Toppers Unite

[CraigEster]

Unique golden brown/bronze silk Top Hat from the Dutch hat maker, J.S. Meuwsen.

I can't thank Stefan @steur enough for finding this one and sending it my way.

View attachment 686742

View attachment 686743

More images here:

https://www.thefedoralounge.com/threads/beneluxury.102293/post-3165539

Please scroll up to read Stefan's great research on the history of J.S. Meuwsen.

The history of hat plush gets muddy after the 1940s. After the closure of the last large French maker, the quality and consistency of plush declined and it was harder to get in general.

The brown color of some of these silks is probably from postwar experimentation with modern dyes. The traditional plush dyeing process was very long and arduous and shortcuts weren't possible without a decline in quality.

Black, as many will point out, isn't a color - it's the lack of color. Black is attained by making a strong mix of dyes that filter out most wavelengths of light. The black on silk top hats was refined in the 19th century and reached the peak with "huit-reflets" plush. This plush is a deep black with a blue color when viewed offhand and green undertones; the gloss is a warm white and the surface is almost as smooth as glass when polished correctly.

The expertise needed to get these results started to go away. In the 1950s it was noted that recently made plush was "slatey" and didn't have the blue or green in it, compared to the much more beautiful Edwardian-era plush. The decline started around 1920.

With what I know about natural dye, I think this brown is the result of someone new trying to make hat plush and using a brown component of the dye mix that is too strong. Once a batch comes out wrong, there's no way to undo it and you're left with a unique color. In this later era it would be novel to sell a unique color of hat, whereas a few decades prior you'd probably have your name ruined. The issue would be sorted out after one dye batch, making these hats probably quite rare.

More wild colors of plush were made, but these never reached the "huit-reflets" quality and were meant for novelty hats. The black plush is the glossiest. You can determine if this hat is a novelty hat or a failed black hat by seeing how glossy it is compared to a black one. If this hat has a similar gloss and the color is just off, it's probably a failed dye batch. If the gloss is noticeably less, then it is a novelty color. It's not 100% certain but the general rule is that the care and extra processes were put into black silk but not the other colors, which plush makers bought from various dyers in Lyon while they made their own black silk.

 

[VintageEveryday]

Forgot to post! I bought a replica made by a new York milliner, Rodney Gordon. It was made for a stage production in the '90s I think? I'm unsure if he used new old stock silk plush, or if this was some kind of fur. Here it is paired with my work in progress Edwardian morning coat.

 

[steur]

The history of hat plush gets muddy after the 1940s. After the closure of the last large French maker, the quality and consistency of plush declined and it was harder to get in general.

The brown color of some of these silks is probably from postwar experimentation with modern dyes. The traditional plush dyeing process was very long and arduous and shortcuts weren't possible without a decline in quality.

Black, as many will point out, isn't a color - it's the lack of color. Black is attained by making a strong mix of dyes that filter out most wavelengths of light. The black on silk top hats was refined in the 19th century and reached the peak with "huit-reflets" plush. This plush is a deep black with a blue color when viewed offhand and green undertones; the gloss is a warm white and the surface is almost as smooth as glass when polished correctly.

The expertise needed to get these results started to go away. In the 1950s it was noted that recently made plush was "slatey" and didn't have the blue or green in it, compared to the much more beautiful Edwardian-era plush. The decline started around 1920.

With what I know about natural dye, I think this brown is the result of someone new trying to make hat plush and using a brown component of the dye mix that is too strong. Once a batch comes out wrong, there's no way to undo it and you're left with a unique color. In this later era it would be novel to sell a unique color of hat, whereas a few decades prior you'd probably have your name ruined. The issue would be sorted out after one dye batch, making these hats probably quite rare.

More wild colors of plush were made, but these never reached the "huit-reflets" quality and were meant for novelty hats. The black plush is the glossiest. You can determine if this hat is a novelty hat or a failed black hat by seeing how glossy it is compared to a black one. If this hat has a similar gloss and the color is just off, it's probably a failed dye batch. If the gloss is noticeably less, then it is a novelty color. It's not 100% certain but the general rule is that the care and extra processes were put into black silk but not the other colors, which plush makers bought from various dyers in Lyon while they made their own black silk.

Interesting information. I doubt though that this hat is post-war. We know from a maker like Spoorenberg, who lasted the longest making top hats in the Netherlands with the original silk, a good batch of which he kept behind after selling the company to Habig, that the silk on later hats was used as sparingly as possible. That meant not using it on the brim. This one does have a silk finished brim. I rather think that Meuwsen may have tested if there was a market for a different kind of top hat, even if the silk used could have been from a failed batch. It could even be the silk manufacturer testing if there was a market for other colours than black.
There probably wasn't a market for them, as the formality of the top hat doesn't line up with the brown colour, which is usually perceived as informal.

 

[CraigEster]

Interesting information. I doubt though that this hat is post-war. We know from a maker like Spoorenberg, who lasted the longest making top hats in the Netherlands with the original silk, a good batch of which he kept behind after selling the company to Habig, that the silk on later hats was used as sparingly as possible. That meant not using it on the brim. This one does have a silk finished brim. I rather think that Meuwsen may have tested if there was a market for a different kind of top hat, even if the silk used could have been from a failed batch. It could even be the silk manufacturer if there was a market for other colours than black.
There probably wasn't a market for them, as the formality of the top hat doesn't line up with the brown colour, which is usually perceived as informal.

If the supplier had changed and this were an attempt at making new plush, I could see more plush being used to make a hat more traditionally - it may even give it an edge over a black one that doesn't have plush on the brim.

The decline in plush started around 1920 and there was a lot of shifting going on in the French silk industry in the period leading up to WW2. This chaos was compounded in the postwar era.

One thing that the research I've done points to is the economic viability of an enterprise shifting. A silk dyer may, before the Great War, have employed a mix of synthetic and natural dye processes. Weighting of silk was also very common in this time. Practically every single silk product had a different dye and treatment process and they were almost all labor-intensive.

As time went on, economic efficiency in the silk market became more important. A lot of high-end processes with thinner profit margins were abandoned even though they were technically still profitable. Supply lines of silk were also impacted by the various colonial troubles in Southeast Asia and the activities of Imperial Japan. After the war, French Indochina wasn't producing much silk (and wouldn't until some time after the end of the Vietnam War), China was in pieces and then Mao wasn't helping the situation, and India became independent in 1947 and had a lot of subsequent economic setbacks.

All this turmoil was going on while synthetic fabrics were on the rise. More general-purpose silk cloths - the reliable backbone of the industry that kept it afloat - like satins and sheer weaves were being made from nylon and polyester. The upholstery industry needed cheap, durable, and fire-retardant materials, further shrinking the silk market.

The last large plush makers closed down or stopped making plush before WW2, but after that point it was made by smaller mills in Lyon (or mills that sold through offices in Lyon). Postwar economic shifts were killing many of these smaller mills which were family-owned and often only had a small number of looms.

I wouldn't be shocked if it were the case that hatters went through a half dozen suppliers before the plush was truly dried up. I think you're right about the hatter testing new markets - everyone was trying whatever they could to stay afloat.

At some point, there was nobody left to turn to. I think that before this point there was a lot of trial and refinement as new makers tried to get "up to speed" and each time this happened the level of quality dropped a little.

Now, it's important to stress that these little declines are still vastly better than what is on the market today. Even into the 1960s the French mills were staffed by experts - the product of generations of masters in their craft. This industry was the best in the world but it wasn't flexible, and that's why it was shrinking. You had old-world masters that, decades prior, were the ones introducing new weaves and they were leading a lot of the fashion world. Yet, at that time, they were expected to serve a market that was hungry for American petrochemical fibers and bright azo dyes. Fashion moved faster than the hand loom.

Now that the plush is gone the rest of the silk hat industry is going with it. The tools, other materials, and artisan skills which are still used in repair are also on the decline.

 

[steur]

If the supplier had changed and this were an attempt at making new plush, I could see more plush being used to make a hat more traditionally - it may even give it an edge over a black one that doesn't have plush on the brim.

The decline in plush started around 1920 and there was a lot of shifting going on in the French silk industry in the period leading up to WW2. This chaos was compounded in the postwar era.

One thing that the research I've done points to is the economic viability of an enterprise shifting. A silk dyer may, before the Great War, have employed a mix of synthetic and natural dye processes. Weighting of silk was also very common in this time. Practically every single silk product had a different dye and treatment process and they were almost all labor-intensive.

As time went on, economic efficiency in the silk market became more important. A lot of high-end processes with thinner profit margins were abandoned even though they were technically still profitable. Supply lines of silk were also impacted by the various colonial troubles in Southeast Asia and the activities of Imperial Japan. After the war, French Indochina wasn't producing much silk (and wouldn't until some time after the end of the Vietnam War), China was in pieces and then Mao wasn't helping the situation, and India became independent in 1947 and had a lot of subsequent economic setbacks.

All this turmoil was going on while synthetic fabrics were on the rise. More general-purpose silk cloths - the reliable backbone of the industry that kept it afloat - like satins and sheer weaves were being made from nylon and polyester. The upholstery industry needed cheap, durable, and fire-retardant materials, further shrinking the silk market.

The last large plush makers closed down or stopped making plush before WW2, but after that point it was made by smaller mills in Lyon (or mills that sold through offices in Lyon). Postwar economic shifts were killing many of these smaller mills which were family-owned and often only had a small number of looms.

I wouldn't be shocked if it were the case that hatters went through a half dozen suppliers before the plush was truly dried up. I think you're right about the hatter testing new markets - everyone was trying whatever they could to stay afloat.

At some point, there was nobody left to turn to. I think that before this point there was a lot of trial and refinement as new makers tried to get "up to speed" and each time this happened the level of quality dropped a little.

Now, it's important to stress that these little declines are still vastly better than what is on the market today. Even into the 1960s the French mills were staffed by experts - the product of generations of masters in their craft. This industry was the best in the world but it wasn't flexible, and that's why it was shrinking. You had old-world masters that, decades prior, were the ones introducing new weaves and they were leading a lot of the fashion world. Yet, at that time, they were expected to serve a market that was hungry for American petrochemical fibers and bright azo dyes. Fashion moved faster than the hand loom.

Now that the plush is gone the rest of the silk hat industry is going with it. The tools, other materials, and artisan skills which are still used in repair are also on the decline.

Really cool information. Thanks for that. Jan Spoorenberg (there's a special post on him somewhere) did try to replicate the original silk plush with the help of weavers from India. The results were promising, but it would have taken a lot more trial and error to get it to be useable for making top hats. It would have cost quite a lot of money to do that and the market just wasn't there. So the project was abandoned. Another reason for not pursuing it further is that making the base for a silk covered topper is much more involved than just pulling a base over a block or pressing it into a mold.

 

[CraigEster]

Really cool information. Thanks for that. Jan Spoorenberg (there's a special post on him somewhere) did try to replicate the original silk plush with the help of weavers from India. The results were promising, but it would have taken a lot more trial and error to get it to be useable for making top hats. It would have cost quite a lot of money to do that and the market just wasn't there. So the project was abandoned. Another reason for not pursuing it further is that making the base for a silk covered topper is much more involved than just pulling a base over a block or pressing it into a mold.

Yep, I'm well aware of the shell issue. I was naive and thought that gossamer would be an easy issue to tackle but it certainly wasn't. If gossamer shells were even just moderately difficult then I think there would be at least one hatter making traditional, lightweight grey ascot hats (the kind from 80+ years ago where a thin rabbit fur was stretched over a goss shell).

The more refined shape and lighter weight of a goss shell aids any hat, not just toppers, and yet nobody is working with it. The closest thing would be milliners with buckram but that's really nothing like goss.

The market issue is complicated. I don't think there's a foundation for mass production - actually, it would harm the hat market. In influx of even mediocre hats would hurt demand for the fine antique silk ones. I do think that a slight inflow is needed to serve people with very large heads and the novelty, as well as more financially-able market in London might be able to make that viable.

I think that just a gossamer hat shell would add at least 500 GBP to the cost of a hat. They're quite labor-intensive and all the materials need to be processed or made in-house.

It's a shame to see such a beautiful craft go extinct, and it shows how nobody is safe from the mass die-off of traditional crafts. Silk toppers were worn by stock exchange workers only a bit over 40 years ago, the Ascot market is made up of well-connected businessmen among others who are able to patronize more costly crafts, and yet silk hatting still disappeared. It's not just a problem affecting what we often think of as ethereal, "otherly" cultural groups. No culture is safe, even that of the people that own the companies that push the trends that are shaping the world.

It's a bit of self-foot-shooting when you think about it.

 

[Steve1857]

The history of hat plush gets muddy after the 1940s. After the closure of the last large French maker, the quality and consistency of plush declined and it was harder to get in general.

The brown color of some of these silks is probably from postwar experimentation with modern dyes. The traditional plush dyeing process was very long and arduous and shortcuts weren't possible without a decline in quality.

Black, as many will point out, isn't a color - it's the lack of color. Black is attained by making a strong mix of dyes that filter out most wavelengths of light. The black on silk top hats was refined in the 19th century and reached the peak with "huit-reflets" plush. This plush is a deep black with a blue color when viewed offhand and green undertones; the gloss is a warm white and the surface is almost as smooth as glass when polished correctly.

The expertise needed to get these results started to go away. In the 1950s it was noted that recently made plush was "slatey" and didn't have the blue or green in it, compared to the much more beautiful Edwardian-era plush. The decline started around 1920.

With what I know about natural dye, I think this brown is the result of someone new trying to make hat plush and using a brown component of the dye mix that is too strong. Once a batch comes out wrong, there's no way to undo it and you're left with a unique color. In this later era it would be novel to sell a unique color of hat, whereas a few decades prior you'd probably have your name ruined. The issue would be sorted out after one dye batch, making these hats probably quite rare.

More wild colors of plush were made, but these never reached the "huit-reflets" quality and were meant for novelty hats. The black plush is the glossiest. You can determine if this hat is a novelty hat or a failed black hat by seeing how glossy it is compared to a black one. If this hat has a similar gloss and the color is just off, it's probably a failed dye batch. If the gloss is noticeably less, then it is a novelty color. It's not 100% certain but the general rule is that the care and extra processes were put into black silk but not the other colors, which plush makers bought from various dyers in Lyon while they made their own black silk.

While this hat is novel it is definitely not a novelty hat. I doubt that J.S. Meuwsen were ever in the market for a novelty Top Hat.

As Stefan notes, this is not post war.

The gloss is definitely the same as my black antique Toppers.

The colour does not seem to be "just off". What do you mean by that?

You mention your research into the history, making, manufacturing, and supplying of Top Hats, which all sounds very interesting.

Can you supply any source material for your research?

 

[CraigEster]

While this hat is novel it is definitely not a novelty hat. I doubt that J.S. Meuwsen were ever in the market for a novelty Top Hat.

As Stefan notes, this is not post war.

The gloss is definitely the same as my black antique Toppers.

The colour does not seem to be "just off". What do you mean by that?

You mention your research into the history, making, manufacturing, and supplying of Top Hats, which all sounds very interesting.

Can you supply any source material for your research?

While the decline really took off in the postwar era, the beginning of the decline was the First World War. Hat plush wasn't very profitable after the turn of the century and makers that were once dedicated solely to hat plush started to make other silks. The fundamental problem with plush is that is uses a lot of silk and it is very technically difficult to dye and weave. With the specialized labor, machinery, and the time-consuming process of treating the silk, profit margins were thin.

In regard to "novelty", what I mean is any use other than formal attire. New and untested fashions were, in many old books, categorized as novelty. When I say novel I mean that something is new and when I say novelty I mean that it is distinctly separate from the established market of the time.

As for the color being off, the background for that statement is my own experience working with other silks. It looks shockingly different to the casual observer but to me it just looks like one of the dyes in the mix wasn't light-fast or it oxidized and faded. Until the rise of modern dyes, color permanence was hard to attain. If the silk is as glossy as a black hat, that's evidence of this as well - the gloss means that the silk was more carefully treated than the more experimental hats.

Either this hat was incompletely dyed (intentionally, I doubt someone would forget and let silk leave the mill looking so distinct from the norm) or there was a change in production and one of the components of the color was not up to par with the others.

All of this builds into the changing supplier hypothesis. Practically every manual on dyeing from this era will state that it takes a lot of experience and experimentation to actually make a color consistently and of high quality. You could approach the most experienced silk dyer that does bright colors and ask them to give you a seemingly simple black but they might turn you down (in the age of natural dyeing). Black was considered the most difficult color to get on silk and so many extant black silk pieces are rotting in collections because subpar methods were used. Black was more appreciated on certain fabrics, which was part of its popularity in this time.

 

[Steve1857]

While the decline really took off in the postwar era, the beginning of the decline was the First World War. Hat plush wasn't very profitable after the turn of the century and makers that were once dedicated solely to hat plush started to make other silks. The fundamental problem with plush is that is uses a lot of silk and it is very technically difficult to dye and weave. With the specialized labor, machinery, and the time-consuming process of treating the silk, profit margins were thin.

In regard to "novelty", what I mean is any use other than formal attire. New and untested fashions were, in many old books, categorized as novelty. When I say novel I mean that something is new and when I say novelty I mean that it is distinctly separate from the established market of the time.

As for the color being off, the background for that statement is my own experience working with other silks. It looks shockingly different to the casual observer but to me it just looks like one of the dyes in the mix wasn't light-fast or it oxidized and faded. Until the rise of modern dyes, color permanence was hard to attain. If the silk is as glossy as a black hat, that's evidence of this as well - the gloss means that the silk was more carefully treated than the more experimental hats.

Either this hat was incompletely dyed (intentionally, I doubt someone would forget and let silk leave the mill looking so distinct from the norm) or there was a change in production and one of the components of the color was not up to par with the others.

All of this builds into the changing supplier hypothesis. Practically every manual on dyeing from this era will state that it takes a lot of experience and experimentation to actually make a color consistently and of high quality. You could approach the most experienced silk dyer that does bright colors and ask them to give you a seemingly simple black but they might turn you down (in the age of natural dyeing). Black was considered the most difficult color to get on silk and so many extant black silk pieces are rotting in collections because subpar methods were used. Black was more appreciated on certain fabrics, which was part of its popularity in this time.

Thanks for all your comments on this thread.

You definitely seem to be quite knowledgeable about the rise and fall of the manufacturing of silk Top Hats, though not willing to share where your research sources come from. Thanks for your pm btw.

I'm curious to know: do you actually own any Top Hats that you can show us? Apologies if I've missed them. And can you explain the different aspects of them in regard to your comments here on Toppers Unite?