Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - Use of the Sword by American Indian Tribes

Jim McDougall · 1st September 2022, 06:01 PM

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.

1st September 2022, 06:01 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,747	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. Attached Images Last edited by Jim McDougall; 2nd September 2022 at 05:53 AM.