17th & 18th century artisans ?

[Jim Curlee]

I've noticed that in muzzleloading circles that a lot of guy's are trying to replicate old stuff.
Lots of the old stuff I have seen is crusty, and poorly done, and that's what some guy's are trying to replicate.

I guess that's fine, but I'm wondering if there were other artisans that did their own thing and turned out unique top shelf products?
I try to "Jimmyize" everything I make because it's a reflection of me, not a copy of somebody else's stuff.
I do try to follow some "rules", but I don't get wrapped up in the "uglier" is better mentality, because uglier is not better. lol
Now don't get me wrong this is kind of a free world, so everybody has the right to do exactly what they want, but are we also allowed self expression or is that taboo in the longrifle world?

I like one off, cool stuff, and I'm guessin that even back in the day there were guy's as whacko as me.

Jim   

[rich pierce]

Jim, I have certainly seen top notch original pipe tomahawks, engraved, with inlays and so on. Obviously many powder horns were very individual in their construction and decoration. Tools were often finely made. The coffee grinder attributed to Andreas Albrecht is a fine individualized item. Of course Native American accoutrements were usually finely made and individualized.

However there were likely a dozen plain or even crude homemade powder horns for every fine scrimped one saved for posterity.

What sorts of accoutrements were you thinking of?

[Tim Crosby]

 So do you think everything should be neat, clean, shinny, best materials, right out of the box machine made clones?

   Tim C.

[Jim Curlee]

No I don't, but even that crusty stuff you see now a days, was new at some point in time.
There may have been some guy's using less than new materials, but I'm thinking when you went down to the trading post to trade in your beaver pelts, that you got newly manufactured items made out of newly manufactured materials.

That's why I asked the question, because I don't have a clue.
Not trying to ruffle any feathers, like I said it's a free country, if you want your stuff to look old, and crusty go for it, you're the one wearing it. lol

Jim

[Dave Marsh]

If I am reading the posts correctly the discussion ends up with aging your accoutrements artificially versus aging them naturally through use.  Same as the discussions on guns.  Some like them to look new and "hot off the press"  while others like them to look like a 200 year old original.  All a matter of taste and free choice.

Dave
.

[tallbear]

Jim

I don't think there's one answer for this.We all come at it from different points of view and have different objectives in our work..Some like aged items some do not.Often when making things we are replicating Folk Art which was sometimes kind of crude.There are some that say you should always do your best work and I agree with that to a certain point.Sometimes the object does'nt call for your best work.  Believably recreating Folk Art is a skill on it's own....A big part of my business is recreating original objects for Museums or Collectors who can't afford/obtain the original object .When doing this I sometimes have to work down to the object if you understand what I'm saying.A good example is this Peace Medal I recently completed. The engraving on the original is pretty crude.If I did my" best work " and enraved it to the best of my abilities it would no longer resemble the original object and would be unacceptable to my client.In order to pull off a believable copy I needed to "dumb" down my engraving some. Not trying to say anyone shouldn't try to do their best work but many of us have different goals depending on the job/client/object they are making.My best advice it keep doing what makes you happy!!!!!!

Mitch









Here is the original for comparison.

[Jim Curlee]

Mainly I'm talking about the quality of work, not so much the materials, or the patina.

As an example, stitching.
Again I'm not picking on any body in particular, so please don't take anything I write as a personal attack, because it isn't.
If your doin it, the only one you have to make happy is yourself, so peace man. lol

No matter what muzzleloader sites I look at, a lot of the leather work has stitching that is here, and there, and everywhere, no rhyme or reason to why.
I can't believe that everybody that worked with leather, just stitched here and there through the leather.
Even if you sucked when you started, after a few dozen projects, your stitching is bound to improve.

I admit my methods are probably not traditional, but I use an old divider with a piece of leather sinewed into one spot, so the points are always the same distance apart.
I use this tool to scribe around the outside of the project to get an even border, then I use the points to define my stitch sites, then I punch it with an awl, then lock stitch everything together. Easy Peasy
 
Now the only thing in my method that is not old, is the steel dividers.
I'm guessing I could have pounded a couple of nails in a board to make the same tool.
Wouldn't take much to make everything symmetrical.

A good leathersmith wouldn't need any mechanical assistance, he can see when his stitching is in or out.
I have seen plenty of vintage handstitched items that look like they could have come off of a machine.

So what I'm getting at, is that there had to be craftsman back then making stuff to the best of their abilities.

If you were on the frontier you worked with what you had, but a lot of the stuff that went west was made in the east.
Don't you think that even 200 years ago when the item was new, that you could have had your stitching even and precise?
Maybe nobody cared, I don't have a clue.

Jim

[tallbear]

Jim

    There is no doubt that very high quality work was being done in the 18th Century.That high quality work is still being done by artists today.If you're not seeing it I would suggest you are'nt looking in the right places.I would plan a trip to the CLA show this August or one of the many mini shows.Many artists there do work that rivals the best of what was being done in the 18th century.Then as now it depended on the client.

  Since you mentioned stitching I suggest you look at the work of my friend Eric Fleisher.Eric copies original bags right down to the stitch count per inch....Eric and others like him do stitching that would rival any period.His work can be found here...http://www.efleishershotpouches.com/   

  At a CLA show there are folks doing high level work no matter what the medium.

Mitch

[Tim Crosby]

Don't you think that even 200 years ago when the item was new, that you could have had your stitching even and precise?
Maybe nobody cared, I don't have a clue.

Jim

 Could be but I doubt anybody sitting in a cabin, if they had one measured stitches, they did the best they could with what they had. I do it today, if I have a horn with a hole or soft spot I don't trash it I put a patch on it and move on.

  Tim C.   

[James Rogers]

There was a difference between items made by people who had training and ability to make them and home cobbled items that were crudely put together just to serve the purpose. Both existed. There are people making both these days. Some well made items are also in this day and time aged to look old. There are also a bunch of the homespun type styles aged as well. 
There is also another facet in modern times. It is to use crude materials but attempt techniques that were only seen in the period from the work of a trained person. This in my opinion while inspired by the historical is more of a modern  art form and not likely to have had many historical counterparts. Within the 4 aforementioned categories there are many levels and sub-categories and mixes.  So there is a wide range of craftspeople doing a wide range of styles to accommodate anyone's fancy or desire.

[rich pierce]

There is leatherwork being done today that in every way appears the equal or superior to 18th century work, as mentioned above. The “every man a cobbler” topics here have good illustrations of excellent technique.

As TC mentioned, a basic question to be asked when making something of leather, is “who do we want to portray as making this?”

A professional leather worker? What percentage of say, shooting bags used in America 1750-1830 would have been purchased ready-made?

A frontiersman or farmer in his cabin? Was this perhaps most common uncertain areas?

A frontiersman on a long hunt or expedition? I’d expect these to be rare, 1 in 100.

A Native American woman? This could apply to items for Native American use, and in the West, items purchased or traded for.

[tallbear]

Jim

As long as you're talking about bagwork(and he posted on this thread ) in addition to erics site take a look at James Rogers work....another fine bag maker who's work is based on originals.......http://fowlingpiece.blogspot.com/

Mitch

[T.C.Albert]

I’m curious about the “lock stitch” Jim mentioned.
What is it?
Tim A

[Jim Curlee]

Lock-stitch might not be the proper name for the stitch, but it's the one that I use.

I poke a series of holes in a line, then using 2 needles with the proper(guess) length piece of linen string.
I run the first needle through the leather to be stitched, now I have a needle on each side of the piece I'm sewing attached to each other with the thread.
I usually do the left hand needle, and run it through the piece to the right side, now I take the right hand needle inserting it through the same hole, making sure you didn't go through the thread that is already there.
Now I have the right hand needle on the left side of the bag, and the left hand needle on the right side.
I go down the holes, always putting the left hand needle through the piece followed by the right, and on and on.
If you miss guess the length of the thread, I will usually go backward a few holes then cut. Then I'll go to where the thread ended, and start over.
Make sure after every stitch, that you pull the thread tight.
What will happen is the stitch that you are sewing will be loose, but the previous stitch will be nice and tight.
I am trying to hold the piece vertical between my knees when I'm sewing, easier for me.
Hope that makes sense. LOL
Jim

[B.Barker]

Take a look at James Rogers leather work if you want to see neat stitching in leather work. However many old shot pouches have poor stitching if they were home made. Most folks back then needed something that would work but didn't take a long time to make. Saddle makers would have turned out really nice leather work but a back woodsman would not have done the same quality. Some of the items we see today were made by folks who needed an item and didn't have a clue how to make it "properly". They may have only made one or two so they would not have ever become proficient at it. Even some of the engraving on rifles by trained stockers is not top shelf work. I don't think anyone should do "shotty" work just to. But if we are trying to replicate something some times we have to to get the look of an old piece. Some people question me about my folding knives I make. I don't polish them or try to get out the file marks. Why, because that is how the originals were made not some but all the ones I've ever seen that were the cheep everyday folders the average guy would own. They were probably slapped together by young boys and done just a fast as could be done. The knives are very serviceable but they are not show winner shiny pieces. If you want to make things top notch that's fine but if you are trying to catch the historical feel of some items then you have to lower the finish and some times even the construction of the item. All of the old tin powder measures that I have seen look as if they were made as fast as a person could go. They aren't a thing of beauty they are kind of they are so ugly they are cute. It was an item that was made for utility and function not beauty as were many items in the days before the assembly line.   

[T.C.Albert]

Jim, I believe you are describing a saddle stitch. Sounds like a good choice to me.
TC

[Jim Curlee]

TC;

One thing is for sure, if you cut the thread of one stitch, it will not unravel in leather.
I'm still going to call it a lock stitch. LOL
Hard to teach an old junkyard dog new tricks. LOL

Jim

[T.C.Albert]

Yep, call it what you like as you point out it’s a free country. Thanks for the explanations.
I’ve sewn up a few things in the past myself too but never consider myself too old to learn new or better ways to do stuff.
TC Albert

[James Rogers]

[Jim Curlee]

Okay Okay maybe I'll start calling it the saddle stitch. LOL
No matter what you call it, it works.

Jim

[Brokennock]

TC;

One thing is for sure, if you cut the thread of one stitch, it will not unravel in leather.
I'm still going to call it a lock stitch. LOL
Hard to teach an old junkyard dog new tricks. LOL

Jim

Language matters. A lock stitch is a specific thing, as illustrated above, and a saddle stitch is something different. If you tell me you stitched something with a lock stitch I will picture it having been done with one of those "speedy-stitcher" sewing awls. Also, if you tell me you used a saddle stitch I will know what to expect.

The saddle stitch is vastly superior.