Dave,
I agree that the most common buckle seems to be square or rectangular, however oval or double "D" buckles are found too. The military in particular used the Double "D" and so does some horse tack. What we can't really find much support for are the round forged buckles that are so common on modern buckskinners. Probably were there, just hard to find any documentation. Now roller buckles are PC. They go back to medieval times. Don't have time to run it down now, but there are some mentioned in the trade lists on Dean Rudy's Mtn Man Research site. Here's one quote for you:
1 gro 2" Roller Buckles 2.5 2.5
½ gro Roller Buckles for Harness $1.25 $0.105
(Invoice of Sundry Merchandise furnished Rocky Mountain Outfit 1837 under charge of Fontenelle, Fitzpatrick & Co.).
For a long time especially before the Rev War and into the early 1800s brass was actually cheaper than iron, consequently brass buckles seemed to also be more common. The military used all brass buckles, I think not only because they looked good, but because they were cheaper. Brass also doesn't rust. However, it you are using an iron/steel buckle everyday it tends not to rust either. All that being said, period documents of fur trade company purchases of belts seem to be mostly from saddle makers (logical) and probably had iron buckles. Here's a quote from the American Fur Company which shows that between 1829-1834 they purchased .leather belts. from Grinsley's saddle shop which also furnished saddles, halters, bridles, hobbles, saddle bags, stirrup leathers and pack saddles (American Fur Company Fur Trade Ledgers, 1802-1871, AMFC Retail Store Cash Book, Vol. R, Missouri Historical Society, St. Louis, MO.).
Here's a quote from Charles Larpentuer's Forty Years a Fur Trader, referencing brass on a belt: .On the 19th of July we left Union. On reaching the landing at Buford we learned that the Sioux had fired on the traders whom Mr. Gaben had sent from Union to them, after obtaining permission of the Peace Commissioners to do so. One was shot in the back with an arrow; and at least one ball glanced off the other, having struck the brass mounting of his belt.
I agree with you, Randy and several of the folks here that smaller width belts are more common. Most belts seen in period sketches and paintings are plain leather usually less than 2" in width. Most are probably 1 1/4" - 1 3/4". This is contrary to the many large 3" wide or wider belts commonly seen on today's buckskinner. We probably need the wider belts today to support our bad backs and bigger guts. All the belts shown are plain leather without beads, brass tacks, conchos, silver coins or other ornamentation. Belts are just plain leather. The overly "tacked" belts and concho belts, becoming more common at today's rendezvous are from a much later period and seem to have a southwestern origin. These types of tacked or conchos belts are seen predominantly in the late 1800s photos of Indians and Mexicans.
I find that there are not a lot of belts & buckles in the fur trade records, but this may be due to several factors:
a.. Belts last quite a bit longer than other clothing items.
b.. Buckles would survive when the rest of the belt has worn out.
c.. Belts are easily manufactured by trappers themselves either with re-cycled buckles, buckles taken from horse accoutrements, or with new buckles.
As Always,
Your Most Obedient Servant,
Gene "Bead Shooter" Hickman
Booshway Manuel Lisa Party
http://www.manuellisaparty.com/
Booshway Montana Brigade
American Mountain Men
http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/amm/index.html
