Paleo/Primitive/Stone age skills

  • Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.

sam_acw

Native
Sep 2, 2005
1,081
10
41
Tyneside
As someone who reads both this board and the paleoplanet board I was wondering if there is much of a following of this way of doing things in Europe.
There have been a few good threads along this sort of line but in general Uk bushcrafters seem to be quite a high tech bunch.
What do other people think - is there a following for stone age ways of doing things here which just isn't that apparant?
Is there a reason bushcrafters are quite high tech and gadgety?
 

leon-1

Full Member
I think there is a lot of interest in stone age ways, people do not always have the time or area to practice the skills though.

Bushcrafters "gadgety", Sam you are still using a computer. Whether we like it or not technology has a very large impact on us all and Bushcraft is no different from any other skill base.

For all skills as things progress tools are made to make life easier (you use an operating system on your PC and don't type in BASIC FORTRAN or PASCAL), a lot of the time that is done to make things a little more accessible to everyday people.

If you don't have the time or the correct enviroment to practice skills in the best and easiest way of learning is through gadgets. As peoples abilities progress in bushcraft I like to think that they become less high tech because thier knowledge base has increased.
 

Salix

Nomad
Jan 13, 2006
370
1
55
Bolton
I cant speak for the rest of europe, or this forum, but i suppose it depends on how you look at it, or where your coming from. There are people out there who are coming from a historical / re-enactors perspective, trying to see how our ancestors lived, and trying to unlock there way of life. Wether by coincidence or not, bushcraft fits this mould very well. Some people are into Buschcraft because of the survivalist aspect, these could be mountaineers or other sports enthusiasts adding to there practical field skills, i sippose these people will be the ones who embrace the modern technological aspect of this field. Like I said, just my thoughts.........................im'e sort of in both camps, being interested in paleo archeology and survival. :)

Mark
 

Toddy

Mod
Mod
Jan 21, 2005
38,990
4,639
S. Lanarkshire
I agree with Leon-1; the divide you perceive is a product of our modern world. We are all in touch because we can get on-line, but I have a large network of friends I see, who all do craftwork, who I never meet on the web.
The gadgety things we use are simply modern versions of the material culture of the past. I use a firesteel where in the past I would have used pyrites and chert, kind of thing.
Personally I really appreciate the knowledge we all share for making things using natural resources, however, I can make a grass cape but I'm still going to wear Goretex or waxed cotton when I'm out for a walk :rolleyes: I wear courrans in period, or maybe for camp shoes, but I prefer my boots.
I think it's really that bushcrafters like to be able to know how things are made, what to use, when and where the resources are available; but in our cold, damp climate we do like the things that make the difference between an enjoyable weekend out or a truly miserable time. ;)
Gadgets are really just tools, and mankind is the ultimate toolmaker, whether we use stone or steel, plastic or plants.

Cheers,
Toddy
 

Salix

Nomad
Jan 13, 2006
370
1
55
Bolton
I dont know...................gadgets are good, they make life easier. :)

I would still try and master the ancient ways though, just out of curiosity, and understanding :cool:

Mark
 

leon-1

Full Member
Rangerman180 said:
I dont know...................gadgets are good, they make life easier. :)

I would still try and master the ancient ways though, just out of curiosity, and understanding :cool:

Mark

Effectively both yourself and Toddy have just said the very same thing, we learn because we want to, we do not always use what we learn because we have something that is more effective at hand (why use a firebow to lite a cigarette when you have a lighter to hand) that is a natural progression from our learning.

People are lazy by nature and will take the easiest route like water down a ravine. It doesn't mean that we don't want to know how things can be done and it doesn't mean that we don't want to practice those skills. It just means that most of the time we will take an easier route because it is in our nature.
 

Dogface

Member
Jun 16, 2005
25
0
60
Surrey
I think it comes down to the old chestnut, a definition of 'bushcraft', perhaps. There is no reason to expect that bushcraft demands a stone-age blade, for example, and as has been mentioned by Rangerman I think it's reasonable to view 'bushcraft' as a point of convergence rather than a strict discipline. One of the great and interesting things about BCUK is the way that so many people are coming at it from such different directions and are able to offer such varied insights and info.

I'm not sure I'd agree with the idea of bushcrafters being 'gadgety', though!

Cheers,

Nick.
 

Hoodoo

Full Member
Nov 17, 2003
5,302
13
Michigan, USA
If you are outdoors and doing no harm, it's all good.

Two of my favorite authors, John & Geri McPherson, discuss this issue in their book "Naked into the Wilderness - 2" in chapter 6, Primative, Primative. What I love about them is the total honesty and lack of pretentiousness. Not only do they "practice" primitive living, they live it. But by the same token, they recognize that they are not the purists that some primitive tribes might be (or might have been.)

John wrote the following: "Abstract: Theoretical rather than practical. As discussed earlier, a pretty good description to what we're into. I mean, I don't know of and have not heard of anyone in this day and age who lives and breathes primitive, primitive 100%. The very closest would have to be aborigines isolated from most day to day contact with the outside world. And they have and use steel tools. This ain't no game for them. It's one heck of a lot easier to dig out a log for a canoe using steel tools rather than stone (something we know of from experience). Can you picture some aboriginal anywhere in the world shopping for a stone axe or adze to refine his canoe to make it pure. Face it Steel is easier."

I often see Graves' book "Bushcraft" being touted for being "purist," whatever that means, but I've read the book at least a half dozen times over the past 30 some years and I'm not seeing it.

For instance:

We can start with clothing. On p. 9 I see some pretty fancy boots, shorts, belts, and a nifty hat. I doubt they were homespun.

On p. 64, Graves talks about making forms that are "bolted together." I'm guessing he got the bolts at a local hardware. He mentions shovels too. Hand carved? I doubt it.

He talks about building a log cabin and cutting logs but makes no mention of how he cut the logs nor how they are notched. Based on the drawings, my guess is he used a modern saw and axe.

He talks about billys and shows lots of drawings of them. Again, not crafted from the wilderness.

He never discusses knives directly but talks about splitting matches with the point of a sharp knife (p. 82, p. 149.) I wonder where he got the matches? And there's the "small, screw-top, plastic container" that he keeps them in...

On p. 82 he talks about using a kerosene-soaked bandage for a fire starter. I don't think even my old scout master would approve of that.

On pp. 95- 96. he uses "bags" to make a camp bed.

He does mention "knife, machete, or tomahawk" on p. 147 but I can find no mention of how he derived these from the bush. Axe talk pops up on p. 155.

Fire making includes the use of things like "sugar and permanganate of potash (Condy's crystals), " magnifying glass, saltpetre, cotton and linen, synthetic flint, and "perspex." Kerosene pops up again on p. 171.

There's more interesting stuff in Graves' book but these examples illustrate that Graves left a lot "unsaid" and he was not the "purist" he is often portrayed as.

I have zero problems with Graves' book. In fact, I love it and always have. But it's not an abo bible.

So, it's all about drawing lines. We all depend on modern technology of one form or another and I've yet to see a real purist. John and Geri don't consider themselves purists and they are about as close as it gets, not just in practicing bushcraft but in how they live their lives.

So, draw your lines but don't be telling me I crossed a line. Like I said, it's all good. Let's enjoy it instead of pissing in each other's billy can..or birch bark container. Whatever.
 

Grooveski

Native
Aug 9, 2005
1,707
10
53
Glasgow
I drifted here from Paleoplanet, which I'd found after talking the notion to build a bow from stone tools.
Was just standing in a field chucking arrows about a few years ago and thought it'd be nice to try to make a setup the way must have been done for most of the bow's history.
I'd never so much as made a shoot arrow at the time and I'm not really any further on with a stone bow than I was then but I've learned a lot of interesting stuff just playing with the idea and getting sidetracked a million times.

I go camping as often as I get the chance and have done for most of my life. I use modern gear and don't think that'll ever change. Primitive technology is for me a hobby and not something I'm trying to turn into a lifestyle.
I like making things and am not fussed what tools I use, one of these days I'll get back on track with the bow and then I will be, but that's just a personal choice for that one project.

Many folk over on Paleoplanet aren't shy of a gadget or two either sam_acw ;) . Bandsaws and Nickleson's rasps aren't any more primitive than pre-sawn blanks for knapping. Each person makes their own mind up how they want to go about things. :)
 

sam_acw

Native
Sep 2, 2005
1,081
10
41
Tyneside
I wasn't trying to start a debate on the relative merits but the reasons behind differing approaches.
Prehaps it is a difference between process and end result?
guess I didn't set the stall out clearly enough :sad6:
 

Stuart

Full Member
Sep 12, 2003
4,141
50
**********************
sam_acw said:
I wasn't trying to start a debate on the relative merits but the reasons behind differing approaches.
Prehaps it is a difference between process and end result?
guess I didn't set the stall out clearly enough :sad6:

not to worry sam, in the past some people have come to the BushcraftUk forums from a primitive skills background and mistaking this for a primitive skills site have grumbled that we are not 'pure' enough in our pursuit of these skills. this past experience has resulted people appearing a little defensive in their response to anyone who appears to be criticizing their level of technology use.

I don’t believe you intend to criticize anyone, I think you are merely enquiring as to the nature of Bushcraft as we practice it on BCUK.

Bushcraft does encompass stone age skills, but it is not solely about these skills. Bushcraft encompasses modern survival techniques but Bushcraft is not solely about these techniques either. botany, anthropology, mycology, Zoology, meteorology are all important parts of Bushcraft but none of them are Bushcraft in isolation.

Bushcraft is a difficult area of study to define, the best definition I can offer is:

Bushcraft is the art of confidence in the outdoors obtained through the study of age old skills and wisdom, enabling you to make the best use of modern technology without becoming dependant upon it for your enjoyment of the natural world.

I hope this makes thinks a little clearer
 

Pablo

Settler
Oct 10, 2005
647
5
65
Essex, UK
www.woodlife.co.uk
I don't think I've ever had a past-time where you start with technology and gadgets and go backwards once you've got the skills. I used to take a lighter to the woods to start a small fire, but I now know enough to choose my own tinder and use a firesteel. Next step...fire by friction (a retrograde step in terms of technology).

I don't think anyone can criticize the use of gadgets and technology for bushcraft. The old adage that "anyone can be uncomfortable" is more relavent to me especially at my age :rolleyes: I'm now in a position to choose when I get wet and by how much. Having said that, I intend to "go back" as far as I can in terms of using primitive skills.

As many have said, Bushcraft covers a multitude of topics and means different things to different people. I know that if I want to go to the woods with a 66 litre sack of gear with cookers and hi powered torches or a small pouch with clipper knife, I might have a different object for the excursion, but I'll have just as much fun. :D

My tuppence worth

Pablo
 
Feb 13, 2006
19
1
37
suffolk
I think that learning to do things the old way can be much more satisfying than using modern tools.

But on the other hand, making (for example) a bone arrowhead using only stone tools is a difficult skill to learn and for the sake of understanding the basics it is easier to use a hacksaw instead of a burin. i suppose the problem is that we are often trying to learn as much bushcraft during one lifelime as was accumulated over many generations in primitive societies. Do we learn every skill to the highest level? no- in most cases we try and make use of modern tools when we can so that in a real situation, or when the time is there we have a solid base in as many skills as possible to buid on.

Using modern tools is an easy way in to a new skill, the idea being that in time, the same principals and understanding can be applied to the 'primitive' technology.

it was interesting though, that on a woodlore recruitment weekend i went on recently, no one was obsessed with their gadgets. far from indicating a real outdoorsman, having millions of modern gaddgets seems to do the opposite. i guess it distances and insulates you from the realities of being outdoors.

we all seemed to have the same kit with only a few minor variations to suit personal taste. it sems to me that modern technology is a tool to keep you alive and outdoors untill you learn enough to do without it.

cicely the potter

theres no such thing as bad weather , just bad clothes
 

Hoodoo

Full Member
Nov 17, 2003
5,302
13
Michigan, USA
cicelythepotter said:
Using modern tools is an easy way in to a new skill, the idea being that in time, the same principals and understanding can be applied to the 'primitive' technology.

Well said. Over the years my appreciation for stone age technology has grown immensely. For people who venture outdoors, I think it is in their best interest to learn as much of it as they can. It's the ultimate backup plan, not to mention that learning so-called primitive ways is rewarding in its own right. But am I selling my kevlar canoe tomorrow? Nope. ;)
 

Templar

Forager
Mar 14, 2006
226
1
48
Can Tho, Vietnam (Australian)
Hi all just thought I'd throw in my two cents...
The use of "modern" kit is best described as a realistic approach to BC, we being the evolving creatures that we are we tend to use what ever labour saving device that we can find, and having lived in a "stone age" village whilst serving overseas with the UN in East Timor, I can safely say that even they even they will use iron tools when they can get them and iron spear points to hunt with when they can get them because they know that they are the better option for the longevity of the tool, sure it is nice to create a tool by hand but you must temper the experiance with the added safety of some "modern" kit....

Thats my two cents.... sorry if I rambled a little, but after spending time in the Army and also as a Search and Rescue operator you tend to look at the inherant safety of things and practicality a lot...
Karl :)
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE