Dating help on silk roses dress - 1930s/40s or possibly older?

[DaisyandStella]

Hi!
I have a gorgeous silk roses dress that has side snap closures that go all the way up the left side from the first skirt tier. A partially attached gathered cummerbund encircles the waist with a cascading peplum and bow accent that closes with eye/hooks and 1 snap. The upper waistline has tiny gathers at center which creates a pouched effect - possibly just for a larger cup size?

I'm wondering could this be older than 1930s/40s? Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you!
Brooke

 

[Rue_de_la_Paix]

That is a lovely dress, and the roses print is beautiful. I can't see this as any earlier than 1930s, but will hold off on dating this one, as this is difficult without seeing/handling it in person or seeing more close up photos.

What seems a bit odd to me is the way both the peplum/tier and the tier under it have such deep hems. They also appear to be the same depth as the actual hem of the bottom of the dress (but I cannot see the bottom hem too well). From a dressmaking standpoint, this is a bit unusual. The top tier or peplum should not have a visible hem at all, or at the very least have a very narrow one. Same with the middle layer. So I wonder if the dress was somehow altered during war time, from a dress with a voluminous hemline?

Unless .....my eyes are fooling me, (nothing new there!) and those are not hems at all, but are a sort of ruffle or flange on each tier? That would explain the stitches. I which case my above comments can be ignored.

Still, a very pretty dress.

 

[DaisyandStella]

That is a lovely dress, and the roses print is beautiful. I can't see this as any earlier than 1930s, but will hold off on dating this one, as this is difficult without seeing/handling it in person or seeing more close up photos.

What seems a bit odd to me is the way both the peplum/tier and the tier under it have such deep hems. They also appear to be the same depth as the actual hem of the bottom of the dress (but I cannot see the bottom hem too well). From a dressmaking standpoint, this is a bit unusual. The top tier or peplum should not have a visible hem at all, or at the very least have a very narrow one. Same with the middle layer. So I wonder if the dress was somehow altered during war time, from a dress with a voluminous hemline?

Unless .....my eyes are fooling me, (nothing new there!) and those are not hems at all, but are a sort of ruffle or flange on each tier? That would explain the stitches. I which case my above comments can be ignored.

Still, a very pretty dress.

Hi Barbara! The peplum is actually a part of the cummerbund with the bow and has a thin rolled hem i believe (dress isn't in front of me currently). The skirt does have two 'tiers' separate from the cummerbund peplum if that makes sense. I'm not sure if you call it a tier as it's basically a fold of fabric that's stitched under creating a visual effect of a tier.

Thanks for your response!

 

[Rue_de_la_Paix]

Hi Barbara! The peplum is actually a part of the cummerbund with the bow and has a thin rolled hem i believe (dress isn't in front of me currently). The skirt does have two 'tiers' separate from the cummerbund peplum if that makes sense. I'm not sure if you call it a tier as it's basically a fold of fabric that's stitched under creating a visual effect of a tier.

Thanks for your response!

From what you describe, they are indeed a type of flange effect (as I wondered about, above). In which case, ignore my above posted comments about the hems being too deep and off looking.