Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 9th June 2008, 05:26 AM   #12
ausjulius
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: musorian territory
Posts: 458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VANDOO
VERY INTERESTING AND NEW INFORMATION TO ME AT LEAST . I WAS AWARE OF THE USE OF ARMOR AND HAD SEEN SOME KNIVES BUT HAD NOT HEARD A DESCRIPTION OF THE ARMOR OR FIGHTING STRADEGY BEFORE. THE WAY THE BATTLES WERE FOUGHT AS WELL AS THE ARMOR WITH BACK SHIELD TO PROTECT THE WARRIOR FROM THROWN OBJECTS FROM HIS OWN SIDE REMINDS ME OF THE GILBERT/KINGSMILL ISLAND ARMOR AND METHODS OF BATTLE.

WAS THE ARMOR SIMULAR TO THESE TWO EXAMPLES FROM THE GILBERTS?
yes the sibeiran and alaskan natives armour is very like this but made more of bone and wood, leather and fish skin,,,,
also complexed helmets were used, ill look if i can get some pictures ......
the technique as used in some micronesian islands was similar to the one use in the artic,,

David thanks for the norse link was interesting reading ,,.


i would say the the combative technique and weapons of the artic and subartic peoples of north american was far more advance than the plains indians,...
aspecialy the natives ofr alaska and these areas... although these areas realy had rather dense populations once you got out of the artic circle..
i did once read most of north americans native population was concentrated along the western coste of canada and alaska ,, something like 80% aspecialy northen british columbia and southern alaska. before the arrival of syphilius and small pox .
these peoples concept of warfare was much more advanced than the more nomadic plains people.. as most of these folk were seditary.
no doubt the inuit understood these techniques well but had less numbers and materials to use the , they did however use armour and group combative tactics ,, and relyed less of indivudial combat as the plains folk did.. and more on a group of persons armed for a specific task, such as spear throwers and persons with body armour for hand to hand fighting,, ect ect.
no doubt the plains folk were just rather to indivudialistic... and liked each to get in on the action ..
i think social structure played an big part in tactics also,, for exsample the tinglit they were very organised in combat and built defencive wooden fortresses and used body armour and rather organised fighting techniques..

mainly they had a herditory clan system like in the pacific and used slaves and the like.
it is interesting they never had any majoir clashes with the british,, and seem to have fallen mainly to syphilus introduced by traders and sealers.
Attached Images
  
ausjulius is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.