"Lattice" prints (and indigo resists)
I've been thinking about the prints that have a diapered motif. (I had been calling them "trellis" prints to myself, but "lattice" is more what I was trying to convey so I have changed terms.) I have only ever seen them used as lining fabrics, which had left me scratching my head. I started to fear that they were some specific sub-set of prints that period people recognized as lining fabric, but I finally came to the realization that they just flat don't exist as outer fabrics anymore.
Reading about the elusive indigo resists brought me to that conclusion. The indigo resist fabrics are rather rare in general, but it seems 90% of known examples exist in the United States, which has led some people to believe they were printed here. I don't personally believe that, but it does seem a mystery as to why they don't appear elsewhere, especially England since that is where they likely were either made or re-exported from. There are several scraps of them in the pieced bed hangings at the V&A, but they are a tiny minority. I think it comes down to a couple of factors: If re-exported, then possibly most of them moved on from London without many being smuggled back; or if created there, then they were viewed as a fairly inexpensive and un-treasured fabric.
This is only an educated guess on my part, but in America durable goods like curtains and bed covers could have survived longer than in England because they would have been difficult to replace during the war years and perhaps for a while afterward. If they lasted for at least a generation beyond the war, they could have been valued as symbols of the Revolutionary generation. IIRC, by the War of 1812, people were already looking back nostalgically and holding up that generation as heroes. People would be much more likely to save Grandma's Revolutionary War-era curtain in the U.S. than people would be in England. (If you think I'm completely off-base here, let me know)
Back to "Lattice" prints. Thinking about how some things are saved but not others reinforced the fact that fancy wear is saved way more often than every day wear. I already knew that of course, but I guess hadn't fully accepted that there could be whole classes of prints that simply don't exist any more. I think now that the lattice prints were probably used for outer fabric in poor people's clothing, and possibly even higher classes, but because they were a relatively small subset of prints, they have had the bad luck to almost completely disappear. There are quite a few lattice prints in the V&A bed hangings: some with only one color, some with several; some with a crude pattern, some complex.
The only visual documentation I've found as yet of lattice prints being used for outerwear is this engraving which could be showing a woven silk for all I know, but I suspect is a printed cotton.
Until I find something contradicting this line of reasoning, I'm updating the status of lattice prints for clothing to "completely plausible, very likely." I'll be adding my small red lattice print to the fabrics available in my Spoonflower shop soon.
Reading about the elusive indigo resists brought me to that conclusion. The indigo resist fabrics are rather rare in general, but it seems 90% of known examples exist in the United States, which has led some people to believe they were printed here. I don't personally believe that, but it does seem a mystery as to why they don't appear elsewhere, especially England since that is where they likely were either made or re-exported from. There are several scraps of them in the pieced bed hangings at the V&A, but they are a tiny minority. I think it comes down to a couple of factors: If re-exported, then possibly most of them moved on from London without many being smuggled back; or if created there, then they were viewed as a fairly inexpensive and un-treasured fabric.
This is only an educated guess on my part, but in America durable goods like curtains and bed covers could have survived longer than in England because they would have been difficult to replace during the war years and perhaps for a while afterward. If they lasted for at least a generation beyond the war, they could have been valued as symbols of the Revolutionary generation. IIRC, by the War of 1812, people were already looking back nostalgically and holding up that generation as heroes. People would be much more likely to save Grandma's Revolutionary War-era curtain in the U.S. than people would be in England. (If you think I'm completely off-base here, let me know)
Back to "Lattice" prints. Thinking about how some things are saved but not others reinforced the fact that fancy wear is saved way more often than every day wear. I already knew that of course, but I guess hadn't fully accepted that there could be whole classes of prints that simply don't exist any more. I think now that the lattice prints were probably used for outer fabric in poor people's clothing, and possibly even higher classes, but because they were a relatively small subset of prints, they have had the bad luck to almost completely disappear. There are quite a few lattice prints in the V&A bed hangings: some with only one color, some with several; some with a crude pattern, some complex.
The only visual documentation I've found as yet of lattice prints being used for outerwear is this engraving which could be showing a woven silk for all I know, but I suspect is a printed cotton.
Until I find something contradicting this line of reasoning, I'm updating the status of lattice prints for clothing to "completely plausible, very likely." I'll be adding my small red lattice print to the fabrics available in my Spoonflower shop soon.