Was violence between American Indian tribes worse than violence between whites and Indians?

Nov 2014
416
ph
Generally speaking, was violence between American Indian tribes worse than violence between whites and American Indians in terms of war crimes perpetrated?
 
Mar 2019
1,956
Kansas
Generally speaking, was violence between American Indian tribes worse than violence between whites and American Indians in terms of war crimes perpetrated?
On the east coast at least....no. From early accounts of tribal warfare neither side would deny the other access to common hunting grounds or resources they normally shared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phalo

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
5,204
Sydney
pretty much the same , it went from quite mild to genocidal
on the whole , the whites were trying to save face as the good guys
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fiver

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
3,411
Australia
Generally speaking, was violence between American Indian tribes worse than violence between whites and American Indians in terms of war crimes perpetrated?

:confused:


'Warcrimes' under whose standards ?
 
Aug 2011
183
The Castle Anthrax
Prior to the advent of "Hate crimes" I don't believe that you could say that it was. Viewed on the whole, there was murder, rape, torture on all sides. I mean, killed dead is killed dead right? However; I do believe that the violence between the Native American tribes and Mexicans was particularly bloody and that torture was lowered to an art form.
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,810
Prior to the advent of "Hate crimes" I don't believe that you could say that it was. Viewed on the whole, there was murder, rape, torture on all sides. I mean, killed dead is killed dead right? However; I do believe that the violence between the Native American tribes and Mexicans was particularly bloody and that torture was lowered to an art form.
Existential and religious in nature. Hard to grasp for outsiders. Quite profound and spiritual for insiders.

Same goes for the North American situation.

That's not to say there weren't some seriously scary conceptions of cosmos, society and humanity at play.

The again, the exact same observation might just as well be made about European societies historically.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
5,204
Sydney
The one thing the Indians had was the torture of war prisoners to break their will
the prisoner was supposed to bear it even to taunt his tormentors to humiliate them
once the man had been broken the men would loose interest and the women would rip him apart
Apache women were supposed to be able to make a man last quite a while in torments
their common name of "the snake people" wasn't just imagination
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartakus X
Sep 2017
769
United States
I’m not sure which was more brutal and bloody, but intra-Native warfare was a lot smaller in scale most of the time. I think it was also probably less consequential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JakeStarkey
Aug 2018
556
Southern Indiana
On the east coast at least....no. From early accounts of tribal warfare neither side would deny the other access to common hunting grounds or resources they normally shared.
Nonsense, look up the beaver Wars. The Iroquois Confederation displaced numerous tribes throughout the Ohio Valley from the mid 1600's to the mid 1700's. They completely exterminated at least two tribes.

As far as the OP's question, "was the violence worse?", that depends on how you define it, in numbers?, in savagery?, in the end result to the tribes?