20's/30's? multicoloured silk devore housecoat

Pinkcoke

Pinkcoke

Alumni
This has some holes but not too many and for the most part they are lost in the pattern so I think this one may be salvageable. If anyone has repaired a fabric like this before I would appreciate hearing how it was done. It's wonderfully light, only weighs 250g which makes me wonder why they put such a heavy metal buckle on it? I have to attach that better. I was hoping somebody could date this better for me, also how do you determine size with a garment like this? is it just meant to be free size / loose on whoever wears it? Though I'm not sure it should be worn, perhaps just for display.
Vintage19front.jpg

back-1.jpg
buckle.jpg
pattern.jpg
 
It looks 1920s to me, I don't believe the buckle is original to the garment. The buckle looks older than the piece itself.
I don't think this is a housecoat. If it does not do up at all, chances are it was the overgarment for a 1920s dress. The dress
would have been sleeveless and the same fabric.

I think if you take a fine sized needle and just stitch together the tiny holes to the more solid parts close by that would work to mend the holes.
If you notice if you are trying to do this and the tear keeps growing, this may not be the way to go. Perhaps find a nice black chiffon scarf and
cut it to make very small patches on the underside and sew the areas that are disintegrating down onto the patch.

By they way, I love the pattern and colours in this piece!
 
Mm yes the colours are very deep and bright in reality - if you know what I mean. Should I take the buckle off it then? I suppose it draws the eye to the centre but I must admit I haven't looked closely at the buckle itself, maybe I'll find some marks. I do think it is too heavy for the fragile fabric now though.
 
I don't know about the age of that buckle, but its definitely in the wrong spot. It should be at the hip, where the skirt is gathered. This looks to me like an overdress, probalby had a black silk slip underdress and this was worn over it, with a belt on the hip line, exposing the front of the slip. Housecoaty things from the 20s overlap and often have ties attached at the hip line. This is also too dressy - its a late day dress and I agree with MaryJane - late 20s - probably intended for a matron, so its a little conservative.
 
I agree with the others: not a housecoat, '20s and an overdress - and would remove the buckle. I can't see the damage you speak of, but if the fabric is very weak, you could back it onto a fine silk tulle to strengthen it. There may have been a buckle at the front where the skirt starts but this would not have been the right buckle - as you say, it's too heavy, and also as others have said, it's not the right time period.

It's a beautiful piece.
 
Hmm, in looking at the strength of the fabric I now suspect this may have been something else entirely, there is a good 7 inches of hem on the bottom turned over which seems excessive unless you wanted to save the original fabric in one piece, I think the black edge is a later addition, as there is a ribbon edge/trim on the inside of the opening that does not follow the new lines but is folded over more in the middle; lessening towards the bottom, it has also been taken in at the sides of the top by 2 inches either side, this new seam is open where it would normally be sewn into the skirt.

Update on the buckle, which I removed, it is hallmarked on the front of both pieces in *tiny* stamps: sterling silver, London assay, dated 1894 with a maker's mark of W.C standing for William Comyns & Sons Ltd so Jonathan is probably right this belonged to an older lady if she had a 40 year old buckle! It is very dark in colour, is it better to leave these as is or polish up?

When I said the buckle was heavy: it weighs 43g versus the 200g silk! Would this have been from a standalone belt or a dress belt?
 
I would leave the buckle as is - it doesn't look that dark in the pictures, and looks quite nice as is to my eyes. Too much polishing can actually take away too much and make things, that were meant to have a patina-ed look look too new and shiny. At least that is my experience with vintage silver pieces. I am usually quite careful when I clean anything that's silver.

Karin
 
That photo was with flash, this is the buckle in daylight: I am also thinking I will leave it as is, it shows the age better anyway! I still don't know what the marks II A are for on the back, did buckles have retailer's/import marks like other silver did?
DSCF9982.jpg
DSCF9985.jpg
DSCF9987.jpg
DSCF9986.jpg
 
Ah yes, that looks considerably darker.
No idea about the marks. My mom used to have a book with British gold and silver hallmarks (written, I think, by someone who also was on the Antiques Roadshow as an expert), but I don't have that here. It's a long time since I last looked into that book.
The only piece of British silver I still have is a powder compact, which I bought on my first trip on my own to London, at an indoor antiques market somewhere on Kings Road. I think it was Birmingham silver, but I don't remember the year. I was able to identify that though, but not the maker if I remember right. I just looked at it again, and saw that beside the marks, there is also a VII scratched into it. No idea either what that is for...

Karin
 

Attachments

  • compact2.jpg
    compact2.jpg
    218.6 KB · Views: 248
  • compact1.jpg
    compact1.jpg
    52.5 KB · Views: 227
Are you sure you are reading the hallmark correctly? This is belt clasp from the 1890s - they didn't really have them in the 1880s...

As I understand it (and I am not a silver person...):
The lion rampant means English sterling silver
The next mark is, I think, a leopard's head, which is the assayer's mark for London
The letter "T" is the date year for 1894
and the W.C. is the maker's name, which is, William Comyn's & Sons Ltd. from what I found online.
 
Thanks for the extra information - I think your overdress may be an adapted dress, with an opening cut down the centre front and finished in the black. That was a popular style in the '20s but I've seen a few with the centre front opening too.

The buckle could have been added at any time - this dress has had almost a century to be worn and updated for assorted wearers.
 
Would it have been that much longer earlier in the 20's? Just realised I didn't show these photos of the alterations inside earlier: (plus one of the fabric, it looked so pretty with the light coming through it!)

DSCF9980.jpg
DSCF9979.jpg

DSCF9978.jpg
DSCF9981.jpg
 
That could be the original hem.

A note about why this isn't a housecoat - devore' is one of the most luxurious fabrics ever made. A pattern is applied to velvet (usually silk) and then burnt out using chemicals. Parts of the fabric are burnt away, leaving the base (which is why it's sheer). It's a labourious and time consuming process, easy to botch and always expensive. This dress would have been valuable and treasured.

Housecoats are usually cottons, as they're hard wearing and easy to clean. Sometimes in other practical fabrics but never in anything as beautiful and luxurious as a devore'.
 
Thank you Nicole for all that information.
I didn't personally think it was a housecoat but this was the information given to me when I purchased it, out of everything they said, only the fabric was correct!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top