Featured Need Help with Antique Apron & Valenciennes Lace

I was about to list this apron and noticed in my closeup photos that the entire thing is hand sewn including the pin tucks. So then I wondered whether the lace was hand or machine made. I assumed it's machine made, but decided I should re-read @Northern Lights Lodge Lace Lesson #7 - Valenciennes Lace, but still am not sure about the apron lace--can you help, Leslie?

I'm also not sure if the apron is Victorian, Edwardian, or other era (it's made for a tiny waist)--can anyone help with that question also?

 

That is lovely But I can't help.

 

Thank you, Pearls

 

Just, wow! It's absolutely stunning! Following this thread.

 

Thank you, Lucille.

 

is it odd that I'm somewhat aroused by that uniform...?

 

Such delicate work, a lot of patience and nimble hands. Beautiful, and still in good condition.

 

Definitely NOT something to wear to make spaghetti sauce! Lovely and a labor of love!!!!

 

Interesting that you would say that, since I was originally thinking of photographing the apron in a “French maid” outfit -- or even with no dress underneath. But after I realized all the hand work that went into it, and that it’s probably older than I thought, I decided to give the mannequin more of a parlourmaid look.

But I’m still puzzled about the age of the apron and who would have worn it. I’m wondering if a servant would have ever worn an apron with that much hand work, but I read somewhere online that parlourmaids sometimes made their own aprons. Or was it made as a labor of love for a daughter to wear over a fancy dress? The waist ties seem short even for a small woman.

 

rich folk.....fancy servants ???

too classy for a French maid.......but you got the gist of it !!

 

Hi Joan,
What a pretty little piece! Unusual, pretty apron, for sure! I can't say I've ever seen one with a back "V" neck like that, all the pintucks and the beautiful embroidery!

I've given careful examination to the lace... unclear if I'm looking at the front or the back or both...
That said... here's what I can tell you...

*Yes, I think you have pegged it correctly as machine Valenciennes! Good JOB! A+++

*This lace is made it was made by working the long length... not shortwise.

*The netting area, looks as if it is supposed to be a hex ground, which is constructed with four thread bars or braids (which "should" lay flat) and then at the end of the bar/braid, 2 threads (or 1 pair) splits off to the left and 2 threads (or 1 pair) splits off to the right. In comparison with your piece, the cross overs to new bars (or braids) look garbled and the entire net area appears to be made of "round braids" rather than flat ones.

Refer to the blue circle on photo below. This seems "odd", since if you compare to other similar connections, they are not all like that - some DO appear to be woven. I can't "quite" make it out... but it appears that threads in that blue circle, have come from the above braids and just looped around the one on the bottom...giving it a "looped" appearance rather than an actual braided connection. If you compare to other similar connections, they are not all like that - some DO appear to be woven. Very inconsistent.

*If you review the first Valenciennes Lesson #7 top image, and compare the look of the grounds or netting. Although they are a slightly different shape than your example, the crossings of the pairs in the Lesson example are much "tighter", but all connections appear to actually be woven together.

*Also, in the yellow circles (and there are other locations that I didn't circle); note that there are "cut offs" or which have frayed. Although it is possible to find "cut offs" and frays in hand made pieces; this is amount is excessive and would indicate that threads were added in and then just "cut off" where not needed.

Again if you refer to the Valenciennes Lesson #7 top image, you can see some very tiny shadows or bumps on the right hand side of some of the design elements. I should have taken a front photo also...but I believe these are the "cut offs". The cloth stitch is so TIGHT in the design elements, that those cut off threads are indeed cut off very closely to the lace work itself and is very, very unlikely to ever become anymore unravelled or come loose from the body of the element.



*In the photo below, the blue and yellow indicate the outline threads in this lace. In this instance, if you follow the blue line, it is very inconsistent. Sometimes it is 2 threads next to each other and sometimes it appears to be a braid, sometimes it is loosely twisted, sometimes not twisted at all.

*In following the yellow highlighted area, this also appears to be an outline thread... but again it is not consistent. It "should" be constructed of at least a few threads which run continuously around the outer edge of the elements; but, it seems to start and stop at different points and then, sometimes, only contains threads which are entering or exiting the design element.

If you go back and review the Valenciennes Lesson #7, first image; review how neatly the outline is managed around the elements...it is a single pair that the ground/netting pairs and the element threads work through (in and out of)...the outline threads stay true to themselves as a pair of threads.



*Lastly, if we examine this last photo... I've marked frayed cut offs on each side of the ball element... this seems to indicate that the extra threads which were needed to make the ball sufficiently filled, were added on one side (perhaps the on the right) and removed on the other (perhaps on the left)... which indicates to me that the extra threads just ran parallel over the netting (or ground) as loose threads, worked in and out of the ball element and were cut off on both sides when the lace was "finished off".

*In the examination of the yellow highlighted "peaked" area... threads are very inconsistent - coming in and going out, twisted or not twisted... just very odd.

*The blue highlights are in regard to the picot edge. In handmade bobbin lace, "picots" or the little loop on the edge, can be made with either a single - tightly twisted thread, so that it twists up tightly on itself, is pinned through the twist and the thread moves on.

Or there are a number of ways that a picot can be worked with 2 threads, none of which seem to be worked in the below example...sorry. Clearly, 2 threads have been utilized, but only a few picots appear to have ANY twists in them - usually these are just looped out and go back into the work, as shown in the blue circle below.
The yellow "V" that comes out, appears to do a picot and goes back up into the cloth stitch area, looks the "closest" to what "should" be occurring. But, the blue boxes show that that "V" area is very square and it rather "looks" as if the threads come out of the cloth stitch area and more or less work into that edge braid (indicated by the blue line) that allows the loopy picot "out" and then those pairs work back into the braid and is later let out to go back into the cloth stitch area.

Ultimately, "consistency" is the key with handmade lace. I find that, generally, in handmade bobbin lace, mistakes are are "one off's"...meaning the lacemaker skipped a pin, or took the wrong worker, something that is either omitted in the work or corrected by the next repeat.

I find this piece to be very inconsistent, pretty much everywhere. Sorry! The tension is inconsistent, stitches are inconsistent, picots are truly just - worked incorrectly... and yet, I've never seen a piece of machine made lace made quite like this! At a distance it is positively lovely!

I always enjoy scrutinizing a piece of lace, whether it be hand or machine... this one was truly different!

Thanks for sharing!
Cheerio,
Leslie

 

Ya, sure Northern........ now tell us what you really think !! ....

 

WOW! Thank you, Leslie, for your detailed explanation and photo markups. Your knowledge is amazing. The photos are of the front side of the lace. The inconsistencies you mentioned never seeing in machine made lace make me wonder if it's from a machine that wasn't working properly, or maybe an employee didn't set it up properly???

 

You are quite welcome! My thoughts were that it was perhaps an earlier machine lace; where they hadn't quite refined techniques that made machine pieces more "consistent" - and that could amount to a machine not being set up properly.

That makes more sense to me than a lacemaker... even a poor one. My reasoning is, that even though it is a narrow and a relatively simply styled piece, it is still a fairly complex pattern. It has a complex ground or netting, the outlines around the elements and even the shallow scallop - any lacemaker would have to be fairly skilled to even attempt it. And, I'll mention here, that picots are one of the first skills that a lacemaker learns! I just don't see any parts of it, which are worked "cleanly enough" (without inconsistencies), which would indicate that it was made by hand. So, therefore, process of elimination, led me to believe that it is indeed machine.

I truly love "reading" lace. It is fun to pick it "visually" apart and make deductions! Your example was a good challenge!

Cheerio,
Leslie

 

Hi Joan,
I did find a machine example which might be helpful. This piece appears to have no
front or back side... both sides look nearly identical. But the pattern has similarities to yours.



In comparing your piece to this one, although they do have a similar ground, you'll note in the photo below, the yellow circles are around a garbled area in every repeat!

The blue circle around the "ball", and the blue line under it along the "wave element", highlights the fact that it IS a fairly uniform outline, much more like you'd find in handmade lace.

The small blue circles have that curious "loop" connection which appears in yours, and repeated in the same location along the piece.

Lastly the black "Vee's", which in a very few locations, do more accurately mimic the in and out of the worker threads.

My last notation which I didn't color code; but it is pretty clear, is the more uniform threads that go lengthwise through the piece, that the top has a very nicely mimicked "footing edge" which has a straight edge, with a narrow space and then two passive pairs which run parallel to the straight edge. This is quite similar to a handmade footing and, infact, VERY hard to tell hand from machine if that is your ownly clue!

In the lower design "wave elements", it is "almost" clear, but there are garbles to the right and left, around the "eyes", where the threads may actually be stitched or knotted to fill the space without adding extra pairs.


So, I think this is a nice example of something from a lace machine that had either better programming, or had more precise stitches. It has more of what real handmade lace has, and less of what earlier(?) machine examples have...

Loved this challenge! Hope you did too!
Cheerio,
Leslie

 

Thank you so much, Leslie, for all the additional research and explanations. Now I no longer need to wonder if it's hand or machine made. Based on your comments I'm inclined to think it's an early version of machine made lace. Thank you again.