18th Century Original Shot Pouches and Ball Bags/Pouches

Thanks, Spence!

Gus, that’s great. I have some thoughts that I’ll write when I have a moment tomorrow. My smashed ankle is paining me this evening. 

Ok… I’m finally feeling up to this, even though my PT yesterday was grueling and I hurt. So…

A few caveats. I think Doddridge is a wonderful and important primary account. However, we do well to mind that the Rev. Dr. composed his notes 40-60 years after the time period he describes and of necessity, much is painted with broad strokes. That isn’t to say the image of life is inaccurate, rather that as with any written history, it is accurate in the eyes of the writer. It’s the author’s impression and recollection of events. 

Statements such as “Every family tanned their own leather” set my skepticism tingling, even if just momentarily. We, as dedicated students of the era, are certainly intelligent enough to recognize this as a generalization rather than hard fact. Surely not every family tanned. But Doddridge’s intent is clear… lots of families… maybe even most families… tanned their own leather. 

My reading leads me to an admittedly general and still developing impression of the time: few individuals or families existed in true isolation… and the civilized world was hot on the heels of those pioneers. Where people established themselves on a group of small farms, merchants, smiths, tradesmen, etc. were soon to follow to service the establishing community. Spence’s quotes from the Fort Pitt Waste Book show a healthy trade in raw and finished goods in that location. Gunsmiths were established in the Ohio Country from an early date (1730s?). Harris’s Landing was pushing goods into the Susquehanna frontier. The Cumberland Valley of Pennsylvania saw merchants establishing not long after the valley saw pioneer settlements. 

There are shades of gray in the term ‘frontier’, from the isolated family homestead squatting on land not yet acquired (purchased or taken) from the Indians, to thriving fort towns with a goodly amount of goods and services, like Michilimackinac. We need to consider where and when we are studying to really understand what the material culture was like.. and this often needs to be as specific as a certain year in a particular valley. That’s why a lot of my threads are ‘Suchandsuch Valley circa 1750’. 

I think the overwhelming message from Doddridge is one of self reliance on the frontier. It just may be that often it wasn’t individual or family self reliance, but community self reliance. The transition from homesteader generalist to specialized farmer, weaver, merchant and cordwainer wasn’t necessarily the slow crawl we often think it was. That isn’t to say that many things weren’t still produced or repaired by the family unit. They certainly were. But the human condition that drives us to form communities is strong, and with community comes specialist professions and trade in labor and goods. The final statement in the Doddridge quote above reinforces this idea. 

So… then… shot pouches. Yeah. A ‘professionally made’ pouch likely came from the eastern towns in the earliest times of a specific area’s settlement. I’m quite certain many were made by the individual as well. I believe we too often associate homemade work with ‘crude’ and self-made pouches could likely match a saddle maker’s work for construction…and then determining a origin may need to be by examination of available materials. I believe the barter system was strong, and if someone in the valley was known for doing good amateur leather work, (a la Doddridge’s weaving) a ‘semi-professional’ tradesman was established. A professional-looking shot pouch’s origin ‘back East’ may just be the other side of that frontier valley. 

Here's what you are going to have to historically document to prove your theory.

How could an untrained amateur match the construction methods of a professional when the untrained amateur didn't have the same materials, training and perhaps more importantly didn't have the TOOLS the professionals had in the leather working trades?  

Let's begin with a craft FAR easier to do than professional leather working.  

Sure, Doddridge could make serviceable shot pouch straps, belts and leg ties on his primitive board loom, but did they look as good even those made on tape looms and similar small looms in the period, that had begun to be common in many households way back east during the 1760's and not done by professionals?  Probably not, if not definitely not.  

I agree the leather from frontier tanned hides would have been a dead giveaway it was not the work of professionals and probably not the thread, either, unless the thread was purchased from back east, but we are only beginning.  


I can see how an untrained person could have figured out how to make his stitching look somewhat similar to a professional, the same way I did it many years ago, purely by accident at first and then figuring out how I did it by always placing the second needle over or under the thread from the first needle and the exact same way for each stitch.  BUT without a Pricking Iron, there was no way the stitches were going to be as uniform as a period professional.  That wasn't just important to esthetics, but also to the way the body of a shot pouch would look when it was turned inside out.  If the stitching wasn't uniform in length, it will easily cause the pouch to look misshapen and especially with frontier tanned/non uniform leather.  That would not have been acceptable to a professional.  Further, how would an untrained amateur even known what a Pricking Iron was or how to use it, unless he had seen a professional use it?  

An amateur may not have realized that using leather closer to the belly would make a misshapen pouch.  Would he even care as long as the pouch worked?  Would he have known to make the strap from the back of the hide?

How about a simple welt to reenforce stitching together of two thin or weaker/stretchier pieces of leather?  An amateur may have seen it on a professional pouch, but would he realize why it was needed to be done?  I extremely doubt that even if an amateur had seen a rolled leather "piping" welt, that he would figure out how to make it, if he even cared.  

Pouch flaps that were not uniform were a clear sign of an amateur, as were the non uniform bodies of pouches and even strap width in size/shape.  Even the way the straps were attached to a bag would quickly show if an amateur had not done it the way a professional had been taught. 

Now there were ways to make home made tools to get around many but not all of these things, but would someone on the frontier living basically a bare subsistence life have had the TIME to make them, even if he could figure out ways to do it?

There were no books on the frontier to learn these and more things professionals learned, even if an amateur could read.  There were no Tandy catalogues or stores in the period where an amateur could have learned techniques only professionals had been taught or gotten the required tools to come close to a professional's work.  

Gus

I've said this more than once - Doddridge has some interesting information and perspectives, but it should be taken with a cup of salt due to the delay between the events and the writing. Also (IIRC), some of the events he describes occurred before he was born or was quite young.

Memory is a fickle thing and should be considered suspect - we tend to remember the version we prefer rather what may have been the actual facts (using eye-witness court testimony as an example).

I admit to being literate, all right. That might indeed make me a frontier anomaly. You got me there, Gus.

But as for tools: an awl, a needle, scissors, and a knife. I think even the old boys could manage those.

Um, yes. In fact, I do make all of my own patterns. And I do use a ruler. Mine has numbers on it, but it wouldn't need any to make a strap, would it?

It isn't rocket science. Truly.

But before you ask, yes: I used electric lights so I could work after dark. I suppose that invalidates the authenticity of all my work. Case closed.