shooting bag and ball bag ideas?

[jrbaker90]

I am trying to get idea for a pc accurateshooting bag and ball bag. I kind of want something around the 18th century just trying to get ideas thanks

 

[Artificer]

JR,

Your questions have been of special interest to me for about 4 decades now. The problem is that so very few original 18th century shooting pouches have survived, that we only have a small piece of the puzzle and not anything like a clear picture - outside of some paintings and other sources.

Unfortunately, original paintings of the quality that we can pretty well count on the leather gear being pretty accurately depicted are usually of English and American Gentry. So the depicted items are higher status and may be or probably are more specialized and usually made by a professional leather worker. Now PLEASE don't take those comments too far, as lower status people followed design trends and shall I say "fashions" when they made their own shooting pouches and ball pouches.

Here is a GREAT link explaining some of the problems we have in documenting what was or may have been used in the period, by James Rogers. I greatly admire James' work and his way of documenting what he makes. James has also been extremely generous with sharing his knowledge with others on this and other forums. James' interest is more towards fowlers and the gear for them, but he has some great items for rifle gun shooters. Though this is only my opinion, I believe had James been alive in the 18th century and doing leather work - his customers would have included Gentry and other affluent people as his work really is that good and his construction techniques are right in line with what was made back then.
http://contemporarymakers.blogspot.com/2012/06/contemporary-makers-blog-interview-with.html

Here are some examples of his work on this link:
https://www.facebook.com/JamesRogersFowling

Gus

 

[Artificer]

JR,

A few more things I wanted to mention, but thought were better laid out in a separate post.

The following is only speculation on my part, so do not take it as gospel.

I personally have wondered for a long time that the few surviving hunting pouches documented to the 18th century and accepted as having been for rifle use, have given us a slanted view of what was “common” and we MAY well be generalizing too much from them.

The somewhat smaller to much smaller size of the FEW original 18th century hunting pouches, when compared to larger 19th century pouches, strongly suggests to me the 18th century pouches still extant were used by people for “day hunting” or short term hunts as the size of those pouches just can not hold many items. If one is only going on a one day hunt, one does not need much more than 5 balls and patches, a turnscsrew (period name for a screwdriver), a couple spare flints and an extra piece of leather or two to hold the flint in the cock jaws, and some kind of vent pick. A SMALL powder horn is all that is needed and could be carried in a pocket as well as a folding knife in a pocket. If one was coming back to the cabin or homestead before or not long after nightfall, one would not needed to carry much more than this then or today. Of course it seems in the original pouches, the original 18th century items actually carried in the pouches were emptied out long ago.

Now there have been 19th century pouches found with items inside that seem to be from the period. In the larger 19th century pouches/ there are items such as a larger ball pouch, more flints than would be needed for a day’s hunt, a fire starting kit, a piece of candle, an awl and linen or other thread, sometimes fishing hooks and line, and other items that today we call “survival items.” This tells me the person using that bag was going out for longer periods of time than a “day hunt” or two.

So where are the 18th century hunting pouches for those who went out for longer than a day or two hunt and would have carried more things in their pouches? I personally believe those pouches did not survive, or they have not been identified to the 18th century, or it is possible no such pouches were made, though I don’t believe the last. There would have been times in the winter that hunting would have required more than a day or two even for those who lived near or in mountains of PA, VA and the Carolina’s. There is documentation of longer hunts in Kentucky to lay in meat supplies and short term expeditions to get salt. This would require more things than can be kept in most of the surviving 18th century pouches.

Now it has been suggested that longer hunts would have been done on horseback and extra items stored on the horse. Well, that works fine until the horse gets spooked and runs off or gets sick or hurt in an accident. Horses also got stolen by both NA’s and thieves on the frontier.

To me, it would appear common sense to have a basic survival kit in your shooting pouch and that requires more room than most extant 18th century pouches normally identified as rifle pouches. So I believe that larger shooting pouches were made and used than the ones so far identified as 18th century rifle pouches.

Gus

 

[Brokennock]

Just speculating here, not arguing as I think you have an interesting point. Could it be that during the 18th century those hunters going out for more than a day carried their non-shooting related stuff, needle/thread, hooks and line, etc. in their haversack, snapsack or napsack? This would allow them to keep their shooting pouch the same all the time regardless of hunt duration. No packing or repacking thus forgetting stuff, just grab the same shooting bag you usually do and also grab the bag of extras.

 

[Artificer]

Sure, they could have carried extra items in a snap sack or haversack or even rolled up in a blanket roll on a longer hunt. I would even say that may or would have been more likely for someone who was primarily a farmer or tradesman in a town or settlement (even close to or on the frontier). They most likely set up a base camp and dropped most of their extra items there when they went hunting and came back at night or when they had killed something. Of course if someone visited your camp while you were out hunting, you may have found those things gone when you get back.

However, I also speculate that those who made their primary living from hunting (mainly for meat, though hides as well) and especially those who acted as scouts = would have been more likely to have extra items in their pouch rather than extra sacks or even in their blanket roll, for at least three reasons.

1. The more “stuff” you have on you, the more difficult it is to sneak up on something or someone or at least not sound like a herd of cattle going through the woods, because the extra sacks will catch on every branch and briar.

2. If you carry the extra items in a slightly larger shooting pouch, you don’t need to carry snap sacks or haversacks. Also, there are accounts where they folded the ends of their hunting shirt into their sash or belt to make a pouch or pocket, in which they carried travel food quite often.

3. This one will depend on how close one was to the frontier and possibly running afoul of hostile NA’s or other Europeans who were thieves/cut throats. There is not a lot of documentation on how individual hunters or small parties slept at night when they were in such areas. Small parties may have and most likely did alternately stand guard through the night. Yet even if someone else was standing guard, I know I would have slept with my pouch and horn on me, knife and hawk on me and my gun or rifle in my lap or snuggled next to me. If hostiles attacked and there were too many of them, one would have to leave in a hurry to save himself. When the shooting pouch already contains the extra items, including basic survival items, you don’t have to worry about leaving it behind.

Gus

 

[Rickey Brown]

I tend to agree with you, although applying 21st century common sense does not always pan out. During one of the many jungle survival schools I attended an old Gunnery Sgt. told us to assume we would be stranded with just what was on our person at the time. That is why to this day I keep a lighter, small flashlight, two days meds, a knife etc on me at all times. The same would have held true then, a true woodsman/frontiersman/hunter would have been prepared that in the likely hood he is separated from his supplies he would still have pouch and horn to survive.

 

[Billnpatti]

Wow! Levels of craftsmanship to which most of us can only aspire to achieve but not really expect to reach. As Robert Browning said "Ah, but man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?"

 

[Beaverkiller]

Hello all, I've been readin' up on this topic and would like to add my 2 cents worth. Here in wyoming we do alot of hunting from horses, and while yes a horse will run off, but when in unfamiliar country they tend to stay around camp, even if it is a one night camp, with that said I wonder if maybe the meat hunters, hide hunters, and long hunters didn't have some type of saddle bags they carried their possibles in. At camp they simply took the saddle bags off the horse and kept them handy, such as alot of hunters now days do with their day-packs. As I said just a thought. Keep your powder dry

 

[tenngun]

I was a thinking that as I read this. I love to treck...but how authintic is that?A person may have scouted a few day from the main camp or traveled across some distance, but in general the bulk of ones gear was horse back or in a canoe or flat boat. How long do you think any one would have spent with just what could be carrired on person. Unless they were caught with thier pants down and had to make a run for it. Oft times we read of some one with plenty of powder but only a few balls an miles to go to the nearest succor. This tells me they wern't carring a few lead bars and mold. Glass was robbed of his gear but the story goes his wallet with his fire fixings was eing used as a pillow for him. If that is a true story his fixings wernt in his pouch.
Paintings of MM oft times arn't in the best scale, but often show small pouchs, yet some old pouchs are good sized. Just those old pouchs can't be dated. I don't know of a painting of a white man with a big pouch. Some photos exist but these were after the time we're generaly interested in. Many bigger pouchs seem assoated with areas already well settled, where it was unlikly a person would be hunting mare then a day from home. Were the painters taking artistic lisince and concentrating of the gestalt and not the pouch, or was the hunter restocking every night from camp stores. But then why would pouchs get bigger when they were less needed? Lets not forget style. Some things not needed are 'cool'

 

[crockett]

I'll add some things I've thought about. On the Eastern bags, I agree some of those that have survived may have been hung over a fire place and never used, a bag owned by a farmer on the fringe of the wilderness. The quality may be better than what a long hunter used.
The other issue is today we stitch "inside out" so the bag will billow out and be more roomy. The first couple of bags I made, I used a running stitch with "outside" stitching and the bag wanted to stay flat and was hard to spread the sides apart and put things into it and less roomy inside, BUT I did it that way because that's how a lot of old bags looked.