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

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,629
#11
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.
The driving impetus of the Beaver Wars was European demand for furs. Remove the European demand, and they never happen. No point.

Really, it's how the native societies of the North American east coast were inducted into the European controlled global trade network. It was about global demand, and economy driven. (It's the other end of the spice-island competition in south east Asia, and European demand for labour to exploit the resources of a couple of new continents driving slave trade in west Africa at the same time.)

It was on a level where many societies simply stopped producing anything except furs for sale to the Europeans, because the Europeans could pay in not just amounts but in ways, goods unheard of before, no one had ever seen until then. Entire native pottery traditions, up to the time discernible in archeological digs, just went out inside a generation. Why make pots when you could hunt fur and trade them for anything you might need or care to have from the Europeans? And when you deplete your hunting grounds, you go for your neighbour's which still has beaver. And so it rolls on until the beavers run out...

The Iroquois also wouldn't have been able to do what they did without access to western firearms. They were also part of a global phenomenon sparked by the European commercial expansion known as "gunpowder empires". (Another aspect of it was the African slaving states that with access to firearms re-tooled themselves to become primarily providers of people for enslavement to be shipped to the New World to generate further profit. At the other end of north America the Comanche built an empire based in access to horses from the Europeans, something that clearly also could not have happened without the Europeans.)

It's all about economics, and all interconnected. But it's an economic model that wasn't developed, and certainly could never have worked on the scale it did, without the global demands driving it.
 
Last edited:

Haakbus

Ad Honorem
Aug 2013
3,767
United States
#12
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
In many southeastern tribes, women were responsible for the fate of war captives including torture which is either super kinky or immeasurably humiliating depending on how you look at it.