The old russian army greatcoat can be waterproofed to some extent and at the same time made less "itchy" by soaking it in a special solution. I don't know the recipe, but I recall that after the treatment (and drying for several days) it becomes much heavier and stiffer. Also the wool's color becomes somewhat brownish.

Sure thing, it's not a substitute for a good sleeping bag, but I'm pondering an idea to use a sleeping bag in a "skatka" manner to store and wear the gear. Perhaps, with a nylon tarp or/and hammock as an outer shell. The ideal backpack is no backpack at all.

Now if someone could only replicate that coat in synthetic material, adding Goretex and DWR coatings, and all that kind of stuff, it truly would be a great coat.

Patagonia and TNF should get cracking....

Handwash itchy wool in Woolite, in the bathtub. It works for me, YMMV.
No affiliation, standard disclaimers.

Wool, canvas, leather and down sure worked well for a long time before any synthetics came along. They took more care perhaps. Skins before that were functional, requiring even more care. Used within their limitations, they have served man well enough.

For now, you can rely on synthetics to get you by. When the bubble goes up, we will be back to the 19th century apparel options once again.

I remember reading about a college project where the students designed coats for the homeless. The were like hooded greatcoats but of some modern materials of waterproof nylon lined with wool or fleece and with a buckle belt that would release under a tug. If they were grabbed by a criminal or cop by the coat, it would come free and like the lizard losing it's tail to the bird, the homeless could shed their coat and be away.

A great read if you haven't, old school.

From OF MEN AND MOUNTAINS.

William O Douglas

"We took great pride in these packs. We did not know about ruck
sacks or pack baskets, so we never used them. Once I tried the pack
board with the forehead strap ? and once the Nelson pack. But I
found the horseshoe roll more to my liking. Each would take one-
half of a canvas pup tent which would serve as the outside cover
of the roll. Inside would be the blankets (two in each pack) and the
food. And we designed a method for carrying food that suited our
needs. We took the inside white cotton bag of a sugar sack, washed
it, and then had Mother, by stitching it lengthwise, make three bags
out of one. We d fill these long, narrow, white bags with our food
supplies. The sacks, when filled, would roll neatly up with the
blankets. Each end of the roll would be tied with rope, later to be
used for pitching the pup tent. Then the roll could be slipped over
the head onto the shoulder.

We could not pack fresh meat, not only because of its weight but
because it wouldn t keep. Canned goods, ham, and bacon were too
heavy to carry. We would, however, take along some bacon-rind for
grease. We d substitute a vial of saccharin for sugar and thus save
several pounds. Into one white sack we would put powdered milk;
into another, beans. We d fill one with flour already mixed with salt
and baking powder and ready for hot cakes or bread. In another we
would put oatmeal, cream of wheat, or corn meal. One sack would
be filled with dried fruit prunes or apples. Another would contain
packages of coffee, salt, and pepper. Usually we would take along
some powdered eggs.

On the outside of our packs would be tied a frying pan, coffee
pot, and kettle. One of us usually would strap on a revolver; the



INDIAN FLAT 25 MILES 69

other would carry a hatchet. Each would have a fishing rod and
matches. Thus equipped, each pack would weigh between 30 and
60 pounds, depending on the length of the trip planned.

We also took along a haversack which we alternated in carrying.
In it were our plates, knives, forks, spoons, lunch, and other items
we wished to keep readily available. It hung by a shoulder strap on
the hip opposite from the horseshoe pack. The one who carried it
was indeed well loaded. "

I am reminded of a quotation from a book. True story. World War II in Norway. An old man, Norwegian, rowing a rowboat against a cold wind, across a stormy sea. He was in his 70's and helping to transport a fugitive from the Nazi's.

His remark was ...

"Now they have iron ships and men of wood,
But in the old days we had wooden ships and men of iron"

:-)

Pete

Probably true to a point. We are getting "softer" as civilization advances. But taking the argument further, Nelson's "iron men" and Napoleon's Old Guard were wimps compared to someone like Hernan Cortes, who conquered the Aztec empire with just a handful of conquistadors. And neither would compare favorably to Leonidas and his 300 Spartans...

I'll be the first to agree that we're getting increasingly reliant on technology in general. Probably far too much for our own good. But idealizing the past is not the solution either. I don't think it would be a smart decision to deliberately deprive oneself of the advantages offered by new technologies, gear and materials.

Case in point, I'm sure the traditional bedroll has many uses. But realistically, I fail to see what benefits it has to offer over the more modern solutions. A modern sleeping bag provides better protection from the elements overall. As far as a means of load carrying, I'd much rather haul my gear in a proper backpack, which allows me to carry more weight more comfortably, in a more organized, easily accessible manner and in a pretty much waterproof package.

I'm sure 19th c. grunts were tough mean bastards - but if I have any choice, I'd much rather stick with a proper sleeping bag and backpack these days as opposed to the good old greatcoats and bedrolls. And I'm probably not alone here - when push comes to shove, how many of us would honestly prefer the Brown Bess musket to a modern centerfire rifle, or a flint and steel to a ferro rod (or even a butane lighter)?

I believe it's a great idea to experiment with traditional gear, simply to test its strenghts and limitations. That said, the idea of spending $300 on a bedroll makes me cringe. Looks like somebody is making a good buck there, never thought the "traditionalist" outdoors market could be so lucrative.

That mental toughness and resilience can be trained. Get out and try hard things, find your limits, push those limits. People can adapt to the difficulties they face, we just don't face as many as people used to. When "normal" is enduring very difficult situations as a matter of course, you become accustomed and do not expect it to be easy. You learn how to deal with it. If you want to learn how to be tough like the days of old, go out and do tough things, seek those types of challenges.

People haven't changed much, our environment has changed.

You make an excellent point. That iron men/wooden ships thing has been around forever and everyone knows that modern folks are panty waists compared to the real tough guys of long ago.

But how many were doing 5.15a routes or El Cap in less than a day? or running sub 4 minute miles? pushing long passages underground? etc. etc. Not many are accomplishing those feats even now, but we are cherry picking outstanding examples from the past and comparing to perceived norms of the present. I think when you compare norm to norm, or exceptional to exceptional, we do OK right now.