PRIMATIVE AMERICAN ARMOR

[VANDOO]

I MANAGED TO GET HOLD OF A COPY OF A PAPER PUT OUT BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION IN 1895. THE CURATOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ETHINOLOGY WALTER HOUGH.
THE PAPER DEALS WITH NATIVE AMERICAN ARMOR AND I DID NOT REALIZE TO WHAT EXTENT ARMOR WAS USED IN THE AMERICAS BUT IT WAS NOT AS UNCOMMON AS I THOUGHT. THE FIRST SECTION WAS ON SHIELDS WHICH FALLS INTO THE CATAGORY OF ARMOR THE SECOND SECTION DEALS WITH BODY ARMOR. AND I WILL QUOTE

"THE ABORIGINAL ARMOR OF NORTH AMERICA WAS INTENDED TO PROTECT THE VITAL ORGANS AND TO ALLOW FREE MOVEMENT OF THE LIMBS. THE FORM ASSUMES THAT OF A SLEVELESS JACKET ,COAT OR WIDE BAND GOING AROUND THE TRUNK, SUSPENDED FROM THE SHOULDERS. THE SELECTION OF DEFENSIVE MATERIALS AND THEIR ADAPTATIONS TO DEFENSIVE COVERING FOR THE BODY FORM AN INTERESTING STUDY IN NATIVE INVENTION,WHILE THE EVIDENCE IN NORTH AMERICA OF THE MIGRATION OF INVENTIONS AWAKENS NO LESS INTEREST. THUS WE FIND THAT AT THE PERIOD OF DISUSE OF ARMOR BY THE ABORIGINES THERE WERE SIX TYPES OF BODY ARMOR FOUND IN THE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT AND CONTIGUOUS REGIONS.
1. PLATE ARMOR -ROWS OF OVERLAPPING PLATES PERFORATED AND LASHED. ESKIMO AND CHUKCHIS

2. SLAT ARMOR- WOODEN SLATS TWINED TOGETHER, SITKANS, SHASTAS,IROQUOIS, VIRGINIA INDIANS

3. ROD ARMOR- WOODEN RODS TWINED TOGETHER, ALEUTS, SITKANS, COLOMBIA RIVER TRIBES, KLAMATHUS, HUPAS, IROQUOIS, VIRGINIA INDIANS, ECT.

4. BAND ARMOR- BANDS OF SKIN ARRANGED IN TELESCOPING FASHON. CHUKEHIS

5. SKIN ARMOR- COATS OF HARDENED HIDE, TLINGITS, HAIDAS, HUPAS, CHINOOKS, NAVAJOES, MOWHAWKS, SHOSHONES, PAWNEES, COMANCHES, ECT.

6. COTTON PADDED ARMOR- MEXICANS, ISTMIAUS, AND PERUVIANS

THREE WELL DEFINED AREAS, INCLUDING THE ABOVE MENTIONED TYPES OF NORTH AMERICAN BODY ARMOR WILL NOW BE CONSIDERED, VIZ:

1. BERING STRAIGHT AREA, THE AMERICAN SHORE OF BERING SEA AND THE ISLANDS AS FAR NORTH AS CAPE PRINCE OF WALES, INHABITED BY ESKIMOS. AND THE ASIATIC SIDE INHABITED BY THE COAST CHUKCHIS (PLATE ARMOR)

2. WESTERN AREA EXTENDING FROM SITKA THROUGH NORTHERN CALIFORNIA AND THE CENTRAL BASIN TO MEXICO, (SLAT, ROD AND SKIN ARMOR)

3. EASTERN AREA, EXTENDING FROM SOUTHEASTERN CANADA TO VIRGINIA, INHAVITED BY ALGONKIAN AND IROQUOIAN TRIBES. (SLAT,OR ROD, AND SKIN ARMOR)

THE FIRST TWO AREAS ARE KNOWN BY ACTUAL SPECIMINS, WHILE THE THIRD AREA IS HISTORICAL. IN THE INTERIOR OF THE CONTINENT, ACCORDING TO HISTORICAL NOTICES, SEVERAL STOCKS USED ARMOR. THERE IS, THEREFORE, SUFFICIENT TESTIMONY TO SHOW THAT IF NOT UNIVERSAL THE USE OF ARMOR WAS AT LEAST GENERAL AMONG THE NORTH AMERICAN TRIBES." END QUOTE.

IT WAS NOTED SOME OF THE EXAMPLES OF NORTH AMERICAN ARMOR WERE MADE THE SAME AS JAPANESE ARMOR AND INCLUDED PROTECTIVE PICES FOR LEGS AND ARMS AND SOME EVEN HAD HELMETS. THERE WERE OTHERS THAT RESEMBLES THE SORT USED IN THE MARSHALL AND KINGSMILL ISLANDS AND EVEN HAD THE LARGE SHIELD BUILT IN TO PROTECT THE BACK OF THE HEAD. SOME WERE DESIGNED TO FOLD UP LIKE A FAN AND TO BE EASILY CARRIED WHEN NOT IN USE. MATERIALS USED INCLUDED, BONE, IVORY, BALEEN, WOOD SLATS, SHELL, RODS AND HARDENED SKIN OR LAYERS OF COTTON AND PLANT FIBERS. SOMETIMES THEY WERE WOVEN AND SOME FORMS HELD TOGETHER WITH CORDS AS IN JAPANESE ARMOR.

UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T HAVE A SCANNER SO CAN'T INCLUDE ANY OF THE MANY EXAMPLES PICTURED IN THE ARTICLE.

THERE IS A BOOK OUT CURRENTLY (NATIVE NORTH AMERICAN ARMOR, SHIELDS AND FORTIFICATIONS) BY DAVID E. JONES

I HAVE NOT READ IT YET SO I CAN'T SAY IF ITS GOOD OR NOT.BUT SUSPECT IT USED THIS ARTICLE AS ONE OF ITS REFRENCES.
THE SMITHSONIAN ARTICLE WAS NEW INFORMATION TO ME AS I IMAGINED NAKED WARRIORS IN BREECH CLOTHS NOT SAMAURAI ARMOR ON AMERICAN INDIANS.

[Jim McDougall]

Just saw this, fantastic Barry!!!
This is a great topic, and as you know we had a great run on the bulletproof vests in the wild west, and this is excellent to look into this not often considered subject.
I really look forward to this,
All the best,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

As noted, a fascinating topic, and while the discussion of armor used in the wild west, targeted at discovering evidence of gunfighters using bulletproof vests continues, this use by American Indians is really interesting.

The book mentioned, "Native North American Armor, Shields and Fortifications" by David E. Jones looks like a great resource. It seems well established that many of the Northwest Indian tribes and 'Eskimo' groups as well used body armor that was of somewhat heavy construction. The use of body protection among American Indian tribes, especially plains and Southwest, seems less known.

"Native American Weapons" by Colin F. Taylor, is another great resource, and describes some of the instances, mostly which seem focused on variations of leather. The Comanches were known to have worn leather armor from c.1700-1750, and its use was certainly much wider spread than that as tribes they traded with were Pawnee and Wichita.

One of the most intriguing characters celebrated in American Indian history was Chief Pohibit Quasha (also called 'iron shirt'). Coincidentally he was given this nickname as he seemed impervious to bullets, and it was not until he was brought down by a .58 cal. Henry 'buffalo rifle' in 1858 that his source of invincibility was revealed. He apparantly wore an old Spanish breastplate, believed of the 'conquistador' period, under his shirt. A shot was fired from the side, indicating this was the front plate only, and his vulnerable side was open.

Actually, the Spaniards quickly became disenchanted with the heavy, hot, and typically not readily available iron armor, and began using heavy leather coverings (cuerra) and eventually the mounted soldiers became known as 'soldadas de cuerro'. Interestingly, the use of such leather armor seems to derive from the 'escuapil' (padded cloth or leather) used by the Aztecs, at least in the New World. Certainly such types of leather armor were well known in Europe and into Asia much earlier.

With the advent of firearms in the 18th century, Native American use of leather body covering seems to have largely been abandoned, however its use ceremonially and by ranking individuals continued with leather shirts and garments.

I once thought it was interesting if old Spanish armor might have been used by various tribal warriors, however the case of Chief 'Iron Shirt' seems to have been singular. Studies on the Spanish 'conquistadors' (a term not even applied to them until at least a century after they were gone) reveal that large numbers of such components were probably not that common.
'Hollywood' has understandably seized on these thoughts and the character allegedly based on Chief 'Iron Shirt' appears in 'The Comancheros' with John Wayne. "Dancing with Wolves" of course has the cherished old conquistador helmet shown in one scene being admired by the warriors. These morions, like the term conquistador itself, seem to have antedated these Spanish explorers.

All best regards,
Jim

[celtan]

Cuera is probably an americanized term derived from Cuero (Leather), "Soldado de Cuero" (leathern Soldiers) was probably the original term.

The other closest aception would be "Soldadas en cuero", which would basically translate "Naked Warrior Ladies"....

Yes, the concept boggles the mind....



BTW: The leathern shields (span. adargas/ franc. turs) and armor (Coraza/Cueraza/Cuirasse ) were common warfare implements of the Spain of the Reconquest. I'm not sure whether their origin was arabic, european, or a little bit of both. After all, the arabs became markedly europeanized while they stayed in Spain, and adopted many of the local weapons, and even the clothing fashions. After a while, it was reportedly dificult to ID the combatant merely from appearance.

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

As noted, a fascinating topic, and while the discussion of armor used in the wild west, targeted at discovering evidence of gunfighters using bulletproof vests continues, this use by American Indians is really interesting.

The book mentioned, "Native North American Armor, Shields and Fortifications" by David E. Jones looks like a great resource. It seems well established that many of the Northwest Indian tribes and 'Eskimo' groups as well used body armor that was of somewhat heavy construction. The use of body protection among American Indian tribes, especially plains and Southwest, seems less known.

"Native American Weapons" by Colin F. Taylor, is another great resource, and describes some of the instances, mostly which seem focused on variations of leather. The Comanches were known to have worn leather armor from c.1700-1750, and its use was certainly much wider spread than that as tribes they traded with were Pawnee and Wichita.

One of the most intriguing characters celebrated in American Indian history was Chief Pohibit Quasha (also called 'iron shirt'). Coincidentally he was given this nickname as he seemed impervious to bullets, and it was not until he was brought down by a .58 cal. Henry 'buffalo rifle' in 1858 that his source of invincibility was revealed. He apparantly wore an old Spanish breastplate, believed of the 'conquistador' period, under his shirt. A shot was fired from the side, indicating this was the front plate only, and his vulnerable side was open.

Actually, the Spaniards quickly became disenchanted with the heavy, hot, and typically not readily available iron armor, and began using heavy leather coverings (cuerra) and eventually the mounted soldiers became known as 'soldadas de cuerro'. Interestingly, the use of such leather armor seems to derive from the 'escuapil' (padded cloth or leather) used by the Aztecs, at least in the New World. Certainly such types of leather armor were well known in Europe and into Asia much earlier.

With the advent of firearms in the 18th century, Native American use of leather body covering seems to have largely been abandoned, however its use ceremonially and by ranking individuals continued with leather shirts and garments.

I once thought it was interesting if old Spanish armor might have been used by various tribal warriors, however the case of Chief 'Iron Shirt' seems to have been singular. Studies on the Spanish 'conquistadors' (a term not even applied to them until at least a century after they were gone) reveal that large numbers of such components were probably not that common.
'Hollywood' has understandably seized on these thoughts and the character allegedly based on Chief 'Iron Shirt' appears in 'The Comancheros' with John Wayne. "Dancing with Wolves" of course has the cherished old conquistador helmet shown in one scene being admired by the warriors. These morions, like the term conquistador itself, seem to have antedated these Spanish explorers.

All best regards,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

[QUOTE=celtan]Cuera is probably an americanized term derived from Cuero (Leather), "Soldado de Cuero" (leathern Soldiers) was probably the original term.

The other closest aception would be "Soldadas en cuero", which would basically translate "Naked Warrior Ladies"....

Yes, the concept boggles the mind....



Oops! Thank you Manolo!!! I certainly wasn't thinking of 'naked warrior ladies ..or in leather' , my Spanish is pretty bad.
Good notes on the use of leather in Spain in the Reconquista period, and these traditional forms certainly did continue in the frontiers of New Spain.

I found more on the legendary Comanche chief Phohebits Quasho known as 'iron jacket'. There seem to be varying accounts on the spelling of his name, as well as to the weapon that finally brought him down. We know the Texas Rangers and Tonkawa warriors who pursued the Comanche's were using Colt revolvers as well as 'buffalo rifles'. The gun used by the marksman that finally broke the 'magic' of iron shirt or jacket, was believed a .58 cal. Henry buffalo rifle, but some say it was a Sharps buffalo rifle.

The event was the Battle of Little Robe Creek, May 12, 1858 and took place in the Antelope Hills of Oklahoma, near Canadian River. It was said that the rifle shot struck Iron Shirt in the side, behind the armor breastplate (?) which was said to have been of plate armor from Spanish explorers.
Other accounts note that he wore Spanish mail under his garments, which had deflected the fire of low velocity or light weapons, causing the belief he had great magic protecting him.

It is known that Coronado had expeditions in about 1539 which penetrated into regions from New Mexico, across Texas, Oklahoma and into Kansas.
In many discussions on the armor of these explorers, it seems that the expensive plate armor breastplates were not particularly common, though mail was slightly more known until superceded by the use of leather vests and coats as earlier mentioned.

While it seems quite possible that 'Iron Shirt' had some type of armor, either plate, which would most likely have come from early Spaniards, or mail, also possibly from them, it could not withstand the much heavier velocity of the buffalo rifle, whichever it was. I wonder if the shot may have hit him directly and actually penetrated the mail.

One other instance I have found of another 'Iron Shirt' involved a Blackfeet chief of Grease Melters clan who wore a shirt of buckskin decorated with pieces of metal ("The Old North Trail". Walter McClintock, 2004, p.422).
Even after leather 'armor' had been abandoned by the end of the 18th century, the wearing of leather shirts remained as signifying rank or prestigious position.

Best regards,
Jim

[celtan]

I was just kiddin' with the language issues, Jim.

Sometime ago, an US based Airline had to cancel a full advertisement campaign. Its central motif revolved around the unique luxury of their customers flying on leather seats, translating it into "Viaje en cuero", which in common street-spanish means "travel naked"....

A pleasure to ponder , indeed. I wonder how many jumped into the offer !

: )

Seriously, though.

Perhaps it's not a matter of withstanding the full impact of a bullet, but merely deflecting same. The "petos" had a sloping curve meant precisely to do that, just like that seem in the "morriones". Straight-on they may have crumbled under the impact, but the angles may have made the difference. It's the same principle as used in today's armoured vehicles.

I recall a case in which an assailant shot at his victim with a .45 Colt through a car's front glass. The bullets bounced away..! I know the .45 is a slow speed slug, but it illustrates the deflecting-surface concept.

A thing to consider regarding these items. The Spanish had terrible problems with rust in the tropics, and in America in general. I recall reading that gun barrels, culverins et al needed to be smelted and recast every few weeks, often times leading to the conquistadores using bows and arrows instead.

Metal armor would probably crumble away without intense, specific care by their Indian owners across the centuries...

Best

M


[QUOTE=Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by celtan

Cuera is probably an americanized term derived from Cuero (Leather), "Soldado de Cuero" (leathern Soldiers) was probably the original term.

The other closest aception would be "Soldadas en cuero", which would basically translate "Naked Warrior Ladies"....

Yes, the concept boggles the mind....



Oops! Thank you Manolo!!! I certainly wasn't thinking of 'naked warrior ladies ..or in leather' , my Spanish is pretty bad.
Good notes on the use of leather in Spain in the Reconquista period, and these traditional forms certainly did continue in the frontiers of New Spain.

I found more on the legendary Comanche chief Phohebits Quasho known as 'iron jacket'. There seem to be varying accounts on the spelling of his name, as well as to the weapon that finally brought him down. We know the Texas Rangers and Tonkawa warriors who pursued the Comanche's were using Colt revolvers as well as 'buffalo rifles'. The gun used by the marksman that finally broke the 'magic' of iron shirt or jacket, was believed a .58 cal. Henry buffalo rifle, but some say it was a Sharps buffalo rifle.

The event was the Battle of Little Robe Creek, May 12, 1858 and took place in the Antelope Hills of Oklahoma, near Canadian River. It was said that the rifle shot struck Iron Shirt in the side, behind the armor breastplate (?) which was said to have been of plate armor from Spanish explorers.
Other accounts note that he wore Spanish mail under his garments, which had deflected the fire of low velocity or light weapons, causing the belief he had great magic protecting him.

It is known that Coronado had expeditions in about 1539 which penetrated into regions from New Mexico, across Texas, Oklahoma and into Kansas.
In many discussions on the armor of these explorers, it seems that the expensive plate armor breastplates were not particularly common, though mail was slightly more known until superceded by the use of leather vests and coats as earlier mentioned.

While it seems quite possible that 'Iron Shirt' had some type of armor, either plate, which would most likely have come from early Spaniards, or mail, also possibly from them, it could not withstand the much heavier velocity of the buffalo rifle, whichever it was. I wonder if the shot may have hit him directly and actually penetrated the mail.

One other instance I have found of another 'Iron Shirt' involved a Blackfeet chief of Grease Melters clan who wore a shirt of buckskin decorated with pieces of metal ("The Old North Trail". Walter McClintock, 2004, p.422).
Even after leather 'armor' had been abandoned by the end of the 18th century, the wearing of leather shirts remained as signifying rank or prestigious position.

Best regards,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

LOL! Great one on the airline ad Manolo!!! I know you was kiddin! Actually I have always been fascinated by languages, even though I do not speak any except of course English. Most languages, especially Spanish, French and Latin based languages are somewhat easy to read at least in certain degree aside from looking up key words.

Well observed notes on the ballistics as well as the excellent observation on the armour if not properly cared for. The desert regions would have probably been an exception, and the long standing images of old cars sitting out there for many decades is something I have seen personally often in travels.

All best regards,
Jim

[celtan]

Yep, like the USAAF cemeteries, with AC that look ready to fly again..!

I remember that a couple years ago some archeologists found Mexican medals, hat ornaments, weapons and the like, all from the Mexican Wars. Virtually in perfect condition. IIRC, this was at San Jacinto.

Best

M

[Lee]

The article can be seen starting on page 627 here courtesy of Google books.

[VANDOO]

THERE IS A CD ON EBAY WITH THIS MATERIAL PLUS SOME MORE SEE THE SWAP FORUM IF INTERESTED.

[fearn]

I was able to download it as a pdf. Thanks Lee!

[pallas]

i remember reading about skeletons encased in copper armor found in burial mounds in ohio and a few other places in the eastern US in the 19th century......nothing specific about the armor was ever said.....not sure what became of that stuff..........its also worth mentioning that the skeletons where described as "giant" 7-8 ft tall.......it appears that a great many of these "giant" skeletons with and without armor were dug up over the course of the 19th century in the eastern and central US..........yet there dosent appear to be any examples of this armor or of the skeletons themselves in the museums (field, smithsonian, ect)

[aiontay]

Yes, those giant skeletons were Welsh basketball players that came over with Prince Madoc before they all ended up in the Dakotas....or Atlantean Yuchis.

If you scroll through to the "Warfare" section in this report, you'll find a description of Cree armor: htp://books.google.com/books?id=te4SAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=notes +on+the+Cree#

[pallas]

i wouldent count out the presence of other cultures in the new world before columbus, but thats a barrel of fish for another day..........


the caqiue tuscaloosa who accompanied desoto on part of his journey through alabama was said to be a "giant" and there was another cheif who wouldent meet with desoto and had to be tracked down and forced back to camp who was also described as such...

[aiontay]

I certainly don't discount pre-Columbian contact at all; I fact, I'm throughly convinced it happened, I just doubt that it was that significant, and I was just poking fun at some of the 19th and 21st theories regarding the mound builders. Of more interest to me, and probably of much more significance were the pre-Columbian contacts between the Mound Builders and Central America.

I don't doubt that the miko of Tushka Lusa (there's a good Chickasaw/Choctaw name for you!) was a giant, or at least an exceptional large individual. Large size may not have been accidental either. As an Osage friend once told me when we were discussing the "Big" Osages and the "Little" Osages, the difference in sizes was intentional. That was part of the function of the clan system, which governed marriage. As he put it, they were bred that way.

[celtan]

I'm not sure about the name, but If IIRC phillologist Barry Fell from Buffalo U., wrote an interesting book unambiguously stating that Celt-Iberian mariners left many inscriptions around water bodies in the current US of A.

One of them, IIRC, reportedly translated into: "[We] Mariners of Qadir (today's Cadiz) have reached here"...

That goes well in hand with the Quetzacoatl legends.

Best

M

Originally Posted by pallas

i wouldent count out the presence of other cultures in the new world before columbus, but thats a barrel of fish for another day..........


the caqiue tuscaloosa who accompanied desoto on part of his journey through alabama was said to be a "giant" and there was another cheif who wouldent meet with desoto and had to be tracked down and forced back to camp who was also described as such...

[aiontay]

I read Fell's book America BC years ago. The problem is, he posits not just Celts, but a whole mess of different folks roaming around the US. He wrote another book which claims Scandinavians visited the copper mining regions in the NE USA and Canada and left inscriptions in North African scripts. So how exactly did folks from Sweden learn Berber scripts in the Bronze Age? Plus, all the inscriptions Fell dechiphers in all his books are so terse as to almost be nonsensical. Like I said, I don't doubt there were pre-Columbian crossing of both the Atlantic and the Pacific for that matter. Based on Caesar's descriptions, Celtic tribes in Gaul had the technological abiltiy to get a ship across the Atlantic.

Again though, the question is how significant was the contact? If you believe Fell, there were Celtic horse ranches out on the Plains of Oklahoma in the early Iron Age. Given the speed with which the Plains tribes adopted horses at a later date, why didn't they acquire them in the BC when it would have been just as advantageous?

[fearn]

I've got to sit with Aiontay on this one.

Thing is, we've got enough archeological evidence for things like the spread of the bow and arrow from the Labrador Eskimo around 2000 BCE to down through the Americas, and we've got some evidence of corn spreading out of Central America by around 1000 CE. What we're missing is substantial evidence of technical or biological transfers from the Old World to the New, with the exception of those Chilean chickens and (possibly) Mayan bark pounders. Not great.

Even at L'Anse Aux Meadows (link), we've got good archeological evidence of the Vinland colony, and material from it shows up in Indian archeology sites. But we don't see the Indians learning to make iron tools from the Norse. Ditto with the Norse Greenland settlement.

Similarly, the only good evidence we have for New World to Old World transmission is the sweet potato from south America making its way into Oceania, probably again from Chile. Again, not much.

It's a wonderfully seductive area to theorize in, but with the exception of the sweet potato transferring to Oceania, there was little in the way of definite technology or cultural transfer. Even with millenia of potential contacts, that's kind of a sad result.

Best,

F

[pallas]

i have an interest in the mystery hill site in new hampshire as there are dolmens/cairns and various underground complexes that seem to be "celtic" in nature there.........

[celtan]

There are many interesting theories out there regarding the amount of influence that numbers of individuals can exert on their surroundings.

You need a certain amount of people to exert enough social pressure to cause persistent and observable changes in a society. There's a term for this concept, that I can't remember right now.

Perhaps isolated bands of bands of lost mariners didn't have the critical numbers to be able to influence the native tribes.

There have been found large cemeteries in China with what appears to be celtic remains, and yet, no signs of their presence has been found beyond these...

Vasques, Galicians and Asturian sailors plied the waters of Labrador for centuries, and yet, no signs of their presence is apparent, beyond a few underwater wrecks.

Vikings had a large colony in Galicia, known as Jakobsland. Yet the only remaining signs I ever saw of the vikings (beyond toponymics) was a couple rowing oars. These were over the altar of a forgotten medieval church, lost in the Galician mountains...

The Spanish reached today's Canada (Aca Nada: Nothing here) in their explorations, and yet only a Helm and a breastplate have ever been found, in the silt of a dredged harbour.

So yes, I also believe that there were many, albeit ephemeral visitors to American coasts, long before Erik and Colon.

Just pondering.

Best


M

Originally Posted by fearn

I've got to sit with Aiontay on this one.

Thing is, we've got enough archeological evidence for things like the spread of the bow and arrow from the Labrador Eskimo around 2000 BCE to down through the Americas, and we've got some evidence of corn spreading out of Central America by around 1000 CE. What we're missing is substantial evidence of technical or biological transfers from the Old World to the New, with the exception of those Chilean chickens and (possibly) Mayan bark pounders. Not great.

Even at L'Anse Aux Meadows (link), we've got good archeological evidence of the Vinland colony, and material from it shows up in Indian archeology sites. But we don't see the Indians learning to make iron tools from the Norse. Ditto with the Norse Greenland settlement.

Similarly, the only good evidence we have for New World to Old World transmission is the sweet potato from south America making its way into Oceania, probably again from Chile. Again, not much.

It's a wonderfully seductive area to theorize in, but with the exception of the sweet potato transferring to Oceania, there was little in the way of definite technology or cultural transfer. Even with millenia of potential contacts, that's kind of a sad result.

Best,

F

[fearn]

Hi Celtan,

The weird part, come to think of it, is disease. There's this theory out there that the Americas were largely depopulated in the 16th Century by epidemic diseases introduced from Europe. Actually, it's a bit more than a theory...

So...I guess everyone before the Conquistadors who made it to America was perfectly healthy. Now there's a weird thought. Did ships get that much faster after 1492? Fast enough, I mean, to bring infectious people to the New World.

F

[aiontay]

Fearn,
You raise a very good point. Disease would be my other argument against extended contact. There wasn't enough newcomers (and their livestock) to be vectors of disease. Or if there a large settlement, it was so long ago that the epidemics ran their courses and the population rebounded.

Also, the depopulation continued well after the 16th Century. Take the Mandans for example. In 1719 Bernard Le Harpe visited an area of Wichita villages in eastern Oklahoma that had a population of around 6,000 people if I remember correctly. Later, in the 1750's the Wichitas had a fortified village on the Red River on the OK/TX border where they defeated a Spanish expedition with cannons, and probably a few of those lancers with leather armor. If I remember correctly, by the end of the 19th Century, there were only 332 Wichitas left. Today there are around 2,000, about 1/3rd of what one group them had in the 18th Century.

[aiontay]

This probably should go in the thread about Spanish colonial leather armor, but it sort of fits with the Wichita bit I previously posted, In his book "Oklahoma Treasures and Treasure Trails" Steve Wilson describes the 1759 Parilla expedition's attack on the fortified Red River village of the Wichitas. He writes that the Wichitas were well armed with French muskets and that Parilla's "...cuirass was twice shot", but doesn't tell exactly what kind of cuirass it was. He also notes a lieutenant had his leather shield shot from his hand. As might be guessed from the title, the book isn't exactly a scholarly history, but I have no doubts about the chief officer wearing some sort of body armor and the lieutenant carrying a leather shield.

[VANDOO]

ONE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THE OLD NORTH AMERICAN ARMOR IS THAT IT WAS AS WELL CONSTRUCTED AS THE ARMOR USED IN MANY OTHER COUNTRYS AROUND THE WORLD THAT DID NOT HAVE METALS EASILY AVAILABLE. ALL FORMS AND CONSTRUCTION TECKNIQUES OF PRIMATIVE ARMOR (NON METALLIC) SEEM TO HAVE BEEN USED AND TO HAVE BEEN OF A QUALITY ON A PAR WITH THEIR COUNTERPARTS AROUND THE WORLD.
HEAD PROTECTION WAS USED IN SOME AREAS AND SOME WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE SOME FIERCE BEAST TO CAUSE THE ENEMY TO FEAR YOU AND AS ONLY VERY GOOD WARRIORS WORE SUCH THINGS IT WAS ALSO A SYMBOL OF STATUS AND WOULD ATTRACT SUITABLE FOES FROM THE OTHER SIDE AS TO KILL SUCH A WARRIOR WOULD BRING PRESTIEGE AND WOULD PROVE A WORTHY FOE.
MOST ARMOR DID NOT HAVE A FIERCE MASK COVERING THE FACE AS SOMETIMES SEEN IN SAMURAI ARMOR BUT IN THE AMERICAS NO DOUBT WAR PAINTS MADE A FIERCE ENOUGH FACE AND DID NOT INTERFERE WITH ONES SIGHT.
I HAVE READ OF ARMOR, SHIELDS AND BOW QUIVERS BEING MADE FROM THE ARMORED HIDE OF THE LARGE GAR FISH IN THE AMERICAS. TURTLE SHELLS AND CROCODILE HIDES ARE USED IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD SO IT IS LIKELY TURTLE AND ALLIGATOR SKINS WERE USED IN THE AMERICAS TOO. THE BACK SKIN MAKES A VERY GOOD ARMOR AS THERE ARE BONE PLATES CALLED SCUTES BUILT INTO THE SKIN
AS TO OTHER RACES VISITING THE AMERICAS IN THE PAST IT IS MORE LIKELY THAN THE ARGUMENT THAT NO ONE EVER CAME EXCEPT ACROSS THE BERING STRAIGHTS. IN OKLAHOMA THERE ARE SEVERAL SITES WHERE WRITEING CAN BE FOUND WITH EVERYTHING FROM SPANISH TO NORSE TO EGYPTIAN. BUT THERE ARE THOSE WHO SAY COLUMBUS WAS THE FIRST WHITE MAN EVER AS WELL AS THOSE WHO SAY MANY OTHER THINGS.
THE SIMULARITYS TO POTTERY DESIGNS AND TECKNIQUES AND TO ARROW POINTS AND TOOLS FOUND IN THE OLD AND NEW WORLDS WOULD LEAD ONE TO LOGICALLY THINK THERE WERE WAVES OF IMMIGRATION AND EXPLORATION BY GROUPS OF EXPLORERS AND ADVENTURERS IN THE AMERICAS AS WELL AS EVERYWHERE ELSE. AS NONE OF IT CAN BE PROVED I RESERVE MY JUDGEMENT AND LET THE OTHERS ARGUE AS THEY WILL.

[pallas]

Originally Posted by fearn

Hi Celtan,

The weird part, come to think of it, is disease. There's this theory out there that the Americas were largely depopulated in the 16th Century by epidemic diseases introduced from Europe. Actually, it's a bit more than a theory...

So...I guess everyone before the Conquistadors who made it to America was perfectly healthy. Now there's a weird thought. Did ships get that much faster after 1492? Fast enough, I mean, to bring infectious people to the New World.

F

i agree with the the general lack of old world illness as evidence of unsustained precolumbian (actually "pre norse-scandanavian") contact between the new and old worlds, however was there not a general lack of large damaging plagues/waves of diseases in europe before the 1200's? i know that they occured here and there (the plauge that afflicted the huns in italy and that which afflicted byzantine troops of justinian in byzantium as examples) but they dident seem to be as widespread or as devastating as those that swept over europe in the 12-1300s. could the vikings/celts and/or other european visitors have been largely communacable-disease free at the time they landed? im excluding STDS of course as theyve always been present in most world populations..

[aiontay]

Pallas,

I've read that part of the reason the New World was relatively disease free is that the cold temperatures of Beringia killed most germs, viruses etc. Assuming this is true, then maybe the Norse, coming via Greenland would have been relatively disease free.

[fearn]

Hi Aiontay,

The Western Hemisphere has all sorts of indigenous diseases. What was missing in Beringia wasn't diseases, it was the ability to spread quickly. If someone in a hunter-gatherer band falls sick (say, he picked up influenza from a migratory duck he shot for dinner) then the worst that could happen is that he and his family would die. Others would be unaffected, and a potentially lethal epidemic would fizzle. That kind of disease screen showed up all over the world, including Polynesia, Australia, and so forth. Diseases hit hard there too.

As for why the Norse didn't bring anything with them, I think Pallas might be onto something, in that they happened to voyage at a time when there weren't massive epidemics scudding around. So far as I know, the Black Death made it into Scandanavia, and, well, we all suffer from influenza in cold weather. Cold isn't necessarily a barrier to disease.

F

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by VANDOO

ONE INTERESTING THING ABOUT THE OLD NORTH AMERICAN ARMOR IS THAT IT WAS AS WELL CONSTRUCTED AS THE ARMOR USED IN MANY OTHER COUNTRYS AROUND THE WORLD THAT DID NOT HAVE METALS EASILY AVAILABLE. ALL FORMS AND CONSTRUCTION TECKNIQUES OF PRIMATIVE ARMOR (NON METALLIC) SEEM TO HAVE BEEN USED AND TO HAVE BEEN OF A QUALITY ON A PAR WITH THEIR COUNTERPARTS AROUND THE WORLD.
HEAD PROTECTION WAS USED IN SOME AREAS AND SOME WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE SOME FIERCE BEAST TO CAUSE THE ENEMY TO FEAR YOU AND AS ONLY VERY GOOD WARRIORS WORE SUCH THINGS IT WAS ALSO A SYMBOL OF STATUS AND WOULD ATTRACT SUITABLE FOES FROM THE OTHER SIDE AS TO KILL SUCH A WARRIOR WOULD BRING PRESTIEGE AND WOULD PROVE A WORTHY FOE.
MOST ARMOR DID NOT HAVE A FIERCE MASK COVERING THE FACE AS SOMETIMES SEEN IN SAMURAI ARMOR BUT IN THE AMERICAS NO DOUBT WAR PAINTS MADE A FIERCE ENOUGH FACE AND DID NOT INTERFERE WITH ONES SIGHT.
I HAVE READ OF ARMOR, SHIELDS AND BOW QUIVERS BEING MADE FROM THE ARMORED HIDE OF THE LARGE GAR FISH IN THE AMERICAS. TURTLE SHELLS AND CROCODILE HIDES ARE USED IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD SO IT IS LIKELY TURTLE AND ALLIGATOR SKINS WERE USED IN THE AMERICAS TOO. THE BACK SKIN MAKES A VERY GOOD ARMOR AS THERE ARE BONE PLATES CALLED SCUTES BUILT INTO THE SKIN
AS TO OTHER RACES VISITING THE AMERICAS IN THE PAST IT IS MORE LIKELY THAN THE ARGUMENT THAT NO ONE EVER CAME EXCEPT ACROSS THE BERING STRAIGHTS. IN OKLAHOMA THERE ARE SEVERAL SITES WHERE WRITEING CAN BE FOUND WITH EVERYTHING FROM SPANISH TO NORSE TO EGYPTIAN. BUT THERE ARE THOSE WHO SAY COLUMBUS WAS THE FIRST WHITE MAN EVER AS WELL AS THOSE WHO SAY MANY OTHER THINGS.
THE SIMULARITYS TO POTTERY DESIGNS AND TECKNIQUES AND TO ARROW POINTS AND TOOLS FOUND IN THE OLD AND NEW WORLDS WOULD LEAD ONE TO LOGICALLY THINK THERE WERE WAVES OF IMMIGRATION AND EXPLORATION BY GROUPS OF EXPLORERS AND ADVENTURERS IN THE AMERICAS AS WELL AS EVERYWHERE ELSE. AS NONE OF IT CAN BE PROVED I RESERVE MY JUDGEMENT AND LET THE OTHERS ARGUE AS THEY WILL.

Excellent thread Barry, and this is a great post as well. The book "Native American Weapons" by Colin Taylor is indeed excellent, and the Smithsonian report you have referenced is one of many references in the bibliography.

The variations in armour you have categorized from the Native American tribes and 'Eskimo' or Inuit people are as noted, amazingly well made with materials most accessible, and the methods of construction are in many ways surprisingly consistant with styles of other cultures. Naturally in the constantly debated and controversial theories of intercultural contact that would support influences in these forms of armour, it is hard to show any direct development other than free association in most cases.

The decoration on most defensive items as far as I have understood is mostly totemic or spiritually symbolic or both in varying degree, and often talismanic in many of the applications.

Excellent observation on the face masks, and I have understood that much as in African masks, most Native American masks that encase the face and head are ceremonial, and as you well point out, they would be terrible in combat as they would severely impair vision and movement.

The use of war paint, more notable in tribes toward and including the Plains and Prairies, utilizes key symbolism that represents values and properties important to the individual, as well as status in tribal systems. While this facial and often bodily applied art work certainly would look frightening to unaccustomed individuals facing them in combative situations, it was not in itself intended specifically to frighten, but to enhance the warriors strength and abilities.
The horses were often painted very much in kind with the symbolisms painted on the warrior, as they were very much a team. Many of the symbols often seen on the horse represented the achievements he and his rider had accomplished, as well as also to enhance his powers in battle.

Regarding the prehistoric ancestry of the Native American tribes, the long standing theory of movements of early man across the Bering land bridge is well established. However, many theories derived from numerous archaeological discoveries in recent years have suggested that perhaps there are many potential points of entry. The discovery of the remains of the so called Kennewick Man, in Washington in 1996, has created considerable rethinking in certain theories, as well as important movement toward creating protective legislation for Native American ancestry.

The number of hoaxes and discoveries of completely astounding artifacts and inscriptions etc. in remote regions of America seem to reflect the creativity and devious nature of humanity in modern times. While it is known that well educated and scholarly individuals often accompanied the early explorers in thier incursions into the inner regions of America, they were intent on the claiming of these parts of the New World for thier king or queen, not handing it off to Egyptians, Sumerians or any other culture or power.

Most of these purported evidences of these ancient cultures have been disproven. In Arizona, the so called 'Peralta Stones' which are supposed to hold clues to the Lost Dutchman Mine and to have been left by earlier Spanish in accordance with ancestral claims to this treasure, are mostly considered a hoax. In looking at images of these the symbols look almost cartoonish, and even the Spanish words are spelled incorrectly and incongruent.

Lots to consider, but absolutely fascinating history!!!

All the best,
Jim