Native American Military Contributions
With a Focus on the Vietnam Era
By Cameron Mahlum

Warrior Traditions

Summary from Strong Hearts Wounded Souls by Tom Holm

Tom Holm is a Cherokee-Creek Indian who served in Vietnam in 1968. Today he is Associate Professor of American Indian Studies at the University of Arizona.

In this book he describes how Native American motives for going to war, combat experiences, and civilian readjustments differed from those of other ethnic groups. He explores Native American traditions of warfare and the roles of warriors to explain why many young Indian men chose to fight in Vietnam. He also shows how native men drew on tribal customs and religion for sustenance during combat and he describes family and tribal ritual and ceremonial practices for helping veterans heal from the trauma of war and return to the "white path of peace."

Specifically, the author studied warfare traditions and rituals from these groups:

  • Eastern Woodlands: Cherokee, Creek, Menominee, Mohawk, Ojibwa (Michigan, New York, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin)
  • Great Plains: Cheyenne, Lakota (Western Dakota), Kiowa, Pawnee (Arkansas, Kansas, Mantana, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota)
  • Great Basin: Ute (Colorado and Utah)
  • Plateau: Shoshone (Wyoming)
  • Pacific Northwest Coast: Tlingit (Alaska)
  • California: Hupa, Pomo
  • Arctic: Inuit (Eskimo) (Alaska)
  • Southwest: Apache, Hopi, Navajo, Tohono O’Odham, Yaqui (Arizona and New Mexico)

From these tribes, Holm concludes that most had group ceremonies before for preparation and after for victory and honoring warriors. (See Table 1, pp. 36-37) He states, "… for many tribes … war was equally a physical and spiritual experience. Warriors were ritually prepared for and ceremonially returned from the battlefield." (p. 22) He also makes these generalizations about Native American warrior traditions:

  • "Instances of territorial conquest were apparently few and far between… Although there were certainly some tribes that possessed power enough to destroy competing tribes, few attempted to do so until the advent of trade with the Europeans." (p. 31)
  • "… intertribal conflict was simply an activity whereby young males gained status within a group under a strict set of guidelines. From this point of view Native American warfare and raiding was less a deadly, economic-driven battle for territory and goods than an elaborate game whose players vied to become tribal celebrities and leaders." (p. 32)
  • "The actual killing of an enemy warrior was considered to be the least important part of battle." (p. 47)
  • "Ritual warfare with traditional enemies was not all that expensive in terms of either lives lost or the constant search for more destructive weaponry." (p.42) The author claims that Native Americans warfare is more ritual than predatory.
  • "Very likely, a prisoner would opt for death in order to prove his valor and thus overcome, in a spiritual sense, his tormentors." (p. 50)
  • "Even though it usually has been associated with a system of graded war honors for acts of bravery, the taking of coup among the Plains tribes was a method of raising warfare to a kind of spiritual level. The object of taking coup was either to touch an enemy with a special stick or, for that matter, with one’s hand, or to capture an enemy’s weapon, or to steal a favorite horse." (p. 47)
  • "Often enough an individual, perhaps with a friend or a kinsman, simply went to war alone to fulfill a vow, to seek individual wealth or revenge, or to follow a vision to go to war. In any case, there seems to be no evidence of forcing individuals to participate in war among any tribal group. Warfare was strictly voluntary." (p. 58)
  • "Native American nations did not normally conquer vast territories, engage in the wholesale slaughter of other tribes, occupy enemy lands, or seek decisive victory." (p. 67)

Holm further states, "…the patterns of Indian warfare varied little from tribe to tribe and region to region." (p. 56) The following are general preparation, weapons, and tactics used in warfare:

  1. War leaders were followed because they had already proved themselves in combat or had been granted special medicine by supernatural forces.
  2. Individual warriors concerned themselves with their personal medicine.
  3. The principal weapons of war were: clubs and hatchets, bows and arrows, lances, knives, and later, guns.
  4. On the trail, war parties moved silently and utilized various methods of communicating with their comrades.
  5. War parties preferred using surprise and the concentration of force.
  6. Retreat in the face of superior force was no shame.
  7. Warriors of all tribes made every attempt to remove their wounded from the field of battle and to recover their dead.