Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: TatankaOhitika on May 04, 2013, 04:55:06 pm
-
Hey gang . Im not new to this sight but havn't post anything in a while . In the last couple days iv'e had some thoughts running through my head about primitive archery . Iv'e personally have been building bows and hunting with them for a little over 7 years . But what is primitive really ?
Let's look at the word primitive . I know it means " simple " . As simple as possible , but efficient at doing it's job . If im not mistaken , the very first bows were fully bending in design . Iv'e built quite a few stiff handled bows without arrow rests . But with stone tools this would make the job more time consuming . So is using a stiff handled design being built with steel tools primitive ? In my opinion , no .
I still use steel tools , but if you want to claim primitive , start from scratch and build it with stone tools . I have never seen but one native american musuem bow with a stiff handle design , and suprisngly it was on a 47" length ntn .
Id like to hear your guys opinion on this !!
-Aaron
-
I agree. A lot of what gets posted on this site is art, but not truly primitive.
Jon
-
Mostly on here primitive means old/historical, horn bows aren't simple nor are many other bows on here.
I call it primitive if it is made from natural materials, the closer to historical design the better.
-
this is a good subject!
But i think its a fair question whats "primitive" ?...but then how far do we wanna take it?
Wouldn't "totally primitive" though mean that you don't use tables and chairs to work on and you sit on the ground with your wood and stone tools?
wouldn't total primitive mean that your energy to make a bow or arrow is created entirely by a stomach filled with wild game
and foraged and harvested plants ,harvested by stone age impliments? and no driving vehicles to the woods to harvest material-you walk!...see where i'm going?
Something similar happens with those of us who sell our art work in Santa Fe. Is it "contemporary" or "traditional?"
Is that pot fired in a traditional firing? whats "traditional?" Today Galleries define traditional firing as using tin ,milk crate and sheep and/or horse dung!
Well in order to get the "traditional" status for shows you'd be amazed at what some artists will do to play the game and have safe firings.
a nice roomy wind-proof tin shed is built , a raised wood and earth platform is built in the center of the shed, an electric kiln is installed to "pre-heat" the pottery.
once its preheated (NOT FIRED!) its moved with steel tongues or fiber insulated gloves to the center of the earth platform and covered with the "traditional" milk crate and dung is placed around the crate and its bic ignited using burning newspapers.....This has become an officially accepted "traditional" way to fire a pot
and be able to say it was NOT kiln fired. a LONG way from the old trench firings of the ancient pueblo peoples.
-
lets put it this way, I consider all bows not made with stone tools to be traditional bows so long as they are made of materials that are mostly natural(TB2 or 3 is fine) Anything that is made with stone tools and ALL natural materials gets my vote as "primitive" Another way to look at it is to say "aboriginal" that is a much better term in my opinion because it clarifies that we are talking about bows made before steel tools were available.
-
Dude if you want an argument come over here... ;)
I agree it's a vague term, but then do we really want to get into semantics and pedantry?
You could define it with a time line (say pre 1800) or materials and say no, glass, carbon metal etc.
I think you are presumtious to say no primititve bows had stiff handles.
If a neolithic bowyer found a gorgeous stave that just happened to have a big gnarly knot in the middle he'd have left it stiff.
I think it's patronising to think that 'primitive' man had neither the artistry, imagination, curiousity or humour to make odd character bows.
I'm not saying he did, but curiosity and humour are surely two on mans enduring and endearing traits.
Now who's going to help me down off this high horse? ;)
Del
-
Im liking these responses . I agree that traditional bows are made even with steel tools . But im by no means a purist . I always carry a knife . That's it . However I have built 3 hunting weight bows using just quartz and sandstone ( sandstone as a rasp , and quartz as crude scraper and chopper for rough shaping , If I had chert or flint that would be awesome ) If you ever go into a situation were long-term survival in combination with lack of tools becomes an issue , you can go in knowing that after establishing a shelter , a good water source , fire that can be mainatined , and a readily available low calorie food source , that within a month or two you can construct a hunting weight bow from a sapling using stone tools . And you can fashion a bowstring from natural fiber , and so forth ect.. To an in-experienced archer , this undergoing would be a waste of time . I know my hunting skill and capability , and I would not hesitate to expend calories making a bow an arrow to potentially bring home big game calorie ( think tasty ribs , not cold roots ) . I think if you boil it down , just using a steel knife is as simple as your gunna get to primitive . But we are modern people , with modern tools . Their is no reason not to use them . However , it's always fun to build a serious bow and arrow from stone tools you didnt by online . Then you know you have the skill to do that if your stuck naked , without anything
Del ! Oh boy . Argument it is :D . I do agree with what you said though about an ol' caveman finding a knotted stiff handle stave .
-
I remember when I first started making bows when I was 12 , But only started building big game bows 7 years ago . Well they werent really " bows " I made at 12 but they put food on the table . I would just bend a green hickory branch and tie a shoe string to it , whip up a few un fletched ( not straight ) willow arrows , and fling them at rabbits and trout in a shallow creek . It still worked . So my philosophy is that a primitive bow doesn't have to be art . It can be down right ugly . It worked . Because im sure as hell not trying to catch a rabbit with my bare hands .
-
I think you are presumtious to say no primititve bows had stiff handles.
If a neolithic bowyer found a gorgeous stave that just happened to have a big gnarly knot in the middle he'd have left it stiff.
I think it's patronising to think that 'primitive' man had neither the artistry, imagination, curiousity or humour to make odd character bows.
I'm not saying he did, but curiosity and humour are surely two on mans enduring and endearing traits.
Now who's going to help me down off this high horse? ;)
Del
I'd rather just cut the cinch and let gravity do what it does best! :laugh:
My best guess, based on all the stone-age bows I have seen, and seen photos of, is that those bowyers ALWAYS used the best wood they could get and NEVER went looking for "snakey" or "character" staves. Their purpose was to to get food or protect lives. I think it is only we "civilized" folks who have the luxury of time to show our skills in the use of wood that the iceman would have not given a second look.
As for a definition of primitive, I think no use of steel serves well. I don't make primitive bows. I make natural material bows.
Lot of guys doing that today in Clarksville!
Jim Davis
-
Would you say Otzi the Ice Man was primitive? How about his bow? I wonder if he used his copper axe to rough out the stave or as a scraper? Just wanted to blow the stone tool theory out the door, you don't have to use stone tools to be primitive. Now with that said in my humble opinion I like my bows to have or be made of all natural materials, including the string. I guess we all have our own way...
-
we read in the bible in the first half of genesis that there were "great ironworkers" who had great skill with iron and steel also in the same part of genesis that there was a left handed man i believe his name was Enoch, who was was a great archer and and hunter so i figure if there were "great ironworkers" i figure they probably had the technology to make scrapers, hatchets and drawknives, which just happen to be my primarey tools since i don't have a bandsaw (i've been putting it on my christmas list for years with no luck). Duck
-
I use modern tools. making a bow with stone tools Is on my to do list. One thing I've thought about is, it doesn't seem worth it for natives with stone tools to go cut a 14 inch diameter Osage tree split it dry it and chase the ring it seems way to much of a hassle for the tools they had I feel like most natives use sapling bows to take there food down
-
Considering what not primitive is today (wheels, cables, carbon limbs, sights, releases) in my opnion the bows I make are primitive. The only non natural products used are the varnish, the tb3 and the b50 string. The reason I use modern varnish is so I spend less time maintaining the bows I use and more time shooting them. My goal however is to make a nice wapnanog bow that is sealed with some sort of pine pitch glue and the only thing not primitive is the string. So I guess it depends on your perspective. Are my bows truly primitive when compared to the compound bows of today? Yes. Of the bows made 300 years ago...They are real close aside from varnish and glue. ;)
Greg
-
Lots of plains bows in museums all over the world with stiff handles, so I think Del is right, they had the skill and ability obviously. Most were made with steel tools I would imagine, so "primitive" is a bit subjective, but they were certainly made in primitive conditions, without the benefit of band saws and sanders. Pretty impressive stuff, but as Jim said, utilitarian in form and function.
-
there was a time in the 1640s when at least one village of my wendat ancestors (of the "Huron" Confederacy) went back to "stone age" tools
and got rid of all the euro-trade goods as a choice to purify itself from invaders because it seemed where ever the french traders and Jesuits appeared ,
the diseases and dying became relentless killing off half the population reducing the confederacy to around 15,000. But this stone age return didn't last, obviously
people were still getting small pox and dying... and a steel tool is hard to resist.
In Ohio in the 1700s-1800s my Wyandot ancestors were big time traders with the British and Americans in all kinds of materials and rarely used stone tools.
But they still developed their own unique styles. To them sustainable life meant learning to survive with what you had around you.
"Primitive" can be a word relative to any historical time frame a person is living in.
A Wyandot ancestor in the 1700s with trade hatchet, flintlock or a selfbow and kettle-brass tipped arrows would have viewed Ishi
and his tools as stone age "primitive".
-
a historical Onondaga bow with a stiff handle
this one has kinda become my basic starting place design for most of my bows (but i'm still a beginner)
-
a historical Onondaga bow with a stiff handle
this one has kinda become my basic starting place design for most of my bows (but i'm still a beginner)
That looks like a sudberry bow
-
Greg - half cup pine pitch and half cup rendered deer fat makes a nice sealent that lasts 3 times longer than oil or anything of that nature . Used it a few times but it's more effort than it's worth .
And im talking about cultures that had never come into contact with the modern world . Absolutley zero metal tools . If you can fashion metal from natural material . That is primitive . Because you had absolutley ZERO aid from the modern world . All you have is your beating heart , skin , and the natural landscape around you . But like I said I would consider a steel knife and modern clothing primitive survival . But it's definatley far from the simplest way , and definatley not starting from scratch .
The bottom line is if I was stuck in the woods for months without nothing , im making a fully bending bow with stone tools .
-
I suppose technically primitive would infer first or prime, but in fairness to what we generally regard as primitive archery there is a fairly wide spectrum. Primitive doesn't necessarily mean native American, so a primitive weapon doesn't necessarily have to be a bend in the handle bow. Some of the ancient Turkish, Hungarian or Mongolian recurves were complex laminated bows, as were the Japanese Yumi. And although I'm a long way from reaching their advanced weaponry even though I have at my disposal power tools, laboratory-created glues, and man-made materials, I consider what I'm building and what I'm trying to replicate are primitive bows. Just curious, what about the Meare-Heath bow and perhaps some of the other early European/Scandinavian bows, did they bend in the handle?
-
Greg - half cup pine pitch and half cup rendered deer fat makes a nice sealent that lasts 3 times longer than oil or anything of that nature . Used it a few times but it's more effort than it's worth .
And I'm talking about cultures that had never come into contact with the modern world . Absolutely zero metal tools . If you can fashion metal from natural material . That is primitive . Because you had absolutely ZERO aid from the modern world . All you have is your beating heart , skin , and the natural landscape around you . But like I said I would consider a steel knife and modern clothing primitive survival . But it's definitely far from the simplest way , and definitely not starting from scratch .
The bottom line is if I was stuck in the woods for months without nothing , I'm making a fully bending bow with stone tools .
Good point TatankaOhitika,
I have thought about trying it with copper hand made tools or even stone/bone. That will be a good project for when I am retired.
The cool thing about people like your self and many others on this forum is if we had to we could create from a minimum of materials a functional bow from whatever we could find for wood and stone/steel hand tools. I like to make my own things because I get some sense of satisfaction from creating something from my own hands like your and my ancestors. Not to metion if made well will shoot right along side of modern long/re curve bows.
Thanks for the tip on a homemade varnish. :)
Greg
-
This really takes me back to when this site got its start! This could go for a while???! I love pontification it makes me smile! I have an opinion but don't we all!
-
LOL!!!!
Granite Mtn,
I remember all those threads too.We had em,on other sites as well.
-
Deja vu :). The question is open ended and a catch 22 so to speak. Make wooden bows with a method you are comfortable with no matter the tools and enjoy shooting them- this is my belief.
Tracy
-
The EWB guys argue about the Mary Rose and Agincourt and this is what we argue about. ;)
I agree with Tracy. I think it's cool that different people do things in different ways. Stone bows are cool, hell even custom fiberglass bows are cool sometimes, just not my cup o' tea. There are trade offs in any direction you take it and in the end it comes down to what you want to get out of it and what appeals to you. I think the basic parameters that PA sets for its forum do a good job of keeping us all talking about relatively the same thing, aside from that I try not to get too worked up about it.
-
Well, the bows that we make are "primitive" compared to what passes for archery gear now a days.
-
The middle ages or medieval era lasted from the 5th to the 15th century. And many many bows on here are built that look like some of the bows that were built during that time. The 5th century had to be quite primitive, "Seriously"
Ya I know we use store bought glue, dacron string etc.....etc.....but for the most part the bows are wood and some backed with natural materials. I personally don't care to get into Sinew or RAwhide backing or natural strings. I'll stick with the store stuff.... >:D Later on down the road I'll try out stone tip arrows and flintnapping.
-
Why would metal disqualify something as primitive, our ancestors had metal
-
I think you are presumtious to say no primititve bows had stiff handles.
If a neolithic bowyer found a gorgeous stave that just happened to have a big gnarly knot in the middle he'd have left it stiff.
I think it's patronising to think that 'primitive' man had neither the artistry, imagination, curiousity or humour to make odd character bows.
I'm not saying he did, but curiosity and humour are surely two on mans enduring and endearing traits.
Now who's going to help me down off this high horse? ;)
Del
I'd rather just cut the cinch and let gravity do what it does best! :laugh:
My best guess, based on all the stone-age bows I have seen, and seen photos of, is that those bowyers ALWAYS used the best wood they could get and NEVER went looking for "snakey" or "character" staves. Their purpose was to to get food or protect lives. I think it is only we "civilized" folks who have the luxury of time to show our skills in the use of wood that the iceman would have not given a second look.
As for a definition of primitive, I think no use of steel serves well. I don't make primitive bows. I make natural material bows.
Lot of guys doing that today in Clarksville!
Jim Davis
C'mon Dude... how many stane age bows are there in existence? maybe a handfull. How many have been made over the millenia? Millions.
So the one's you've seen are hardly a statistical sample.
They certainly decorated bows, blimey the native Americans even cut bonkers scallops out down the side so I don't think there is any argument against experimentation.
Some of this gotta do it exactly how they did it is bonkers.
Do you think at the start of the stone there was some stone age guy looking down at the guys using flint because it was a new fangled tool?
Man will use the best tool available to him, improvisation and necessity is the the mother of invention.
Nah, me? I'm going to swing about in the trees and eat fruit... none of this new fangled walkin' upright for me.
Del
-
Maybe the best test of 'is it primitive' would be to imagine it handed to Mr Ugg our stone age tester.
If he knew what it was and could use it then it's primitive :)
When we tried this test with a compound, he gave it to Mrs Ugg and she hung the washing on it to dry :laugh:
Del
-
Why would metal disqualify something as primitive, our ancestors had metal
Exactly, metal tools have been around for aloooong time.
-
Real primitive stuff has a wide range between pragmatic and representational, and this is especially true of weapons. But I often find it striking how even everyday objects are carefully decorated. Look at the aurignacian finds, it's present from as far back as we can see.
I imagine they just sat around the fire chatting, singing, manufacturing stuff, teching each other techniques most every evening. Ample time.
But they certainly did their best to make it look high tech!
-
There are many definitions of the word primitive. One means original, another is primal, another is crude, another is simple, another is elemental, another is self taught, another is tribal. I am not sure it matters one way or another. Stone age guys were working with state of the art tools and techniques. Iron age people were working with state of the art tools and techniques. Native Americans before and after first contact were working with state of the art tools and techniques. Otzi's axe was very advanced, and perhaps part of the reason he was murdered.
I think we trick ourselves by thinking we are on the cutting edge of primitive, or maybe we really are. I think looking backward for inspiration and state of mind, or maybe a philosophy, is more appropriate. And our entire society will be considered primitive or archaic 100 or 1,000 or 100,000 years from now.
-
Well, the bows that we make are "primitive" compared to what passes for archery gear now a days.
Absolutely! I went shooting at a local indoor range with my bows and the guys looked at my bows and me like I was an Indian who just walked out of the bush :) It was amusing ;)
Greg
-
I only use a tomahawk, knive, and a horse rasp to make my bows. It is as primitive as my skills allow. One who can make them with only stone is an expert bowyer in my opinion. I think people have different styles, likes and dislikes. I feel that if it is made from primitive materials such as wood, horn, backings such as sinew or natural products. The Souix tribe did have arrow rests. Maybe not as wide or deep but they did. :o
-
The way I see it is we haven't changed our base instincts one little bit from our ancestors times. Sure we have different influences that take us in certain ways now but we are still the same. What we all are doing in one way or another is harking back to a 'simpler' time. The level at which we do so is up to the individual. Bending wood and shooting sticks at things is fun now like it was 1000, 10,000 etc years ago :)
A hunting method, that is as pure as is it gets, in a time before bows, atl atl's etc was to run your prey down. This method is on the verge of dying out completely. Animals like deer are limited when running to one breath per stride with the leg action working the lungs like a set of bellows. If you can keep a deer running for long enough it's body temperature will rise and keep rising until it has to collapse and your tea is sat there in front of you. We on the other hand can sweat and breathe at a high enough rate to keep cool and of course the real clincher is that we can can water with us. Of course great fitness and supreme tracking ability are essential.
I regale the above story because what do you think man thought when somebody invented the first bow......umm maybe I don't have to run after my deer anymore. Do you think they sat round the fire saying 'well that new bow thing is a bit advanced for me I think i'll carry on running'? My guess is that they had a similar discussion to this one! Our problem is that we have gone too far, in many respects, with 'technology'. Hopefully the balance between us and the world will sort it's self out.
-
I'd like to point out what I see as an important nuance. I see some of us using the argument that people have always used the best technology that they had available to them and that we are no different. But I think there is a fundamental difference between a group transitioning between the atlatl and the bow and our culture transitioning between the wooden bow and the compound bow. And I think that difference explains why we are interested in using a wooden bow when we could just as easily use a compound bow.
Our culture may collectively possess the capacity to create a compound bow in a factory but that is not a capacity that we as individuals can posses. We are just handed a product to use. I can't speak for everyone but I think it's safe to assume that many of us are into wooden bows because it's a technology that we can own. It's something that we can make with our own two hands and create a product that is truly ours. We can fix it we can replace it, and we've put our hearts and souls into it. The ancient man could say that about any technology that he was using, new or old. That remained a constant. We have had something important taken away from us in our world of "products" and I think part of our interest in this craft is an attempt to reclaim that legacy that is a deep part of our human nature. Whether we use a rock or a bandsaw I think we're all trying to scratch the same itch.
-
I'd like to point out what I see as an important nuance. I see some of us using the argument that people have always used the best technology that they had available to them and that we are no different. But I think there is a fundamental difference between a group transitioning between the atlatl and the bow and our culture transitioning between the wooden bow and the compound bow. And I think that difference explains why we are interested in using a wooden bow when we could just as easily use a compound bow.
Our culture may collectively possess the capacity to create a compound bow in a factory but that is not a capacity that we as individuals can posses. We are just handed a product to use. I can't speak for everyone but I think it's safe to assume that many of us are into wooden bows because it's a technology that we can own. It's something that we can make with our own two hands and create a product that is truly ours. We can fix it we can replace it, and we've put our hearts and souls into it. The ancient man could say that about any technology that he was using, new or old. That remained a constant. We have had something important taken away from us in our world of "products" and I think part of our interest in this craft is an attempt to reclaim that legacy that is a deep part of our human nature. Whether we use a rock or a bandsaw I think we're all trying to scratch the same itch.
I think you said it right there !
-
To me primitive is pre contact, at least here in the US. The tools you use influence design of the bow. For example, it's hard or even impossible to use primitive tools and obtain a flat bellied design. Belly has to be slightly rounded for the tool to work efficiently. I've made arrows with stone tools and a bow. I like steel tools :) Jawge
-
Weylin made some good points, (well actually i'm not sure i've seen his knapping >:D)
when we make our own things we're "closer" to them, AND we're also one step less dependent on an industrial $ driven system .
in felling one tree:
1000s of people are required to manufacture a chainsaw, more needed to have it delivered into our hands. 1000s of people we're dependent on.
the thing cuts through wood like butter , seems almost magical, its easy, and saves a heck of a lot of time and MY energy. we like it!
at the other extreme,
a person makes a 3/4 groove stone axe from scratch and fells a tree...alone.
the energy expended in EACH situation is a lot...but only ONE has proved over thousands of years to be sustainable .
and only one is evidence of a truly independent and free individual.
I think most of us like our cool tools but none of us really like being dependent on any system.
so we like to know HOW to be able to do it without the industrial system (when there are no more chains for our chainsaw )
-
Interesting discussion. I knap stone points, ...but I do it with copper tools. My brother uses 'ABO' tools to make his points. I've done some abo work, but prefer my copper tools. He has tried copper, but feels better about his abo tools. They look the largely same at the end. Are mine different? yes, somewhat, but many things about he and I are different. Are they in someway less? hmmm... I don't think so. Do they lack some spiritual factor that his have? maybe (idk) Can the deer tell the difference? None have ever complained! ;D ;D ;D
OneBow
-
“If God had meant for us to use fiberglass bows, He would have made fiberglass trees”.
Kevin Forrester
-
It's interesting how differently the state department of fish and game defines primitive as opposed to what we think of as primitive. Bows of any type are defined as primitive! So you can go hunting with a bow that is not really a bow shooting an arrow that is not really an arrow, and still be defined as a, primitive weapon"! One traditional archer defined the wheel bow as a, "projectile launching device"! It's legal to hunt with in all 50 states "primitive weapons" season". Go figure! Dale
-
Primitive for me is about the hunt and equipment used for the kill. I want to hunt with all home made items. 43# yew bow. sinew string, shoot shaft arrows, sinew wrapped fetching. I have not mastered stone yet so I traded sinew for stone points(trades legal for this in my mind). Brain tanned some deer hide to make a quiver. I have found I can't do one without having to learn the rest.
I did use steal tools and the internet. (thanks for all the great advice / pics BTW) will have to see if the Washington Fish and Game Department will trade sinew for my tags..LOL Happy Hunting.
-
Just out of interest has anyone on here ever tried persistance hunting? eg. running a deer down on foot.
-
Just out of interest has anyone on here ever tried persistance hunting? eg. running a deer down on foot.
Too fat and old for that >:D
Tracy
-
Just out of interest has anyone on here ever tried persistance hunting? eg. running a deer down on foot.
I have chased and killed a couple of deer by tracking them walking not running. It took 4 hours in each case till the deer would allow me to get close enuf to shoot(rifle). It is very intresting to see what the deer does. Towards the end it is almost as if the deer is curious as to why you are trailing it.
Greg
-
The oldest bow yet (to my knowledge) was stiff handled (7000 BC, Holmegård bow), as was the 3200 BC Hjarnø bow (in essence).
I considder anything that COULD have been made with stone tools and matrials available to stone age man, primitive.
Cheers
-
This is a good type of thread that comes up very once in a while. Glad to see the thoughtful responses.
My two cents: Primitive is limited by what we can hunt with in accordance with our state laws. We try to use all natural materials but some of us can't hunt with stone points, for example, so we have to "cheat" and use steel. We also have to wear orange on public lands (kinda clashes with buckskin) and we also don't have the luxury of waiting for a dry day to hunt, so we sometimes use man-made waterproof finishes, bowstrings, paints, and glues.
All tools are fair game, in my opinion. After all, this is primitive "archer" not primitive "tooler". ;)
-
IMO, it is impossible for any of us to be truely primitive today. I believe the "primitive" comes from Primitive Archery Magazine, another option for us all. We all try to be as "primitive" as possible but in todays world being truely primitive is impossible for modern man.
When I got into "primitive" archery my goal was to be as simple as possible but still be effective for hunting and I think I am on my way there. ;)
-
Primitive ppl where not always on the hunt for food, as modern people think today.
They ate pretty well and had more down time than you think. If everyone did there part things where fine.(unless hit with drought or famine) But there is a time and a place for everything. Even making a fancy bow. If you think that "good looking" bows didn't exist in 'primitive' times.... Well your wrong. I have been to countless museums and seen some bows that blow my mind. Especially the ones here on the west coast of Oregon.
Perfectly crafted and painted, some have neatly burned in designs. Each color and shape holds a meaning in the physical and spiritual world. Even taking the time to reflex 90deg tips.
Taking to time to paint a canoe. Why? Bc you have the time and would like to please the ancestors.
Painting the bow to maybe give it spiritual power? Idk or maybe just bc they felt like it.
Some ppl build nice fancy looking/functioning bows and some don't. That's just how it is. Same then as it is now.
Maybe they didn't have steel but copper makes a usable tool.
The art produced by some of these cultures are way sophisticated, and imaginative, combined with the social moieties has me believing that
Non of these tools look primitive to me. Yet they are considered so.
(http://i1251.photobucket.com/albums/hh544/bryceott/null-15.jpg)
(http://i1251.photobucket.com/albums/hh544/bryceott/null-13.jpg)
(http://i1251.photobucket.com/albums/hh544/bryceott/null-17.jpg)
(http://i1251.photobucket.com/albums/hh544/bryceott/null-14.jpg)
PortlandArtMuseum.pdf.
(http://i1251.photobucket.com/albums/hh544/bryceott/null-18.jpg)
(http://i1251.photobucket.com/albums/hh544/bryceott/null-19.jpg)
We all have a depictions of 'primitive'
To me, made from all natural materials. The bow in its own merit can be considered primitive.
-Pinecone.
-
good point Bryce,
"primitive" the way we use it does not necessarily mean crude or without beauty or of little value.
MANY things our ancestors made with their hands were time consuming and valued highly.
your pictures illustrate it. I took lots of pictures in Auckland NZ of the amazing artwork of ancient Maori,
often wood carvings using stone tools like this hand carved canoe prow.
But it seems in any time frame there WERE "craftsmen" who were not as skilled or gifted as others
and there's plenty of examples of "crude" work in museum collections as well...kept in archival basements!
-
Yes! Infact to even view some of the bows that aren't on display you have to be granted permission and supervised. They don't have the good stuff on display most of the time.
-
the simplest things... a wrapped gourd water bottle or a wicked fighting "sword" made by tying on sharks teeth.
all done with care and precision, for function and use.
-
Thanks for the pictures guys. As detailed and intricate as some of these pieces are certainly shows that old or ancient isn't necessarily primitive, and certainly isn't crude or common.
-
It seems to me that we are relating primitive strictly to native Americans, what about the old world who had bronze, iron, steel (I would debate metal not being a natural material) we have hundreds of years of their work that nobody Seems to be considering as primitive.
-
There is stuff from New Zealand up there bud.
It's not just North America. But those pieces of knowledge and history are just easier to come by sense we live here.
-
There is stuff from New Zealand up there bud.
Realized that right after I posted :)
But my point remains that when people say that stone tools are a necessity/part of primitive they are also saying that much older artifacts are not primitive. I'd bet you Odysseus bow wasn't with stone.
-
Primitive just means first or earliest. The first or earliest way of doing things could be more complex or intricate than later ways.
It certainly doesn't mean crude or simple, though people are conditioned to understand the word that way.
In terms of bow and bow making technology, I consider self bows (or maybe simple backed bows) to be primitive since that was the form of the first bows. Where bow -making- is concerned, the use of metal tools is a relatively recent technology in both the New and Old World. The use of metal tools may be ancient, but they're not primitive by the definition of the word. Only in the Near East (and possibly Asia?) are the origins of archery and availability of metal tools even remotely close together on the timeline.
Anyway, that's my introduction on this forum. Hope I didn't offend anyone. Nice to be here!
-
Primitive ppl where not always on the hunt for food, as modern people think today.
They ate pretty well and had more down time than you think. If everyone did there part things where fine.(unless hit with drought or famine) But there is a time and a place for everything. Even making a fancy bow. If you think that "good looking" bows didn't exist in 'primitive' times.... Well your wrong. I have been to countless museums and seen some bows that blow my mind. Especially the ones here on the west coast of Oregon.
Perfectly crafted and painted, some have neatly burned in designs. Each color and shape holds a meaning in the physical and spiritual world. Even taking the time to reflex 90deg tips.
Taking to time to paint a canoe. Why? Bc you have the time and would like to please the ancestors.
Painting the bow to maybe give it spiritual power? Idk or maybe just bc they felt like it.
Some ppl build nice fancy looking/functioning bows and some don't. That's just how it is. Same then as it is now.
Maybe they didn't have steel but copper makes a usable tool.
The art produced by some of these cultures are way sophisticated, and imaginative, combined with the social moieties has me believing that
Non of these tools look primitive to me. Yet they are considered so.
We all have a depictions of 'primitive'
To me, made from all natural materials. The bow in its own merit can be considered primitive.
-Pinecone.
Great post Piney ;) Some gorgeous stuff there.
Me & Mrs Cat went to see the Ice Age Art exhibition at the Brit' Mus' a few weeks back... excellent.
Del
-
It seems to me that we are relating primitive strictly to native Americans, what about the old world who had bronze, iron, steel (I would debate metal not being a natural material) we have hundreds of years of their work that nobody Seems to be considering as primitive.
.
Metal is a natural material there's no debate
-
I'm with Pat. I understand primitive archery equipment to be made with primitive materials, by primitive methods, by primitive man. What we're making, utilizing modern tools, including things like artificial lighting and heat, modern-made tools, even a bench vice, the internet for reference, etc. could never be considered primitive in true sense. It's not primitive simply because it's made of natural materials. I also agree with others above that just because it IS primitive, doesn't inherently mean it's crude.
-
Just a few questions for the guys who think that "primitive" is not only in the design and materials, but in the tools and the mentality of the maker. Let's stir the pot a bit. >:D
What is the difference between a rasp and a rough rock? Between a sanding sponge and a handful of rough grass? In my view, there is one difference: efficiency.
Does "primitive" mean that we have to be less efficient? If yes, then why don't we just use dull knives and worn out saw blades to make our stuff? Because that would be stupid? Or does primitive mean that we have to do it the "old" way? If yes, then where do we draw the line? Maybe we should use the tools contemporary to the item being reproduced? If yes, then where is the reliable information and hard archeological data?
What about people who believe the earth is less that 7000 years old (or even younger)? Can they understand what "primitive" means? Does mentality even need to enter the picture?
Why don't we keep it simple as say that only the guys who are willing to go into the wilderness with nothing but the knowledge in their heads, buckskins for clothing, pemmican for food, sticks for making fire, and stone tools for making things are the ones making "primitive" archery equipment? And the rest of us wannabees can go pound sand?
Or maybe it's possible to define "truly primitive" in a way that is more inclusive. You know, less elitist. (I hope Iwoabow will jump on this one)
-
Primitive is coooool!
:laugh:
-
I'm 64 years old and on certain days I feel primitive... :laugh:
How anyone makes their bows is only up to them to decide. I don't need to prove to anyone I make primitive bows, only that I make my own wooden bows.
-
When ppl think 'primitive' I think that Stone Age tools jump into there minds.
-
jackcrafty ,hey, good points ( and yes , i've seen your points! :))
its probably easier to agree on what IS NOT primitive. start at the extremes of High tech and go from there.
but it seems "primitive" is always gonna be a grey area word.
on the tool issue though :
there may (or may not) be much in the way of efficiency between a hand full of certain grass and a sanding sponge
BUT the handful of grass requires only a knowledge and ones ability to harvest the material.
while the manufacture of a sanding sponge requires machinery, factories, advertising, and petroleum-based technology that's anything but "primitive."
So, that might be a agreed upon difference. When we use these products (as we all do) we're still "plugged-in" to the machine, so to speak.
learning to do without "the machine" for some of us is important...even if its not essential.
-
Bryce, what tools were available during the stone ages? I have a pretty god idea but what do you think?
-
Richard, would it be OK if I made a sanding sponge out of a real sponge covered with pitch glue and then dipped in sand? What if there was a special "trade" for making such items?
(I get your point, just want to know where to draw the line :))
-
I'm gonna guess stone.....perchaps?
I've only ever studied PNW cultures, so that all I got in my hand lol
They did have copper.
Willing to learn.
Richard, would it be OK if I made a sanding sponge out of a real sponge covered with pitch glue and then dipped in sand? What if there was a special "trade" for making such items?
(I get your point, just want to know where to draw the line :))
Or a piece of leather dipped in hide glue/pitch and rubbed though the sand and then some finer clay sediment. You know for that satin finish :)
-
I'm gonna guess stone.....perchaps?
Good guess!! ;) I assume that PNW stands for Pacific North West?
Anyway, most people don't realize that the "stone ages" overlap with the use of metal tools in many areas around the world and in many stone age cultures. Ishi is a good case and point. These transitional time periods are basically ignored in discussions like this. Much to my dismay. :-\
-
I've thought and pondered hard many a time on this subject,and have seen many a post,opinion,and others thoughts on it,and I still don't know the definition of it......but what I do know is that I love this earths materials and gathering them, and making all types of things from it with my own hands :D
-
Jack
sorry, i was out cutting firewood (with my high-tech chain saw) till i got rained out of the woods :)
you are right about stone age overlapping metal ages. It even happened here in this country. The first trade axes
that ended up at my ancestors villages in Ontario look like they were painstakingly cut apart and used for wedges , or anvils?
stone axes seemed good enough, and they did use sheet hammered copper nuggets for various things.
Folks can agree about what's NOT "primitive."
example, at a "Primitive Cornstalk Shoot"
bows with training wheels(love that) ,sights, weights and balances, fiberglass etc.carbon arrows with plastic vanes, wouldn't be allowed
alongside selfbows with dogbane or sinew string and shoot arrows. someone or some persons would have to draw those lines.
Of course another category could be made for "Traditional" with their own rules, maybe even allowing POC arrows and plastic knocks.
Metal is going to be around for a long time . Even with a meltdown of society and no more plastic sponge factories!
I doubt we'll ever be without finding metal around. scrounging metal for points or knives maybe an act of necessity.
By then no one'll care whats "primitive," technologies will emerge that'll enhance the survival of our families.
Maybe ocean sponges with pitch and grit, might become one of the better tools around! ;)
but we do need to familiarize ourselves with handtools.....cuz when the power is off...we can't stop living.
-
I think folks might have a more objective view about what IS primitive if they'd not concern themselves or their equipment with BEING primitive.
-
When ppl think 'primitive' I think that Stone Age tools jump into there minds.
I think there is some primitive living and hunting going on around the world today. Places like the Amazon and Africa and plenty of other areas have people living what i would consider primitive lives.
Primitive is a relative term. How primitive is primitive can be discussed all day but lucky for me I really don't care that much. I'm just here to have a good time and learn to make bows. I'm sitting here at my desk on my computer in the air conditioning. There isn't very much about me thats primitive. you can define what I'm doing by whatever word you want. I'm not doing it for the definition. It has been an interesting read even though I'm not reading it thru cave painting.
-
When ppl think 'primitive' I think that Stone Age tools jump into there minds.
I think there is some primitive living and hunting going on around the world today. Places like the Amazon and Africa and plenty of other areas have people living what i would consider primitive lives.
Primitive is a relative term. How primitive is primitive can be discussed all day but lucky for me I really don't care that much. I'm just here to have a good time and learn to make bows. I'm sitting here at my desk on my computer in the air conditioning. There isn't very much about me thats primitive. you can define what I'm doing by whatever word you want. I'm not doing it for the definition. It has been an interesting read even though I'm not reading it thru cave painting.
Yes I know
-
instead of Primitive I prefer hand crafted wooden archery tackle
-
instead of Primitive I prefer hand crafted wooden archery tackle
I like 'Modern reproductions of of primative/ancient stringed weapons systems.' ;D ;D ;D
OneBow
-
Primitive bow-bow biased upon a pre-gunpowder society, constructed using the materials, and tools available to that society
-
Newindian, so, for example, Plains Indians bows made after the introduction of firearms to the Plains tribes (and using tools obtained from Europeans) were NOT primitive?
-
No ,because they are still based off the bows they had before, but you could say they are a little less primitive. The problem I see with my definition would be with something like the Penobscot bows which were a totally new design created after contact( I may be wrong on that)
-
It also may be better to say pre-gunpowder dominate socity
-
Del , ya almost had me choking to death on my dinner after reading that comment about swinging across trees eating fruit :laugh: . But yep ! Im still gunna use steel tools . But as little as possible . Remember yall , primitive means simple !!
-
Been following the thread, and I like it too. i didnt realize it would get us all inspired to share.
anyway here is my view.
I had always thought using stone tools was a way of cheating when making primitive bows, however it dawned on me that the way its made or rather with the tools a bow is made has really no effect on the out come being primitive or not. For instance, if you get eh same bow using stone tools and steel tools no one will know the difference, so who cares really. On the other side of the spectrum sing stone tools allows you to look at the past and re-invent what teh primitive cultures did. Any who as to the question what is really primitive. My opinion is that if its made with all natural materials (the bow) like wood, sinew, wax, and other form of sealer it doesnt matter where you get it or what tools you use, as long as its made of. but thats just me. I will one day complete a stone tool bow when i find a green sapling suitable for it just because i like to try all aspects of this stuff.
-
"For instance, if you get eh same bow using stone tools and steel tools no one will know the difference, so who cares really."
Well, that's the thing... you're NOT going to get the same bow in the end. You're not going to cut down the same tree with a stone hand axe that you would have with a chainsaw. Or do the same quality of work with stone axes and scrapers as with steel saws, planes, rasps, scrapers, etc. Heck, you may even elect to design the entire bow differently, to better facilitate its construction with primitive tools and methods. Try it. You'll see. Then by all means, come back and tell us what 'primitive bow' means to you afterwards. I think there's a pretty good chance you'll see things a little differently :)
-
"For instance, if you get eh same bow using stone tools and steel tools no one will know the difference, so who cares really."
Well, that's the thing... you're NOT going to get the same bow in the end. You're not going to cut down the same tree with a stone hand axe that you would have with a chainsaw. Or do the same quality of work with stone axes and scrapers as with steel saws, planes, rasps, scrapers, etc. Heck, you may even elect to design the entire bow differently, to better facilitate its construction with primitive tools and methods. Try it. You'll see. Then by all means, come back and tell us what 'primitive bow' means to you afterwards. I think there's a pretty good chance you'll see things a little differently :)
Why don't you try it
-
"For instance, if you get eh same bow using stone tools and steel tools no one will know the difference, so who cares really."
Well, that's the thing... you're NOT going to get the same bow in the end. You're not going to cut down the same tree with a stone hand axe that you would have with a chainsaw. Or do the same quality of work with stone axes and scrapers as with steel saws, planes, rasps, scrapers, etc. Heck, you may even elect to design the entire bow differently, to better facilitate its construction with primitive tools and methods. Try it. You'll see. Then by all means, come back and tell us what 'primitive bow' means to you afterwards. I think there's a pretty good chance you'll see things a little differently :)
Huh??....what??? ....I'm pretty sure you can get the same results and looks with stone/primitive tools,its just not as easy to do is all...
-
I'd like to make a motion to change the name of the magazine and forum to. "Not as Primitive as it was once thought to be Archer Magazine" or maybe "Less Primitive Archer Magazine" or "Modern reproductions of of primative/ancient stringed weapons systems Archer Magazine"
-
Wouldn't primitive to modern man be pre 1900 wasnt it some where arround there that the car was invented before that most every thing was still made by hand even if it was in a factory it was still a person standing behind a anvil with a hammer in his hand making an item or part of one. Now man can walk up to a machine place a piece of material in it push a few buttons and out comes a item or par of one so intricut and complex it would have taken forever to make by hand if it would even be possible we carry the bulk of the worlds knowledge around in our pockets all we have to do is touch a screen we can travel long distances in no time at all etc etc.there are many times or ages within the general understanding of primitive if it was stone age archer or bronze age archer it would be a lot more restrictive the old world left those ages and was in an industrial age and had gunpowder when the people on this continent where still in the stone age. I think what is more important is the skills learned and the desired connection with those people than the materials used to make the tools power tools may be pushing it a little but it is a new twist on an old machine that with some tweaking could be run with ancient power. Sorry its so long just my .02
-
Marks, good sarcasm is always appreciated. >:D
We have a section on the forum, though, for a certain segment of readers, that practice what we call "very" primitive ways:
Cave Men Only "Oooga Booga" http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/board,20.0.html
Feel free to post your "very" primitive stuff there. And, as you can see, the section could use the help. ::)
-
Interesting conversation,seem everyone has a opinion,I build wood bows ,call it what ever you like. ;) :)
Pappy
-
Great conversation piece but ultimately a bit silly. Primitive is a relative word and nowhere defined really means stone tools, furs, etc.
Merriam Webster...
Definition of PRIMITIVE
1
a : not derived : original, primary
b : assumed as a basis; especially : axiomatic <primitive concepts>
2
a : of or relating to the earliest age or period : primeval <the primitive church>
b : closely approximating an early ancestral type : little evolved <primitive mammals>
c : belonging to or characteristic of an early stage of development : crude, rudimentary <primitive technology>
d : of, relating to, or constituting the assumed parent speech of related languages <primitive Germanic>
3
a : elemental, natural <our primitive feelings of vengeance — John Mackwood>
b : of, relating to, or produced by a people or culture that is nonindustrial and often nonliterate and tribal <primitive art>
c : naive
d (1) : self-taught, untutored <primitive craftsmen> (2) : produced by a self-taught artist <a primitive painting>
— prim·i·tive·ly adverb
— prim·i·tive·ness noun
— prim·i·tiv·i·ty noun
See primitive defined for English-language learners »
See primitive defined for kids »
Examples of PRIMITIVE
the time when primitive man first learned to use fire
The technology they used was primitive and outdated.
The camp had only a primitive outdoor toilet.
Origin of PRIMITIVE
Middle English primitif, from Latin primitivus first formed, from primitiae first fruits, from primus first — more at prime
First Known Use: 14th century
Related to PRIMITIVE
Synonyms
crude, low, rude, rudimentary
Antonyms
advanced, developed, evolved, high, higher, late
Related Words
basic, simple, uncomplicated; homely, homespun, unsophisticated; early, embryonic, primeval, primordial; backward, underdeveloped, undeveloped; aged, ancient, antediluvian, antiquated, antique, dated, fusty, hoary, musty, obsolete, old, oldfangled, old-fashioned, old-time, out-of-date, outworn, passé, past, quaint, unmodernized
Near Antonyms
complex, complicated, intricate, involved, sophisticated; full-blown, grown, mature, matured, perfected, ripe, ripened; civilized, cultivated, enlightened, refined; contemporary, current, latest, mod, modern, modernistic, new, newfangled, new-fashioned, novel, now, present-day, space-age, state-of-the-art, supermodern, ultramodern, up-to-date
This being said... there are a variety of options. One I think is interesting is when looking at "primitive" as often used today in American English as simply meaning old and out of date. In this regard, MOST Americans (although likely not a single one of us) would call this bow primitive...
(http://www.bowhunting.net/artman2/uploads/1/Allen_compound_bow-figure-3.jpg)
I hunt often with a flintlock (and sometimes a matchlock) smoothbore. Most consider this dreadfully primitive, but it is VERY hi-tech compared to most of what we are talking about here.
Heck, MOST Americans would consider this primitive (although I do not even have this tech., myself)...
(http://atomictoasters.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/cell-phone-bag-phone.jpg)
-
By definition that phone -is- primitive in the context of mobile phones. It is -not- primitive in the context of communications technology since it is far more advanced than the telegraph.
I see no problem with referring to bows designed along the styles and principles of the earliest bows on record, ie. Stellmoor, Holmegaard et al., or the latest bows made along said styles and principles, ie. pre-contact American bows, as 'Primitive' regardless of whether it was made with a bandsaw or a sharp rock, since the qualifying factor is the form and function of the bow itself.
A primitive bow is a different subject from primitive bow -making- methods. In my opinion.
-
I now see Primitive as an encompassing word. I personally started by thinking materials are what make it primitive. Some have stated methods and tools. Others go for the historically accurate design.
I'm starting to think we are all right. Just like Archery includes primitive, traditional, and even compound bows, Primitive archery is a spectrum and not just a single meaning. There is a place in Primitive for all of us. Some of us are less primitive than others but if this is an 'exclusive' club then I want out. I like it here because it is inclusive.
-
For me, I feel I make primitive bows with modern techniques. If I had enough experience with primitive tools then I don't see what would keep me from producing the same product if I really wanted to take the time to do so. So the act of building the bow is not primitive but the bow itself fits within the category of being a primitive weapon... Except for the string. ;D
-
By definition that phone -is- primitive in the context of mobile phones. It is -not- primitive in the context of communications technology since it is far more advanced than the telegraph.
Indeed.... point is that it is all relevant. A "primitive" bow made with stone tools etc. is still more hi -tech and "advanced" than an atlatl, or even more a hand thrown spear, or even a a stone thrown.
A primitive bow is a different subject from primitive bow -making- methods. In my opinion.
Totally agreed!
-
Going to start this up again because it is a great topic.
Question 1 if an arrowhead made from chert is produced by a CNC machine and it looks just like an artifact is the item primitive. If I hunt with it can I be consider as a primitive archer. Is it the produce that matters or process.
We now have 3D printers. If a bow was printed using wood fiber and the design was "primitive is it primitive.
I think we can agree that process is important in that we don't cross a line.
What is that line in primitive archery when we call foul. Well to answer that I will try to break it down like this.
A bow has two sticks string and maybe feathers and glue.
Lets start with the string...yes I can male a make a milkweed string without the aid of modern tools
The arrow shaft easily made from dogwood with chert flakes.
Pine pitch easy made primitive
Stone point abo easy
Feather cut and tied easy no problem
Now that bow needs a little sand paper and the snake grass works just as good so that's easy
Cutting the tree down easy...watched a guy at skunk river knapin do it with stone tools and it only took 10 extra minutes to cut a 8 inch log compared to steel. Stone tools are very efficient and better than iron hehe (set both tools down on the ground then come back 20 years later and try cutting down a tree. Which one will do it after you put new handles on both). So the different tool different bow is out. I think when I build mine I will build multi high quality tools and just keep discarding till the job is complete. For example I will make 20 flint scrapers and when it dulls I will just grab another. And for reducing the sides a couple hand axes should make it a short job. I think they just worked smarter not harder. Also we think in terms of an island and being the only person. It is more likely that the labor was divided. Maybe the lady two huts down made your string because that's all she was capable of doing
Anyway I think in terms of substitution.
Example ...snake grass works great so sand paper is not "cheating"
Cutting down milkweed with a flint or steel knife equal in my book
After watching the stone axe demo darn near equal and the steel axe being a non-superior tool (hehe) that's fair.
-
The bows that are posted on this site are only made in "primitive " designs every one on here uses modern materials and tools to make there bows which is perfectly fine
-
I like this topic.
any definitions of "primitive" can be problematic
another question might involve harvesting and the place of fabrication of your stone age bow or arrows.
Is it stone-age primitive if you drive in an auto to get rock, or have UPS deliver flint to your door?
"stone age Primitive" to work in a garage with electric lights or even with safety glasses on?
and how are you obtaining your sinew, sap, etc.. driving again?
we are still pretty addicted to our comforts(and love our internet!)
10,000 yr old stone tools and lifeways we'd call "primitive", but for those living then, it was cutting edge technology.
so seems "primitive" tends to be defined from hindsight...looking backwards.
I don't try to define "primitive" I just have a bent towards using things that are found or where little money is involved,foraging,scrounging,
and creating something from what is on hand. I also like to be able to KNOW how my ancestors survived and thrived,and know by experiencing their techniques...but cheating a little along the way.
-
Primitive does not = crude.
-
I was not overly impressed with this thread when it started. The original poster held himself out as a purist and how steel tools were not as pure as stone tools. And then he stopped posting right after Gun Doc pointed out his love of artificial sinew in the post immediately before he posted how he was "too much of purist to hear the word varnish on a primitive bow".
This whole thread was his uninating contest, wherein he picked and chose the rules himself. His username TatankaOhitika translates as "BuffaloHeart". I could be wrong, my Lakota is very limited and rusty. Those now famous horse bows of the Sioux were most likely universally manufactured with the steel tools he decried as not primitive enough. (And for all his love of bendy handled bows, a 5 curve really doesn't bend in the grip!) Knives, hatchets, axes, rasps, files, etc are all documented trade goods that the Plains Tribes highly valued. If you are going to be a purist, be a purist with some semblance of historical acuracy.
Note the original poster didn't stick around long and never posted a single photo of his work. He posted from May 4, 2013 until June 3, 2013.
-
Wow jw good history on that last post.
-
Would you say Otzi the Ice Man was primitive? How about his bow? I wonder if he used his copper axe to rough out the stave or as a scraper? Just wanted to blow the stone tool theory out the door, you don't have to use stone tools to be primitive. Now with that said in my humble opinion I like my bows to have or be made of all natural materials, including the string. I guess we all have our own way...
JW, you are correct and As I said before Otzi was using metal and so was someone before him.
-
Attach what meaning you want, as long as the end result is cool. In the immortal words of John Lennon," It's just words."
-
I was not overly impressed with this thread when it started. The original poster held himself out as a purist and how steel tools were not as pure as stone tools. And then he stopped posting right after Gun Doc pointed out his love of artificial sinew in the post immediately before he posted how he was "too much of purist to hear the word varnish on a primitive bow".
This whole thread was his uninating contest, wherein he picked and chose the rules himself. His username TatankaOhitika translates as "BuffaloHeart". I could be wrong, my Lakota is very limited and rusty. Those now famous horse bows of the Sioux were most likely universally manufactured with the steel tools he decried as not primitive enough. (And for all his love of bendy handled bows, a 5 curve really doesn't bend in the grip!) Knives, hatchets, axes, rasps, files, etc are all documented trade goods that the Plains Tribes highly valued. If you are going to be a purist, be a purist with some semblance of historical acuracy.
Note the original poster didn't stick around long and never posted a single photo of his work. He posted from May 4, 2013 until June 3, 2013.
He hasn't posted on his YouTube channel either since around his last time on here so this post has nothing to do with why he hasn't been on It's something else
-
I'd guess Ozti the Iceman would have defended his tools as made from the current technologies
he was aware of. He probably wasn't some weekend reinactor >:D trying to make "primitive" weapons
-
a long time not here and now I found this intresting thread.
In Europe there is a contest of praehistoric weapons with very simple rules for the bows, the arrows and the string:
Only natural materials are allowed for the stuff. No metals and no plastic.
So you have "primitive" weapons. They don't have to build with "primitive" tools.
A primitive bow can't be as authentic as a original stone age bow thousands of years later.....
In my opinion for a primitive bow you should only use natural materials. No derived material is really natural. So metal, fiberglas, carbon and other plastics is nothing for a primitive bow.....
...but why you shouldn't use a bandsaw and build a rough selfbow in 10 minutes as Tim Baker (or was it Jim Hamm?) described in the Bowyer's Bible
And I have deep respect if people are building their stuff only with stone - and bonetools.....
-
dont we all^^^^^ dont we all.
-
Several years ago this topic got batted around at paleo planet, they ended up seperating forums. Backed bows, flight bows, scientific discussion. The site really lost traffic after that and a lot of its character. I feel like if the bow is natural materials go for it. We all have slightly different reasons for being here. I like to build wood bows, mostly with hand tools but I also use bandsaws when I feel like it. I enjoy a technical discussion or debate now and then. Mostly I just like to build and shoot any kind of wood bow I can dream of making. Someguys are experts on finishes, some like replicas. No group is any better or any more important or hip than another.
-
We'll put badger.
-
I guess my main point was the primitive tools were darn good. Heck I might even be able to make an arrowhead from a flake faster with an antler tip and ulna bone than with copper. A stone axe will send chips flying and is a good tool so who cared if you use a steel axe or not. I think if you have some understanding of the connection it all makes sense. I don't see the "cheating" part of the argument unless you don't understand the connection.
So for example my ABO tools are really good when used correctly and make points rather fast. I think if I made bows only from really good primitive tools I would find the same to be true. Therefore it is my belief that the basic steel tools including your bandsaws does not fundamentally change ones understanding of how to build a primitive bow anymore than using copper to make an arrowhead. The basic fundamentals are the same but the difference is in understanding the primitive tool's capablities/funtionality/limitation to achieve the same goal.
First time I tried to make a point with antler I thought how in the world is this even possible. It was the exact same way I felt when I first picked up a draw knife. I feel very skilled with both now. The ABO learning curve is high because you cant buy the tools you have to make them and they need to be of good quality combine that with learning bow design and tiller and you have a very big project on your hands.
-
( Primitive Archer )
After reading this entire thread and knowing we are all members (family) of this web site and magazine I wonder still how to define Primitive Archer. I love everyone's bows, projects, ideas and knowledge here and to each his own...No fiberglass but use all the epoxy and plastic and metal you want seems to be hypocritical...I don't condemn anyone for his choice...Just still in the dark here so to speak on the definition and how we can explain it? I've told friends I was a primitive archer and they want me to explain. I tell them I use all natural products on bows from hide glue, self nocks, sinew, pitch and wood, but definitely not abo tools. Just can't define primitive archery ??? Again, to each his own.......
-
I'd like to add a correction to JW's recent post. The author of this posts name means "brave buffalo". In addition, I also agree that metal tools were used after the onset of trappers trading with the lakota. Perhaps the same with the other tribes as well. Does that make them less primitive? I don't think so. Maybe more practical.
-
Not to be argumentative,But His "Handle" actually translates to Brave heart Bull.I remember he had a few vids on youtube back when.It actually kinda irks me,when someone uses a internet handle,that is an old family name,and they are NOT of that family.Some people take this whole infatuation with Native people way too far and it becomes Disrespectfull after a while.I know they dont intend it that way,but it is.
If i remember correctly,the OP became older and was posting under his own name,but kind of drifted away,from archery.I think he may have enlisted in the military,but i might be confusing that,with someone else.
-
Well, the way I see it, this is primitive ARCHER... so as long as we're all running round in the nude chasing animals and grunting, then we're pretty much meeting the requirement :D
... wait, you guys do that too right?
-
Well, the way I see it, this is primitive ARCHER... so as long as we're all running round in the nude chasing animals and grunting, then we're pretty much meeting the requirement :D
... wait, you guys do that too right?
now that's funny
-
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!
-
Well, the way I see it, this is primitive ARCHER... so as long as we're all running round in the nude chasing animals and grunting, then we're pretty much meeting the requirement :D
... wait, you guys do that too right?
Does my wife count?
-
Does my wife count?
I hope so, I count mine :D
-
OK, I'll take a shot.
In this modern industrial and high tech age we are hard pressed to live in a "primitive" way. I can't define primitive but I can tell you that I am a direct connections to it. The changes in my lifetime alone are amazing and I often think "too much."
And so it was for my parents and grandparents on back to a time beyond the ability of my modern technology to recall or trace. And in my every cell there is that lineage and unconscious trail back through time all the way to the cave; and it still calls me to return even though I have hardly been there.
The instinct to make a tool with our own hands and then use it to survive has been in us since who knows when and for some, it is still beckoning to step out of this modern chaos to a time of intelligent simplicity and necessity.
That longing, that beckoning....that is primitive.
-
New here, and no, I haven't read this whole thread. Forgive me if I re-cover old ground.
I hear a similar argument in the woodworking community. The one thing that always strikes me is that the development of tools and the choice of tools is always driven by the need to make a living. When my great-grandfather learned to build houses back in nineteenth-century Germany, I guaran-double-damn-tee you he used the best and most 'modern' tools he had available to him. When I build cabinets today, I could probably manage to build them without electric and pneumatic tools and modern materials (plywood, etc.), but my meager hand-tool skills mean they would not be as well done, and I surely couldn't build them fast enough to put food on the table when competing with someone using contemporary goods. I did not know Great-Grampa, but I have know enough about him to know that he was all about making a living and providing for his family. Now I know there are 'Neanderthal' woodworkers out there who use only 'historical' tools and materials. Some just for the love of the process, but most who do so are trading on the 'hand-made' concept.
What is of concern on this site has little to do with paying the bills except for just a few of us. We are nearly all in it for the love of some aspect of it. For some it's about the challenge of the hunt--doing it with a hand-made weapon makes it all the better. Still others are in it for the love of (pre-)history. Some are romantics seeking a connection with a fading past. Some, no doubt, are Luddites who are threatened by an ever faster moving modern world. For me and, I assume, at least a few others, it's all about the wood--seeing what I can make from a piece of a tree. So, for at least some of us, the choice of tool or method is largely irrelevant.
Within that context, the concept of 'primitive' is bound to be a vague and relative term. Its meaning for one of us is not useful to the next. I haven't spent enough time here to have seen if there are conflicts about who 'is 'authentic' and who is not, but without inclusiveness organizations like this become so narrow as to lose effectiveness. One of the great joys of my life is when I take what I have learned in one arena and apply it in another. Similarly, I learn many things about what is important to me from sources totally unconnected to me or mine. Philosopher Gregory Bateson once said, "The only source of new information is chaos." My point is that if we define 'primitive' too narrowly, we may drive off the next person who can add to the store of knowledge that is the core of websites like this.
Just my two cents.
Best,
Tom
-
I just have a love of the outdoors, and hunting. I love trees and plants, or rather I love knowing the various uses of those plants and their qualities. I love history, especially 18th and 19th century American history. Favorite book of all time is Undaunted Courage about the Corp of Discovery and their interaction with the native American people. How they used natural materials by and large, to cross the continent and back. Just incredible stuff really. This is where my interests lie, and it all come together for me here. Call it primitive or traditional or anything else you wish. I'm not striving to satisfy anyone else's notion of some particular orthodoxy to adhere to. I like learning about this stuff, making it and seeing how it works and using it. I try and keep an open mind towards others interests in this arena, but I hate seeing FG tape on a wood bow. I'm sorry, it's just wrong. So I too have my own self-imposed boundaries, beyond which I personally have little interest. Now, I brain tanned an Axis hide once. It was very thick and I had trouble getting it completely dry and it kept ending up stiff at the end of every day, so I threw it in the dryer with a pair of sneakers. Worked perfectly. You couldn't tell it apart from any other hides we were working on. The purests among us found this entire idea as nearly heretical. The hide made a great shirt. :)
-
---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_Mesoamerica
---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_America
-
Literal translation is brave buffalo bull trust me. In fact, tatanka means buffalo bull. General reference to buffalo is pte. Brave heart buffalo is a totally different meaning. An example would be a lakota society called cante t'inza meaning strong/brave heart. His name makes no reference to that other than brave buffalo bull. I'm not trying to be argumentative either but being a fluent speaker I would know.
-
Yes,
You are absolutely correct,OB.
When i read the post of Brave Buffalo and something posted about heart too.I know its translation,is Brave Bull and then my mind whent to thinking about the Brave heart bull family.Im shure you know them.
My screw up.
Note to self,
Dont think about other things when you are typing something else. :-[
Im sure it irritates you too that since Dances,came out,everybody thinks Tatanka,means "Buffalo"
-
I would definitely defer to your translation skills, O.B.
In addition, I also agree that metal tools were used after the onset of trappers trading with the lakota. Perhaps the same with the other tribes as well. Does that make them less primitive? I don't think so. Maybe more practical.
O.B.'s family likely did not spend any time arguing about the purity of stone over metal, except in the case of particular ceremonies or medicine. They had a life to live and were in the business of being practical. We, on the other hand, are doing this for fun. We have the luxury of taking methods that are slower and more painstaking. If it was put on a more life and death basis, we'd all be kicking down the doors of the gun shop. The bow would again be a footnote in the back of the book again.
It actually kinda irks me,when someone uses a internet handle,that is an old family name,and they are NOT of that family.Some people take this whole infatuation with Native people way too far and it becomes Disrespectfull after a while.
You hit that nail right on the head. I'm most definitely lacking any pigmented ancestry and I get a little saddened when I see this.
-
The fact is that steel only makes the work easier. Most all the bows made here could be made with stone tools, yes even laminated bows. It would only take longer with more effort. It's also a fact that several hundred years ago people had more time on their hands because of simpler living, no modern machines to occupy our time, no rat race. Wen you have less distractions you have more time to spend on those things that really matter.
-
New here, and no, I haven't read this whole thread. Forgive me if I re-cover old ground.
I hear a similar argument in the woodworking community. The one thing that always strikes me is that the development of tools and the choice of tools is always driven by the need to make a living. When my great-grandfather learned to build houses back in nineteenth-century Germany, I guaran-double-damn-tee you he used the best and most 'modern' tools he had available to him.
Best,
Tom
Good point,
I guess at some point in time humans have passed by wanting to speed up the process of making things to make a living and gone to wanting to slow down the rat race instead. When I was a kid I was tethered by a phone cord and no answering machine was ever used that I knew of. Now it drives me nuts to see all this technology and kids can't live without checking cel messages and emails all day. To my kids I will be primitive. UGGHH UGGH OOGA BOOGA
-
Well, the way I see it, this is primitive ARCHER... so as long as we're all running round in the nude chasing animals and grunting, then we're pretty much meeting the requirement :D
... wait, you guys do that too right?
Does my wife count?
...as long as you have a long curved stick in your hand while you are chasing chase her.
OneBow
-
I will offer the general definition used for folks who play period hickory shafted golf clubs. It should look, feel, and perform like the equipment of the day/time you are trying to replicate or emerse yourself into. For example, if you use a modern adhesive, to secure the clubhead to the shaft, you can't see it or tell any difference from a true period club of early 1900's (where they did not have modern adhesives). So most hickory players don't object to modern adhesives to secure the clubhead. you could not pick up a club and tell the difference. But if you put a rubber grip on it, it would not look or feel like a club of the period. It would be noticeably different than period-authentic equipment. That is where you draw the line in my opinion. It must look, feel, and perform like the equipment of the day/time you are trying to replicate or emerse yourself into
Archery-wise, for many of us, this would translate to historical times of Native American culture (there are few bow artifacts of pre-contact or even early contact). So I am fine using a bow made with metal tools - it would look, feel, and perform similar to a period weapon. The string is where I think many of us cheat our intentions. It is certainly easier to use modern materials for a string, but to me the bow does not have same feel. I use strings made of rawhide or gut, as this is truer to the period of interest. You will lose a little performance, but interestingly, if brace height set-up for this material, you will shoot a bow that is ultra-quiet (or has been my experience). A natural string is a more difficult path to take for sure.
The sealant is another area where I don't want to compromise. I use bear grease or pitch varnish. A good pitch varnish is an incredible sealant; and has a look and feel that is different from modern finishes. And no doubt these finishes look and feel to the touch (if you shoot a SE American D-bow with no grip) different than modern sealants.
Just my 2 cents. To me, these details matter. For others, it may be no big deal. I am not judging, just expressing my opinion.