When did belt bags come into vogue?

[Harddog]

However. . . if you take any of those bags and shorten the strap, voila, you have a belt bag.
It's a pity, but far too many items did not survive from antiquity; consequently, we must extrapolate at times to create logical representations. This field of our is called "Historical interpretation" so it is up to us and our research to "interpret" the period as best we can. whether you use a belt bag or not, do so on artifactual and documentary evidence. it's OK to make a "Best guess" estimate as long as it's done with careful thought and research.
There's just not enough evidence to back patent black-&-white conclusions.
Proper interpretive displays require the right mix of intellect and imagination more than mimickry.
Whew, I haven't been this high up on my soapbox in a LONG time, anyone got a ladder?:redface:

Good luck on your search, and let us know what you come up with.
Cheers!

Bruce,

I think this is the first time I have heard this called "Historical Interpretation"???

I have always believed that one should be able to show three sources of primary documentation before we can call it historically correct. The idea that a lot of things didn't survive perhaps also means that they didn't exist at all in an earlier time period we are discussing. Your defination and use of historical interpretation smells to much like "If they would have had it, they would have used it". I would tell you that using items based on you defination of historical interpretation is how items become accepted by many today even though they were never used or available in a time period.

You mentioned the Scottish sporran. Sure it has been around since the 1500's or 1600's, we know that because there are many sources of primary documentation to prove it.

People who research for historical documentation also research for what was common so that the overall presentation, not just their persona, is also representative of the period. For example we know that the Englishman Drummond brought some fine English sporting rifles to a western mountainman rendezvous. However, if everyone doing western mountain portrayals carried fine English sporting rifles then the overall atmosphere of a modern day rendezvous would not be at all like the original rendezvous of the 1800's because the modern day guys would not be carrying what was common. Everybody can't be a Lewis Wetzel at a reenactment or trade fair even though one Lewis Wetzel is surely documentable.

"There's just not enough evidence to back patent black-&-white conclusions." isn't exactly true. Many things have been proven to be historically correct as well as common. There are many people out there every day doing research to prove the historical correctness of common everyday items used by our ancestors.

Randy Hedden

 

[bnail]

Randy:
"Historical Interpretation" is an official term that has its roots firmly planted in public history; you can actually get a degree in it. I detest the term "Living historian". . . as opposed to what, a dead historian. Show me a PhD, and I will accept that you are a "living historian."
Now, you go right ahead and get your three sources, that's admirable.
but if you cannot extrapolate (that is, using what you know to find out what you don't know) then all you're doing is mimicking. you must have more at stake than merely "three sources."
it takes intellect to actually read the sources and find the patterns and trends (it's called reading between tyhe lines).
I applaud your dedication to authenticity, but just because you can't see it doesn't mean you can't use established historical skills to create a REASONABLE substitute.
Finally, if you want to discuss the nuances of documentation and participant labels, then either PM me, or start another thrread, I went too far off topic befor and won't hijack Texan's thread any more. :nono:

 

[flm_shooter]

Finally, if you want to discuss the nuances of documentation and participant labels, then either PM me, or start another thrread, I went too far off topic befor and won't hijack Texan's thread any more. :nono:

Please, start another thread! As a starting-to-be-serious-person I'm fascinated with this side discussion. I can see the merits of both sides...convert me to your way.
:hmm:

 

[Welchman]

Captain John Knox's Historical Journal, July 12/13, 1757, Vol. 1, page 34 "These Light Troops have... ..a leathern or seal's-skin bag, buckled around their waist, which hangs down in front, this contains bullets, and a smaller shot the size of full grown peas: six or seven of which with a ball they generally load."

This is the web site where I found the above. I don't think they are talking about a just a bag hanging with bullets and shot since it was buckled around the waist.

Have a good day and remember to pray for our troops.

Welchman[url] http://www.ccnnwebdesign.com/paladin/shooting.htm[/url]

 

[Harddog]

Randy:
"Historical Interpretation" is an official term that has its roots firmly planted in public history; you can actually get a degree in it. I detest the term "Living historian". . . as opposed to what, a dead historian. Show me a PhD, and I will accept that you are a "living historian."
Now, you go right ahead and get your three sources, that's admirable.
but if you cannot extrapolate (that is, using what you know to find out what you don't know) then all you're doing is mimicking. you must have more at stake than merely "three sources."
it takes intellect to actually read the sources and find the patterns and trends (it's called reading between tyhe lines).
I applaud your dedication to authenticity, but just because you can't see it doesn't mean you can't use established historical skills to create a REASONABLE substitute.
Finally, if you want to discuss the nuances of documentation and participant labels, then either PM me, or start another thrread, I went too far off topic befor and won't hijack Texan's thread any more. :nono:

Bruce,

I will be starting a new thread in the General Muzleloading forum. See you there.

Randy Hedden

 

[bnail]

:thumbsup:

 

[taylorh]

I guess that makes you the winner! Good job. Your resources were all French. Did English men typically use shoulder bags? Just curious... Now I'm gonna have to jump over to the other thread about "historical interpretation" and watch the sparks!
Taylor in Texas

 

[bnail]

No Sparks there Texan, you muck racking troublemaker! :winking:
The forum rules should read, no politics, gun control, religion, or semantics! :haha:
personally, I'm antisemantic :rotf:

 

[tg]

I suspect a scaled down version of the common wallet of the time that was carried over the shoulder, could have been tucked into a belt or sash to hold shooting gear, this would a practical type for the time.

 

[Deadeye]

The question was " How recent is the use of the MODERN belt bag? I'd think that use would have been recent but the use of the belt bag is about as old as the belt.

 

[mmahlock]

In response to your question, in 1800 the 95th Regiment and other battalions equiped with rifles in the British Army were equiped with a bullet bag worn on their Rifle Belts. I'm on the road so I can't check a book I have that describes the bag in detail but its basic purpose was to carry loose balls and patches. Basic tools were carried in the box on the stock. They also carried a cartidge box on a shoulder strap which i believe also had space for other incidental tools etc.

Here are two pictures of the period

Here is a picture of the bag that Hard Core Reenactors of the 95h use which in estimation is a bit large given the description I have in the book I mentioned before.