Old style Haversack

[jojo]

I thought you may be interested. I have made an old style Haversack using Barbour oiled cotton fabric and leather. I wanted a useful bag for day outings, and also wanted to practice hand sewing, because I want to make a linen shirt next! The haversack is 14" wide, 16" deep. I used waxed linen thread throughout. The buttons are hand made in bone (from the pet shop!) the button holes are hand sewn. the hard bit there is keeping the stitches regular... The leather strap is 2" wide, and stained with home made dye, with wire wool in vinegar. The mix react with the tannin, I believe, in the leather and turn a sort of dark slate grey/black colour, it's actually more of a chemical reaction than a dye.

The bottom and top of the bag are reinforced with leather.

 

[JohnC]

I like the look of that, I've a lot of canvas left from a project and may give making a bag a go.. I hadnt thought of the pet shop for bones...

 

[Mike Ameling]

A traditional haversack is a nice handy little shoulder bag for carrying gear. But you can get razzed about carrying a "man bag". But at least it doesn't look like a purse.

Historically the haversack was issued to soldiers for them to carry their issued food rations in. Every few days up to a week, they would receive their food ration for the next so many days. All per written military regulations. What the soldiers actually got was often different.

The weekly Brit military ration in the late 1700's was:
- seven pounds of bread or flour
- seven pounds of beef or pork
- half a pound of rice
- three pounds peas
- six ounces of butter
- one quart of vinegar to every six men

Or a daily ration of one pound bread or flour, one pound of beef or pork, just over one ounce of rice, seven ounces of peas, and just under one ounce of butter. The soldiers were generally grouped into a 6-man "mess", and combined their rations for communal cooking. Their "officer" was under orders to make sure the soldiers cooked their food properly - mostly boiled, never fried or roasted.

This was all then carried in the soldiers haversack. That bread/flour was often Ship's Biscuits - hardtack. And the meat was issued RAW. So that ... haversack ... quickly became a pretty grungy/unsanitary item.

If you take that fairly standard sizeed haversack, and put on two shoulder straps instead of a that one long strap, you end up with a knapsack (back pack) - another common military issue item of the late 1700's, but this time for clothing and other gear.

Most originals were made from just heavy clothe/canvas - including the strap. And no leather reinfocing. Closed with either one, or two or three buttons.

Nice haversack. And they are very handy to use slung over your shoulder.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands

 

[hiraeth]

Very nice work, wouldnt mind one like that myself.

 

[firecrest]

A traditional haversack is a nice handy little shoulder bag for carrying gear. But you can get razzed about carrying a "man bag". But at least it doesn't look like a purse.

Historically the haversack was issued to soldiers for them to carry their issued food rations in. Every few days up to a week, they would receive their food ration for the next so many days. All per written military regulations. What the soldiers actually got was often different.

The weekly Brit military ration in the late 1700's was:
- seven pounds of bread or flour
- seven pounds of beef or pork
- half a pound of rice
- three pounds peas
- six ounces of butter
- one quart of vinegar to every six men

Or a daily ration of one pound bread or flour, one pound of beef or pork, just over one ounce of rice, seven ounces of peas, and just under one ounce of butter. The soldiers were generally grouped into a 6-man "mess", and combined their rations for communal cooking. Their "officer" was under orders to make sure the soldiers cooked their food properly - mostly boiled, never fried or roasted.

This was all then carried in the soldiers haversack. That bread/flour was often Ship's Biscuits - hardtack. And the meat was issued RAW. So that ... haversack ... quickly became a pretty grungy/unsanitary item.

If you take that fairly standard sizeed haversack, and put on two shoulder straps instead of a that one long strap, you end up with a knapsack (back pack) - another common military issue item of the late 1700's, but this time for clothing and other gear.

Most originals were made from just heavy clothe/canvas - including the strap. And no leather reinfocing. Closed with either one, or two or three buttons.

Nice haversack. And they are very handy to use slung over your shoulder.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands

They actually seemed to have got quite a lot of food in quantity (though not variety) did they pick things along the way as well?
We take for granted the modern miracle of sandwich bags for seperating foods with don't we.

 

[Mike Ameling]

They actually seemed to have got quite a lot of food in quantity (though not variety) did they pick things along the way as well?
We take for granted the modern miracle of sandwich bags for seperating foods with don't we.

Soldiers being ... soldiers, they could and would scrounge/trade whatever they could on the side. But this was what they were SUPPOSED TO GET by military orders. What they actually got tended to vary in quantity and QUALITY.

But look again at that daily ration ---

daily ration of one pound bread or flour, one pound of beef or pork, just over one ounce of rice, seven ounces of peas, and just under one ounce of butter. The soldiers were generally grouped into a 6-man "mess"

That was all you got for the whole day, and you were marching/fighting or doing heavy labor for that day. Divide that by 3 meals a day, and it gets whittled down real fast! Flour runs around 4 cups per pound.

And those "biscuits" (hardtack) generally took 2 cups of flour each. So you got two of them per day. It was made from: 2 cups flour, 1/2 tablespoon salt, 1/2 cup of water -- mix all together, roll out around 3/8 to 1/2 inch thick circle, poke a dozen holes in to to help the moisture escape, then bake in an over around 350 to 400 degrees for around 1/2 hour - thoroughly dry and slightly browned. Hard and dry! That makes ONE biscuit. You would get two per day as your "daily bread".

Plain food, but the soldiers survived on it.

That issued "raw meat" needed to be cooked fairly soon. And anything left over from your cooking, would get packed up back in that ... haversack ... and eaten "on the march" or for your next meal.

Of course, on board ship or in a barracks/fort location, the soldiers would go through the regular "chow line".

Different times, different standards of sanitation, and different tollerances to ... questionable ... food. Being involved in living history and trying to recreate the past has a way of making you VERY AWARE of how far we have progressed in modern living! And how much we have become accustomed to lots of sugar and spices in all parts of our daily lives. That "sugar addiction" tends to catch up with people trying to live on the normal diet of those early days - even for just a weekend!

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands

 

[Ozhaggishead]

Nice work mate!Like the bone buttons a lot.

 

[jojo]

Thanks for all the comments. It is actually quite easy to make,starting life as a rectangle of cloth 15" wide and about 35" long.

Different times, different standards of sanitation, and different tollerances to ... questionable ... food. Being involved in living history and trying to recreate the past has a way of making you VERY AWARE of how far we have progressed in modern living! And how much we have become accustomed to lots of sugar and spices in all parts of our daily lives. That "sugar addiction" tends to catch up with people trying to live on the normal diet of those early days - even for just a weekend!

Mike, interesting comments. The more I read, on the net and books, the more I realise I don't know very much about all this! Making the "kit" is probably the easiest part of it. But getting in the frame of mind of the people of the time must be the hardest. It must be most difficult to forget all you know, that they didn't, about our standards of hygiene for example. I mus say, however much I like these things, psychologically, I would find it next to impossible to put a lump of uncooked meat straight in my bag, and even more to use the bag after a few days/hours, and even less likely to want to eat it afterwards!
I suppose they may have seen these bags in the same way we see plastic bags, as a disposable item.

Would the diet of the "ordinary" people, as opposed to the soldiers', have been much different? The soldiers had not much choice given to them, but the civvies had more freedom, in a way, to have a more varied diet?
When you participate in a re creation trek, for want of a better word, do you use the standard fare of the time you try to recreate or do "modern" standards creep inevitably creep in?

 

[Mike Ameling]

The variety of foods and spices available back in the 1700's was a whole lot more limited than today. And many food items were only available seasonally - or if they were preserved in some manner. Example: root cellars were great for storing vegetables, apples, gourds, squash, pumpkins, etc. so that you could eat them other than just when they were ripe. Otherwise you had to preserve them in some manner - such as pickling, canning, drying, or cooking them into a long lasting form like jams/jellies/butters.

When I go out ... trekking ... (a term borrowed from southern Africa in the 1800's), I try to only carry along food that would have been available in my area during that early time period. But if I bring along fresh/raw meat, I use MODERN care and cautions. I wrap it up separate in an extra piece of waterproof canvas or oilclothe. But for meat I usually bring along some form of dry sausage or beef boiled in vinegar. And a little "jerky". Bread I carry smaller hard rolls or "hardtack". And recently I've been bringing along wild rice - to cook up with a little maple sugar.

It is an ... adjustment ... in diet, and it is best to start getting yourself used to it beforehand. I also know several people who ... pushed ... the limits of proper sanitation and got a mild form of food poisoning. Not fun.

Yes, I use my haversack to carry my food in - along with my cup, wood bowl, and spoon. And I've been know to stash a spare pair of socks and a wool cap/touque in there as well.

This "living history" stuff does end up teaching you a lot along the way. As well as teaching you how NICE some more modern things are!

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands

p.s. A haversack is such a simple little project to tinker with, and handy to use. And making up some simple flat bags of similar materials as well. Those little bags sure help ... organize ... your stuff inside whatever you are using to carry your gear - and make it easier to find things.

 

[drewdunnrespect]

very nice work

 

[Eric_Methven]

Mike, were the bags always flat, or were they ever gusseted?

Eric

 

[Snufkin]

Is that one of Mark Bakers "Pilgrim" books?
If so, is it good? I've only been able to find a secondhand copy over here, and it cost more than it would to have a new copy sent from the States. Do you think it's worth the 30 odd quid it would cost?

 

[jojo]

Yes it is, Snufkin. I have got both the books and they cost me 35 quids, less than 1/2 what I would have paid here. You can get them here from a place called The Identity Store

I think they are worth the 35 from amazon but I wouldn't have paid double that from The identity Store! I think the are quite good and interesting, with plenty of info about the muzzleloading "world".

 

[Mike Ameling]

Mike, were the bags always flat, or were they ever gusseted?

Eric

The traditional military issue haversack was flat. It was a quick/simple/cheap bag - no reinforcing, no fancy stitching, no gussets, just a basic utilitarian bag for the soldiers to carry their food in.

But nowdays, people make them better for their own personal use, and tend to carry clothing/gear in there instead of food. And some do add gussets, or make them more in the shape of a flat "box". It's a matter of personal choice, and the use you have for it. It does make a good "throw it over the shoulder" bag for carrying a little gear along. Or to take along with you when you go "shopping" at the assorted "market fairs". Small purchases fit nicely into it without having to ... juggle them. And it can also "hide" those little things from inquisitive eyes - especially things that might become a birthday present later.


Mark Baker's two A Pilgrim's Journey books are pretty good - if you are interested in Living History stuff. They are a collection of articles he wrote for Muzzleloader Magazine over the years. Volume 1 covers articles from 1986 to 1995. Volume 2 covers 1996 to 2005. They do show some patterns, and camp/carry methods. And they show the "journey" that Baker went through in researching and experimenting in how to live and work as a woodsman on the Colonial frontier - including examples of his ... errors ... along the way. They are a good "read", but not really pattern/construction books. More like "this is what I did" books. They can be ordered direct from the publisher of Muzzleloader Magazine. They list Vol. 1 at $32 and Vol. 2 at $36. Shipping in the US is listed as $8 for one book, $10 for both. But shipping to the UK would be different.

Another writer for Muzzleloader Magazine also has a good book out of some of her past articles - Beth Gilgun - Tidings From The 18th Century. She wrote her articles from a view point as if she were writing a letter to a friend in the 18th century - with little "notes" included for modern things. Her book has more patterns and recipes in it - but more from the women's point of view.

And Muzzleloader Magazine also published a series of books called The Book of Buckskinning volumes I through VIII. These books are all about doing 18th century living history for yourself. Lots of patterns, construction tips, camping gear, materials, and cooking/recipes. They are much more "how-to" books than Baker's.

You can check all this out at their web site www.muzzleloadermag.com They even have a message board/forum for discussions of historical topics.

I have no association with them, other than I have all these books and have subscribed to their magazine since the early 1980's. I've been happy with them.

Just my humble thoughts to share. Take them as such.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands