Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I could see that the white man did not care about each other the way our people did. [View all]Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)82. "Excavations at the Crow Creek site revealed the bodies of 486 people...."
Intertribal warfare was intense throughout the Great Plains during the 1700s and 1800s, and archeological data indicate that warfare was present prior to this time. Human skeletons from as early as the Woodland Period (250 B.C. to A.D. 900) show occasional marks of violence, but conflict intensified during and after the thirteenth century, by which time farmers were well established in the Plains. After 1250, villages were often destroyed by fire, and human skeletons regularly show marks of violence, scalping, and other mutilations. Warfare was most intense along the Missouri River in the present-day Dakotas, where ancestors of the Mandans, Hidatsas, and Arikaras were at war with each other, and towns inhabited by as many as 1,000 people were often fortified with ditch and palisade defenses. Excavations at the Crow Creek site, an ancestral Arikara town dated to 1325, revealed the bodies of 486 peoplemen, women, and children, essentially the town's entire populationin a mass grave. These individuals had been scalped and dismembered, and their bones showed clear evidence of severe malnutrition, suggesting that violence resulted from competition for food, probably due to local overpopulation and climatic deterioration. Violence among farmers continued from the 1500s through the late 1800s.
Archeological data on war among the nomadic Plains hunters are few, but some nomads were attacking farmers on the edges of the Plains by at least the 1500s. By the eighteenth century, war was common among the nomads, apparently largely because of conflicts over hunting territories.
Prior to the introduction of European horses and guns, Plains warfare took two forms. When equally matched forces confronted each other, warriors sheltered behind large shields, firing arrows; individual warriors came out from behind these lines to dance and taunt their opponents. This mode of combat was largely for show and casualties were light. However, sometimes, large war parties surprised and utterly destroyed small camps or hamlets. Increasing interaction with Europeans from the eighteenth century on changed these patterns dramatically. Massed shield lines could neither stand against mounted warriors nor protect against firearms; this mode of battle largely disappeared with the introduction of horses and guns, although equally matched mounted war parties sometimes used the old tactics. Early access to horses also allowed some groups, notably the Comanches, to overwhelm and displace neighboring tribes who lacked such access. Documentary and archeological evidence indicate that horses and guns contributed mightily to this more destructive mode of Plains warfare, most intensively along the Missouri River.
http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.war.023
Archeological data on war among the nomadic Plains hunters are few, but some nomads were attacking farmers on the edges of the Plains by at least the 1500s. By the eighteenth century, war was common among the nomads, apparently largely because of conflicts over hunting territories.
Prior to the introduction of European horses and guns, Plains warfare took two forms. When equally matched forces confronted each other, warriors sheltered behind large shields, firing arrows; individual warriors came out from behind these lines to dance and taunt their opponents. This mode of combat was largely for show and casualties were light. However, sometimes, large war parties surprised and utterly destroyed small camps or hamlets. Increasing interaction with Europeans from the eighteenth century on changed these patterns dramatically. Massed shield lines could neither stand against mounted warriors nor protect against firearms; this mode of battle largely disappeared with the introduction of horses and guns, although equally matched mounted war parties sometimes used the old tactics. Early access to horses also allowed some groups, notably the Comanches, to overwhelm and displace neighboring tribes who lacked such access. Documentary and archeological evidence indicate that horses and guns contributed mightily to this more destructive mode of Plains warfare, most intensively along the Missouri River.
http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.war.023
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
151 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I could see that the white man did not care about each other the way our people did. [View all]
tecelote
Oct 2014
OP
Yeah they went to war for resourses just like Every other race , they killed other tribes for food
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#18
He's saying that Whiteman didn't care for it's people like our people did for our own
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#32
They didn't accumulate wealth while they let their people starve, is what I got out of it.
bravenak
Oct 2014
#35
What do you think happened when you took horses and hunting grounds in war ?
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#42
It doesn't work out like that when large group of mostly just elderly , childern and women
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#52
And then the europeans came and killed off the millions of people who had survived.
bravenak
Oct 2014
#54
No , what I started was the Whiteman comment in the OP and how native americans were so different
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#68
You know , the only one so far that has tried to use a strawman argument in this entire thread
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#79
If you reread my posts I'm the one who wrote the cultures were different in how wealth
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#88
That's how it's was achieved , greed for the best hunting grounds , greed for the fastest ponies
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#94
Native American tribes did war against one another for resources but they did so for
liberal_at_heart
Oct 2014
#86
That was the wealth in how they perceived it . Claiming the land where migration of game animals
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#98
Not when it was raids against other tribes for horses , Many had more horses than they needed but
scarystuffyo
Oct 2014
#147
How do you feel about ruining a thread we were all enjoying? We were having a pleasant discussion.
Enthusiast
Oct 2014
#119
I think the point is that, WITHIN THEIR TRIBE, they cared for their own people
thesquanderer
Oct 2014
#129
If you are going to cut and paste information without attributing it, and pretend you wrote it ...
kwassa
Oct 2014
#99
What he was seeing even back then was that his tribe took care of their own in a community linked
jwirr
Oct 2014
#60
And in the past, most such chiefs would have quickly found themselves without people
Scootaloo
Oct 2014
#43
And where do you get your data? Our tribe has several casinos and they not only pay a dividend
jwirr
Oct 2014
#65
The change in our tribe is unbelievable. The homes are repaired, the schools are good, anyone who
jwirr
Oct 2014
#127
Where do you hear this? Because I've just spent some time looking for evidence of
Maraya1969
Oct 2014
#87
500 posts since joining 10/7 - if nothing else you are very prolific scary stuff yo
lunasun
Oct 2014
#151
I am now reading: Bury my heart at Wounded knee by Dee Brown. Breaks my heart
Paper Roses
Oct 2014
#12
Always felt this to be the case. 'Whites' as generally identified, come from a continent that was at
freshwest
Oct 2014
#19
Native people were much less reliant on and desirous of mfg. goods, materials
appalachiablue
Oct 2014
#81
Black Elk would be one of my ancestors...If he could see me now, I hope I would make him proud.
Tikki
Oct 2014
#34
The USA Gov.will never allow a Ghost Dance for peace, prosperity, and unity across the regions
Sunlei
Oct 2014
#137
Chief Seattle's reply to a Government offer to purchase the remaining Salish lands:
AgingAmerican
Oct 2014
#143