-
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 -
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
Later shooting bags??
- Thread starter jrbaker90
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
- Messages
- 468
- Reaction score
- 646
What resources are you seeing for bags dating prior to the 1840s? (That's a serious question: there just aren't a lot of bags that can be securely dated with actual provenance to use prior to 1840, vs "well, it looks old and they could have built it before 1840".)
Since Charles Hanson put me up to it in '81, I've been studying original bags used in the trans-Mississippi west. For about 25 years I spent a lot of time visiting local museums and private collections. I met a lot of neat people, saw some neat bags and horns, and while I still don't have any solid conclusions I did get some impressions of the common bags used in the west in the second half of the 18th century. All that doesn't make me "right" in any absolute sense, and those impressions are limited to a particular time and region.
My impression is that the surviving bags differ a fair amount from the bags commonly used today. No surprise there, as we use our bags differently than they were used then. I think on the whole, they also differ somewhat from surviving bags used in the same period in regions like Appalachia, or in the South. I'd say they also differ from bags used in earlier periods, but there just aren't a lot of earlier bags to compare to--mostly, we have period paintings and drawings, and the bags were seldom the focus of the illustrations.
From what I've seen, very few of the bags in museums and collections can be accurately dated in the sense that "Bob Jones bought this bag from a pedlar in Whachawhoosis County in 1849". We can sometimes go by makers' marks (e.g., a saddler's stamp known to have been in use during a certain period), or construction details such as machine sewing. Most of the time there is little provenance beyond "this was Grandpa Jones's bag, he died in 1901" or "I bought it at a farm auction in 1953, and don't know any more about it".
Construction-wise, many, if not most (I'd have to sort through my notes to be sure) of the surviving bags are machine sewn (vs handsewn, even professionally handsewn). Liners (or traces of liners) are extremely uncommon. Original fabric straps are extremely uncommon, but a lot of bags have fabric straps as replacements.
If I were trying to come up with a bag representative of those used in the trans-Mississippi west in the 1840-1860 period, I'd go with a simple commercial bag. Commercially veg-tanned leather of about 4 ounces, maybe some simple stamping on the flap. Machine sewn or handsewn, probably no welt, roughly 7-8 wide and tall. Flap sewn to bag body, with straps roughly 1-1.5" width sewn into the flap/body seam. If I was going to use a buckle on the strap, it would be a common harness buckle. I'd probably just oil the leather rather than dying it (it will darken over time on exposure to sunlight).
But that's just one man's opinion, based on bags with a history of use in a limited area.
Since Charles Hanson put me up to it in '81, I've been studying original bags used in the trans-Mississippi west. For about 25 years I spent a lot of time visiting local museums and private collections. I met a lot of neat people, saw some neat bags and horns, and while I still don't have any solid conclusions I did get some impressions of the common bags used in the west in the second half of the 18th century. All that doesn't make me "right" in any absolute sense, and those impressions are limited to a particular time and region.
My impression is that the surviving bags differ a fair amount from the bags commonly used today. No surprise there, as we use our bags differently than they were used then. I think on the whole, they also differ somewhat from surviving bags used in the same period in regions like Appalachia, or in the South. I'd say they also differ from bags used in earlier periods, but there just aren't a lot of earlier bags to compare to--mostly, we have period paintings and drawings, and the bags were seldom the focus of the illustrations.
From what I've seen, very few of the bags in museums and collections can be accurately dated in the sense that "Bob Jones bought this bag from a pedlar in Whachawhoosis County in 1849". We can sometimes go by makers' marks (e.g., a saddler's stamp known to have been in use during a certain period), or construction details such as machine sewing. Most of the time there is little provenance beyond "this was Grandpa Jones's bag, he died in 1901" or "I bought it at a farm auction in 1953, and don't know any more about it".
Construction-wise, many, if not most (I'd have to sort through my notes to be sure) of the surviving bags are machine sewn (vs handsewn, even professionally handsewn). Liners (or traces of liners) are extremely uncommon. Original fabric straps are extremely uncommon, but a lot of bags have fabric straps as replacements.
If I were trying to come up with a bag representative of those used in the trans-Mississippi west in the 1840-1860 period, I'd go with a simple commercial bag. Commercially veg-tanned leather of about 4 ounces, maybe some simple stamping on the flap. Machine sewn or handsewn, probably no welt, roughly 7-8 wide and tall. Flap sewn to bag body, with straps roughly 1-1.5" width sewn into the flap/body seam. If I was going to use a buckle on the strap, it would be a common harness buckle. I'd probably just oil the leather rather than dying it (it will darken over time on exposure to sunlight).
But that's just one man's opinion, based on bags with a history of use in a limited area.
I'm thinking about a bag to use both in hunting and competition where you have to "shoot from the bag". I'd like to stay somewhat authentic but bags in the 6-8in width range are unusable cuz my hands are fairly large.
Like your research shows, I'm thinking of a plain bag but about 10+ in wide for my hands. That's also about the minimum useable size to carry prepared ammunition for competition. I like the idea of a cloth strap and plain iron buckle.
Like your research shows, I'm thinking of a plain bag but about 10+ in wide for my hands. That's also about the minimum useable size to carry prepared ammunition for competition. I like the idea of a cloth strap and plain iron buckle.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
- Messages
- 468
- Reaction score
- 646
There were bags that were "outside the norm" of course. A lot of stuff was made to suit the needs of the shooter, and probably to use available materials as well.
I saw a bag in Oklahoma IIRC (don't have my notes handy, but it made an impression, must have been 15 or more years ago) that was set up for match shooting. It was an atypical bag in a lot of ways. It was roughly 10-11" wide and about 6" deep with a gusset in the side for more internal room.
Family history had it as having been purpose-built for match shooting in the 1880s, probably by the wife of the shooter. The body leather was 2 layers of pigskin, quilted to give it body! Nicely done too. The flap was additionally stiffened with something between the layers of quilting (buckram maybe), so the single button closing it was more than enough to secure it. The strap was about 3/4" wide, and looked like it started life as a bridle rein.
Contents of the bag included a really neat British-made capper, some cleaning supplies including a ramrod extension, a device sort of like a false muzzle for seating sugarloaf bullets, and 6-7 pill vials full of powder. There was also a tackhammer with handle shortened to fit the bag, a cap tin full of carpet tacks, and a few pieces of old targets (aparently saving "best groups" has been going on for a while).
Despite the stuff carried, there was no indication that the bag had ever had pockets to keep stuff separate: it was all thrown in and allowed to settle as it would. I liked the guy's solution to the eternal problem of forgetting a stapler or tack hammer--if I were going to build a bag just for matches, I might do the same (more likely just put a hammer loop on the back).
I saw a bag in Oklahoma IIRC (don't have my notes handy, but it made an impression, must have been 15 or more years ago) that was set up for match shooting. It was an atypical bag in a lot of ways. It was roughly 10-11" wide and about 6" deep with a gusset in the side for more internal room.
Family history had it as having been purpose-built for match shooting in the 1880s, probably by the wife of the shooter. The body leather was 2 layers of pigskin, quilted to give it body! Nicely done too. The flap was additionally stiffened with something between the layers of quilting (buckram maybe), so the single button closing it was more than enough to secure it. The strap was about 3/4" wide, and looked like it started life as a bridle rein.
Contents of the bag included a really neat British-made capper, some cleaning supplies including a ramrod extension, a device sort of like a false muzzle for seating sugarloaf bullets, and 6-7 pill vials full of powder. There was also a tackhammer with handle shortened to fit the bag, a cap tin full of carpet tacks, and a few pieces of old targets (aparently saving "best groups" has been going on for a while).
Despite the stuff carried, there was no indication that the bag had ever had pockets to keep stuff separate: it was all thrown in and allowed to settle as it would. I liked the guy's solution to the eternal problem of forgetting a stapler or tack hammer--if I were going to build a bag just for matches, I might do the same (more likely just put a hammer loop on the back).
