This is indeed very interesting, Janine!
Diana - I totally know what you mean about passing on possibly unreliable information, especially with your name on the piece! I always make sure its clear where the information came from and try to use reputable authors.
I should give the context for that quote - I was researching the costumes of female impersonators in military concert parties during the First World War, and one picture I found had a female impersonator wearing a very practical women's suit or dress with big pockets (with his hands in them!)
Here are the comparisons I found that were similar to it, from Vogue:
The top three suits all date from March 1917, the dress dates from September 1916.
I guess when I said 'patch pockets' I meant BIG ones!
Hollis - your observations are so fascinating, and worth noting for future reference! The trouble with many self-proclaimed fashion historians is that they often have little or no experience of examining the actual clothes themselves, but rely entirely on written or pictorial sources. Most of the pockets that you mention would not be visible in fashion plates!
With your wealth of experience (and Diana's) in handling these garments, you have challenged what is probably an incorrect claim - or at least a claim that should be qualified to be more accurate. Maybe it should 'visible external pockets'?
I love stuff like this! :bouncy:
Good job no-one's going to read my dissertation anyway! :lol:
Sarah