Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Comancheria

Well hey, REAL Texas history is way to cool not to broadcast, and Steven L. Moore must be something of a prodigy...

http://www.stephenlmoore.com/

..anyhow, I dunno the quality of his WWII books, but he's rapidly climbing my list of favorite Frontier Authors.

One thing that puzzled me was that when Mr Moore wrote of the famous incident where the Comanches boiled into town spoiling for a fight right after the Council House fight (or ambush, from their perspective) and surrounded San Jose Mission, he made no mention of the subsequent duel where two Texan Officers shot and killed each other in a duel precipitated by one accusing the other of cowardice.

Turns out that the reason he did not was that this duel did not take place right away. The council house fight took place on March 19th, 1840. Nine days later, as Moore has it...

..a war party of at least two hundred Comanches rode down to San Antonio on March 28 looking for a fight. Chief Isomania, veteran of an earlier fight with frontiersman Jack Hays, boldly came into town with another Comanche. They rode into the San Antonio public square, tauntingly circling around the plaza on their horses. The two paraded some distance down Commerce Street and back again, shouting all the while for the Americans to come out and fight them...

In front of the local saloon on the northeast corner of the public square, he halted his horse. Rising in his stirrups, he angrily shook his clenched fist and shouted defiantly.

Mary Maverick wrote in her memoirs "The citizens, through an interpreter, told him the soldiers were all down the river at Mission San Jose and if he went there Colonel Fisher would give him fight enough."

A whole bunch can be gleaned between the lines here, the patrons of the saloon clearly not identified with "the Americans" down at Mission San Jose, neither by the patroms themselves nor apparently by the Comanches.

Often as I have been there, I dont have any photos of Mission San Jose at all where it sits today in the heart of the South Side on busy four-lane Roosevelte Avenue. Through chance preservation and purposeful restoration is remains by far the best-preserved of our five missions, and is the one I would recommend visitors to go see, maybe even more than the Alamo.

This sketch as it was back then is pretty much how it is today, part of a National Historic Park AND an active local congregation.




The acting commander of the "Americans" (I woulda said Texians) at Mission San Jose, one Captain William Redd, famously refused to fight, much to the chagrin of his own men, telling the Comnaches to come back in twelve days when the unilaterally declared truce was over. Redd apparently still believed more White captives could be ransomed for the Comanche women and children.

It was this refusal to fight that ultimately embroiled him in that fatal duel six weeks after the fact.

Turns out though that Captain Redd was absolutely correct in his assessment; the previously mentioned five prisoner exchanges took place after this incident, Cheif Isomania himself being one of the two Comanche leaders active in arranging the exchanges.

Indeed, the actual commanding officer at the Mission San Jose, Lieutenant Colonel Fisher, was laid up from falling off a horse at the time Isomania and his Comanches rode up. Fisher had been in charge on the Texian side at the Council House fight, and was not by any description an "Indian lover", yet he had this to say (as related per Moore) presumably pertaining to Isomania's subsequent negotiations...

I saw one of the principal War Chiefs, Isamani, who is well known here and sustains a great reputation for bravery.

He appears to be evidently anxious to become reconciled with the whites; and it appears that in a council held by them the evening before they came in town, he killed a Comanche Indian for endeavoring to excite the Comanches to offensive measures.

They have gone on the Pinto trail towards the head of the Pedernales.

Note, the Palo Pinto Trail was the very same followed four years later by Jack Hays prior to the Battle of Walker Creek.

Birdwatcher

Lysander Wells, the guy who instigated the duel, was actually a 28 year old Yankee from Connecticut. This is the same Texas Cavalry guy who's Colt Patterson binded on him during the Council House Fight...

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fwe24

The other fatality, 30 year-old William Davis Redd, was a lawyer from Georgia.

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fre11

I dunno what the prior history was between these two, but it would appear Wells willfully left Redd with no other recource BUT to fight a duel (as per Moore)..

During the early part of May, Colonel Edward Burleson made a tour of the detachments of the First Regiment of Infantry which were stationed at Mission San Jose in San Antonio. During his visit, two of his leading officers had a quarrel about the Council House Fight.

Major Lysander Wells of the cavalry was bitter towards Captain William Redd for not fighting Chief Isomania's Comanches on March 28...

In an insulting letter, Major Wells apparently called Captain Redd a "dastardly coward" among other things. Wells also complained that Redd was under the influence of a "petticoat government," making insinuations about a certain woman from Georgia who was living with him out of wedlock. Lysander Wells had his letter signed by others from San Antonio before presenting it to Redd.

Captain Redd was furious, and challenged Wells to a duel the following morning. At 6:00 am on May 10, 1840, two of the Texas Army leaders met where the Ursuline Convent now stands near the Alamo.

Two other Texas Army leaders, Albert Sidney Johnson and Felix Huston, had duelled in 1837. They both had old horse pistols. Three years later, the weapons were much better. In fact Major Wells' cavalry is known to have been armed with the new Colt Patent Arms repeating pistol as of 1840.

"I aim for your heart" announced Redd.
"And I for your brains" countered Wells.

Bexar citizen Mary Maverick later recorded the deadly results of the army leaders' duel...

They fired. Redd sprang high into the air and fell dead with a bullet in his brain. Wells was shot near the heart, but lived two weeks, in great torture, begging everyone near to dispatch him, or furnish him a pistol that he might kill himself and end his agony....

In Captain Redd's pocked was found a marriage license and a certificate showing that he was wedded to the girl - also letters to members of his own and her families, speaking of her in the tenderest manner, and asking them to protect and to provide for her.

First a noted Comanche War leader rides into town and stands outside a saloon in the town square screaming for the Americans to come out and fight, and then this.

History better than fiction.

Birdwatcher

Dunno if I'm the only one reading anymore, but working out the supply of revolvers in early Texas is of interest...

First off, in 1840 everything was still produced at Colt's "Patent Arms Company" at Patterson NJ. Apparently the durability and uniformity of parts was still a big issue in that era, and Pattersons gained a quick reputation for fragility, prob'ly why the operation folded.

Wiki gives the following stats...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Paterson



OK, more'n 2,800 Pattersons made, how many made it to Texas?

"Texas History Online" has it that The Republic of Texas ordered 180 of the .36 caliber Holster model revolvers for its navy in August 1839 http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/lnc01

Moore ("Savage Frontier") gives a pretty comprehansive account but is vague on numbers, from which I assume we don't know today exactly how many Pattersons were sent here...



That would be where Lyman Wells got his one presumes. Interesting to note that the new handgun was classed as a cvalry arm from the very beginning, that not being an innovation of Jack Hays.



For way of comparison, note that the Texas War Department was also contracting at that time with Tryon in Philadelphia for 1,500 smoothbore flintlock at about $20 per..

http://www.thestoryoftexas.com/get_involved/pdfs/Star_OND11.pdf

Thus for comparison...

Flintlock musket... $20

Belt model revolver... $35

Revolving carbine, with supplied accesories... $55

For further point of comparison; Moore has it that a Ranger Captain of that era made $75 a month while a Private made $35. Moore also points has it that,such was the demand for and the scarcity of these weapons that the going rate for one among civilians at that time hovered around $200.

Birdwatcher

Sure is a knotty problem ironing out Texas history; often a paucity of written records and a bewildering array of militias and ranging units mustered for short terms of service, most of which either encountered no Indians at all on their expeditions or else fruitlesslessy mustered in response to murders to chase an elusive foe a hundred miles or more before horses gave out.

Complicating matters more is that civilians not infrequently went out on their own hook in response to raids, usually with the same lack of success. I'll have to consult Wilbarger's classic "Indian Depredations in Texas" again, he list amny instances of this.

Specific to Colts Patent Firearms with their revolving cylinders, we know that numbers were purchased by the Republic of Texas, and that these began to arrive in 1840. Many went to the Navy, and thus were removed from immediate consideration re: the Comanche Wars, others went to the Texas Army, at least some of which, brand new, were on hand for the Council House Fight.

From that point the problem becomes that the erswhile First Regiment of Infantry (AKA Frontier Regiment) which essentially WAS the Texas Army in 1840 and therefore must have recieved a lion's share of the new arms was singularly inactive in fighting Indians (or anybody else) through 1840, finally being disbanded in 1841 due to the Texas Congress refusing to appropriate funds.

In practice, though the First Regiment had been used against the Cherokees in 1839, Mexico remained the greater threat to the existance of the Republic than did Comanches. Other short term militia or volunteer units would be raised in 1840 to combat Indians, even in San Antonio where the majority of the regiment was based.

It is apparently a topic of much debate exactly when and how many Colts' weapons appeared in the Frontier areas, I shall list individual examples of their use in combat from 1840 as given by Moore, but first an aside about duelling, which carried off two Frontier Regiment Officers after the Council House fight.

Duelling assumes almost comic opera status in that period of Texas (and I suppose Southern) history tho' of course it was no doubt anything but for the participants, such that the officers at least appeared to be in more danger from each other than they were from Indians.

There was a second duel fought between officers of the Frontier Regiment in San Antonio resulting in a wounding that same year. And the nominal leader of the Texas militia which was to fight the Comanches at Plum Creek in August, Felix Huston, had three years earlier almost killed Albert Sydney Johnson in a duel precipitated by himself.

Another participant at the Battle of Plum Creek was the entirely remarkable Benjamin McCullough, later a noted Texas Ranger and Confederate General of considerable natural talent, the guy is pretty much indispensible to Texas history. HIS career was almost nipped in the bud too in 1839, when duelling with the nefarious Rueben Ross..

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fro84

This duel was fought at forty paces with RIFLES, Mc Culloch suffering an arm injury that would trouble him the rest of his life. The quarrel with Ross flared up again, and this time it was Benjamin's younger brother Henry that dueled with Ross on Christmas Eve 1839, with pistols, Henry Mc Culloch emerging victorious.

Arm injury notwithstanding, Ben Mc Culloch himself challenged a political rival to a duel in 1840, the other man declining to fight.

Just to add to the general air of lunacy, the President of the Texas Republic at that time was Mirabeau Lamar. Second President of Texas after Sam Houston, elected in 1838 when both his opponents committed suicide.

Were it not for the accounts of such remarkably level-headed folks as Noah Smithwick and RIP Ford, one might conclude that the whole Texas leadership was nuts.

Birdwatcher

Johnston, not Johnson. A Confederate General, not some nasty politician.

Fine example of a Colt's Navy with the barrel wedge properly placed.



Another one, this one circa 1852.

It is a bad if not uncommon mistake to equate being nuts with nuts.

Never said he was, a nasty politician that is. Huston apparently pressed the issue, the occasion being Huston's losing command of the Texas Army to Johnston. Anyhoo, it worked after a fashion; Johnston, being wounded, could not take command.

Smithwick encountered Johnston, twenty-five years later, the occasion being Smithwick (a Union man) leaving Texas for California encountering Johnston comng the other way...

http://www.lsjunction.com/olbooks/smithwic/otd26.htm

It was so hot during the day that we had to keep up our night travels, during which every cactus was regarded with suspicion. Somewhere out in that desolate region we met A. Sidney Johnston and party hastening to join the Confederate army. Upon learning that we were from Texas he said with some asperity:

"I think you are doing very little for your country."

"Well," I retorted, "it seems to me you are doing equally as little for yours." Johnston had just resigned his position as commander of the Pacific Coast Division of the United States army.

We wanted to send letters back to friends in Texas by the party, but they did not care to have papers that would betray their destination in case they fell in with United States troops. They at least had the courage of their convictions, which was more than could be said of the current of emigration that was setting toward California.



In this case I believe one can judge that particular tree by its nuts... er... fruit.

Birdwatcher

Some histories, including that by Fehrenbach, report the Comanches as strangely absent from the Bexar (San Antonio) area in the months following the Council House fight. These same accounts entirely ignoring the prisoner exchages occurring in the month following the incident.

Moore (Savage Frontier) refers to several depredations actually committed by Comanches around San Antonio and Austin in the summer of 1840.

A common failing in our foreign policy, then and now, is to assume that all of the actions of our enemies are in response to us, as if they had no other concerns of their own.

1840 was the summer the Comanches and Kiowa allies concluded their "Great Peace" treaty with the Cheyenne and Arapho at Bent's Fort way up on the Arkansas River in present-day Colorado. This was a big deal for the Comanches and thousands were present. The extent to which those proceedings affected the Southern Comanches down in Central Texas, and how many were present, is unknown.

The way I read it was the treaty was arranged as a pragmatic measure by the Bent brothers to keep the peace around Bent's Fort, which by that time had become an important trading post for a number of Plains tribes.

Other histories have it that the peace treaty was a pragmatic decision by the Comanches to secure their northern border in the face of increasing pressures by the Texans in the east. Moore points out however that the Comanches had hardly yet begun to lose and that, in 1840, still pretty much had free rein across the state. Comanches up north making peace in response to pressures hundreds of miles away also would imply a centralized policy-making process on their part, something seemingly unlikely among this famously anarchic people.

In any event, the loss of maybe thirty Comanches at one time as had occurred at the Council House fight was a relatively minor event on the scale of Comanche history.

Meanwhile in San Antonio, at the Missions, besides the two duels fought by their officers a mutiny occurred among the Frontier Regiment, surpressed by other Texas troops hustled down from Austin to keep the peace. Two deserters were actually shot, a rather unusually severe punishment for a fairly common offense in the Texas Army at that time.

Despite the existence of this ~500 man Frontier regiment, calls were put out that summer for the creations of a 300 man "Border Guard" to protect the frontier around Austin, and for a seperate 500 man force to protect the trade highway between San Antonio through Laredo, a commerce frequently raided by "Indians, Mexicans, and other lawless Banditti".

Sorta like that extact same trade route at the present time, when looking at the events in the area we commonly overlook the continuing legitimate commerce quietly occurring amid the assorted bad guys and chaos.

Given the volatility of Texas politics, as best I can gather the Border Guard was never deployed and the second force never completely mustered.

However a six-week expedition against the Comanches WAS launched from San Antonio in July of 1840. One Captain Clendenin led twelve Frontier Regiment soldiers accompanied by a local attorney, Captain John R. Cunnigham and nineteen volunteers. A force of thirty-three hardly sounds like an army but recall that Jack Hays had less than half that many men on hand four years later when he fought the much-vaunted "Battle" of Walker's Creek.

Seems a safe bet that at least some of the new revolving firearms were carried by the members of the Frontier Regiment, tho no mention is made, seems possible that a prominent and presumably successful individual such as Captain Cunnigham could have acquired one too.

The force parted company shortly after leaving town (a command dispute one wonders?) and Clendendin and the twelve Frontier Regiment privates eventually returned wthout encountering any Indians (actually, a not uncommon occurrence for travellers at that time, Texas is a big place).

Cunningham's group of twenty however, by virtue of the services of their Tonkawa guide Antonio, soon picked up a trail of a small group of Comanches crossing the Frio River, fifty miles West of San Antonio.

July is hot in Texas, and an arduous day-long forced march following the trail ensued, Antonio locating a camp of twenty Comanches towards evening. A surpise attack the following morning routed the camp, no bodies recovered but "several severely wounded". Isomania hisself was reportedly present among the Comanches, and I dunno if this prominent War Chief appears in history again after this event, so perhaps he was a casualty. Cunningham in his report does mention the courage of the Comanche rear guard enduring heavy rifle fire while covering the retreat of their companions, sounds like something a guy famous for his valor would do,

Of note among the spoils recovered in the camp; a quantity of silver eagle money, previously stolen along the Laredo road along with the mule that had carried it, and "many guns". Contrary to popular history, there are a number of references to rifles in the hands of Comanches during these years, and likewise it seem more than possible that people who had traded with Americans and Mexicans for years would realize the value of minted coinage.

Birdwatcher

OK I finally caught up. So very interesting. Lavaca Lodge 36 is across from the Linnville site mentioned much earlier. Hell of a long ways to be raiding down here on the coast and roving around Austin. Impressive amount of traveling to say the least.

Thanks to all of you for the thread. I'll be adding to the book collection.

Richard

I'm just glad anyone's still reading the thread


I'm gonna jump out of narrative sequence here for a book recommendation.

See, popular Texas narratives, incuding Gwynne's "Empire of the Summer Moon" fail to account for a puzzling discrepancy; that being the collapse of the Comanches in the mid 19th Century. Puzzling in that the inroads made by Texans with guns, ANY guns not just sixguns, are not nearly enough to account for the population collapse after the 1840's.

On the one hand we have Comanches killing people in broad daylight within the Austin city limits into the 1840's, then a seemingly sudden jump to remnants being chased around up on the High Plains in the 1870's. No real explanation either of why a major portion of the tribe in Central Texas should be so completely reduced to misery and handouts on reservations by the 1850's.

I found a great book today, one which many of you may already know about, and a must-read for anyone interested in Texas History. "Comanche Empire" by Pekka Hamalainen (2008), unique among books on real Comanche history in that it ain't boring.

http://www.amazon.com/Comanche-Empire-Lamar-Western-History/dp/0300126549

An exerpt, describing Comancheria in 1849....

In 1849.... [on the eve of the massive cholera epidemic] They were prosperous and powerful. Although epidemics had cut into their numbers, their population hovered near the twenty thousand level... There were still an estimated eight hundred Mexican slaves and countless Native captives in Comancheria... The various Comanche bands collectively owned well over one hundred thousand horses and mules... and the Comanche alliance network comprised more than twenty different groups, who sent regular trading envoys into Comancheria, bringing in firearms, metal, food and luxuries...

Comancheria was a land of great riches and enormous bison herds... Calculations based upon the range-use efficiency of livestock... suggest that Nineteenth Century Comancheria could support approximately seven million bison... Based on these figures, the Comanches and their allies could kill approximately 280,000 bison a year without depleting the herds...

..the Comanches and their allies were killing an estimated 175,000 bison a year for subsistence alone... [plus an estimated 25,000 a year for trade]...

[after removal to Indian Territory in the 1830's] Cherokees, Chickasaws, Choctaws and Creeks - all numerous groups - embarked on active bison hunting, and many Delaware, Shawnee and Kickapoo bands became specialized bison hunters...

At the same time, on Comancheria's western edge, Ciboleros, the New Mexican bison hunters... harvested an estimated 25,000 bison per year....

Cheyennes and Arapahos delivered tens of thousands of robes to Bent's Fort and probably harvested many of them in Comancheria...

This balance was rendered even shakier by the Comanche's burgeoning horse economy... Horses and bison have a 80% dietary overlap and very similar water requirements... Even more critically, both animals could survive the harsh winters on the plains only by retreating into river valleys... To meet the expansive grazing needs of their growing domestic herds, Comanches had turned more and more bottomlands into herding range...

Southern Comancheria near the Texas frontier was the home of massive herds of horses, which had virtually taken over the region's resources... On the western portion of the Llano Estacado... the bison had to compete for grass, water and shelter with thousands of sheep driven there by New Mexican herders....

...freighting along the Santa Fe trial grew into a large-scale industry in the early 1840's. A typical trade caravan consisted of some two dozen freight wagons and several hundred oxen and mules, and each year hundreds of such caravans trekked back and forth.... the trader's livestock introduced anthrax, brucellosis and other bovine diseases...

In 1845, a long and intense dry spell struck Comancheria... it was a difficult time for the Comanches but a disastrous one for the bison... Comanches headed for the few spots where water and forage were available...

In 1847, reporting on the situation on the Western Plains of Texas, Indian agent Robert Neighbors wrote "The buffalo and other game have almost entirely disappeared."... At the same time, Comanches continued to kill large numbers of buffalo for commercial trade...


The author doesn't mention 'em, but I suppose one could throw in at least a couple of million wild longhorns on the Texan side of Comancheria. Famously six million by the 1860's but perhaps there were fewer in the 1840's.

And note; Indian Agent Robert Neighbors was a prominent figure in Texas history who travelled extensively around the Plains, presumably he knew whereof he spoke...

Fascinating stuff, and a must-read book

Birdwatcher

Can't wait for you to really get into the 18th century portion of Texas History!!!!!!! You'll freak out! I suggest you start with the Bexar Archive Translations. I think North Texas State University (Denton) has finally got them available online......

You will also enjoy any of the works of Herbert Eugene Bolton. The real Father of early Texas History. Bolton was the chap who helped with the placement of all those big granite "El Camino Real" markers (like on SH 21) on the route from Bexar to Natchitoches La. He rode the route in 1914 on horseback.

Bob N.

My first handgun, back in 1984, was a well-used Uberti 1858 Remington repro, shot the heck out of it, eventually I gave it to a friend's son in New Mexico who cowboyed with it for years, far as I know its still going strong.

Never did mess with them wedge designs until recently. Bought the '51 some years back. After all, if you're talking Texas handguns, especially cap and ball, the '51 Colt was THE handgun in Texas.

Speaking of wedge designs....

http://collectorebooks.com/gregg01/coltrevolver/Lot-462.htm



There's a few of these things still around, at least one probably unfired (NIB??), if ya got a cool $30-$70,000 to blow prob'ly just the thing to impress folks at a Campfire gathering...

Anyways... William Selby Harney....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_S._Harney

Called by the Lakotas "Mad Bear" in "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" (also, apparently, "Woman Killer"). Harney is also the guy described in the recently discussed "Eagles and Empire" as the guy who brutally executed by strangulation at one go (actually hanging, but done so as not to break the neck) 30 Irish deserters of the San Patricio Brigade in the Mexican War, including a guy that had just had his legs amputated..

Brutal as he was, and however he felt about Irish and Catholics, he WAS an effective Officer in the field.

He's pertinent here on account of if ya wanna talk Colt Patersons in combat, he's your guy.


Turns out that in 1838, in response to a request by Harney, Sam Colt sailed to the Florida Territory and personally sold him and General Jessup fifty revolving rifles and the same number of handguns.

The Seminole War has been called "our first Vietnam", and was indeed a protracted and expensive guerilla conflict involving an elusive enemy setting ambush in densely vegetated Tropical terain. Harney too (easy to calculate his age, he was born in 1800) was no shrinking violet when it came to combat, personally leading 50 hand-picked men of his 2nd US Dragoons into the field on "Spec Ops" type endeavors, all armed with these new rifles.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1998-08-16/news/9808140824_1_colt-seminoles-harney


Crap, a whole new line of inquiry, prior to googling that quote up I had read of the Paterson Colts in Florida in mostly dismissive terms.

Paterson Colts did fail military trials at West Point in '37 and again in '40, but surely Harney's continuing enthusiatic endorsements must have played some role in the purchase of those 1,000 Walker Colts in '47, launching a whole new era.

Be interesting to read the specifics of Harney's Florida scrapes with these weapons. We know in combat, especially in ambush situations, that people have a tendency to fire off all their rounds pretty quick. Do that with a Paterson and reloading is gonna take considerable time (unless ya got extra loaded cylinders on hand like Jack Hays' crew).

That and the complexity and fragility of the arm, plus the fact that, until the '51 Navy thirteen years and a different factory later, parts for these things were NOT drop-in interchangeable between weapons.

I'm wondering if they wouldn't have been better served with the much maligned but actually quite functional Hall's carbines (the one with the chamber that tipped up from the front to load), already in service, simple to fix, and available in both flint and percussion versions.

Birdwatcher

Also, Hall breeches could be removed and used as a pistol.

Many of your questions can be answered if you can find a copy of Randall Gilberts book, Arms for Texas"....

BN

Sounds like Mr. Colt had quite the knack for selling his guns, too.

Above quote from your link: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1998-08-16/news/9808140824_1_colt-seminoles-harney

That weren't the half of it, the guy hustled to make a buck, and partied hard too...

http://www.ctheritage.org/encyclopedia/topicalsurveys/colt.htm

..and Kaywoodie wrote...



Thanks for the tips

In popular pre-PC Texas history at least, Comanches unthinkingly committed pillage, rape and murder.

Hamalainen in "Comanche Empire" gives a more nuanced version. I mean, pillage rape and murder were still a main export, but I least they thought about it (tho' I doubt the author would support that interpretation )...

But a pretty good exploration of what made the guy in the breechclout and paint raiding the settlements tick:

Chief A Big Fat Fall by Tripping, it is told, owned fifteen hundred horses, but he was so fat he could not ride any of them and had to be moved about on a travois. That a man so obese rose to a leadership position in a society known for its martial skills may be unexpected, but it was far from exceptional.... [the author goes on to list three similarly obese major Comanche cheifs at that time]

Rich, powerful, flamboyant and physically striking... A Big Fat Fall by Tripping represented the new elite men who led Comanche society in the early Nineteenth Century... They embody the complex changes that transformed Comanche society during the zenith of Comanche power....

Just as the rise of Comanche hegemony was made possible by horses, so did the new elite base its position on horse wealth. An averageComanche family owned twenty to thirty horses and mules [the author states elsewhere that about one-third of their horse herds were actually mules, some Comanches actively breeding these], but wealthy families - the largest households capable of mobilizing the most labor - could possess two, three, or even ten times this amount...

Comanches always considered their horses private property and massive herds of horses represented a source of immense economic, political, and social capital to their owners. Horses were tools that allowed men to raid for more livestock and slaves...

Men with large horse herds could support large extended families and several slaves, who provided supplemental labor for hunting, herding, and other household chores. Horses also provided the social currency that gave men access to women... Although most men could eventually afford the favored bride-price, only the wealthiest men could pay the price several times over and amass a substantial labor pool of extra wives. Rich horse owners could then invest their assets to acquire several slaves and wives to prepare robes, meat, and other tradable goods, which in turn enabled them to dominate the wealth-generating import and export trade....

Few men became superrich, the elite of the elite. Typically senior men in their fifties, sixties and seventies, they accumulated enough wealth to turn their households into veritable manufacturies. They had the means to purchase and adopt numerous personal slaves and captives, and they had several wives who not only labored themselves but who could feed and care for a multitude of children. While most Comanche extended families had one or two slaves, the wealthiest ones had several dozen.

Preeminent elders also had several marriagable daughters, who attracted courting bachelors and their lavish gifts, and several sons, who hunted and raided for them. Belonging to the new aristocracy also meant being able to claim other Comanche men as social dependents. Prosperous elite men lent running mounts to horseless young men in return for a share in the bounty, in effect employing the junior men as hired hands.

They might also marry thier daughters to less accomplished men who paid the bride-price through labor, serving their fathers inlaw as debt bondsmen, sometimes for years. if a man had several married daughters, he might be able to stop hunting himself, because custom obliged his sons-in-law to provide him with meat evan after the marriage was concluded.

The most successful elite men could retire almost completely from physical labor, becoming something of an anomaly in what was still, in essence, a labor-intensive foraging economy... They could leave the life of a warrior-hunter, grow fat, and carry their bulk as a marker of masculine honor and priviledge...

When men reached the status of prosperous leisure, they were in a position to amass considerable political power. Since the no longer had to prove their worth in aggressive competition with other men, they could appear indifferent about their personal status and more concerned about group welfare, a quality the Comanches thought essential in leaders...

If these leaders formed the upper echelon of Comanche society, the bottom end consisted of young men with few or no horses. The building of a substantial herd was a slow and gruelling process, and most men spent several years in this lowly position. Like most foraging societies, Comanches put high value on self-reliance and expected young men to make their own fortunes, even the sons of the wealthy elite had to devote years to livestock raiding because it wsa considered inappropriate for young men to ask their fathers to provide them with horses.

And raiding did not offer junior men such a fast track to wealth as one might assume, senior men who led war parties had the first pick, younger men were fortunate to score a few low-quality horses. Moreover, young men frequently gave away all or most of their captured horses to the parents of a potential bride in the hope of earning the right to begin courtship...

The lack of horses exclude young men from key activities that brought men wealth, respect and status. They had to borrow animals from senior men and pay them with a portion of the kill or plunder, which in turn prevented them from accruing surplus animlas and robes for trade purposes. High quality guns, metal tools, blankets and other imported goods were all but inaccessible to them.

Marriage too was but a distant prospect. Not only had the escalation of polygamy diminished the pool of potential wives, but junior men lacked the horses needed to pay the bride-price. Poor and prospectless, they were undesirable to adolescent unmarried girls... many unattached Comanche women viewed marriage as a vehicle for social mobility and shunned less established suitors.

Poor young men lived in all-male gangs on the outskirts of camp, sleeping in makeshift shelters, subsisting on small animals, and servng wealthy senior men as hunters and raiders. Many Comanche men spent more than a decade in this kind of low-status social place.....

Between these two extremes was a large segment of middling sorts, tbhe families of early middle-aged men who had accumulated enough horses to considered secure if not quite rich. These men owning enough horses for hunting and raiding and enough pack animals to put a large family on horseback. A small reserve of surplus animals enabled them to participate in trade... Although they could not retire entirely from active labor, , their wives' labor allowed them to specialize in hunting and raiding.


Such a society would account for the early difficulties suffered by the young Quanah Parker after he was orphaned at age twelve (as describe in Gwynne's "Empire of the Summer Moon).

Hamalainen in his book makes scant mention of our familiar Texas pantheon of frontier heroes, but really, on the scale of twenty thousand Comanches (if there really were that many) in 1840, one could argue that our guys didn't make much of a dent on that tally with courage, determination and guns alone.

Where he does cite Texas is in reference to the unstoppable power of population demographics, the Texan population increasing from about 40,000 in 1840 to 600,000 by 1860. Meawhile Comanche numbers in that same interval declining from 20,000 people to less than 3,000.

Birdwatcher

You can say that again! Sam Colt was a fair-to-middlin' gun designer, but his designs needed really talented gunsmiths and manufacturers to get off the ground.

The parallels between Sam Colt and Steve Jobs are somewhat startling at times. I'm reading the recent Jobs biography, and it's like having deja vu. All over again.

That was a fascinating excerpt, Birdie! Thanks for sharing that. I'm gonna go looking for a copy of Hamalainan.

Birdwatcher, I think you've enough to add to the history that you should consider writing a book. Excellent insights here.

Doc,

Hamanleinen also gives a figure of 20,000 displaced Eastern Tribes in the Indian Territory by 1831, an era when these folks were still being removed to Oklahoma.

In other words, these new groups, collectively totalling half as many as the total Comanche population at its very peak, began to roam pretty much at will across and around Comancheria. My contention is, based upon accumulated years of recreational reading, that the Eastern Tribes killed far more Comanches in combat over the years than we ever did.

Interesting too that virtually ALL of our successful expeditions against Comanches were guided to 'em by these and other Natives. The only exception that comes to mind is a young Charles Goodnight finding Peta Nocona's camp (and thus Cynthia Anne Parker) in 1860. But then Mr Goodnight was reportedly tutored as a youth by an elderly Caddo living in the Brazos River bottoms.

All of which makes me suspect that truly virtuoso tracking, on the single-bent-blade-of-grass level, was a skill about like becoming a virtuoso on an fine instrument: To be THAT good you really gotta start as a child, the required circuitry literally becoming a permanent part of the developing brain.

A thing which has repercussions even into the modern era, and compelling evidence to keep one's kids off of video games...

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/28/world/fg-bombs-vision28

The best troops he's ever seen when it comes to spotting bombs were soldiers from the South Carolina National Guard, nearly all with rural backgrounds that included hunting.

"They just seemed to pick up things much better," Burnett said. "They know how to look at the entire environment."

Troops from urban backgrounds also seemed to have developed an innate "threat-assessment" ability. Both groups, said Army research psychologist Steve Burnett, "seem very adaptable to the kinds of environments" seen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Video game enthusiasts are narrower in their focus, as if the windshield of their Humvee is a computer screen. "The gamers are very focused on the screen rather than the whole surrounding," said Sgt. Maj. Burnett.




...edited to add "..and lifelong bird watchers living and working in a tough urban environment?

Well hey they can spot a ruby-crowned kinglet against a background of gang grafitti...."

Birdwatcher