onefeather
45 Cal.
- Joined
- May 13, 2005
- Messages
- 838
- Reaction score
- 0
i dont know.its something to do lol :thumbsup:
-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Packs, haversacks, equipment and camping?
- Thread starter Stophel
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
when I was a kid skate boards were wheels off of an old pare of skates nailed on to a board and we had a great time . now days they are made of space aged materials and some of the kids riding them make six figures time do change.
one feather said:
My wife used to take her 19' Dolphin/Toyota to the mountains in the summer, she was always amazed at the folks with the big diesel pushers, who pulled in to a site, hooked up the water, electric, and sewer connections, set up their sattelite dish, and disappeared into the rig never to be seen again, until they decided to move. :youcrazy:
You might find this about what officers in the British Army carried in Spain.
John Kincaid in his book on his experiences during the Pennisular War against the French wrote the following, "A haversack on service is a sort of dumb waiter. The mess have a good many things in common, but the contents of the haversack are exclusively the property of its owner; and a well regulated one ought never to be without the following furniture, unless when the perishable part is consumed, in consequence of every other means of supply having failed, viz. a couple of biscuits, a sausage, a little tea and sugar, a knife, fork, and spoon, a tin cup, (which answers to the names of tea-cup, soup-plate, wine-glass, and tumbler,) a pair of socks, a piece of soap, a tooth-brush, towel, and comb, and half a dozen cigars."
In addition to this the officers and men both carried packs while actively campaigning. Edward Costello describes the contents of his pack as "two shirts, two pair of stockings, one pair of shoes, one pair of soles and heels, three brushes, box of blacking, razor, soap-box and strap, and also at the time an extra pair of trousers, a mess-tin, centre-tin and lid." He adds that each squad also had to carry four bill hooks that they passed around each day so no one man carried much more than another. This stuff with the rest of the equipment he carried were estimated to weigh 70 to 80 lbs. Costello was cobbler by trade and therefore also carried the tools of his trade to repair shoes, boots, and leather gear. He does mention that while getting off the transport in Lisbon harbor he "accidentally" dropped his portable anvil. A similar list is provided by a John Spencer Cooper of the 7th Fusiliers. He adds, pen, ink and paper, pipe clay, chalk, etc, two tent pegs.
John Kincaid in one of his books also describes a sleeping bag made from a blanket by folding it in half and sewing the bottom and half way up the side. He also states that in his oppinion dropping packs when going into combat is very bad idea because by the end of the day you could be a very long way from where you started and it could take days for mules and baggage train to find you and what mobility you lost in battle by carrying them was more than made up for by the comfort they provided at the end of the day.
One more item. In several of the journals I've acquired they make reference to dumping their "Trotter" packs at the first opportunity and replacing it with a French pack since it was more comfortable to wear and didn't have a cross strap tieing the shoulder straps together restricting the ability to breath.
I won't even begin to get into the general list of equipment/belonings taken to war by the officers of the British Army.
One last thought. I find it amazing that two hundred years ago the British Soldier went to war with 70-80 lbs. of stuff and today we pack the same weight. Something about that number must be magic.
John Kincaid in his book on his experiences during the Pennisular War against the French wrote the following, "A haversack on service is a sort of dumb waiter. The mess have a good many things in common, but the contents of the haversack are exclusively the property of its owner; and a well regulated one ought never to be without the following furniture, unless when the perishable part is consumed, in consequence of every other means of supply having failed, viz. a couple of biscuits, a sausage, a little tea and sugar, a knife, fork, and spoon, a tin cup, (which answers to the names of tea-cup, soup-plate, wine-glass, and tumbler,) a pair of socks, a piece of soap, a tooth-brush, towel, and comb, and half a dozen cigars."
In addition to this the officers and men both carried packs while actively campaigning. Edward Costello describes the contents of his pack as "two shirts, two pair of stockings, one pair of shoes, one pair of soles and heels, three brushes, box of blacking, razor, soap-box and strap, and also at the time an extra pair of trousers, a mess-tin, centre-tin and lid." He adds that each squad also had to carry four bill hooks that they passed around each day so no one man carried much more than another. This stuff with the rest of the equipment he carried were estimated to weigh 70 to 80 lbs. Costello was cobbler by trade and therefore also carried the tools of his trade to repair shoes, boots, and leather gear. He does mention that while getting off the transport in Lisbon harbor he "accidentally" dropped his portable anvil. A similar list is provided by a John Spencer Cooper of the 7th Fusiliers. He adds, pen, ink and paper, pipe clay, chalk, etc, two tent pegs.
John Kincaid in one of his books also describes a sleeping bag made from a blanket by folding it in half and sewing the bottom and half way up the side. He also states that in his oppinion dropping packs when going into combat is very bad idea because by the end of the day you could be a very long way from where you started and it could take days for mules and baggage train to find you and what mobility you lost in battle by carrying them was more than made up for by the comfort they provided at the end of the day.
One more item. In several of the journals I've acquired they make reference to dumping their "Trotter" packs at the first opportunity and replacing it with a French pack since it was more comfortable to wear and didn't have a cross strap tieing the shoulder straps together restricting the ability to breath.
I won't even begin to get into the general list of equipment/belonings taken to war by the officers of the British Army.
One last thought. I find it amazing that two hundred years ago the British Soldier went to war with 70-80 lbs. of stuff and today we pack the same weight. Something about that number must be magic.
The full load of the infantry soldier hasn't changed for over 2000 years; the Roman Legions carried about the same amount. As the years pass, what goes into that load has changed, with armor taking up less and less, and other things being carried instead. Easy to see why, too; that's about the most a healthy adult can carry long term, and no army is going to want their troops to have less than the most they can carry!
onefeather
45 Cal.
- Joined
- May 13, 2005
- Messages
- 838
- Reaction score
- 0
good refrences :grin:
The first time my mountain grandfather saw my brother and me heading to the woods carrying our boy scout packs, tent, etc., he yelled to us that if we wanted to be mules he could find plenty of work for us around the farm. He went hunting or fishing with a pone of corn bread, a blanket, some salt meat and a frying pan. (Well, there may have been a fruit jar of likker hidden in the blanket for snakebites.) He learned his woodcraft from men who had carried longrifles, so I suspect the tradition goes back a long way.
Ghost has a point about the farmer/hunter--my grandfather fit that description. However, I'll bet that even the longhunters who went the woods on horseback had to travel much lighter than most of us do today. I've only been on one horsepacking trip, but it surprised me how little the horses carried. If they had to carry out hides and meat, they either went in very light or left a lot of gear in the woods.
It is a matter of personal preference how much stuff anybody takes to the woods, but I have serious doubts that any longhunter or mountain man carried all the stuff most of us think we need to be comfortable.
If what I've read about cavalrymen in the Indian wars is correct, they stayed out weeks at a time with not much more than a tin cup, a blanket, and cold rations.
Ghost has a point about the farmer/hunter--my grandfather fit that description. However, I'll bet that even the longhunters who went the woods on horseback had to travel much lighter than most of us do today. I've only been on one horsepacking trip, but it surprised me how little the horses carried. If they had to carry out hides and meat, they either went in very light or left a lot of gear in the woods.
It is a matter of personal preference how much stuff anybody takes to the woods, but I have serious doubts that any longhunter or mountain man carried all the stuff most of us think we need to be comfortable.
If what I've read about cavalrymen in the Indian wars is correct, they stayed out weeks at a time with not much more than a tin cup, a blanket, and cold rations.
Cruzatte
50 Cal.
My purpose in chiming in here is not to pose a contrary argument; but rather to amplify some of the statements above.
Mountaineers, longhunters, and certainly voyageurs travelled, hunted, trapped, and went about their business in groups. So each man did not have to carry several kettles, folding skillets, axes, spades, etc., etc. Naturalist John Bradbury states that he accompanied Ramsey Crooks and an unnamed French Canadian to find an Omaha village where Crooks was to collect some debts owed. Among the things Bradbury lists that they carried was one kettle for the three of them.
Second, Mountaineers, and longhunters especially stayed out sometimes for years at a time. Indeed, William Ashley's famous advert. for enterprising young men to go up the Missouri stipulated terms of one, two, or three years.
The upshot of all this is that an individual was required to carry only the bare necessities in the way of arms, ammunition, and accouterments, including a blanket. Further, the Ashley men were organized under somewhat of a military system; that is several men were grouped together in messes, just like soldiers of the period. They cooked for each other, and they shared the implements of cooking. In other words, a mess consisting of perhaps six or eight men would share one kettle. Each individual might have only a tin cup, his butcher knife, and maybe a wood, horn, or pewter spoon, and that's it as far as mess gear.
As far as setting up camp, the men in each mess pooled their resources here, too. It was usual for men to bunk together, having been raised in large families where all the brothers slept in a bed, and all the sisters in their own bed from the time all of them were weaned until they married. So it becomes easy to figure out how you're going to situate yourself if the six men of a mess each has a blanket, and two of them can sleep under one blanket. The extra blankets can be put to use in making up some sort of shebang for the night if such is needed. Otherwise, you sleep out under the stars.
Cruzatte
Mountaineers, longhunters, and certainly voyageurs travelled, hunted, trapped, and went about their business in groups. So each man did not have to carry several kettles, folding skillets, axes, spades, etc., etc. Naturalist John Bradbury states that he accompanied Ramsey Crooks and an unnamed French Canadian to find an Omaha village where Crooks was to collect some debts owed. Among the things Bradbury lists that they carried was one kettle for the three of them.
Second, Mountaineers, and longhunters especially stayed out sometimes for years at a time. Indeed, William Ashley's famous advert. for enterprising young men to go up the Missouri stipulated terms of one, two, or three years.
The upshot of all this is that an individual was required to carry only the bare necessities in the way of arms, ammunition, and accouterments, including a blanket. Further, the Ashley men were organized under somewhat of a military system; that is several men were grouped together in messes, just like soldiers of the period. They cooked for each other, and they shared the implements of cooking. In other words, a mess consisting of perhaps six or eight men would share one kettle. Each individual might have only a tin cup, his butcher knife, and maybe a wood, horn, or pewter spoon, and that's it as far as mess gear.
As far as setting up camp, the men in each mess pooled their resources here, too. It was usual for men to bunk together, having been raised in large families where all the brothers slept in a bed, and all the sisters in their own bed from the time all of them were weaned until they married. So it becomes easy to figure out how you're going to situate yourself if the six men of a mess each has a blanket, and two of them can sleep under one blanket. The extra blankets can be put to use in making up some sort of shebang for the night if such is needed. Otherwise, you sleep out under the stars.
Cruzatte
My turn to dig up an 'ol parsnip.
I carry more than a feller would have for an overnight in 1790, but it's not because I want more stuff. It's because I have less time. It would be nice to be able to vanish for three or four weeks even instead of a true "long hunt" and hunt while traveling, but alas. I have to squish weeks into one weekend at a time and take it in spurts.
I love to hike into a remote spot and cook a lunch, even though it would take less time to just walk right on out the other side while munching parched corn and jerked venison. But I try to work with what I have. I can imagine I'm three weeks into a trek instead of three hours away from the car.
Oh well.
I carry more than a feller would have for an overnight in 1790, but it's not because I want more stuff. It's because I have less time. It would be nice to be able to vanish for three or four weeks even instead of a true "long hunt" and hunt while traveling, but alas. I have to squish weeks into one weekend at a time and take it in spurts.
I love to hike into a remote spot and cook a lunch, even though it would take less time to just walk right on out the other side while munching parched corn and jerked venison. But I try to work with what I have. I can imagine I'm three weeks into a trek instead of three hours away from the car.
Oh well.
"forty miles a day on beans and hay":thumbsup:loophole said:
I've got a buddy who's motto is, "travel light, freeze at night." It's not meant to justify one or the other, merey a statement that one must choose one option or the other.
3 stinky dogs
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2005
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
I don't know about others but I Carey a large back back to. Like yours it is a large surplus model. Most of the space is taken up by a sleeping bag that gets stuffed into the bottom. Next are 4 1 qt bottles of drinking water, a mess kit, change of cloths, and my camp meal items if I have them. and last is snacks for the trail, big knife, camp ax, small first aid kit and extra smokes and my pack of Bic lighters. A family friend taught me this and he figured it out as an infantry man in the jungle of south Asia . Very simple and not heavy. I could do the same with a shooting bag, Haversack, blanket set up you mentioned .
Guest
I agree that a hunter going out for a 'one-nighter' on foot would take a minimum of gear. I still do today. But many went out on horseback, commonly with pack animals, too, and they probably carried a few more select items--not too much, becuse they wanted room to pack out the hides and meat. I like traveling light. Learned as a child that it is alot more comfortable and extends your range. I remember being up on the upper slopes of Mt Whitney (highest peak in lower 48) years ago with my little knapsack and watching a group ready themselves for the 'final ascent': they had HUGE packs--one girl dropped to her kness and had to be helped back up when her boyfriend put the pack on her back! She was also trying to tote a huge camera with a long telephoto lens. They needed horses. I am sure they didn't need all that stuff!
Patrick Hand
36 Cal.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Messages
- 79
- Reaction score
- 1
I don't think they went "Camping" just for fun like we do now...
But for us modern people....
Wouldn't it depend on who, and what time period you were reenacting? If you were an "average person", farmer of townsman, just on a hunting trip...you wouldn't need a lot of equipment... but soldier or a Rocky Mountain trapper living in the wildreness, would carry more stuff. OK... maybe not a bunch of folding chairs and a large wall tent tho....
for example...I'm working on what a 1670's Buccaneer would have carried on a hunting expidition... but Buccaneers were not your "average person" from the time period. Also, everything has to pack light... (so no candle lanterns or castiron frying pans....) everything has to fit into a bedroll or snapsack.
So I guess it depends on what the goal of the camping trip is... a hunting trip, reenacting a certain time period or event.... whatever... would determine what to carry...
3 stinky dogs
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2005
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
Here ia another guy's opinion and suggestions on the issue. [url] http://www.muzzleblasts.com/vol3no1/articles/mbo31-5.html[/url]
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree.
One of my goals is to construct three camps.
The first is the one that I am working on now which is a "heavy campaign camp" (BTW I portray an office in the British Army.) It is constructed to reflect my research on the gear taken on campaign for use during extende stays in one location such as during the winter between campaigning seasons.
The second is a subset of the first consisting of enough equipment to make life in the field tollerable for a gentleman without requireing an entire baggage wagon or fourty mules to transport.
The third is a further subset of the second that can for the most part be carried on my person using a knapsack. [there are some small concessions for comfort and practicality such as a cooler for food and a barrel for water.]
This is just my thing.
One of my goals is to construct three camps.
The first is the one that I am working on now which is a "heavy campaign camp" (BTW I portray an office in the British Army.) It is constructed to reflect my research on the gear taken on campaign for use during extende stays in one location such as during the winter between campaigning seasons.
The second is a subset of the first consisting of enough equipment to make life in the field tollerable for a gentleman without requireing an entire baggage wagon or fourty mules to transport.
The third is a further subset of the second that can for the most part be carried on my person using a knapsack. [there are some small concessions for comfort and practicality such as a cooler for food and a barrel for water.]
This is just my thing.
