Patch Knives

[Red Owl]

Kermit- the razor is not really a bad idea. Trying to find a period correct folding knife is all but impossible.
    On the "could have been" approach as being okay as long as period materials are used.  I agree- I think it is unrealistic to insist on every item having documentation.  It is logical to assume that presented with the same problem a similar solution would result.  Still, if any documentation is available- never hurts.  Excessive seeking  of documentation is a good way to go crazy.  Where does it end?  A shirt is supposed to be PC except the fabric weave is off, or the thread a little wrong?  A really nice pocket knife but the blade is from bar stock instead of forged?
    

[Tony Clark]

Knifes that might have been used to cut patches.   The bottom knife blade is 3.5" long.  Check out the horse head on the middle folder.  tim

That folder appears to me to be a grafting or budding knife. They were mostly all folders so they could conveniently be carried when working in the orchard. Regards, TC

[Randy Hedden]

Brian,

I am surprised that you have this viewpoint about trying to be period/historical correct. You are a somewhat long time member of the ALR which is a message board where guys worry about making exact copies of original long rifles right down to how long the ramrod ferrules were, how were they placed, how was a certain rifles forearm or wrist shaped, etc., etc.

Aren't many of the members on this board just as wrapped up in PC/HC when it comes to building rifles as others are about clothing, accoutrements and other gear?

I think so.

Randy Hedden

www.harddogrifles.com

[Randy Hedden]

Kermit- the razor is not really a bad idea. Trying to find a period correct folding knife is all but impossible. 

Kermit,

You just haven't been looking in the right places for a period correct folding knife. There are a couple that were just put up on the Contemporary Makers board or on the CLA sight?? Period correct folding knives are available from a lot of different sources.

Randy Hedden

www.harddogrifles.com

[Dphariss]

No insult intended but this really needs to be said.

There is a difference between being HC and being completely off a cliff over it.
The "no patch knife" idea is too silly to contemplate.
Now I am not saying that little bitty patch knives are all that great since they are limited in use. But a knife on a bag COULD be a “patch knife”. I generally  use precuts but my 54 at least shoots better with cut at the muzzle patches. Then we have the problem of making “precut” patches without shears or a punch. If you have a knife on the pouch and you use it to cut precuts from a strip of cloth is it then a “patch knife”?
The advantage to having a knife on the bag is simple. If you have to grab and run the bag with knife and horn is complete. Grab rifle and bag and you are in pretty good shape even if poorly clothed.
When people get phobic about bullet boards I think of the one on the pouch owned by a man born in 1761 in Kentucky Rifles and Pistols 1750-1850. Yeah he died in 1840 but I suspect that the horn/bag were in service long prior to that. The board?? Who knows. Personally I don’t like or use them, don’t care for the dirt the patches collect.
Think about it. How many descriptions of actually loading rifles do you find from the 18th century? How many descriptions of how the bag and horn were carried. What was in or on the bag??? Very little was written down.

When people get to this level of nit picking I think of the poster on another site who would not accept a haversack pattern *printed* in a *1775* Maryland Gazette as something for the Militia to use, as suitable for Rev War use. Now I ask you is this nonsense? HE did not think they were actually used!!! HE did not THINK... Pompous elitism.
Someone will write some OPINION someplace  and people read it and since its written down it has to be fact. Thus "patch knifes" are taboo in rev-war era.... Define patch knife.

We need to think a little more, or read a little more period writings. When the knife on the pouch as described by Squire Boone is well published how can people who are supposed to be researching the period miss it??  Then surviving bags with sheaths/knives. People interested in the period should have read it and seen that many a rifleman had a knife on his pouch. Now was it a "patch knife"? WHO KNOWS. WHO CARES? He had a knife on his pouch strap. Thus knifes on pouch straps are correct. It might be a 3" or a 6" we can't tell from here. But I bet that someone will get their britches bunched next summer at some colonial "event" because someone has a pouch knife because they read someplace that this is not HC.
The rifle was in use in America for at LEAST a century by 1780. Longer than that is Europe. It is ridiculous.
I can document beyond question that as of Summer 1804 there was a "Bear" (dare I say "TEDDY"?) childs toy at the Falls of the Missouri. So toy bears are fine any time in the 19th century in Montana, are we to assume that they were unknown 25 years previous? So toy bears for native American babies are "out" in 1790 since nobody wrote it down?
Yes things need to be HC and in some cases, like perhaps fashions or hairdos, the percussion cap etc it might be datable to a few years. Other stuff???
Dan

[smokinbuck]

Kermit,
I have a number of "old" straight razors and some of them have etchings that I didn't want to cover up or destroy. I took  a couple and removed the handles and made small fixed blade knives out of them for "patch" cutting. I used bamboo for the handles and then wrapped them in sinew. Made pretty durable old looking knives. Patch knives, ?
Mark

[Tony Clark]

I don't know, it's seems to me part of the problem with this discussion is just trying to call a particular knife a "patch knife". Going back to the first question in this post I would say that the answer might be that if you want to carry a small, medium or large knife, well just go for it. That would for sure be period correct, right? If you wanted to use your small knife to cut a patch, well go for it. Just don't say that its your knife for "cutting patches", because more than likely its sole use wouldn't be for that, it would be for anything you needed a small knife for like gutting a deer or cutting your toenails. Why do you have to give the knife a label? Maybe my logic is goofy, but oh well. Regards, TC

[LRB]

 Tony, I think your logic is pretty much right on. I am convinced that pre-cut patches were the norm, but I would also think that on occassion a patch might be cut at the muzzle, but I would think it would be cut with the easiest knife to get at, which would likely be the belt knife, or one attached on the bag. As far as working a deer, I can work one easily with my nine inch bladed belt knife. Much depends on the weight and shape of the knife. Most early blades were thinner than what many carry today, and most had a slightly dropped point forming a spear type point that will get into tight areas pretty well.

[T.C.Albert]

I once saw an old bag that had several pre-cut patches hanging in a stack, threaded through the centers on a piece of knotted cord. The other end of the cord was tied to the strap ....you could pull off a pre cut patch from the stack as needed by yanking it over the knot on the dangling end of the cord....pretty handy and a neat idea...I wish I could remember for certain if the pouch also had a knife attached...but I cant.

Its also prety common to find a stray old pre cut patch in an old bag....but its not common to find an actual
chisel type patch cutter anywhere, especially not in a bag...I dont think you even see such cutters in fancy cased gun sets, so Ive always wondered where the pre-cut patches were coming from since they were definately out there too.

All I know for sure is that most bags I see do have some type of sheath attached for a knife...and the knife is generally long gone...and as Madison Grant states, quite a few of the sheaths seem to be spuriously attached and not necessairly put there by the bags initial maker, maybe indicating that it was too hard to guess what kind of knife the final user was likely to want on the bag, even way back in the day???
TCA   

[Mike R]

The problem is documentation. Just because we as 21st cent types think that something "could" or "should" have been used in the 18th cent does not mean it was [and even if considered then, does not mean it was common or universal]. The problem with old hunting bags as "proof" is that the vast majority of them are 19th and ealry 20th cent bags--I know of NO documented 18th cent hunting bags.  Most of these extent bags that do contain sheaths [-and not all do] have "hunting" knives attached--which can be used to cut patches or field dress game.  What is a patch knife? Any reasonably thin sharp edge blade will do.  I know of NO accounts of "patch knives" being carried or used in the 18th cent. Precut patches seem to have been the norm--I have read at least one period account of scissors being used to cut patches prior to an expected battle.  I know of at least one period account of a knife being attached to the bag--but it was clearly a hunting knife. Reenactors who are serious about their hobby require documentation for use--not just "what if" scenarios.  Modern shooters are free to use whatever devices and methods they choose [patch knives, ball starters, bullet blocks, modern chemical lubes, etc]....

[T.C.Albert]

Mike...the original question as posed was pretty general...
were patch knives historically used...I can only answer that in my opinion that yes they were judging from the old bags I have seen...and true, you cant prove, nor would I ever say they are 18th century ( though, on the other side of the coin in alot of cases no one can prove they are not either, although I recognize that logic in no way assumes or constitutes proof of date or origins, only the lack of it)

...but at some point along the way lots of bags started sporting small knives attached to the strap for some sort of use, perhaps I have assumed incorrectly that they were "patch" knives....
TCA

[Mike R]

Yes, the original question was too generally phrased--"historically correct?" without adding which era is of interest. They are historically correct for the early buckskinner period for sure.  They seem to have been in use by those surviving shooters of the late 19th cent who taught the early 20th cent boys how to do it.  I have seen one bag supposedly dated to at least the 1840s which [currently] has a knife sheath attached to the strap; however the current knife in it obviously does not belong in that sheath and is not a "patch knife" in the the generally thought of way [it is a pointy little dagger].  I have seen numerous bags in collections that likley date from the 19th cent that have various knives attached either sheathed on a strap or on the bag itself--these knives are typically small bowie style hunting knives or butcher knives.  I have seen a couple of knives called rifle knives or such that were interpreted to be late 18th or early 19th cent. I have searched for descriptions of early loading proceedures and have not found cutting at the muzzle mentioned--even in detailed accounts.  It seems obvious to us, trained to do so, that cutting at the muzzle must have been done at some time--but was a special "patch knife" carried for that or just the hunting knife/butcher knife?  Yes, the question must be answered with caveats--what period? what is your interest--shooting or reenacting a specific time? how certain [how much documentation] do you need to be? etc....I would have no problem showing up at a 1920s overthelog shoot or turkey shoot with a bag knife attached [I have one attached to my hunting bag--a hunting knife size].  I feel that thye are not enough documented for my 18th cent personas....

[Dphariss]

Yes, the original question was too generally phrased--"historically correct?" without adding which era is of interest. They are historically correct for the early buckskinner period for sure.  They seem to have been in use by those surviving shooters of the late 19th cent who taught the early 20th cent boys how to do it.  I have seen one bag supposedly dated to at least the 1840s which [currently] has a knife sheath attached to the strap; however the current knife in it obviously does not belong in that sheath and is not a "patch knife" in the the generally thought of way [it is a pointy little dagger].  I have seen numerous bags in collections that likley date from the 19th cent that have various knives attached either sheathed on a strap or on the bag itself--these knives are typically small bowie style hunting knives or butcher knives.  I have seen a couple of knives called rifle knives or such that were interpreted to be late 18th or early 19th cent. I have searched for descriptions of early loading proceedures and have not found cutting at the muzzle mentioned--even in detailed accounts.  It seems obvious to us, trained to do so, that cutting at the muzzle must have been done at some time--but was a special "patch knife" carried for that or just the hunting knife/butcher knife?  Yes, the question must be answered with caveats--what period? what is your interest--shooting or reenacting a specific time? how certain [how much documentation] do you need to be? etc....I would have no problem showing up at a 1920s overthelog shoot or turkey shoot with a bag knife attached [I have one attached to my hunting bag--a hunting knife size].  I feel that thye are not enough documented for my 18th cent personas....

Let me get this straight. Squire Boone with a knife on his pouch strap is not good enough??
What is??? How do you discount this account?
This is what I was trying to point out with the Maryland Gazette haversack thing. Saying that something MENTIONED in PERIOD accounts is not good enough is simply beyond my comprehension. It goes back to people "learning" something, correct or incorrect and sticking with it no matter what comes to light. Looking at old pouches is fine, valuable knowledge is gained. But its nearly impossible to find a pouch in good shape that was not used into the 19th Century. There were likely 100,000 rifles and pouches in America between 1760 to 1790, How many surviving rifles do we have? The number of pouches is even less. So trying to make iron clad pronouncements concerning anything is tough.

This reminds me of the friend who did a college paper on the Wolf Reintroduction in the Mountain West and was given an A- because he did not give a wolf's perspective...
A bag knife is certainly optional. I only have one bag with one but I always have one in my pocket and/or on my belt. But if Squire Boone mentions one I cannot possibly see how it cannot be "HC"and its certainly good enough for me.
People seem to get a lot of giggles over "buckskinner" outfits from the 60s and 70s. And yes they generally stink. But they laid the ground work for what most of you folks are doing now so cut them some slack.
Do you have citations for the "detailed accounts" of loading processes? Is it 2-3 acounts or 10? Lets see out of a 100000 what is the percentage? Are they REALLY from the time or are they rewrites. Are they by serious riflmen, small percentage anytime, or something from someone who only know "powder first then ball".

Dan