18
REFLECTIONS ON LACE MAKING;
Pamela Fisk
Moorestown High School, Moorestwon, NJ
NEH Summer Seminar 2000
Historical Interpretations of the Industrial Revolution in Britain
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth at the University of Nottingham
“For now we see through a glass darkly; but then face to face.”
First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians
Five and twenty ponies
Trotting through the dark
Brandy for the parson
‘Baccy for the Clerk;
Laces for a lady, letters for a spy
And watch the wall my darling, while the
Gentlemen go by!
Rudyard Kipling
From the perspective of the twenty first century, it is difficult to imagine a world in which a commodity such as lace was so highly prized that high born individuals would risk the land upon which their wealth was based to acquire it. Traditional classical economist would doubtless argue that supply was the key motivator, while neo classical economists would emphasize demand, or as Professor Hudson would say “exogenous factors.”
This paper, however, will examine the Lace Issue purely from a cultural/historical viewpoint, exploring aspects of those who wore the lace, and those who made it, concluding in the mid nineteenth century with the Great Exhibition of 1851. In the process, the question pondered will be whether the wearers and the makers ever had occasion to interact, and in that connection the Lace Curtain will be introduced as the climax to the piece.
Professor E.J. Hobsbawm, in his book, Uncommon People, Resistance, Rebellion and Jazz, betrays his concern for the lives and struggles or ordinary men and women, whom he identifies as “uncommon” people, and in whose ranks he includes the machine breakers and the political shoemakers. He does not mention lace makers specifically, but like the shoemakers, most of them have become as though they have never been, however, they collectively left a rich and varied story. Hobsbawm noted,
“Their lives are as interesting as yours and mine, even if nobody has written about them. --- collectively, if not as individuals, such men and women are major historical actors. What they do and think, makes a difference.”[1]
I f the uncommon people have left an indelible mark, their “common” masters and mistresses did likewise. As evidence of their penchant for lace, there are innumerable individual portraits, both painted and written, to entertain the reader, and it is with these that this paper will begin.
In England, which is the setting for this essay, lace was originally used seldom by women, little by men and quite lavishly by the church, whose prelates and altars were highly decorated. As for notable folk, Henry V111 owned handkerchiefs and shaving cloths with trimmings worked in both Flanders and Italy, while during the reign of his younger daughter, Elizabeth, lace became a popular way of decorating personal clothing, the most spectacular item of which was the neck ruff. Elizabeth’s own ruffs were “bejewelled, spangled, bugled and pearled. They were made of cutwork, sliver lace, gold lace, needlepoint lace and bone lace, and were constructed in single, double and treble layers.”[2] The care of them, moreover, was difficult considering the damp English climate, for they had to be heavily wired and starched. The former process involved the use of setting sticks, poking sticks and struts for fluting, and for the latter, while members of the court imitated their royal mistress, ordinary people apparently avoided them, calling the starch used to stiffen them, “the devil’s broth.”
( Just as well, as it turned out, for late in her reign, Elizabeth actually forbade Londoners from wearing ruffs above a certain size, and officials were sent out to cut down any offending items in public, while apprentices who took to wearing white work on their collars were publicly flogged.) A large household might employ a seamstress specifically for ruff making, and considerable amounts of lace, lawn and lace edgings were involved, as illustrated by an early seventeenth century letter,
“Commend me to your sister and tell her that the lace I gave her for Jackes ruff was butt 15 yeards: if it be not enoughe, as I think it is not, lett me knowe what wantehth and I will send it for there was three yeards left behind” Anne and Mary Fytton, Gossip in a Muniment Room, 1617.[3]
Eventually, the ruffs became so cumbersome that they were known as “millstones” and it is calculated that a triple ruff could cost the equivalent of $600 today,
There is mention of the young gallant pleading that a friend come “not so close, thy breath will draw my ruff” while a French Queen wore a ruff so large that she had to send for a spoon over 60 cm ( 2 feet) long in order to eat her soup at dinner
Practical lace aprons and utilitarian handkerchiefs, were also fashionable by the end of Elizabeth’s reign, the latter not merely to wipe the nose but to indicate favours, ( Figure 1) noted by a sixteenth century writer,
“Maydes and gentlewomen gave to their favourites as tokens of their love, little handkerchiefs of about three or four inches square “
such favours were apparently worn in the hat. The former became fashionable in
upper circles, as parodied by the Stephen Gossons in his Pleasant Quippes for Upstart Gentlewomen of 1596
“Those aprons white of finest thread
So choicley tied, so dearly bought,
So finely fringed, so nicelty spread,
So quaintly cut, so rich;y wrought.”[4]
The Stuart successors to the Tudors saw lace used as “roses” on shoes, as frills on boots, and as decorations to stockings and garters, although the new royal house started its odyssey so impoverished that James 1’s Queen, Anne of Denmark, had to make do with wearing altered dresses of her famous predecessor, and was apparently highly indignant that , “gowns previously worn by a woman of 74 should be considered suitable for a blossoming young woman of 26.”[5]
At this stage, the ruffs were replaced by large, softly falling collars, which were easier to care for and infinitely more comfortable, as noted by a contemporary observer, John Morristown, in The Malcontent.
“ If you should;d chance to take a nap in the afternoon, your falling band requires no poking stick to recover it.”[6]
By the mid seventeenth century, English lace was highly regarded overseas, and the French eagerly purchased it. On the home front, nothing was too insignificant to be decorated , whether it be linens, clothing , tooth cloths or footwear. Queen Henrietta Maria set the fashion in decorated footwear, using green lace for that purpose, which may have been responsible for “ irregular thoughts and desires in the youth of the nation,” according to The Tatler.
Such thoughts and desires, along with lace, were carefully controlled during the republic, however, upon the restoration in 1660, the carefully hoarded lace made a reappearance , and small items such as lacy handkerchiefs were clearly highly prized, judging from a London Gazette advertisement,
“Lost, as lawn pocket handkerchief with a broad hem, laced round with a fine point lace about four fingers broad, marked with an R in red silk.”[7] [8]
The last two Stuart monarchs, the luckless daughters of James 11, and their consorts, showed their support for lace - in the case of Mary and William, upon the death for the queen, William resolved not to use his trimmed razor cloths and handkerchiefs for two years as a mourning gesture, however, upon the lapse of those years he extravagantly replenished his supplies. William outlived his wife by almost a decade and their effigies lie together in Westminster Abbey - adorned with lace. William’s displays cravat and ruffles; Mary’s double sleeves and a raised lace tucker.
The Georgian period, ( 1714 - 1830) with its turbulent backdrop, including the Seven Years War, the American War of Independence, the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars, eventually saw a decline in the production of hand made laces in England, although at the onset of the dynasty this decline was not apparent. Sleeve ruffles took on a new dimension, becoming so exaggerated that they were difficult to wear elegantly and caused many a problem for consumers of soups and sauces at the dining table. Aprons , headresses, lappets ( strips hanging from a head dress) and caps continued to be worn, and at least one lady thought the commodity might alter the course of justice by appearing at her trial elegantly attired in lace flounces, sleeve ruffles and a stomacher. Impressed though the jury may have been, nonetheless Margaret Caroline Rudd was found guilty and sentenced to death.
If this lady wore her lace to the court of law, the fabric was much in evidence for other special occasions, ranging from weddings, when ladies are recorded as wearing lace aprons ( rather old fashioned, but in memory of her dear departed mother) lace caps and , at the onset of the eighteenth century, lace veils. The marriage of Queen Victoria to Prince Albert of Saxe Coburg displayed lace made in Honiton over which two hundred lace makers toiled, and which cost the equivalent of $1,500 in 1840. (Figure 2`) On less happy occasions, gentlefolk went to meet their Maker dressed in their best lace ( though disguised by woollen outer shrouds as the law of the land wished to protect the woollen industry.) Even those involved in executions, whether he be a king, such as Charles 1, or a highwayman, felt the need to depart this life with lace. For the latter , one gentlemen of the road rode to the gallows atop his coffin, dressed in his best lace. Children, too were decorated in their laces on formal and even informal occasions. (Figure 3) Ostentation, however, sometimes had tragic results for the innocent. An eighteenth century christening of a baby smothered in lace ended in her death from suffocation. Little wonder that the officiate, the Archbishop of Canterbury, commented on the docility of the infant.
The decline of hand made lace, however, was in the air and it was due to another “revolution” of the period, the Industrial Revolution. Machine made net made its appearance in the middle of the eighteenth century, and in 1809 Heathcoat perfected the “twist” net machine, which was to revolutionize the lace industry. Moreover, there was a literary movement afoot , which targeted the luxurious living - and hence dressing - of the wealthy. For instance, Daniel Defoe decried the uncleanliness which fashion could hide, and Swift tears apart the curtain of privacy and pretension in his A Beautiful Young Nymph Going to Bed,
Then seated on a three legged chair,
Takes off her artificial hair
Her eyebrows from and Mouse’s Hyde
Stuck on with art on either side
Untwist her gums and from her gums
A set of teeth completely comes
Proceeding on the lovely Goddess
Unlooses next her steel Ribbed Bodice ----[9]
Could this unfortunate woman have been looking in a mirror in the process of undressing and exposing what Patricia Earnshaw describes as, “ the contrast between the external illusion of beauty and the squalor of underlying reality?”[10]
It has been established that a demand for hand made laces maintained its supply, and the attempt to protect the English lace makers from competition from abroad is exemplified by numerous bans on imported laces which were introduced by parliaments throughout the period. Determination of those who wished to own lace is verified by the high level of smuggling which took place to supply that demand. It is to the “underlying reality” of the lace makers that the paper will now turn.
“The history of lace is a cruel story, fraught with cruelty and controversy,” notes Bo Niles , “ at the height of its popularity, from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century , lace was the ultimate status symbol ---- but they were created by crafts people,
( almost all of them women) who endured abject poverty and grim working conditions.”[11] Moreover, as Virginia Bath notes, although lace making potentially offered as much freedom of personal expression as painting or drawing, in fact traditional lace patterns were almost always copied from someone else’s pattern.
“The lace maker was not the creator of the design and the designer did not make lace..”[12] Thus, the hand lace makers were at the mercy of a variety of elements, ranging from their physical conditions to their exploitation by dealers ( or manufacturers, as they preferred to be called) who sold the labours of their hands. Conditions in Lace Schools, lace shop or cottages were grim. Commentaries of the time observed that the day began at 4 a.m. and often lasted for eighteen hours, much of which was spent working by candlelight. In addition, because it was important to keep the threads clean, fires could not be in the proximity of the workers, even in the winter. Furthermore, household chores and child rearing supplemented the workers’ days, and many of them were blinded by the age of thirty by the close work they did. Moreover, workers with babies found various ways to keep their offspring under control. Some cottages sported “revolving posts” with a wooden arm to which the children were tied, so that they could run around, but not escape. Other cottages had ”go carts,” or walkers, but most simply used the “imprisoning board” at the door. An early twentieth century commentator on hand made lace workers observed,
“On the whole, the lace maker’s lot was a hard one. A year or two ago I overheard a child telling her truobles to her grandmother, an old lace maker. ‘Get along with ye,’ was all the comfort she got, ‘ ye don’t know what troubles are!’”[13]