D-ring Harness Origins

[Carl Russell]

I agree…. I think it is a simple fact that we can look to many other cultures, regions, and historical renditions of animal harness to find origins of some of the basic principles in the D-ring harness.

In fact, and I won’t at this time share all of the links, when I searched the US patents I found many examples from all over USA from 1890ish to 1930ish where innovators were finding ways to create compartmentalized harnesses, with central strap attachment rings, plates, doo-hickies, and the like. There are several renditions of a “Front Trace” that goes just from the hames a short distance back to some other mechanism of horse-to-equipment attachment and detachment. There are several alternative chain traces, cable traces, and the like.

It is really had to believe that the D-ring wasn’t among these innovations, especially since I did find a patent for the D-style heel chain/hook attachment for the trace end.

So I think it is too great a leap to just say that the common design came from just one example, especially seeing the examples of the wheat and circus harnesses from the interior west, and the square ring style from the Philadelphia region.

However, I for one am mostly interested in finding that one manufacturer/designer/harnessmaker/blacksmith/foundry who decided that the D-ring hardware, the tear-drop one like in the Bellows Falls picture, was important enough to replicate in such a manner that either their own business, or those of other regional harness makers could install them into complete retail harnesses.

I have been trying to get images from Sears Roebuck, again some examples of heavy express harnesses, but only long traces with no rings, or breaks of any kind.

I have an e-mail into a friend of mine who runs a modern Harness Review of sorts, Shop Talk Magazine (Proleptic) for harness makers. I’ve asked him if he knows of a harness historian who may have some clues about some of these broader industrial questions that I seem to be having a difficult time searching out…

More later, Carl

[Andy Carson]

In some ways who, where, and when we give “credit” for the invention of the the d-ring harness depends on what you want to define a d-ring to be. In other words, how close to the modern design does the harness in question have to be to be called a true d-ring. I think the critical and unique advantages of the d-ring is the attachment of the yoke, traces, saddle, britching, and front tugs to a central ring. This unique property could be accomplished by a round ring, the current d-ring, or probably even a square rings. Because of this, I was not focusing on the shape of the ring, but instead on arrangment of the various straps. I can see the value of looking for the appearance of the d-ring itself, though. I think the appearance of the d-ring means that the harnessmaker understood the unique advantages of the harness and knew it was valuable enough to make new hardware for. If a swedish immigrant hitched a traditional scandanavian harness to a wagon set up for a Boston sidebacker (and inadvertantly created a functional d-ring) do we give them credit for inventing the harness??? Or do we give credit to whoever recognized the advantage of this arrangement and manufactured it???

By the way, if the d-ring was a result of hitching a scandanavian harness to a piece of equipment set up for a side backer, then perhaps the more western Swedish settlement did not developed this adaptation because belly backers dominated in the west. It true, this could explain a new England origin in areas and times associated with Swedish immigration. It still doesn’t display if there was an understanding of the advantages, though, I think we would need either a true d-ring (as Carl seems to be looking for) or possibly some history and rationalle for why the prison decided on manufactoring this particular design.

[Carl Russell]

Andy, I understand what you are getting at, but the reason I am looking for the so-called true “D-ring” is because I think there are too many near missed for us to ever give adequate recognition to the actual source. For example here is a link to a patent submitted by a one Jefferson O. Adams of New Iberia, Louisiana. http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=00971426&SectionNum=1&IDKey=270EEA7C8336&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-adv.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PALL%2526S1=00971426%2526OS=PN/00971426%2526RS=PN/00971426

This device is described as follows “My present invention pertains to Harness: and it contemplates the provision in a harness of convenient, durable and otherwise advantageous couplings of effecting connection between the depending straps of a harness saddle, on the one hand, and the traces, breeching-straps, and belly strap, on the other, as well as effecting connection between the said harness elements and shafts of thills with a view of enabling a draft animal to back a vehicle when occasion demands.”

The device is basically a ring that is spliced into an unbroken trace. If you follow the above link you should arrive at the USPTO Patent Full-text and Image Database. There will be several red bordered text boxes, click on the one that says “Images”. Then on the next window on the left side menu, click on “Drawings” for a picture, then on “Front Page” for the filing description.

The reason I want to find the first large scale manufacturer is to try to draw attention to the period of time when the harness in its current form became widely available, and possibly to get some biographic information on the individual (s) who took the initiative.

I think we can pay homage to many bright and serious minds that have taken initiative to improve the application of animals to work. I just feel like New England has some particular role in the development and distribution of this style of harness, and at the present time it seems to be missing.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Here is another style, which I actually did see in an advertisement in the National Harness Review. This one was filed in 1905, allowing a full trace to run through a ring-like device that could be used to attach at least four auxiliary straps.

http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=00780258&SectionNum=1&IDKey=2F86391B42B2&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-adv.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PALL%2526S1=00780258%2526OS=PN/00780258%2526RS=PN/00780258

This one is from 1891, and is a piece of sheet metal formed to accept straps from many different angles……http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=00457891&SectionNum=2&IDKey=53AEFA3606CD&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-adv.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PALL%2526S1=00457891%2526OS=PN/00457891%2526RS=PN/00457891

This is as close as I could find to the actual D-ring that we more commonly see, but as far as I can tell the inventor is more concerned with the construction of the hardware, and is not specifically concerned about where it is employed. It is from 1889, but doesn’t resemble any of the other D-rings that we see in the photos. http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=00408661&SectionNum=1&IDKey=8002A02B7AD7&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-adv.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PALL%2526S1=00408661%2526OS=PN/00408661%2526RS=PN/00408661

I am going to stop there. I will go back over the others I bookmarked and share any pertinent ones.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

So after more consideration I think this one is the patent (1891) for the square style D. It is called a Hame Tug, but is a square with bolts to connect the hame trace to the heel trace, also saddle strap and belly strap, and a loop to attach rear side-strap. Still no accommodation for front side straps. I think this is the device in the picture in front of the Betsy Ross House (Circa 1900).

http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=00463938&SectionNum=1&IDKey=491A528C57C0&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2%26Sect2=HITOFF%26p=1%26u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm%26r=1%26f=G%26l=50%26d=PALL%26S1=00463938%26OS=PN/00463938%26RS=PN/00463938

Carl

An interesting aside. This team is parked in front of the Hame Chain Maker. If you notice this harness has side straps, but no belly backer. Instead there are “Hame Chains” attached directly to the front of the pole. I think there is a neck yoke holding the pole up, but the Hame Chains are employed for stopping and backing.

[Carl Russell]

I also think that this is the same style that is represented in Mitch’s photo of the potato day, as well as the photo in the quarry in NH, although the rendition in the quarry doesn’t include the loop for the side strap.

I think the D-ring that we use today was designed to be large enough to accept the front side strap and the front trace, and as such would constitute another specific design change to combine trace and hold-back systems. If you look at the Hame Chain method of holding back, it was a step between the side-backer/belly backer method and the front side strap method, using the link between hame-trace-breeching to hold back at the pole.

I can see in Mitch’s photo that there is distinctly a front side strap, but I really can’t see a rounded D-ring there. It looks too stream-lined from front trace to rear trace, and it seems to me the user may have just made the modification himself, putting a front side strap into the opening in the square D.

I am willing to bet that the rounded D was a New England modification of the square D, as a way to combine the repair and attachment features of the square D with the Side-backer and breeching style harness. Neck yokes were set up for the Side-backer, and in the hilly terrain the system was much more effective for braking and backing, so I bet it was a quick modification that could be made by like guys in Mitch’s pic.

It would only be a matter of time before a blacksmith would be asked to make an larger rounded ring to improve wear and to make more room for the front side strap…..

Mitch, Who is that guy??? :rolleyes:

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Furthermore, the back saddle seems to be incidental to the original design, at least to the square D, which may be why so many folks seem to be willing to use D-ring harnesses without a saddle. There was accommodation made for the saddle strap, but there doesn’t seem to be any acknowledgment that using this attachment will take pole weight off from the neck. It does seem like the guy in Mitch’s pic has figured that out though.

Who is that guy???:confused:

Carl

[Mark Cowdrey]

For me the critical breakthrough moment would be when someone realised that with a “D-ring” (actual shape not withstanding) harness it is possible to move the pole weight from the neck to the back. I am inclined to substantially define a D-ring harness one that has 5 straps to the “connector”. Previous to that, e.g. the Betsy Ross photo, the “connector” seems more of convenience of some sort than anything substantive. From jut the photos on this post we can see that there were many, many harness variations manufactured and doubtless many other combinations and amalgamations in actual use. It is not beyond the pale for me to believe that some such incidental combination of parts allowed the above mentioned adjustment to occur accidentally. I can conceive that it was some sort of “ah-ha” moment in barn dooryard or livery rather than a drawing board solution to a perceived problem. If so, it would spread a neighbor saw the benefit. If this was the method, it could easily have occurred simultaneously at several different geographic points. This line of thinking spreads the invention out to several people, though certainly when the benefit became widely recognised some enterprising harness maker would start making them new.

One set of harness I have has a forged ring that the straps are sewn onto, the D has 2 “stems”, one for the trace and one for the britchen. The other set, however, has a larger ring in the style of a clevis, that is, it has a bolt that forms the D’s stem. This makes the D look much more like a D. My guess, while we are doing all this guessing, is that the clevis type is simpler (to put the harness together) and likely a precursor to the forged type.
Mark

[Carl Russell]

@Mark Cowdrey 31881 wrote:

For me the critical breakthrough moment would be when someone realised that with a “D-ring” (actual shape not withstanding) harness it is possible to move the pole weight from the neck to the back. I am inclined to substantially define a D-ring harness one that has 5 straps to the “connector”. Previous to that, e.g. the Betsy Ross photo, the “connector” seems more of convenience of some sort than anything substantive. From jut the photos on this post we can see that there were many, many harness variations manufactured and doubtless many other combinations and amalgamations in actual use. It is not beyond the pale for me to believe that some such incidental combination of parts allowed the above mentioned adjustment to occur accidentally. I can conceive that it was some sort of “ah-ha” moment in barn dooryard or livery rather than a drawing board solution to a perceived problem. If so, it would spread a neighbor saw the benefit. If this was the method, it could easily have occurred simultaneously at several different geographic points. This line of thinking spreads the invention out to several people, though certainly when the benefit became widely recognised some enterprising harness maker would start making them new.

One set of harness I have has a forged ring that the straps are sewn onto, the D has 2 “stems”, one for the trace and one for the britchen. The other set, however, has a larger ring in the style of a clevis, that is, it has a bolt that forms the D’s stem. This makes the D look much more like a D. My guess, while we are doing all this guessing, is that the clevis type is simpler (to put the harness together) and likely a precursor to the forged type.
Mark

Mark you are exactly correct. If you read the patent for the square D, it is basically a trace connector, to improve flexibility, strength and to simplify repair. The breeching loop was incidental to the design, and there basically is no purposeful mention of connection to back saddle. However, it seems to be a convention among those who used saddles, to attach saddle straps to such a device.

As far as the ah-ha moment about pole weight, I’m almost willing to bet that it never was instrumental to the development of the D-ring modification. You can see from the photos that it seems to be entirely optional depending on the preference of the user. I’m almost more willing to assert that the biggest reason for developing the D-ring was to improve on the hold-back system represented by the Side-backer. And of course there was room available for attaching the back saddle, but as you can see the saddle was a convention for many harnesses that never could bear saddle-weight anyway.

According to Les, most people that he has met had no idea that the D-ring harness they were using could be adjusted to bear pole weight, even men older than he who had used the harness their whole lives. I wonder if that was just a regional innovation in itself, merely taking advantage of any mechanism, square D or rounded D, to accomplish that, and may not have had anything to do with the actual design and subsequent manufacture and marketing of the D-ring harness.

I was always under the impression that the forged D-rings were an older style than the bolt-through clevis style. Can’t say why, just that the forged ones I have seen were obviously older than the clevis styles I have seen. Might be coincidence.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Mark Cowdrey 31881 wrote:

…. I am inclined to substantially define a D-ring harness one that has 5 straps to the “connector”. Previous to that, e.g. the Betsy Ross photo, the “connector” seems more of convenience of some sort than anything substantive. ….
Mark

I will just say that I have dug pretty deep into historic records recently, and it really appears that the square D was present well before the rounded D.

I can’t be certain, so I am not going to hold this ground ferociously, but I don’t see a rounded D in Mitch’s photo. I am standing by what I see as a square D with a farmer innovation, running that 5th strap into the opening, even though it was not purposefully designed for that. I am backing up this assertion based on patent information I saw and examples in photos and publications from the time that don’t show any development of the rounded D.

I think the round D came sometime after 1900, and on second thought was probably a round version of the square D, with the clevis style like you suggest, with the forged style coming later.

The square D was made with bolts front and back, and the breeching loop was a slightly larger clevis that was attached to the rear bolt (optionally). It is basically a very small modification to make a rounded D with a bolt to attach the rear trace and the Breeching loop.

In fact another completely unrelated rationale for making the round D may have been strength.

At any rate we have yet to find any link to the designer or manufacturer of those rounded D-rings.

Carl

[Andy Carson]

@Carl Russell 31883 wrote:

According to Les, most people that he has met had no idea that the D-ring harness they were using could be adjusted to bear pole weight, even men older than he who had used the harness their whole lives. I wonder if that was just a regional innovation in itself, merely taking advantage of any mechanism, square D or rounded D, to accomplish that, and may not have had anything to do with the actual design and subsequent manufacture and marketing of the D-ring harness.

If this thought is widespread, perhaps the credit for the Ah-Ha moment (or at least the Ah-Ha moment that is more critical) belongs to Les, or whoever taught Les how to adjust the harness. that would be pretty cool, but it’s hard to imagine that so many harnesses were manufactured without this critical adjustment and unique advantage known. Why would a manufacturor decide to make this particular design instead of others? I think the advantage of the d-ring is an integration of formerly separate propulsion, braking and pole/shaft holding systems. If one looks at an one of these systems in isolation, its hard to envision how even if the D-ring is superior to preexisting harness…

Also, I think the horses in front of the Betty Ross museum were pulling a trolley. You can see the tracks on the road below. I have included a photo of a trolley from the same era in Chicopee Mass. You can see a similar attachemtn to the collars, but the pole is held up by itself. Also, the horses in the photo don’t have a britchen, as the trolley provides all the brakes. It is pretty common for trolley horses to not have a britchen and I’m not sure what the horses in the Betsy Ross photo are doing with thiers. It is adjusted pretty loose, though, and I strongly suspect its not used.

Certainly Ah-Ha moments can happen anywhere at any time and they don’t all have to make sense, but I am doubtful of the the idea that the D-ring sprang from a square d-design that was so widespread that it could be found in Philadelphia. It’s hard for me to imagine that the harness spread all the way through some of the most populated areas in the united states and no one said “ah-ha’ until it got 15 miles away from a swedish colony in northeastern maine and 2 miles from the canadian border, where the “ah-ha” seems to have happened almost immediately. I am still going with a combination of a Swedish harness and a sidebacker. Regurdless of who was the first to try the combo, I still think it takes alot of skill and thought to have recognised and prefected the harness out of the multitudes of possibilities, though, and that’s why I am curious to figure out who first manufactured this harness in large numbers.

[Mark Cowdrey]

@Carl Russell 31883 wrote:

…I’m almost more willing to assert that the biggest reason for developing the D-ring was to improve on the hold-back system represented by the Side-backer. …
According to Les, most people that he has met had no idea that the D-ring harness they were using could be adjusted to bear pole weight, even men older than he who had used the harness their whole lives. I wonder if that was just a regional innovation in itself, merely taking advantage of any mechanism, square D or rounded D, to accomplish that, and may not have had anything to do with the actual design and subsequent manufacture and marketing of the D-ring harness.
…

Carl

Carl,
Thanks for taking my intuitive thoughts and running them through your research.

It is not immediately apparent to me that the D-ring offers any substantial improvement holding back than a side backer does. Your thoughts?

Coming from the current position of knowing the pole weight advantage of the D-ring it baffles me that it would not be an initiating element of the design. Certainly the photos in this thread certainly bear out that that capacity was not used. Just an instructive example of the lens of “time prejudice” I look through when I look back from my perspective of today I guess.
Thanks,
Mark

[Carl Russell]

Andy, I was thinking the same thing. Les has told me that nobody “taught” him how to adjust the D-ring harness, and he attributes his own education and intelligence in his own “figuring it out”. He does not however take any credit for this “ah-ha” as he assumes like the rest of us that the saddle feature is part of the original design.

However I am not convinced, as the patent from Louisiana shows that folks were looking for ways to connect the different strap without any particular import expressed to bearing pole weight, or that weight bearing was even related to the design of saddles.

Also it is clear from several patents for front traces and short tugs that the broken trace was not exclusively a “Swedish import”.

The fact that this square D is patented, it seems likely that the design was sold to harness makers and that it had the potential of becoming widespread. I don’t have any questions that the square D could have been as wide spread, especially as it is evident in Concord NH in 1908, and I still say that it is a square D in Mitch’s photo. Furthermore there is very little resemblance in Mitch’s photo to the Swedish harness, as the breeching, side straps, and traces are all of similar design and manufacture of other commonly worn harnesses of the time.

I am not that clear on how the front side straps are connected to the yoke on the team at the potato day. I can see what looks like a front side strap, and I can see what looks like the end of a jockey yoke, but it doesn’t look to me like they actually connect. It is hard to tell from this angle if there is weight on the saddles, or if it is just well fit horses and a snug harness.

There were already large distribution companies, such as Sears Roebuck, and they were shipping their harnesses and hardware all over the country by rail. Any person could have traveled into or out of the area with something similar. I have not seen anything that makes me think that the D-ring, nor the front side-strap for that matter sprung out of northern Maine. As the photo from Bellows Falls shows that as early as 1907 the round D-ring was in use specifically as a what appears to be a modification of the side-backer.

Here is the full pic of the Betsy Ross horses, and they are apparently not on the tracks. They also are in great shape and have reasonably nice harness on, with private business initials. There is also pipe laying on the sidewalk right beside them, which may have as much connection as the trolley tracks. I think that as loose as the breeching is, it is quite clear that the breeching in combination with the hame chains allows for stopping and backing.

Carl

[Andy Carson]

Carl, you make a convincing argument with the square d patent and the early photo in Philly. You are right, of course, that they are not pulling a trolley here, but I am still critical of that pole attachment arrangement. I don’t see a yoke, and I would think that if the horse were asked to brake hard, they would be forces together and either thierncollars would be pulled down hard (if the pole was not flexible) or the pole would rise. Perhaps this particular harness was made for heavy hauling where it was expaected that the brakes of the wagon would provide the bulk of the braking force. If so, if someone hitched this up to a wagon without brakes, particularly in a hilly region, I bet they would rig up a different system for braking. If they attached straps off the front to a jockey yoke sidebacker style, they would make a functional d-ring. One could make a similiar argument for modifications to a Swedish harness, but I can’t find any documentation that a Swedish harness was made in American at the time, either in colonies like new sweden or in Minnesota. Either way, I see this as a special combination of circumstances that might lead to the development of the d-ring and I’m beginning to lean away from the Swedish hypothesis and towards Carl’s square d theory.

Just to summarize what I believe might be the special circumstances that may have led to d-ring develpoment by these two theories:

Swedish origin:
1. Preexisting scandanavian harness (no evidence)
2. Preexisting sidebacker type harnesses (ample evidence in new England)
3. Swedish settlers (yes, and times correspond to dates of d-ring types, but not all settlers use these)
4. Some demonstrable benefit of d-ring (some areas are hilly, possible advantages with jigger wagon or other equipment)
5. Two additional straps

Square D origin:
1. Preexisting square d harness (documented with patents and photos)
2. Preexisting sidebacker harness (again, all over new England)
3. Some demonstrable benefit of d-ring (some areas hilly, might allow mass produced harness to be used effectively, similar possible advantages with jigger wagon of other equipment)
4. One additional strap

[mitchmaine]

I would just hazard a guess about marks forged rings being the prototype and the drilled ring being the improvement. A handy fellow could always forge his own ring after the fact confusing the issue, but I had a forged set in tugs and they were a piece of work.

I also think the d ring to good a piece of work to be created without the notion of its features and the a-ha later on. Looking at the photos, I can believe lots of teamsters didn’t realize the design of their own harness. But it wasn’t lost on the locals around here. I was advised years ago about hooking the harness with a peavey, and tuning it to f-sharp. But it alsp requires the saddle for that purpose, and wonder why its missing in so many photos.

Just got off the phone with a horse logger from new Sweden. I was directed to him by the historical folks up there. New Sweden has a tidy history. 140 years. With some old folk still alive whos grandparents settled the area. The younger ones have moved away for jobs, and the pop. Of each town seems to run around 2-400. Small communities who know each otherwell. First off, he knows about d-ring, and watched les barden on rural heritage tv, but he hasn’t used it and doesn’t know of anyone around that does. Not a ringing endorsement from a small rural area that a few generations ago might have created the d-ring harness. So I’m cool to the Swedish connection for the time being. Randy clark is his name and he is going to go through photos at the historical society for us, but if that town did bring over the d-ring harness to the usa, everyone in town would know it, and they would have a d-ring festival every august. We know about joseph peavey, and Alvin Lombard and even silas taber. It is starting not to make sense anymore. But I haven’t completely given up on northern maine, just not expecting my own a-ha moment.

one mention about the shape of the d-ring is of course the angle of the front tug to the hames and as the force turned the tug could swing in a small arc aquare to the ring.

[Author]

Posts