Tweet
Gentlemen,
For all you 19th century (military culture) leather fanatics.....David Jarnagin and I have a new article we wish to share with the distinguished and learned members of this forum. It is coming out this spring in the Company Journal of the Company of Military Historians entitled: MILITARY LEATHER IN THE 19TH CENTURY, ITS METHODS AND SECRETS. It is a comprehensive look at the types and color of military leather used on equipment in the war time period as well as the tanning, currying, dyeing and finishing processes common to the period. Some of you may wish to read it. In addition, we have a second article coming out in the summer issue of the Journal entitled CONFEDERATE LEATHER BLACK OR BROWN, HOW & WHERE?. It is an in depth look at Confederate leather types, colors and production. It is a re worked-reprint of an article of the same title published last summer in the NORTH SOUTH TRADER magazine.
As a teaser, I offer a couple of excerpts of the first article, MILITARY LEATHER IN THE 19TH CENTURY, ITS METHODS AND SECRETS. ........
................. All leather intended for military equipment construction was dyed and finished at the tannery during the tanning process. For military usage two types of leather were provided by contract tanneries to both the government and to private accoutrement suppliers and used in making cartridge boxes, cap pouches, belts, bayonet scabbards and horse equipment- “sleeked” (vegetable tanned leather dyed black on the “grain” or smooth side of the leather) or, “buff” (“mineral”tanned then dyed black or white on the “rough” or “flesh” side of the leather). White buff was used extensively by the military through the Mexican War. In the 1850's the army had trouble getting buff in any color so in 1858 they switched to black “waxed” leather (leather finished over the rough or flesh surface side) for its belts and slings. For most other Federal “war time” leather accoutrements (cartridge boxes and cap boxes) “bridle” leather was usually used and finished (“sleeked” or “jacked”) on the grain (smooth NOT rough) side. Black buff leather was still made for belts and slings but did not make up a large part of Federal accoutrement production. (See Text Box # 1)..................
.............So, how was leather dyed black? Historians have naturally assumed the formula found in the 1861 Ordnance Manual was the pervasive recipe for military equipments. However, this formula was never meant for dyeing sleeked leather. It in fact, lacks the necessary ingredients to chemically bond the tannin to turn vegetable tanned leather to black. In practice, this recipe was only intended as a re-blacking or touching up formula for mineral tanned buff leather and in effect, little more than a good quality black ink.
The use of the word, “dye” is a bit misleading too. In actuality, the process of coloring vegetable tanned leather to black is a chemical reaction between iron mordants, logwood and the tanning agent used in leather during the tanning process. Iron mordants are particles of iron often mixed with mild acids such as vinegar. Logwood is vegetable matter that acts as a natural dyeing agent to get the blue black iron mordants to turn a deep, rich black. Tanning agents are residue from plants essential in the process to preserve hides into leather. As noted above, for most military usage leather this tanning agent (in vegetable tanning) was usually the bark from oak trees. Careful and often secretive preparation of the leather at the tannery including the right balance of the above ingredients, will determine the quality of both the leather, the black color and how long each will last. 1.....................
.............. What about the chocolate brown colored leather often seen among other wise legitimate artifacts today? Why are they not black? These leather artifacts were made from hides tanned with Hemlock tree bark rather than the officially sanctioned and, correct Oak bark. Before leather was dyed and finished it was easy to tell the difference between Oak and Hemlock tanning. The two major barks strike unique, entirely different colors. Oak bark always leaves a yellow color whereas hemlock always leaves a reddish skin tone color. However, they further distinguished themselves when dyes were applied. “The most interesting aspect of Hemlock tanned leather and one that created enormous troubles for the Federal Ordnance Department during the war and for collector’s today, was the inert tendency for the dyes of Hemlock tanned leather to fade, often quickly, from black to brown.” 7. Unlike oak bark, hemlock bark tannin does not seriously bond with the iron mordants to change form and thus turn the leather black. After tanning, various specialty dyes were applied that will turn the leather black but usually only temporarily. Unfortunately, the logwood in the leather will eventually oxidize (sometimes very quickly), causing the iron to change form again and return the hemlock leather from black to the chocolate brown we often see today. (Photo # 4)
Nevertheless, it is clear tanners routinely “cheated” and used hemlock tanning anyway. But why? Hemlock bark had a higher percentage of tannin than Oak and it thus shortened the overall tanning process by a month or more. Another advantage was that Hemlock tanned hides tended to be heavier and therefore brought more money because leather was sold by the pound (until about 1885) rather than by square feet as it is today......................
UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLEEK, WAXED AND BUFF LEATHER:
“Sleeked” and “Waxed” are finishes applied to vegetable tanned leather.
“Sleeked” leather as noted above was finished on the “smooth” or, “grain” side of the leather. “Waxed” leather was finished on the rough or flesh side however, the “blackening” finish for waxed leather was very different. Waxed leather was not dyed using iron mordants but instead lamp black, tallow and wax was mixed into the finish and carefully applied in multiple layers to completely conceal the rough flesh of the leather. This type of leather has a heavy finish which can show up in photos with a high, brilliant shine. The appeal of waxed leather was its beauty and its thick finish which allowed it to be repaired if scratched or damaged. Its disadvantage was that the lamp black cracks and breaks off with age.
“Buff” leather went through the same initial beam house preparation as vegetable tanned leather but was then “mineral” tanned ( a totally different process). Buff leather has the grain surface destroyed during the extended liming and what is not removed is sanded off. This sanding process was called “buffing” and may be where the leather derives its name. For accoutrements, the leather was finished (dyed black or whitened) on the “rough” or “flesh” side. To dye buff to black, extracts of logwood, pulverized nut gall, copperas and rain water were mixed then carefully applied to dye the leather a deep black yet retain the rough finish. White buff was made white with the use of “Paris Whiting” or chalk powder.
Correspondence of the period suggests ordnance officers were often confused about the complicated tanning and dye methods and their different applications for sleek, waxed and buff leathers and thus, relied upon the more experienced (and sometimes unscrupulous) leather tanners for direction. ............................
PHOTO CAPTION: Two 1864 dated Watertown Arsenal Federal cartridge boxes. The box on the left is Chestnut Oak tanned and still retains its dark black dye finish. The one on right is Hemlock tanned that has turned its signature brown. Fading will always result on Hemlock tanned leather regardless of the finish applied.
For more information, you may wish to obtain the full article. Thank you!!
Ken R Knopp
For all you 19th century (military culture) leather fanatics.....David Jarnagin and I have a new article we wish to share with the distinguished and learned members of this forum. It is coming out this spring in the Company Journal of the Company of Military Historians entitled: MILITARY LEATHER IN THE 19TH CENTURY, ITS METHODS AND SECRETS. It is a comprehensive look at the types and color of military leather used on equipment in the war time period as well as the tanning, currying, dyeing and finishing processes common to the period. Some of you may wish to read it. In addition, we have a second article coming out in the summer issue of the Journal entitled CONFEDERATE LEATHER BLACK OR BROWN, HOW & WHERE?. It is an in depth look at Confederate leather types, colors and production. It is a re worked-reprint of an article of the same title published last summer in the NORTH SOUTH TRADER magazine.
As a teaser, I offer a couple of excerpts of the first article, MILITARY LEATHER IN THE 19TH CENTURY, ITS METHODS AND SECRETS. ........
................. All leather intended for military equipment construction was dyed and finished at the tannery during the tanning process. For military usage two types of leather were provided by contract tanneries to both the government and to private accoutrement suppliers and used in making cartridge boxes, cap pouches, belts, bayonet scabbards and horse equipment- “sleeked” (vegetable tanned leather dyed black on the “grain” or smooth side of the leather) or, “buff” (“mineral”tanned then dyed black or white on the “rough” or “flesh” side of the leather). White buff was used extensively by the military through the Mexican War. In the 1850's the army had trouble getting buff in any color so in 1858 they switched to black “waxed” leather (leather finished over the rough or flesh surface side) for its belts and slings. For most other Federal “war time” leather accoutrements (cartridge boxes and cap boxes) “bridle” leather was usually used and finished (“sleeked” or “jacked”) on the grain (smooth NOT rough) side. Black buff leather was still made for belts and slings but did not make up a large part of Federal accoutrement production. (See Text Box # 1)..................
.............So, how was leather dyed black? Historians have naturally assumed the formula found in the 1861 Ordnance Manual was the pervasive recipe for military equipments. However, this formula was never meant for dyeing sleeked leather. It in fact, lacks the necessary ingredients to chemically bond the tannin to turn vegetable tanned leather to black. In practice, this recipe was only intended as a re-blacking or touching up formula for mineral tanned buff leather and in effect, little more than a good quality black ink.
The use of the word, “dye” is a bit misleading too. In actuality, the process of coloring vegetable tanned leather to black is a chemical reaction between iron mordants, logwood and the tanning agent used in leather during the tanning process. Iron mordants are particles of iron often mixed with mild acids such as vinegar. Logwood is vegetable matter that acts as a natural dyeing agent to get the blue black iron mordants to turn a deep, rich black. Tanning agents are residue from plants essential in the process to preserve hides into leather. As noted above, for most military usage leather this tanning agent (in vegetable tanning) was usually the bark from oak trees. Careful and often secretive preparation of the leather at the tannery including the right balance of the above ingredients, will determine the quality of both the leather, the black color and how long each will last. 1.....................
.............. What about the chocolate brown colored leather often seen among other wise legitimate artifacts today? Why are they not black? These leather artifacts were made from hides tanned with Hemlock tree bark rather than the officially sanctioned and, correct Oak bark. Before leather was dyed and finished it was easy to tell the difference between Oak and Hemlock tanning. The two major barks strike unique, entirely different colors. Oak bark always leaves a yellow color whereas hemlock always leaves a reddish skin tone color. However, they further distinguished themselves when dyes were applied. “The most interesting aspect of Hemlock tanned leather and one that created enormous troubles for the Federal Ordnance Department during the war and for collector’s today, was the inert tendency for the dyes of Hemlock tanned leather to fade, often quickly, from black to brown.” 7. Unlike oak bark, hemlock bark tannin does not seriously bond with the iron mordants to change form and thus turn the leather black. After tanning, various specialty dyes were applied that will turn the leather black but usually only temporarily. Unfortunately, the logwood in the leather will eventually oxidize (sometimes very quickly), causing the iron to change form again and return the hemlock leather from black to the chocolate brown we often see today. (Photo # 4)
Nevertheless, it is clear tanners routinely “cheated” and used hemlock tanning anyway. But why? Hemlock bark had a higher percentage of tannin than Oak and it thus shortened the overall tanning process by a month or more. Another advantage was that Hemlock tanned hides tended to be heavier and therefore brought more money because leather was sold by the pound (until about 1885) rather than by square feet as it is today......................
UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLEEK, WAXED AND BUFF LEATHER:
“Sleeked” and “Waxed” are finishes applied to vegetable tanned leather.
“Sleeked” leather as noted above was finished on the “smooth” or, “grain” side of the leather. “Waxed” leather was finished on the rough or flesh side however, the “blackening” finish for waxed leather was very different. Waxed leather was not dyed using iron mordants but instead lamp black, tallow and wax was mixed into the finish and carefully applied in multiple layers to completely conceal the rough flesh of the leather. This type of leather has a heavy finish which can show up in photos with a high, brilliant shine. The appeal of waxed leather was its beauty and its thick finish which allowed it to be repaired if scratched or damaged. Its disadvantage was that the lamp black cracks and breaks off with age.
“Buff” leather went through the same initial beam house preparation as vegetable tanned leather but was then “mineral” tanned ( a totally different process). Buff leather has the grain surface destroyed during the extended liming and what is not removed is sanded off. This sanding process was called “buffing” and may be where the leather derives its name. For accoutrements, the leather was finished (dyed black or whitened) on the “rough” or “flesh” side. To dye buff to black, extracts of logwood, pulverized nut gall, copperas and rain water were mixed then carefully applied to dye the leather a deep black yet retain the rough finish. White buff was made white with the use of “Paris Whiting” or chalk powder.
Correspondence of the period suggests ordnance officers were often confused about the complicated tanning and dye methods and their different applications for sleek, waxed and buff leathers and thus, relied upon the more experienced (and sometimes unscrupulous) leather tanners for direction. ............................
PHOTO CAPTION: Two 1864 dated Watertown Arsenal Federal cartridge boxes. The box on the left is Chestnut Oak tanned and still retains its dark black dye finish. The one on right is Hemlock tanned that has turned its signature brown. Fading will always result on Hemlock tanned leather regardless of the finish applied.
For more information, you may wish to obtain the full article. Thank you!!
Ken R Knopp
Attached Files
Comment