also in a church that believed that wealth is sinful and being poor is a virtue. The would have considered corsets and petticoats absurd luxuries of the idle, sinful wealthy class.

@@deewesthill1213 I don't think that you get me. With 'dirt-poor', I mean actively starving and taking 'every' job. "Off the rack" corsets cost around 1$ in the US and were wearable for years on end. Since certain styles supported both the bust and back, especially for the working woman, while being very flexible, buying one would make sense. Of course it would not be like the more fashionable and highly structured version like the one in the video, but still. Same goes for petticoats. The ones your ancestors wore would probably be mended a lot more, maybe not have the ruffles and be shorter. But it did not only protect the overgown, but also helped with warmth and may have even been quilted. Those were even less expensive. I really don't mean to be rude, but as an genealogist and historical reenactor I just had to jump in :).

@@loverofteaandspice I don't care about your occupations, you are still wrong, so please do NOT presume to tell me what you imagine my female ancestors wore! They were subsistence farmers on farms with poor soil. Most of the time they had no money, and if they had a little extra it went for absolute necessities or to help out even poorer unemployed relatives who would come by begging for spare change. My mother mentioned how her younger sister in her early teens tried unsuccessfully to hand-sew herself a brassiere from old cloth scraps because there was no money to buy one from Sears-Roebuck. Around age 16 they and all their other siblings got jobs teaching in one room schools, and only then could they finally afford a FEW luxuries like lingerie and new shoes.

@@deewesthill1213 Alright. You know, I will, indeed, never know half as much about your ancestors as you do, as I don't intend on studying them. I was just stating that there is a very long way between what the video shows, and nothing at all. Many a times even the poorest women, those who died from hypothermia because they lived on the streets, wore both of these things. I can presume, it may never be completely right, but I just wanted to explain some things to you and offer possible insight. There is no need to get worked up, as I never had the intention of aggravating you with my words. If I did, then I am truly sorry.