Hiking In the Face of History: A Historical Trek to Garfield

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Fisher Cat

New member
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
789
Reaction score
109
The movies of Hollywood are always trying to make an impression on us. This is especially true with historical pieces. Their goal is to get us to associate with a character. Are we like them? Would we have acted the same, or differently? Who do we relate to the most, or want to? Its no different with Historical Trekking. Even the most subtle of changes can denote decades of time. I, like many, thoroughly enjoyed Mann's Last of the Mohicans, 1992. Its main characters at the outset zipping through the woods, an epic soundtrack and cinematography along with them. Truth is they fail to show, hidden by camera angles, the graded path the stars were running along. No matter. (I am, by the way, a HUGE Cooper fan.) Historical? Maybe. Possible? Sure. History is both subjective and relative. I wasn't there 200-300 years ago, so one has to go with what is documented. This summer and fall I have decided to go with the oft-overlooked Provincial. Oh sure, if you look at a classic period painting, such as the Death of Wolfe, this most unique classification of men just may be pictured there. But they are usually way in the background, off to the side, or in a corner, if at all. Truth is, prior to "the Big One" the last of the F & I War, the Seven Years' War, Provincial forces played a huge part in the military history of the Colonies, hence, if you're family has a LONG history in New England, odds are you have descended from one of them.

The area many of us call, or have called home, or perhaps our favorite recreational area, was once nothing more than a tract of land stuck between struggling, antagonistic empires. Continental Europe had become a fruitless battleground, its fields seeped with blood, had spawned nothing more than a stalemated quagmire. In order to force the hand of the opponent and divert resources and manpower in this European draw, it became evident that the most vulnberable target was each other's North American colonies. While history is subjective, general trends do arise. New France, short on manpower, could rely on her acute Native American allies. Properly supplied, and with all the instincts the woodland life could provide, such warriors could roll back the frontier hundreds of miles with ease. The English, though numerically superior, were stuck in the morass of colonial government. Cooperation and unity did not come easily. Petty jealousy, rivalries, use of troops outside each colonies boundaries, and unreliable help from overseas, made bad situations even worse. Forced to fight reactionary campaigns to the hit and run tactics of the enemy, they were spread thin and could only mount an occasional campaign up the coast of Maine, or using the well traveled Champlain corridor. The solution from the viewpoint of the colonies was simple: New France must be reduced.

Thus steps into history, the Provincial. Born of the necessity of repeated distinct, monarchial indifference, and the need to do something, with very little training, and even worse discipline, they came from the common stock. Choosing their own unit leaders and carrying and providing, quite often, their own arms and supplies, they formed a defense for their towns and colonies. They could only usually react to the raids from the north even on their home territory. However, their British superiors saw another use for their numbers. To stop the raids, these men could supplement the lack of British Regulars. So, from among these common men of the New England colonies, as well as some from NY, PA, even VA, our forefathers went to the battlefields of Port Royal, Louisbourg, and Quebec, to name just a few.

And trek they did. In all weather and season, under threat, compulsion, and mere promises, without pay, without reserve, against delusions of ease and with dreams of plunder, through both storm and safety. In the end, their last moments could be a reverberating thud, an acrid puff of smoke, a rush of fear feigning itself as adrenaline. All to preserve for us lands that they knew they could never even hope to inherit personally.

So pause please, and think of these men. The 200 Provincials who, in 1690 during King William's War, died of smallpox as they retreated from the foiled invasion of Quebec.

Or, the multitude of unmarked graves of the Provincials from New England who died of disease and lack of supplies at a little place called Wood Creek, as they vainly awaited the British Regulars sent to reinforce them during Queen Anne's War.

And, the 193 Provincials who died as French cannons fired grapeshot at point blank range into their ranks as they futilely stormed the Island Battery at Louisbourg during King George's War. Their valor so intense that the French commander, Admiral du Chambon, felt the need to justify directly to his King, the medical treatment afforded the prisoners taken, usually provided only for Regulars, by stating " the Provincials were worthy foes, and I felt it only right to salute them." Louisbourg would eventually fall, its capture solely done by Provincial forces on both land and sea, only to have the fortress returned to the French as a provision of the peace treaty that ended the War.

In the years between the peace, and sometimes amidst the conflicts, some of these Provincial forces even ranged toward the Whites. They were people like us. They loved and lost. They fought for lands many would not even see with their own eyes, just hoping that somewhere, at sometime, their descendants might live there. They had wives, children, parents, brothers and sisters. Their graves are unknown, their names, many forgotten, their voices, unheard. In many cases they lie under parking lots, roads, developments, and so on, just as much as their worthy foes are. Though they are mute, and by many a footnote in history, they ask only to be remembered. To their superiors they were a rowdy lot, unruly, rabble-rousing, undisciplined, unreliable, prone to drunkeness and fighting, even rebellious. To me, they are my forefathers. Not one of us can claim or take credit for the sacrifices and accomplishments of our ancestors, be they great or small, but we can certainly honor what they did. They are the original Trekkers, and we can only follow their footsteps.

This hike dedicated to my grandfather, Henry Willard, a veteran of King Williams War, and his son, also named Henry Willard, a veteran of Queen Anne's War.

IMG0526-S.jpg
 
Provincials and wilderness

We were provincials before we became fully Americans, loyal to the Crown, but less like Europeans and more like Americans every day. We are their descendants, by blood, culture, or both. We dare to dream, and to hope for better than we have. They often saw wilderness as "daunting terrible" before they saw it as a place to subdue and turn to their purposes of survival, prosperity, and, above all, the freedom to make the most of one's chances. They sought prosperity through toil as we seek spiritual and emotional renewal through wandering in wild places. We live in very different societies, yet we share with them the acceptance of personal responsibility for ourselves and those we love, the willingness to earn our keep through effort, and the self-respect that comes from such accomplishments and has little to no patience with the notion that we are not fit to run our own affairs.
A piece that explains this better than I can: The conservative case for wilderness by David Jenkins. I only saw it in the Rutland Daily Herald for 8/2/2006.
 
You bring out a lot of observations Creag, thank you.

For the equipment minded, here's an inventory of today:

Double-soled elk hide mocs
Wool tights ( of course)
Wool breeches
Wool leggings & leather straps
Wool jacket
Linen undershirt
Wool voyageur hat
Powder horn, shot bag, primer fluke, knife
Wool blanket bedroll
Tomahawk and socket bayonet in waist/thigh holster
.62 smoothbore, Queen Anne style flintlock

After 10 miles of varying terrain, the double soled mocs look great. They are a testimony to craftmanship.
 
Your historical trek is simply inspiring, Fisher Cat! I always enjoy reading your reports and musings. I am sorry that Kirby and I did not recognize you today heading up to the summit!
 
Bummer, I would've loved to have met you guys! What were you wearing?, was it when you were going up or coming down? we got up around 1:45 or so.
 
Here is everything pictured, mind you, it has not been washed yet:
IMG0532-M.jpg


I can have some more pics up as soon as I get them from Forester Jake, who took a lot, including the one atop Garfield pasted in the TR. All clothing comes from Flying Canoe Traders, the mocs from the wonderful Ouellette family at Arrow Moc, the edged weaponry from Swamp Fox Knives, and the smoothbore from Early Rustic Arms. These are all incredible people to work with.
 
provincials and Rangers

Of course, we are so far discussing only the lives and doings of the average provincial militia. The long-range travels of Rogers' Rangers exceed the provincial average by about a factor of 10... in fact, Major Robert Rogers invented the concept of Rangers still followed today. Although I wonder what one of them would say were he to learn that we go bushwhacking for the fun of it...
 
Your gear is quite intriguing. Being a gun guy (and one who occasionally enjoys the smell of burnt Goex clouds expelled from a smokepole :D ) I would love to hear more about the .62 Queen Anne. Clearly it is not an original (I would imagine an original would be of a value way too high to be carrying around in the woods ;) .) Who made it? A family heirloom or first generation to you?

Brian
 
Really great posts. They make me want to check out VFTT a bit more than my once every three months!

Thanks Brian! if you check too often you may get addicted to TR's!:D

Your gear is quite intriguing. Being a gun guy (and one who occasionally enjoys the smell of burnt Goex clouds expelled from a smokepole :D ) I would love to hear more about the .62 Queen Anne. Clearly it is not an original (I would imagine an original would be of a value way too high to be carrying around in the woods ;) .) Who made it? A family heirloom or first generation to you?

Brian

Yea, anything original from that time period should be in a museum, and never fired again due to the historic value. It is 1st generation to me and was made by Early Rustic Arms, which is a family run operation, father & son, Larry and Terry Williams. Due to a variety of reasons, the father is not involved too much in the making anymore, I am proud to say I have one of the last ones made personally by him. The stock is 100% tiger maple, and it took them just over 18 months to make it. Its pretty dang heavy, the barrel alone is 44 in., hexagonal to round. I've never weighed it, but one has to alternate ways of carrying it when going up and coming down. Average powder measure is 80g, but I have cranked it up a bit in the past to 110g. 2F in the barrel, 3F in the pan. Here's a link to any interested:

http://www.earlyrusticarms.com/index.html

Which brings me to the aspect of hiking in Historical Trek gear, you have to carry a lot. The wool feels at times like it weighs a ton, and high stepping up rocks, boulders, etc., it can feel like lead weights. However, like many fibers, it initially feels even heavier when its wet, but very quickly it "drys" out, and the feeling of breathability definitely comes back. The more you hike in it, the better it feels. Some of the more modern-day fabrics tend to cause me skin irritation, mild rashes, etc., but not wool. As a matter of fact, I find the chafing in the thighs that normally comes from hiking shorts, is non-existent with wool breeches. I wish there were a way to integrate more wool into today's gear, especially the gear one wears in the shoulder seasons of spring and winter. Maybe its already out there and I'm just missing it. The mocs are awesome too. I have great traction in them even over wet rock, and the few frozen rivulets we hiked over the last .2m to the top of Garfield. You just have to be careful in descent, since its double-sole elk leather, arch support is a bit weak and those concealed roots and small rocks can roll right up into your arch and make it feel like your knee gave out. Somehow running in them would be more fun I'll bet, just a bit more hazardous.

I only got to do one Historical Trek this year, which was a big bummer. I'd like to do 2 next year, one summer, one fall, and I've been eyeing Osceola and Moosilauke. Each year I've increased both mileage and altitude with the same equipment and its holding out fine, but that is accented by the fact that I get to follow trails and am not bushwhacking through the woods like the Original Trekkers.
 
Tiger maple makes for some gorgeous stocks! I used to subscribe to the International Blackpowder Hunters Association and I used to love seeing all the wonderful custom rifles built by many "mom and pop" family run companies. And those with the tiger maple sure made the best looking ones.

It is funny you mention the benifits and drawbacks of wool. I like to read about days gone by (I just finished reading Norman Maclean's "A River Runs Through It" today, as a matter of fact), and back then they all wore wool. Summer, winter, spring or fall. I always thought it odd that even in summer's heat they wore this stuff, and yet before polypro that was what was cutting edge. Sadly there are a lot of things that worked well back then that are no longer in use, but would probably still hold it's own in this the modern age.

Brian
 
I always thought it odd that even in summer's heat they wore this stuff, and yet before polypro that was what was cutting edge. Sadly there are a lot of things that worked well back then that are no longer in use, but would probably still hold it's own in this the modern age.
Ever wear a modern light-weight wool tee shirt on a warm day? It is very comfortable.

And it doesn't smell like polyester... :)

Doug
 
I always thought it odd that even in summer's heat they wore this stuff, and yet before polypro that was what was cutting edge.

Two notable exceptions to when the heat took its toll in the past are: Braddock's March at the beginning of the F&I War, and the Battle of Monmouth, 1778 during the Revolution. Especially the latter, heatstroke killed as many as actual battle. With temps over 100, it didn't matter what you were wearing coupled with the extreme rigors and duress of battle.

And as DougPaul mentions, it doesn't smell like polyester, but wool in contact with wet leather (as I had a lot of leather strung over my shoulders i.e. shot bag, powder horn, bedroll) does emit a certain tang.

I do believe that a study of hiker's clothing through the years would show a high percentage of wool right up to the post WW2 era when the big change in clothing and materials available happened.

I'll take wool anyday for hiking.
 
I do believe that a study of hiker's clothing through the years would show a high percentage of wool right up to the post WW2 era when the big change in clothing and materials available happened.
I started winter hiking in the winter of 1974-1975. Around that time, the "baselayers of choice" were cotton fishnet, wool fishnet, or merino wool (Stil-Long was a popular brand). Polypropylene came into popular use soon after. The main insulation was wool or down. Shells were nylon (breathable or waterproof) and cotton/nylon (60/40, breathable) soon replaced by polyester/cotton (65/35, breathable). Pile and fleece main insulation and waterproof-breathable shells came into use by ~1980. IIRC, polyester baselayers came a bit later. (The term "polypro" is sometimes carelessly used to refer to polyester.)

Mittens, gloves, and hats were knitted wool, partially replaced by fleece when it came into common use.

Socks were always wool over the entire period. (Although some might have used cotton liners inside wool outers early on.)

I still have all of the above in my "archives"...

I'll take wool anyday for hiking.
Wool still works as well as it ever did. IMO, in humid or wet environments wool is better than fleece. Fleece might be slightly better in dryer conditions.

Recently, there has been a popular return to wool using the low-itch Merino wool. (Merino is a breed of sheep--they produce a wool with a finer fiber than "standard" wool.) Damp wool is also less itchy than dry wool so a wool cap becomes less itchy as you wear it.

I still wear military surplus wool pants and I've recently switched some of my hats from fleece back to wool.

There is a bunch more discussion on the use of wool in http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9712

Doug
 
Last edited:
Wool still works as well as it ever did. IMO, in humid or wet environments wool is better than fleece. Fleece might be slightly better in dryer conditions.

I still wear military surplus wool pants and I've recently switched some of my hats from fleece back to wool.

Doug

Agreed, the old rule is true, wool, even when wet, retains heat far, far better. I also have two pairs of military surplus wool pants I have used when working in the woods in winter or hunting. Used them a little while ago when spending time in Forester Jake's sugarbush and they were excellent.

I know my wife and her sister enjhoyed the wool blanket that encompassed my bed roll, perfect for sitting on and when they felt cool or the breeze picked up, they could just roll up the corners.
 
Top