This hand knit sweater is 40s...? and for a man or woman?

[Jen S]

This is a thick and soft wool, hand knit, with an elaborate collar. I'm pretty sure it's 40s, but can't tell if it's for a man or a woman. No labels. It's quite big (chest about 48"), but the wide tight waistband makes it look like a woman's. Linda...? Anyone else? Thanks!

 

[poppysvintageclothing]

It looks more like a woman's sweater to me.

 

[Circa Vintage Clothing]

I agree with MJ. A mans sweater will have longer arms and broader shoulders.

 

[Jen S]

OK, thanks, that was my instinct as well. And no arguments with 40s?

 

[Pinkcoke]

I thought it looked later, mid 50s to early 60s...but I'm certainly not the most experienced in this area! I just know I have seen a pattern booklet from that period with these sort of graphic knits in...

 

[retro ruth]

The yarn content could be a clue to went it was made. Can you snip a bit off and do a burn test? If it was knitted in the 40s, I would expect pure wool. Pure wool wouldn't rule out a later date, but if it's synthetic or a blend, it's likely to be later.

The cuffs look to me as though they've been designed to be folded back, so the lower portion is deliberately slightly looser, or has become stretched by being folded back. Sometimes cuffs have a line across them for folding, achieved by knitting a row or two on a smaller needle to create a fold line. I don't know whether this was done in 40s patterns, but it may well have been.

 

[Jen S]

Thank you all for your insights. The sweater is pure wool; I did a burn test to be sure.

One reason I do not think it's modern (other than my instinct) is that the wool is too thick, and, while it's soft for an older sweater, it's not nearly as soft or smooth as most of the newer sweaters I've handled. It has a more dense quality than modern wool yarn.