Topstitching -- Which is correct / common?

[toccoa42]

To all the handsewers out there --

I'm assembling a Charles Childs RD II jacket kit (very nice by the way) and I'd like to know if anyone knows which of two handsewn topstitches is more historically correct. The jacket represents an early war CSA artillery lieutenant, so a polished look is important:

1. Serpentine -- the finished look is such: - - - - -

2. Double serpentine -- which looks more machine-sewn: __ __ __ __ __

Serpentine means a simple "snake" pattern, running one way down the cloth. Double serpentine means the stitch runs back in the OPPOSITE direction, once the above #1 is complete. At least, this is what I THINK is happening, given what I have seen in close-up photos of the real deal, plus other hand-sewn reproductions. Double serpentine provides a more "polished" appearance.

Note that in the above "examples", the dashes really don't cooperate and don't leave enough space in #1. Example #2 "double serpentine" should look like the top stitch you will find on Levis.

If another technique was used, I'd like to know that as well. Any advice is appreciated.

Thanks,
Lynn Kessler

[Dan Wambaugh]

Lynn,

I have always used a modified running stitch for topstitching, where the needle is angled back toward the previous stitch on the opposite side of the surface. This forces you to pass the needle through to the other side of the fabric, and thus takes a bit longer, but I find that the result is much closer in appearance to original topstitching than trying to use any technique where you pass the needle through the same side of the fabric (such as backstitching.)

That is my method when I have thick layers to work with. On thinner layers I have seen backstitches used as topstitching to great effect, but when you're dealing with the six layers of a jacket front (front, facing, and interlining doubled back on themselves) I've found my modified running stitch to be the only effective method.

I hope this helps!


Best Regards,

[toccoa42]

I have always used a modified running stitch for topstitching, where the needle is angled back toward the previous stitch on the opposite side of the surface.

Dan --

For demonstration purposes, this is a single topstitch from the OBVERSE:

—

The left end is the "start" point, the right is the "finish" (where the needle enters the fabric).

If I understand you correctly, you are creating a normal topstitch on the obverse of the jacket, then from the reverse, returning the needle at an angle so that it will exit the obverse almost exactly at the point where the needle originally ENTERED the obverse, resulting in this for three finished topstitches:

———

And resulting in the "machine finish" appearance but handstitched. Yes / no?

Thanks,
Lynn Kessler

[Secesh]

To all the handsewers out there --

I'm assembling a Charles Childs RD II jacket kit (very nice by the way) and I'd like to know if anyone knows which of two handsewn topstitches is more historically correct. The jacket represents an early war CSA artillery lieutenant, so a polished look is important:

1. Serpentine -- the finished look is such: - - - - -

2. Double serpentine -- which looks more machine-sewn: __ __ __ __ __

Serpentine means a simple "snake" pattern, running one way down the cloth. Double serpentine means the stitch runs back in the OPPOSITE direction, once the above #1 is complete. At least, this is what I THINK is happening, given what I have seen in close-up photos of the real deal, plus other hand-sewn reproductions. Double serpentine provides a more "polished" appearance.

Note that in the above "examples", the dashes really don't cooperate and don't leave enough space in #1. Example #2 "double serpentine" should look like the top stitch you will find on Levis.

If another technique was used, I'd like to know that as well. Any advice is appreciated.

Thanks,
Lynn Kessler


Hello,
I found your statement about a "polished look" interesting...Officers in both the Union and Confederate armies were required to purchase their own uniforms. As a result, many contracted with tailors who were capable of turning out beautifully finished garments; however, the RDII jacket was a government issued tunic, originally for the enlisted ranks, and later (I think 1864) made available to officers at a cost, and once the needs of the enlisted ranks had been met. As a result, the garment drawn by an officer would have exhibited no superiority in construction over the enlistedmen's jackets, and would have been subject to the skills of whatever seamstress happened to work on that particular piece. Perhaps if it's a polished officer's look you are seeking you should go with a frock coat or commutation style jacket, both of which could and did exhibit the style you seek. Just my 2 cents worth of rambling...Best regards.

[Ted Mueller]

OK . Here's my 2 cent's worth. This is a top stich I use. I start from the back or bury the knot . then push the needle in from the back and tip the needle slightly in the direction the seam is going , pull through.and return just behind where the needle came out and push through to the back side at the opposite angle, again in the direction the seam is going. this way you see no stich, only the point where the needle came and went. I guess you could call it a serpentine stich as it zig zags it way up the seam . This has no bearing on anything I have seen on an origional CW garment. Just a thought! Ted Muller

[jhuether]

OK . Here's my 2 cent's worth. This is a top stich I use. I start from the back or bury the knot . then push the needle in from the back and tip the needle slightly in the direction the seam is going , pull through.and return just behind where the needle came out and push through to the back side at the opposite angle, again in the direction the seam is going. this way you see no stich, only the point where the needle came and went. I guess you could call it a serpentine stich as it zig zags it way up the seam . This has no bearing on anything I have seen on an origional CW garment. Just a thought! Ted Muller

It almost sounds like you are describing a prick stitch. This is where on the finished side you end with no visible sign of a stitch exept a very small prick, but on the facing side you can see full, and often long, stitches.

While I haven't seen any original garments with this form of top stitching, I do seem to remember reading a thread a number of months ago mentioning this stitch on at least one original. If this is more than my imagination, maybe the poster will chime in. Of course, I have been known to not have a clue what I was talking about before.

[rbruno]

I have looked at original jackets with all of the above mentioned styles of topstitching. The type of stitch Dan described was on a couple different jackets, including a Depot III that was worn by an officer. The officer drew the jacket and had it tailored at an extra cost. Some parts you could tell the workmanship was different then other parts. For instance, the lining was replaced and you could see that someone else had worked on the coat. Another officer coat had the "prick stitch" that was describe in another post. Still another jacket had topstitching that was very small and practicaly touching each individual stitch. You could barely see the stitch on the back or the inside of the coat. Almost a reverse to the prick stitch. As I was looking back through my pictures to write this post, I noticed that many of the jackets had no topstitching at all. I guess my point is that a variety of types can be used or not at all.
Rob Bruno
1st MD Cav

[toccoa42]

Just to add background to my original question --

The jacket I am replicating appears in Echoes of Glory. It is an officer's Richmond Deport artillery jacket that has topstitching that is clearly more involved and "finished" than the simple serpentine topstitch that might be common on the stock or issued jacket that an enlisted man might receive. So yes, it is possible that the original owner had extra tailoring performed on the jacket. Or not. We'll never know. In any event, a "finished" appearance is required for the jacket I have in mind, as the photo depicts.

Lynn Kessler

[Richmond Depot]

Mr. Kessler,

Could you be more specific as to which jacket you are looking at in EOG ?

Best,

[toccoa42]

Could you be more specific as to which jacket you are looking at in EOG ?

Sure. Captain Otey's jacket, bottom page 122. It may or may not be an RD II, given that the epaulets are missing and we can't tell if there are belt loops. But, given that he was killed in October 1862, I'm betting it's either a I or a II with the epaulets removed.

I should say I'm replicating it to a certain degree. I'm building mine as an RD II, with epaulets, no exterior chest pocket flap, with the same red piped trim, but as lieutenant instead of captain, and with 9 buttons, not eight as the photo depicts.

Lynn Kessler

[Secesh]

Otey's jacket is a private purchase, neither an RD1 or RD2. The piping and trimmed pockets are not found on Richmond Depot jackets. Best regards.

[toccoa42]

Otey's jacket is a private purchase, neither an RD1 or RD2.

Yeah, I figured that too. Still, the RD II pattern from CRC works for my intentions.

The piping and trimmed pockets are not found on Richmond Depot jackets.

Well, he WAS and officer, so he could do what he wanted. And it still works for my intentions.

Lynn Kessler

[DougCooper]

Yeah, I figured that too. Still, the RD II pattern from CRC works for my intentions.



Well, he WAS and officer, so he could do what he wanted. And it still works for my intentions.

Lynn Kessler

So Lynn what we aren't getting is the point of this exercise - if you are making a jacket not based on a single surviving example, why the question on top stitching?

[Secesh]

Exactly my point...an exercise in futility...why are you not using a commutation pattern? It seems you are using an RD pattern to make a non-RD pattern jacket...And why make a copy of Otey's jacket based on an RD pattern when Otey's jacket isn't one???!!!

[jhuether]

... Another officer coat had the "prick stitch" that was describe in another post. Still another jacket had topstitching that was very small and practicaly touching each individual stitch. You could barely see the stitch on the back or the inside of the coat. Almost a reverse to the prick stitch. As I was looking back through my pictures to write this post, I noticed that many of the jackets had no topstitching at all.


Rob,

Do you think you could post some of these pictures. I would be really interested in seeing the prick stitch and reverse(?) prick stitch.

[WestTN_reb]

I'll be the devil's advocate and ask the question that nobody else has asked. Are there even enough men under your command to warrant the rank you are assuming? The question is not directed at you personally, but at the hobby in general (this side of the hobby is better about it). Something to think on.

[LibertyHallVols]

Exactly my point...an exercise in futility...why are you not using a commutation pattern? It seems you are using an RD pattern to make a non-RD pattern jacket...And why make a copy of Otey's jacket based on an RD pattern when Otey's jacket isn't one???!!!

Why not? Sure some jackets are unique in their cut and construction, but a lot of them are simply variations on a theme (6 piece body and 2 piece sleeve). I've never seen the Otey jacket in person, but in simply viewing the pics, an RD pattern seems like a logical starting point. The biggest difference I see in patterns is the collar (the Otey jacket being a bit more square).

In reply to another post:
Yep, there are examples of piped and trimmed RD jackets. The J.B. Royal jacket in the MOC has red piping on the epaulets.

On topstitching:
I'm a backstitch fan, but have used a running stitch as well. It depends on the project. In looking at the Otey jacket in the "Echoes..." book, it is clear that it has some topstitching, but that's about all you can tell. It could honestly be just about any kind of stitch.

It can be tough to reproduce an item based on a picture(s). Even with some highly detailed shots, at some point you're going to have to make your best guess. At the end of the day, if you have a reasonable facsimile of an officer's jacket, none of your pards will think twice when they see you wear it at an event. No, it ain't an exact replica. This is the "sliding scale" of authenticity that Curt Schmidt talks about. If you like it and it meets the authenticity regs of the events you attend, then it works. Others seek the exacting replica and that works, too.

On "Commutation Jackets"
I just gotta say it... "Commutation" is the means by which uniforms were obtained, not the pattern for a particular type of garment. There were "Commutation" trousers, overshirts, frocks, and many other things. So when folks say, "You should use a commutation jacket pattern," what does that mean, exactly?

[Secesh]

In referring to the piping on Otey's jacket I am speaking of the red piping trim surrounding the pocket flaps, etc. ...His piping goes a little beyond what is considered the norm for RD jackets. By commutation pattern I am referring to something more along the lines of a common jacket or common purchase, not specifically a government issue pattern. Otey died in early 1862, at a time when the Richmond Depots were just being issued. Wambaugh & White offer a commutation pattern jacket that very much resembles the cut of the Otey jacket.

[rbruno]

Jason,
I will try to post some of the pictures. I am having a hard time finding the button to attach photos. Could use some help on that.

I agree that a commutation jacket will look like a RD, similar pieces and construction. I would think that if a person was going to have a coat made, the maker would make what they would know and I am sure many would know how to assemble a RD jacket. I had a debate with a friend in my unit over a similar jacket. He believed it was a RD jacket because it had 6 panels and 2 piece sleaves and linings. I disagreed because of all of the other details in the jacket ie. padded chest, etc. I still think this was a private purhase jacket, but basically a RD pattern because that is what tailors new.
Rob Bruno
1st MD Cav

[LibertyHallVols]

Tom,

I have no specific knowledge of the Otey jacket. However, I think that your argument that the Otey jacket is likely not a reworked version of an issue jacket makes sense. "Never say never," but if he died in early '62, I think you have a point.

In any case, I think all the red trim on that jacket was probably added at the same time, whether when the jacket was originally made, or if it was modified later. My comment on trimmed RD jackets was simply to illustrate that your earlier comment was a bit of an over-generalization. Generally, you are correct, but it is not an absolute truth. ...what is "absolute" when it comes to CS garments?!? ;)

With regard to using an RD pattern...
If a guy has experience and a comfort level with CRC patterns, and wants to construct a jacket with a 6 piece body, then the RD pattern is not a bad choice. I would not advocate making a "RD jacket with red trim and a pocket on the front" and try to pass it off as a "replica" of the Otey jacket. Rather, I was saying that the RD pattern from CRC could be used as the starting point for a reproduction. Modification to collar, sleeves, facings, even the shap of the front might be necessary. However, these are minor modifications when compared to the prospect of working with a pattern from other vendors, with whom one might not have experience.

Thanks!

[vamick]

Just as an aside, I have a book containing letters/dairys ect, with an entry describing privates of McGregor's battery/Stuart horse artillery wearing red piped shell jackets as late as Five Forks, ( it mentions they were piped, not just red collars as in Tait's) Ive also seen several different "RD IIs" some with epulets and belts loops, some with just epulets, some with epulets trimed with red piping ( private Blair Royal Richmond Howitzers EOG)
some with only collars some with none/ 9 buttons/8 buttons...when we say something never happened, or even that it wasnt PEC. sometimes new evidence comes to light!...I like to be careful with 'never' its a dangerous word ;)

[toccoa42]

Why not? Sure some jackets are unique in their cut and construction, but a lot of them are simply variations on a theme (6 piece body and 2 piece sleeve). I've never seen the Otey jacket in person, but in simply viewing the pics, an RD pattern seems like a logical starting point. The biggest difference I see in patterns is the collar (the Otey jacket being a bit more square).

In reply to another post:
Yep, there are examples of piped and trimmed RD jackets. The J.B. Royal jacket in the MOC has red piping on the epaulets.

On topstitching:
I'm a backstitch fan, but have used a running stitch as well. It depends on the project. In looking at the Otey jacket in the "Echoes..." book, it is clear that it has some topstitching, but that's about all you can tell. It could honestly be just about any kind of stitch.

It can be tough to reproduce an item based on a picture(s). Even with some highly detailed shots, at some point you're going to have to make your best guess. At the end of the day, if you have a reasonable facsimile of an officer's jacket, none of your pards will think twice when they see you wear it at an event. No, it ain't an exact replica. This is the "sliding scale" of authenticity that Curt Schmidt talks about. If you like it and it meets the authenticity regs of the events you attend, then it works. Others seek the exacting replica and that works, too.

On "Commutation Jackets"
I just gotta say it... "Commutation" is the means by which uniforms were obtained, not the pattern for a particular type of garment. There were "Commutation" trousers, overshirts, frocks, and many other things. So when folks say, "You should use a commutation jacket pattern," what does that mean, exactly?

Thank you. This covers all the intentions of my project exactly. I'm not recreating Otey's jacket, I'm creating MY jacket.

And as far as how many men are under my command -- none. And I don't care.

Lynn Kessler

[toccoa42]

With regard to using an RD pattern...
If a guy has experience and a comfort level with CRC patterns, and wants to construct a jacket with a 6 piece body, then the RD pattern is not a bad choice. I would not advocate making a "RD jacket with red trim and a pocket on the front" and try to pass it off as a "replica" of the Otey jacket. Rather, I was saying that the RD pattern from CRC could be used as the starting point for a reproduction. Modification to collar, sleeves, facings, even the shap of the front might be necessary. However, these are minor modifications when compared to the prospect of working with a pattern from other vendors, with whom one might not have experience.


Sorry folks, I seem to have gotten up on the wrong side of the website this morning . . .

Mr. Wickett points my intentions out quite well again. The RD pattern is a starting point, and I'm not recreating Otey's jacket, I creating a jacket that might have fallen into the possibilities of the rank and design. No, there will not be a chest pocket and yes, there will be red trim. What I am doing may not suit the purist campaigner's intentions, but it suits MY intentions, which are not mainstream, but also not purist campaigner's, either. I could simply buy a jacket off the racks of a sutler and call it a day, but I'm not willing to do that. I want a jacket that is correct in design, cut and construction (CRC does that) that I can build as was built during the war, but with the embellishments that I might have had added, as an officer, who procured his jacket from the Richmond Depot, but had a tailor add the requested embellisahments. Not outside the realm of possibility, as I see it.

Apologies if I ruffled anyones feathers, but it's just too damned early in the moring for me . . .

Lynn Kessler

[Secesh]

Well, for the record, I pulled out my MOC Catalogue of Uniforms, in which Capt. Gaston Otey's jacket is described (for those who are now curious about this jacket)......
Cadet gray wool with off-white osnaburg lining, red wool facing on collar with gold braid captains bars, red wool worsted piping, 2 slit pockets with flaps trimmed in red wool worsted piping, red wool worsted captains sleeve braid, 8 button front with Block A locally cast brass buttons...Otey was wounded in May 62 near Lewisburg, West Virginia and died of his wounds several months later. Best regards, and good luck on your jacket.

[toccoa42]

Well, for the record, I pulled out my MOC Catalogue of Uniforms, in which Capt. Gaston Otey's jacket is described (for those who are now curious about this jacket)......
Cadet gray wool with off-white osnaburg lining, red wool facing on collar with gold braid captains bars, red wool worsted piping, 2 slit pockets with flaps trimmed in red wool worsted piping, red wool worsted captains sleeve braid, 8 button front with Block A locally cast brass buttons...Otey was wounded in May 62 near Lewisburg, West Virginia and died of his wounds several months later. Best regards, and good luck on your jacket.

Yeah, that is interesting. Thank you. Any info on anyone from Lowry's Battery, Wise Legion, ANV, by chance? Do you need specific names? Or does your info apply only to the pieces within the MOC collection?

Lynn Kessler

[Secesh]

I am only familiar with Otey from that unit, mainly thru researching his uniform and having seen the original, plus his personal items, at the Museum of the Confederacy. In addition to his jacket and kepi, they also have his doeskin gauntlets in which he, on the back of the hands, drew scenes of artillerymen firing their pieces. As I recall, Otey was a very small man, based upon the size of his jacket. Best regards, Tom

[LibertyHallVols]

Nevermind... Couldn't get a file to load. Sorry!

[rbruno]

Jason,
I wanted to try and post some of the pictures you asked about before. I think I can do it now. The first picture of the sleeve is an example of what I would call the prick stitch from the earlier post. You can only see a very small stitch on the outside of the coat. The larger stitch is on the inside of the hem. The second picture, the topstitching around the collar is very close together almost touching and you can barely see anything in the back of the collar. It is pretty much the reverse of the sleeve. These were both officer coats and very well tailored.
Rob Bruno
1st MD Cav

[Bill]

Gentlemen,

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Richmond Clothing Bureau selling unfinished kits and/or yard goods to officers? In that case wouldn't it make perfect sense that an officer's jacket would look very much like the basic RD II jacket, but made better and with certain custom touches? Just asking.

[roundshot]

Lynn: If you are interested in Lowry's Btty, then you may find the attached relic of interest: http://www.historybroker.com/items/belt.htm
While the antique dealer believes the alteration of the "NY" was done by it's Confederate owner, I personally believe it was a crude attempt to make a "NJ" New Jersey plate by its Union owner. It bears a pretty uncanny resemblance to several post-war NJ plates, but that's only a SWAG on my part.

I find the history of the Wise Legion Artillery quite interesting as well. I would venture that a good bit of their mid-war clothing came from the Wytheville depot.