The material gains available from trade or political alliance with the colonists gradually transformed the nature of warfare among native societies. The increased use of firearms made combat far more deadly than before. Instead of being characterized by small bands of warriors conducting sudden attacks against each other in forests and glens distant from settlements and inflicting few deaths in battle, warfare among the Indians began to involve the destruction of enemy villages and the driving away of survivors to gain control over an entire region and its resources. These “remnant societies” of survivors were sometimes destroyed, but more often they were adopted by intact tribes in the region. Adoption of outsiders, both individuals and groups, into tribal communities as full and equal members was a longstanding tradition among the Indians.

Almost inevitably, tribal peoples throughout the Americas experienced a sometimes lengthy period of military alertness against a local European colony. The two sides might not be actually fighting all the time, but war could break out at any time. This required indigenous communities to modify some longstanding political and cultural traditions. The colonists, belonging to hierarchically ordered societies, pressured the natives to designate political leaders with the authority to enter into binding decisions and treaties. Tribal societies traditionally practiced consensus politics, imbued local councils with decision-making authority, and elected temporary political chiefs and war chiefs to conduct diplomacy and to lead their forces in battle. But to respond more effectively to continual threats of war and European demands, many native peoples began to name permanent chiefs and war chiefs, sometimes even permitting sons to succeed their fathers in these positions.

At the same time, this increase in warfare encouraged native communities to become more dispersed, causing the authority of tribal leaders to weaken over the years. Further, the customary authority of senior women in these societies decreased substantially because the continuing military threat highlighted traditionally male functions and concerns, and because the cultivation of crops—so often a female activity—was often disrupted and gradually became less central to their existence.

I have pointed out other notable similarities and differences related to Indian-colonist interactions in Resilient Cultures. Only a book-length treatment can include the individual histories and case studies necessary to illustrate the complexity of this important historical process and the impact it had on the lives and cultures of the millions of people, both native and non-native in origin, who have since called the Americas their home.

John Kicza is professor of history at WSU. He has actively researched Indian-European interactions since pursuing his doctorate in Latin American history at UCLA in the early 1970s. His book, Resilient Cultures: America’s Native Peoples Confront European Colonization, 1500-1800, was published fall 2002 by Prentice Hall.