Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The most fierce tribe in N. America

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Author
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The most fierce tribe in N. America
    Posted: 26-May-2010 at 08:06
Originally posted by Maximus Germanicus

I also stumbled on this--Is this strange behavior for Indians?--a thought a lot of the Indian on Indian battles were bloodless more like counting coup?
 
Extreme violence associated with inter indian wars was more common than Dancing with Wolves implies.  French voyageurs observed that inter indian warfare in the Great Lakes region of U.S. and Canada often resembled small scale genocides.  
 
Likewise, archaelogical evidence from the Amerian South East shows examples of deliberate siege warfare against palisaded villages. One excavation in particular found evidence that the victims probably did not die in combat, but were massacared. 
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959
  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2010 at 13:29
Originally posted by Cryptic

Originally posted by Maximus Germanicus

I also stumbled on this--Is this strange behavior for Indians?--a thought a lot of the Indian on Indian battles were bloodless more like counting coup?
 

Extreme violence associated with inter indian wars was more common than Dancing with Wolves implies.  French voyageurs observed that inter indian warfare in the Great Lakes region of U.S. and Canada often resembled small scale genocides.  

 

Likewise, archaelogical evidence from the Amerian South East shows examples of deliberate siege warfare against palisaded villages. One excavation in particular found evidence that the victims probably did not die in combat, but were massacared. 


Brian Debry in "War of a Thousand Deserts" talks about the same thing and situations like Wounded Knee was a common battle tactic amongst the plains tribes.
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2010 at 13:46
Originally posted by eaglecap


Brian Debry in "War of a Thousand Deserts" talks about the same thing and situations like Wounded Knee was a common battle tactic amongst the plains tribes.
 
Does the book mention this incident:
 
In summarry:
- Apaches raid Navaho territory, killing thirty people and capturing three girls.
- Apaches get cornored in a cave. 
-Navahos kill a few Apaches who try to escape, then offer to let the others go if captives were freed.
 
But, Apaches had already excecuted the captives.  Navahos then suffocate, burn etc. all 42 members of the Apache raiding party trapped in the cave.
 
As a side note....
 
"Sioux" means enemy or snake in Chippewa.  The Lakota did not earn that nick name from Dancing with Wolves, but rather by acting like wolves.


Edited by Cryptic - 26-May-2010 at 13:53
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2010 at 19:45
In re:  "and situations like Wounded Knee was a common battle tactic"

I'm confused.The accounts I've read of Wounded Knee, which took place after the Indian Wars had ended, involve a fight or 'massacre' that arose during teh "Ghost Dance" craze. Nothing I've read suggest that the Lakota used a 'common battle tactic', unless it was concealing their firearms.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2010 at 12:58
Originally posted by lirelou

In re:  "and situations like Wounded Knee was a common battle tactic"

I'm confused.
 
It is probably a reference that Europeans do not have a monopoly on atrocities and that massacres during wars or raids were a common Native American tactic.
Back to Top
TheGreatSimba View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 22-Nov-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
  Quote TheGreatSimba Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2010 at 13:21
Its a myth that Native American's were more peaceful. Like Cryptic said, Native Americans were very brutal to one another, and as mentioned before, many times they went for all out genocide against rival tribes.

This is especially true of the Great Lakes region where there were fierce rivalries.

Also, anyone ever hear of Mourning Wars? The logic behind that is pretty brutal.


Edited by TheGreatSimba - 27-May-2010 at 13:53
I use CAPS for emphasis, not yelling. Just don't want to have to click the bold button every time.
Back to Top
perterra View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Jul-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote perterra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jul-2010 at 16:46
I don't even know how I stumbled on this but it seems a question poised by a kid asking, which is better, cats or dogs.
 
There is no answer, at any point in time a snap shot could be taken and it would reveal a different tribe in power, maybe only 10 years apart after the pox and pneumonia. No tribe or race has a lock on cruelty, they are all pretty equal when it comes to degrading their fellow man, no tribe has a lock on fierce response to acts of agression from others. I would hesitate to say any were more succesful than the Anglo when it came to stopping the west ward migration. As disease and sickness introduced by whites took it's toll the strong tribes became shells and weaker tribes pushed them into other areas.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jul-2010 at 16:54
By writing; "As disease and sickness introduced by whites took it's toll the strong tribes became shells and weaker tribes pushed them into other areas.", I hope you are not announcing that "whites" who or whom ever they might have been, did delibertly infect the "reds!"?

If so, then the understanding of infectous diseases, must be pushed back a few years!

Regards,

Edited by opuslola - 17-Jul-2010 at 16:55
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jul-2010 at 17:31
Perterra, in re:  "I don't even know how I stumbled on this but it seems a question poised by a kid asking, which is better, cats or dogs."
 
Amen.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jul-2010 at 18:00
Well lirelou, every one knows that dogs are better!

But, do any of you know just why, since some historians think that the Americas were regularly visited by Europeans for hundreds of years before Colombo, that no native American diseases were ever sent East?   Or why over these centuries, the Native Americans never built up immunity to Eastern (European) diseases?

Regards,
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
perterra View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Jul-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote perterra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 05:47
Opus, My understanding is pigs brought by the Spanish brought a large number of diseases into the new world. Charles Mann's 1491 and The Plains Indians by Paul Carson goes into more detail of the price paid by the native population by infectious diseases..
 
I wouldn't doubt there were cases of intentional exposure but the Spanish weren't trying to exterminate the Indian, they were trying to convert and acquire a cheap labor force. There was the search for treasure, but after they moved north of Mexico the Indians owned little that lit the fire in the conquistadors eyes. A labor force was about all they had to offer the Spanish.
 
The original poster asked a question that is asking for opinion more than fact. There is no set description of fierce, you cant judge something that happened 200 years ago by todays standards and norms. 


Edited by perterra - 18-Jul-2010 at 06:04
Back to Top
perterra View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Jul-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote perterra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 05:51
Originally posted by opuslola

Well lirelou, every one knows that dogs are better!

But, do any of you know just why, since some historians think that the Americas were regularly visited by Europeans for hundreds of years before Colombo, that no native American diseases were ever sent East?   Or why over these centuries, the Native Americans never built up immunity to Eastern (European) diseases?

Regards,
Again, my understanding is there were a few diseases that may have gone east. Syphilis maybe, guns germs and steel also discusses it to some detail.
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 06:14
Originally posted by opuslola

Or why over these centuries, the Native Americans never built up immunity to Eastern (European) diseases?
Regards,
Though rare contact occured prior to Columbus, there have only been five centuries of large scale contact for all of the Americas. My guess is that European disease introduced by the far less numerous and far more localized (Newfoundland only) Vikings etc. simply burned out in the local area.  Thus most Native americans never got exposed to them.  
 
In contrast, Africans, Europeans and Asians have been in large scale contact with each other for thousands of years and have had far monger to develop immunities.  Even then, Africans are far more resistant to Malaria than Europeans.


Edited by Cryptic - 18-Jul-2010 at 06:19
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 07:06
Originally posted by opuslola

Well lirelou, every one knows that dogs are better!

But, do any of you know just why, since some historians think that the Americas were regularly visited by Europeans for hundreds of years before Colombo, that no native American diseases were ever sent East?   Or why over these centuries, the Native Americans never built up immunity to Eastern (European) diseases?

Regards,
 
 
 
 
Syphpyllus was transmitted from native Americans to Euros.  At one time NA did have immunity from European diseases, it only takes 2 generations of non exposure to lose natural immunity.
 
Even modern vaccines for small pox have a life.  Small pox vaccines have a 20 year effective limit.  Being on the 2nd tier of 1st responders, my wife and I have been vaccinated for small pox 3 times.
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
perterra View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Jul-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote perterra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 14:49
Originally posted by opuslola

Well lirelou, every one knows that dogs are better!

But, do any of you know just why, since some historians think that the Americas were regularly visited by Europeans for hundreds of years before Colombo, that no native American diseases were ever sent East?   Or why over these centuries, the Native Americans never built up immunity to Eastern (European) diseases?

Regards,
Read the Zuni Enigma, that will give you something to think about. LOL
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 15:34
In re:  "I wouldn't doubt there were cases of intentional exposure but the Spanish weren't trying to exterminate the Indian, they were trying to convert and acquire a cheap labor force. There was the search for treasure, but after they moved north of Mexico the Indians owned little that lit the fire in the conquistadors eyes. A labor force was about all they had to offer the Spanish."
 
First, there was only a single documented case of germ warfare, and that was by a British officer in Pontiac's War.
 
Second, there were indigenous disease outbreaks that also occurred in the Americas from time to time, and one of Mexico's early pandemics, blamed on smallpox, is now believed to have been such.
 
Third, The Spanish were'nt merely looking for a labor force or 'riches'. Their mind set came out of the Reconquista, as did the military machine that conquered the Americas. Yes, they intended to convert (for the betterment of the Indigenous, who no longer had to give up their sons and daughters to human sacrifice). Yes, they intended to direct the labor of the indigenous to ends that favored their own estancias. But they also intended to reside among the indigenous, constituting the top rung of their hierarchy. The Spanish were not only here to stay, the were here to convert the indigenous into Spaniards, though that was seen as a very long term project. The not only saw the world in term of 'La Espana', they saw it in terms of "Las Espanas". In that regard, the nomadic and semi-nomadic peoples north of Chichimeca, were seen as totally unfit for civilization. Perhaps the Spanish would have happily waged a war of extermination on the Comanche and others, but at the time (18th, 19th centuries) it was seen as far too expensive and not worth the expenditure of military effort.
 
No one was trying to 'exterminate' the indigenous inhabitants. European wars, more properly campaigns, were waged for limited ends. Despite letters expressing satisfaction at seeing an enemy indigenous village burn, with all its inhabitants, the fact remains that by the early 19th century, the descendants of those tribes were still fishing in the rivers where the descendants of those early colonists were erecting industrial cities. The dams that powered the Merrimack and other rivers were the event that put and end to 'Indian' fishing in those waters.
 
(Esperando con respeto las flechas de mi distinguido contrincante doctorado)
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
perterra View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Jul-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote perterra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 18:35
Originally posted by lirelou

In re:  "I wouldn't doubt there were cases of intentional exposure but the Spanish weren't trying to exterminate the Indian, they were trying to convert and acquire a cheap labor force. There was the search for treasure, but after they moved north of Mexico the Indians owned little that lit the fire in the conquistadors eyes. A labor force was about all they had to offer the Spanish."
 
First, there was only a single documented case of germ warfare, and that was by a British officer in Pontiac's War.
 
Second, there were indigenous disease outbreaks that also occurred in the Americas from time to time, and one of Mexico's early pandemics, blamed on smallpox, is now believed to have been such.
 
Third, The Spanish were'nt merely looking for a labor force or 'riches'. Their mind set came out of the Reconquista, as did the military machine that conquered the Americas. Yes, they intended to convert (for the betterment of the Indigenous, who no longer had to give up their sons and daughters to human sacrifice). Yes, they intended to direct the labor of the indigenous to ends that favored their own estancias. But they also intended to reside among the indigenous, constituting the top rung of their hierarchy. The Spanish were not only here to stay, the were here to convert the indigenous into Spaniards, though that was seen as a very long term project. The not only saw the world in term of 'La Espana', they saw it in terms of "Las Espanas". In that regard, the nomadic and semi-nomadic peoples north of Chichimeca, were seen as totally unfit for civilization. Perhaps the Spanish would have happily waged a war of extermination on the Comanche and others, but at the time (18th, 19th centuries) it was seen as far too expensive and not worth the expenditure of military effort.
 
No one was trying to 'exterminate' the indigenous inhabitants. European wars, more properly campaigns, were waged for limited ends. Despite letters expressing satisfaction at seeing an enemy indigenous village burn, with all its inhabitants, the fact remains that by the early 19th century, the descendants of those tribes were still fishing in the rivers where the descendants of those early colonists were erecting industrial cities. The dams that powered the Merrimack and other rivers were the event that put and end to 'Indian' fishing in those waters.
 
(Esperando con respeto las flechas de mi distinguido contrincante doctorado)
 
 
Wouldnt argue any of the above, one documented case is probably correct. Was it tried in other places, dunno, wouldnt surprise me, like I said, no race has a lock on cruelty.
 
I dont think I said anyone was trying to exterminate anyone. Maybe the Spanish wanted to lead them into the Christan world, probably did but I think the driving factor to the conquistador was wealth and fame.
 
Not going to argue any of it.
 
My only question is what happened in the 1300's to decimate the Anasazi?
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2010 at 20:16
Redclay,wrote;

Syphpyllus was transmitted from native Americans to Euros. At one time NA did have immunity from European diseases, it only takes 2 generations of non exposure to lose natural immunity.

Even modern vaccines for small pox have a life. Small pox vaccines have a 20 year effective limit. Being on the 2nd tier of 1st responders, my wife and I have been vaccinated for small pox 3 times."

So, just what caused N.American germs,not cause another "cause and effec?"
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2010 at 19:09
Perterra, in re your question on the anasazi. I was at Mesa Verde last July and the going theory then was that the area entered one of its periodic cycles of drought and the resulting shrinking of arable land caused increasing conflict among the Anasazi which eventually led to their abandoning the area. Some Pueblo groups (but not all that claim so) are genetically related to the Anasazi, so what disappeared was a certain percentage of their population and their presence in areas that then turned to desert. If that is true, the descendants of the Anasazi are alive and well in some of today's Pueblos.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
perterra View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Jul-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
  Quote perterra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2010 at 19:54
I was out at Chaco, Gila Cliff Dwellings, El Morro and stayed at the Zuni Pueblo (Inn at Halona) a few days last fall. I think the cliff dwellers live on in the Hopi and Zuni today, maybe any of the pueblo dwellers.
 
From talking to a few anthropologist they seem to think the park service is toeing a line of political correctness by not mentioning some of the signs of cannibalism and warfare in the desert southwest. It's all up in the air, Zuni didnt have a written language until the late 1970's I think. Archeology doesnt take in to account oral tradition so I doubt we will ever know for sure. Something big was happening at the time, the Indians of the Mississippi were building pallisaded villages around their mounds at about the same time the cliff dwellers were suffering. Zuni tradition says some of the tribe went back to Mexico, could be where the dwellers went, Some bad juju was in the air.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.