[...] N. Andries CAROLUSKANTJES [...] [...] I can't find its publication date [...]
Flip open the cover of the *patern portfolio* (not the info/photo booklet), and the publication date is there: 1998. But all the info booklet says is that the lace is 17th century; how much of it was of the 3rd decade of that century is unclear, but most (if not all) of the lace looks to be somewhat later (end of the century, rather than beginning). Pattern #30 is, probably, the only one of the collection which could "pass muster", though, even this one would require a lot of "stretching" -- it has almost the right width, but the scallops are nowhere near as deep as the earlier ones, and the technique (early Flanders), is wrong.
The Danish book -- Christian IV and Bobbin Lace, published by the Danish Lace Guild in '01 -- has *photos* of lace worn by that king up to and including 1648. The book also has patterns, but those have to be disregarded in this particular context -- there are a few from the *very early* 17th century (still mostly plaited), and the rest are patterns *called* "Christian IV", but *designed* in late 19th/early 20th c. They all share certain characteristics; one of those is that *none* of the laces look like, or use the techniques of, the laces worn by Christian IV (before 1644)... <g>
As someone has said before (sorry, can't remember who it was), 1630s (and 1640s, for that matter) was lace that could be called "early Milanese" -- a meandering *tape*, with some decoration within it, and *very little ground* (the last is true also of the "early Flanders", as in Caroluskantjes). For technical reasons (congestion in the "valleys") none of the "true" yardage laces (like Flanders, however early) are capable of forming scallops that are 2-3" deep; only tape laces can do that, because they turn back on themselves, instead of running straight down.
Jeri mentioned the possible *regional* differences in the style of clothing (and the lace on them) :
There is no indication of which country this inquiry is from. Costume of the
period varies quite a bit, depending on the country of origin [...]
I think I remember Sharon Palmer as being located in the US (though, as she was asking on behalf of a friend, that means nothing in itself <g>). But, even in Europe, there wasn't all that much difference in lace styles, from one decade to the next. They copied whatever was considered fancy as much as we do now. But, because the communication methods were slower than they are now (a woodcut carried on a ship or in a carriage, instead of a digital/scanned photo sent over the e-waves), the fashions didn't change (or not drastically) from season to season, either; a picture/miniature mannequin from 1625 France or Italy was likely to be -- still -- worth copying in England or Germany of 1630...
And, of course, in the *American Colonies* of 1630s, the time lag was likely to be even longer, given that the trip -- capital to capital (never mind the dissemination through the countryside) -- took 3 *months* instead of 3 weeks. *And* -- I should think -- in the American Colonies of 1630s, *anyone* wearing lace would have been as rare as hens' teeth... The governor of Virginia and his lady -- maybe... *100 yrs later*, when all the muckety-mucks of western Europe were having a "champagne bath" of lace trimmings, Americans -- in the main -- were still wearing prim muslin ties and shawls; look at the portraits...
----- Tamara P Duvall Lexington, Virginia, USA Formerly of Warsaw, Poland http://lorien.emufarm.org/~tpd/
- To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
