18th Century Original Shot Pouches and Ball Bags/Pouches

These are pages from Diderot's Encylopedie for documentation:

From the Harness and Saddle Makers plate:
A round stitch marker or pricking wheel is shown as figure 16

i.pinimg.com/474x/b2/11/b0/b211b0dbe44f0f08e184ba320ef69ca1--diderot-leather-working.jpg


From the Belt Maker's Plate:
Fig. 8 is a curved pricking iron.
Fig. 7 is a straight pricking iron.
Fig. 17 is a single pricking punch used for getting around corners or in other tight places.

i.pinimg.com/originals/c1/bf/b6/c1bfb64b0b22ebf075981b3d49b2754e.jpg

Gus

Gus, check your images, friend. We got a duplicate of the same plate. 

As documented in Diderot above and other places, the number one thing would have been the use of either a pricking iron or a round pricking iron or at least a stitch marking wheel.  (The latter is often referred to today by Tandy and some sources as an "overstitch" wheel tool.)  This quickly marked the position of the places on which to stab the awl holes in a very uniform manner, so the stitching would have looked much more uniform and esthetically pleasing.  IOW, these tools sped up the work and made it more professional looking.

Professionals like Harness and Saddle makers and Cordwainers used higher quality leather hides tanned in professional tanneries here in the colonies, though they MUCH preferred English tanned leather, which was a notable step up from tanneries here in the colonies.  There is no record of which I'm aware that they would have accepted lower quality, "home vat tanned" hides, because their professional status was on the line.  Now a Cobbler may have accepted such hides for use, particularly an itinerant cobbler, but he was not held in the same professional regard as the earlier named trades.  

Professionals used features not found on many/most amateur made shot pouches from the 18th or 19th century.

After that, the quality of dying and finishing would have been higher than amateurs could do without the tools of professionals.

Gus

I understand the use of specialized tools and skill from education and repetitive work stands the professional apart. But I’m seeking physical attributes of any particular shot pouch. 

So far I’m gathering these qualities:

* Evenly spaced and small, tight stitching 
* Leather quality
* Quality dyeing of the leather
* Cleanness of pattern
* Construction methods 

Maybe we can firm these up with specifics and add to it to give us a list of expected attributes if we were to examine a relic bag? 

Yes, these are the things one looks for when examining original pieces.  

OK, have to bow out for a while as the arthritis in my fingers is really acting up now.  More later.

Gus

I would also add decorative elements which require a high degree of precision (e.g., double welting or "piped" edges, pinking or scalloping, possibly even edge binding.

Do you suppose this could be a period example of a professionally made pouch being repaired by an amateur?  

"John Cutright was in this fight, sporting a brand-new shot-pouch which was badly rent by a ball and its contents scattered on the ground. The Indians were routed, and in the short pursuit made by the whites, Cutright was left behind. When the party came back, he was sitting on a log stolidly mending his damaged shot-pouch, embellishing his crude work with an occasional emphatic expletive.”

Spence