Use of the Sword by American Indian Tribes

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you for responding Ed, I wasn't sure if this unusual topic would meet with much interest, but very encouraged with your observations. To be quite honest, I had always pretty much shared your views, that as ceremonial items and symbolic regalia in the manner of bearing swords etc. was the only likely use for Indian tribes.

It does seem that largely this was true, symbolism in this culture was of course prevalent and case in point, a warriors shield was not intended primarily to defend a warrior physically, but spiritually and carried his totem or symbolic representation of significant beliefs. There were however apparently war shields as well made heavier with thicker leather.

As I added in the 1845 account, the dragoon lieutenant noted that while the Dakota Sioux had a number of swords, they did not know how to use them.
But the author of the article it was in, noted that indeed they did use them in degree.
The native illustrations illustrate using the saber, and from my understanding in studying these kinds of resources, the inclusion of this would be deemed reliable. While there is of course dramatic mythology and metaphysical subject matter in the oral traditions, paintings of events tend to be accurate (despite the rudimentary artistry).

The 'long knife' was indeed awkward, and Indian culture was skilled in the use of primitive weapons, but hardly the use of the saber. What I had not thought of was as the author pointed out, the hacking or slashing use of the saber was similar in action to that of the war club.
In Indian warfare one of the key factors important to the warrior was to reach his opponent, 'up close and personal', and one of the highest honors was to get directly in contact with an enemy and 'count coup'. That is effectively to strike him not necessarily with injury......in the sense..I could have killed you but I didnt.
To kill enemy with arrows or other from distance was not considered honorable or brave to a warrior,, but obviously necessary in overall combat.

However, swords were not always left unaltered, and quite frankly, many blades were cut down, primarily for the lance, which was indeed one of the key up close weapons of the Plains warrior. Naturally as steel was at a premium as Indians had no forging skills or knowledge generally, many blades ended up in knives. However, knives were readily available through traders, just as were guns (and clearly some swords).

Apparently, as the warriors were well aware of the use of the sword by the cavalry, and to have a sword which had been captured was symbolic of the victorious prowess of the warrior. It does not seem much of a reach that warriors would try to use the saber of the 'blue coat', much as they would sometimes take and wear his captured clothing, even carry his flag.

Ironically, the use of the saber was notably diminished by the Civil War in the Union forces, and quite honestly the derisive term 'old wristbreaker' for the heavy M1840 saber was well placed. This was due to lack of training in the use of the sword, and obvious focus on firearms. There were very few recorded injuries from swords in the war, and those that were seem to have been blunt force trauma (the swords were often simply not sharpened).

I had always thought that there was little use of the saber in the 'Indian Wars' but I have found that was incorrect. I had assumed this from knowing that Custer and his forces had left behind their swords before Little Big Horn.
Incredibly, the only use of the sword there was by a number of warriors, and there was at least one sword among various weaponry recovered from the battle.
(see the attached in previous post).

I agree that use of the saber in combat was limited, but was surprised with the well researched data presented in the 1990 article to learn that in degree they were.
The use of the sword symbolically is also detailed, and in one case it notes its use as a symbol of power of the chief, in the case of visitors, the saber would protect them being placed near them so they would not be harmed or threatened. I have not explained that entirely here but simply noted the instances.

[kronckew]

There are earlier threads here on this subject, I recall a post about a Native American warrior who carried a Japanese katana, how he'd come by it nobody knows.

[CutlassCollector]

Yes, I remember that Wayne. Amazing.
And here is some info.

https://history.nebraska.gov/sites/h...1987Swords.pdf

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you guys, there was indeed some presence of Japanese Samurai swords with American Indian tribes in the latter 19th century, but the only real evidence are two examples, this one with Indian scout Dog Child in Alberta sometime pre 1900, the other was one one the wall of Red Cloud's house at Pine Ridge, S.D. in 1890.

I recall talking with Dr Bleed on this some years ago, and this article, and with the Red Cloud example we can only speculate but there seem to be several possibilities. In one case there were diplomats from Japan in Wyoming regions near Red Cloud's agency in 1876 but no record of contact with him. However there were eleven diplomatic ventures by Red Cloud into Washington between 1876-1890 and as Japan had been entertaining diplomatic ventures to Washington in these years (with this theme in the Charles Bronson movie "Red Sun" 1971). It seems reasonable that Red Cloud would possibly have acquired this in those visits.

Dr Bleed spent quite a few years studying in Japan, and knows the swords well, and his notes on the Red Cloud sword are interesting, in that these fittings (handachi) were important and not the sort which might be seen on trade or less than entirely authentic sword.

On the Dog Child sword, this one has more specific provenance, as it coincides with the travel to Japan by the missionary to the Blackfoot in Alberta in 1895 to marry a lady missionary there, and they returned to Fort MacCleod, in Alberta where this photo was taken. Interestingly, this sword is in tachi fittings as is the sword in the Bronson movie.

There was little, if any, possibility of Japanese Nihonto being outside Japan prior to the Satsuma Rebellion of 1877, which of course virtually dismissed the Samurai. While the traditions including sword making continued in degree in more covert manner, in the following years numbers of such swords would enter trade situations but not until early 20th century. These were not the same as other European and US swords obviously, and these two known examples were clearly diplomatic.

[Jim McDougall]

In reviewing some of the material covered to look further into actual use of the saber as a combat weapon by Indian warriors, in its original state, not altered etc. I wanted to add these excerpts. As many of the recorded events with warriors using the saber are in Indian paintings, it is tempting to think of these as using metaphor or artistic license. However in my view, Indian paintings are depicted rather accurately (despite the rudimentary artistic skills) as actual events are regarded as actually seen, not using symbolic or metaphoric additions. Therefore if a saber is depicted, then it was there. The lack of commonality in the inclusion of swords in paintings corresponds to the notably limited use of it in action. Still, the objective is to show that the saber was used in degree, and effectively when it was.

In a skirmish between US cavalry from Ft. Leavenworth Kansas and Cheyenne warriors May 18, 1865:
"...several of the Cheyennes carried cavalry sabers and used them expertly".
(Austerman, 1990, op.cit. p.15)
It is noted as well that "...the most extensive documentation of the Indian reliance on the saber comes from the Sioux Nation of the Northern Plains".

With that statement followed by the account by Lt. James Carleton of the 1st Dragoons in 1845 encountering Dakota Sioux. In his account he notes they purchased these from 'the traders', but claims they wear them only for grandeur, and that they throw away the scabbard carrying only the blade.

The author notes this assumption was incorrect, going on to describe several instances of effective use of the saber by Sioux and Cheyenne.
It seems unclear why warriors would throw away the scabbard. It is interesting though that the Indians would purchase sabers from traders unless they intended to use them.
The 'grandeur' thing is pretty off center as well. An Indian warrior would not wear unwarranted awards or decoration, such as cavalry swords unless taken as trophy in combat or received as gift etc. This goes to the wearing of symbolic awards such as feathers etc. To do so would fall under the heading of what we know in our times as 'stolen valor'.

While much notation of actual use of the saber by Indian warriors is essentially anecdotal, it seems well placed and supported by contemporary sources despite the rather limited degree of incidental use. Still the sword in this context in my view, must be seen in the same way as it is in the use of the US cavalry, actually used in combat, but also ceremonially on occasion.