By these lights, it would appear that "It's the economy, stupid!" applied then as much as it does now.
Ya, before reading stuff again for this thread I too was viewing Comanches as "typical" Horse Indians going to war for status etc...
Well, I'm sure they did, but turns out there was this huge pragmagtic angle too. Fer example, everyone here would understand the motives of the Scot James Kirker and at least a few former Texas Rangers actively participating the in the Apache scalp trade beginning in the latter 1840's when Mexico began paying bounties. They were in it for the money.
We would even accord Kirker's Shawnee crew the same motives; being acculturated Eastern tribesmen they were in it for the money too.
But here's the deal, Hamanleinen points out that the COMANCHES down in Mexico, who at that time would form large encampments down there for months, got involved in this trade in a big way too.... NOT yer stereotypical Plains Indians, at least not the ones in popular remembrance.
A similar case, I also have had another book knocking around for years, David Paul Smith's "
Frontier Defense in the Civil War: Texas Rangers and Rebels" (1992). Upon first read it seemed cripplingly dull, even given the topic, and frankly it is, devoting most of its time to the repeated organization and reorganization of various units scrambling to both secure the border against pro-Union irregulars and Confederate deserters, enforce the draft, and when they could find the time (not much), fight Indians.
Two things in there especially relevant to this thread. Smith gives the far Texas Frontier populations in 1860 as being just 5,000 Whites (as opposed to 600,000 in the whole state), that figure doubling the next year. Whatever ever the actual figures, the portion of the Texas population actually being flayed by Comanche raids was small compared to the state as a whole, even less compared to the nation. Probably important in seeking to understand why just a few hundred raiding savages were allowed to hold up civilization in that part of the world for eight long years after the War Between the States.
Although Smith does point out that in the 1850's, fully 25% of US forces in the field were deployed on the Texas Frontier.
Smith also gives 1860 as the year that raiding Comanches and Kiowas started to drive off cattle in a big way. This is of interest to me because, while you can run horses and mules probably at least as fast as those ridden by your pursuers and so escape given any kind of head start, you can't do that while driving a herd of cows, at least not to my knowledge.
Ergo, in 1860 and thereafter, Comanche raiders after cattle likely felt that either nobody was gonna come after them, or if they did they would be able to handle the opposition.
Perhaps this was partly due to the absence of that Federal unit that would a training ground for some future prominent Confederates; "Jeff Davis's Own", Robert E. Lee's outfit the US 2nd Cavalry, actively patrolling the Texas frontier in the late 1850's, and once in a while even catching Indians.
The stated reason for the shift to rustling cattle on the part of the Comanches? Trade of course, meeting the increasing demand in the Indian Territory and New Mexico.
Birdwatcher
