Apaches: Tigers of Mankind

82
Apaches: Tigers of Mankind
Apaches, group photo, 80s


Among American historians, the Apaches are considered the best guerrillas in the world. The subjugation of these Indians required the US Army to wage long and exhausting "Apache Wars" that began in 1849 and finally came to an end only in 1906.




Apaches went to work

The Apache tribes lived in what is now Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, northwestern Texas, and the Mexican states of Chihuahua and Sonora. Well, how did they live... It was a territory where all the locals were regularly terrorized by the tribe's warrior squads. Even though whites made no difference between a robbery raid and a major war, for the "people" themselves (and that is what the Apaches call themselves: t'inde - "people") there was a difference: a simple theft of horses, even if accompanied by the murder of their owners, was not considered a war - just part of everyday life...

The Plains Indians formed three powerful confederations of tribes: the Blackfeet and their allies in the north, the Sioux with the Arapaho and Cheyenne in the central part, and the Comanches with the Kiowas in the south. These were powerful peoples whose camps could stretch for kilometers and consist of hundreds of tipi tents. But their conquest did not cause the Americans half the trouble that the Apaches could cause.

Compared to their neighbors, the Apaches were poor. They did not have huge herds of horses like the Sioux or Cheyenne. When using the word "tribe" in relation to the Apaches, all writers are stretching the point. These Indians lived in the mountains in small tribal groups (of which there are about 30), with an average of 20-30 people. The fact is that the land that the Apaches inherited was extremely harsh even by Indian standards - a desert with rare rains and a small number of water sources, large groups simply could not feed themselves there.


Nalto - Chief of the Western Apaches. Arizona 80s

But this land produced excellent warriors!

"The adult Apache is the embodiment of physical endurance - lean, slender, of medium height, with sinews like steel, insensitive to hunger, fatigue and physical pain... The nature of the Apache differs little from that of the wolf or the coyote. From his earliest childhood he is accustomed to defend himself against enemies as cruel and vindictive as himself. The Apache does not need our supplies or our equipment..."
— wrote "Apache expert" George Crook.


If you prepare a fighter from childhood, there will be results!

How did such fearsome fighters grow up? Let's start with the fact that Apaches never beat children. A guilty boy could be forced to run to the top of the nearest mountain and back - and he would feel his fault and train his endurance. However, not only a boy: up to 10-11 years old, Apaches made no difference in the upbringing of boys and girls. Then boys began to be taught hunting and war, and girls - housework (however, Apache women could also take the case weapon).

In archery, a teenager was required to be able to shoot seven arrows: when the first one hit the ground and the last one left the bowstring, there had to be five more in the air. Since the Apaches had no hereditary leaders, they tried to instill in each boy leadership qualities and the ability to organize military actions; for example, a boy who found a wasp nest could gather a "war council" of his peers: "We heard that vile creatures live there, let's declare war on them!"


The knife on this squaw's belt isn't for cutting bread...

However, life among their fellow tribesmen prepared Apaches to become warriors. When an Indian from a hostile tribe, an American or a Mexican, was captured, the fate of the captive was sad: he was given with his hands tied behind his back to women who, even against the background of their merciless fathers, husbands and brothers, were distinguished by their sophisticated cruelty. On the other hand, the return of a military detachment from a successful raid was a celebration: with dancing, singing and abundant feasting.


Young Apache warrior

At the age of 16, a young Apache was taken to war... as an apprentice. During his first four campaigns, he carried water, chopped firewood, looked after horses, cooked food and made beds for the warriors, stood guard while the elders slept. And he learned. Travel at night (Apaches slept during the day during the war), run dozens of kilometers with a small stone in his mouth (so that his mouth would not dry out), find water in the driest places, and set up ambushes around fires lit in the prairie. After four "training" campaigns, the young Apache became a warrior, "the tiger of the human race" - in the opinion of General Crook.

Apache tactics did not involve large battles. They were based on excellent individual training and the intelligent initiative of each individual warrior: each Apache was an "army of one." Apaches usually carried out a surprise raid, stole horses, slaughtered cattle, killed settlers, and burned farms. Their cruelty was beyond all bounds and was monstrous even by the standards of the Indians of the Great Plains, who were far from angels in this regard. Having attacked a traveler in the middle of the prairie, Apaches usually cut his tendons and left him to die. After which they demonstrated miracles of resourcefulness and ingenuity in escaping from pursuit by a cavalry detachment of the U.S. Army or local militia.

When escaping pursuit, an Apache detachment would suddenly change direction, could drive or slaughter their horses, and cross a mountain range on foot to steal new ones on the other side. The Apaches were also aware of the weaknesses of the American army: for example, dependence on a supply train. As a result, a common tactic was to go behind the pursuers, cut out and plunder the supply train, thereby forcing the soldiers to return - the Apaches themselves did not need supplies: anyone could catch a rabbit or a rat even in the desert, roast it and eat it, and if not, well - an adult warrior could go without food for up to 15 days.


Ambush in the mountains is a favorite Apache tactic

If the chase caught up with them, the Apaches retreated to the mountains. No one risked fighting them in the mountains. In 1885, during the pursuit of Geronimo's band of 11 people, a detachment of 30 Navajo scouts, who boldly pursued the Apaches across the prairie, categorically refused to pursue them in the mountains: the US Army could not come up with a more terrible punishment for them than the Apaches would have provided in the mountains.

And the Navajo's actions were completely justified: the Apaches were at home in the mountains. They were very good at setting up ambushes in the ravines - a squad that had carelessly entered the mountains would be hit by bullets from both sides of the ravine, and soldiers retreating from the trap would be ambushed at the entrance. Incidentally, the Apache morale in matters of retreat was quite... flexible. They never accepted a fight with superior forces if they had the opportunity to escape. But at the same time, having caught an enemy who decided not to accept a fight with superior Apache forces, they would torture him like a coward - a typical "that's different!"


Wandering Coyote - US Army Apache Scout

The US Army, having suffered enough failures while fighting the Apaches "according to regulations", began to form mobile units to fight them, equipped "in the Indian way" - without a supply train, with a small supply of water and food on pack horses. These units often included scouts from other Indian tribes, but... There was little sense in this. The use of the old principle - "divide and rule" allowed them to achieve victory. They set their fellow tribesmen against hostile Apache groups: fortunately, wars between Apaches themselves were commonplace and it was not easy, but very easy to find those willing to defeat the enemy with the help of palefaces.

The process became especially active after some of the groups were placed on reservations. The Americans played on the Apaches' warrior culture. The Apaches placed on reservations received food from the US authorities, who tried to turn the "tigers of the human race" into farmers, whom the "tigers" openly despised. When American officers offered the Apaches living on reservations to take part in a military event, there was no end to the number of volunteers! After all, only in war could a young warrior gain glory, without which his position in society was below the level of the city sewer.


Equestrian portrait of Geronimo, according to contemporary artist David Graham

In 1886, Geronimo surrendered to the mercy of the authorities. After that, Arizona and other areas of Apache activity experienced peace. Relative, of course: it is impossible to wean a people who have lived by robbery for centuries from this fascinating pastime. Therefore, isolated episodes of antisocial behavior on the part of the "tigers of the human race" occurred until the beginning of the XNUMXth century. But these episodes clearly did not qualify as "Apache wars" - they were ordinary crimes.


The real Geronimo is less pathetic. But very dangerous! Photo from 1886 - after surrender.

What was the Apaches' strength? Oddly enough, it was their weakness and disunity. Large tribal confederations, capable of fielding thousands of horsemen, were easier to defeat on the battlefield, but the main thing... The chiefs, who had smoked the pipe of peace with the palefaces, tried to keep the agreements they had reached. And their authority was enough to ensure that their fellow tribesmen did not question the decision made by the council of chiefs. The Apaches lived in small tribal groups, and there was simply no one to conclude an agreement with: having concluded peace with the informal chief of one group, one could count on the fact that he would personally fulfill the agreement, and this was in the best case (the Apache morality was, as I have already noted, very flexible).


Apache detachment returning from raid

From a military point of view, the problem was to track down small bands that left no trace, abandoned their horses, and marched thousands of miles across the desert on foot (Geronimo's band once covered 8 miles in 2,5 weeks). And in case of danger, they disappeared into the mountains, which they knew like the back of their hand. Tigers of the human race? More like jackals...
82 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    27 November 2024 06: 34
    the simple theft of horses, even if accompanied by the murder of their owners, was not considered war - just a part of everyday life...
    Even if we ignore the murder of horse owners, horse thieves were supposed to be hanged by law in any state. And in places where the law had not yet reached, and there was no judge or even sheriff, horse thieves were simply hanged "according to the rules."
    1. +7
      27 November 2024 07: 43
      Apaches had no laws... But in order to hang, they had to catch someone first. Those who were caught were hanged, of course...
      1. +8
        27 November 2024 14: 49
        The topic of where the Apaches came from is not disclosed. They were driven out of the north. And they became nomadic bandits. Thugs. All other tribes hated them for their boundless cruelty: torture, gang rape of prisoners, collective murders.
        Other tribes actively helped the whites exterminate the Apaches.
        1. +3
          27 November 2024 15: 57
          Yes, even against the general background (and the Indians were not angels in principle) they stood out for their lawlessness. In principle, all Indian tribes considered their enemies to be fierce scumbags (the Sioux and Arapaho will not let you lie). But absolutely all Indians considered the Apaches to be like that...
          1. +5
            27 November 2024 17: 14
            In general, the topic is interesting. Once in my childhood I read the book "My Sioux People" by one of the main Sioux chiefs. With photos, interesting.
            Then I was struck by the photos from the US Congress: group photos of leaders who came to sign treaties. I have a huge Jewish nose laughing , but the noses of some of the leaders are even longer! Doesn't fit with the Mongoloids. Of which there are a minority in those photos.
            And development: on the one hand, the deep Stone Age, no cities, no factories, like the Bedouins. On the other: definitely smart people. They learned how to reload guns (and it was not easy) in a flash...
            1. +3
              27 November 2024 18: 13
              Well, they are not Mongoloids. Their ancestors came to America back in the days when modern racial types had not yet formed.
            2. 0
              27 November 2024 21: 25
              Quote: voyaka uh
              They learned how to reload guns (and it wasn't easy) in no time...

              The Chukchi, having seen the Russians' guns almost in their very first battle, understood their mechanism of action and by the end of the battle they were already shooting from captured guns.
              1. +1
                27 November 2024 21: 30
                The Chukchi, about whom, as I recall, there were many jokes in the USSR, were tough warriors. Whom the Russian army was never able to defeat.
                They won the right to live on their territories, not to pay taxes, to hunt whoever they want, not to serve in the army, etc.
                The Indians are far from them.
                1. +8
                  28 November 2024 00: 58
                  The Indians are far from them.


                  Millions of people did not move to the land of the Chukchi, that is why they “fell away”, who will look for them there in the “endless tundra”. The entire population of the Chukchi there is a couple of tens of thousands of people.
              2. -1
                29 November 2024 06: 59
                Are you saying this as an eyewitness?
            3. +4
              27 November 2024 22: 14
              But they still haven't learned how to repair guns and revolvers...
              1. 0
                30 November 2024 22: 28
                Quote: Flying_Dutchman
                But they still haven't learned how to repair guns and revolvers...

                Well, even today not every person (be it in Europe, Asia or America) can repair a rifle, shotgun or revolver even if they have the necessary tools at hand. And where would the Indians get these tools and the necessary materials? And to work with metals, teachers are needed who would teach at least how to use the tools. And other tribes in general could not use metalworking tools.
    2. +1
      27 November 2024 11: 30
      Quote: Nagan
      Even if we ignore the murder of horse owners, horse thieves were supposed to be hanged by law in every state.

      According to the law of the owners, there should be no states there and the new owners of the horses were supposed to be hanged.
      1. +7
        27 November 2024 12: 14
        by law of the owners


        The stronger one is the master; if the Indians had developed faster, they would have sailed to the European continent and driven the locals into reservations.
      2. 0
        1 December 2024 18: 50
        Quote: Olgovich
        Quote: Nagan
        Even if we ignore the murder of horse owners, horse thieves were supposed to be hanged by law in every state.

        According to the law of the owners, there should be no states there and the new owners of the horses were supposed to be hanged.
        I read the book "Yamshchina" by M. Shchukin, so in Siberia in the second half of the 19th century, captured horse thieves were taken further into the forest (taiga) and They hammered nails (for shoeing horses) into their heels and left them there...
        hi
  2. +1
    27 November 2024 07: 26
    The leaders, who smoked the pipe of peace with the palefaces, tried to abide by the agreements they had reached.


    Is this about our "peace party" and the Anglo-Saxons by any chance?
  3. +7
    27 November 2024 07: 54
    Very good article! You are simply great, Gershard, for being able to present the topic so well!
    1. +17
      27 November 2024 08: 01
      Thank you, if you are interested I will continue)))
      1. +5
        27 November 2024 08: 02
        Quote: Flying_Dutchman
        I'll continue)))

        By all means
      2. +10
        27 November 2024 10: 16
        Quite a lot has been written about North American Indians. But it would be interesting to cover in detail the history of, say, the Mapuche, also known as the Araucanians. After all, they were the only people in South America who managed to defend their freedom in numerous wars until the 19th century. And several times they epically defeated the brave conquistadors in open battle... Spain even had to officially recognize their independence.
        1. +2
          27 November 2024 22: 16
          I've added it to my work plan))) But most likely for December.
      3. +6
        27 November 2024 11: 04
        Good article Gerhard, the only thing is that it doesn't include various emotional expressions for a beautiful word. For example, "below the baseboard" etc., etc. How would a poor Apache know what a baseboard is and where it lives? feel
        By the way, it would have been possible to supplement the work with a description of the weapons of the article's heroes. The evolution is quite curious, from traditional (bark, bow, club and tomahawk) to trophy.
        Have a nice day, everyone!
        1. +6
          27 November 2024 11: 38
          Before the advent of rifled weapons - they say the Bible was very popular among the Comanches.. At first the missionaries were happy about such interest - and then they found out that they were stuffing their shields with it. It seems that they held a round bullet quite well...

          And from the traditional objects - the most exotic thing is a pole for counting ku... In many films, warriors often hold a club, all hung with feathers and colorful rags. So this is not a spear at all - this is what it is, a pole for counting ku...
        2. +2
          27 November 2024 22: 18
          The topic is vast, it could be a book. The same Comanche armor is an interesting option, or Tlingit...
      4. +3
        27 November 2024 12: 31
        Very interesting, definitely continue!
  4. +5
    27 November 2024 08: 43
    Well - everyone was worth each other there... Bad warriors didn't survive on the Plains. The Apaches held out for a long time simply because no one needed their land. They were just trying to wean them off raids.

    And so - the same Comanches hurricanes over a huge area, their troops almost reached Yucatan. Again - the Americans themselves believe that despite the fact that there was never a real war with them, the Blackfeet killed most of the whites... All the Indians interviewed unanimously claimed that the Cheyenne were the most ferocious and desperate fighters. The opponents of the Osage had a custom of cutting the tails of their horses short - they said that this was because the warriors of this tribe had a habit of catching up with an opponent on foot and grabbing the horse's tail, jumping on it and then cutting the rider's throat. And so on...
  5. +7
    27 November 2024 08: 50
    The article is simply magnificent, as are all the author's materials. Thank you.
  6. +3
    27 November 2024 09: 14
    "Miners are children of the mountains!"
    Apaches are not Swiss.
    And their mountains are clearly not like the Swiss Alps.
    1. +7
      27 November 2024 11: 18
      Apaches are more like Nokhchis in mentality and habitat conditions.
      1. +2
        27 November 2024 13: 24
        They are similar to the highlanders, but also similar to the Turkmen.
        They also lived by robbery, plunder and the slave trade.
        Fleeing from righteous punishment into the desert.
  7. +9
    27 November 2024 12: 11
    After four "training" campaigns, the young Apache became a warrior, "the tiger of the human race" - in the opinion of General Crook.



    A good assessment of one's own talents is to exalt an obviously weak enemy. I will never believe that the regular army had great difficulties in clashes with the Apaches, who were constantly running away. It's like many people consider the Cossacks to be super warriors, and when it came to the Civil War, the regular cavalrymen from the dragoons and hussars, veterans of the First World War, as part of the 1st Moscow revolutionary detachment of Sivers and Sablin, dispersed the Cossacks of Kaledin. Regular troops always win against irregulars. And the "exploits" of the Savage Division were exalted too much, but in fact the Makhnovists routed these highlanders without any particular problems. By the way, now in the SVO the "fighting spirit" of these highlanders is not particularly noticeable. It doesn't take much combat skill to fight from ambushes on the sly.

    Tigers of the human race? More like jackals...

    The last words of the article are correct.
    Peoples living in comfortable natural conditions have the best qualities of warriors, they conquered these places, and drove the weak into the mountains and deserts
    1. +4
      27 November 2024 13: 12
      Many consider the Cossacks to be super warriors

      One of the Americans wrote that in the art of horsemanship only the Russian Cossacks are on par with the Comanches, and indeed the plains Indians in general. True - I think that, for example, the same Mongols would not agree with him at all...
      1. -1
        27 November 2024 18: 04
        only Russian Cossacks.. True - I think that for example the same Mongols would not agree with him...

        it's like comparing the Greeks of Alexander the Great and the ancient Romans
        which one of them would win
        they were a hundred years out of time
        although Alexander the Great "raped" the Greeks so much that the passionaries there ended sad
        1. +1
          27 November 2024 18: 08
          But they are not comparing military qualities, but horsemanship! I don't think that the Mongols, even 500 years after Genghis Khan, became worse riders...
          1. 0
            27 November 2024 18: 12
            riding and horsemanship?
            Under Temujin, the Mongols improved both their military skills and horsemanship through driven hunts
            I don't think they practice it now...
    2. -12
      27 November 2024 15: 04
      Of the highlanders, as you write dismissively, more than 20 people have been awarded the title Hero of Russia in the SVO. And then the highlanders there have no problems with migrants.
      1. +3
        2 December 2024 03: 35
        Adam Kadyrov alone is worth something.
        This 16 year old boy has so many medals and orders that any dressed-up Cossack with the rank of Generalisumus would be envious.
        1. -1
          2 December 2024 09: 05
          Adam is the son of Putin's main ally. The guarantor's support just in case.
    3. -4
      27 November 2024 15: 59
      The Savage Division ceased to exist after the revolution. You read how they describe the defeat of Denikin's group by Makhno's troops. They first defeated 20 thousand Russians and Cossacks. Then 10 thousand Chechens. And read about the numerical strength of the division. In 1919, that's how many Chechens there were in the steppes of Ukraine.
    4. -2
      27 November 2024 21: 35
      Quote: Konnick
      dispersed Kaledin's Cossacks.

      And the balance of forces? Tactics and strategy are actually a terribly simple thing. Knowing the balance of the fighting qualities of your soldiers and your enemy, you just need to fight observing the ratio of the number of your soldiers multiplied by their fighting qualities, which should be twice as many as the number of enemy soldiers multiplied by their fighting qualities. The Cossacks were destroyed by the gentlemen generals - natives of the lazy parasitic class, who simply froze a third or half of their Cossack army before the last major cavalry battle of the civil war.
    5. +1
      28 November 2024 15: 29
      That's right: good warriors live on the plains. There's something to fight for there...
    6. 0
      28 November 2024 18: 11
      Quote: Konnick
      Peoples living in comfortable natural conditions have the best qualities of warriors, they conquered these places, and drove the weak into the mountains and deserts

      There is logic. However, the Incas will not agree with you.
  8. +7
    27 November 2024 12: 25
    The article is like a collection of myths, the emergence of which is due to two circumstances:
    1. The people are few in number and difficult to reach - therefore there is no one to refute the myth.
    2. The need for such myth-making arose because the time of pacification of this people dragged on, compared to others, until the beginning of the XNUMXth century. It was necessary to somehow justify themselves before the "world community".
    Now it is clear why and how the "Apashas" appeared.
    However, there are no complaints about the author - the article is in the spirit of the sources he found.
    Thanks for the photos good And the recipe against dry mouth using a stone is wonderful!
    1. 0
      27 November 2024 19: 02
      Quote from cpls22
      1. The people are few in number and difficult to reach - therefore there is no one to refute the myth.
      2. The need for such myth-making arose because the time of pacification of this people dragged on, compared to others, until the beginning of the XNUMXth century. It was necessary to somehow justify themselves before the "world community".

      The Chukchi, for example. They fought with the Russians from the 16th century until 1950. In the end
      The Chukchi, who had been terrifying their neighbors for years, were filled with respect for the Russians. This was a rare case when the Chukchi, who lived with a sense of their own exceptionalism, were forced to recognize the Russians as their equals, that is, as “the only real people.”
      1. +3
        27 November 2024 19: 38
        Quote: bya965

        The Chukchi, for example.

        Yes, but we didn’t make tigers out of the Chukchi, and we didn’t stage any buffoonery based on the recipes of the Buffalo Bill show.
        1. 0
          27 November 2024 19: 55
          By the way, yes, "Chukchi wars" is a "taboo" topic. As are "Yakut rebellions". But it would be interesting to read about it. Because they are used to making jokes out of Chukchis...
          1. +2
            27 November 2024 20: 12
            Quote: Monster_Fat
            It would be interesting to read about this..

            It is unlikely that there are any detailed sources left.
            And what they can now compose or compile from what is left will be clearly biased, it is clear by whom. Recently, a film about "Sherlock Holmes in Russia" caught my attention on TV, and it featured Russian officials who killed an entire village of indigenous peoples of the North for the sake of diamonds. And they pretended to be travelers, villains. It is clear where such masterpieces come from. And "elite cinema" has been blowing into the same pipe for a long time. And what, we have freedom of creativity, and none of the "free" artists likes to talk about grants. It is worldly...
      2. +1
        27 November 2024 21: 01
        Quote: bya965

        The Chukchi, for example. They fought with the Russians from the 16th century until 1950.

        So it turns out I didn't quite live through it? Oh, it's a pity I didn't get to see the fierce Chukchi partisans. In my naivety I thought they were quite peace-loving, but look how it turns out... belay
        But seriously, it's complete nonsense. laughing
        1. 0
          28 November 2024 04: 38
          Quote: Beringovsky
          But seriously, it's complete crap. laughing

          If you don't know the subject, you need to look for information first, but not knowing the issue doesn't give you the right to talk nonsense. laughing

          The image of the Chukchi was best described by Captain D.I. Pavlutsky, who fought with this people for a long time, entered their mythology as an evil character and was eventually killed by the Chukchi:

          "The Chukchi are a strong, tall, brave, broad-shouldered, reasonable, fair, warlike people who love freedom and do not tolerate deception, vengeful, and during war, when in a dangerous situation, they kill themselves."

          https://disgustingmen.com/history/warriors-of-chukotka

          “The Chukchi, especially the reindeer, are remarkable walkers,” wrote Staff Captain N. Kalinnikov at the beginning of the 20th century: “They are truly some kind of steel people in overcoming fatigue, hunger, insomnia... especially in their younger years.”

          Death did not frighten the Chukchi at all. They were much more afraid of demonstrating cowardice and leaving a bad memory. When captured, warriors often starved themselves until they died.

          https://rbth.ru/read/2461-chukchi-great-warriors
  9. +7
    27 November 2024 12: 29
    Judgments about morality are very shaky ground. From the point of view of a medieval person - we are demons living in sin, debauchery and witchcraft, having forgotten about God, allowing interpretations of the holy scriptures, etc. - in a word, heretics and there is nothing sacred in us.
    From our point of view, a medieval person is an uneducated, dense pig who has no idea about hygiene, science, or humanism.
    Even if we find some kind of arithmetic mean point, for it both we and he will be approximately the same dirt that I described.

    All because there is no absolute moral position. Everything moves and develops, reaches optimal values ​​(it would seem) and develops further, to the point of absurdity and through absurdity a new morality appears, justifying the old immorality or castigating the old morality. In the days of Jack London it was absolutely normal to write about certain racial "properties" in literature, what today would be called flagrant "racism", all because then many people came into contact with these properties on a daily basis and it was not just a prejudice, but the result of collective experience. And now "no, sir! This is not nice, sir!" overshadows some rational links of the past, it is simply declared "the black pages of history" and that's it.

    The history of mankind is fucking cruel, ladies and gentlemen. People took everything from each other, threw it where they could without consequences, and this was stupidly everywhere. Everyone stupidly lived by this "morality" - it was the morality of survival in the style of "be strong and fast or die". Even now these principles have not disappeared - they are just designed in something pretentious, with monograms and frills.
    1. 0
      27 November 2024 23: 35
      Human ideals are far from perfect, so striving for human ideals means striving for things that are far from perfect. Yes
  10. 0
    27 November 2024 13: 22
    Tigers of the human race? More like jackals...


    Well, jackals don't have such qualities. So Apaches don't deserve such a (clearly offensive) description. They can be compared to honey badgers, the most fearless and combative creatures.
    In general, American Apaches are the equivalent of our Chukchi.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. -4
    27 November 2024 14: 45
    Not gangs: bands of warriors fighting against the gringos.
  13. +2
    27 November 2024 16: 16
    What did the Indians do? Hunting and gathering... Primitive communal system. There wasn't always enough food. And here the white settlers grow grain, raise cattle. They always have food. It needs to be taken away... And if the Indians live on fertile lands and don't cultivate them, then they have no use for them. They need to be driven off this land. Antagonism...
    1. 0
      27 November 2024 17: 21
      Why did they need to raise cattle? Before the arrival of the pale-faced killers, herds of bison stretched almost to the horizon.
      1. +2
        28 November 2024 15: 37
        Absolutely right! But, as usual, there are nuances. The Indians began to hunt bison exactly after they domesticated mustangs. And mustangs are feral horses that escaped from white settlers. So the Indians mastered the Great Plains only after the whites arrived, and with them - mustangs and firearms. To bring down a bison with a bow... is a bit difficult. And such a hunt is very risky. In general, life is a complicated thing, in it there are rarely clearly good or bad phenomena. And, yes, the Comanches as a tribe were stronger than the Apaches. And stronger than the Sioux. And the Arapaho. The Apaches are not the strongest warriors, but the biggest pain in the ass for those around them...
        1. +1
          30 November 2024 23: 33
          Quote: Flying_Dutchman
          Absolutely right! But, as usual, there are nuances. The Indians began to hunt bison exactly after they domesticated mustangs. And mustangs are feral horses that escaped from white settlers. So the Indians mastered the Great Plains only after the whites arrived, and with them - mustangs and firearms. To bring down a bison with a bow... is a bit difficult. And such a hunt is very risky. In general, life is a complicated thing, in it there are rarely clearly good or bad phenomena. And, yes, the Comanches as a tribe were stronger than the Apaches. And stronger than the Sioux. And the Arapaho. The Apaches are not the strongest warriors, but the biggest pain in the ass for those around them...

          I can't agree that the Indians began to hunt bison only after they domesticated mustangs. I agree that mass bison hunting became widespread after the domestication of mustangs, as did the conquest of the great plains, but at one time I came across a description of how a FOOT TRIBE (unfortunately I don't remember the name, I read it a long time ago) hunted bison and even without bows managed to destroy a herd of several hundred heads, which ensured a winter without hunger. As for the difficulty of hunting bison without guns, look for books by James Kerwood. It seems that there was a description of a bison hunt (with the help of mustangs, of course), where archers killed several times more animals than those with guns. After all, at that time it took from 30 seconds to a minute or even a minute and a half to load a gun, and that was on a galloping horse!!! After all, the Indians hunted bison long before they had rifles with unitary cartridges.
          Regarding the fact that the Comanches as a tribe were stronger. Of course they were. After all, you yourself indicated why. The Comanches and Sioux had a food supply an order of magnitude, if not two, better than the Apaches and, accordingly, many more warriors. And yes, probably these tribes in ancient times drove the Apaches into the mountains and deserts where they had to survive in hellish conditions. So they began to live, essentially, not even in tribal, but in fact, family or clan groups, and in order to survive, they had to start robbing. (At one time, Geronimo surrendered precisely because his tribal group was blocked in the mountains where there was essentially nothing to eat at all). But it was precisely because of the harsh conditions that the Apaches turned out to be excellent individual warriors. In other words, something like a modern special forces. Their goal was not to fight large detachments, but to hit and run. And I do not agree that they were jackals. A pain in the ass, 100%. 10-15 years ago I came across a description of a battle of one Apache from Geronimo's group (the group consisted of 10 people and then with these people Geronimo walked from Mexico to the Canadian border and back and 5000 people tried to catch his group. During the attempts these hunters lost about 1000 people killed, and Geronimo did not lose anyone). When the group galloped across the American settlement in broad daylight, the horse of one of the Apaches was shot. He shot back for a couple of hours until night fell, and then broke away from the pursuit and caught up with the group. (A jackal is basically a coward because it is weak, but Apaches as individual warriors were not weaklings. Especially they were not cowards). I do not justify them. But if you think about it, the same thing happened in the Caucasus at one time.
      2. 0
        1 December 2024 12: 33
        Is it easy for a poor Indian to hunt a bison? Without a gun? Where can he get one? From the palefaces. In fact, if you read the description of bison hunting in the Middle Ages, it becomes clear that bison hunting was also difficult and dangerous.
    2. +1
      30 November 2024 22: 55
      Quote: Igor Belobrov
      What did the Indians do? Hunting and gathering... Primitive communal system. There wasn't always enough food. And here the white settlers grow grain, raise cattle. They always have food. It needs to be taken away... And if the Indians live on fertile lands and don't cultivate them, then they have no use for them. They need to be driven off this land. Antagonism...

      However, it is not quite so. Some Indian tribes (unfortunately I do not remember the names, but either the Iroquois or the Shoshone) were just farmers and received even greater harvests even without draft animals than the whites, which caused their destruction. And warriors from these tribes did not come out very good. After all, a well-fed life does not contribute to the development of military skills. Although yes, they could repel, for example, an attack by neighbors, but only thanks to their numbers and greater physical strength as a result of better nutrition and daily work in the field, but they were primarily destroyed by the whites because they did not know how to fight well and occupied the best lands!!!
  14. +1
    27 November 2024 17: 19
    15 days without food? Well, the author went too far! Yes! Apache warriors are brave and skilled. But the Comanches still defeated them. The Comanches are the strongest. And then all the rest.. Eh! The Indians should have united against the palefaces and not negotiate with them. Well, and also.. In the movies, the Indians look much cooler. And the clothes and weapons. And in the photo, almost everyone has bowler hats on their heads...
    1. +1
      27 November 2024 19: 44
      Quote: solovyov-igor
      And in the photo almost everyone has bowler hats on their heads...

      But the path from the tipi to the photo studio is not short and long. Those who did not recognize hats, hardly reached the photographer.
      1. +2
        28 November 2024 17: 56
        Quote from cpls22
        But the path from the tipi to the photo studio is not short and long. Those who did not recognize hats, hardly reached the photographer.

        In the age of photography, not all Indians lived in tipis.
        In the first third of the 1821th century, the Indians were rapidly being civilized. The five civilized tribes – the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek and Seminole – who lived in the southern states adopted farming skills from the whites, established cotton plantations, built houses similar to those of the white colonists, and most of them adopted Christianity. The Cherokee tribe advanced the furthest along this path. In 1828, the chief of the tribe, Sequoyah, developed the Cherokee syllabary, and in XNUMX he began publishing the Cherokee Phoenix newspaper in the language of this people.

        However, the Indians occupied a lot of fertile land. Naturally, Biden's political great-grandfather could not tolerate this when he came to power.
        In 1829, Andrew Jackson became the first Democratic candidate to become president of the United States. In his youth, he had fought with the Indians and was a supporter of their “removal” beyond the Mississippi. In a message to Congress, he said: “I am glad to announce to Congress that the generous policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years in regard to the removal of the Indians, is approaching its happy conclusion.” On May 28, 1830, the Indian Removal Act was passed.

        It should be noted that the Whig Party, the future Republicans, was against it in words, and beautiful six-hour speeches were made in Congress, but those responsible and citizens who hope for Trump should take a closer look at the result:
        However, in 1837-39, the Five Civilized Tribes were deported to the prairies. The route the Five Civilized Tribes took to move west became known as the Trail of Tears.

        However, this did not yet break the most civilized Indians, it was not for nothing that the newspaper was called "Cherokee" phoenix".
        The most organized society on the IT was created by the Cherokee. In 1850, the tribe included 22 thousand people, including 4 thousand black slaves. They were the first in the history of the USA to introduce free education: 30 schools operated on their land, and both English and the national languages ​​were taught there, as well as the syllabic writing developed by Sequoyah. The Cherokee had their own president ("supreme chief"), government, parliament, constitution, courts and police. Other tribes never created such a modern organization, and were ruled by traditional chiefs.
        1. +2
          28 November 2024 18: 55
          Quote: bot.su

          In the age of photography, not all Indians lived in tipis.

          I meant that this entire path into the bosom of an alien civilization was not instantaneous, and by the time of photographing in the 80s it had already been completed by those who could and wanted.
          1. +2
            28 November 2024 19: 41
            Quote from cpls22
            I meant that this whole journey into the bosom of an alien civilization was not instantaneous.

            I agree completely.
        2. 0
          30 November 2024 15: 57
          However, the Indians occupied a lot of fertile land.


          There was nothing to stop the authorities of that time from pursuing a smarter policy - for example, initially involving the nomadic Indians settling on the land in all sorts of alternative activities, such as sailors or industry.
          A settlement of hereditary sailors or gunsmiths does not need arable land - and then there is no conflict of interest with white farmers. As far as I remember, one of the tribes was very good at working as high-rise assemblers, although this was already at the beginning of the 20th century - so there was potential here.
          1. 0
            30 November 2024 20: 04
            Quote: ycuce234-san
            There was nothing to stop the authorities of that time from pursuing a smarter policy - for example, initially involving the nomadic Indians settling on the land in all sorts of alternative activities, such as sailors or industry

            The problem was that the progressive Indians wanted to create an Indian national state. But the paleface authorities did not want this.
            Quote: ycuce234-san
            A settlement of hereditary sailors or gunsmiths does not need arable land - and then there is no conflict of interest with white farmers.

            There would be a conflict of interest with white sailors, workers and industrialists.
            1. 0
              30 November 2024 20: 14
              In the South of the USA there was no developed industry and there was a free niche in industry, in the northern states the climate was dominated by industry and the Indians there could occupy the position of nomadic cattle breeders without conflict since there was no developed agriculture and live by forestry.
              But the establishment of an Indian state in the USA (and even many such states) would only strengthen it in the long term - since the modern understanding of this is that such an Indian state would provide additional tens of millions of loyal population and millions of economically active population.
              1. 0
                30 November 2024 20: 28
                Quote: ycuce234-san
                In the South of the USA there was no developed industry and there was a free niche in industry, in the northern states the climate was dominated by industry and the Indians there could occupy the position of nomadic cattle breeders without conflict since there was no developed agriculture and live by forestry.

                What industry was there in the north? And who would create industry for the Indians in the south? Remember, the only good Indian is a dead Indian. That was taken literally then.
                How could the Indians exist in the north without conflict with the whites, if they were cutting each other, some Indians together with the whites were cutting other Indians and vice versa? More or less civilized Indians lived in the south. In the southwest, to be precise.
                And the whites were arriving both in the north and in the south and they needed land. Even now, everything in the north that is not under industry is under agriculture. So the Indians had no chance.

                Quote: ycuce234-san
                But the establishment of an Indian state in the USA would only strengthen it in the long term - since the modern understanding of this is that such an Indian state would provide additional tens of millions of loyal population and millions of economically active population.

                Well, I don't know who justified this understanding, but it's unlikely. The Indians did not want to accept US citizenship and it is not a fact that the Indian state would have entered the US. It is more likely that they would have tried to create some kind of Indian Republic, independent from the US and this would have led to a further and very bloody war.
                1. 0
                  30 November 2024 20: 41
                  On the other hand, the Indians had their own large tribal formations-unions, which could develop into statehood. The same princes in Rus' or the Normans (they are at an approximate level of development) in their time burned so that their adventures are still not forgotten, but they were established as states.
                  At the same time, the white authorities managed without conflicts with the multi-million unassimilated migrants and their state desires - and they also went to the New World not only from the Old. In fact, there was only one major civil war there, which is a very good political result. Accordingly, if they tried, there would definitely be a place for the aborigines, there were few of them in relation to resources anyway and there would be enough for everyone.
                  1. 0
                    30 November 2024 21: 23
                    Quote: ycuce234-san
                    On the other hand, the Indians had their own large tribal unions, which could develop into statehood.

                    Without a doubt. If it weren't for the white colonizers.

                    Quote: ycuce234-san
                    The same princes in Rus' or the Normans (they are at an approximate level of development) in their time burned so much that their adventures have not been forgotten to this day, but they were established as states.

                    But the Saxons in the 11th century were not so lucky, the Duke of Normandy invaded with troops of the same level of development, maybe a little better organized and armed, and now they are already in a subordinate position. It didn't come to genocide simply because someone had to work the land. But what if the Saxons had been invaded by Indians with firearms and wide-stretched capitalism, suffering from a lack of land in their America? There would be no Great Britain now.
                    Quote: ycuce234-san
                    Accordingly, if there had been some effort, there would certainly have been room for the natives, there were few of them in relation to resources anyway and there would have been enough for everyone.

                    With effort It should be emphasized very strongly. But there was no such effort on either side.
                    1. 0
                      30 November 2024 22: 24
                      Well, the situation wasn't so hopeless.
                      Caribs and Africans were intensively imported to America precisely because of the need for labor, which is why they had to resort to slavery. Mohawks in the role of high-rise fitters later fully proved that Indians can be effective, highly skilled construction workers.
                      In those earlier times they were hired for cattle breeding, were trappers (forest users), and military personnel.
                      The whites' need for labor satisfied by the aborigines was quite real, and by working to integrate them into the economy and forming a state-state for them, it would have been entirely possible to avoid genocide, even under the conditions of that economy and morality.
    2. +1
      30 November 2024 23: 36
      Quote: solovyov-igor
      15 days without food? Well, the author went too far! Yes! Apache warriors are brave and skilled. But the Comanches still defeated them. The Comanches are the strongest. And then all the rest.. Eh! The Indians should have united against the palefaces and not entered into any negotiations with them.

      Well, those who did not go to negotiations died from smallpox, blankets, fire water, and various other reasons. And the Indians eventually suffered defeat due to hunger. There were no more bison!!! The Americans almost completely destroyed them in their time.
  15. +1
    27 November 2024 17: 22
    Hmm, and in all the movies the most crazy ones are the Comanches. Although... Hollywood.
  16. +2
    27 November 2024 20: 21
    Judging by the story about the arrows, the mortar was invented by the Apaches...
  17. -3
    27 November 2024 20: 34
    Apaches are cool guys, it's just a shame they didn't interrupt the pin dos dances enough.
  18. -1
    28 November 2024 01: 48
    And what cute faces! The cuties of the American continent.
  19. +2
    28 November 2024 12: 55
    It seems to me that Russia should express concern about the trampling of democratic freedoms and rights of our native Aleuts and their brothers, the Indians of North America, and immediately begin delivering ballistic missiles of shorter, medium and not very medium range to the national liberation army "Free Alaska" and "Independent India" to strike deep into the territory of the United States at targets that the Indians themselves choose.
  20. 0
    28 November 2024 13: 25
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Which the Russian army was never able to defeat.
    They won the right to live on their territories, not to pay taxes, to hunt whoever they want, not to serve in the army, etc.


    Nonsense. They didn't win anything, nobody really conquered them. Many peoples of Siberia and the Far North had similar privileges, some (like the Tofalars) even more. The climate in Chukotka is too harsh, so no one else is able to live there permanently. And since this people (or rather tribe) is small in number, they are trying to preserve it.
    Comparison of "barbaric" Russia/USSR with the USA is certainly not in favor of the civilized. All our small nationalities are present and others have even become more numerous than their distant ancestors. In the USA, not only the warlike Apaches and Comanches, but also the more peaceful Hopi and Sioux are worth listing in the Red Book.
  21. -1
    28 November 2024 13: 29
    Quote: Igor Belobrov
    What did the Indians do? Hunting and gathering... Primitive communal system. There wasn't always enough food.


    There was always enough food, before the palefaces arrived. Hunting and gathering - among those tribes that were quite well fed by these activities. Some tribes already practiced agriculture and cattle breeding. Let's not forget that the North American Indians are the closest relatives of the Aztecs and Incas (common ancestors), the latter created very developed civilizations.
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. +4
    28 November 2024 15: 58
    The story of the Apaches as told by their enemies is like the story of any people as told by their enemies.
  24. 0
    2 December 2024 22: 03
    Am I the only one who thinks that the author ripped off quotes from “Apache experts” in American newspapers who justified the need for genocide of these Indians?
  25. 0
    5 December 2024 13: 15
    Actually, in French, apache doesn't mean anything good. In this case, it's just a b##₽_&++655ec.