Excellent. I have also been looking at the 'people of fire series about the peoples of the southeastern USA.

That's essentially anti-white propaganda

@@karlscher5170 The noble savage trope was invented by a white guy

​@@forbiddendomeeverything was invented by a white guy lol 😂

not only that but it makes the natives seem way less cool by portraying them as always on the back foot rather than as the epic warriors they could often be

What are you talking about. His biggest grudge is against you, the invading white man coming to steal his land

Did he take his horse in the sky

He took YOUR horse into the sky.

@@resipsaloquitur13 i don't own a horse

​@@scottmaclaren4695 anymore

Yeah right, anyone can say they are Comanche! Get off your knees.

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing!

Native American history is fascinating yet tragic, it’s worth to study and to draw inspiration from. Thank you for still being with us after centuries-long genocide! You’re one of a kind race!

This makes more sense. In the video it seems like the Comanche happened upon the escaped horses and mastered riding and fighting on them within a few years or even months. Maybe the escaped horses did give them a numerical advantage they didn't have before, but it seems probable that they had already mastered warfare on horseback.

This is a valuable bit of context, thank you.

it is common in most nomadic people's to be honest, the situation also shows ricardo's law in action basically the comanche saw the succes the appache had with horses but also realised that they essentially just used them more as transport to and from than anything else. all of that makes a lot of sense when you realise how heavily what can be done on horseback has been dependent on technology, the romans had four pronged saddles that held them in place on top (before that horses could sparsely be used in (at least melee) combat outside of charriots)but which still required them to clamp on with their thighs to stay in the saddle, the stirrup was invented in the central asian steppe, it allowed for much more mobility in the saddle, the single horn saddle was invented in medieval western europe. the commanche essentially didn't have any of that..... and somehow mannaged to make that their advantage, not being locked in a saddle (and with extreme levels of training to learn to do so) they learned to do things such as riding their horses whilst hanging off their sides, if you saw what seems like a herd of wild horses on the plains, in the distance, whilst it was kind of getting dark.... well it might allready have been to late for you. though it does have to be pointed out that we see similar feats being performed in shows by steppe peoples in Eurasia all over so I would argue that the mongols may have had similar skills, and as for those stirups, they make it much easier to guide a horse but you don't have to use them if you require more flexibility (and in fact we know that during his early rise, genghis khan also used the tactic of hanging on the side of horses covered in essentially wicker shields on the other side to win a battle, being able to surprise them by going for more close quarters than was usual

Effective use of horse archers and quick raids. Also used by South American natives like the Mapuche of Peru, various Turkic and Iranic people, and even some Europeans like the Cossacks. A well armed cavalry host or even a small collection of well trained skirmishers can make life miserable and short for the enemy.

@@istoppedcaring6209 another thing about the Stirrup is that it allows you to have something to stand on and thus use your back muscle's to Pull 100-150 pound bows which the mongols did // The Comanche did not use that heavy poundage bows, they only used 60-70 pound bows which did not require a stirrup and could be pulled with just arm strength

@@aburoach9268 true, it is also why longbowmen used to stand in a certain way whilst firing on foot, they had to utilise those backmuscles as much as possible

Mongols used the same tactics that was used before them by numerous nomadic Turkic peoples, such as Scythians, Huns, Gokturks, Avars, Pechenegs, Kipchaks (Cumans), Seljuks, etc. Mongols were just the latest ones and were able to conquer the largest territory.

I would

Hell yeah! However, who would be the victim and who would be the oppressor?

@@drgordo112 Great question. Wouldn't they all see themselves as the victims at some point in the story?

@@spurtikus1 Let me put it this way: I am trying to be an effective teacher who happens to be a straight white male. Unfortunately, identity trumps competency. I am frequently reminded by school LEADERSHIP that I am by birth an Oppressor. I survived the Catholic Church, but they will not grant me the title of Survivor. It's unfair! It's outrageous!

Not if he's gonna self-censor history

They would have been the Mongolians of The Americas if they had horses wayyy before.

@@felipegarcia5114 the horse was originally native to the Americas, there are theories that there were already original Native American horse breeds in North America that inter-bred with the horses that were brought with colonisation by the Spaniards. If you think about it, horses evolved and potentially travelled with nomadic humans for hundreds of thousands of years, certainly long long before the colonisation of the Americas by Europeans in the last few centuries. Therefore it was certainly possible horses could have already been in the Americas as both indigenous wild species and also brought with the nomadic Native American tribes when they first came from Asia. There's no reason to think that Native Americans never saw a horse before. Just the 'Western European eye' always thinks everything revolves around itself, and never thinks about the complexity of reality of the rest of the world / universe / nature / history. outside of itself etc. We probably still have much to discover. There are Comanche narratives today that say that they kept horses before the 'Spanish horses' appeared and then interbred with native blood-lines, before then being dominated by the British DNA blood-lines shortly after. There are the Bakshir curly haired horses for example that are described as having been documented as being owned by the Sioux but then being almost exterminated due to being 'different' under colonialism. There are horses held within indigenous communities with dark stripes on their spine still to this day. History is now being re-written, but maybe it will take time for the full truth to emerge, of how the indigenous Native American horses were originally integral to Native American society and already here, long before the white man turned up. Just as the Native American people were massacred, so were their horses, but at least some Native breeds still remain and are being protected to save them from extinction to this day. www.yesmagazine.org/environment/2020/04/27/native-horses-indigenous-history

@@liliaaaaaaaa the historical sources in that puff piece is dubious at best

​@@felipegarcia5114Agreed.

The Numunu braided their horses main into a loop where they would hook their arm into it and would hang under the horses neck revealing only one leg draped over the back. Plus the Numunu used the smallest dream catchers for target shooting. 9 inches across. Even my aim is pretty good and I don't practice. Dream catchers were used like a dart board, but rolled on the ground and the one nearest to the middle won. Not the stupid made up lie about catching dreams. Spears with barbs were used and bets were also placed. Numunu men could shoot arrows accurately from under the horses neck. Plus Numunu men broke horses in shallow rivers and creeks, so if you got bucked off no pain and it would tire the horse out faster. Plus they used mares in estrus to draw stallions. This is the answer to the other supposed Comanche indian that didn't know that.

Yup, you are right. With the political tones in this country the native Indians are spoken of as the poor minorities. This is used as leverage for one political party to gain what it is that they want over the other political party for power. I went to a private school in Indiana and American history taught by the Nuns was first class. Politicians are destroying this country faster than history can create it. Sad........elections have consequences.

That's like saying a teacher was militant Eastern Hemisphere. Which nation or "tribe" did she support stealing land from and enslaving other tribes? Or do you mean she was just anti-White?

Don't trust white people go to San Carlos or white river and mescalero get the truth this all lies

Native people don't make treaties this all lies from a white man let us here this from a true apache not a white person.

It also kind of puts a damper on the automatic 'native-good-white-man-bad' complex that's been taught and, ah...rather insisted on, from certain quarters. Natives fought natives, brutally, for decades and centuries, before the others ever even arrived.

@@noahhyde8769 for reals. For example, the Sioux regard the Black Hills as their 'sacred ancestorial lands'. Conspicuously missing from the discussion is the Sioux stole the land in a war of extermination against the Cheyenne, Crow, Kiowa and the Arapaho in the 1700s. Somehow only the white man is the transgressor.

They were not noble savages... by today's standards. If we judge Europeans by today's standards let's judge natives by the same standard

@@nkinash321 Yeah, comparing tribalistic genocides and warfare in America, Africa, and Oceania to mass genocides and the world wars that occurred in Europe. Makes sense.

MOre like humans being human.

​@@gondar6181 This doesn't seem like an apt comparison. It would make more sense to compare the people of their time, wouldn't it? Or compare the groups at similar levels of technological development? I'm sure if the Comanche had machine guns during their feuds with the other tribes. They would not have taken issue using them. And if the Comanche's brutality was present during the world wars, the results would not have been better and Dare I say, they would have been much worse. It's better to make comparisons that make sense. During the Comanche's time, the Spanish were just another group to contend with. Just like all other tribes and nations did across the globe.

@@repentandbelieveinJesusChrist9 Ah, we were wondering when you'd grace us with an appearance. It seems these comment sections aren't quite complete, until one of you lot weighs in. I'm a pragmatic agnostic, but here's one I've always liked, which might be applicable to you: "For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies." 2 Thess. 3:11 (KJV)

Naw, nobody wants to see that sh**. Too violent and soulless. I don't know if there is a heaven, but they sure deserve to go to hell.

Netflix could do it. With a black Comanche chieftain of course. "My grandmother told me.."

​@@Eraphionwe wuz chiefs mang

@@hooktraining3966 Twerks With Wolves.

@@Eraphion No... It'd be a black woman Comanche chieftain... Maybe even a black "woman" Comanche chieftan. Oh that would be so... brave. *eyebrow wiggle

Aztecs originally came from the North (what would is the US today), essentially kicked out by other tribes or fleeing, we don't know exactly what happens but they are not welcome anymore and they begin their long exodus that eventually brings them to the valley of mexico where they sell themselves as mercenaries and labor until the nations of the valley of Mexico find them too cumbersome and refuse to give them a place to settle, they eventually see the eagle eating the serpent, the sign announced by their late leader Tenoch. They see the sign in a marsh where local nations finally agree they can settle... fast-forward and they turn the marsh into habitable and agricultural land and eventually turn on nations that had exploited them and go on conquering roughly what is midern day mexico. It's not impossible they might have been the same peoples as the Comanche

I’m Tarascan Yeah we defeated the Aztecs and sent them away from our land too 😂 But those fools had the Devil inside them

Go to hell with your stupid Religion you pos

No they weren’t. The Comanche sure, the Aztecs absolutely not.

@@luiscarlosgarcia9354 Your name is in Spanish and you’re acting like you fought the Aztecs yourself. The ones going with the devil are the Spaniards and Latin Americans who went against the rules in their own religion.

Horrific methods are what is required to defend yourself as a native American while under oppression or invasion.

It's still interesting history

Welcome to the european seas of old with the Vikings, and to the Mediterranean Sea with that PLUS arab, berber and turkish raids. Welcome to east europe raided by tatars. And as Italian, I guarantee Venetians and Genoese weren't that better behaved.

​@raymondjmcclain Good thing the Indians were conquered

What is crazy to think about is we are all descendants that survived through the horrors and uncertainties of Human existence..

To bad it's an overreaction to fit the "we weren't all that bad, ya'll were doing it too", so you can sleep at night narrative.

@@lorenzovillarreal4693 Those who are secure in their own need not to speak of it.

100%

boring

North Vietnamese.

How do you think they would have compared to the Afghans? They held their mountains too against a far more advanced empire.

​@@gaslampnation735 if the US forces had used the Indian wars rules of engagement the war in Afghanistan would have been over by 2003 and 85% of the population would have been gone. Don't compare apples and oranges. The war in Afghanistan was fought with 2 arms and a leg tied behind our backs because our politicians and military industrial complex wanted to spin it out for decades. Trust me it only ended because they started planning this Ukraine thing....

Thank you! I have a new video coming out this afternoon on Mangas Coloradas. Let me know what you think.

Yes, they do. I do see it a little differently though, the Comanche used similar tactics as the Mongols but did not wage war with the same tenacity as the Mongols. Interestingly, as I watched the video above I too had thoughts of how similar the swiftness and deadliness of the Comanche attack were to those of the Mongols.

Yess, except the mongols had superior strategy (all mongols were requried to have 5 horses), bows, and battlefield tactics (faking retreats to lure enemies into a trap) thus would have slaughtered the Comanche.

​@@musicmadgic6931 mongols conquered more territory in 20 years than Rome did in it's entire existence. Mongols would have crushed the Comanche and Apache simultaneously.

@@Arthurian. Comanche didn't set out to conquer, they raided and roamed. What makes you believe same numbers group Mongols could beat Comanches (mounted, bow / long af lance) when it took literary half of continent, guns and STDS(because of tea-bagging noobs) to stop them?

@@lymphy12 sorry, your red man heroes were no match for superior forces like Europeans and mongols.

There is something to that because the Apache for the most part did not fight at night...read that in several troopers autobiographies

My ancestors fought at night. Chichimec and Moskitos fought at night. In fact, Moskitos were hired to guard the Panama Canal. No one screwed with them, and they turned prisoners (anarchists) over to local Carib, who guarded in the day.

I hsve died thru the night. Physical death. Spirit and body reunion 12 hrs later. Not awate of exact route either way. Altiugh just ovet tbe horizon on eastern sky plains is ehete i beliece i went. Coming back i wad wasted. So had to be a guide to do it

@@davidtyndall3786 sounds fun

@@marschlosser4540 and where are Moskitos and Chichimec from?...this is a post about Apache ...and most Apaches did not fight at night.

That's the result of liberal teaching in the public education system and other facets of Liberal ideologies. The idea is to create a, us versus them world and culture. White people are the enemy. They are the oppressors and always have been and always will be. Every other race, is just the victim and has never done anything wrong. Any violence ever attributed to minorities or in this case Native American Indians is always written out as a defensive measure, never offensive. Some of the earlier tales of Christopher Columbus, tell of him helping out some indian tribes against another indian tribes, because they would war with eachother and then eat eachother because they were cannibals. I didn't learn about that in school it was only when I was out of school and did the research myself. That sort of history, goes against the narrative, so it is suppressed.

The camanche regularly engaged in trying to exterminate or enslave their enemies

Well, if we learned the TRUE history of the Native American Indigenous population; a fuck ton of modern narratives of "white man baaaaaad" would be sunk to the bottom of davy jones locker

It would hurt the myth that the native pagan tribalists were all happy peaceful flower eaters.

@@AR15andGOD Facts

You didn't hear about it from any official source because it would destroy the myth of the Noble Savage! And you won't hear about it now because it would destroy the narrative of the Noble Savage who was so badly treated by the European colonists.

Yeah schools need much more time to cram in all of that white guilt.

Super nice. Thank you.

Agreed 💯

@@datesanddeadguys Thank you too. As an European, I'm completely ignorant about "native" American history. But then again, humans are humans, and we are not as cute as cats. (what a cruel, war mongering species we are)

@@worfoz if you would like to learn more about the Comanche in particular and the Indian tribes that they came in contact with in general ,then I can wholeheartedly recommend the book Empire of the Summer Moon by SC Gwynne . It is loaded with historical facts about the Comanche tribe and its surrounding neighbors . It is exhaustively researched and well written.

@@jackburton5483 I tried to study cultural antropology once, so in my view, Gwynne would show me how modern American culture looks at the Comanche culture, revealing the very nature of American main stream culture. I mean: The '59 movie Ben Hur reveals a lot about American imperialism at that time, but not about Rome...

I don’t think anyone hated the Spanish more than Geronimo, that dude had a personal vendetta to kill every single one of them that he came across. Comanches would kill anyone that crossed their boundaries no matter who they were. I never understood why the mission line from Spanish Mexico abruptly turned due West from San Antonio and followed the border all the way to California. One of the most well equipped and well trained armies in the world didn’t want nothing to do with the Comancheria lol.

@@jackburton5483 comes done to cost. for Spain to wipe out the comanche would require massive outlays of capital and man power from across the Spanish empire, and it was not worth it. for the record the comache were successful because they attacked small isolated settlements. they preyed on the weak but avoided major battles unless they had clear advantage. the Spanish they fought were primarily the "local" garrisons that were mostly poorly led and often poorly trained (an issue with the Spanish colonies that persisted till the Mexican revolution, and after). if it came to a dedicated effort to exterminate the Spanish could call on vastly more manpower than the comanche had people but to do so would pull forces from Spain itself and the other colonies many of which had their own issues to deal with. end of the day the kill the comanche was not worth the effort so a simple redirection of the border was done

Agree 👍 Exactly Y I just Subscribe. I love history an thought I knew about the West's Indians. However I was Rong. The Indians had Huge Wars going on. In land disputes. Over Huge Tracts of land. Just the Weapons Tech at first primitive wood & Rocks. Horses even came Europe. IRON

​@@jackburton5483 It was Mexicans that Geronimo hated, not Spaniards. They had been gone for decades by the time Geronimo was born. Mexican troops killed Gernomino's family at Janos during a trading trip.

@@jackburton5483 I'm sure geography had nothing to do with it..

This is about the best kind of compliment I can get. I trying to take the stuff I learn and tell it in a entertaining story. Thank you.

I never heard these stories. Truly fascinating. Human beings are so...violent. But I can't imagine being a European in such an alien territory and being terrified by the bright moon illuminating the plains.

@@datesanddeadguys I dont trust Google to truthfully reply to many things in history that can falsely influence present agendas. So I wanted to ask, Is it true that American Indians learned scalping from the English? And what facts exist (around that use of fear) in westward expansion? Great job on the channel/ video- best regards.

He has a pleasing tone of voice and enunciation. His speaking pace is also pleasing. He breathes and speaks at the correct speed for a story teller.

Yes and No. There is pretty irrefutable archeological evidence of scalping centuries before the arrival of Europeans to the new world. It has been falsely pushed by different authors that natives learned it from Europeans, most notably Howard Zinn (at least that I am aware of). What is true is that the English and other Europeans absolutely benefited from Native Americans scalping. They would often pay bounties for scalps the I would have to bet made the practice more common. This series for the example has focused on the Apache. It was not a common cultural practice for them but they would capitalize on bounties. Neighbors though, like the Comanche did it commonly regardless of outside influence. In summary, The practice existed and was used prior to European arrival but it was also influenced by Europeans.

Native American tribes' histories were taught during my 7th grade Texas history class although the historical narratives were brief as were discussions covering the Texas colonization periods (Spanish, French, and Mexican). However, the Comanche nation and their land, Comancheria, dominated the subject of Texas' Indian tribes. I imagine most Texans from my generation were/are quite familiar with the Comanche war chief Quanah Parker.

A Sioux once bemaoned that the US aArmy/WHites wwere doing to them what they had been doing to the Pawnee, Crow, Shoshone etc for decades.

Teaching history did not begin at the stealing invaders part though. The omissions on what the pre colonial or non colonial people were doing exist because it goes against the cultural narrative kinda prevalent in all colonizing groups of the history of this land kinda begins with us narrative. This is not limited to the industrial era colonialism though but all the one that existed prior and likely will exist in the future. It’s unlikely that if a humanoid species makes it out of this Earth there will be great efforts to preserve earth history among them and most stuff will focus in however their new founding fathers and early conflicts are.

@@locknload4691 I am from Europe: we have had our differences between our tribes as well. Celts, Germans, Saxons, Gauls, Tartars, Vikings: you name it. Now all tribal people accuse US of your tribal wars... BECAUSE WE ENDED IT humanity....

Rofl. Ah, a racist trying to further his own agenda. And here I thought you actually cared about history.

How can someone living at the edge of Africa get hold of a Comanche relic (arrow head)? Ive never been near America but my heart has always been with the Native Americans. I would kill for something from them

​@@neilvanschoor3502 Why? Our own culture and history is far more interesting.

is there any bias in its re-telling?

Lubbock native, I may have to dig into this, cuz it's pretty interesting stuff to learn

Thanks

It's based on the story of Cynthia Ann Parker. You should read about the fort Parker massacre.

You should watch the John Wayne movie The Searchers based on the same story. One of the finest piece of cinematography and storytelling out there.

I knew people didn't that movie for using white actors to play the Comanche, but I was unsure how they felt about depicted them as violent raiders. Know I now it had some historical basis.

​@@lucinae8510 I see no problem with that

@@lucinae8510 I’ve seen the movie numerous times, but those playing the comanches looked native enough to me !

I love that story so much but when I tell it to most people they do not get the same kick out if it that I do.

@@datesanddeadguys WOW! Thanks for the note! I too get that kick you mean. WOO! HOO!

"In North America the horse went extinct" - Because newly arrived Native Americans hunted remaining North American horses down by 8000 BCE.

And more ironically, the re-introduction of horses to North America was due to Christopher Columbus.

​@@harleyquinn8202 ...Source? I'm honestly interested.

I am a New Zealand Maori My tribe Nga Puhi use to raid and pillage up and down the country, similar to the Comanche. But we didn't have horses. Being an island nation, we used war canoes, which were sleeker and faster than normal canoes.

I think that is a valid comparison. The Mongols were also masters of the horse, and, of course, were equally terrorizing and unbelievably cruel. Neither did they cultivate food. They stole everything they needed through raiding and pillaging. But their primary weapon was the bow rather than the lance. The Mongols met their match in Hungary when the Hungarians changed their battle tactics by a scorched earth policy and the building of many castles to house and protect the peasants and their food supplies. The land was stripped of everything which could support life, the provisions having been placed safely within castle walls. The Mongols had neither the time nor the energy to invest castle after caste. They were left in a virtual desert, and a whole army starved to death before they could withdraw and reach their own empire to the east. The Comanches ultimately faced a similar end as the bison were killed off and the Americans attacked them with repeating weapons like the revolver and hunted them down to the point of total exhaustion.

As a Quahadi Comanche myself, I can say the backstory to our family and it's stories of our ancestors basically line up with that. Empire of the Summer Moon is a good book if you want more specifics

Was thinking the same. Fascinating!

I agree the Huns of America's

Was she a catholic by any chance?

@richardmullins1883 yes absolutely yes, she passed away thinking I still went to mass lol but yeah now I have a feeling that had something to do with it

@@jerlaine1638 the catholics were good at making people ashamed of their original non catholic background. They recently found many remains of Cree children here in Saskatchewan on land where there was a catholic school...so they've got no place to make people ashamed of the past. I recommend the book Empire of the summer moon which covers the Comanche in more detail and of course covers a lot about their sworn enemies the Apache.

name? jaramillo, sanchez, garcia, etc ??

@nlcatter I'm a Candelario however that's my great-grandfather's name and he's Mexican. His wife my Great Grandmother and her mother who were from the rez and all my mother can recall was calling her Grandma Sophia and she's the 1 who is Apache according to my grandfather

And you used ten adjectives.

Not ridiculous. It was theirs to fight for. Europeans had no business here other than greed and glory.

Great relativism of the big American holocaust!

When someone tells me that the United States belong to the indians, I remind them that "Native" Americans came from Asia.

Cry more you donkey​@@burn31

Does this cover the entire history of the red man or just the Comanches?

@@Morgue12free Its focused on the Comanche, their rise and fall.

My great great grandfather Quanah Parker.

I dont know much of my Family's history, but i hope to learn more. I do know that we have Comanche blood from somewhere down the line

@@chillones9574 oh wow! Thats incredible!

I highly recommend the book "Empire of the Summer Moon" by S. C. Gwynne. It is one of the best history books I have ever read. And I love that you're teaching your daughter such history.

One of my best friends throughout my 25+ years as a truck driver was a Mescalero Apache. What an amazing man and friend.

i did some road work with the navajos.Pretty easy going friendly folks with a good sense of humor.If you drink with them you take your chances.Fights are common

Y u indians always so violent?

@@andrewpinkham9904 That’s because all N.A.’s lack the Gene to break down alcohol. Scientific fact.

210!!!!! What part?

@@damianketcham oh castle hills! Sup!!

sooo the word "mission" stands for a castle too? My dictionary doesn't know this meaning.

@@Zeratsu not necessarily. “Misión” is the Spanish word for a Catholic settlement/church. Most times fortified to defend against attacks tho.

​@Skate_Health fun part about history is seeing how the Spanish approach failed while the US succeeded to conquer the west the spanish had to fortify missions due to their centralized approach of governing citizens weren't allowed to own guns so they had to rely on the military to protect them from raids preventing growth while the US allowing gun ownership allowed for settlers to fight back against the natives when they would raid settlements making confrontation with settlements more costly

Rfoggooo❤

My GG was a mountain man named bear claw by the Indians, he was loved by many animal. He could shoot the legs off a fly at 1000 yards,

@@chocolateface8664 Chuck Norris checks under his bed for my ancestors - Steven Seagull modeled his tough-guy persona on my warrior clan's reputation!

@@dancarter482 - Is that the same Steven Seagull who is related to Jonathan?

@@dougearnest7590 Living-Stone; he'll raid ya bins & steal your chips!

Amen.

Yes, the notion that Native American Tribes lived in Harmony firmly quashed.

@@emlynjay8633 Yeah, it is almost as if humans, regardless of origin, make war on each other. Who'd of thunk it?

@@emlynjay8633 yes but you u can’t tell White liberal brain dead do gooders that or POC…

Not really no. Russell means was way more accurate on indigenous peoples history of turtle island. This is white washed garbage and you all are brainwashed

We heard about how the Muskogee often were at war with the Cherokee in Northern Alabama. The Cherokees also helped Andrew Jackson defeat the Muskogee ay The Battle of Horseshoe Bend. Jackson betrayed them later though with the Indian Removal Act of 1830.

prairie nigers lived in states of constant brutal violence. Empathy was a european trait. But of course in an age of dewhitification of humanity, true history is lost.

@@Daron7181 Yeah.... the Cherokee are often sort of presented as innocent and peaceful, and almost naïve. They were anything but originally, they came into the south and Carolinas, TN, GA etc dominating the local tribes as a very expansionist group themselves. They were known to love hunting and waring, and the preferred the latter at that time. (words of another tribe I read) They made war with the colonists at first, including several grim massacres, but when they realized that wasn't working they quickly adapted to the NEW English culture, traded with them, and took advantage and adapted their technology. Under the new western culture they flourished, they created their own writing, they became very much apart of colonial America, adopting western farming, housing, and lifestyle, but they also got a little soft. The Trail of Tears was by far one of the darkest moments in American history, and esp where I live it tore local families apart that were very much a mix of settlers and Cherokee. It was a complete betrayal of a people who had become allies to the fledgling states. MANY so called "white" families in East Tennessee were in fact predominantly Cherokee. However if we're to be honest historically, I am sure many southern tribes would have seen it as Karma as the Cherokee had displaced many tribes before them and then helped the likes of Jackson in the Indian wars. I think the entire history of the Cherokee is interesting, and I wish we could remove the lens of modern PC, revision, and take a look at them as they were, and their entire arch. From fierce warriors to educated and civilized farmers, to victims of their own success. After all the whole reason for the Indian Removal Act was lust for the successful and bountiful farms and settlements they had created by newcomers who had no history with them. Older colonial families saw them as part of their community and had married in with them. Still I know little about teh pre-Columbian history or even their very early history coming into the southern areas, I would really like to learn more and separate the fact from the myths.

a good book that touches this subject is "Creek Mary's Blood"

A diversion from the well known fact that the Euro colonizers exterminated Native Americans?

All people be it White, Red, Black, or Yellow need to have a stong connection to their ancestors. This modern world really tries to steal that from our men.

I just passed through the White Mountain Apache reservation on a road trip through Arizona. Stunningly beautiful country up there. Unspoiled pine forests with open meadows, creeks and lakes.

Respect to your ancestors From a Nga Puhi Maori

Some Apache blood mixed with Navajo, sometimes, black and Mexican too, as they were captured as slaves, and assimilated into Dine…some also our Northern Athabaskan blood, Dene, of Canada and Alaska, tall and lean.

1

I think you mean "versed in" not "averse," which is quite the opposite meaning.

Yeah you appreciate it because it fits the "we weren't so bad because y'all were doing it too" so I can fall asleep at night narrative.

Modern Texans makes much more sense, now! They are living on the old Comanche Indian lands. 😨 Comanche energy is everywhere.

However but People always act as if only the Europeans were the bad guys in America. But the Native Americans were no better either. Because they have done all the bad things that the Europeans have done. Including oppression, enslavement and genocides.

Also being small makes them harder to shoot with arrows or muskets

@@wutm8 In fact, the Comanches forged an alliance with the Spanish against the Apaches. Therefore, the Spaniards delivered the Comanches weapons and ammunition. The content of the contract, which provided for joint military action against the Apaches, also included that the Comanches received a bonus for each Apache killed, for a warrior killed (from the age of 14) around 100 pesos, for a woman 50 pesos and for a child 25 Pesos. Then a peso was about a dollar, but after the American-Mexican War premiums on Apache scalps were increased significantly to offset inflation.

Well, blooded horses like Thoroughbreds couldn't be expected to run wild and live by foraging.

How were they small? Average height was 5,6, that was a bit taller than the average European at that time and around the same height as the European American.

That book has terrible inaccuracies, I'm afraid to tell you. If you want actual honest details go to the source. That author got many things wrong.

My great great grandfather was Quanah Parker. Our ancestors wow just wild times.

@@chillones9574 And look now, here we are just chatting on social media! Our ancestors would have never imagined it. 😂😂

Are you even for real and have you looked in the 🪞 carefully at yourself? 😂 You are a descendant of pale-face colonizers and because you may have the blood of the people do not make you our people. Feel how you want to because many of us do not claim generational mutts as our people.

I'd hit it...twice✌️

The steppe people crossed the bearing straight ice bridge to become Native Americans. They share the same blood.

I absolutely love that book

You'll love "Man Corn" by Christy G . Turner.

Not quite as long as there’s game and housing materials humans tend to experience population booms. Needing to create wealth in order to live takes a much greater deal of importance once a financial system regulates people’s lives and controls how they spend their time if they don’t want their stuff taken away though

There were aggressors like anywhere else. Though we should be glad there are still native peoples who follow their ways of culture and tradition. European colonizers tried taking that away from the natives of all over the world.

@@gondar6181 you act as if they didn't do it among themselves first. prior to the Europeans they were actively murdering each other to the tune of massacre in d major for generations. the Europeans were just better at it. there are no remaining natives who live completely but the old tribal traditions because many such traditions no longer have a useful place in the world. much like the native languages they are dying because the children of the tribes increasingly stop learning them due to lack of utility. the cree language as an example is useful only among the cree, and they do no make a large enough nor concentrated enough group to get much use from it. it sucks but such is life

@@kertagin1 Yeah, obviously I’m aware of Native American violence. So what though? it doesn’t affect anybody in the modern world and is simply a piece of history that is left, though is now used by Westerners to try and justify what their nations did to these people. I’m not denying Native Americans weren’t at all violent and obviously they were not “peaceful angels who lived in harmony” (which funnily enough nobody actually believes and instead it’s the opposite that’s pushed into the minds of the West). The America’s to this day are still affected by colonization, whatever the Natives did before that in terms of violence wouldn’t matter to modern society if they were all equally oppressed under the West, from more warlike tribes to the benevolent ones. We can’t equate Native American violence to Western European colonization, that’s the issue. Every group in human history has experienced violence, and guess which were the worst, or as you say, “better”? Where did the worst wars take place? Who was responsible for wiping off the Taino out of the Caribbean, or the Selk’Nam in Patagonia? Who was responsible for the loss of millions of lives in the Congo? Who was responsible for wiping off all native Tasmanians? Or stripping away the cultures and rights of Native Americans and Australians? Also are Europeans being better at being violent something worth proud of? They won mostly because of diseases because the natives were much cleaner than them and they were using technology that originated in Asia.

@@gondar6181 the world gets ruled by the survivors so yes in that time being better at killing is a desirable civilization trait. the fallacy is trying to assign Europe bad because they moved into others lands and took over. while excusing the same behavior of the ones who were pushed out. the point is the native tribes were as happy to extinct each other as the Europeans were to help them. the whole reason the comanche went after the apache is because the apache pushed them out, and as soon as the comanche got the chance they did the same right back. all the European powers were doing was playing the big boy version of the same game. the story would have been the exact same regardless of if it had been the Polynesians in charge or china or the Zulu. no nation on earth in that time given the chance and power of the European powers would have hesitated to do the same or worse than was done (and there were vastly worse peoples to be taken over by than the French and brits). how are you defining the worst wars? as I can thing of several wars of extermination in Asia, for example Genghis was fond of extinction events to show his displeasure. the wars between the Hutu's and tootsies in Rwanda get pretty far down the horror slope. if your just talking casualties then yes the largest corpse piles are in Europe but beyond size they mostly were not that bad as Europe stopped doing wars of extermination fairly early on. the thing is you need to define what traits your assigning as bad because the metrics change with the assigned traits. Europe for example has little signs of eating or sacrificing prisoners but Polynesia and south America not so much. what rights are stripped and a when? north America has had Europeans for near 500 yrs and the powers are not monoliths what was condoned by Spain was condemned by the British more often than not. as of today no right of citizenship is denied any native in the US. if as a native you desire to work or live anywhere you are free to do so. granted that was not always the case but that is the US not every north American nation. so for clarity what time frame and what specifics are you talking of. if it is historical chances are I will agree with you depending on when and what as some actions taken were seen as bad even by the people of the time. others were just the standard of the day in which case I can't condemn one without condemning the other (not in good conscience at least)

The important thing here, the Comanche didn't call themselves Comanche AND not all the warriors in the Comanche Army are related by Tribe. It's a confederation of Tribes. If you are sitting in a canyon listening to your Comanche wife bitch about running out of flour, AND you know where there is some flour.... You asdk your buddies if they want to go down to Walmart, right? Insert (some othe tribe's camp that has flour in the story) AND that is the purpose for raids. The Indian tribes didn't have the "money system' concept. The only way to get massive amounts of "stuff for free" was to take it by force. It's a game. Not political in nature. The thought behind it is, "Apache did it to us", we do it back. Not about right or wrong. You keep what you kill, Law of the Plains

There is a line in Thucydides’s Peloponnesian War I thought about while researching this quite a bit. There is a section, many years into the conflict where the Athenians travel to the island of Melos. They demand that the Melians pay them tribute or that they would be slaughtered. The Melians tried to reason with the Athenians and swore that the Spartans would avenge them. The Athenians are to have said “The strong do as they will and the weak suffer what they must.” Before slaughtering the men and taking the women and children as slaves. I tried to get that sentiment across in the video. Our pacified world of institutions that arbitrate for us is not the world of the past.

@@datesanddeadguys excellent !!!! So, the Apache were "playing the game" there, a politcal move, and lost. The Emeny of my Enemy is my friend. Wonder which San Antonian recognized after the Apache refused to move to the settlement, it was a trap? That's a smart realization really for a bunch of guys sitting in a large house by a river and not any real enemys around to learn such devious ways. Even more clever for the Apaches to think it up.Sounds Roman in nature.

“Nords” is a Skyrim concept buddy, it’s not a real thing …

@@whynottalklikeapirat Correct, but it came from Norse which was what we wherem also Viking is an occupation, not a tribe

I am incredibly grateful that batman likes history videos.

Absolutely. I’m trying to tell an interesting and engaging story but at the same time it is just horrifying and tragic because it’s true. Thanks for watching.

Charles Littleleaf or Carlos Nakhi?

@@brushwolf No, Doc Tate Nevaquaya

@@brushwolf No Doc Tate Nevaquaya

From what I have heard they basically tortured/mutilated and executed anyone they found though. No real mercy shown. Therefore imo nothing to be proud about. Besides the horsemanship.

@@darkfoxjjyea they were legitimately universally reviled by ALL other Native tribes and ALL Europeans for being needlessly cruel savages. But since they are direct descendants of the Aztecs who fled north after their cannibal death cult was overthrown in Mexico, and who promptly ate the entirety of the Hopi and Anasazi and Puebla tribes of southwest US when they arrived at the beginning of the 17th century, this makes sense.