Ultralight 1917

Horace Kephart lists an English camping kit weighing 6 pounds, that included tent, stove and cooking gear, down sleeping bag, mat, and a few other accessories of dubious value that could be safely discarded. My recent reprint edition of his book was copyrighted in 1917, although parts were published some years earlier.

So it's been 100 years, and contrary to lots of hype, weights for similar bare minimum kits are nearly unchanged. In the case of the sleeping bag and alcohol stove, at least, neither has functionality made huge gains.

I would like to read "Invisible on Everest: Innovation and the Gear Makers" published in 2003. This book "traces the evolution of clothing and equipment for outdoor activities, from the middle of the nineteenth century to the present day."

See also this page, related to authors' work:
http://www.lums.lancs.ac.uk/news/malloryreplicas06/
---------

--

Interesting, however, SOME, not ALL of the oldtimer's gear WAS superior under certain conditions than it's modern counterparts. The growing use of virgin merino wool garments is an indication of this, I started wearing these over 40 years ago and will now not bother with anything else.

Much contemporary gear is made to market and this is part of the whole backpacking industry and has been for over 30 years. The REALLY highend, fuctional gear, as in Mystery Ranch packs, Valandre sleeping bags, probably the finest I have seen and custom items that last a lifetime of active wilderness activity are ignored in favour of this season's "new" pack or whatever.

So, being a tad "retro"is likely a GOOD thing and reading the classics of "Nessmuk", et al. is worthwhile and enjoyable.

Am really looking forward to nano-tech backpacking, but alas, it seems at least several decades in the future. Everything besides food might one day weigh nearly nothing !!!

(On the other hand, what's six pounds? Nano food and water may be the final breakthrough for backpackers!!!)

I'm addicted to reading Kephart and Nessmuk and even Theodore Roosevelt. These were three, truly fine writers, and though each indulged in plenty of ultimately silly hyperbole, I find it much less objectionable that what's continually encountered today in the average sort of "consumer magazine" generic hype about the world.

Yet don't believe for a minute, as today's hypesters might put it, that the gear of 100 years ago was superior to what's now available. However, it wasn't necessarily heavier, nor in all cases worse, functionally, than modern stuff. Nor the hype any less.

As Chris Bonnington observes in the link provided above, the 1924 Everesters "were very well equipped" and some of their gear was lighter than much-later standards. This sounds like a reasonable and limited appraisal from one who is informed, but lacking all experience of the 1920s.

,