|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 6, 2020 10:52:00 GMT -7
Hey folks, once again, I need some help from our masters of archiving their research.
I am looking for pictures of, paintings would be okay if detailed, of some shot pouches/shooting bags. But, a little more specific than usual. My period being pre-AWI I've been following the "smaller" is more accurate school, which is true to an extent. But, many of the examples given for this are bags associated with rifle culture from Pennsylvania and Virginia on south. And while I have learned to prefer the smaller bag, and I only carry in it what is needed to make the gun shoot, these items are a few more for a smooth bore or fowling piece than for a rifle.
So, I am seeking pictures of shot pouches/shooting bags (the over the shoulder type, I've already got the Lyman belt pouch as my next project) that are extant to: the period of F.&I. thru about 1785ish, the New England Colonies, and are associated with fouling pieces or Fusils. Bags from Pennsylvania and New York might be okay too as long as they have some proof of having been paired with a smoothbore.
I know this is a tall order, I thank you in advance as all that is shared here is greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Feb 6, 2020 12:47:32 GMT -7
That is a tall order indeed. It is my understanding that extant early bag examples are nearly nonexistent. Seems that contemporary paintings might be a resource with the caveat that there may have been some license taken by the artist at the time.
Madison Grant's hunting pouch book comes to mind, but may contain later examples than those you seek.
|
|
Keith
City-dweller
Bushfire close but safe now. Getting some good rain.
Posts: 990 
|
Post by Keith on Feb 6, 2020 16:29:18 GMT -7
I have to agree with Black Hand, 18th century art can be misleading & extant or not, it is not always possible to document what arm the bag was used for. Smoothbore shot pouches were I believe in general larger than rifle shot pouches, but then again there is always that personal choice, or, whatever came available in a time of need. My pouch is styled on an original, but I prefer a smaller bag, so I made it the size I wanted. I added a button as per some originals because that makes the contents more secure in case I should take a fall. I do not like fancy things, some in moderation are okay, but the shot pouch & wanted to be a plain one of early style. I do not pay too much attention to dates supplied, because often these are based on where the item was found, e.g. Revolutionary War site, but this does not mean that the pouch was made in this period. I go by style. If the powder horn is attached to the shot pouch strap, then there is a good chance it is post French & Indian war. Early period shot pouches commonly did not have the horn attached to the shot pouch strap. Sometimes you will find an antique pouch with no horn attached, but I look for signs of there having been a horn attached. Very often you will spot the remains of a horn strap still stitched to the pouch strap.  Someone has tied the horn strap to the shot pouch strap, this could be post F & I war, but I tend to think not. The bullet board marks this as a rifle pouch. I would say pre Revolution, note the common style of these earlier bags.
www.morphyauctions.com/jamesdjulia/item/52751-5-403/ This one claims to be 19th century, but no sign of horn strap tags on the pouch strap. The style could easily be pre Revolution.
Processed By eBay with ImageMagick, z1.1.0. ||B2 Again I would say pre Revolution. The strap is short, but my guess is that part of the strap is missing.
m.skinnerinc.com/search?s=Hunt+Horns;
Claims to have been found in Kentucky. No date or documentation, but if it is genuine, then likely to be pre Revolution. Woodland Indian shot pouch dated 1710 to 1775. It has a broken shoulder strap.
www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=532855&partId=1&from=ad&fromDate=1700&to=ad&toDate=1750&material=17656&page=1;  The shot pouch I made many years ago. Strap is finger woven in two parts & then stitched together as per some originals.
This claims to be a 19th century Kentucky shot pouch, & it probably is. Note the different flap closure shape, & note the powder horn strap remnants still attached to the shot pouch strap.I suggest you simply copy the style & make it the size you need brokennock, that I would think was the way it was done in the period. Keith. |
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 6, 2020 18:35:05 GMT -7
Thank you gentlemen. I do prefer the smaller bag, and I don't really carry much more in it than is needed to load the gun and keep it running. With a rifle this is basically a flint wallet containing the things needed to keep the gun running, flints/wipers/ball screw/turn screw, that I don't want loose to potentially be grabbed when trying to reload, and some balls and patch material. This is all that really needs to be in the bag for a rifle. With the smoothbore, if prepared for large and small game, one needs this same stuff (maybe not the patch material) but also must add wadding material and either a container of shot or a container of shot cartridges. So while the bag may not need to be much bigger, though wad material is bulkier than patching, it would seem to need to be better organized, so, I wondered if we would see a difference in construction or layout, IF we could/can find examples.
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 6, 2020 19:03:22 GMT -7
I would add that pouches made and did not have horns attached were still well known during the AWI. This because it allowed collecting the "slung" powder horns separately from the Shot Pouches to fill the powder horns, when powder rations were issued by the Artillery or Quartermaster's Detail/s. This allowed one soldier to carry many horns to the Detail/s for powder issue and return them to their owners. Brokennock, "Sporting Pouches" were made for Smoothbore Fowlers in the 18th century and much of the documentation comes down in original paintings, though the paintings are often of the English Sporting "Gentry" and that means affluent people. Affluent people in the colonies may have to probably imported them as well. To my mind, James Rogers is one of the best at replicating original 18th century Sporting pieces because of the way he authenticates his designs. The following is a link to his blogspot that is a bit dated, but James went to Facebook for his main website. Since I and some others don't "do" Facebook because of security concerns, I list this site: fowlingpiece.blogspot.com/Here are some more links that better explain some of his pieces: contemporarymakers.blogspot.com/2017/07/hunting-pouch-by-james-rogers.htmland especially: contemporarymakers.blogspot.com/2012/07/cmb-interview-with-james-rogers-part-2.htmlGus |
|
Keith
City-dweller
Bushfire close but safe now. Getting some good rain.
Posts: 990
|
Post by Keith on Feb 6, 2020 19:33:28 GMT -7
Thank you gentlemen. I do prefer the smaller bag, and I don't really carry much more in it than is needed to load the gun and keep it running. With a rifle this is basically a flint wallet containing the things needed to keep the gun running, flints/wipers/ball screw/turn screw, that I don't want loose to potentially be grabbed when trying to reload, and some balls and patch material. This is all that really needs to be in the bag for a rifle. With the smoothbore, if prepared for large and small game, one needs this same stuff (maybe not the patch material) but also must add wadding material and either a container of shot or a container of shot cartridges. So while the bag may not need to be much bigger, though wad material is bulkier than patching, it would seem to need to be better organized, so, I wondered if we would see a difference in construction or layout, IF we could/can find examples. I simply put the less used things in the bottom of the pouch, ball mould, lead ladle, tool pouch, lock cover. Everything I need for immediate use I know by feel. Keith. |
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 8, 2020 3:26:03 GMT -7
I would add that pouches made and did not have horns attached were still well known during the AWI. This because it allowed collecting the "slung" powder horns separately from the Shot Pouches to fill the powder horns, when powder rations were issued by the Artillery or Quartermaster's Detail/s. This allowed one soldier to carry many horns to the Detail/s for powder issue and return them to their owners. Brokennock, "Sporting Pouches" were made for Smoothbore Fowlers in the 18th century and much of the documentation comes down in original paintings, though the paintings are often of the English Sporting "Gentry" and that means affluent people. Affluent people in the colonies may have to probably imported them as well. To my mind, James Rogers is one of the best at replicating original 18th century Sporting pieces because of the way he authenticates his designs. The following is a link to his blogspot that is a bit dated, but James went to Facebook for his main website. Since I and some others don't "do" Facebook because of security concerns, I list this site: fowlingpiece.blogspot.com/Here are some more links that better explain some of his pieces: contemporarymakers.blogspot.com/2017/07/hunting-pouch-by-james-rogers.htmland especially: contemporarymakers.blogspot.com/2012/07/cmb-interview-with-james-rogers-part-2.htmlGus Thanks Gus. Mr. James Rogers responded to my same query on the ALR forum thus, "As Eric states, the animal you seek is either rare or extinct for your area. The Lyman type is good for all arms IMO. As I mentioned on another board, your accoutrements are not going to be many unless you are carrying a mixture of wads and cards not in the period you are working with. Here are a few shoulder bags I would use for the period from paintings. Unfortunately I have more period images of belt bags than shoulder bags. All three images contain smooth bored guns. The first close up picture is a crop of a painting done in VA c.1780 IIRC " Obviously the pics he posted would not "copy and paste." |
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 9, 2020 12:20:05 GMT -7
Something I wonder about at times is do we consider the social status/financial ability of the people in the period who used different guns and their gear? IOW, I suggest a person who could own a fancy gun would also probably own at least a Shot Pouch made by a Saddle Maker or other full time leather worker. Thus that person's Shot Pouch could have or would have been a fancy Shot Pouch, as well. After all, personal status was a big thing in the period and people of higher status wanted to be seen in clothing and gear that reflected that status.
Now of course there were lesser expensive "export grade" firearms where the owner would not have been so affluent. Still the owner of a gun like that may have had a full time leather worker make him a "less expensive" copy of some of the pouches shown in the period art work.
Then we go to smoothbores "made for the trade" that were less expensive during the period. Here the owner may have made his own Shot Pouch and even then he may have copied a more expensive Shot Pouch, This doesn't automatically mean the Shot Pouch was downright crude, though.
I guess what I'm getting at is I think it is neat to match the Pouch and Horn to the quality of the gun.
Gus
|
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 9, 2020 19:54:48 GMT -7
Gus, that whole line of thought is something I've always thought about.
I don't think everything homemade was necessarily crude, maybe just not as decorative. And, maybe a little more personalization could have gone into it. Same if one had a local shoemaker, cordwainer, or other leather worker make you something a working stiff or young person could afford. Maybe not as nice a finish, little or no decoration, maybe a lesser grade leather with some blemishes, but, "hey, could you add this extra pocket, or divide this pocket?"
Obviously the guy with the English "Best Grade" fowling piece is going to want a bag, horn/flask, measures, etc. to match.
What about a working class young man who had to spend a few years as a "guest" of the natives for a while whilst growing up. Might this experience have influenced his taste in decoration or practical design?
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 10, 2020 3:52:35 GMT -7
Well, one would not have had to have been a "guest" of a NA tribe in the period to have been influenced by their designs. At risk of being tarred and feathered for not remembering the exact quote and person who said it, there was an 18th century Preacher who was not happy with the "Indian Dress" that was becoming something of a fashion statement on the frontier with younger folks. Grin.
Exactly right about period "bespoke work" or what we would call a "custom order" today. Even young people of little means could have copied features of pouches they had seen or thought about and included them when they made the pouch or had them included if someone else made the pouch for them, if they could afford someone else to make the pouch. Then as they got older and more prosperous, a pouch later in their life could have been fancier and perhaps with more decoration, if they wished. So age can also be a factor in determining the style/quality of their Shot Pouch and Horn.
Of course the opposite of that, no doubt, were folks who were perfectly happy with plainer pouches and horns and saw no reason to spend money on what we would call "upgraded" gear today.
Gus.
|
|
|
|
Post by straekat on Feb 10, 2020 6:52:21 GMT -7
Something I wonder about at times is do we consider the social status/financial ability of the people in the period who used different guns and their gear? Gus
IMO, that line of thinking stops short of a larger matter, and that is North America was not limited to people who were English, or with ethnic backgrounds out of the UK. Focusing on the "English" world, without remembering there were not only Germans, Swedes, Dutch, French, Spanish, and also mixed heritage people of those backgrounds. Also, let's not forget there were Spaniards in Florida (and Georgia), and west of the Missouri-Mississipi.
We know German gun makers were important in and around parts of the mid-Atlantic colonies/states. If they made firearms based on their own traditions, then it's also likely they would have also had Germanic influenced pouches, tools, hunting and shooting practices of their own. That also applies to the French (and their influence on New England, Canada and in the far west), and Spanish communities that were overtaken by the spread of "Americans" throughout North America.
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 10, 2020 7:24:52 GMT -7
Something I wonder about at times is do we consider the social status/financial ability of the people in the period who used different guns and their gear? Gus
IMO, that line of thinking stops short of a larger matter, and that is North America was not limited to people who were English, or with ethnic backgrounds out of the UK. Focusing on the "English" world, without remembering there were not only Germans, Swedes, Dutch, French, Spanish, and also mixed heritage people of those backgrounds. Also, let's not forget there were Spaniards in Florida (and Georgia), and west of the Missouri-Mississipi.
We know German gun makers were important in and around parts of the mid-Atlantic colonies/states. If they made firearms based on their own traditions, then it's also likely they would have also had Germanic influenced pouches, tools, hunting and shooting practices of their own. That also applies to the French (and their influence on New England, Canada and in the far west), and Spanish communities that were overtaken by the spread of "Americans" throughout North America.
I have no idea where you got the idea I meant to preclude other nationalities in the colonies in our time period. I thought leaving it as non specific as I did in my comments would include virtually all of the Settlers/Colonists, no matter where they came from. Yes, there could or would have been differences in decoration and style of items they used in their original countries and brought those styles/customs with them. For instance, the German Shot Pouch illustrated in the James Rogers link I posted above is decidedly different than many of the pouches of the period. Gus |
|
|
|
Post by spence on Feb 10, 2020 8:57:34 GMT -7
Straekat said: "Also, let's not forget there were Spaniards in Florida (and Georgia), and west of the Missouri-Mississipi."
Fransisco Goya was a Spanish painter who painted a lot of hunters and their gear in late 18th century, and it's interesting to compare that with what we think of as our history. Functionally the same, but quite different. Shoulder bags, possibly shot pouches, seemingly cloth, but with nets for game on them? Metal powder containers clipped onto a waist belt. Several leather or cloth bags with drawstring tops for shooting gear and supplies, but attached to a waist belt .
Spence
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Feb 10, 2020 10:45:26 GMT -7
Don't get to use this link very often, but how about some Spanish buckles of the period? (And other things on the different pages.) There is nothing hugely different than found from other countries, but some interesting differences in small details. www.artifacts.org/Bucklepage.htmGus |
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Feb 10, 2020 11:47:10 GMT -7
Something I wonder about at times is do we consider the social status/financial ability of the people in the period who used different guns and their gear? Gus
IMO, that line of thinking stops short of a larger matter, and that is North America was not limited to people who were English, or with ethnic backgrounds out of the UK. Focusing on the "English" world, without remembering there were not only Germans, Swedes, Dutch, French, Spanish, and also mixed heritage people of those backgrounds. Also, let's not forget there were Spaniards in Florida (and Georgia), and west of the Missouri-Mississipi.
We know German gun makers were important in and around parts of the mid-Atlantic colonies/states. If they made firearms based on their own traditions, then it's also likely they would have also had Germanic influenced pouches, tools, hunting and shooting practices of their own. That also applies to the French (and their influence on New England, Canada and in the far west), and Spanish communities that were overtaken by the spread of "Americans" throughout North America.
I completely agree with you for the purposes of a broader discussion. But, my o.p. question was/is trying to nail down gear to the area of New England. That said, I could see some influence, from the Dutch and Germans, moving into the north wester Connecticut area where I am via northern Pennsylvania and New York, and French influence from Canada. As well as non "guest" native influenced from native groups like the ones at Stockbridge. I would be curious to see a chart or such of ethnic demographics for the various colonial areas at the time. One issue would be how to determine where someone or a family is from. Many immigrants came here after spending time in other countries than their homeland before being able to get on a ship to come here. |
|
