Eighteenth Century Stitching – Part One Make a hole

[Artificer]

I asked the same questions some time ago on another forum. Labonte and CaptJas very graciously answered a lot of my questions, for which I'm grateful.

The Joseph Dixon Company of the UK still makes high quality leather working tools much the same as they did in the early/mid 19th century and their tools can go back to the 18th century in most cases. The US Distributor for them is:
Booth and Company at: http://www.boothandco.com/index.php


For many years I used the Tandy Adjustable Stitching Groover, as shown below, but they are not correct for 18th/Early 19th century. https://www.tandyleatherfactory.co...ent/tools/stitching-lacing-tools/8069-00.aspx

Instead, to make grooves for stitching, they used single or double "Creasing Irons" to crush down the leather for shallow grooves as shown below. (Some folks also used blunt compasses to do the same thing as the adjustable creaser.)
Single http://www.boothandco.com/shop/item.php?prodID=39
Double http://www.boothandco.com/shop/item.php?prodID=38
Adjustable http://www.boothandco.com/shop/item.php?prodID=41

Awls http://www.boothandco.com/shop/item.php?prodID=16

Labonte and CaptJas informed me the number of stitches per inch varied with how thick the leather used and for what uses. They informed me that 8 to 10 stitches per inch was the average range for sheaths, shooting bags and the general items most of us Non Professionals will make.

I have a large collection of stitching wheels and over stitchers including many from the mid to late 19th century and have used them like you do. However in the 18th and early 19th century, they used Pricking Irons. CaptJas informed me to ASK to get the special NARROW EDGE Pricking Iron as he suggested that would be most useful for most of the kind of work I mentioned above. These 1" Irons have been suggested as the most useful AND you can go around curves by lifting one side of the iron and only using part of the iron to mark your stitches. It seems if you only have one Pricking Iron, then 8 Stitches Per Inch is a good "general purpose" size. http://www.boothandco.com/shop/item.php?prodID=86

Labonte went into great detail on the number of threads in the linen thread and the best kind to buy. Barbours was one he recommended. Perhaps he will add that here? If the number of cords is too much for thinner leather, then you strip off one or more cords as needed. ALSO, it was suggested you buy or size your awl to the number of cords in your linen thread so the hole is large enough for the number of cords, but not too large to close up properly. (Something you can ask when you order awls from Booth, for example.) http://www.campbell-randall.com/shop/index.php?route=product/search&filter_name=linen

Hope this helps.
Gus

P.S. I am pretty sure the information above is correct from what I've been informed, BUT since I am not a professional leather worker, I have no problem with and would appreciate being corrected any place I erred.

 

[Artificer]

I VERY much agree I don't in the slightest way wish to steal any thunder from Greg, as we are most fortunate to have someone who worked the Trade of a Period Cordwainer and is willing to share his knowledge and experience with us!!!! There are things in leather working that True Cordwainers know about making and fitting shoes that no other trade is going to know.

Also, Greg may or may not have a slightly different twist or explanation on doing something that may "turn the light bulb on in the head" of some of us reading his posts. I better learned my trade after my own apprenticeship, by seeking others out who knew things I did not OR had a slightly different way of doing them. I did this my entire career and never stopped learning things that helped me improve my work. So each and every tidbit I learn is truly appreciated.

Along these lines, the links offered by LaBonte are VERY interesting. I never had the opportunity to be a true Apprentice to a Master Leatherworker and my early stitching really showed it by how painfully irregular and amateurish it was. This was also before the excellent book by Al Stohlman was published. Then I happened to notice that some of my stitches looked good and correct. I went back and figured out it was by the fact I was uniformly putting one needle over the other when stitching AND I had uniformly pierced the leather with my awl. This is explained and shown far, FAR better than I ever could in the link by Nigel Armitage in "Saddle Stitch in Detail" shown below. Those who are starting out in leather working and perhaps even those who have done it for some years may learn quite a bit from this link that Labonte led us to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGuiha5S2oE

To Greg Geiger directly:

Greg, you posting these articles takes me back to the early 80’s. I did not know how to sew leather flat end to flat end and that was required to make a proper period scabbard for our family’s M1850 Foot Officer’s Sword and other items I wished to replicate. (Someone had done a very poor replacement scabbard to the Family Sword in the late 19th century and I wanted to get the scabbard back to the original form.) Then it dawned on me that this was how they constructed Dice Cups at Colonial Williamsburg. So on my very next trip to CW, the FIRST stop was to the Cordwainer’s Shop.

There were a lot of visitors in the Cordwainer’s Shop that day and I somewhat impatiently waited to get to the front. Finally I got there, picked up a Dice Cup and pointed to the stitch and asked, “How do you make this stitch?” The Master Cordwainer beamed and grinned. Then he not only showed and explained how it was done, but invited me into the work area. He sat me down at one of the benches and also showed me the way they saddle stitched and other things. I learned more things about working leather in four hours there, than in all the time I had tried to do it before. We got to talking about the 18th century and virtually forgot the other Visitors there. I looked up to a room full of silent visitors and apologized to the crowd for taking so much of the Cordwainer’s time. However, they said they were learning more from the questions and things we talked about, then they knew enough to ask. They all said to keep on as they were enjoying it as well.

Then the Master Cordwainer did something highly unusual. He invited me and my parents to tea. As a Marine I drank coffee rather than tea, but was honored by the invitation. My Mother was even more excited and honored, though, as the ceremony of “having tea” was something she truly enjoyed. The Master Cordwainer “apologized” as the Tea Service was only from about 1810, but he was trying to find an earlier authentic service. So we had “Tea on the Lawn” with the Master Cordwainer to top off the visit. I had visited Colonial Williamsburg many times before and since, but that visit stands out as my all-time favorite thanks to a Master Cordwainer, who I still hold in highest regard.

So Greg, I not only look forward to more posts for the information you offer, but it also brings back some VERY fond memories of time shared with another Cordwainer.

Gus

 

[thecapgunkid]

Artificer...

Semper Fi

 

[Artificer]

Thank you and Semper Fi to you as well.

Gus

 

[crockett]

Thanks to all for the great information. You are opening up worlds to me I didn't even knew existed. On the groove along the edge of a project- where I am currently using the Tandy adjustable groove tool. That Tandy tool cuts and removes a tiny shaving of leather to create a groove and then you can make the awl holes in the groove and hopefully have a straight line of stitches. The historically correct tools appear to not remove any leather but rather make an indentation type line in which to make the awl holes- is that correct? The difference (I think) is in time the indentation will disappear whereas with the cut groove- it will always exist. I am assuming the stitching will be different. On what I am doing right now, with the cut groove- the stitching is more or less below the surrounding surface- in the cut groove however I am understanding that the more pc way was the indentation and I am wondering whether this creates a stitching that lies on top of the leather.
The "Prick" tools- were those used in place of an overstitch wheel to mark out where the awl should make holes or did the prick tool actually make the holes?
Thanks for any information. Good thread (no pun intended )

 

[Artificer]

Thanks to all for the great information. You are opening up worlds to me I didn't even knew existed. On the groove along the edge of a project- where I am currently using the Tandy adjustable groove tool. That Tandy tool cuts and removes a tiny shaving of leather to create a groove and then you can make the awl holes in the groove and hopefully have a straight line of stitches. The historically correct tools appear to not remove any leather but rather make an indentation type line in which to make the awl holes- is that correct?

That is correct.

The difference (I think) is in time the indentation will disappear whereas with the cut groove- it will always exist.

I am assuming the stitching will be different. On what I am doing right now, with the cut groove- the stitching is more or less below the surrounding surface- in the cut groove however I am understanding that the more pc way was the indentation and I am wondering whether this creates a stitching that lies on top of the leather.

If you are not used to wet forming or indenting leather, it may surprise you how long well indented leather holds its shape since it crushes the fibers of the leather. Also, when the threads are pulled tight, they also crush the leather between them a bit. This pulls the stitching down a little from the surface as well, though not entirely without an indented line. The indented lines made by Creasing Irons usually were used for decoration and if those lines did not last a long time, they would have done it differently.

Some other folks may know of more period examples, but the only period examples I know of where they cut into the leather to keep stitching below the surface of the surrounding leather was when they used a sharpened compass to dig into the leather on "rural" shoe soles made by people themselves or cobblers. They stitched through the soles to attach the shoe uppers to the soles and the threads were exposed on the bottom of the soles to abrasion from walking on the ground or wooden floors. So the groove made by the sharpened compass got the stitching lower than the leather around it - to protect the stitching. However, there was no concrete or asphalt to walk on that abraded shoe soles and rough stone was not used much except for the occasional step stone.

Now, if one looks at the shoes made by the Cordwainer at Colonial Williamsburg, there was no stitching that came through the soles. What they did was cut into the sides of the soles and stitch up into the uppers from inside that cut. Then they glued the cut closed. That left no stitching on the bottom of the soles to be abraded. Of course, shoes made by Cordwainers were much more expensive and much better made than the shoes made by ordinary folk or even cobblers.

The "Prick" tools- were those used in place of an overstitch wheel to mark out where the awl should make holes or did the prick tool actually make the holes?

The Pricking Irons actually cut/indented into the leather a little way when struck by a mallet, but normally were NOT used to go all the way through the leather. The indentations they made/make are about the same depth as if you bore down hard on a overstitch wheel in the leather to mark it for holes and perhaps a little deeper than that. The awl was/is what cuts the hole through the leather. Note: In the video that LaBonte provided from Nigel Armitage on making leather boxes, he demonstrates the UNUSUAL method of going all the way through the leather with his Pricking Iron because it is one of the rare times the stiches are made 45 degrees to the surface of the leather. I suggest you go back and watch that video as he explains it fully.

The advantage of using a Pricking Iron over the modern overstitch wheel is the Pricking Iron indented the leather correctly to show you how the hole had to be punched and was sort of a guide to punch the holes with the awl to make a sort of angled set of holes. Again, I refer you to the videos down by Nigel Armitage and especially the one on hand stitching to fully explain this.

Now to be honest, unless you are going to be doing LOADS of period leather work and especially in a living history environment where you should use period tools, you don't absolutely have to have a Pricking Iron and can use an overstitch wheel to mark your hole locations. You just have to be much more careful on aligning the awl to pierce the holes in the right fashion and it will take a bit longer to do it.

For me personally, I have made lots of stuff without a Pricking Iron where the holes are correctly aligned for 18th century hand stitching and having used overstitch wheels to mark the holes. However, since I am interested in doing Artificer work at living histories and reenactments, then I need to get a Pricking Iron for authentic work. I probably will wonder how I ever got along without one.

Thanks for any information. Good thread (no pun intended )

You are most welcome for any assistance I can offer, though the real credit goes to Greg and more knowledgeable leather workers. As always, though, since I am only a Novice at these things - I hope more knowledgeable people will correct anything I erred on.

Gus

 

[LaBonte]

I'll be back with more later but you two need to quit denoting things like stitch wheels and groove cutters as non-P/C or modern - implying they are a post 19th Century invention.
The real difference between some of the methods being discusses is more in the "schools" - basically the English/American vs the Spanish/ American, than it is in being P/C or modern.

Groove cutters have been used by Spanish leather workers for a long time in the Spanish SW areas for instance as have overstitch wheels and the Spanish leather crafting methods influenced those in the SW USA including California and the later even western American saddlers and boot/shoe makers. These latter trained makers are the ones who have had the most influence upon the later hobby makers (i.e. Al Stohlman and his influence on Tandy, etc.) as well as professionals, who work mostly in a western motif whether saddles, gun leather, personal gear, etc.

That's why IMO it's important as a studen tof leather work to study not just the English (and French) Colonial influences, but the Spanish (which itself was heavily influenced by North African/Arabian leather work) as well to fulle understand the overall world view of whatever time and place one is interested in. Otherwise one may make erroneous statements about something being non P/C or modern or whatever when it as always depends on the who, what, when, and wear.

On pressed in grooves, heating the pressing iron using an oil lmap or candle was/is a common method of deepening and keeping the groove in lace. Done when the leather is cased properly it will hold a groove as well as a groove cutter, but it is more time consuming. You can also cut your groove and then you use a pressing iron to smooth and round the edges of the groove.

 

[Capt. Jas.]

Keep in mind as well that some of these tools were used more in a certain trade. There were pricking wheels as well as irons. A harness maker for example who is used to running irons is going to become proficient with the iron in doing curves and probably poo poo the pricking wheel because of what he is used to. There was and still is a wide variance from shop to shop of the way many tasks are done and how the tools are used to do them.

 

[Artificer]

I certainly have not written or implied that pricking wheels were post 19th century. If I have not mentioned it before, I have an original U.S. marked Pricking Wheel Set with several extra wheels that can be mounted on the tool and the extra wheels are stored in the grip of hollowed out wood and the threaded end screws off. I have been able to document that to the 1880's. I have also seen original pricking irons from just before the Civil War era. There are earlier examples of pricking irons, some quite fancy, on the Internet.

What I have not been able to document is how far back overstitch wheels go and where and when they became common for leather workers and what trades they were used in. I would be interested in finding out more on that.

I would also be interested in documentation that shows how far back groove cutters go when they were commonly used, what trades they were used in and where.

My personal interest in leather working tools is Pre-1820 and what was commonly found in Virginia and the Eastern Colonies/States nearby.

Gus

 

[Capt. Jas.]

I would also be interested in locating some historical information from the tools that are associated with Spanish/western influence.

 

[crockett]

I'm interested in the tools but also in the final appearance. As I said, so far I've been using the Tandy groove tool to cut the groove but I could case the leather and make an indented groove. What I didn't know is whether the groove was done very lightly- just to establish the location of the awl holes and then, in time, the lightly marked groove disappeared leaving the stitches on top of the leather. I didn't think about regional variations but it sounds like either method is pre-1840. I haven't ever actually seen in hand, close up, pre-1840 leather work where I could examine the stitches. In fact, I must confess, I might not have even noticed this detail.
I appreciate everyone's input. Muzzle loading crafts for me is a never ending, learning experience.

 

[BrownBear]

...Tandy groove tool to cut the groove....

No claim or clue about authenticity, but I do the same for a very functional reason. It drops thicker thread lower so it's not so subject to wear with use. I've had "high" stitching wear out, and swore never again.