Lost in Translation - Julia E. Sanders errata

I don't know if she is the original tatter, but I know she was the editor. The mistake is egregious, because the two pieces don't remotely match. Good news is that the adaptations listed above are working out perfectly so far.

I have only completed one, but I will post pictures as soon as I get the next two done for comparison.

I agree with @GraceT. The tatters of the articles in the original pattern books were not registered. J. E. Sanders was the editor of a collection of earlier books under the title 'Tatting Patterns'. Nevertheless, this book contains a wealth of information about early techniques in tatted lace.

in reply to JudithConnors's post:

I was hoping to hear from you about this! So did Julia Sanders work as an editor for Priscilla in 1915, or did she only enter the picture when Dover republished "Priscilla Tatting Book 2" in 1977?

I know she is not the tatter, but she is the only name I could put to this weirdly specific mistake, which is in the original as far as I can tell, because the cut aways are the same. Whether it was the fault of the original tatter in writing down the pattern, or a mistake of editing in the Priscilla book, it is, of course, the very reason I am tatting this in the first place. Corrected pattern seems to be the right one, c4-4 for the first row, and the chain between groups of attached rings as 7p rather than 5.

in reply to GraceT's post:

Grace, Julia E. Sanders editted the collection later, for Dover, I think. I'll check the details.

No, not so. See below.

in reply to GraceT's post:

Julia Elma Sanders' name is linked with the 1977 unabridged republication of 'The Priscilla Tatting Book No. 2: A Collection of Beautiful and Useful Patterns with Directions for Working' (1915). However, as Julia Sanders was born in 1844, it is probable that she editted the 'collection' in the 1915 book.

The 1977 Publisher's Note on page 2 is an addition. At some time it appears that the Explanation of Stitches on page 3 may have been added, as the type face is different from that in the rest of the book.

Wow! Thank you so much for this!

in reply to JudithConnors's post:

Wow, thanks, Judith! So Julia Sanders lived much earlier than I had thought.

@wodentoad and @GraceT,
On further research at http://antiquepatternlibrary.org, a copy of the Priscilla Book No 2 of 1915 can be read. On the inside front page Julia E. Sanders is published as editor. So your supposition was correct, Grace. Julia Elma Sanders' work is still appreciated in C21st.

GRRRR! Hey, guess what! There is another mistake that I had not seen until I had tatted the lower three pieces... again, but it looks like they go back to the central triangles. It's looking like the points that are 8 ds on either side of the c1, I think it's only 4. Additionally, I think the Chains 8-4/4-8 on either side of the c1s at the points on the ovals, are actually just chains of 4 ds. Which means I have a LOT of re-tatting to do. I'm going to cut back to the second round of the triangles, and I think the c1's at the points are actually connected to the 5 picot chains.

Many curses have been said. Many, many curses.

Gotta watch the inspirational video again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6wRkzCW5qI

It's such a big project already, without the retatting you've had to do!

Commiseration and sympathy, my Dear. I'm so sorry for all the added work. But I have to say, I really love your inspirational video. That should be playing in the background for a few days as you tackle this again.

in reply to JudithConnors's post:

Thanks, Judith! Little do we know what impact our daily work may have...

in reply to wodentoad's post:

Wow. But I'm so glad you're not giving up. Love the inspirational video! Onward and upward!

Thanks, all, I have come too far. Victory or Death!

Also, as a side note. The c1 points of the triangle are not joined.

Okay, I've had some setbacks, some mistakes, and a little more cutting than I was strictly comfortable with, but I'm back to where I was (except for re-tatting the last row of the remaining three triangles).

Because of my visible joins, I'm sorta using them as a design element, and when I finish it, I will iron it to block it.

If I ever do another of these (And I probably will, in a few years), I'll probably use more colors, but that's another thing. This still needs to be ironed, but from what I have figured out, the triangle and the ovals are the same on the outside row: Long chains have 7 picots, c1 cloverleaf triangles at the points are joined by chains of 4 ds.

I can't make the second row of the triangles have those pretty and neat chains, but I can't tell if this is a failing on my part or a failing of the pattern. The point being that it works, and at this point, I'm looking at about five other large doilies and dreaming, occasionally, about doing something else. So, on we march. It's like my husband's family's top of the stove cookies. They are bad at writing down recipes and wrote down the recipe with a mistake. Instead of correcting it, they simply remembered what the mistake was. This did not help me when I was trying to make these later, not knowing that there was a mistake nor what the correction is. This recipe card is going to get replaced very soon.

In the end, I decided to join the c1 cloverleafs to the first picot of the chains to either side, simply because in counting the little bumps in the enlarged, enhanced photo of a scanned half-tone print of a photo from 1915.... I didn't see one extra bump between the picots and the chains. I do, however, see a couple of extra bumps on the next ovals, but my instincts are telling me that it's a join.

What I wouldn't do to see the actual physical piece that the pattern was taken from. It has to still exist, doesn't it? I have this dream that it's in someone's grandmother's or great grandmother's attic just waiting to be discovered.

Well, back to work!

You do realize, @wodentoad, that you are fast becoming a favourite tatting hero around here. You take my breath away with your tenacity, creativity, and mind boggling ability to intuit things.

Well done! I wouldn't worry too much about those visible joins - I can't see them!

Thanks, guys. I am really starting to see towards the end of this thing. The ovals tat up pretty quickly, so I am hoping that this won't be another year in the tatting. Obviously, I still have the last two rows of edging to join my triangles and then 24 little motifs left. Optimism! It's the only way, that and super inspirational YouTube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgmVOuLgFB0

in reply to wodentoad's post:

Yay!! We're cheering you on! You WILL cross that finish line!

Okay, so I finally finished the fourth oval, which will be mirrored on the other side. Attachments should be more clear after I block it, but I'll do that after I've finished the whole triangle.

I hope this is clear enough to see the joins.

Thumbs up!!

Oh, now I see what you mean - those little blips of the opposite colour. Don't worry about them! They won't be noticed in such a gigantic and majestic tablecloth.

If those white-in-black blips annoy you, try colouring them with a tiny dot of PERMANENT black ink. It must be waterproof so the colour will not run when washed.

Jane Eborall has a joining technique that will eliminate blips.