Collar Tabs

[Tony]

I'm curious as to how some you of tell whether collar tabs are original to a uniform or tunic. Any sewing techniques (machined or hand sewn), thread, or patterns that would signal replaced tabs? What about position of the collar tab itself on the collar, does that mean anything? I remember someone mentioning that in previous thread.
Thanks
Tony

[Dave Suter]

I'm sure others have additional techniques, but to start this off; I always look at the piece outside in the sunlight as this seems to show up minute details better. I look at the back side of the collar for stitch holes from a removed tab. If the piece has some wear or soiling, is the wear/dirt on the top of the tab consistent with the collar? Is there a 'shadow' where a previous tab was? The type of uniform makes a difference too. For instance, I wouldn't touch an enlisted waffenrock with hand-stitched tabs. Overall, does the tab just look like it's been there for 50+ years?

Scott, chime in.

[CSP]

For enlisted litzen there were several techniques for sewing on. Factory applied einheitslitzen usually had the ends sewn from the reverse/underside (could be machine - sometimes hand) and then the long edges were machine sewn from the top (I have seen hand sewn as well but not often). Thus, they give the impression of having invisible stitching on the short ends.
If the litzen were mounted on backing, such as the earlier models before the einheitslitzen became the norm, then machine sewing from the top around all edges was the usual method in my experience.
I have also seen completely hand sewn EM litzen that looked absolutely original to the piece. Sewing was generally neat and professional looking (unit tailor?).
There was a technique for tucking the ends of enlisted litzen (both einheits- and tropical) that is difficult to describe, but the tucks of the corners left angled/pointed corners versus a boxed corners. One can see photos of the boxed corners, but they are few and far between. Any collector lookig at an example today should be very skeptical.
Another method on the EM litzen did include machine stitching all the way around, however, here is an instance where a collector would be wise to follow my friend Sarge's advice and look for signs of resewing/replaced insignia, as this is the most common way insignia is replaced today I believe.
Regarding NCO litzen, same comments above apply, except the tresse - almost as a rule - should slightly overlap the front/lower edge of the einheitslitzen. This overlap can either be the distance between the upper/inside row of machine stitching of the tresse and the tresse edge, or in some cases this inside row of stitching that held the tresse on the collar can also sew over the front edge pf the litzen. Of course, in the case of an early litzen that is mounted on a backing, the front edge of the backing is generallly tangent to the tresse,making the litzen itself appear set back a cm or two. There are exceptions in photos, but again, not common, so be wary of anything not sewn on to this standard.
Officer litzen were simpler = Machine or hand sewn, depending on the source of work. A private tailor was likely to do either, but I believe hand-sewn is more the standard. An officer's orderly is more likely to do a hand sewn job for his boss. Consequently, I am usually happier to see hand-sewn litzen on officers uniforms.

[Gene]

.

[CSP]

Panzer collar tabs on Heer/Army uniforms can also be found similiar to the aove mentioned Luftwaffe tabs where the shulls are affixed throught the tab an collar material.
The tabs themselves can be sewn by hand or by machine. Machine being the more common in my experience. The stitching is usually a couple/few mm in from the piping being sewn all around the rhomboid. On second model panzer wraps and beyond, the tabs are sewn parallell to the lower edge of the collar. I'd have to measure the distance on one of mine, but proper distance off the top of my head is about 3 cm.
scott

[Tony]

Sarge, Scott, and Gene, thanks for the help.
All of it was very informative, and I learned some good tips. One of my Luftwaffe tunics had the gull prongs through the collar and the other tunic did not. It's nice to know both methods are acceptable. I'm always skeptical of hand stiching, but from the comments here, I may have to rethink that one.

I realized (not that long ago)that sunlight is a good technique for cloth. I took one of my M43 Luftwaffe caps out in the sun and realized the eagle was a replacement. With indoor lighting you could not tell. I saw the outline of the original eagle, which was slightly larger than the replacement. Someone did an excellent job, because it's hardly noticeable, and it's an original eagle. It's still one of my better caps, as far as condition goes.

How do you guys feel about that? If it's original insignia, and its done properly, do you care?? I know we all want to believe the insignia on our uniforms/headgear are original to the piece.
Tony

[Tony]

Sarge, Scott, and Gene, thanks for the help.
All of it was very informative, and I learned some good tips. One of my Luftwaffe tunics had the gull prongs through the collar and the other tunic did not. It's nice to know both methods are acceptable. I'm always skeptical of hand stiching, but from the comments here, I may have to rethink that one.

I realized (not that long ago)that sunlight is a good technique for cloth. I took one of my M43 Luftwaffe caps out in the sun and realized the eagle was a replacement. With indoor lighting you could not tell. I saw the outline of the original eagle, which was slightly larger than the replacement. Someone did an excellent job, because it's hardly noticeable, and it's an original eagle. It's still one of my better caps, as far as condition goes.

How do you guys feel about that? If it's original insignia, and its done properly, do you care?? I know we all want to believe the insignia on our uniforms/headgear are original to the piece.
Tony

[CSP]

There have been discussions on this forum before about restoraton. Certainly any piece with period - to - the - item, original insignia commands the most respect. However, these pieces are scarce. A restoration of an item back to what it obviuosly was during the war is fine as far as I am conccerned. Museums do it all the time. However, it should always be represented as such and it shoud only be restored to the obvious condition it was originally in. Fanntasy pieces, such as taking an original uniform and making it in to soemthing it neer was is a srep in the wrong direction as far as I am concerned.
I should point out, going back to Heer EM litzen, that another technique of hand sewing was similar to what I described in more detail above with machine sewing. In this case, the long edges were hand sewn with small single ply stitched that run horizontal/90 degree angles to the long edge. The technique is usua;;y extremely neat and professional. About 10-15 stitches are typically used and it will look like sewing that has been there for 50+ years.
scott

[Dave Suter]

I'm with Scott. For instance, removal of the breast eagle is something all uniform collectors have to live with. Having the original is much prefered, of course, but there is nothing wrong with restoring something, as long as it is done correctly and, if sold, that restoration is reveale