who made these?

Picrel are usually represented as native weapons.
I don't believe any of the south/north American natives developed metallurgy to the point where they could build iron or steel axe heads. So who the hell made these, and why are they considered native American symbols?

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That but stone.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They were tools of the frontiersman back in the day and some of the first weapons/tools ever traded. Eventually the Natives liked their usefulness so much that they were considered prized possessions, very useful both as a tool and weapon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I got to thinking about it because I kinda want a hammer axe thing.

      That but stone.

      Strangely I can't find much about the stone ones besides some etsy and ebay sellers peddling BS.
      Not even looking up museum websites find much. Most look like just a rock tied to a stick with some leather strips.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        R(n)iggers axe

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        while that's not a tomahawk per se, it does look to probably be an archaic hafted tool of some sort in poor condition
        probably more of a heavy wood axe from c.2000 years ago as opposed to a battle weapon

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They don't have to made them, they can just trade with Europeans.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How did they cook before they got iron kettles from the Europeans? I can't imagine cooking in a shallow, hollowed out stone

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A lot of their food was based on roasting, smoking, drying and in the case of fruits/vegetables, just straight up eating raw. If they needed something boiled they'd use animal stomach and heated stones

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They were tools of the frontiersman back in the day and some of the first weapons/tools ever traded. Eventually the Natives liked their usefulness so much that they were considered prized possessions, very useful both as a tool and weapon.

        >t.Chippewa btw

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          do tribes prefer the term native american, native or indian
          I remember reading somewhere that some prefer the term "indian" and were a little miffed at the push to "native american" as they felt the push came mostly from the outside, and was thud another example of outsiders pushing something onto them

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Indian is a placeholder word the whites used because it was just easier for them. Any Native person who unironically refers to themself as Indian is C O L O N I Z E D as fuck.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              yeah I knew that already; so what do they prefer?
              Obviously the ideal is to actually address them by tribe, but it isn't practical to expect someone to know the tribes or peoples outside of their local region, or even within the region, for example in WA
              "Chehalis, Colville, Cowlitz, Hoh, Jamestown S’Klallam, Kalispel, Lower Elwha Klallam, Lummi, Makah, Muckleshoot, Nisqually, Nooksack, Port Gamble S’Klallam, Puyallup, Quileute, Quinault, Samish, Sauk-Suiattle, Shoalwater Bay, Skokomish, Snoqualmie, Spokane, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish, Suquamish, Swinomish, Tulalip, Upper Skagit, and Yakama. ALA would also like to recognize Duwamish, Wanapum, and Chinook, these tribes are not recognized by the U.S. federal government but have had a long history in present-day Washington."

              Of those off the top of my head I could name the Duwamish, Muckleshoot, Snoqualmie and Yakima, while I swear the Snohomish was a tribe.

              These days the general push is towards tribe or band self-ID, Native American, Indian, and First Peoples are all OK according to my NDN friends, but red man and injun are right out the window

              so I assume the safe bet would be First people

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                First Nations, Indigineous, aboriginal

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            These days the general push is towards tribe or band self-ID, Native American, Indian, and First Peoples are all OK according to my NDN friends, but red man and injun are right out the window

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Indian is a placeholder word the whites used because it was just easier for them. Any Native person who unironically refers to themself as Indian is C O L O N I Z E D as fuck.

            These days the general push is towards tribe or band self-ID, Native American, Indian, and First Peoples are all OK according to my NDN friends, but red man and injun are right out the window

            Native American is no longer the academic/politically correct term since it brings up connotations of the nativist movements of the 1800s (white Americans calling themselves natives in comparison to white immigrants). As strange as it may sound the academic PC term is now American Indian.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous
          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Indian is a placeholder word the whites used because it was just easier for them. Any Native person who unironically refers to themself as Indian is C O L O N I Z E D as fuck.

            I never understood why Indian even stuck around as a term for Native Americans
            not even from a PC perspective but contextually
            >hey so I took a look around and it turns out this is not South East Asia
            >oh shit really?
            >yeah in fact we aren't anywhere close to the Indies
            >wow we sure did goof on that one lmao whoops
            >so since we aren't in the Indies should we stop calling the locals "indians"?
            >nah they still indians

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Clay pots

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      leather pots. won't burn until the water is all boiled away,
      you put the water in the pot, get a couple of smoking hot rocks and drop em in there, then add your food. Works a treat, apparently and as a bonus any ash on the stones will help nixtamalize corn if if its in there

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Learned this in the Boy Scouts, even though I was also an Indian Guide (we never did it). The troop leaders in my area all knew about it, because some of them also participated in the Indian Guides. We used chunks of cleaned limestone and a steel pot instead of a skin. It was supposed to be a way to make corn & grains more nutritious to eat. I'd completely forgotten the word "nixtamalization." I vaguely recall "tamalli/tamale" and hominy discussions related to the project.

        Preppers & the prepper-curious should pay close attention to this simple process, and have supplies in place for it when SHTF. It can greatly extend the usefulness of a critical part of your food supply instead of crapping out all sorts of nutrients your body could be using.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixtamalization

        >The process of nixtamalization was first developed in Mesoamerica, where maize was originally cultivated. There is no precise date when the technology was developed, but the earliest evidence of nixtamalization is found in Guatemala's southern coast, with equipment dating from 1200–1500 BC.

        >How nixtamalization was discovered is not known, but one possibility may have been through the use of hot stones (see Pot boiler) to boil corn in early cultures which did not have cooking vessels robust enough to put directly on fire or coals. In limestone regions like those in Guatemala and southern Mexico, heated chunks of limestone would naturally be used, and experiments show that hot limestone makes the cooking water sufficiently alkaline to cause nixtamalization. Archaeological evidence supporting this possibility has been found in southern Utah, United States.

        >The Aztec and Mayan civilizations developed nixtamalization using slaked lime (calcium hydroxide) and lye (potassium hydroxide) to create alkaline solutions. The Chibcha people to the north of the ancient Inca also used calcium hydroxide (also known as "cal"), while the tribes of North America used soda ash.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Colonial Era one were usually imported from Britain, then made locally for tradesmen, their shape is designed to minimize consumption of steel for the production of one item, in comparison to normal axe or hatchet. Its was a ripoff to pay the redskin retards less for their furs and beaverskins.
    Same with paper thin shitty Birmingham knives, substandard guns and cut down blankets. Everything was devised to garden gnome the natives more for bigger profit.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >trading fur for tools and weapons infinitely more effective than what they had was ripping them off

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This. It clearly benefited both sides.
        >Can you believe it Gordon, these savages are perfectly willing to accept such substandard tools?
        >Ha, ha, white man so stupid, white man give us magic metal and all we have to give him is dumb water-rat skins

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because of fur trade tribal hunting grounds were being depleted in 1650s causing redskins to commence whole series of war between tribes, on a scale unseen before, because endemic raiding to get some street creed and corn maize was transformed into all-out war of conquest and extermination as neither side would give up their rights to hunt on their own territory, because it would mean impoverishment and starvation. Also, yes, it was still a ripoff off even if muskets were more effective than bows. Indians got paid less than European fur trappers, the quality and amount of goods was regulated to maximize profits. For example there were strict limits for amount of ammunition - lead and powder that could be traded along with guns. It was a security measure, but also enabled better bargaining. Tools and weapons rejected for European trade were shipped to colonies and import monopolies established to ensure there would be no competition between traders to outbid themselves by offering Indians better quality goods. Indians were well aware of it, thats why they were trying to trade with different colonial powers, whenever it was possible, biding Dutch against British and British against French to get better access to goods. This is why many sided with French in 1750s, to avoid British monopoly. By that time not one of them would be in awe of shitty trade musket or a butcher knife, they were used to them for more than century and aware of quality differences. Obviously getting European tools and weapons was highly advantageous, but lets not pretend that it was an equal relationship after the colonies and trading companies became firmly established and able to impose trading monopoly with the tribes in their area.
        Btw, the same tactics was used by British against American colonies and helped to provoke the secession.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver_Wars
        https://www.revolutionarywarjournal.com/tomahawks-and-hatches-part-2-of-3-trade-axes-of-america/

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They were made semi-standardized in Europe and sent to frontier trade posts and forts to sell to natives and frontiersmen in exchange for animal pelts

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    death to morons
    and garden gnomes

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Made in the Americas based on selling early surplus Navy and foreign boarding axes to Natives.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    these were made by the millions for trade. they are collectively called trade axes, trade knives, trade guns etc.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Copper and other metals, but little to no iron. The Mississippi Mound Builders we're on their way to full scale mining and metallurgy before the cataclysm.
    The central and south American were considerably more sophisticated, using enameling, drawing fine wire, damascening and alloys quite proficiently
    These axes were made as trade goods for French voyageurs in the 1700s. They were patterned after native tomahawks.
    Also knives, rifles, pots and pans, broadloom cloth etc.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There was were a examples of meteoric iron being used to make tools, but obviously that wasn't a commonly or widespread resource.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And drift iron from ship wrecks up west where the freaky pole people lived
        >pic related

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Its the same with horses. Natives had no horses before European contact.
    Your analogy is stupid, as frontiersmen were not making weapons like those, the natives were. No different than Europeans making cannons with eastern technology.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The natives did not make those tools. They were made in Europe specifically for trade with the natives. See

      these were made by the millions for trade. they are collectively called trade axes, trade knives, trade guns etc.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this guy is holding an original tomahawk. as others said, hatchet type "tomahawks" were made in Europe, originally brought by the colonists as tools, and later by the boatload as trade items. your Americana is actually a Frenchman's camping tool, with feathers added.

Your email address will not be published.