Michael Turner
Short answer: Personal load-carriers trace back to prehistoric communities, with archaeological and ethnographic evidence placing shoulder-slung pouches and simple carrying frames in the Neolithic period (c. 10,000–4,000 BCE); recognizable modern framed designs date to Ole F. Bergan’s Norwegian external-frame patent of 1908, while internal-suspension systems became widespread across outdoor and military use during the mid-20th century.
Concrete historical markers include the Roman leather loculus used by legionaries in the 1st–2nd centuries CE, assorted medieval and early modern knapsacks for sailors and hunters, and late-19th-century mountaineering adaptations that introduced sturdier materials and reinforced straps. Museum collections and battlefield inventories document gradual refinements in shape, closure systems and strap ergonomics.
Technical milestones: Ole F. Bergan’s 1908 external frame introduced a curved metal frame that improved load transfer to the hips; mid-20th-century military designs standardized harness geometry and modular attachments; from the 1960s–1970s, manufacturers adopted internal frames, synthetic fabrics (nylon), and lightweight alloys, producing the suspension concepts common today.
Practical recommendations for further reading and selection: consult patent archives for Bergan’s 1908 filing, review military field manuals and museum catalogs (Imperial War Museum, National Museum of Norway), and compare three performance metrics when choosing a modern unit – torso length fit, hip-belt load rating relative to stated litre capacity, and frame type matched to intended use (external for heavy, bulky loads; internal for dynamic activities).
Archaeological evidence: identifying the earliest load-carrier artifacts
Prioritize preserved suspension features and characteristic use-wear over pictorial or single-find claims to assign an object as an early shoulder-borne carrying system.
Diagnostic criteria
Look for paired anchor points (holes, slots, rivet bases) aligned for symmetrical shoulder straps; repeated abrasion grooves on organic or bone mounts that match tensile directions of straps; localized compression and deformation on wooden frames consistent with carried loads; and paired attachment hardware designed to accept flexible webbing or cords.
Preserved fibres and cordage provide direct evidence: twisted plies, S- or Z-twist count, fiber diameter distributions and cross-sectional morphology distinguish plant bast (flax/hemp) from animal hair or leather strips. Combine polarized light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to record morphology before chemical tests.
Organic residues and adhesives often survive: terpenoids and pitch markers indicate plant resin used for waterproofing or lamination; peptide profiles identify animal glues or leather (use ZooMS and LC–MS/MS for species-level collagen signals). Match residue chemistry to the suspected component (e.g., pitch on wood framing, animal protein on strap fragments).
Contextual indicators strengthen attribution: securely dated stratigraphic position, association with human osteological markers of habitual load-bearing, repeated representation across coeval sites, and congruent experimental replication of stress patterns on replicas.
Field protocols and laboratory workflow
Document in situ with high-resolution photography, photogrammetric 3D capture and precise provenience coordinates before any removal. Collect micro-samples only after non-destructive imaging; record conservation treatments and avoid consolidants that mask residues.
Sequence analyses to reduce contamination risk: (1) macroscopic and microscopic use-wear mapping, (2) fiber identification via PLM and SEM, (3) molecular analyses–FTIR/Raman for polymers and binders, GC–MS for lipid/terpenoid profiles, ZooMS and LC–MS/MS for collagen/peptide identification, (4) AMS radiocarbon on the same organic component sampled for molecular work, with Bayesian modelling to integrate site phases.
Require at least two independent lines of evidence before asserting functional assignment: structural attachment + fiber/residue chemistry, or attachment + secure date + experimental correspondence. Deposit raw spectra, 3D models and radiocarbon datasets in open repositories and include full sampling metadata to permit reanalysis.
Common pitfalls: taphonomic compression can mimic strap impressions; later repairs or historic conservation may introduce modern fibres or adhesives; iconographic likeness does not substitute for physical evidence. Treat single ambiguous features as hypotheses requiring additional tests rather than definitive identification.
Materials and construction techniques from ancient to medieval packs
Use vegetable-tanned cattle hide 2.5–3.5 mm for body panels, 4–5 mm for load-bearing straps, and waxed linen thread 0.6–1.0 mm with a saddle stitch at 3–4 mm stitch length for durable historical reproductions.
Materials by period and recommended substitutes
Bronze Age: single-piece rawhide or untanned hide sacks, bast-fiber cords (flax/hemp), and bone or wooden toggles. Substitute: waxed flax cord and modern rawhide for experiments. Iron Age: woven linen or wool sacks, tablet-woven shoulder straps, and plant-fiber twine. Substitute: handwoven linen and hemp cord. Roman period: vegetable-tanned calf or ox leather, iron/bronze rings and bow buckles, linen or sinew thread. Substitute: oak-bark tanned leather and waxed linen thread. Early medieval to high medieval: layered leather panels, sewn-in wooden slats or frame staves in some pilgrimage packs, cast or forged iron fittings and rivets, wool padding under straps. Substitute: ash or willow slats for frames, brass or mild-steel fittings for exhibition pieces.
Construction techniques and practical specifications
Panel layout: cut main body from a single panel when possible to reduce seams; add a 6–10 cm gusset for volume. Edge treatment: bevel leather edges 1–1.5 mm and burnish with wax for abrasion resistance. Stitching: punch holes at 3–4 mm intervals; use two-needle saddle stitch with waxed linen or sinew for tensile seams. Rivets and rings: place rivets at high-stress junctions (strap ends, bag-mouth corners) spaced no closer than 20 mm; use 6–8 mm diameter rivets for straps that carry heavy loads. Strap geometry: 40–50 mm wide shoulder straps for adult use, tapering to 25–30 mm at attachment points; add a chest strap of 25–30 mm to stabilize heavy loads. Fastenings: wooden toggles and thong closures common early; metal buckles and adjustable plates appear increasingly in medieval examples–use iron or bronze reproductions matching period finds. Waterproofing: coat seams and interior with pine pitch blended with animal fat or beeswax; reapply annually for regular use. Reinforcement: double-skin the base with a 2 mm overlay and stitch plus rivet at corners to resist abrasion. Comfort: line shoulder areas with 6–10 mm wool padding fixed by quilting stitches to prevent slippage and distribute pressure. Repairability: design seams and attachments to allow replacement of straps and panels using hand tools only (awl, awlknife, awl punch), mirroring historical maintenance practices.
Key innovations that created the modern pack: straps, frames, and closures
Select a pack with an adjustable torso range (38–58 cm), a padded hip belt 10–13 cm wide that transfers 60–70% of load for heavy loads, S-shaped shoulder straps with 10–20 mm closed-cell foam, and an internal frame for loads over 12–15 kg.
Straps and load management
S-shaped shoulder straps: 40–60 mm webbing width with contoured foam (10–20 mm) reduces pressure on the trapezius and improves fit across chest widths. Load-lifter straps should sit at a 20°–30° angle from the shoulder strap to the pack’s top; this pulls load toward the torso and keeps the center of mass close to the spine. Sternum straps should be vertically adjustable over a 5–12 cm range and include a low-profile quick-release for airway clearance. Hip belts: foam density 40–70 kg/m3, belt width 10–13 cm for general trekking, narrower 8–10 cm for smaller frames; wide belts shift 60–70% of weight onto hips. Compression straps (20–25 mm webbing) on both sides reduce sway and stabilize load transfer; cross-compression between lid and body prevents top-heavy pitching. Recommended adjustment sequence for heavy loads: tighten hip belt first, then shoulder straps, then load-lifters, then sternum strap.
Frames and closures
Internal frames: common constructions use two 6–8 mm anodized aluminum stays or composite rods (3–6 mm carbon or fiberglass) paired with a semi-rigid polypropylene sheet (2–4 mm) to shape the pack and transfer load. External frames: tubular aluminum 10–12 mm historically allowed large loads and ventilation but add bulk; internal frames dominate modern designs for closer-carrying comfort and better body-following movement. Frameless designs rely on an integrated pad and hip-belt system and suit loads under 8–10 kg.
Closures: roll-top closures provide the highest water resistance and variable volume control; specify a 50–70 mm overlap and a robust cord-lock or buckle for sealing. Zippered main access requires water-resistant (PU-coated) sliders and YKK AquaGuard-style seals for wet conditions. Lid/flap closures with dual buckles and a small zipped pocket remain optimal for load stability and quick access. Hybrid solutions (roll-top + external zip pocket) combine weatherproofing with convenience. For hunting applications choose silent fabrics (210D silent nylon or muted 500D Cordura), low-profile buckles, and hydration-compatible ports; see model suggestions at best backpack for bow hunting.
| Use case | Volume (L) | Torso range (cm) | Hip belt width (cm) | Frame type | Recommended closure | Shell material |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daypack / Commuting | 15–25 | 38–48 | 6–9 | Frameless / Minimal stays | Top zip or short roll-top | 210D nylon, PU-coated |
| Trekking / Expedition | 50–80 | 42–58 | 10–13 | Internal aluminum/composite | Roll-top or lid + drawcord | 500–1000D Cordura, reinforced panels |
| Hunting / Tactical | 30–60 | 40–54 | 8–12 | Semi-rigid internal or light external | Quiet flap or roll-top with low-profile buckles | Silent 210–500D nylon, scent-control linings |
Military and exploration use: dates and documented first deployments
Consult primary material evidence and procurement records first: iconography, military ordinances, museum accession entries and patent filings provide the clearest dates for initial military and exploratory issue of personal carrying systems.
-
Roman sarcina – c. 1st–2nd century CE
- Documented on Trajan’s Column (completed 113 CE) and in late Roman military manuals; individual marching kit (sarcina) carried by legionaries as a single-portage unit with food, tools and cloak.
- Primary sources: Trajan relief panels (visual evidence) and later textual summaries in Vegetius describing standard soldier kit.
-
Early modern soldier packs – late 17th–early 19th centuries
- Leather knapsacks and cloth rolls issued in Napoleonic-era armies (c. 1790–1815); surviving museum specimens in Musée de l’Armée (Paris) and the National Army Museum (London) carry accession dates and maker marks traceable to this period.
- Military regulations and quartermaster invoices from the Napoleonic period list standardized personal stores and carrying cases for infantrymen.
-
British 1908 Pattern Webbing – 1908 (first formalized webbed valise/haversack issue)
- War Office specification produced a unified load-carrying system for infantry (Pattern 1908 webbing); documentation in the 1908 supply regulations shows official issue and widespread deployment by World War I.
- Material evidence: surviving 1908-pattern valises and web haversacks in UK military collections with factory stamps and contract dates.
-
Ole F. Bergan external-frame patent and commercial debut – 1908–1910
- Patent filed by Norwegian mechanic Ole F. Bergan in 1908 for an external-frame load carrier; patent records and early production catalogues date the design to 1908–1910.
- Documented use: Norwegian polar and Arctic teams in the 1910s adopted framed packs for sledging and fieldwork; expedition logs and equipment lists from Roald Amundsen’s 1910–1912 South Pole venture include framed pack entries.
-
German and Austro-Hungarian mountain units – late 19th to early 20th century
- Mountain troops (Alpenjäger/Gebirgsjäger precursors) issued cloth rucksacks by the 1890s; military procurement records and regimental kit lists from Alpine units document standardized issue before World War I.
-
U.S. Army haversack adoption – 1910s
- M1910 haversack officially introduced in U.S. Army ordnance records (adopted 1910) and used in WWI; contract documents and surviving examples held by the U.S. Army Quartermaster Museum confirm dates and manufacture.
-
Polar and high-mountain exploration – mid-19th to early 20th century
- Mid-19th-century explorers (Livingstone, 1850s–1870s) and mountaineers (Matterhorn ascent, 1865) used personal cloth/ leather packs; expedition kit lists preserved in the Royal Geographical Society archives give itemized entries and dates.
- By the 1910s polar parties switched to purpose-designed framed packs and sledging harnesses; expedition inventories from Nobile, Amundsen and Shackleton list commercially produced frames and Bergan-style carriers.
-
World Wars and mass issue standardization – 1914–1945
- WWI–WWII procurement records show rapid standardization and mass production of cloth packs, alpine rucksacks and haversacks (e.g., British 1908 webbing, U.S. M1928 and subsequent field packs). Supply contracts, factory serial numbers and ordinance manuals provide precise deployment dates and unit issue histories.
Recommended verification steps:
- Compare iconographic evidence (Trajan’s Column panels) with contemporary textual sources (Vegetius, Roman supply lists) for earliest military kit.
- Request accession records and maker stamps from national military museums for Napoleonic and 19th-century leather specimens.
- Consult patent office filings for Ole F. Bergan (1908) and War Office/Ordnance specifications (British 1908 Pattern, U.S. M1910) to confirm official issue dates.
- Examine expedition inventories and supply lists in RGS, polar archive and national expedition collections for documented first uses in exploration contexts.
