Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Greenhorn |
May I respectfully suggest that anyone interested in primitive camping go to thewomenofthefurtrade.com site and go to the camping primitive style part of this site. I think you will get a great education on how some ladies are doing it the old style. I respect these ladies, I have met a few of them, and it really undercuts the argument that this type of trekking is too difficult. If these lovely ladies can do it right, why can't we men do it right as well. Of course, this is just my humble opinion. | ||
|
Factor |
Thanks for the suggested site. Interesting! Oh by the way, who said this type of trekking is too difficult? In fact I don't know of another type of "trekking" except maybe horseback Also, who says we men don't already do it well? (BTW the "hardtack" recipe on the site is incorrect, IF you want to produce the product from the 18th and 19th century. No oil, no honey, no eggs, no milk, no caraway seed, and no rye flour...., just soft white, whole wheat flour, a little extra bran to reproduce the lowest level of flour sold and used for the product, water, and salt. ) LD It's not what you know, it's what you can prove | |||
|
Greenhorn |
Didn't mean to ruffle anyone's feathers. I just wanted to present this site as a source of information to anyone who is curious about primitive camping. Yes there are men doing this but I have also met many other men who would not consider doing this because they view it as too difficult. I have also met many self styled "mountain men" who do not have one fraction of the knowledge these women possess. In my humble opinion, when it comes to historical recipies, I sincerely doubt there was one standarized recipe that all cooks had to adhere to. I suspect it was as today, cooks all had their own recipe. But that is just my humble opinion. | |||
|
Booshway |
I have visited the Women of the Fur Trade site many times. There is some very good information there about trekking and camping primitive-style. There may be men who do or have done many of the same things, but there are few sites that explain it all as well as these ladies do. Tuscarora | |||
|
Factor |
Well you can call any cookie "hardtack"..., doesn't make it so... Ship's biscuit aka hardtack was a military item, starting with the Royal Navy, and made to specific standards, which means it was made from flour, salt, and water. It was extremely cheap, bottom of the scale rations, and was made to preserve the flour in a cooked form, for storage. The salt wasn't for flavor, it was to retard mold. It was then stored in barrels for many months at a time, in some cases longer than a year..., take any recipe you wish, even the one on the site, make a bunch, put it in a wooden box on a shelf to simulate barrel storage (if you don't have a barrel), leave it for a year.... and see if it doesn't mold and go bad. The honey, eggs, oil, and milk on the website will cause spoilage. Defeating the purpose. It was not some sort of 18th century granola bar. Hardtack continued unchanged except for shape, into the American Civil War, because it worked and was cheap. LD It's not what you know, it's what you can prove | |||
|
Greenhorn |
If your definition of "hardtack" is completely restricted and limited to that product made under British Royal contract, of that era, for use with the British military, of that era, most notably the British Royal Navy, then, of course, you are absolutely correct. I was using the term in a more general and generic sense. My humble opinion only. | |||
|
Factor |
No I was using the definition of what began in England, and continued through the Civil War into modern times. It is the website that you referenced that appears to be trying to change the age old, long established, definition. And since this is about how it was done, back then, how would not using the original recipe somehow be "restricted"? Hardtack (pilot bread, ship biscuit)..., it is a cracker prepared of plain flour and water, not even salted, and kiln-dried to a chip, so as to keep indefinately, its ony enemies being weevils....., Horace Kephart, Camping and Woodcraft copywrite 1917 LDThis message has been edited. Last edited by: Loyalist Dave, It's not what you know, it's what you can prove | |||
|
Greenhorn |
I will no longer be responding to this conversation, contributing to or reading this forum. I was only trying to bring a very interesting site to the attention of this forum. Perhaps some could have found benefit from the site. I did not want to get into a "flaming" match about a recipe that I am sure was changed over the many years by many cooks. Just my humble opinion, and goodbye to this forum. | |||
|
Booshway |
Fancy, don't let this back you off. I thought your in-put was very good, and "Women of the Fur Trade" bring honor to the rest of us and what we try to achieve. I know one of these gals and don't know many men who can do or accomplish what she does in the "primitive way"!!!!. I have been a member of this forum for awhile now and there is always someone that seems to just want to draw attention to themselves, even if it is negative. This site is a good place to learn and there are far more folks here that really do care what you have to say or share. I am one of them. "don't retreat" .."reload and fight"!!!! respectfully, Jim "Don't Retreat, just reload" | |||
|
Free Trapper |
Fancy, Don't let the comments of others get the best of you! I have enjoyed your past posts in this forum and do look forward to many more from you. Your last on the "Women of the Fur Trade" was very interesting and gave great thought. Talltree Keep your tail high and dry! | |||
|
Factor |
Gosh, I commented that the site was interesting, and was only critical of one recipe on the site, ONE..., unless you are the author of said recipe, nothing was directed at you or what you had posted. I explained why I commented on the recipe, that "hardtack" was supposed to last, and that the ingredients on the website would spoil. It was you who objected to my definition or parameters, but it's not my definition, it was the definition of then and now. I posted a 20th century reference to show that I wasn't shooting from the hip, and you take personal offense? How does pointing out an error in a third party's website become negative, or is somehow drawing attention to one's self? So say somebody chimes in with a website, which is interesting, but at one point the site recommends cleaning a rifle barrel bore with white vinegar..., no rinse no oil after..., so if I point out the problem with using a corrosive you might spoil your barrel, that's negative? OH so I point out that the "hardtack" recipe will spoil, and the original recipe is not what was posted on that website and just because somebody posted a link, that's negative? Sure if you imply that I have a narrow, unsupported view, and am wrong because it is such, (NOTE ...is completely restricted and limited to that product made under British Royal contract, of that era, for use with the British military, of that era, most notably the British Royal Navy, then, of course, you are absolutely correct. was his comment, not mine) and I don't think it is such, I am going to demonstrate why I think it is a valid view. If that's flaming and negative..., fine I'm negative. LD It's not what you know, it's what you can prove | |||
|
Hivernant |
How unusual....LD usually NEVER pisses off someone to where they leave this site.....But look, I came back after a year....or so..... Keep inside the tree line, Don't let 'em know where yer bedded. Some have less than you do and my be inclined to try and take what little ya have. | |||
|
Hivernant |
[QUOTE] Yes there are men doing this but I have also met many other men who would not consider doing this because they view it as too difficult. QUOTE] Seems you need new freinds! I'm just the opposite. 99% of the women I know are as capable as any,and the men know no other way! Appears "Fancy" is very new to our lifestyle and didnt understand how capable we are. And, if he let L/D get to him,he's REALLY green! Loyalist Dave is so soft and cuddly! | |||
|
Hivernant |
Something else jut hit me Fancy,you have an AMM number and your freinds find primitive trekking difficult? How did you get in the AMM? Primitive trekking is all we do! | |||
|
Greenhorn |
Mr Pathfinder, I wasn't going to continue this thread but your last comment does deserve some reply. I got into AMM a number of years ago by having as my sponsors two of the most respected members of AMM in the Rocky Mountains As for trekking, go back and review the 2011 issues of T&LR. You will find a story on a 7 day horseback pack trip we took thru the mountains of western Wyo and eastern ID. We also only allowed ourselves 6 ozs of meat and a cup and a half of meal for the whole trip, everything else we ate came from the land. We also covered over 100+ miles during that 7 days. The only items not pre 1840 during that trip would be a water filter, medicines, and a small camera to document the trip. I find your question "how did you get into the AMM" insulting and not a question one AMM member would ask another AMM member. I also brain tan deer, elk, antelope, and buffalo robes. For the record, I didn't say primitive trekking was too difficult, I said that the Women of the Fur Trade are people who could provide an example for a lot of men. | |||
|
Booshway |
I say let's all get together and do a "primitive mule/horse pack trip...... "Don't Retreat, just reload" | |||
|
Free Trapper |
Sage, lets go! Talltree Keep your tail high and dry! | |||
|
Greenhorn |
Someone threw a locust log on ...Got a few sparks flyin' They'll settle down in a bit .. everybody just sit tight ! Don't trust what don't rust ! | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |