Dear Jeri, In fact, in rereading Marian Powys, I realized that she says the Diana and Endymion piece "Was inherited by the same person as the Garniture de Lit described above and is reputed to have been also used by Napoleon and Marie Louise. So the piece you refer to and the piece I am discussing were in the same hands. (My guess is Princess Stephanie.) Amazing what you see when you reread a book! Your point that it was desirable to be able to split up a big piece into pieces that could be made by many lacemakers in order to deliver the item before fashions change or rulers are deposed, a major problem in the mid-19th century, is well observed. I have heard that a major breakthrough in making "big lace" such as was so popular in the 19th century was the development of point de racroc, the joining method for point ground lace. This was done with a needle, or two needles and thus a large piece like a shawl or fan could be made by several people and joined invisibly, hastening production. Consequently, you would think that multiple people making strips of drochel and then joining them with a needle as in point de racroc would make complete sense. It is then with a feeling of hysterical incomprehension that I observe that the way the drochel strips are joined seems to imply that the worker of a strip is joining that strip to the adjacent one at every row. The situation seems to be that at the edge of the first strip, a loop of twisted threads is left. Then when the second strip is made, the worker sews in to the first strip. So, this negates the advantage of having lots of strips in terms of how many people can make them simultaneously. I suppose that it might be possible for individual strips to be made in advance, and then have a worker joining into a strip on the right and a strip on the left, but it still doesn't operate as smoothly as a solution where you would start with many strips and then join with a needle or some other clever way. But, perhaps I am not understanding what I am seeing. I am going to keep Jeri's email at the bottom of this one because some people don't get them sometimes. Devon
On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 3:17 PM Jeri Ames <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Devon, > > Some history memories: > > I seem to recall that Napoleon ordered very large laces for his first wife, > Empress Josephine (m. 1796-1809). These took so long to execute by hand that > they were delivered when he was married to his second wife, Marie Louise - > Duchess of Parma (m. 1810-1821). I think this is mentioned in several lace > history books, and explains why grounds were worked in narrow strips and lace > motifs were individually made and appliqued on various grounds for large > orders. > > We have also read that lacemakers were not paid for laces until they were > delivered, which explains why they developed an early form of an assembly > line, with a number of lacemakers all working on different stages of the same > commission. There been discussions on Arachne through the years that in part > laces lacemakers only received a pricking (design) for the elements they > worked as individuals, and not the entire large piece of lace - to ensure > that a design would not be copied. I remember this was done with the Honiton > wedding laces made for Queen Victoria, so it would make sense that this was > common practice in lace-making countries. > > Only the very rich and powerful could afford laces that were made on a grand > scale. They would not tolerate lace copies being made for the use of others. > > Jeri Ames in Maine USA > Lace and Embroidery Resource Center > ------------------------------------------- > In a message dated 1/19/2019 1:03:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected]. Photo site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lacemaker/sets/
