Do you prefer horn attached to pouch or hung separately?

[Artificer]

Folks, I wasn't sure whether to put this in the shooting section or accoutrement's section.  But since it has to do somewhat with shooting, I put it here.

It doesn't seem to make much difference between the two suspension systems when one is casually loading on a target firing line.

I have no idea how common it was to have the powder horn slung by a separate suspension strap in the 18th century.  The lack of enough original shot pouches and horns that we can clearly date to the 18th century makes it pure speculation.  From the very sparse information I've been able to gather it seems to have been more common around the F & I War and especially with quilled, beaded or similarly decorated suspension straps.  Perhaps I'm completely wrong here, but was it more likely done by Native Americans than Colonists - or is that only because the decorated suspension straps have lasted longer because they were fancy?  I know traders and others could have traded for such suspension straps or even taken them off dead enemies.  I've also wondered if some of the highly decorated ones that remain do so because they were only for "fancy dress" and not for common usage - thus better ensuring their survival.

The reason I ask is because in actual shooting, I've used horns slung on the pouch and on a separate strap.  The ones slung on a separate strap are easier to move and put where you need the horn.  Maybe I'm wrong, but it would seem you could load faster with a separate slung horn.  It would seem it would allow loading directly from the horn better rather than dragging the pouch in front of you when you are trying to load, especially if you are loading on the run?  I'm reminded of the scene from "The Last of the Mohicans" where Daniel D. Lewis is running up the side of the mountain to rescue his lady and pulls the stopper from the horn with his teeth while running with the rifle in his left hand.  Then he is shown pouring powder into the muzzle (they didn't show him priming the pan) and I think sticking the horn back towards his mouth to get the stopper back in the horn.  That would have been more difficult to do with the horn attached to the pouch and having the pouch swinging around the body. 

I've also read accounts and I'm not sure if it was F & I War, but perhaps more likely Rev War or even possibly War of 1812 where riflemen (and perhaps militia) would "turn in their horns" to have them filled with powder.  This seems to suggest they either untied them from their pouches or the horns were slung on separate straps - otherwise the men who gathered the horns to have them filled would have wound up with a lot of shot pouches in their hands if the horns were attached with sewn straps.

This sort of leads to another question or something I've pondered over the years and that is how low the pouch was slung on the body.  I know I read somewhere from an original source that they wanted the pouch to be high enough for the elbow to lock it against the body when running.  I can see that on horseback, maybe, but on foot it seems that would have the pouch slung too high and cause you to do some rather contorted movement of your arm to get something out of the bag quickly with the hand on the pouch side of your body.  I wouldn't want to try to pull something out of a pouch on the run when it is slung too high. 

Riflemen's frocks of the 18th and early 19th century often or did not usually have button closures like modern coats.  They used the waist belt to keep the frock closed and hang knife, hawk, maybe a pistol and other things.  I don't have any original documentation to support this, but it seems to me that people on foot would have been wise to wrap that belt around their powder horn straps to keep the pouches from bouncing around as much and losing things.  I've seen a lot of folks lose things out of their pouch while on the run at primitive matches when they didn't have the belt around the pouch straps and/or there was not a closure on the pouch.  I've lost things out of pouch on the run that way, myself, so that's why I won't have a pouch without a closure and having the waist belt wrapped around the suspension straps a little above the bag, it doesn't allow the pouch to bounce around as much when the flap is open - as they would have left the flap open in combat - I think. 

Now there is one good reason for securing the horn to the shot pouch.  In case of emergency, you only have to grab the shot pouch and your powder horn is automatically attached.  You don't have to worry about fumbling with two separate suspension systems and getting them on in the proper order.  If you are just hunting in an area where there are no hostiles who would be drawn to the sound of a gun shot, it wouldn't matter as much if the horn was attached to the pouch and that's why I think it was much more common to attach the horn to the pouch in the 19th century - at least in the examples of original pouches and horns we have still extant.  You also don't have the expense of having another suspension strap and leather was a lot more expensive back then than it is today.  Even a woven suspension strap would have cost more than just attaching the horn with a couple of short pieces of leather strap or hand cut leather lace. 

Now for our shooting and hunting today, it would seem to make little or no difference to have a separate suspension strap for the horn.  I also realize the beauty of muzzleloading is that you can do the same thing many ways and still remain "period correct."   I have more of a "combat mindset" than some folks as I've had to think about such things for over a quarter of a century on active duty and it's the little things that can get you killed in combat.  I would think that Long Hunters, people out on the Frontier and Riflemen who served in warfare would have thought more about these things though as their life would often have more depended on it. 

I put this post up for discussion and if anyone disagrees a little or a lot, that's fine.  A major way to test the accuracy of a theory is to see how well it would stand up to challenges.  Also, if anyone has any historic evidence one way or another, I would be exceeding grateful to have it brought up.  That's the beauty of a forum like this as with more people, we get a larger amount of experience and knowledge. 

[Daryl]

I prefer separate horn and bag.  My wife's bag has her little horn attached and it's OK as she's got but one rifle (poor girl).

 I've several horns, some with 3F, some with 2F and since I'm just a bit short on different bags for individual rifles, I need to have the horns separate when changing rifles and using the same bag.
As to grabbing a pouch and having the horn when attached, this would save time- but I've generally got an extra few seconds to spare so no need there.  There are times I fling the horn around my back when digging into the bottom of the bag and an attached horn would be in the way.

Your note in  the horn and bag possision is a good one. I prefer them low enough I don't have to contort to dig into the bag. As I wear the bag on my right side & that's the injured shoulder (should stop shooting that 14 bore ) cranking my elbow up is painful at times, so low it is.  The horn rests just down from the top of the flap and is easily held there against the flap when ducking underneath windfalls, walking into a tipi, etc.

[BrownBear]

I've got both, but for hunting in our brush pile I don't really like either one.  Just more straps to get hung up or snarled together.  For hunts I have a little day horn that I drop into a plain bare shooting bag.  It holds about 1000 grains of powder, and if that aint enough, I'm outa luck anyway.   Just for an excuse to make more bags and horns though, I've made range bags with the horn attached to the straps (horn hanging right at the top of the bag) for each of my rifles.  No confusion about powder in the horns and no chance to leave tools or components at home.

As for bag height, I make them all adjustable, but am just about to simplify my life and quit doing that.  They all get adjusted so the top of the bag is belt high, which puts them just right so I can reach the bottom of the bag with no probs.   I like that height because I can just squeeze my elbow against my body to secure it when needed, no matter which hand I happen to be carrying my rifle in at the moment.  

I'm all about convenience and remembering not to forget.

[hanshi]

When I use my horn it is hung on a separate strap around the neck.  It is a day horn and small enough to go into a standard size bag.  The small bag I'm making now won't hold even this, of course.  The horn strap positions the horn about the top of the bag and is not usually a problem.  I really don't often carry a horn when hunting; I normally carry pre-measured charges for that.  I must say that I've never felt completely at ease with an exposed horn filled with a fifth of a pound of powder only inches away from a flashing flintlock.

[Kermit]

I've moved/am moving away from the "whole season" horns that are large, heavy, and just plain hold way more powder than I need. I've gone to smaller horns with everything. Small caliber gets a "bag horn" hereafter.

As to suspension, I've got horns hung separetly now. I used to hang them from the bag strap, and found it inconvenient at best, since they were not removable from the bag. Lately I've been looking at bag-suspended horns that have either buckles or buttons to make 'em "separatable" from the bag. I had come to the conclusion that bag-suspended horns were on way too short straps limiting how high I could lift the horn. Seemed like separate straps made more sense than just hanging 'em from higher up.

I like my bags to ride high. Low down they swing and bang around and get hung up on branches and brush. I've seen bags that I swear are so low that the owner almost has to bend over to reach what's in the bottom. Bags have grown smaller through the years too. No more "possibles" bags holding implements for every conceivable eventuality. That's what haversacks are for.

I'd be interested to hear from folks who carry the horn opposite the bag. How's that work for you? I've never tried it.

Just my way of doing things. Everyone evolves a system that works for them.

[Leatherbelly]

Kermy!
  I'm one! I am right handed but my horn is lefty.  Bag on right side, horn on left. I find it easier to pore with my left hand into my measure in my right hand, grasp my rifle with left hand,which is propped inside of my right forearm and bicep. Sounds more complicated then it really is. Once you pour the charge, your right hand is free to retrieve patch and ball from your right side carry pouch. The horn is just above belt level on left, the top of the bag is at belt level on right. Try it. Works great for me.

[Nate McKenzie]

I like a bag just high enough to clamp under my elbow and the horn on the opposite side. That's the way I learned and I'm too darned old and stubborn to change. More important, I like a stiff horn strap of bridle leather so it will slide around my shoulder when I bring it forward to pour into the measure.

[James Rogers]

Beginning to like a belt pouch these days. 

[Dphariss]

There are so many factors.
I like the horn on the pouch.
I used to ride horse now and then and having a buckle on the strap to get it higher helps a lot for this.
Having a separate horn would be a PITA for me.
Having it on the opposite side even worse.
But its going to depend on what you have learned and where you hunt etc etc. I have been using a horn on the pouch since the 60s and its the easiest way for me by now.

I do have a small horn and pouch for hunting and need to make maybe two full size sets.

Dan

[Kevin G]

I prefer my horn attached to the pouch and my pouch is carried fairly high although I do have a buckle on the pouch strap so it can be adjusted a little for extra layers, etc.

[Mike R]

I prefer separate horn and pouch straps, and being sort of a collector, I have different horns and pouches for each different caliber rifle I have.   I have searched a little for evidence of when attaching horn to bag/strap started.  My impression is that it is mostly a 19th cent thing, and alot of late 19th-early 20th cent bags have horns attached. Of course 18th cent examples are rare as hens teeth.  I also started out years ago carrying the horn on my left and bag on my right side--mainly because the horn seemed to be in the way of both bag access and rifle carry when hunting, when on the right with the bag. In recent years I was influenced by Mark Baker and others writings and switched to carrying both horn and bag on my right [right-handed]. In 18th cent period art I have seen it both ways [same side, opposite side].  The of the earliest drawings I have seen, ca. 1718, shows coureurs de bois wearing horns on straps and slit pouches through their sashes instead of shoulder bags--I have also used this method and like it.  I also have a 'standard' belt pouch that I prefer for use in timed target work and in hunting.

[Roger Fisher]

I use a seperate horn and then a belt bag with heavy bearhide flap and the bag has a 'finger access' pocket on inner side of said bag for easy access to a ball/balls.
I don't hanker much of a strap hanging around my shoulder when I'm trying to shoot. 

Of course, you get to a certain age that you do not do much running anymore! ::)Although fear makes a runner out of most folks.  A jealous husband can cause a similar reaction (at least when I'm scampering downhill)

[Dphariss]

Considering how long powder horns were used I find it hard to believe that it was circa 1800 before someone found it was possible to hang the horn from the same strap as the pouch.
Everyone finds their own way of doing things.
A belt pouch is a good idea I think, but for someone horse back this would be a major pain IMO since for comfort it has to be pretty high and tight in my experience.
What else do you carry? Will having the horn and pouch on separate sides interfere?
If a knife is carried on the off side from the pouch then the offside horn will get in the way and likely thump on the knife/pistol/belt axe that might be on that side.
There are many questions that I think a lot of folks miss. If I go out for a deer/antelope hunt I will often cover 4-5 miles in the course of the day and a lot of this is just stepping out to get to where I can check out a spot where I can get within range. So something that is uncomfortable when walking, that "thumps" every step etc is found pretty quickly.


Dan

[BrownBear]

Those are important fine-tuning points Dan.  Another not on your list is raingear or other layers outside your clothes.  As much as I love belt pouches and have made several, you can't get to them under your raingear or heavy outer layers.  Same for knives on belts.  That's why I use shoulder bags and why my sheath knife is in the bag.  In my brush experience, knives mounted on the carry strap tend to hang up.

One point for adjusting length of the shoulder strap carefully- As much as I value having it high enough to secure with a press of my elbow, if it gets too high it interferes with the best solution I've found for minimizing slap while making tracks and for passage through brush or rough terrain when both hands are needed:  Shift the bag around so it is riding in the small of your back rather than hanging at your side.

I've got a lot of saddle time, but got out of the horse business before getting into muzzleloaders.  Intuitively my impulse would be to take the bag off altogether, knot the strap, and hang it from the saddle horn.  Heck I might even build in a short "auxiliary" strap between the attachment points for the main strap, specifically for hanging the bag.   Idle speculation, but in the kind of brush I'm in on the rare occasions I ride these days, I don't think I'd want my head through a strap.  It looks like a great formula for getting yourself ripped off a horse.

[G-Man]

I have used bag/ horn combos set up both ways for different guns - some attached together, some on separate straps.  Overall, I prefer having a medium sized horn, attached to the bag straps.  Just my preference, and I would suspect that in the 1700s it probably was a matter of preference as well, especially once you were into the period of longrifles and hunting pouches as we think of them today, i.e. latter part of the 18th century.

I find that horns on separate straps tend to want to work their way around out of place when moving through the woods, leaning, stooping over, etc. and tend to swing out in front of me and hit on things.  And if you are carrying a canteen, haversack etc. a separate horn strap is one more thing to arrange and wear around your neck that is unnecessary.  I have never found a horn attached to the pouch to be cumbersome or get in the way when loading, if you put a little thought into where to attach the horn straps and how long to make them.  I could see where a very large horn, 15 inches or bigger, might tend to get in the way a bit more, so perhaps there is one reason for carrying it on a separate strap.

This is just my opinion, but I think there is overgeneralization about the way things were done in the 1700s.  I know Madison Grant's book states that most 18th century horns appear to have been carried on separate straps, but I am unclear how that conclusion was reached since to my knowledge, there are no documented 18th century pouches with the original strap intact, are there? Not saying it is not true, I am just not sure there is much evidence to base it on.  And as Mike pointed out, while there are some good early European depcitions of their colonists and officers, there are frustratingly scant few, if any, "in the field" portraits that clearly depict late 1700s American frontiersmen, settlers, etc, equipped with longrifles and hunting pouches with enough detail to glean much about how they did things.  Studio portraits or portraits done many years later, like the Chappel portrait of Dan Morgan, or the Boone/Harding/Lewis portrait - done from a head and shoulders sketch made while Boone was propped up in bed, with the body added later and finished in a St. Louis studio. - can be misleading.  I would expect a settler moving from an area with a well established rifle culture, like Virginia or North Carolina, through Cumberland Gap in the 1780s or 90s might be equipped a bit differently than a provincial officer like Robert Rogers or Guy Johnson in a studio setting done 15 or 20 years earlier.

As far as how high they were carried, again, I think preference would prevail.  A few years back a lot of guys started slinging their pouches really high, perhaps because of 19th century photos, and it does tend to keep the pouch and horn securely in place while moving around in the woods, especially if you have to move fast.   But as some others on here pointed out I find it really awkward and uncomfortable to do so as I have to bend my hand backwards to reach down in the pouch.  If it is a bit lower, I can reach straght down into the pouch.  There are a few 19th century paintings that show pouches slung in the waist area - between the hip bone and the lower rib - whether this is how they did things in the field I don't know but I find that to be a good compromise between keeping things securely in place, and allowing good access.  What works for an individual will depend on their body shape, size of the horn, etc.  Maybe even length of the gun barrel - I find it preferable to keep the muzzle as close to straight up as possible when loading, but with a 47 or 50 inch barrel, it is pretty tough to do that with a measure attached to your strap unless you are really tall...or have the accoutrement straps for your measure etc. hanging down really far when not in use.

Fun to ponder

Guy

[G-Man]

Here is another interesting variation - -Joseph Brant painted in 1807 with what looks like a small hunting pouch hung suspended below the powder horn - i.e. the bag hangs from the horn, rather than the horn hung from the bag or a separate strap.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Joseph_Brant_by_William_Berczy_c.1807.jpg

Also - does anyone recall - doesn't the F&I War pouch shown in the exhibit at the Heinz History Center have evidence of bieng made as a belt pouch?

Guy

[Artificer]

First, I appreciate everyone's replies.  Thank you all.

BrownBear, Hanshi and Kermit (and maybe others I'm forgetting) got me to thinking about something.  Perhaps one reason we don't see more 18th century horns attached to bags is because the bags that survived may have been more from the settled areas.  They may also have found a smaller horn carried in the bag or other ways was more convenient to use than a larger horn.  They didn't need to have a large quantity of powder available as they weren't going on a long hunt and they weren't going on a military expedition.  Even a militia suitable horn only had to be large enough to hold a 1/4 pound of powder as that was the minimum expected in many militia laws right up to and including the 1792 Militia Act. 

I also think that's why some of the 18th century bags that are still around are somewhat small.  I think they are also from the more settled areas, where they would have had a better survival rate, and the people didn't need to carry as much "stuff" on their person as someone on a long hunt on the frontier for months at a time.  If you are only going to be at most a day's walk from your cabin or house, you don't need a bullet mold, spare lead and other things that would be awful good to have in the pouch on a long hunt. 

I tried carrying the powder horn on my left side as Leatherbelly mentioned and it didn't work for me.  Not saying there is anything wrong with that, maybe he is more coordinated than I was.  Grin. 

I can see Brownbear's point about hanging the pouch on the saddle when mounted and we can get away with that today.  However, in hostile territory I would want the rifle in my hand and the pouch and horn on my person as so often shown in especially 19th century paintings.  Last thing I would want is to get ambushed and then get shot or thrown off a horse and my ammo goes bouncing away with the horse.  Grin.  I'd also make a point to dismount and find a good fighting position with some cover if I couldn't outrun a party of hostiles on horseback.  Having the pouch on the saddle might make that even more dicey. 

Guy made a great point if the separate horn sling is too loose, it can swing out from the body.   Also, I fully understand having to "correctly arrange" everything you have to hang on your person and around your body if you carry a canteen, haversack and other "stuff."  Grin.  This reminds me of one of the first times I got all kitted out as a member of a Rev War period 42nd Royal Highland Regiment in the mid 90's. 

I prefer to sleep in a lean to, lodge or tent; but my Lady's back was way too bad for that.  So we stayed in a motel in Williamsburg.  That actually was a good thing as I had never worn a Philabeg (short kilt) and hand tied diced hose before and had to work my way through it the first time.   Got my shirt, stock, weskit and period glasses on and took the other stuff to the car.  When parked close to the encampment area and I began to put everything on because we were supposed to be standing in full kit at 0800 for inspection.  I screwed up the order of putting things on a couple times.  I forgot to put my sporran and belt on before the cartridge "belly box" and belt, so I had to take that off and do it over.  Then I felt really stupid as I had for some strange reason put on my haversack before the Regimental Coat.  Took that off and put the Regimental on.  Then I did manage to get the haversack and canteen on properly and topped it off with the Balmoral.  The only thing left was my musket, so I had everything on, but I still double checked everything was in the correct place.  (This all even though I had been "doing" military impressions since the late '70's.  Grin.) 
 
I hurried to where we were supposed to be in line in full kit and I was there a good ten minutes prior to 0800.  Well, I was out there all alone for a good while as many of our members were still beginning to crawl out of their tents and put on their gear.   When our Captain came out, I was the only one in line, let alone fully kitted out.

I had not wakened my Lady until I was fully dressed, so she had not seen me go through the contortions to get the philabeg and diced hose on.  The plan was she would drive me out and then go back to the motel and she and daughter would go to breakfast and come out later.  I kissed her goodbye and started off when she stopped me.  She HAD to know if I was "authentic," meaning I wasn't wearing anything under the Philabeg.  I told her I was and she asked me how it felt.  I told her it felt "very free."  She grinned, rolled her eyes and took off.  When she and daughter came back about two hours later, they asked me if I needed anything and I fervently said, "YES, Bug Juice.  PLEASE get me some Bug Juice."  Seems the Virginia skeeters just loved the fact I had gone "authentic."  Grin.

[Mike R]

...I think one reason that early bags are small is that thye did not carry all the junk/stuff that many today carry in them--all you really need to shoot the rifle/gun is powder [in horn], lead balls [in bag], patching/wadding, extra flints, a priming wire and a worm [in bag or pockets, etc]. 

[BrownBear]

I can sure relate to the little bit of gear needed for day hunts! 

My favorite bag is only 6" x 7" and is loaded only with a 3-ball loading block, a tiny drawstring bag (with 6 balls, two flints, a strip of patching and lube in a cap tin), a small knife, and a small horn.  First time I carried it, it was so noisy with those things rattling around in it, I ended up adding my spare gloves for padding.