Whose Side Was He On?

If you grew up in the Northeastern United States, you probably learned early on that the Redcoats were the enemy in conflicts fought in the early days of the fledgling country. “The Redcoats” were the British, of course. Schoolbook illustrations of the War of 1812 featured red-coated Canadian troops as well in descriptions of the battles. Today, re-enactors in the Niagara region of Ontario proudly wear their red coats when educating tourists about the heroes of the Canadian side.

But those schoolbook illustrations are misleading, as we recently learned from a beautiful uniform that came into our care from the Delaware County Historical Society. This scarlet coatee with black collar and cuffs was likely to have been worn by a New York or New England patriot. The fine, dense wool was almost certainly spun and woven in England, based on its quality, but the coatee was probably tailored for a soldier on the southern side of the 45^th parallel.

The Red Coatee from 1812

In 1812, the U.S. regular army was growing but fairly small and the country still was dependent on state militias for much defense. Soldiers in some Connecticut militias, for instance, wore Red coats with black trim that would be indistinguishable from the coat in our care. Musicians, indispensable for armies at the time, often wore “reversed colors” and so even in regiments such as the New York City Artillery, who wore blue with red trim, a drummer or trumpeter might be clothed in red. U. S. Cavalry troops throughout the North East also frequently wore red.

We may not know who wore this uniform, but he certainly had a fine tailor! The quality of the fulled red twill fabric is impressive and the stitching meticulous. Unfortunately, the past 200 years have not been kind. The plain-weave front lining (woven from unbleached white wool singles) was riddled with holes from insect damage. The black collar and cuffs, made of fustian (similar to corduroy) were faded to brown and quite ragged from wear.

The damaged natural wool lining

In preparing the coatee for display, the goals were to protect all the fabrics while leaving them visible for examination and simultaneously presenting the garment’s handsome appearance in the best possible way. To accomplish this, the fine lining was fitted with a sheer overlay. The overlay will allow the coatee to be slipped on and off a mannequin without damage.

The lining, protected by a sheer overlay. Note the pillows to cushion the coat against creases

The thickset cuffs and collar were also protected with an overlay stitched in place. For this, a nearly invisible, soft netting was applied in areas of wear. Once those areas were protected, the yellow trims were reattached where they had come loose.

The "thickset" collar. The blue arrow shows one of the areas protected by netting

Finally, custom pillows were fitted in place so that creases that would weaken the fabric could not develop in storage. 

The provenance of this bit of history are still being researched by the historical societies that have cared for it. Someday we may know the name and regiment of this soldier. In the meantime, we can celebrate his memory by admiring his uniform.

Thanks to Shaun Pekar (on Facebook and shaunpekar@gmail.com) and Matthew Keagle of Fort Ticonderoga (https://www.fortticonderoga.org) for their patience, expertise and valuable insights in helping with this posting.

Conservation and Mounting for the Exhibition of an 18th Century Silk Officer's Sash

What do you do when you are asked to perform the seemingly impossible? You bring in the troops.

Much of conservation and museum work is about team work. Spicer Art Conservation, LLC recently completed a project that encompassed the conservation and mounting of 28 military artifacts. (you might be reading more about these artifacts in upcoming future blogs, and if you missed it, check out our recent blog that discussed just the hats that were treated in the project: "Conserving, Storing, and Mounting Hats").

Left: The Silk Sash as it appeared before treatment.

Above: A close up of the weave structure of the Silk Sash. Sprang weave is unique, and while the sash may appear to be a knitted textile, upon close examination, it is not.






For this particular artifact, the curators from the owning institution desired that the Silk sprang-weave Officer's Sash would be mounted as it was worn by the officer. The difference between this request, and other more traditional mannequin based mounts, is that the sash was to be mounted alone, without any other artifact. Instead the sash would be displayed on a singular, custom designed and fabricated, three-dimensional mount that appeared to float in midair.

The sketch that showed the original display idea of the curators.

We were given a sketch of the concept (see above) and the rest was ours to design and execute. Luckily, we were working with the very talented staff of Brigid Mountmaking on this project. A member of their group, Deanna Hovey, came to the studio and we soon worked out an idea. The mount would meet the needs of the curator's display concept, and at the same time, would provide full support of the long sash. The mount would then be fabricated by Deanna and brought back to Spicer Art Conservation later for covering with show fabric, and a final fitting of the sash.

Deanna Hovey (left) of Brigid Mount Makers and Gwen Spicer (right) of
Spicer Art Conservation, LLC work to design a mount to provide support
for the 18th century sash, and to meet the display needs of the exhibit curators.

Once Brigid Mountmaking fabricated the mount, it returned to
Spicer Art Conservation. The team worked to carefully mount the Silk Sash.
Above the photo shows how the sash is supported by first being folded
around one side of the "yin and yang" mount halves. The sash then is
supported at the rear (bottom of photograph above, and detail in photo below)
with another piece that holds it securely in place. The mount is supported
on ethafoam blocks to provide easy manipulation of the mount.

The rear of the display mount has a fully supportive contoured
back support which holds the sash securely in place with overall
pressure between the soft surfaces. The long rod that sticks out
of the back will secure the mount on to the display deck.

The bottom of the mount shows the hardware and metal securing
components. Notice that all metal pieces are perfectly toned
to match the color of the show fabric. 

The sash was fully supported because of the method it was placed within and wrapped around the custom mount. But as that the actual duration of the exhibit was not fully known, additional anchoring stitches were placed at the waist. This was a safety feature to ensure that the effects of gravity would be lessened. Of course the stitches were carefully placed so as not to penetrate the yarns of the sash, rather they anchor loops of the stitches to the mount.

The finished treatment. The Silk Sash is securely mounted in a free-hanging display.

The display of this sash was a different approach than the way other silk officer's sashes that have been prepared for exhibit at Spicer Art Conservation, LLC. These sashes are amazingly stretchy (thanks to the sprang-weave) and much like this one, appeared on American officer's waists as early as the Revolutionary War. In fact, we have treated officer's sashes from the War of 1812 and the American Civil War. If you would like to know more about officer's sashes, check out our blog post that discusses them in depth, particularly the characteristics of sashes from different eras and conflicts: "How do you know? Dating a War of 1812 Sash".

____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.  

Look for Gwen's book, "Magnetic Mounting for Art Conservators and Museums",  to be released in 2018.

Why do polyester fibers attach so well to wool?

Here at Spicer Art Conservation, LLC, we are finishing the treatment of several wool uniforms from several military conflicts. The uniforms were stabilized, then mannequins were custom made for all of them. As all conservators do, we keep our work space clean and tidy, vacuuming on a regular basis. However, no matter what we do, those pesky polyester fibers find themselves on the surface of the wool uniforms. And to make matters worse, they are not easy to remove. Why is this?

White polyester fibers on black wool. Why do they attach so well!?

Well, with my research on magnetic systems, I have been investigating various issues regarding the materials that are frequently placed and used within the magnetic system, other wise known as the "gap". How these materials behave is related to many things, the topography, friction, cohesion, and static charge of the materials. All have an additional influence on how the magnetic system functions. In the mentioned scenario, several of these things have a role.

Where I am going with this, is that when materials are in contact with one another, they share electrons, which assists with the cohesion of materials to one another. The amount of sharing from one material to the other is related to their placement on the Triboelectric series.

The Triboelectric series? What is that?

Well, it is a ranking of materials in the order of their propensity to gain or lose electrons. It is based on the conductivity of the individual materials as seen in the table below. How it works is if two materials in contact are neighbors on the scale, there is less exchange. But if they are far apart, no matter where they lie on the scale, exchange occurs.

Schematic of electron exchange when two different materials are in
contact and then separated. The extent of this exchange is based
on the materials placement on the Triboelectric series.

To go back to the wool uniform and polyester fibers: referencing the chart below, notice how wool is neutral, close to cotton? It is not too often that I find myself trying to remove cotton fibers from wool. But, polyester is far away from neutral on the scale!

So the next time you find yourself complaining about the challenges of polyester fiber removal, do not blame the wool, blame those electrons!

Table: Material order of the Triboelectric series.

Charge	Material	Notes
+++	Air
	Polyurethane foam
	Hair
	Nylon, Dry skin	Dry skin has the greatest tendency to give up electrons and becoming highly positive in charge.
	Glass
	Acrylic, Lucite
+	Leather
	Rabbit's fur	Fur is often used to create static electricity.
	Quartz
	Mica
	Lead	Surprisingly close to cat fur.
	Cat's fur
	Silk
	Aluminum
	Paper
	Cotton	Best for non-static clothes
	Wool
NEUTRAL
	Steel	Not useful for static electricity
	Wood	Attracts some electrons, but is almost neutral
	Amber
	Sealing wax
	Polystyrene
	Rubber balloon
	Resins
	Hard rubber
	Nickel, Copper
	Sulfur
	Brass, Silver
	Gold, Platinum
	Acetate, Rayon
	Synthetic rubber
	Polyester
	Styrene & Polystyrene	Why packing peanuts seems to stick to everything.
-	Plastic wrap
	Polyethylene
	Polypropylene
	Vinyl, PVC
	Silicon
	Teflon	Teflon has the greatest tendency of gathering electrons on its surface and becoming highly negative in charge.
	Silicone rubber
- - -	Ebonite

_____________________________
Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.

Learn more about magnets and their many uses in the new publications Magnetic Mounting Systems for Museums and Cultural Institutions. Available for purchase at www.spicerart.com/magnetbook.

Wha does a date mean when found on a artifact?

by Nicolette Cook, with Barbara Owens, SAC staff

What does a date mean when it is found on an artifact? It could be the date when the work was completed, or it could also be a commemorative or anniversary date of a particular event. Dates and what they "really" mean was a recent topic of discussion at the Spicer Art Conservation studio when we received an interesting 19th Century Chapeau de Bras dated "1812".

The front of Buffalo History Museum's Chapeau de bras featuring ribbon detail and brocade work.

On objects such as prints, paintings, embroideries, and samplers, if a date is present it typically represents the date when the work was completed. But with commemorative items, that certainty is not the case. One example that most people are familiar with is the specially minted commemorative coin. These coins are often re-struck at a later date but bear the date of the event they are commemorating. In some cases the coins are engraved with the event they are celebrating, but in other cases they are simply a copy of an original historic coin. So, it begs the question, if the item is an old reproduction, how can we tell it is in fact a reproduction and not from the original time period?

Don't these look old? These are reproduction pieces of Greek coins.  The website http://www.catbikes.ch/helvetica/owlcoins.htm#copies says that these are probably from the 1950 or 60's.

The same question can be asked for many prints and posters of significant events, such as newsprint posters from the day President Lincoln was shot. There are many reproduced and fabricated items from that time, and a reproduction will have the same typeface and the date of original publication. But that doesn't mean the artifact is from that time, or even original for that matter. For you history channel watchers out there, how many times have you seen the show, "Pawn Stars" where item is brought in with a date on it and the owner swears up and down that the date is real? The answer is: too many times. And usually they don't trust the item as authentic until an expert has checked it out. Likewise, the date on the chapeau cannot be fully trusted without investigation. As textile conservators, it is important to be aware of the various materials and construction techniques of a multitude of time periods. Luckily for us, we have an extensive library of the history of textiles throughout the ages. We are especially well-stocked on books dealing with military uniforms, which came in handy with this hat. 

Detail view of the nap of the silk.  The board layer can be seen where the silk has thinned.

The artifact in question, a bicorn military Chapeau de Bras from the Buffalo History Museum (BHM) is a hat that was designed to allow it to be easily folded and carried under the arm as part of official and ceremonial dress when it was not worn on the head. The literal meaning of "chapeau de bras" is "arm-hat." The brim is turned up on two sides to cover the crown and form two corners or ‘corns’, hence bicorn. During our first examination, the hat was found to be constructed from a beige cotton board material. This base layer is covered in a woven, pile fabric on both sides attached with an adhesive. The weave is brown cotton and the pile is a black shiny material, possibly silk. The crown of the hat is lined with two glazed cotton fabrics. The vertical interior of the crown has a beige and white stripe fabric and the top has an embossed plain weave white cotton fabric. On the middle of the crown lining is a printed label, which reads, “N, N. Weaver, No. 16 Genesee Street, Utica”. There is a leather sweat band around the internal rim of the crown. 

Detail view of the embroidered date.

But the most unusual detail of the hat was that the date "1812", which was stitched to the proper right outside of the chapeau in metal thread braid. The braid was stitched in position with small black thread stab stitches. At first I was willing to believe the date was affixed at a later date, but that it was in fact a hat worn by it's owner in the war of 1812. Just a few months before, I had worked on a War of 1812 military sash, which also came from the BHM, and had consulted many of the books illustrating uniforms from that war. The hat looked to be similar to the style, but was not an exact match. I was to learn later that the original owner of the hat was Major General Elias W. Benson (1796-1874) of Syracuse, NY. But then I learned that he was not a top-ranking officer during the war of 1812. He in fact served during the War of 1812 as an 18 year-old drummer boy for just less than a month, from October 27th, 1814 to November 21st, 1814. This hat was not the hat of a drummer boy. However, Major General Benson would later rise up the ranks of the NYS Militia and later was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Veterans of the War of 1812. However, according to BHM, the chapeau dates from the 1820s-1830s. If that was the case, then why was "1812" stitched to the cap?

Sean Pekar, a former staff member at SAC, who now works at Fort Ticonderoga, was able to shed some light on the mystery. He immediately recognized that the style of the chapeau was not that of the War of 1812 and inferred that this chapeau de bras was worn in commemoration of the U.S.'s victory over the English during the conflict beginning in 1812. Thus for that reason the date would have been stitched to a later style military cap.

Example of a commemorative date, as opposed to the actual date of manufacture.  This image from the Smithsonian and the Project Gutenberg ebook: "American Military Insignia 1800-1851, by J. Duncan Campbell".  The paragraph below is an excerpt from Mr. Campbell's book discussing commemorative dates

J. Duncan Campbell wrote in his above mentioned book: "An example of this commemorative military wear is the above pictured insignia from The State Fencibles of Philadelphia who were originally organized as "Sea Fencibles" in 1812 for duty at the port of Philadelphia. This cockade, with brass eagle, was first worn about 1840 and it continued in use for many years thereafter. Dates incorporated as parts of devices are generally the original organizational dates of the units concerned—as is the case in this instance—and bear no necessary relation to the age of the badges. Some Militia cap plates bear the date "1776," and there are waist-belt plates bearing organization dates of 100 years earlier than the dates at which the plates were made."

Pekar had valuable insight on the construction of the chapeau as well. Confirmed by subsequent fiber analysis, Pekar identified the plush pile that covered the pasteboard core was silk. He pointed out that the use of pasteboard and silk plush had become common place in the 19th century because the cost of beaver felt (castor) was steadily rising. The rising cost was of course due to the rising demand of beaver fur in Europe, to the point that the animal was almost hunted to extinction on the American continent. In the 19th century the style of military caps changed, getting larger overall, thus the use of silk and pasteboard was the more economical option.  

This particular chapeau de bras is shown in its hat box.  This hat is featured on the website: navalswd.com, where they indicate it is in fact made of beaver pelt.

The chapeau de bras, and later the chapeau (made more rigid and therefore not to be flattened, hence the drop of "de bras") existed in military attire for approximately 120 years before they were finally phased out in the 1930's.  As you would guess, this style of hat changed quite a bit over those years.  Here is a great page from pinterest showing various expressions of the chapeau de bras: http://www.pinterest.com/mgcoste/chapeau-bras/

This image from Parks Canada is wonderful.  Re-creators show the uniforms worn, highlighting the two chapeau de bras in the front.  Wow, they are large.

The above images are illustrations from the site thelordz.org.  These 4 uniforms are those worn in New York State during the war of 1812.  Notice the hat is worn with the "corns" oriented front to back.

It seems totally plausible that this hat is a local militia officer's chapeau de bras that was worn in commemoration of the victory over the English during the War of 1812. And honestly it does not matter much whether it was worn in 1812, or in 1820 or 30, it is nonetheless a very old hat. Which means for us, from a conservation standpoint, our treatment approach will not differ. What was invaluable information, was learning about the silk covering, made to look and feel like fur. Having this knowledge would shape the way we approached the treatment of the hat.  

With that in mind, it leads to the simple fact that authenticity does not have much footing when it comes to the treatment approach. Regardless of the owner, or the war, this hat is an approximately 200 year-old hat composed mainly of cotton and silk and needs to be treated as such.  

_____________________________

Gwen Spicer is a textile conservator in private practice.  Spicer Art Conservation specializes in textile conservation, object conservation, and the conservation of works on paper.  Gwen's innovative treatment and mounting of flags and textiles is unrivaled.   To contact her, please visit her website.