Comment

Comment by Paula Harten on May 1, 2012 at 4:06pm

I agree that this looks a lot like Beds, even the shape of the collar is like those in B. Underwood's book, but the one element that jumps out at me is the trails done in whole stitch.  I don't know if there are examples of Beds with that.  Interestingly, there are also a lot of whole stitch ground areas in Devon's unknown piece.

Comment by Devon Thein on May 1, 2012 at 3:21pm

Whatever this is, I may have another piece like it, this lace of uncertain origin.Helen and I have discussed it in the past and I don't think we formed any conclusion. The petals are tapered, not flat like the wheat ears of Bedfordshire, which seems to be significant.

Some people think that the building is St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, suggesting that it is a tourist item for mid-19th century tourists, possibly also suggesting an Italian origin, although there is no rule that tourist items actuallly have to be made anywhere near where they are sold.

Comment by Helen Bell on May 1, 2012 at 10:28am

Pretty piece.  I've seen some pieces that are reminiscent of that piece, and they would appear to be Danish.  It's got the Beds looking elements, but I'd hedge a guess that it's Danish.  It just makes me immediately think of the other pieces I've seen.

 

Comment by Lorelei Halley Administrator on April 30, 2012 at 10:30pm

Is this Bedfordshire, Danish, or possibly Swedish?

https://picasaweb.google.com/110476155563856600497/MuseoDeArenys?fe... 

It is from the Museo de Arenys.

Comment by Lorelei Halley Administrator on February 1, 2012 at 5:21pm

While searching for something else, I came across this page with some photos of antique bobbin and needle laces:

http://www.ladentelledupuy.com/index.php?page=tissutheque

Comment by Lorelei Halley Administrator on February 1, 2012 at 4:06pm

Patty

This is where Tebbs is really useful.  She uses all these deceitful names for the laces she describes how to make.  I haven't got it all straight in my head yet because the verbal descriptions are like untangling the tower of babel. 

In practical terms there are several varieties of part laces from the late 19th to early 20th century, that I've seen, that don't fit into the Brussels-Duchesse-Bruges Bloomwork continuum.

There is a kind of coarse Duchesse type lace, in terms of how the motifs are worked and their shapes, that I have several examples of on my website.  See http://lynxlace.com/bobbinlacerevivalerapart.html  #179   178   390   98   209    208   177 and possibly 123.   I have a few of these in my collection.  They are typical Duchesse in technique, but the scale is larger, worked perhaps in 100/2 linen (most good duchesse is considerably finer).  Yo Pauwels, who taught at Kantcentrum in the 1980s, was in Chicago to give us a workshop and stayed at my house.  I asked her what she thought they were.  She said "oh, we call that fine bloomwork"  fijn bloomwerk.  But it is not as coarse as Bruges bloomwork usually is and its technique is like simple duchesse, not Bruges bloomwork.

Then there is the Vieux Flandres you mention.  Please look at the same page in my website:   http://lynxlace.com/bobbinlacerevivalerapart.html   

#55   174   175   349  

But 338    166   165 are different again.  They have the coarse duchesse bobbin lace motifs, worked more openly (almost cheesecloth-like), but the odd thing is the handmade needle lace ground.

I cannot keep it straight in my head which of these is what Tebbs called "vieux flandres".  She also has other names.  I don't know which label goes with which piece.  But these are examples I've seen and handled.  I've always wondered what to call each of these types and exactly where they may have been made.  Tebbs probably has the answer, but I haven't worked it out yet.

Comment by Patty Dowden on February 1, 2012 at 1:47pm

I had an identification adventure at the Lace Museum several years ago.  A woman came in with some lace from a deceased relative that was not quite finished.  She also had a piece that needed to be repaired.

I showed her how to sew in the ends on the unfinished piece and she picked it up quite easily.  

The piece that needed a bit of repair was a puzzle to me as far as what kind of lie it was.  From it's condition, it seemed fairly old (1900 or so), and the first impression was Duchesse, but it was was TOO BIG.  The thread was too big, the parts were too big; it seemed a terrible quandary.  I couldn't tell her what it was.

Later I figured out that is was Vieux Flandre, a horror foisted off by the lace manufacturers with a fancy name implying great age.  What a shock!  While the woman was there, I kept running through the checklist in my head for Duchesse and saying yes to elements, grounds, pattern, but always came back to the sheer size of it.  

I am curious to know what other knowledgeable people know about Vieux Flandre. 

Comment by Beth Schoenberg on February 1, 2012 at 12:07am

What a great project.  Well done!

Have you shown the curator(s) at the museum the finished pieces?  I'll bet they'd love to see how the "fresh new" lace must have looked.  If they have seen your work, and/or your Bulletin article, what did they say?

Comment by Lorelei Halley Administrator on January 27, 2012 at 4:10pm

Fascinating.

Comment by Paula Harten on January 27, 2012 at 3:22pm

Actually the" hole with a cross: is made with 10 prs (white,white,red,white, white on each side) coming in and 10 prs going out.  The first and fifth pairs on each side form the sides of a box.  The center pairs (white and red) are plaited and crossed with a windmill crossing and the fourth pair on each side comes in, cuts off the corner and leaves, making the box appear rounded.   No pins are used at all.  I agree it gives the look of 4 honeycomb rings, but it is really less complicated and there is no gimp.

The "open hole" is more complicated because the five pairs coming from each side start with the first and second pairs from each side switching sides (through each other), then the third, fourth and (red) fifth pairs are brought through the first pairs that are continuing diagonally to the next hole. These incoming pairs are woven into a bundle before the third, fifth and second pairs are dropped off in sequence, thinning the bundles to a single pair on each side to join and form the bottom of the hole.  Working 10 pairs into a honeycomb would not recreate what I see in this detail of the Spiro lace.  

Yes, I found a page with images of Kortelahti's patterns and can see that she had, indeed done something like this, but with only 3 pairs coming from each side. A simple plait  would suffice to keep the first two pairs together and the third pair bounces of the plait in the middle of the sides.  I was hoping that was what I was seeing in the Spiro lace, but it really is not.  

As I said in the article, I am not suggesting that the pre-Columbian lace was the ancestor of our modern lace, but that things were learned, done and lost.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 47
• 48
• 49
• 50
• 51
• Next ›
• Page