Lads: I am in a quandry here. I wanted to make a better closure for my shooting bag..it had none other than the loose flap. So, I grabbed a hunk of Elk antler (given by a friend) and sawed off a thin section. I figured it would make a good "toggle button". Sewed it on, added the fixed whang to wrap around it (attached to the bag body) and it works great. Easy to access, holds it firmly closed, and looks "good" to me.

Then I recalled some disparaging comment that such buttons were "not correct". Arrrg....

However, to perhaps fly in the face of "history" as we use it, I do have good early example for this. In our family we preserve a leather "document case" dating from about 1810 or earlier. It is a simple pouch the size of a document, sort of like an enclosed file folder. It has a flap that can be secured by means of a hand made bone button and a stout length of cord. The button is on the flap, the cord is attached to the body of the pouch. In use the cord is wrapped two or three turns around the button thread. It is a similar setup to that I have seen on even earlier "portfolios" for artist's to use.

So, by making my own "button" of horn, and adding a fixed whang to the body of the bag, have I committed a "period incorrect sin"?

I would hate to get dinged at a Rondy by some Dog Soldier stating it is "not correct". Oh, I portray a late-period long hunter from about 1790 or so.

Whatcha think about this?

Col Boone

Hey Boone, I think there have been antler buttons made since we learned how to where clothes! I disagree completely that horn buttons are not period correct. Maybe there wasn't a big call for them, and maybe they weren't preferred. But even at a juried event, those folks would have to show me absolute, written, proof that they did not use antler buttons! I have not seen anything written that says that anywhere. Therer just isn't a lot of talk about them at all

Sawbones - That is comforting. So, instead of "were used" you say "prove they weren't"..I like that "no flinch" attitude. If I play "informed conjecture" with myself I see that I am deep in Kantuk-e in 1790, my shooting bag keeps flopping open, what to do? I grab a convenient Wakipti horn, use the bow saw (had one for cabin building, took it in on my pack horse) and cut off a thin round of horn. Used my awl to drill a couple of holes, sinew to sew it to the bag flap and tied a whang to a small hole in the bag (made with the same awl) and off I went. I got the idea from a lawyers document case I once saw as a kid.

"Prove to me that I would not have done that" seems like a decent response - though the Old Col might be thought of as a bit "crusty" to take that attitude.

But, as you so aptly say, "never flinch".

Col Boone

IF and only IF something wasnt wide spread does that in and of itself make it NOT P.C.?????? There are accounts of events that werent the norm but they are recorded as FACT,Donner Party ring a bell.I go with PROVE it didnt,then come prove it to me then I might care to try and prove it otherwise.

Crow who Walks - Agree. In my case I have a pretty good handle on antique tools and their use, a growing idea of the material culture of the Colonial Frontier, and a lot of hands on experience building with traditional tools. So, when I came upon this notion I simply "played a scenario" in my mind - the one I wrote down in my last post. That involves elements (the old portfolio my family has, photos of other similar items, tools of the period, and the fertile mind of a creative person) all of which are "PC" in every regard.

So, I think the "never flinch" that Sawbones chants goes here too - "prove it is NOT period correct and I will cut off the horn button, until then leave me alone!".

How does that sound?

Col Boone

button MAY have been made from antler, but it was probably cut from the side of the antler as bone buttons were....and why wouldn't you're woods-savvy hunter just carve himself a button out of wood?....don't try to justify what wasn't-search for what was...Mitch

Mitch - Ok, so you disagree. My read is that what I did is entirely plausible, uses materials that would have been available in a very rugged and primitive setting and "made it work". I see little wrong with that. Just because somebody "probably cut it from the side of the antler" does not mean that is the ONLY way....does it? And, why carve a button of wood when a single slice off the antler does as well, or maybe better. The thing here is that I am a THINKING
person and thought up a viable solution to my problem that involved items and skills I logically would have had. Again, what is wrong with that? Why does somebody ELSE have to think it up for me? How about I THINK FOR MYSELF....?
As long as I restrict my approach to what we KNOW was available at the time, it seems I am being as PC as a fella in 1790 was then.

Perhaps an novel suggestion, but.....

Col Boone

FAR to many "EXPERTS" have all the ANSWERS to all the questions,Wake up and smell what your stepping in!!!!!!!!!!I would be willing to go on record," The person in the settling of this country,no matter what the period,did what was necessary to get the job done and stay alive,PERIOD.

no offense intended, but you cannot use 21st century mindset/thinking in trying to determine what "they" would have done...and you are all free to choose your own path, I don't really care if anyone follows mine....you choose to "logically justify"...I prefer solid documentation...and you still didn't say why you wouldn't just carve a wooden toggle/button...and I've yet to see a antler chunk on any existing "fur trade" equipment..lots of other types of buttons, but no antler...no reason to get upset because my answer to your question didn't fit your wanted answer..so it goes

"I" didnt see it!!!!!!!!! so it isnt so!!!!!Interesting,narrow but, interesting.I never see the Grand Canyon,a volcano or Angel Falls or a buffalo are they real???????????????????????????????
Mindset/thinking!!! Hey I have an Idea wild as it might sound,let's throw logic in to the mix.
I know why you didnt carve a wooden toggle/button,CAUSE YOU DIDNT,JUST CAUSE,JUST YOU DIDNT.
Col Boone keep at it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not upset over your answer,just wondering about the LOGIC of it.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Walking Crow,

You all might give some thought to calling the "Mountain Man Museum" in Pinedale, WY. I was just there and swear I saw some outfits(original) with antler buttons. Just a thought!!

"Aim small, miss small"

I have seen one antler button that has possible 18th century provinance.Wallace Gusler owns what many believe to be a 18th century hunting pouch.The closure on the bag has a homemade style cufflink for a flap button.The out side button is metal but the inside button is a waffer thin antler button and it looks like a cross section of a antler tine.That antler nutton is under a leather patch so it wouldnt catch on stuff in the bag or scratch your hand and it appears from indentations in the leather to be as old as the bag.T.C Albert has looked at thid same pouch at the 2008 CLA show,maybe he remembers it too.

quote:

Originally posted by Mitch:
no offense intended, but you cannot use 21st century mindset/thinking in trying to determine what "they" would have done...and you are all free to choose your own path, I don't really care if anyone follows mine....you choose to "logically justify"...I prefer solid documentation...and you still didn't say why you wouldn't just carve a wooden toggle/button...and I've yet to see a antler chunk on any existing "fur trade" equipment..lots of other types of buttons, but no antler...no reason to get upset because my answer to your question didn't fit your wanted answer..so it goes

Mitch summed it up and nailed it all quite nicely. For something to be 'authentic' or not we have to define when/where/who/etc. My personal take is that a mountain man probably would not have a saw handy to cut a slice of antler into a button. But, who is to say he didn't acquire one through trade?

thanks for your answer Rifleman1776...Walking Crow-once again, your rambling answer really makes no sense...

Lads:

Whew, what a firestorm this has become! I sure had no intent to start that.

To end my involvement here - First, some have used the term "mountain man" - well, as of 1790 that does not really apply. Second - I agree that in this era (1790) and location (Kanta-ke)
"staying alive" was the key motive, never mind exactly how. Third - why a given longhunter would slice off a hunk of antler rather than carve a wood button could have many answers, all logical.

As for the saw part - The "bow saw" (a blade fixed within a wood frame which is tensioned with a draw cord. Easily carried as just the blade, with the "bow" portion fashioned from material found in the woods) was a common tool for all carpenters, easily carried, and likely
not that rare. The adz also was a common tool, as was the felling axe and its' partner, the hewing axe. This I do know from many documented sources.

So, how about we let this one rest and move on to other discussions that may actually lead somewhere?

Col Boone

Did the Mountain Men,MN,go to a Rondy!!!! Wonder what was there that was traded for????????Wondering just wondering.They trader with NA,nomadic travelers/traders and other MN,lived within tribes,alike,wonder if maybe they traded for buttons.Accounts Ive read indicate you could buy/trade anything from a jug of cheap whisky,a mule, to a companion for the night.Buttons,never did read about buttons though!!!!!

Crow who walks - The thing if it is, my date of 1790 is at least 30 years prior to the "mountain man" era. We are talking of the Kanta-ke frontier - few traders, longhunters seeking hides and ginseng, and only a trip back over the mountains as a supply chain. Grandpa Daniel lived nearly by himself ("no horse, not even a dog") while awaiting resupply when Squire returned.

So, I suspect it was "make do with whatever you can cobble together" most of the time. Thus, only upon one's return to the settlements would any of the common goods be available. Only the most essential was transported into the area.

So, earlier period may well alter the picture a good deal.

Col Boone

Mike...yep, I did see the pouch and listened to Wallace explain a bit about it, and do remember it...I did not really handle it though....what I think I remember is that the reinforcement button was actually sewn over with a small swatch of leather, but I cant for the life of me recall personally inspecting its composition...I blame it on too many whacks to the head...I do recall (I think..)that the whole pouch was made of recycled "Russian" leather speculated to have come from some fine apholstery perhaps...and that the bag was so small and non descript that it wouldnt be viewed well in light of what we expect to see in a bag today. Fortunately Wallace curated it and has kept its provenance...


TCA

TC Albert - I was hoping you would drop in on this discussion. The specific pouch aside, what is your feeling about the appropriateness of such a button (perhaps best called a "toggle") on a shooting bag from the frontier of Kanta-ke in 1790? That is the key issue here. My persona is a late period longhunter of 1790 on the Colonial Frontier just after the AWI....and that is the context from which the bag would come. My vision is that the hunter used material he had at hand (an antler), cut off a thin chunk, and used it to form the "toggle" attached to the flap of the bag and around which a whang, attached to the body, is wrapped to secure the flap. Does this make "PC" sense to you?

Col Boone

Hi Boone...I will try to help if I can...
First, Im a bit confused by the toggle...is it a wafer round slice like a button, or a tip of antler with attachment holes bored into the side?

Either way...this is indeed a can of worms...and not a new one by any means...I had heard the antler button arguement many years ago, which tells me that its been debated by many for a long time, and as far as I know, Ive heard no definative answer...

Commercially, making uniform buttons was best suited to other materials like shell, bone, metals and even fabric covered blanks....but that was commercially made stuff...primative one off stuff is another matter, and how can I judge what was or wasnt likely to be tried?

I think the pithy core and lac of uniformed shape and size of common antler precluded it from being much use for large scale button making, so perhaps it was never used commercially in th=at reguard...and that could have given rise to the "never used antler button" theory...(notice, the "I think" and "perhaps"....I am only speculating and say up front I do not know for certain...)

But...I cant recall any one ever definatively answering this argument with the hard proof of provenanced examples to the contrary (unless Wallace's pouch lays it to rest, but even there a reinforcement isnt technically a button perhaps, as a devils advocate might be inclined to add?) ...so its easy to see where the controversy of the two camps could arise...

So here goes with my own personal opinion all gloves off...I think, by 1790 Kentucky wasnt quite as wild as we may believe...by then even western Ky. was being settled rapidly and war bounty lands were being snatched up and settled by plantation style farms...in fact it may be hard to document many indian attacks at that late date in Ky....A guy was likely to get mugged along the popular traces or check into a roach motel where he didnt check out, but the frontier was passing by quickly...(someone will blast me on these dates Im sure, but im shoting from the cuff here and not looking it up..)

I have read that in seven years or less most regions became settled once settlement began in that region and the ball was rolling...and then the goal was to build a better home, a bgger farm and a better town...Im pretty sure by 1795 or so the forts and stations even in western Ky. were being abandoned as farmers felt plenty safe to live in the country...and these were well heeled farmers some of them...used to a settled way of life in Pennsylvania, Virginia etc...I think of it sort of like instant gentrification...


these folks had pouches...and they were based on patterns they were familiar with from the east, if not caried with them from the east...and I would expect a man making a living by his rifle to have the finest equipment available, not very much improvised and field created trappings...and to be so adept at using his gear that field imrovisions wouldnt be needed....repairs yes...but radical improvisions???? If his habit was to carry a pouch that he wanted to stay closed, when he bought, consigned or made it before he went on the long hunt, he had a buckle or button incorporated...Ive seen many examples of both...but its a very small percentage of closures I see on any old bags, they generally seem to rely on the horn to keep them closed...or perhaps they often rode high enough that pressing the arm against it in time of need held them closed.

If I faced your delima of what closure to use, and was able to, I would use the finest closure you could...maybe even a super fine silver one of the period as fancy as I could get it, even a hunter would like to show a bit of panache on his gear to prove that he was successful and not on the down and outs, especially if he were a typical scotch/irish one where fine silver buttons were often worn as acumulated wealth by highlanders in the old country, if you are going to take liberties, take em big....

but to answer the question "was an antler toggle ever definately used on a bag"...I cant say yes, nor can I prove yes...but then nor can I prove definatively no either cause its a simple fix anybody would think of using i time of need with those materials at hand...but by strict definition... if modern rules of jury passable PC demand serious documentation, I dont know what you can do?

I realize this isnt an answer, but I dont know what else to say...and seriously hope my comments dont fuel any fires one way or the other...
TCA

This message has been edited. Last edited by: T.Albert,