ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/hist_text/archive/v01.n790

Internet Message Format | 2001-04-20 | 41KB

From: [e-mail] (hist_text-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: hist_text-digest V1 #790
Reply-To: hist_text
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


hist_text-digest       Saturday, April 21 2001       Volume 01 : Number 790



In this issue:

-áááááá MtMan-List: Tent's
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Latitude and L&C accuracy
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Latitude and L&C accuracy
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: pyramid tents
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains
-áááááá MtMan-List: good handy tarp size
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Tent's
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Tent's
-áááááá MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent
-áááááá MtMan-List: Rope: Buffalo hair horsehair
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: good handy tarp size
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: Tent's

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 08:22:17 -0700
From: "Ole B. Jensen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: Tent's

Hello the Camp,
The Pyramid tent has been excepted without much complaint, but it has yet to
be authenticated to the fur trade. The wedge tent has been authenticated and
should be used more. I use a large Marque for park and drops but I would
never use it for a period camp even though it pre-dates the Rocky Mountain
Fur trade. Too all those that would Authenticate the pyramid " good luck ".
I would think that the choices we have at the current time are more than
enough. Just some thoughts!.
YMOS
Ole # 718

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 08:21:23 -0600
From: Angela Gottfred <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Latitude and L&C accuracy

The current _Nautical Almanac_ is available in convenient "book" form at
www.celestaire.com. Consider a "book" today. "Books" never need batteries,
never need to be upgraded. "Books" used over 1,000 years ago are still
compatible with today's most advanced "book" technology. Is there a "book"
in your future? ;-)

Sincerely,
Angela Gottfred



- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:56:25 -0400
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent

When is The Western and which one.  I have been stranded here in Fla. for a while
and have not kept up with the where abouts on encampments.  The Doctors and my
job my let me loose for a few weeks to get of of town and would like to go back
to a Western.

Linda Holley

"Ole B. Jensen" wrote:

> Larry,
> If you can get away with it, go for it. Show and Tell Rendezvous are what
> they are. Will I be looking at youre smiling face at the Western? This is
> one camp I wouldn't miss, the chance will only happen once.
> YMOS


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 10:51:34 -0600
From: "John L. Allen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Latitude and L&C accuracy

Great posting from Jeff: Thanks.

A couple of comments:

Yes, L&C did use Jovian moons for longitudinal observations--mainly because
they couldn't handle the math required for lunar observation, although they
tried that as well by timing the appearance/disappearance of "limbs" of the
moon. It should also be noted that, although the double altitudes method
that Jeff mentions was known, L&C couldn't use it because they simply didn't
have the math necessary--neither of the captains could, to the best of our
knowledge, manage either solid geometry or trigonometry (neither can most of
today's college students, by the way). We know of virtually everything they
took with them and there is no evidence that they had the trig tables that
would have been necessary for double altitude calculations. There is no
indication in any of the expedition's records that spherical geometry was
ever applied to astronomical observation.

On L&C accuracy: the captains were never as accurate as David Thompson who
had training in astronomical observation that went considerably beyond
Lewis's crash course in Philadelphia in early 1803. Their latitude
observations were, as Jeff pointed out, off by 17 miles at Great Falls; they
were off even farther than that (as much as 25 miles) at some other
locations. But it is necessary to keep in mind their primary interest was in
relative location not absolute location--that is, they were more interested
in where things were located relative to other things than the absolute grid
coordinate position of lat. & long. that is so crucial to open sea
navigation (a small error on one side of the Atlantic becomes an enormous
error by the time you get to the other side). Since the captains were
following rivers (their objective, after all, was to find a water passageway
across the continent) or otherwise relatively clearly demarcated trails (the
Nez Perce trail across the Bitterroots, for example), the level of accuracy
demanded of them was that necessary to produce a map at the scale of Clark's
final manuscript map of 1810 (the one that was engraved and printed with the
first edition of their journals in 1814). They succeeded admirably in
attaining that level of accuracy.

The expense of their pocket chronometer: the second largest set of
expenditures in outfitting the Expedition were for what Lewis called
"mathematikal instruments", including the chronometer (largest set of
expenditures were for "Indian presents" or trade goods). The chronometer
alone was the single most expensive item Lewis purchased before leaving the
east for St. Louis--a cost of $250 or more than 10% of the total cost of
goods purchased in Philadelphia. It should also be noted that they carried
the other instruments mentioned by Jeff: a sextant, an artificial horizon.
They were not, however, as skilled in the use of those devices for
navigation (absolute location) as they were in using them for field mapping.

A final note: when Lewis presented his tables of astronomical observation to
one of the best mathematicians in the US for "corrections" after the
expedition, that gentleman could make no sense of the longitudinal
recordings at all and had difficulty with the latitudes. Nevertheless, the
locational accuracy of key sites from Clark's 1810 map is pretty good.
Bottom line: Clark was a better seat-of-the-pants cartographer than Lewis
was an astronomical observer.

John Allen

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Angela Gottfred" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Latitude and L&C accuracy


> At 11:45 AM 4/20/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:43:32 EDT
> >From: [e-mail]
> >Subject: MtMan-List: Latitude and LAN
>
> Hi, I'm Jeff,
> I presume that you are looking for historical methods. Well, here goes....
>
> >...an easy way of figuring out latitude using just the sun.
>
> Two methods were used. The first is easy. Using your sextant and parallel
> glasses (reflecting artificial horizon) record the highest altitude of the
> sun at LAN. Apply instrument corrections and divide by two to find the
> height of the sun above the horizon as measured by the sextant. Apply the
> correction for the refraction of the Earth's atmosphere (modified by the
> density altitude) to obtain the true altitude of the sun above the
> horizontal (horizon). Subtract this number from 90 degrees to obtain the
> distance of the sun from the zenith (the point directly overhead). Look up
> the sun's declination for the time of your observation (nearest hour is
> sufficient) and, if it is north, then add it to the zenith distance to
find
> your Latitude. If south, subtract the declination from the zenith distance
> to find it. Your accuracy with this method (using either modern or
> historical instruments) should be less than 1 nautical mile in error.
(This
> accuracy will seem astonishing to mariners, but they have to contend with
> fuzzy horizons, heaving seas, and a place to stand that continually moves
> across the earth's surface.)
>
> The second method is called "latitude by double altitudes" and has been
> forgotten by modern navigators. The method involves taking two
observations
> of the sun separated by a known time interval of about an hour. (A common
> watch of the period is sufficiently accurate for this purpose.) Using a
> bunch of spherical trigonometry one's latitude can be found to about the
> same accuracy as a "noon shot". With a hand calculator (not historic) I
can
> do the calculations in about 20 minutes. Using trig tables and logs
> (historic) I can beat the problem to death in about 1 1/2 hours or
> so....(if the mosquitoes aren't too bad)
>
> >At night of course, we use the North star, and measure the angle from the
> >horizon to get latitude.
>
> Well, not quite of course, of course. You see, the north star is not
really
> at true north, it's off by about 30 minutes of arc, so that results in a
> huge error (up to plus or minus 30 nautical miles!) if you don't go to a
> lot of bother to figure out the time beforehand. Basically the method was
> not used circa 1800. Much easier just to use the sun or other star on a
> meridian passage - then time is irrelevant.
>
> >I ask because Lewis and Clark took LAN shots on the
> >voyage of discovery. Might be fun to see just how close they were on the
> >observations.
>
> Well, I happened to be at the Giant Springs of the Missouri River for a
> re-enactment with some really nice fellows from Great Falls. Seeing as how
> the springs are readily identifiable and ain't moved much in the last 200
> years or so I figured it would be fun to see how a shot taken by me would
> compare to reality & L&C. I was off by about 700 yards in latitude, and
> Meriwether, well he missed it by something like 17 miles... Unfortunately
> there is no really good reason for such a large error other than
> inexperience. L&C weren't the only explorers to get their sums wrong,
Heck,
> Alexander Mackenzie's first expedition to find the Pacific was such a
> surveying dog's breakfast that he returned home to England for some
> remedial math before setting out again (this time successfully) in 1793.
>
> Oh, by the way, I gather that somebody on the list expressed the view that
> L&C's accuracy went to pot once they let their watch run down. This really
> should have had almost no effect as even pocket chronometers like L&C's
> were not reliable enough over many days for longitudinal accuracies
> comparable to todays. The purpose of such watches was to keep track of
> local time (and they were set frequently for this purpose). Greenwich time
> was determined by observation using the lunar distance method. The time
> difference between local time and Greenwich (or Philadelphia/Paris or
> wherever depending upon your nationality) determined your longitude. David
> Thompson's accuracy in longitude was obtained by means of only a common
> watch and a good eye. Of course, the determination of latitude is
> completely time independent.
>
> For a full discussion (with computational examples) of David Thompson's
> complete methods, I refer you to Northwest Journal Vol. IX. Available
> through Angela...
>
> Oh, Angela has just tacked on the entry by John Allen:
> John Allen wrote:
>  >>On Lewis and Clark and LAN:
> The captains were remarkably close on their latitudinal observations,
partly
> because they had two sets of readings for comparison: local noon time or
> "local apparent noon" which they obtained from solar elevation and
> observance of Polaris at night. <<
>
> Polaris really should not have helped much because of the time
sensitivity.
> Latitude by meridian transit or double altitudes or equal altitudes would
> have been much more accurate and only one of these methods (double
> altitude) requires a watch that can keep time for an hour to an accuracy
of
> about +/-9 seconds. - JG
>
>  >>They were less correct in their longitudinal
> observations because they forgot to wind their chronometer and let it run
> down (no quartz batteries in 1804). They couldn't ever get it set
correctly
> again, forcing them to use incredibly complicated measures to determine
> longitude (transit of the moons of Jupiter, etc.).<<
>
> Did they really use Jovian moons? The method is grossly inaccurate and a
> royal pain. Lunar distance is the way to go (and it yields results of
about
> +/- 5 minutes of longitude if you stay in one spot for a couple of days
and
> observe your brains out) - NB: The Lunar distance method does require some
> math skills while the Jovian method is math-free. -JG
>
>  >>Determining latitude from local apparent noon can be done only if you
> have a
> set of tables (Lewis and Clark carried them) showing the sun's elevation
> above the horizon for different lines of latitude on each day of the year.
<<
>
> The required tables (included in an annual book still entitled the
> "Nautical Almanac") simply list (amongst other things) the declination
> north or south of the celestial equator of the sun for each day (usually
> several times for each day) throughout the year. It's not a large amount
of
> data to carry around and the information pretty much repeats every five
> years. It is important to note that to determine your latitude using
> Polaris *to the same accuracy* you not only need a set of tables, you also
> require the exact time- JG.
>
>  >>Of course, you have to know the date of your observation. One of the
> reasons
> why Lewis and Clark were so absolutely certain to make daily journal
entries
> was so they'd always know what day it was. Any of you who have been out in
> the boonies for any length of time know how easy it is to lose track when
> you don't have to punch a time clock.<<
>
> Quite so! Lose track of a day and you will be in deep navigational
> yogurt.... I might add that navigation is the art of staying found. The
> standard tools of the day (as practiced by David Thompson, Peter Fidler,
> Phillip Turnor and others in British North America) were latitude by
> meridian transit of the sun or other star, latitude by double altitudes,
> the occasional latitude by equal altitudes, and longitude by lunar
> distance. The mathematical instrument of choice was the sextant (designed
> specifically for the observing of lunar distances) used in combination
with
> a mercury-filled reflecting artificial horizon (parallel glasses). Watches
> were usually just common watches; true chronometers capable of accurate
> longitudes were still really only reliable in the context of ship-board
> use. So-called "pocket chronometers" like the one used by L&C were just
too
> darned expensive (Thompson never owned one). Latitude by Polaris and
> longitude by Jovian moon were pass'e, and were no longer included in
> standard navigational texts of the period. For examples of the methods
> taught see "Tables Requisite to be used with the Nautical Ephemeris for
> Finding the Latitude & Longitude at Sea." edited by John Garnett (editor
of
> the American Nautical Almanac), New-Jersey, 1806. - JG
>
> Hope this helps....
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:19:35 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains

In a message dated 4/21/1 06:18:53 AM, [e-mail] writes:

<<One conclusion that could be drawn from all of this is that for clearly 1/2
of the mountaineers, -(the portion of these men who were of mixed bloods)--
especially those free trappers with Indian wives---that wearing a breech
clout and leggings was not a huge breech of deportment nor considered
uncivilized and--that yes-a few Euro-Americans can be documented to have
worn a breech clout.>>

I can see this one is going to go on for a long time.   Win Blevins was
adamant about mt men w/breechcloths a quarter of a century ago but I just let
him talk on and eventually he just went on to other things.  In the writing
(mostly omitted here) there is presented such a mix - from Puritan times back
east to 1830s trappers in the Rocky Mountains.  Consider further - what was
unacceptable to Puritans and Quakers in Massachusets and Pennsylvania/New
York regions was not so looked down upon by the Scotch - Irish - Welch Celtic
people who were the REAL frontiers people.  And on the frontier and beyond -
many times what a person has at hand will have to do.  Try stitching up a set
of breeches by hand and then compare with a breech cloth and leggins.   With
this consider the rest of the outfit - the smock that hung down nearly to the
knees, or a shirt of approximatly the same dimensions bound with a belt at
the waist.  I have seen contemporary Mormons - very concerned about propriety
in dress - wearing such an outfit . . . leggins, breechcloth, smock, mocs . .
. and there would be no cause for tittering in a church gathering because of
"what is showing".  No shirt or smock?? that completly changes the picture.
Just ask the new wannabe on day three about the crescent shaped sunburns on
their butts that cause them to want to sleep on their tummies at night.
This is going to take a while . . .
Richard James

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:58:30 -0500
From: John Kramer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent

Somebody asked for a conclusion:

At one time Whelen leantos were common.  Most camps back when (early '70'=
s)=20
were tipis, Whelens, a few Bakers, and fewer still wall tents.  I didn't=20
see the first Marquee at a doin's until the late '70's or early '80's.

Tents at rendezvous are enough of an anomaly without including tents out =
of=20
their historic time, not to mention place.  At public gatherings where=20
folks want a private place to get naked it seems only reasonable that the=
=20
tents should have at least some relevance as to time period.

The documentation just doesn't exist for a miners (pyramid) tent, as it=20
doesn't for a leanpee, or a Whelen, or any one of a few dozen other desig=
ns=20
to have been in use prior to 1840.

If one wants a single center pole design either the pavillion style or a=20
simple conical tent should suffice nicely.  Given the quality of Miller's=
=20
details either could be what some want to see as a pyramid.  Both were at=
=20
least known before 1840 though it is still questionable if they made it t=
o=20
rendezvous; the conical is probably more likely than the pavillion.

A fur company might have had a wall tent or one of the many variations=20
thereof.  At best a trapper might have had a tarp.  An adventurer might=20
have carried a wedge or conical.  Only someone with a native born wife=20
would have a tipi.

In essence the pyramid is no more correct for rendezvous than a Whelen,=20
Forester or Baker tent.  There are a great many styles available dependin=
g=20
on the size needed.  It seems silly to choose one with no pre-1840 histor=
ic=20
precedent.  Any other interpretation, in the face of a lack of relevant=20
evidence, is only wishful thinking.

If you are portraying a 49er miner; the pyramid is perfect.

John...
John T. Kramer, maker of:=A0

Kramer's Best Antique Improver
 >>>It makes wood wonderful<<<
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 >>>As good as old!<<<

<http://www.kramerize.com/>

mail to: <[e-mail]>


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:40:25 -0600
From: "Gene Hickman" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "John Kramer" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]

<<A fur company might have had a wall tent or one of the many variations
thereof.>>

I agree with all that you have said John, and it appears that we may not get
firm documentation past 1841 for the pyramid tent in the Rockies. However,
the documentation of the wall tent doesn't go far enough back either. The
earliest wall tent that can be documented is 1842. "Bill Hamilton wrote that
his trading party of 1842 (led by Old Bill Williams and George Perkins)
carried a wall tent for use as a store when trading in Indian villages" (My
Sixty years on the Plains by W.T. Hamilton, 1960; Some Notes On Tents in the
Western Fur Trade, by Charles Hansom, Jr., 1980; The Sketchbook on The Tents
of the Fur Trade, by Samuel Darby, 1987). All three of these researchers
list the Bill Hamilton trading party as the earliest referenced wall tent.
In the time I have been looking for the pyramid I also have not found the
wall tent. Then there is the diamond fly in the plow design, very popular,
very simple, but looks like it also lacks documentation for the fur trade
era. So far wedges and lean-to's are the most documented and the most common
tents used. The quest goes on.

YMOS
Ghosting Wolf


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:17:18 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: pyramid tents

D.

So much time has gone by since what your talking about was talked about by
me or anyone that I have no idea what your talking about. It's OK to clip
and paste a bit of the previous message so my brain can get a hint. <G> What
were we talking about?

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "D. Miles" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 3:31 AM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: pyramid tents


> But Roger, It really all boils down to that, doesn't it?<G>
> D
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:33:23 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains

Clay,

Thanks for the further clarification of the mystery.

Capt. Lahti'


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Clay J. Landry" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 6:28 AM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains


> This discussion of Euro-Americans adopting native American dress  of the
> breech clout and leggings is very interesting to me
> and in fact the very topic-with a little twist-that  instigated my foray
> into the research and writing arena. In the mid  1980's I had the good
> fortune to encounter two very fine historians and seminar presenters-Bill
> Brown and John Luzader. Both of these
> men had a common theme in their talks on period clothing-i.e. Anglo's or
> whites would not wear breech clout and leggings for several reasons-first
> and foremost is that these men were products of a strict Puritan society
and
> such beliefs would condemn them in the eyes of their peers --should they
> stoop so low as to go "savage" in their dress. Bill and John  both had
> several other reasons in their arguments -which I will leave alone for the
> sake of time and space.
>
> For several reasons I was not totally convinced by their arguments and set
> out to make my own determination- three years of digging, reading and
> researching resulted in a 1991 essay entitled "Going Indian-the use of
> Leggings and breech Clout by the Euro-American trappers of the  Pre-1840
> Rocky Mountain Fur Trade". This paper ended up quite lengthy so was not a
> good prospect for magazine publishing-but Bill Scurlock did recommend that
I
> use the information as the basis for a chapter in his Book of Buckskining
on
> mountain man clothing. With some additional information and help from my
> friend Allen Chronister the chapter was written.
>
> The points that I would like to make on "Going Indian" as a result of
this
> study and subsequent findings are:
> 1. There is a documented precedent for whites wearing breech clout and
> leggings on the Eastern Ohio frontier the late 1700's-this is recorded by
> Doddridge and Cresswell-to the extent that the young men wore this grab to
> church on Sunday-causing the young Ladies in the congregation to be quite
> distracted from the service.
> 2. One of the sergeants of the Lewis and Clark Expedition records that  on
> one hot August day the men wore nothing but a breech clout. Then there is
> the comments of Charles McKenzie that Angela mentioned-here is a guy who
is
> a trader of status in a fur company and he admits that he dressed
"Indian".
> His excuse was that as he walked through camp the dogs barked at him
unless
> he was dressed like the natives!!
> 3.The records of the Astorian enterprise, in 1811, list some 10 to 15  men
> buying "breech flaps  and leggings" before they embarked from their winter
> camp on the Nodaway River.
> 4. The information on the breech clout and leggings being traded for by
the
> men of the Jed Smith trapping brigades has already been mentioned. Whether
> you can prove from the ledger entries that the men actually wore this
> garment combination is of course speculation-however these entries do
prove
> that leggings and breech clouts were carried in the stores of trade goods
in
> the early 1820's.
> 5. However questionable the entire Pattie story and narrative is, he does
> state that he was wearing leggings and a red breech clout.
> 6. Then there is the question of  "did the trappers actually want to look
> and dress Indian?"A quote from Irving's book about Captain Bonneville
gives
> an indication-"You cannot pay a free trapper a greater compliment than to
> persuade him you have mistaken him for an Indian brave; and in truth the
> counterfeit is complete. His hair suffered to attain great length, is
> carefully combed out, and either left to fall carelessly over his
shoulders,
> or plaited neatly and tied up in otter skins of parti-colored ribbons. A
> hunting shirt of ruffled calico of bright dyes, or of ornamented leather,
> falls to his knee: below which, curiously fashioned leggings, ornamented
> with strings, fringes, and a profusion of hawks' bells, reach to a costly
> pair of moccasins.... Such is the account given by Captain Bonneville ".
> 7. Another part of this "wanting to look Indian" question is "just who
were
> these trappers and mountaineers? what were their origins??  We have had
some
> discussion on this list about many being educated men-however there is
> another demographic that needs examing; "Demographics of the men
> participating in the Rocky Mountain fur trade indicate that a large
portion
> of the camp keepers, rivermen and trappers were either French-Canadian or
> French-American. Historians Carter and Spencer project that 60% of the
3000
> men estimated to have participated in the fur trade of the Rockies were of
> this ethnic back-ground.  These same researchers denote that the French
> engage was characterized as having a "greater illiteracy and intermixture
> with Indians" than his American counterpart. These statistics demonstrate
> that a majority of the mountaineers came from an ethnic background,
French,
> which not only had very limited exposure to the Euroamerican societal
> restrictions, but was also a nationality renown for their ability to adapt
> and mix with native American cultures. Warren A. Ferris' journal provides
> support to these statistics when he makes the following statement, "One
half
> of these men (trappers) are Canadians, and Half-breeds, who speak French,
> and some both French and English; the remainder are principally Americans,
> from every part of the United States."
>
> One conclusion that could be drawn from all of this is that for clearly
1/2
> of the mountaineers, -(the portion of these men who were of mixed
bloods)--
> especially those free trappers with Indian wives---that wearing a breech
> clout and leggings was not a huge breech of deportment nor considered
> uncivilized and--that yes-a few Euro-Americans can be documented to have
> worn a breech clout.
>
>
> Clay Landry
> Moorhead MT
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roger Lahti <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 3:34 PM
> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Teasing--a rant (was: Denim)
>
>
> >
> > Padre Rolf,
> >
> > Thanks for taking the time to dig out this information but may I
> > respectfully suggest that there is some question remaining as to what it
> > means?
> >
> > There certainly is no doubt that European trappers, etc. wore mocs and
> > leggings. They are widely pictured in Miller's field sketches being worn
> (as
> > to mocs) with pantaloons and etc. and the legging is a common enough
> garment
> > shown being worn over pantaloons and even more likely, knee britches.
> >
> > The information below shows two kinds of leggings on account but are
they
> > Indian leggings or the common legging worn by the aforementioned trapper
> > over European leg wear?
> >
> > The reference you share about breech clouts demonstrates that they were
> sold
> > in commerce amongst traders and trappers but for what purpose? Were
these
> > buyers using them as personal wear (which is possible) or were they
using
> > them as gifts or goods to be traded. I would imagine cloth breech clouts
> to
> > be a desirable item of clothing by Native Americans.
> >
> > So how well have we really answered the question beyond the few notables
> > that were recently mentioned who were known to dress Indian, which in my
> > mind is something more than just wearing leggings and mocs but probably
> > includes the breech clout, war shirt etc?
> >
> > And a further thought. Were those breech clouts an outer garment as the
> > Indian wore them or were they an undergarment as worn by certain
cultures
> > around the world as late as the Second World War? (Japanese soldiers
used
> > them)
> >
> > Capt. Lahti'
> >
> >
> > Sept. 21, 1826
> >         John Gaiter               Debit
> >         1 pair sheep skin leggins         $1.50
> >         1 Deer Skin                                   $1.25
> >
> > Oct. 24, 1826
> >         Abraham Laplant     Credit
> >         By difference in Breech
> >         Cloths  250 cts-------                   $2.50
> >
> > also a couple of credits for "Mockasons"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------
> > hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:30:46 -0600
From: "Thomas Ballstaedt" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: good handy tarp size

Hey Gentlemen;
I am gearing up for a two day horse trek, and I was wondering what a good
handy tarp size would be.   that could serve as a diamond fly or for
whatever else situation dictates 8x10, 9x12, etc.
thanks Tom


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:47:58 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Tent's

Ole,

Them's some good thoughts too. <G> I agree with your take on this. Pyramid
tents are usually accepted. Just not well authenticated. If someone is
worried about authenticity in that area, research is needed.

Capt. Lahti'

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Ole B. Jensen" <[e-mail]>
To: "hist_text" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 8:22 AM
Subject: MtMan-List: Tent's


> Hello the Camp,
> The Pyramid tent has been excepted without much complaint, but it has yet
to
> be authenticated to the fur trade. The wedge tent has been authenticated
and
> should be used more. I use a large Marque for park and drops but I would
> never use it for a period camp even though it pre-dates the Rocky Mountain
> Fur trade. Too all those that would Authenticate the pyramid " good luck
".
> I would think that the choices we have at the current time are more than
> enough. Just some thoughts!.
> YMOS
> Ole # 718
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 17:00:34 -0400
From: "D. Miles" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Tent's

Why don't you guys say it.. No documentation, keep it out of anything but
flatland "porkyvoo's" Was that hard?  Clear enough Capt??? Of course with
some of the latest crowd here,  if  you can get away with it, do it, seems
to be the rule of the day...
D


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:20:29 -0600
From: "Gretchen Ormond" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: Going Indian versus Puritains

First I would like to thank Clay for an excellent post.  I have been
coming to a similar conclusion to his speculation about the back ground
of the RMFT.  After reading Ferris and Russell, the ôIroquoisö and the
French Canadians seem to be found in large numbers.  We also have more
journalists in the 1830's than before that time, which may indicate that
more Americans were coming in comparison to other ethnic groups.  An
Iroquois would have Eastern tribes, Canadian, Western tribes and
American styles of clothing to chose from.  Who knows which they chose.
In the early 1840's H.J. Warre painted an Iroquois boatman in the
Columbia region in a black trapper hat and the typical cloth shirt but
we can not see anything else.

Which brings me to a question Capt Lahti wrote

> There certainly is no doubt that European trappers, etc. wore mocs and

> leggings. They are widely pictured in Miller's field sketches being
worn
(as
> to mocs) with pantaloons and etc. and the legging is a common enough
garment
> shown being worn over pantaloons and even more likely, knee britches.
>

I have not seen anything in Millers works that led me to believe he was
portraying leggings worn by any trappers with or without britches etc.
To my knowledge neither did Rex Allen Norman.  I know there are written
documentation for leggings but are there pictures that I do not know
about?

Wynn Ormond


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:17:07 -0500
From: John Kramer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: 49er tent

Again I quote from the Tentsmith site: http://www.tentsmiths.com/page9.ht=
m

begin quote............"
WALL TENTS
Wall tents have been in use for much longer than at first thought.=20
Paintings from 1544 show open-faced wall tents standing with pavilions an=
d=20
wedges. A model of a tent dated to the mid-17th century, and profusely=20
decorated with taped seams outside and fully embroidered inside, stands i=
n=20
a  European museum. There are drawings of wall tents being used in milita=
ry=20
settings ca. 1740. A sketch brought back from England shows a wall tent=20
with overhanging eaves dating from 1780. Long's expedition of 1819 was=20
recorded in paintings which show the tent in use and numerous other=20
paintings attest to its continued use during the 19th century. Truly a te=
nt=20
that has never gone out of style, the wall tent appears in all the=20
woodsmanship books of the early part of this century and is still in use=20
for guided hunting trips and Indian winter living in northern Canada. Wal=
l=20
tents have been popular because they are a very efficient use of material=
=20
for the space provided, are easy to transport, quick to set up, and ensur=
e=20
a dry, trouble free, comfortable camp.

"end quote...........

Peter and Deborah don't skimp on their research or the quality of their=20
finished goods.

John...

At 01:40 PM 4/21/01 -0600, you wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Kramer" <[e-mail]>
>To: [e-mail]
>
><<A fur company might have had a wall tent or one of the many variations
>thereof.>>
>
>I agree with all that you have said John, and it appears that we may not=
 get
>firm documentation past 1841 for the pyramid tent in the Rockies. Howeve=
r,
>the documentation of the wall tent doesn't go far enough back either. Th=
e
>earliest wall tent that can be documented is 1842.

John T. Kramer, maker of:=A0

Kramer's Best Antique Improver
 >>>It makes wood wonderful<<<
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 >>>As good as old!<<<

<http://www.kramerize.com/>

mail to: <[e-mail]>


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:29:43 -0600
From: "Gretchen Ormond" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: Rope: Buffalo hair horsehair

Chris Sega wrote:

If you do have instructions, I would appreciate that
very much.  I am trying to find a source fer Buffalo
hair, and when I get that I'll start makin cord and so
on.

ôMaking Horsehair Ropeö
By Diane Gadway & Richard Schneider
Snowden Ventures
PO Box 1273
White Salmon, Washington 98672
ISBN: 0-96-13756-1-2


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:40:51 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: good handy tarp size

Tom,

I got to carry my tarp on my back or in my bateau cause I lost my horse's to
the Crow so here's my suggestion.

I find that a square tarp of whatever size is more versatile for the weight,
and my buddies that keep their horses tethered at night when in Crow country
say weight is important on horse back too. I like 9' X 9' as it can be set
up as a diamond. It can also be set up with two poles coming up from
opposite corners to the middle of one side, and those supported by one pole
in the middle or two poles coming in from the front sides. The latter
configuration (if you have the poles) makes for a much more roomy shelter
for two guys if you don't pitch it too steep. You can also make a wedge tent
with open ends of that size tarp. Not real high for head room but it works.
Have fun on your trip.

Capt. Lahti'


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Ballstaedt" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: MtMan-List: good handy tarp size


> Hey Gentlemen;
> I am gearing up for a two day horse trek, and I was wondering what a good
> handy tarp size would be.   that could serve as a diamond fly or for
> whatever else situation dictates 8x10, 9x12, etc.
> thanks Tom
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:48:05 -0700
From: "Roger Lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Tent's

D.

Taken your medicine? Well do it now. No more excuses about the taste. Wash
it down with some of that stuff in the brown jug. Either that or I'm calling
your case worker! <G>

Geeze D. Settle down. This is a place to search out the truth. We can beat
over the topic till we are sure we are there. If we are there fine, but if
we all know the truth then why have a discussion or a place for it? <G>

Capt. Lahti'


- ----- Original Message -----
From: "D. Miles" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Tent's


> Why don't you guys say it.. No documentation, keep it out of anything but
> flatland "porkyvoo's" Was that hard?  Clear enough Capt??? Of course with
> some of the latest crowd here,  if  you can get away with it, do it, seems
> to be the rule of the day...
> D
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

End of hist_text-digest V1 #790
*******************************

-
 To unsubscribe to hist_text-digest, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe hist_text-digest" in the body of the message.