Glove Experts - OK, what did I buy?

[Rob L]

Hey all,

Just picked up this white leather glove. Any clue to the age? And no, their is no evidence that a web was attached.

Thanks,

Rob L

[vintagesportscollector]

Hi Rob. OK. I was watching this auction and honestly I didn't think it was a non-web workman's glove. The seller says no evidence of a web, but the pictures are not clear, so you will need to assess that for yourself when you receive the glove. I am not a glove expert, but I am fairly knowledgeable.

A non-web workmans glove would date this to the 1880s. This does not look like an 1880s glove based on the design and features, IMO. The cloth piping, laced bottom, back strap with double button holes, lining and overall shape of fingers seem off. It is also big...a workmans glove would probably be small, not much bigger than a hand, and would be shaped more like a hand, taller fingers and more narrow.

This didn't go unnoticed, but I wouldn't trust the underbidders (I think they are far from experts and probably had doubt too). It's the "experts" that didn't bid that are conspicuously absent that further add to my doubt.

Just my opinion...I could be wrong...I think you'll have a better idea once you get it. (I hope I am wrong and you are rewarded for taking a chance )

-Joe

[vintagesportscollector]

Hi Rob- I am doing some more research, digging through photos, and I've come across some photos of non-web workmans gloves which have some similar features as this glove...specifically the backstrap and shape of fingers as this glove...so I'm thinking that it could possible this could be genuine. The gloves I've seen though have rolled piping and asbestos linings and generally look more 19th cent. Anyway, I'm probably not helping, but just wanted to let you know it's possible.

[Rob L]

Hi Joe,

I actually wasn't figuring this to be a non-webbed glove also, particularly because of the laced bottom. I was more interested in the white leather and was intrigued by the possibility that it might be non-webbed. I was thinking more along the lines of the 1900s, but I will check the webbing issue immediately.

Rob

[Rob L]

Oops, I was mistaken regarding the lacing on the bottom of the glove. I was checking out the Smithsonian collections book last night and noticed that Gallagher has an 1890s glove that does have the same shape and lacing on the bottom of the glove.

Rob

[vintagesportscollector]

Nice. I'm at work now but will check out the Smithsonian book when I get home. I sent Rob Mucha an email to get his opinion..figured he would know best. The more examples I see the more I think it could be 1890's...but the combination of features just seems to make it look more recent. Could it possibly be a more recent, say 1910s, hybrid glove that was made w/o a web? I don't think I have ever seen a webless from era. If it was truly made w/o a web then I think its very rare regardless of the exacy date.

[Rob L]

Hey guys, I would think this sounds right, I just can't get pass the webless thing that late. As far as the Galagher glove was concerned, I was only refering to the bottom lacing and the overall shape of the thumb and fingers. Of course, that is assuming that his glove is an 1890s glove. The webbing on it would seem to date it later, but I'm no expert. I also sent this thread to Rob M. and Jim D. to see what their thoughts were. Should be interesting.

Rob L

[Rob L]

Hey guys,

Jim Daniels just emailed me back and it looks like we are barking up the wrong tree. Jim has an amazing glove collection and memorabilia collection and luckly doesn't live more than 5 miles from my house. Here is his response:

"In regard to that glove, it's cool but it is definitely not 1880's or 90's. I'm so sorry to say that it's a youth glove probably from the teens or possibly even the 20's. I have never seen a webless glove with cloth piping or a laced heel. I have a couple webless gloves and have a lot of pictures of them and they are literally just hands, straight up and down. The suede type interior as opposed to asbestos/wool, indicates that it probably once had a lining and could possibly mean it was made of cowhide and not horsehide. Pre-turn of the century gloves weren't made of cowhide as far as I know. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but I want you take what the others posters say with a grain of salt. Bring it over when you get a chance and I'll try to prove myself wrong. I hope I am but the pictures are indicative of a youth glove possibly from the 20's. I have a few of those as well I can show you. I also have some early catalogue pictures I can show you."

Oh well, the mystery was fun for a while!!

Rob L

[vintagesportscollector]

Makes sense. Mucha had the same response in an email he just sent me....

...but unless I am missing something Jim just agreed with everything that I (and Mike) had posted about this glove already: cloth piping, laced heel, lining, shape not being just like a hand are the exact points(almost word for word) I brought up in my posts already...these are all the things we already cited. Jim makes it seem like we were tryng to convince you this was a 19th century glove and he is setting the record straight.

Anyway....Jim's a great guy...just wanted to set the record straight .

The key point is none of us have seen a webless glove that looks like this. SO...If the was truly made w/o a web..what do you have? Wouldn't that mean you have something that has never been idenitfied before? To me that's still a mystery, no??

[Rob L]

I agree Joe, the webless thing still bothers me. I will take it over to Jim when it arrives. Rob is in my area also so I can probably have him look at it to. I want to see what Jim has regarding ads but I can't imagine they would be webless. We'll see....

Rob L