Lost medieval embroideries and Rosettes  

Posted by MeganH in

Embroideries worth millions found in London flat clearance.....check it out ....http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/jun/07/embroideries-worth-millions-found-london

If anyone finds some follow up details, I'd love to find out more....
~~~~~~~~~

On the Textiles blog today, http://thetextileblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/stained-glass-design-in-1820s.html they feature a book by Nathaniel Wittock about stained glass, written in 1828.

There are a few samples of Tudor Rose and Ecclesiastical designs shown  - enough to get me very interested.

From the blog :




I found the FULL book at http://books.google.com.au/books?id=NCoBAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=nathaniel+whittock&hl=en&ei=hArwTfCfKIXCvgO3zdiPCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

It is about *how* to make stained glass, so there's a lot of clicking needed to find the images. There's only a few suitable for embroidery, but hey - I have a big weakness for Tudor Roses/Rosettes.

This paragraph from the Textile Blog, caused me great amusement

"It must be remembered that the book was published in 1828 and the date does set a certain amount of definition to the parameters of the decorative work featured in the book, particularly that of the glass work. The 1820s was the period of the reign of George IV, rather than his regency, and was therefore part of the dying days of the Georgian period. Many during this period were well aware that the best days of the House of Hanover were long gone. It was considered by the later Victorians in particular as a tasteless episode where every whim and eccentricity was indulged. They were particularly scathing as far as the architectural and decorative arts were concerned. The irony that later generations would feel the same about the Victorian world was probably beyond their understanding, as it no doubt is when concerning our own contemporary world."

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM and is filed under . You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments feed .

4 comments

Wow! Fascinating! And how VERY frustrating not to have photos in the article.

June 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

When George IV was Regent, many of his contemporaries were very disapproving of his spendthrift ways, but he was a great patron of the arts, and much interesting material of the period would not be available to us without his activities.

And the Victorians disapproved of his lifestyle as well...

June 9, 2011 at 4:04 AM

I think that the comment is funny/ironic because of all of the earlier artwork that the Victorians "Victorian-ized" to their tastes, rather than using original works.
There's a lot of it to be seen in illumination work in particular - Victorian books on Illumination aren't particularly to be trusted!

June 9, 2011 at 6:24 AM

Hi, it's taken me so long to stop by and visit you! When I do, there is always such wonderful things to see and to read! blessings,Kathleen

June 9, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Post a Comment