I've been doing a lot of research on how to date vintage clothing and I came across this website. Do you gals agree or disagree with these tips? The one I'm most interested in is the Lot number one. It seems that clothes past "1979" used lot numbers. So my question: Should I take the existence of a Lot number into account at all when hunting or no? Code: http://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/
There is quite a bit of misinformation there. All these things can be indicators, but the writer is making them too definite. For example (her numbers) 1) Copyright year. "Approximately the year noted on the tag, or a few years later" All you can definitely say is it can't be earlier than that year. Eg Lots of DAKS checked garments are labelled copyright 1979, as that's when they copyrighted that check pattern, but they still date them like that today. She does mention this in her Note/Catch, but then goes on to say anything with a copyright date of earlier than 1992 can be defined as vintage. 4) Wool Marks. "Pre-1939 if the made-from-wool garment has no label identifying it as wool". This is misleading. There are lots of reasons a wool garment later than that might not have a fabric content label. 12) Washing Instructions "1971 or newer if the garment has a care label with at least one suggested instruction on how to wash/care for the garment. Pre-1971 if there’s absolutely no care instructions to be found on a tag" Again misleading. I've seen plenty of earlier than 1971 garments that had washing instructions of some kind. The symbols came later, so if you see washing symbols, you can be fairly sure it's post 1970s, but again there are exceptions. I have a 1960s sweater with the dry cleaning symbol for instance.
I don't agree with the information on half sizes or the Made in Mexico labels (big sweeping statement).
Same thing with the zip codes. They may have been introduced in '63, but it wasn't a requirement for quite some time after that. I imagine that labels that may have remained in stock may not reflect this change so quickly -- and so am not sure if it would be correct to say that everything without a zip code is pre '63.
Re zip codes, to compare with the UK, I've had a 1950s harvey nichols label, that shows a postcode format that was about 40 years out of date at that point.
Under the Mexico area: "Although you can certainly buy modern clothing that was made in Mexico, vintage clothing made in Mexico is most likely from the 1950s." I find this statement neither logical nor true.
I wouldn't rely on a lot number being on a label to determine dating whether a garment is vintage alone. I have seen lot number labels in vintage clothing however garment makers can and do still sell groups of items in lots to stores and there may be a label inside of a modern item with a lot number on it. I too have had many garments as well that were not specifically labeled as wool that were post 1939. Sometimes the type of wool will be on a label such as Cashmere, Angora, or Mohair but the word wool will not appear at all. Wool stockings, socks, or gloves may not have a wool label on them either and are not required to. Many vintage outerwear garments and men's sports blazers made before 1971 have the care instruction, "dry clean only" stamped on a label inside. That was the manufacturer's preference. Anyone could choose to include or not to include care instructions in their garments before 1971. To this day fur salons, clothing boutiques, or stores sometimes put labels in their garments that include their business name, address, and city without the mention of the zip code. Some have kept the same wording on their labels throughout time never adding the zip code, some others don't feel the zip code is needed for customers to find them, and some pay additional money to add how long they have been in business to their labels rather than adding the zip code so one cannot assume at all that a garment was made before 1963 just because a zip code does not accompany an address on a garment label.
There's some good information on that page but a lot of generalisations - any labels should be taken with a grain of salt because individual companies chose what to include (even today, many small fashion companies don't include care instructions even though they're required to by law) and a label can easily be removed or sewn into a garment. There are many things to consider when you date vintage garments and you need to interpret all the clues. I like to give the most weight to the definites like fabric and then add labels, style, detailing, construction etc.
Since you asked us to reply with our thoughts on those tips, here are mine. I suggest that you take a lot of what you read on this fashion blog website with more than a few grains of salt. I tend to ignore most sites such as this one that doles out generalizations as if they were cold hard facts (when they aren't), or are full of vague statements, and also when they do not reveal their sources but instead she says things like "a source tells me" and "another source says"......it makes the information second hand or third hand at best, which in most circles is considered heresay. If you do not wish to reveal your source that is fine, but then then don't mention them at all. It is unprofessional and comes off as gossip and not fact. Her website is full of numerous inaccuracies and when she is corrected by her more educated readers in the comment section (which is fairly often) she does not go back and change the errors in many cases. Sammi is enthusiastic, bubbly, and loves the media spotlight (and she gets it often). Nothing against her personally, she loves vintage as we can see, she helps to promote the awareness of vintage fashion in general, and her website is a fun read for the beginner. But many here would agree that there are much better places to learn about vintage fashion and fashion history.
Thank you all for taking the time to read and respond. I just happened to stumble on her blog recently and didn't think to read the comments to see what others thought about her tips. Her tips are just stuck in my mind because of the easy numbered format, but when I went shopping with them in mind I felt like a lot was off (the biggest being the lot numbers one). So I decided to ask. Again, thank you all for spending the time to sift through it and get back to me I really appreciate it.
I excessively have had numerous articles of clothing also that were not particularly named as fleece that were post 1939. Now and then the kind of downy will be on a name, for example, Cashmere, Angora, or Mohair yet the expression fleece won't show up whatsoever. Fleece tights, socks, or gloves might not have a downy name on them either and are not needed to.
