• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

camp chairs

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

jimbowie1

36 Cal.
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
Im looking for at least 2 folding wood camp chairs for RONNDY. New or used. anyone have any recomendations where to get some?
thanks
 
Should you decide that you'd like to build your own for CHEAP, check out the "master index" of WOODEN BOAT magazine & look for the plans for period "canoe chairs".

yours, satx
 
If you wish to build your own like the one below, just do a search for 'scout chairs'. Not hard to make. I made mine to fit me comfortably and to save weight. Chairs at mountain man camps may not have been seen much but many an aging back needs rest or there is no participant at all.

campchair.png
[/URL][/img]
 
If you are looking for your chairs to be HC/PC, these 2-part slat chairs are not. Folding/solid stools/chair as well as ladder-back chairs are/can be PC/HC depending on the who, when and where.
 
Black Hand said:
If you are looking for your chairs to be HC/PC, these 2-part slat chairs are not. Folding/solid stools/chair as well as ladder-back chairs are/can be PC/HC depending on the who, when and where.

BH, I know that. But they are handy to carry with a truck load of stuff and easy to walk around camp with. I have a disc with a bunch of period correct chairs illustrated but none are convenient to carry to or around camp. These work and blend well into (most) camp scenes.
 
I am with you. I just wished to inform the OP if HC/PC was a consideration. I have one just like it that is very comfortable, but I don't use it at camp anymore due to the the modern design.
 
Black Hand said:
I am with you. I just wished to inform the OP if HC/PC was a consideration. I have one just like it that is very comfortable, but I don't use it at camp anymore due to the the modern design.

BH, this is a do yer own thang game. I'm glad you can get by without a chair. But, if we do not accomodate our aging participants there won't be any one day. Chairs, eyeglasses, wheelchairs, oxygen tanks, etc., like it or not, are part of the scene. We all do the best we can. Some may squak "it ain't authentic" but poo on them. I wonder where they will be in a few years.
 
I never said I didn't use a chair (I use a folding stool), just that I prefer to use a PC/HC item.
 
Some places won't let you in with that two piece chair. I like my folding stools, both for space savings, and light weight. As they have a solid seat, I can use one for a small table if needed. I'm playing around with a sorta foldable, backed chair design. If I get it sturdy enough I will post it.

LD
 
Some places won't let you in with that two piece chair.

I understand that. I have been invited to join AMM but really didn't want to put up with the nit picky 'authentic' stuff. e.g. are you wearing Jockey underwear? I have only been to 'drive and dump' ronnys, never a juried type. I have declined to attend a couple rather than arrive after a twelve hour drive and be denied entry because the tread count on my shirt didn't fit someones idea of 'authentic'. It happens.
 
If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. Expecting the rules to be changed to accommodate a few, at the expense of the rest, is unrealistic...
 
My question is, who makes the decision whether something is PC or not? Just because there isn't some sort of documentation to support the authenticity of an item, doesn't mean someone couldn't have hand made it. Let's take these chairs for example, was there any tech that hadn't been invented yet? Are they made out of materials that weren't used? The answer to both these questions is no. So as far as I'm concerned, There is no way to definitively say that something isn't PC if it was possible for them to have been made. :2
 
And that is the fundamental issue. Using your logic, anything and everything COULD be PC/HC. The only factor which determines what IS or IS NOT PC/HC is documentation.

e.g. - an AK-47 is hypothetically possible in the 18th century because all the technology existed to construct one. But there weren't any...
 
So what your saying is, if there isn't documentation, then it didn't exist period, because everything was documented, and done so with complete accuracy?

I am simply saying that if I was a wood worker in the 1700's or early 1800's, and if I came up with an idea for a new chair design, than I would have the right to build it, and it is very possible that it never gets documented, thus fast forward to the modern day, it didn't exist.
 
If our objective is to replicate that actually happened "then", all we have is the documentation. If it isn't documented, then it "didn't" happen. As the field is fluid, additional evidence may come to light later that changes the status quo, but until it does...

If you want to play "dress-up & make-believe" you can do whatever you please.
 
Not addressed to anyone in particular but it all depends on what one is trying to do.

From the living history & reenactment point of view, one is either trying to experience or replicate a past time, for either personal or public enlightenment. Whether this is done very well or not so well varies from event to event and person to person, but since the goal is dealing with what was, and not what might have been, documentation (which includes not just a record written in period but studies of artifacts), is the only way to know that the object or practice existed in period.

From the rondy point of view, (and I generalize because there is an overlap between those who attend rondys & reenactments), historical accuracy is less important than enjoying a break from the modern world. The emphasis is on a more primitive experience than we live today and "could have been" is often as not accepted. As long as materials & techniques from the past are used, objects are not overly questioned.

There is nothing wrong with either approach. Both approaches and the events that cater to them can be a lot of fun. What is wrong is when someone from one school of thought tries to force their approach on others while at an event. If at a rondy, one does not reproach others for their lack of historical accuracy. If trying to participate in a juried event, one does not try to force acceptance of undocumented gear. No one is required to go to an event. It doesn't make any difference whether one considers the guidelines/rules too tight or too loose - to attend is to gracefully accept the standards for that event.
 
Your comment in a nutshell is "my problem" with "librarians" & "thread counters". = MANY things which existed are NOT "documented" in the style that the FANATICS & "self-appointed experts" would like.

For example it is well-known that NUMEROUS WBTS officers (and probably some "other ranks"), including Robert E Lee, had folding chairs, as a part of their "personal property".
Unfortunately, GEN Lee's chair is NOT extant to the best of my knowledge, though he mentioned it in a letter to his wife as a "quite welcome gift from a friend".
(Nobody living today KNOWS what it looked like.)

Btw, my mother has a folding "ladies nursing rocker" that was in TX as early as 1930. - It once belonged to the James A. Musgrove family of Nacogdoches & PROBABLY came from MS with the family's personal effects.

yours, satx
 
But you contradict yourself - the fact that the chair was mentioned is documentation of its existence. That it was not described is another matter altogether. Taking chairs of similar manufacture that existed at the time would allow one to recreate a PC/HC chair, even though the exact description was unknown.

I am speaking about the "flights of fancy", items that people have conjured from their imagination because they are "so simple that someone, somewhere must have thought of it". That just doesn't fly...

Documentation is the only way that what actually existed is used and the "flights of fancy" are not.

As to the rest, I don't really care whether you agree with the PC/HC assessment. I play my game by my rules, you play by yours. Scolding/insulting me because I hold myself to a different standard (than others) has no more effect on me than pouring a glass of water into the ocean affects the depth.

On the other hand, we are here to express our thoughts on the hobby, and my views are just as valid as yours. I'm not required to agree with you, nor will I accept opinion over documentation.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top