Real TOMAHAWK Combat in Historical Accounts: Part 2 (18th Century)

[@scholagladiatoria]

Use the British Newspaper Archive now with my link! tidd.ly/3uHA8xo

[@kyledaniels4969]

Matt Easton! A one Mr. Julian Black Antelope and my father William (Roderick) Scout may be good resources, and contacts, for much more information about historical combat accounts on the North-Western Plains involving Indigenous peoples! They have a show on APTN called "Secret History of the Wild West"

[@jjs3890]

I am half Mohawk/ Iroquois and there is a game that I witnessed children playing where a hoop is attached to a cord that’s attached to two trees and is propelled from one side to the other. The children, holding corn cobs would toss them through the hoop as it is motion. When I asked about it I was told that this is an old game to get children familiar with throwing tomahawks at moving targets. Apparently there were other games of knocking small rocks off bigger rocks with the cobs from various distances. So, I never researched this but thought you might find it interesting.

[@davidgeldner2167]

How do u feel about his use of the word Indian?

[@brianknezevich9894]

We must be from the same area. I learned the same thing as a kids' game doing 1800's reenactment. From a European settler context. For the boys, it was for combat tomahawk throwing, for the girls, it was kitchen items for pest control. And it's certainly a valuable skill, I've killed many a rat at the museum with a thrown hammer.

[@texasbeast239]

The original Cornholio?

[@cornholio1612]

I am the Great Cornholio! I need corn cob for my bungjole! In all seriousness, this is a very interesting tidbit of info. I've been very interested in how Native Americans trained to be so good at their skills. If anyone knows what they used for daily archery practice, I'd be real interested in that, too.

[@bigthunderjohnson7595]

The Plains has the hoop game, we use sticks like lances to capture rolling hoops, it gets mighty violent lol. We played it in college for a NAS class, they separated all the natives from the rest. The other classmates didnt see why until it was time for us to play lol. Lots of bloody noses. We also have a rock tossing game, but it usually was played while hunting grouse.

[@tando6266]

The interesting thing about bows use in uprisings (such as in minnesota) is that you use what you have. Firearms were controlled trade to the natives, but its pretty hard to stop a bowmaker from making bows and keeping them.

[@LisaAnn777]

Screw gun control. Just a way for tyrants to do whatever they want to a population. Many native Americans have theirs up after making peace with the lying gov and then they went and kill them. Right to bear arms for life!

[@Sk0lzky]

@@LisaAnn777 the point is most traders followed these laws for obvious reasons. And those that took the risk charged premium. Man has a great point and we're seeing a similar thing with gun control nowadays - plug and play CNC machines for 2k/piece are the latest edition of "going to a forest for bow staves" By the way bow control is (and has been) a fairly common thing in East Asia which I find both hilarious and sad

[@LisaAnn777]

@@Sk0lzkyWith so many modern methods of manufacturing firearms cheaply and easily it really makes the whole "outlaw guns and the only one with guns will be outlaws". law abiding citizens who are honest won't manufacture their own weapons if it's illegal, but criminals and murderers always will. Classic gun control trying to stop guns being smuggled in the the nation or whatever isn't going to stop people from making a Luty's SMG at their local hardware store. People need them to be able to defend against those dangerous people, and also to protect from any tyrannical state trying to oppress it's population. I have family that live in reservation, and it's very sad that gun control started in the early US to disarm any people the gov didn't like, they did it to many tribes and also African Americans and many other smaller groups. It's hard to oppress and armed populace. I wish gun rights wasn't such a political thing with people looking at it as progressive vs conservative, when the 2A is for all americans. Both parties can attract authoritarian leaders and nobody will care what side of the political spectrum they were on when then start enacting tyrannical laws to push whatever goal they have in mind.

[@Sk0lzky]

@@LisaAnn777 well, luty type guns are nice and all but I'm talking about milling modern consumer quality guns from alu and steel (+3D printed or cast furniture for example) The biggest issue to be honest is manufacturing casings, at least in a significant quality without ridiculous losses. But people brighter than me are working on it *shrugs* And then I still have my bows, axes and a bent javelin for closer range engagements out of stealth and try to regulate that topkek

[@rikertvonfulton16]

@@LisaAnn777 The reason gun control has become a " political" issue is because conservatives want every American to have access to firearms regardless of race. Democrats only want the police and military to have firearms. I have never understood why African Americans would vote democrat as they say they believe that there is a black genocide at the hands of the police.

[@bransonsgeneralstore]

Often the difference between a tomahawk and hatchet was how the handle was attached. The hatchet head is drifted from both sides and a wedge used to permanently attach the handle which often has a wide base to keep it from leaving the hand accidently. made it a better tool. The tomahawk had an eye that was only drifted from the top and a tapered handle that was just friction fit with out a wedge. This made them better for throwing because they left the hand easier and the handle was less likely to break with a mistimed throw. If the tomahawk strikes the target handle first the handle is driven out of the head rather than breaking. The handle makes the tomahawk less useful as a tool and supports that they were a weapon for throwing as well as hand to hand. Like everything there are examples that seem to be exceptions. I worked for a colonial historic site in Illinois just across the Mississippi from St Louis Missouri. This area was a hub for first the French and later American traders traveling up the Mississippi, and Missouri rivers Trade goods were a common topic. Also the term Fusil in this area started with the French and was often written as Fusee or Fufee in English language sources often described a trade musket of any caliber that was smoothbore, flintlock and significantly shorter than a military musket.

[@internetsurferxxx2678]

@@shinobi-no-bueno the "target" can throw it back at you if it doesn't break!

[@user-ef4gf7rr9r]

The other part of that is you can more readily make a new tomahawk handle if you break the old one since you don't need to wedge it.

[@rikertvonfulton16]

Great info I always wondered why no swell on the bottom of the handle of tomahawks. A swell would enable you to swing harder and faster.

[@BrendanBlake42]

"There is a shortage of wood from which to make Frenchmen to hit at." Lindybeige's head just exploded.

[@davidsachs4883]

He mentioned throwing and hitting at a rod distance. A rod is currently 16.5 feet, just over 5 meters. Historically the length could vary a great deal over and under the recent standard

[@mpetersen6]

Like the old Bill Cosby line, "Lord, what's a cubit"

[@mikepette4422]

you said rod hehehehe

[@Likexner]

I didnt even know there was a unit called rod.

[@mpetersen6]

@@Likexner old surveying unit. I pretty sure there was also a unit called "chain" for surveying. Easier to carry around.

[@JayM409]

@@mpetersen6 - A chain is 4 rods, or 22 yards (5.5 x 4). A furlong is is 10 chains, with 8 furlongs to a mile.

[@scholagladiatoria]

I see that some people didn't like me using the term 'American Indian' in this video and I apologise for that. In my previous video I instead said 'Native American' and explained that period sources use the term 'Indian' and so that would occur when I read the sources, but I was then met with lots of posts from people, including many Native Americans, saying that the term 'American Indian' was fine........ So my use of that term in this video was a direct result of being told to use it in the comments under the previous video 🙂 I shall henceforth revert to 'Native American'. But please watch the previous video before criticising my terminology here, because I covered that there! 🙂

[@kmarchery]

It's a complex question . What term to use . Some don't care others do . David treuer in His book "heartbeat of wounded knee" (Highly recommended read ) He up front in the intro addresses the challenge , And basically gives up . He goes back and forth Mostly dependant on context of which time he was referencing . And common useage for each time .

[@MrBrokenwrenches]

Calling Native Americans Indians because they “look” like Indians makes as much sense as calling you German because you’re white.

[@MrBrokenwrenches]

Also love the shit outta your channel.

[@davidgeldner2167]

Don’t worry about it. I feel I may have overreacted so maybe we can meet in the middle-nobody intended to hurt anyone here.

[@scholagladiatoria]

You live and you learn.. I previously used 'Native American' and will go back to that term.

[@vernshein5430]

Axes are still used in mortal combat in the highlands of Papua New Guinea. Most are small Swedish 1 lb axe heads of good steel, kept very sharp and mounted on long hardwood handles fashioned by the users, often with the handle butts shaped pointed for use as required. I have seen axe wounds created by these axes. Most were in the back or the back of the neck/head, struck when the opponent was fleeing. As in most melee battles, the worst damage comes when one side routs and are cut down while fleeing. As a former Australian PNG patrol officer taught me, when things get bad in the highlands, look behind you because that's where the real danger will be coming at you. Words to live by.

[@greyghost1101]

During the revolution the continental congress required all soldiers to carry a tomahawk or Saber. Most carried hawks because of the multiple uses. As a half native, as kids we still were taught the use of them and other weapons. We learned so we could keep our history alive.

[@straydog8044]

I had been wondering why the tomahawk should be primarily a striking weapon while it resembles a francisca so much, when you finally brought up the sources that refer to the tomahawk as a missile weapon. Now my little world is as it's supposed to be again 😉

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

Probably why those French traders did so well in the wilds! Fitted right in with their Frankish axe chucking dna!😉

[@paultowl1963]

That was really interesting to hear those British sources. Really interesting!

[@jackdelvo2702]

Your accounts of the encounters with the Catawba and Cherokee natives occurred here in South Carolina. You have my compliments on your mostly accurate pronunciation of the native names. The knives mostly used were made from trade European kitchen blades. As stated the bow in the eastern woodlands was abandoned early but was in general use longer with the western mounted warriors as it was considered superior by them to the early single shot muzzleloaders at least a close range once the distance had been closed by their speedy mounts and their acrobatic horsemanship. They also used the tomahawk although a longer heavier version that was more effective from horseback. There is a type of martial art here in America, it’s historical accuracy is debated, using the knife and hawk togeather. This type of fighting can be seen being used by Mel Gibson in the movie “ The Patriot”. as taught to him by his arms instructor. If this type of combat did happen it was probably more than not a one on one frontier version of a European duel.

[@taccovert4]

Yep. Decently close on the pronunciations. It's pronounced more KeeOway, but still doggone close.

[@WhatIfBrigade]

I suspect the bow and arrow was less useful in the eastern forests. On the plains and out west there aren't as many trees to interfere with the path of an arrow. But the dense coastal woodlands would have had many leaves and branches to deflect arrows. Even gunshots are deflected by relatively small branches. In dense forests a firearm would be able to take a lot of shots that would be difficult to impossible with a bow.

[@Quincy_Morris]

@@WhatIfBrigade id say the reverse is true as the more likely an attack is to miss the more valuable rate of fire becomes.

[@digitallurke7710]

@@Quincy_Morris yes! The flatbed used by the 0jibwe had a shorter but powerful draw allowing it to be fired quickly especially in heavy brush

[@bloodyhell574]

Well said Jack Delvo

[@CthonicSoulChicken]

The book "North American Indigenous Warfare and Ritual Violence" describes instances 9f early Indian combat where they'd line up, throw weapons at each other, one or two guys would fight and the losing team would run away while the winners would collect the wounded to torture to death. Another excellent book is "War Before Civilization."

[@giftzwerg7345]

It sounds pretty soft Till the torturge part

[@silverjohn6037]

Matt, you may be suffering from a pre-conception when saying the tomahawks wouldn't be useful for chopping wood. Aside from the logs for the the palisade fence around the village perimeter most first nations/native American tribes in the north east didn't really follow the European practice of chopping down fully mature trees for construction material or firewood. Their long houses used smaller sapling sized rod's that could be bent into a long arched structure not unlike a military Quonset hut with tree barks being used as the covering. This size of wood wouldn't be too different from European wattle and a full weight hatchet or felling axe wouldn't really be needed. They also didn't really chop down large trees for firewood as it would have been too difficult to move the logs back to the village with out draft animals. They mostly relied on wood from saplings or branches from trees that they'd killed by girdling for their crop lands. Similar to the European practice of fascines which gave rise to knives like the civilian English bill hook. Again the tomahawk would be a useful weight for this kind of wood.

[@MarkVrem]

Especially in the New England/Michigan, and Canada area where there are a ton of pine trees. Even down south as long as it's high up on the Appalachian mountain range. Nice soft chopping.

[@strydyrhellzrydyr1345]

He is saying on an average... And it wouldn't be as good. On average, as cutting wood as a regular axe... He has always said that... Because.. It wouldn't be as good for cutting wood

[@jean-philippelangevin2757]

Speaking of misconception, I believe the Native People didn't wait for Europeans settlers to use big trees as a ressource. You mention palisades. The cover of some dwellings, like the long houses of the Iroquois, were made out of elm tree bark panels. Their canoes too. Can't use only the base of those huge trees. You can't make a canoe or snowshoes without splitting big logs. Baskets made out of ash tree. Impossible to access to those stripes without processing the whole tree. Many a tribe of the Mississipi were building there dwellings out of massive logs. Not mentionning the woodworking traditions of the West coast and so much more, this statement is plain and simply uncorrect.

[@silverjohn6037]

​@@jean-philippelangevin2757 I was mainly addressing the use of the tomahawk in the north east among the Six Nations in the period Matt was discussing because this was the main point of contact for the English colonists in the period of the 1600-1700's. And yes first nations were spread across an entire continent so there would have been different practices in different locations;). The Mississippi area not only had different construction methods but they even had a strong mound building culture at one point in their history. They also made more use of dugout canoes compared to the north east where they used birch bark construction methods. I'll link a short video showing how birch bark canoes were made in the north east but, unfortunately, they were using modern tools on this project so not a hundred per cent authentic to pre-Columbia. The North West tribes like the Haida also used plank construction which was significantly different from the style used by the Six Nations in the North East. They mainly used cedar which had a long straight grain and was easily split using wedges. Rather than cutting down the whole tree though they used a char and chip technique by charring a small section of a live tree with a burning branch then chipping away the charred section with a stone axe or adze. They'd use this above and below the section of the tree they wanted then use stone and wood wedges to split of the planks. Sorry I did a quick search on Google and couldn't find an example of this but I've seen old black and white photos of trees where they'd been doing this and the tree had lived on for years after. kzbin.info/www/bejne/oWPPln6chd51mLc

[@serpentbeyondthehedge6520]

@@jean-philippelangevin2757 I’m Haudenosaunee/Iroquois, Your right we had large longhouses built with logs for frame, An hollowed out elm/hickory dugout canoes, tomahawks are very useful tools an I still use one today, They’re were also techniques of putting a fire around the base of trees an chopping away the charred wood tho I do believe this was used with stone hawks.

[@Native_love]

My grandfather taught me that a bow and arrow were old methods of hunting that all kids learned to make. He would hunt small Prarie dogs and such for food as a kid. He said you can make a usable bow and arrow from any wood available anytime. He also said there were wild potatoes in the desert you could find and eat in an emergency. I miss seeing him shirt shirtless chopping wood every morning when he was in his late 70's and early 80's! He was from a different time!

[@emde6]

Hey Matt, great video. I've been practicing throwing tomahawks - and various other kinds of axes for that matter - for 6-7 years now, so I thought to provide my personal experience as reference. You can absolutely throw a tomahawk and hit targets with it consistently. But it has to be said, hitting with the edge at all times is almost impossible, especially in the stress of battle I imagine. What differentiates throwing any type of axe from more traditional ranged weapons like javelins and arrows is that the sharp end is not consistently aligned with the general direction of the target. When I started practicing, first I learned to "one turn" the tomahawk to land with edge on target. This means the weapon does one rotation before landing. For this I had to find the appropriate range, which varies by weapon. I have smaller and larger tomahawks and axes I throw and proper distance varies with weight and shaft length. Then I progressed to "two turning" and later "three turning" the weapon. Above three turns I find it almost impossible to land edge on target consistently. Three turning a tomahawk is roughly 13-20 paces for me depending on size. I found that by changing the power and characteristics of the throw I can vary the distance to some extent, but it's pretty much a given for the particular weapon what the distances are you can stick them into target. Of course if the tomahawk or hatchet does not hit with the edge it still transfers considerable blunt force, but it's not comparable in damage with landing with edge. For the above reasons, while I very much enjoy throwing hatchets, I find them limited as true ranged weapons. Btw, I also throw two handed wood chopping axes, those could stop a horse if you ask me.

[@brianknezevich9894]

This is wonderful for my research on a character I'm playing in a historical reenactment group - many thanks for something I never asked for!

[@davidwheadon2419]

I being from the village of Canajoharie, NY in the Central Mohawk Valley was in a group that portraid French & Indian War ( 7 years war in Europe) and American Revolutionary War British Indian department group during reenactments. We during our free time after public hours at Historical reenactment events would practice throwing tomahawks for recreation and as practice for our group. After a couple of years we could consistently cut a playing card into strips at 25 - 30 yards. We also practiced other 18th century skills like starting a fire with flint and steel, live fire musket competitions at rifle ranges, primitive camping and such. Our group was active for about 15 years in the Northeast.

[@unclebuck4er467]

I love to throw tomahawks. Palm stop slices work great so do 4 inch blocks cut from a 4'x8' post. Just bind them tightly together. 15 to 20 feet is a normal toss. They do seem to have penetration issues when we dressed pig parts up 8n linen and wool.

[@garyglonek5496]

When traveling on foot, weight is a primary concern; the tomahawk is a tool that is lighter than a hand axe. There is less metal in the head to keep the weight down and this is compensated for with a longer handle. It was always, primarily a tool.

[@RockyMountainBear]

I always thought tomahawks were differentiated by handle shape & the fit of the head. Tomahawks are friction fit, with a straight handle. The handle is much easier & faster to replace, if it is broken. Anyone who throws tomahawks knows the handle will eventually break, especially for beginners. Axes & hatchets were compression fit by fitting the head tightly from the top of the handle, and fixed in place using a wedge.

[@thomassmestead2801]

Often times in the 18th and 19th centuries, the word 'tomahawk' could mean both the classical, friction-fit handle, tomahawk, or a small, lighter weight, compression-fit axe. What today we might term a hatchet.

[@SlimRhyno]

I so enjoyed these videos on the historical accounts of tomahawks and their usage, as well as your own view on each. If you were to do more of these, you would find no argument from me!

[@kenibnanak5554]

I would hate to try to reload my Brown Bess while 10 people were throwing Tomahawks and charging me.

[@TheTrueNorth11]

I love this Tomahawk content. As a Western Canadian, it hits close to home.

[@ethanblinkhorn8396]

Go western canada!

[@ilsegno7732]

I grew up in the American Midwest. My dad taught me to shoot and to throw tomahawks and knives as kind of a natural, fun thing to do, since we lived out in the country. He didn't know anything about fighting with those items in hand, but his dad had taught him to throw them, so he taught me. I've always thought of tomahawks as primarily throwing implements, so it's interesting to see that this is surprising data for folks!

[@TheTrueNorth11]

It’s surprising because it’s largely bullshit.

[@ilsegno7732]

@@TheTrueNorth11 Throwing tomahawks for fun and sport is largely bullshit?

[@TheTrueNorth11]

@@ilsegno7732 Not what I’m saying.

[@ilsegno7732]

@@TheTrueNorth11 I dont see what you're saying then. Can you elaborate?

[@answeris4217]

@@shinobi-no-bueno I live in Quebec... Not a lot of tornadoes but man the snow

[@Adam_okaay]

I've heard that infantry often had an iron plate in their tricorn hat, I was under the impression this was done to protect from cavalry sabers, do you think tomahawks had an influence on this practice if they were so common carry? Considering the preferred striking location was the head.

[@tuerkefechi]

The secret-skull cap was worn i.e. during the battle of Killiecranke in 1689. In the aftermath one of the descriptions of the wounds soldiers got from Broadsword blows (and maybe also lochaber axes and other nasty things) that the skullcaps were smashed into their heads.

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

@@tuerkefechi some of the wounds inflicted on government soldiers by Broadswords and lochaber axes in the historical descriptions are horrendous. Interestingly the clansmen themselves didn't appear to wear any head protection beyond the bonnet (blue if you're a Jacobite). Mobility was obviously key. 150 years earlier the morion and steel bonnet was a critical part of border reiver kit, but they were almost always mounted. Tombs of highland warriors on the 12,13 and 14 C show them wearing nasal 'norman' style helmets and maille, for considerably longer than in the lowlands where plate became ubiquitous. I suspect that clan warfare by the 18th C was no longer the pitched bloodbath of the Battle of Bloody Bay, a naval engagement fought in the mid 1400s off Tobermory on Mull, fought between two factions of Clan Donald and their respective allies. By 1700s firearms, and skirmishing was more the order of the day and the ability to hit and run was critical. I should imagine that wearing armour of any type ehen running across heather isn't a great idea. We do see portraits of chiefs wearing 1600s armour until into the 1700s but latterly this is likely allegorical.

[@SungJaeUng3]

In westerns and even paintings, native americans are very often depicted as being armed with bows instead of guns. Important context to keep in mind is that the conflicts that have come to be called the Indian Wars, was fought with arms in the forests and hills, but also with words and images from american writers and artists. The narrative that tribes like the lakota and the creek were bloodthirsty savages that were standing in the way of american progress was an important part of those conflicts. That narrative, almost wholly from the perspective of the US government and US citizens, is what informs the fiction and art of the modern era. Half-naked primitives with bows and tomahawks raiding and murdering hapless caravans of settlers and homesteaders. Archeology disagrees with that image. The Battle of Little Bighorn(Greasy Grass to the natives) is an event burned in to the american psyche. Part of what doomed Custer and his men was that over half of the native force that they attacked was armed with rifles. Custer's troopers had single shot springfield rifles, and a lot of the natives had lever-action repeaters. Once they got close enough, the volume of fire the native americans were able to lay down was overwhelming in comparison to what the soldiers were capable of returning at that point. More recent archeological finds at the site confirm how heavily armed the Sitting Bull and his men were.

[@anaussie213]

Three years later an entire British column with artistry support was wiped out by spear and shield armed Zulu's at isadawana.

[@biggoldnugget]

Sorry Matt your scalp is not fit for any decent mans lodgepole

[@erichusayn]

As a kid, my favorite movie was the (Daniel Day Lewis) Last of the Mohicans. Had a dream one night I walked up upon the aftermath of that first battle scene, and was scrambling to grab all the tomahawk and knives i could carry. Was saddened to wake up without an arsenal of badass weapons...

[@watchface6836]

That's a fantastic movie.

[@erichusayn]

@@watchface6836 agreed

[@thomaszaccone3960]

I threw a tomahawk years ago (40 or so). I remember there was a formula - the Hawk should be as long as your forearm to the top of your clenched fist and weigh a certain number of ounces per inch. If you followed that formula it went through one complete spin for every x number of paces you took. If you were tossing it at a multiple of a half pace you had the blade face you when you tossed it and it hit upside down. If you used a whip like motion with your hand and aimed it by siting along the side of your head, it was damned accurate. I could split a playing card at 15 paces with the thing. It made a most awesome whoosing sound. The throwing Hawk had no projection behind the head.

[@alexdarmstaedter454]

I'm wondering if there may be some truth in the notion that Northeastern American Indians were inspired by Viking explorers and their use of axe and shield. Viking axes also had smaller and lighter heads, and there are many examples of hide shields used by these tribes, though most , being wood and leather , have not survived

[@BalrogListenMetal]

There is a First Nations martial art from Canada called Okichitaw, you should really check it out! You can see how the tomahawk is being used in warfare as well as other various weapons like the gunstock club. And yes, there is alot of throwing involved.

[@joejoelesh1197]

@18:15 I'm going to disagree with you there. I don't think you are an amateur historian. Translating history to us plebs seems to be a major source of your income. You look at primary sources, analyze them, and use the medium of KZbin (and others) to get that information out there. You receive financial compensation for this. I think you are removed from the ranks of amateurs.

[@JimmyTownmouse]

50 yards? Maybe I just need to practice more, but my experience says consistently hitting a target at 50 yards is just a pipe-hawk dream.

[@TheTrueNorth11]

At 50 yards, they would have to be thrown en masse

[@JimmyTownmouse]

@@TheTrueNorth11 That’s a valid point, but a tomahawk rotates in flight. To hit something with the blade you have to judge the distance accurately and throw consistently. With the tomahawks I usually throw and my height it is roughly 6 yards for the hawk to make a full rotation. At 50 yards it would need to spin 9 times in the air and arrive just as the blade is oriented forward at the end of what now has to be a significantly arced trajectory. Honestly I’d like to try it, but I don’t think I need to to say there are an awful lot of projectile weapons that would require less training to get more hits at that range.

[@TheTrueNorth11]

@@JimmyTownmouse I agree. All of this is why I’m HIGHLY dubious of the sources.

[@sjohnson4882]

@@TheTrueNorth11 See my reply above to Jesse Cunningham.

[@TheTrueNorth11]

@@sjohnson4882 I’m not going searching for your comment lol

[@andrewdavies5948]

Great video. Superbly researched and eye opening.

[@deadhorse1391]

Good video I made my living for many years making 18th century Knives, Axes and Tomahawks. I think of a Tomahawk as having a round eye with the handle coming down from the top with the handle friction fit Small axes were usually called a belt axe had handles that were fitted into the eye and held with a wedge. Both were probably used more as a tool then a weapon though of course both could be used as a weapon. When you see things like spike axes or spike tomahawks they were more a weapon. Many of the accounts of Indians using tomahawks are where they drew them by surprise and attacked As to throwing tomahawks, I used to be rather good at it and sold them to others that were very good. One thing you have to remember how important it is that your target has to be at a certain range just 5 ft off will cause a bounce. I can see Indians and others throwing tomahawks in camp as a “sport” but less so in battle. Don’t forget if you have one tomahawk and you throw it you are then unarmed. Is like knife throwing I think in hand to hand fighting a tomahawk would have been a very effective weapon

[@sjohnson4882]

Another factor that you will probably recall is that the length of the handle changes the turn radius and therefore will change the distance of the throw. So, always use a tomahawk with the same handle length. Unless you know how to adjust the throw to compensate. After many years of throwing I have never learned to do that effectively.

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

Do you still make them?

[@benjaminstevens4468]

“Metric system schmectrick system, my car gets 5 rods to the hogs head… and THAT’s how I LIKES IT!.”

[@danielschneider1504]

As an American who spent 20-odd years studying the colonial period, I'd say that in the first account you read, the term 'axe' was used to refer to a 2-handed, wood-chopping tool, while 'tomahawk' would mean a one-handed tool/weapon.

[@rook9714]

As someone who uses a small hatchet almost daily for work as well as in the woods for craft, I would absolutely feel comfortable using that tomahawk you are holding (or one in that style) for the purpose

[@daemonharper3928]

Yes, me too - I don't see an issue using that as a tool at all - slightly confused as to why it wouldn't do double duties?

[@neoaliphant]

completely agree, lots of bushcrafters use tomahawks, i think culturely more people in US just because of prevalence, but popular here in UK, from a practical purpose its lightweight for hiking purposes...

[@neoaliphant]

Also we need to appreciate that Matt is coming at this from military perspective, his area of expertise, not from bushcraft perspective. I think if a bushcrafter channel did a video on this subject, would be a bit different.

[@rook9714]

@@neoaliphant I think Matt is also thinking about the tool use of axes being for felling trees and splitting wood for a fire - which I absolutely wouldn't use this for (except cutting saplings or coppices to work green perhaps) - rather than woodcraft and carving or as a utility tool for butchering game and so on. But it's worth noting that Indigenous peoples are probably not cutting down very large trees and splitting them for firewood (or indeed needing to split their firewood at all, potentially), unlike the settlers who are. One advantage of tomahawks is that you can remove the head and use them in the hand, which is useful for some specific tasks in game processing, for instance.

[@rook9714]

But the idea of an item which works both as a tool and as a weapon, but with specialized 'military' versions around for those who need them, is quite common historically - for example, saxes, or the leuku. If I had a choice i would choose a tomahawk with a bit more mass in the head, but those existed, and one of this size would still be perfectly fine. The hammer - if it was hardened - would also be more useful than a regular poll (which will deform) for driving nails (which I always carry) in the bush, allowing it to do a useful double duty (some Finnish axes have a hardened piece of steel forge welded onto the pill for this reason) though I am unaware of the Indigenous use of metal nails in this period.

[@ethanspearman3842]

On the tomahawk topic, I’d be interested to see a comparison between other European types of axes…they particularly remind me of some of the smaller Migration/Frankish period fighting axes, if perhaps a little smaller.

[@emmitstewart1921]

I would like to see you learn to use the tomahawk you now own and give us your opinions on it after using it for a while. I wonder if there are any teachers of tomahawk use in the UK. I would not be surprised if there were some.

[@davidchituras5775]

I read some years ago about a man Simon Kenton, who was instrumental in the settlement of Kentucky. Very interesting life. At one time he did get hit with the pipe end of a tomahawk and he had a quarter size piece of his skull knocked in. The rest of that incident is quite exciting. He also lost most of his properties by fraudulent legal claims by neighbors, as he was illiterate it was easy. Analogous to some of the dealings he'd helped come about with the natives I suppose. Anyway he is worth looking into if one has the time, as some digging leads to some fascinating accounts. I love the this channel, Cheers Matt.

[@morriganmhor5078]

It is not only about Europeans and natives, but also natives vs natives. For instance, Hopi in the south was especially pleased when some Dené tribes (later Apache and Navaho) came from the northeast and began stealing their land and cattle. It´s definitively proved that Indians waged wars long before Europeans came and also after that. There exists nice Keeley´s book "Wars before civilization". I recommend you to read it.

[@davidchituras5775]

@@morriganmhor5078 I agree. The Navaho are still battling in court getting hopi lands. People are people. I was merely pointing out that Simon Kenton got screwed by the system, a system he was instrumental in bringing to a region. It is just ironic. I'm aware of the archeology of pre colonial America. As well as many native American fudes that are still smoldering today. But there are excellent accounts of tomahawks being used as weapons and sometimes as tools when researching Simon Kenton. That's why I brought him up. I apologize for my long-winded reply.

[@morriganmhor5078]

@@davidchituras5775 Thank you for factual reply. Btw, do you know if tomahawks were used also in the south or if those were northeastern speciality?

[@davidchituras5775]

@@morriganmhor5078 tomahawks were for sure used by Southern tribes. Seminole, Cree, Cherokee etc. I'd have to do more research if I wanted to get an actual range of use. It was fairly wide spread by the early 1800s in North America. Far northern peoples and far southern peoples like the Oaxaca I don't think ever adopted its use to my knowledge. But I'm getting into guesswork now. So I'll shut up.

[@morriganmhor5078]

@@davidchituras5775 In any case, thank you very much.

[@draven86]

Nice video Mister Easton but don't have questions about weapons at the moment but i have a question about communication on the battlefield in the early ages of firearms and cannons. How we're soldiers in the early ages of firearms able to communicate to each other and how did they protect their ears on the battlefield?

[@deathbyastonishment7930]

I’m not certain about communications, but flags and trumpets or bugles seem like a fair guess? About ear protection I do know though, they did not protect their ears. Soldiers then (just like many soldiers now) just had to put up with hearing damage.

[@kennyredgrass9318]

The one question I would have is if they ever give a description on how they were thrown. Growing up we threw hawks on the rez during the summer, Jim & Little taught us to throw them with the blade facing the rear, Cody (Jim's son) was the older cool kid and he used to throw them this way as well and mentioned that the hawks would bounce and still stick if thrown this way

[@ericstevens8660]

ON JUNE 25TH 1876 IM SURE TOMAHAWKS WERE USED QUITE A LOT (AND BY THE WAY,) IM SORRY OUR PEOPLES BEUTIFUL VICTORY WAS SO SHORT LIVED😥

[@dorianwolf2198]

@@ericstevens8660 me pal white eyes won again haha

[@squatch2461]

@scholagladiatoria, Thanks for another great video. Regarding the use of hatchets vs tomahawks by those who were not Native Americans. Standing Orders Roger's Rangers, #2 Have your musket clean as a whistle, hatchet scoured, sixty rounds powder and ball, and be ready to march at a minute’s warning. #19 Let the enemy come till he's almost close enough to touch, then let him have it and jump out and finish him up with your hatchet.

[@sjohnson4882]

If you look on the internet, you can see an original drawing of how Roger's Ranger's were made. They were referred to as "Tomahawks". I will look it up as soon as I am able.

[@squatch2461]

@@sjohnson4882 I am no expert. I have seen a painting, although I do not know when it was done, that purports to show a member of Rogers Rangers holding something that looks a lot more like a boarding ax or combat purposed hatchet than a tomahawk. I am definitely not advocating one way or the other. My guess is the terms were used interchangeably or inconsistently.

[@sjohnson4882]

@@squatch2461 Yes the tomahawk I am referring to has a spike opposed to the blade.

[@sjohnson4882]

Having trouble finding a copy of that drawing.

[@mattmoraworld]

Absolutely love these historical accounts! More of that please! :) I already have an idea for a video where I can use all this :D

[@bigthunderjohnson7595]

The thing about terminology is a tough one. All small handled tools were called hammers. The tomahawk, was reffered to by my people as apáksa'tsisa (tool for hitting) an axe was Káksaakin, most likely referring to European axes.

[@stormiewutzke4190]

Is there any indication that they carried more than one tomahawk? If you come across anything about knife use during the time it would be interesting to hear about as well. I have to say I'm loving this series. Something like a tomahawk would be very useful in the woods. It would cut green wood 3-4" with no problem and if their knives were large it may have actually been easier to dress a deer than with a large knife. I imagine they would use one for small game as well although I guess they might even go for deer if they were so good at hitting the head. I know they used sticks for rabbits and other small game and it was probably easy to transition if there was already a tradition of throwing sticks.

[@thomassmestead2801]

Very often, more than one 'hawk was carried into combat situations, by both Indians and whites, in the 18th and 19th centuries. And yes, they can be used to do woodcraft in the wilderness, including the skinning out of game. It can be used for light woodcutting, including removing the head, and binding it to a wooden handle, used as an adze. One would have to be quite adept with a tomahawk to bring down deer by throwing a 'hawk at them. Tomahawks were thrown in combat, and in the 19th century, the Rocky Mountain beaver trappers, (known as 'mountain men' ) used to, (and reenactors in the present) had competitions at rendezvous, amongst themselves.

[@Lucius1958]

As for the abandonment of the bow and arrow in favor of firearms: this may have been due to the improvement of available firearms in the 18th century. In the 16th/17th century, there are accounts of European guns being out-performed by native arrows: in one instance, Capt. John Smith deliberately destroyed his pistol, rather than admit that it was not as potent a weapon as reputed...

[@rns7426]

Research Lewis Wetzel great stories of combat there. Lots of stories in the Appalachian region during colonial and post colonial period. This is where the bulk majority of Indian fighting with tomahawk and musket occurred. Both colonials and Indians fighting much the same way. Particularly the Scotch Irish Americans (yes scotch, that’s what they have always called themselves). Plains Indian wars were much later and out west. That was a different kind of combat.

[@adreabrooks11]

I'd be interested to know what (if any) ties these news correspondents had with the Hudson's Bay Company. If they did, it might go a way toward explaining the terminology. I live in rural Ontario (Canada), with the Alleghany River close enough nearby that I hear it mentioned on the radio - and these terms are still in use (among those who still regularly use axes anyway) in a fairly fixed manner. Like any good corporation, the HBC had done studies on the needs of its customers - both settlers and natives - and, by this era, it was well accustomed to importing goods from Europe to suit customer demands. For native peoples, voyageurs (fur traders travelling deep into the bush) and other far-travelling types, "tomahawks" (like the one you hold in this video) were the favoured commodity. These were multi-purpose items, suitable for use as weapons, tools for light bushcraft and, in some cases, smoking pipes (strange but true) - but the focus was, as you say, on their weapon application. For settlers, a "hatchet" - a one-handed tool which is used much like a machete, for clearing small brush, barking logs and so on - was the trade item of choice. Indeed, there remains today a style of tool, somewhat midway between a felling axe and a modern camping hatchet, which is known as a Hudson's Bay axe. These were your typical "house & home" tool for folk who needed to process kindling, make a stool or put up a wattle chicken-fence. An "axe," by contrast, describes a larger, two-handed tool - for heavy work like felling trees, splitting large firewood and so on. These would go by labels like "felling axe," "forest axe" and so on. Of course, "axe" is a very broad term - but I imagine, in the story of the Alleghany native attacking with a "tomahawk" and the settler attacking with an "axe" referred to the weapon and the two-handed splitter, respectively. If someone in the region of Southern Ontario or Upstate New York told me this tale, I wouldn't need clarification that this was their meaning. Similarly, the distinction remains between "hatchet" and "tomahawk" (like the difference between "knife" and "dagger"). As for the matter of throwing: we still do that too. Get a bunch of dudes (especially young ones with more bravado than self-preservation) together in the woods with axes, and it's only a matter of time - even today - before one of them flings a blade into a log, and someone else tries to do it better. I know a good many "Indians," and plenty of white folks too, who have "taken their exercise" in such a manner. Thankfully, there are a lot fewer people chucking them into skulls these days - but there are still competitions of varying formality. I myself am just a camper who occasionally had too much time on my hands, but I can make a fair go of burying my hatchet in a log from 20 feet away. I have no doubt that someone who hunted for their sustenance, using a weapon-specific tomahawk regularly for fowling and other small game acquisition, might well be able to manage (and exceed) the levels of marksmanship described in these accounts.

[@michaelwaggy6015]

I think you need to consider the Tomahawk as a bit of a multi-function tool, a Swiss-army-knife of the American frontier. They were weapons, yes, missile weapons, yes. But it was also everything else your musket or knife wasn’t. Need to drive a stake? Build a fish trap? Split small wood for a camp? Scrape a hide? Your tomahawk. Yes there are better axes and tools for those jobs, but try hiking hundreds of miles across the wild Appalachians in buckskin shoes with multiple axes, hammers and blades in tow. Pioneers used the versatile tomahawk, or hatchet, while exploring and went back east for “supplies”, including more specialized tools, when they found a place for a camp or homestead. I personally carry one hiking/camping to this day, not as a weapon, but as a utilitarian tool, that by the way, I could easily toss into a target a dozen yards away… bonus.

[@ComancheWarrior63]

For the sake of hopefully ending the heated discussions I've read in chat. The term "Indian" is only offensive to narrow minded people. We actually refer to ourselves as a people by "First Nations". Many tribes don't even know their actual name. The name they use is often a name that was used by a neighboring tribe. When the settlers wanted to know the name of a tribe they usually asked a neighboring tribe. This often resulted in the people becoming known by the name their neighbors used rather than their actual name. Since most First Nations people don't even know their actual name they shouldn't be offended when others don't know. Most of my own people call themselves Cherokee when our real name is Tsalagi. The settlers asked our neighbors what we were called and they gave them the name they used for us which translates to "people of another language". Native American applies to anyone born in America. You can call me any of the commonly used terms but I actually prefer to simply be called "friend"

[@danhaywood5696]

We should stop changing history. However people were normally regularly termed historically, is the proper term. It's like hiding away or destroying statue's or paintings which depict how things actually were, say like Roosevelt on a horse, with a black man and and an Indian both on foot. If that's how it actually was, and since Roosevelt was not a slave holder, did not fight indians, was not a Southern secessionist pro slavery leader, such is simply an accurate historical account. Now if they were all actually mounted, then such is not the case. If we continue on changing terms and attacking historical artifacts and accounts, then we will erase the true essence and ability to learn of and from history. Then it can be misconstrued to suit whatever political environment, yet the actual history itself cannot be changed. Imagine if the accounts you just referenced were altered politically or disappeared? This knowledge would be lost. A lot of Americans can see no use or reason for such knowledge beyond politics, for which the actual truth and lessons are generally perverted. However the real lessons of history are the secret to evolving our future by learning from mistakes and building upon advancement. In today's world the Pike or Tomahawk may be seen as absurdly ineffective against modern weapons, yet those can be accessed and supplied and kept functional, on a far greater scale, and for longer with no ammo supply. They are simple and easy to maintenance. I can step out into the wood behind my apartment and in a few hours have made a tomahawk and blowgun. In a day I could make a survival bow and arrows, and those materials cannot be easily denied, and require zero resupply. The weaponry choices of the North American Indians in their fight for survival against the then modern army's of the British and Americans as over time, is extremely interesting a relevant reality of what they had to deal with and how they did so. It's very interesting and telling that the British actually adopted such defense techniques from the Indians somewhat, exporting to England for common defense against the the French. Obviously they could not at time supply firearms to all their citizens as militia, but found that Indian and Naval weaponry could be adopted and implemented against the firearms of the time. Even in the modern world, a citizenry armed with durable, simple Pikes and Tomahawks, augmenting available firearms, could prevail against the tyranny of their own government, if so determined over time perhaps. I have often wondered the truth and efficacy of throwing tomahawks in battle, and thanks to your revelations of these available and accurate historical accounts, I am now far better informed. So if only inaccurate politically correct paintings and statue's, are allowed henceforth, then of course those historical references will be useless except as modern propaganda. I'm speaking of those with legitimate reference to history, not monuments. If historical terminology is altered or suppressed and attacked, then history becomes manipulated and false, or it's essence unobtainable, it's true lessons lost to propaganda. It's important to see the truth of historical reality and understand such in order to avoid the mistakes of the past by which so many people suffered and died, or were enslaved. I have no animosity towards the senses of victimized people, but erasing and changing and confusing accurate or genuine historical references, can benefit only the oppressor, as they nor their actions can be properly recognized for the danger they are.

[@1südtiroltechnik]

We in german still say "Indianer" to the american Indians. The Word police of today should be quiet!

[@pelewads]

I find the recommendations for its adoption, to be particularly fascinating. I remember reading, many years ago, that tomahawks were used by the French during the Napoleonic Wars. Used by shock troops, they would be thrown en masse, during a charge. Again, this was years ago. And I have no idea, as to the accuracy of this claim. I would love to know if anyone else has heard this.

[@erichneumann3856]

That would make a ton of sense. Once heard France was name after facisca axes. A " vikeing" throwing hawk. They supposedly used it in mass against cavalry and pike men.

[@MacDorsai]

I don't know if I had ever suggested this topic to you in the past or merely thought about doing it. I am very pleased with this video as well as your prior videos and you've exceeded all my expectations. I look forward to more, including (I hope) video of you practicing your throwing and "fastening" your tomahawk to a Frenchman's (facsimile) head. Though I suggest you get some cheaper tomahawks for the practice. Cold Steel makes some more affordable examples in a size similar to yours and if they are broken, won't be a great loss.

[@Krieguerre]

02:28 Not "Indians", native North Americans. Indians are in Asia.

[@Fitzwewels]

Could you find anything about the use of brass knuckles, who used them, and how they were viewed culturally?

[@Spielkalb-von-Sparta]

*Next up:* Matt throwing his tomahawk into a wooden head with a French wig.

[@KroM234]

Partially off topic but since you mention it in the video: "fusil" (French word) translates into English as "rifle" but a "fusil" in French doesn't necessarly designates a rifled barrel. Fusil is used since the use of the flintlock or doglock, and thus mostly refer to the ignition mechanism rather than the bore. Most of the time during this period, a fusil designates a smoothbore. In addition, in North America and on the Frontier, Natives and settlers alike prefered by far to use smoothbore muskets up to well into the 19th century. Because this is way more versatile of a weapon than a rifle. The shooting would occur at less than 100 yards anyway, distance under which the benefits of the rifling still shooting roundball is limited. A smoothbore allows to reload way faster than a rifled musket, and finally allows you to shoot buck and ball, which was a must for hunting certain small game or home defense, or just for its stopping power.

[@JCOwens-zq6fd]

Im half Shoshone & we had a few different types. Though the one we brought from our homeland was more like some of the european bronze style w/ forward facing point on rather than a standard chopping head. Sort of like a short spear w/ the tip bent at 90°.

[@Vespasian705]

Thats the spontoon style he mentions at the start

[@UnfortunateDesert]

As someone interested in the subject at hand and also lives in the American west I'd like to mention a few points: The folks (indigenous or European) using these tools were pretty mobile and self reliant compared to us modern people and weight and encumbrance would have been a bigger factor then, regardless if one was on foot or on horseback. A full size ax is fine in town or village, but in the bush is a fair bit over kill. A tomahawk sized hatchet would be a perfect compromise for someone who needed to keep moving in a hostile environment who needed to split the difference between stealth and speed, versus being well armed and slow. the tapered eye of a tomahawk head allows it to be re-hafted in the field with no special tools or to be un-hafted temporarily to use in specialized tasks like food processing and skinning , and adding a hammer , spike, or pipe, to the device added even more functionality (a hammer having many more uses than merely driving metal nails). The tomahawks use in combat is pretty obvious when considered in a range- hierarchy scale; i.e if you have a gun (or bow) , a tomahawk, and knife to chose from, and want to inflict the most damage from as far as possible, the missile weapon stays in use while the distances close and its use becomes impractical, and then the hafted weapon (tomahawk) gets its chance( whether thrown or swung...), and when one is too close in to swing it any more one would have to engage with knives ( or attack unarmed.) Its just simple practicality, tomahawks were used by Americans throughout the settlement period, (14th through 20th) because it was the best all around tool/ weapon that was simple enough to be cared for in the field, and light enough to not add undue weight for its utility to a outdoorsman's kit ( that was assuredly NOT made of aluminum, nylon, kevlar, and carbon fiber...;)... At least that's my take on it.... YMMV...

[@jonathanferguson1211]

Fuzil and rifle are most definitely not the same in English at this period Matt. A fusil or fuzil was originally a flintlock musket, then by this time, a lightweight musket - the military equivalent of the fowling piece. Here, they likely did mean civilian fowlers.

[@toddzircher6168]

Amazing stuff, thank you for researching this.

[@beowulfshaeffer8444]

My personal theory, which could be wrong, is that "hatchet" more often refers to a larger head and a shorter haft while "tomahawk" more often refers to a small head on a longer haft.

[@christopherfisher128]

From what I've noticed about museum pieces I've seen & from records regarding inventory & trade goods of the period, typical to Long-hunters & trappers, the standard knives of the day were very long & thin which made excellent tools for cutting, but poor weapons so the repeated mention of knives being primarily for scalping, makes a lot of sense and completes the picture. Thanks for taking the time Matt, always enjoy.

[@b.h.abbott-motley2427]

A significant number of Comanche warriors retained bows for cavalry even into the age of the revolver, despite having some access to firearms. By most accounts, it was a combination of the difficulty of consistently trading for enough ammunition & the bow's advantages for mounted use that caused them to use it for so long. Comanche archery impressed. "Under forty yards," John "Rip" Ford wrote in 1885 in a piece about facing Comanche warriors, "the six-shooter has little advantage over the bow." It's fascinating that throwing axes returned to the European military toolbox centuries after the francisca's decline & good while after hurlbats fell out of use.

[@dwightehowell8179]

I'm more than confident that tomahawks were commonly use for camp chores and trapping chores where stakes were being cut. Would a hatchet have been better? Most likely but hawks are low mass to carry and a lot of people spent a lot of time on their own two feet. Axes and saws were better choices for settlers. I will note that many smith made tomahawks were just small strap axes. They may have even been made of iron with a steel insert for the cutting edge. Many of the men on the Lewis & Clark expedition were carrying pipe tomahawks and it's a given they used them both as tools and pipes because when they ran out of tobacco they split the handles and chewed the tube trying to get some nicotine.

[@scotopicvision]

I’m surprised you didn’t mention roberts rangers….lots of info and tomahawks are written in his fighting treatise that are still used by the special forces today

[@meatpilot]

I think we’d all love to hear some period sourced stories of kuhkri or Bowie knife use

[@randylopez5941]

I'm Chiricahua Apache. I grew up throwing tomahawks at wooden targets with my family and friends. These games make one very accurate at using a tomahawk. It's a very dangerous weapon in the right hands.

[@TheFlyguywill]

Excellent video, Matt! As one with a history degree, I really appreciate your efficient research using primary sources. Nothing better to gain proper perspective and context!

[@joeupton99]

Are tomahawks good weapons? /wink

[@neoaliphant]

Forget Covid, riots, global warfare, the most upsetting thing to happen in recent memory.....Is Matt saying that knives werent dual wielded with tomahawks....the teenage me has died pitifully....

[@shadowphoenix8962]

That maybe the most interesting talk I've seen,very surprising info. Thank you.

[@strydyrhellzrydyr1345]

It sounds like he was a bit over exaggerated about that 50 yard story... Lol.. but I believe the rest

[@lenb9506]

Fun fact, these were introduced to North America by an Irishman, Tom O'Hawk,

[@speakupriseup4549]

I absolutely love primary source historical accounts, they give a much more realistic and more likely description of events than any modern pc reinterpretation.

[@dimesonhiseyes9134]

As an Indian, the feather kind not the dot kind, these videos hold a special place in my heart. The tomahawk is very much my people's weapon and very much an American weapon.

[@barnettmcgowan8978]

I've loved both of these videos and I like your methodology. I've grown up in the US and I've loved the Tomahawk and it's history since childhood. I've learned a lot more nuance and context. Thanks.

[@WateringCan]

Is it worth considering that there is an element of sensationalism in some of these accounts, and a bit of a "stock character" or archetype for the Natives emerging? The ubiquity in description can certainly be argued as evidence for there actually being a consistent or regularly observed trend but could also just be "the idea of the Indian" in the mind of the British press emerging. Maybe readers wanted to hear about tomahawks is essentially what I'm wondering. The account you brought up that praised the tomahawk as a potential militia weapon might be indicative of that kind of romanticism... Regardless, great video as always.

[@scholagladiatoria]

Of course, all historical sources must be critically viewed - I spent some time discussing this in the first video, so I thought it best not to repeat myself in Part 2.

[@WateringCan]

@@scholagladiatoria Oh, I did watch that but I must have forgotten, I'll have to give it another watch.

[@raducuflorin5234]

With all due respect, I watched some of your content over time and I couldn't help but notice that you TALK a lot for an "instructor". I've never seen an instructor teaching 99.99% of lessons sitting with it's butt in a chair. Somehow in a funny way most of your content reminds me of Steven Seagal 😂 No hate here, just a piece of constructive criticism. I'm sure there are a lot here that want to see you move more and speak less. Cheers!

[@CaptRons18thcentury]

Most colonial militia acts specify, along with fire arms and other gear require a cutting weapon, a bayonet, if fire lock is not able to attach a bayonet, sword or cutlass, or knife and tomahawk… amongst some tribes the scalping knife is only used for scalping and fighting, because of the contact with human blood, would not be used for food preparation or menial tasks, amongst some tribes… great video…

[@ThomasRonnberg]

i just got myself a frontier hawk tomahawk from cold steel and use it for all my wood chopping and work around the farm, it's so light and easy to carry around on my belt. But it is true that it's not ideal for splitting logs, it still does the job very well.

[@YouTubeIsRunByMarxists]

I loves me a good tomahawk.

[@deathbyastonishment7930]

Historical accounts of weapon use are my favourite videos you make

[@PilgrimBangs]

I think that the head target by native peoples was also due to developed martial arts of generations of fighting with skull cracker war clubs. They certainly had trained warriors and their own martial arts. The iron tomahawk was relatively new, and their hand to hand fighting traditions would've been based upon bludgeoning weapons vs cutting weapons. Thus even with the iron tomahawk target would remain the head. IDK I'm not a historical anthropologist. I just watch Matt's videos.

[@CthonicSoulChicken]

There is no evidence of any kind of "martial art" at all. There are guys who will say "this is how I was trained by my elders" but then they also happen to have trained extensively in kali or something similar before ever claiming to train "indigenous martial arts."

[@deathbyastonishment7930]

@@CthonicSoulChicken The source in this video mentioning “exercise” involving throwing the tomahawk is already evidence of a martial art of some kind.

[@CthonicSoulChicken]

@@deathbyastonishment7930 No it isn't. It's evidence they would practice throwing them. Either as a martial exercise or as a game, it hardly qualifies as a "martial art." There was no system of fighting techniques as taught by Indians. If there was, it was never recorded, never witnessed and never passed down.

[@ethanblinkhorn8396]

would love to see you do a fight review from the revenant, last of the mohichans and frontier.

[@Jmam1509]

I am from Texas and took up throwing tomahawks as a kid. They are (in my opinion) the perfect weapon for raiding and the best hand to hand weapon for sneaking up on a person with a firearm (to kill them silently) because they could take someone down instantly with a blow to the head and can be thrown if per say said person turns around and tries to shoot you before you completely closed the gap to hand to hand range. I think they could also have been tools and are a superior tool to a hatchet when you have to travel a lot (like backpacking). Its twice the work with a tomahawk but half the weight. The one thing that is a liability when throwing is that you can not only be trained to throw them but also to catch them. I don't think this would have made it into newspapers cause European settlers were probably not practicing to catch tomahawks. But I was taught and played a native American stick game with other boys where we would stand in a circle and throw the stick at each other that was colored black on one side (aka the blade side) and left bare wood on the other end (aka the handle side). If you caught the wrong end, missed the catch, or made the stick spin more than twice when you threw it you were out of the game. (FYI, most tomahawk throws don't spin more than twice either)

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

The Scots Magazine is still published. The oldest magazine still being published. Sonce 1734.

[@davidhawley3337]

That was before my time but *think* I would have chosen a sabre or broadsword or backsword or cutlass over a tomahawk for hand-to-hand combat. Of course they wouldn't be as good for throwing. I might have tucked a tomahawk into my belt as well if I had space for it. Not so much for fighting or throwing as for general utility. But I admit I'm speculating. Experience might change my mind.

[@sjohnson4882]

I agree but a tomahawk would be a better weapon and tool that was relatively light. I have several and some are pretty light and some are fairly heavy. I occasionally roam in the mountains (on private property)and shoot at tree stumps with my bow. I much prefer the lighter ones for that.

[@jackdelvo2702]

The tomahawk was not to be used at anything more than arms length unless thrown. If thrown you would be beyond the reach of a sword. Normally the enemy would be charged at a dead run and the attacker be inside the useful striking area of a sword blade before it could be used. At that point only the pummel of the sword would be of much use but by then the hawk or the knife would have found its mark.

[@brooklynwolfbear]

I enjoyed your episodes on the tomahawk greatly. I would like to get your expertise on it's use in the 19th and 20th century. I would also like to see more on the Bowie knife in the 19th and 20th century. Particula rly it's roll in combat.

[@acethesupervillain348]

It'd be interesting to see something like this for cutlasses, I think what most people see or think of cutlasses is complete fantasy.

[@everythingisinfinite4602]

"BRITISH HOME DEFENSE" Ive never laughed so hard in my life. Owww is dat pepper spray???? You criminal how dare you!!!!

[@Cocarat206]

When I was studying colonial history at Uni, I was also pretty surprised how Native tribes with generations of contact with western traders generally gave up their bow and arrow outside of hunting and began fighting solely with muskets as soon as they had the equipment to do so. I'd have guessed there would be some advantage to the quicker firing rate but this doesn't seem to be as much of a concern as acquiring what was seen as longer range, more impressive weapons that came with a psychological effect to people still unfamiliar with them.

[@angbandsbane]

Video: "Most of these accounts were originally taken from American newspapers." Me: "Apaches hate him. These 10 easy tomahawk tricks the plains people don't want you to know." --New Amsterdam Times "Tomahawks' problematic connection to Wendigo supremacists." --Virtue Media. "Our top 10 pipe tomahawks of 1723." --Potomac Swamp Post Yep, that checks out.

[@richardcooke7629]

Sorry but you do not have the original film taken in Canada of a mohawk with a tomahawk killing a guy with a rifle pointed at him by jumping and rolling and coming up and hit in the back of the head it's authentic I've been looking for it you advertise all this stuff but you're in England I guess talking I want to see the original film again I guess I have to go to Canada to get it KZbin does not have it tomahawk the guy rolls and kills him with the tomahawk from the back it takes about 20 seconds I want to see each other and as the encounter starts. real authentic. Not talk real film. KZbin you don't have the film, too f****** bad. R.C.

[@Ve-suvius]

When talking about the Indian and their tomahawks, the name Low Dog comes to mind. Very strong Indian vibes this man had. Strong charisma. Killed two men in a battle at age 14. Those Indians were also extremely skilled with bow and arow. The kids also killed adult whites with them. And don't underestimate the usefulness of the tomahawk when chopping wood or as a general tool. ZEUKI1 has quite few video's on using his CS tomahawks. And a Russian guy called Александр Бушкрафт has quite a few video's on KZbin on the use of tomahawks as well. Cold Steel, CRKT etc. He's skilled with them. Good chopper. I'm a fan of the Fiskars myself. Modern tools for me 😉, the handles are extremely tough. No loosening of the head either.

[@delphinazizumbo8674]

there's NO SUCH THING as an "American Indian" "Indians" live in India just because Columbus didn't know where he was, and he needed to tell his creditors that he was successful, he called the natives on Hispaniola "Indians" calling a native American "Indian" is like calling a black person "n^^^^r"