Many articles, essays, and books have been authored on the topic of the tomahawk, all of which have tried to define what a tomahawk is. These writings have created a host of definitions, categories and sub-groups, geographical trends, and, coupled with modern connotations, the waters are quite muddied. There’s a need for clarification. Thirty-five years of studying extant examples – museum pieces, private collections, and barrels of trade axes recovered from shipwrecks of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries – and reproducing hundreds of the same as a blacksmith and knifemaker have yielded some insights that may help clarify the definition of that iconic object. 

The origins of the word itself are murky. The term “tomahawk” is an Anglo attempt at pronouncing an Algonquian word for tool or cutting utensil, tamahak or tamahakan. It is believed that the word entered the English lexicon by way of Captain John Smith when Jamestown was settled in 1607. At first, he used the word to describe an axe, though later he expanded the definition to include war clubs. Yet more meanings were added as history progressed, with writers describing stone tools such as celts, grooved axes, ball-headed war clubs, and iron axes under the umbrella term tamahak. The word came to mean virtually anything that could be swung with one hand.[1]

American Indians’ first exposure to the iron axe likely occurred when Vikings landed on the North American continent, though it would be more than five centuries before the object became more widespread. Once explorers and fishing expeditions began working the coastal waters of the New World, eventually pushing inland, the importance of the iron axe took hold. By the settlement of Jamestown in 1607, iron axes had made their way south from trade with the French in Canada, covering a region including the Great Lakes and reaching as far west as the trans-Mississippi. The Dutch and English also conducted trade in the New England area. The Spanish presence in Florida and the Southwest was less impactful in the introduction of iron axes to Native economies owing to the lesser degree to which forests covered those areas and the relative lack of furs.[2]

The great concentration of iron hatchets and tomahawks in the Northeast, the Great Lakes, and the Pacific Northwest in the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries had a significant impact on Native American cultures, their economies, and even the environment, contributing to the depletion of furs in the Northeast and Great Lakes. Indeed, by the end of the eighteenth century, blacksmiths could be found in Native towns.[3]

Lists of trade goods and treaty gifts during this span of time show that hatchets or tomahawks were among the most desirable trade goods, more so even than firearms. As many as three hundred axes could be handed out during a single treaty negotiation. In 1765, Sir William Johnson estimated that the Indian Department would need 10,000 axes for trade, a figure that doesn’t account for what would be needed for European colonists. The overall number of axes and tomahawks on the continent, between those locally manufactured and those traded in the colonies by the French, English, and Dutch, could reasonably be estimated in the hundreds of thousands.[4]

Between 1700 and 1730, variations on axes and tomahawks made appearances. One of the earlier modifications was adding a spike to a hatchet, producing what is known today as a spike tomahawk. These were more than likely derived from the larger British boarding axes of the period. Smoking pipes were then added to axes. Generally, early examples were heavier implements useful as weapons, tools, and ceremonial pieces, but by the end of the French and Indian War, smaller, lighter hatchets and tomahawks, more useful as implements of war than as working tools, were prevalent as well.  

Perhaps surprisingly, there are references to these smaller, lighter tomahawks being thrown in combat. Several accounts of American Indians doing so survive. In 1777, for example, Thomas Anburey, a British officer in General John Burgoyne’s campaign, said, “In pursuing an enemy the Indians threw their tomahawks with utmost dexterity and seldom failed striking it into the skull or back of those they pursue.”[5]

Owing to its importance and its constant use as a weapon, the tomahawk emerged as a symbol for both war and peace, giving rise to the phrases ‘burying the hatchet’ and ‘taking up the hatchet’ for making peace and going to war, respectively. Following the defeat of the Algonquins by the Iroquois in 1670, a council was held in which six tomahawks were buried, one for each of the Five Nations of the Iroquois and one for the defeated Algonquins, with the latter being lowermost. Thus, were the Algonquins ever to ‘take up the hatchet,’ or resume the war, they would be reminded of their defeat by the Iroquois.[6] The addition of the pipe bowl to the hatchet and its subsequent proliferation for ceremonial use only added to and cemented the symbolism. 

Pipe tomahawks became coveted items in the late eighteenth century, even if their production numbers were small compared to simpler hatchets. It is unknown who invented the implement, but the merit of the idea can be seen in the importance attached to it. The fine examples of these objects that survive and captivate modern audiences were likely spoils of war or heirlooms that contemporaries also treasured. 

The most common variation of the pipe tomahawk was a standard hatchet with a pipe bowl added. These were made in several different ways. Some were fashioned from a single segment of a gun barrel. This technique required little skill and forging and was often crude. Most, though, were of two- and three-piece construction, with a rapped eye (a reinforced handle socket), a bit of steel for a cutting edge, and a pipe bowl made separately. Pipe bowls were usually threaded and screwed in, though some were strapped and brazed on. Some pipe tomahawks were also cast in brass with a piece of steel dovetailed and brazed in for a cutting edge. 

The finer examples of pipe tomahawks had architectural elements such as panels and columns filed into them. They were most likely to be made by highly skilled blacksmiths and gunsmiths. These specially made examples, adorned with silver-inlaid blades and hafts and engraved with meaningful inscriptions to commemorate events or people, were commonly presented to influential political and military leaders, European and Native American alike. 

A whole host of variants of pipe tomahawks existed. Most notable is the spontoon type, modeled after the espontoon, a pole arm carried by commissioned and noncommissioned officers of European and American armies of the period. These pipe tomahawks were spear-shaped affairs with curled flanges near the handle portion of the blade. They were also referred to as dagger blades or the French type, though it should be noted that the French were not the only ones who made them. 

The tomahawk’s importance during the period extended to European and American militaries as well, being widely used by European settlers, militias, and the British and French armies. By the time the English arrived in the New World, the axe had become obsolete in European warfare. Up until approximately 1700, colonial military formations were typically armed with guns and swords. The French and Indian War changed this trend, however, with tomahawks replacing swords and complementing bayonets in the ranks of the British army’s infantry on the continent.[7] By the outbreak of the American Revolution, the Virginia Convention recognized that some settlers had access to and a preference for tomahawks when they passed the militia law in 1775 requiring “That every militia man so to be enlisted shall furnish himself with a good rifle, if to be had, or otherwise with a tomahawk, common firelock, bayonet, pouch, or cartouch box…and appear with the same at the place appointed for mustering.”[8]

The tomahawk’s use has extended into the present day, with the weapon being carried by American combatants in conflicts all the way to the Global War on Terror. I have personally sent two overseas: one for a participant in the Persian Gulf War and one for the war in Afghanistan. There is perhaps no greater testament to the tomahawk’s significance in American warfare and culture than this centuries-long relevance.

GREG BRAY is the Executive Director of the Pricketts Fort Memorial Foundation at Pricketts Fort State Park, a Revolutionary War era civilian refuge fort near Fairmont, West Virginia. He is also a blacksmith and knifemaker, and the owner of Bray’s Knifeworks.

[1] Harold Leslie Peterson, American Indian Tomahawks (Museum of the American Indian: Heye Foundation, 1965),4. 

[2] Ibid., 12.

[3] Eugene Bliss, ed., Diary of David Zeisberger: A Moravian Missionary Among the Indians of the Ohio, Translated from the Original Manuscript and Edited (Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Co., 1885), 153.

[4] Peterson, American Indian Tomahawks, 13.

[5] Thomas Anburey, Travels Through the Interior Parts of America, by Thomas Anburey, a Lieutenant in General Burgoyne’s Army, Vol. 1 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company), 238. 

[6] Peterson, American Indian Tomahawks, 16.

[7] Fred Anderson, The War that Made America: A Brief History of the French and Indian War (New York: Penguin, 2005), 129-130. 

[8] William W. Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia from the First Session of the Legislature in the Year 1619, Vol. 9 (Richmond: J & G Cochran, Printers, 1821), 27. 

Cover image: Trade Tomahawk, ca. 1800. (National Museum of American History)

The Loudoun Resolves

June 14, 1774

Resolved, That the Act of the British Parliament, above mentioned, is utterly repugnant to the fundamental laws of justice, in punishing persons without even the form of a trial; but a despotic exertion of unconstitutional power designedly calculated to enslave a free and loyal people.  

Resolved, That the enforcing the execution of the said Act of Parliament by a military power must have a necessary tendency to raise a civil war, and with our lives and fortunes, assist and support our suffering brethren, of Boston, and every part of North America that may fall under the immediate hand of oppression, until a redress of all our grievances shall be procured, and our common liberties established on a permanent foundation. 

Resolved, That the East India Company, by exporting their tea from England to America, whilst subject to a tax imposed thereon by the British Parliament, have evidently designed to fix on the Americans those chains forged for them by a venal ministry, and have thereby rendered themselves odious and detestable throughout all America. It is, therefore, the unanimous opinion of this meeting not to purchase any tea—or other East India commodity whatever, imported after the first of this Month. 

Resolved, That we will have no commercial intercourse with Great Britain until the above mentioned Act of Parliament shall be totally repealed, and the right of regulating the internal policy of N. America by a British Parliament shall be absolutely and positively given up. 

Resolved, That Thompson Mason and Francis Peyton, Esqs., be appointed to represent the County at the general meeting to be held at Williamsburg on the 1st day of August next, to take the sense of this Colony at large on the subject of the preceding resolves, and that they, together with Leven Powell,  William Ellzey, John Thornton, George Johnston,   and Samuel Levi, or any three of them, be a committee to correspond with the several committees appointed for this purpose.

Signed by, 

Sources and Additional Reading:

Bish, James, “The Summer of Discontent: How Lord Dunmore Unified Virginians for War in 1774,” Revolutionary Virginia, August 4, 2025, virginia1776.com/summer-of-discontent.

Evans, James D., ed., “Resolutions of Loudoun County,” William & Mary College Quarterly, series 1, 12:4 (1904), 231-236.

Glanville, Jim, The Fincastle Resolutions, The Smithfield Review 14 (2010).

Powell, Robert C., ed., A Biographical Sketch of Col. Leven C. Powell Including His Correspondence During the Revolutionary War (G.H. Ramey & Son, 1877).

Spannaus, Nancy, “Commemorating the Loudoun Resolves,” LoudounNow, June 13, 2024, https://www.loudounnow.com/news/loudoun/commemorating-the-loudoun-resolves/article_32300be2-2981-11ef-9efd-3fe8e315d7a3.html

The Pay Roll of the Garrison of Fort Pitt, 5^th April to 25^th May 1774, represents four pages of material contained in, General Correspondence, Minutes, and Journals of the Virginia Revolutionary Conventions, 1774-1776, Library of Virginia, available on microfilm.

Virginia and Pennsylvania both claimed what is now southwestern Pennsylvania, including what was then Fort Pitt and what is today southwest Pennsylvania. Two 50-man Virginia Militia companies commanded by Captains John Connolly and George Aston garrisoned the fort in the spring of 1774, just prior to the commencement of open warfare in the Ohio River Valley. For those interested in this period, Glenn F. Williams, Dunmore’s War: The Last Conflict of America’s Colonial Era, (Yardley, PA: Westholme Publishing, 2017), addresses details that help place this payroll and the men named in context of the broader events during this period.

Regular British troops departed Fort Pitt in October 1772, creating a security void at the same time that increased white settlement threatened the tenuous peace with the Shawnee, Delaware, and Mingo, who lived in the Ohio River Valley. A series of Indian treaties contributed to confusion over boundaries, while trade and lawlessness by small numbers of individuals, both native and white, further confused a complex set of conditions. Virginia’s last royal governor, Lord Dunmore, John Murray, visited the area in 1773 and initiated a series of actions to strengthen Virginia’s governance and claim to the area, then part of Virginia’s West Augusta District. Pennsylvania also claimed the area as part of Westmoreland County but lacked the organized militia system practiced in Virginia. Virginia’s ability to quickly mobilize capable units gave Virginia the upper hand in establishing political and military authority in the Ohio River Valley and challenging the native inhabitants for control. These differences led to open warfare today known as Dunmore’s War, the last Indian war of America’s Colonial era. 

Researchers interested in this period may find these rosters valuable because most names are legible and Dr. John Connolly would become a key figure in Dunmore’s efforts to retain crown control of the area early in the American Revolution. Some of the men whose names appear on this payroll would later serve in Continental and militia units during the American Revolution, a few others were notable Loyalists.

The Excel document is a transcription of the names from the original documents and may contain some transcription errors, please check this carefully. The Excel document also provides some possible matches for individuals on the roster with digitized Revolutionary pension files and other records. More research on each of these is necessary to confirm these records are on the correct individuals. This post is provided for information and to encourage additional research. 

PATRICK H. HANNUM is a retired Marine and the author of many articles on the Revolutionary War in Virginia.

Which state doesn’t belong on the following list?

Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia.

The answer is Delaware. The other 15 states existed as well-established, individual political entities before transitioning directly to statehood. These include the other original states plus Vermont, Texas, and Hawaii. California’s flag boasts of its brief independence, but it doesn’t really make the cut. Neither does Delaware, which never existed as a fully distinct colony. On the other hand, one Indian tribe has a 250-year-old historic claim to statehood that would put it at the top of the list.

Delaware

What is now the State of Delaware was granted to James Stuart, the Duke of York (and future King James II), in 1664. He gave the territory to William Penn in 1682, after which it was governed as “the lower counties on the Delaware.” It had its own legislature after 1704, but never its own governor before Independence. In form, they were two colonies sharing one governor, but the “upper counties” dominated political affairs and the governor’s attention. John Dickinson served in both legislatures, and delegates from Pennsylvania and the Lower Counties were closely aligned at the 1st Continental Congress. 

Congress urged the colonies to draw up new constitutions on June 12, 1776. William Penn’s Loyalist grandson, John Penn, was ousted as the last proprietary governor shortly after. Acting on Congress’s advice, the Lower Counties Assembly met in New Castle on June 15 to pass a Resolution of Separation. Henceforth, they would serve in the name of “the government of the Counties of New Castle, Kent, and Sussex Upon Delaware,” not the King of England. Cutting ties with the Crown and the proprietary governor had the combined effect of making Delaware an independent state. Pennsylvania did not object. Delaware adopted a new constitution on October 20, on which day its assembly also chose its first-ever governor. “Separation Day” is celebrated annually in New Castle.

Vermont, Texas, and Hawaii

Vermont. Initially called “New Connecticut,” Vermont existed as an independent, self-declared state from 1777 to 1791. While New Hampshire and New York argued over the territory, settlers declared independence in January 1777. They drafted a forward-looking constitution that banned adult slavery and established universal male suffrage for property holders. Though it had its own government, militia, currency, and postal system, Vermont was not recognized by the Continental Congress until it finally joined the Union as the 14th state on March 4, 1791.

Texas was part of Spanish Mexico until Mexico gained independence in 1821. American settlers flocked to the region to accept land grants, but tensions led to the Texas Revolution of 1835–1836. Following the Battle of San Jacinto, the Republic of Texas was declared on March 2, 1836. The republic operated for nearly a decade, negotiating treaties and facing ongoing threats from Mexico, before finally being admitted as the 28th state on December 29, 1845.

The Kingdom of Hawaii emerged as a unified state under King Kamehameha I in 1810. Hawaii maintained its independence for eight decades while gradually adopting Western-style governance and institutions. A coup backed by U.S.-based sugar and pineapple growers overthrew Queen Liliʻuokalani in 1893, and the islands were declared the independent Republic of Hawaii the next year. Hawaii was annexed by the United States in 1898 and became the 50th state on August 21, 1959.

California and Franklin? Not so much.

Several other “states,” “republics,” and proposed colonies came and went over the years, some of which command significant attention. These, however, cannot be called “well-established, individual political entities that transitioned directly into statehood.”

California. The “California Republic” lasted less than a month in 1846. It was proclaimed on June 14, 1846, during the War with Mexico, by American settlers who rebelled against Mexican rule. On July 9, 1846, U.S. Navy forces under Commodore John Sloat occupied Monterey and raised the U.S. flag, effectively annexing the territory. The California Republic existed for about 25 days.

Deseret. The State of Deseret was created by Mormon settlers in 1849 in what is now Utah and parts of surrounding states. The settlers drafted a constitution and organized a government with Brigham Young as governor. Congress, however, refused to recognize Deseret and created the smaller Utah Territory instead as part of the Compromise of 1850. Deseret’s provisional government helped organize settlement, law, and infrastructure in the region until territorial administration took over.

Franklin. The State of Franklin was an organized but unrecognized state in what is now eastern Tennessee. It was created in 1784 by settlers who sought to form a new state from lands ceded by North Carolina to the federal government. Building on the earlier tradition of self-governance established by the Watauga Association, Franklin organized its own government but never received recognition from Congress. North Carolina reasserted control by 1788, and Franklin’s government collapsed amid disputes with both North Carolina and the Cherokee. The territory was absorbed into the Southwest Territory and became part of the state of Tennessee in 1796.

Indian Stream. The Republic of Indian Stream existed from 1832 to 1835 in the disputed territory along the northern border of New Hampshire, claimed by both the United States and Canada. Settlers in the area, frustrated by unclear jurisdiction, organized their own government, adopting a constitution, electing officials, and establishing local courts and taxes. The republic maintained de facto independence, resolving local disputes and asserting authority without formal recognition from either nation. In 1835, New Hampshire successfully asserted control, ending the republic and formally incorporating the territory into the state.

Trans-Oconee Republic. The Trans‑Oconee Republic was a short-lived, self-declared state established in 1794 on lands west of the Oconee River in what is now Georgia. This land had been reserved for the Creek under the 1790 Treaty of New York. Founded by Revolutionary War veteran Elijah Clarke, its settlers built forts, drafted a constitution, and elected officers. Their challenge to both state and federal authority ended in September 1794, when the Georgia militia and federal pressure forced them to surrender, dismantle their settlements, and abandon the attempt at independence. The territory they occupied was fully reintegrated into Georgia after the republic's collapse.

West Florida. “West Florida” existed twice, first as a British colony adjacent to East Florida from 1763 to 1783. This colony reverted to Spain after the Revolution. The Republic of West Florida existed briefly in 1810 on lands along the Gulf Coast, covering parts of what are now Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. American settlers, frustrated by Spanish rule, rebelled, declared independence, and established a constitution. The republic lasted about three months before U.S. forces annexed the territory. 

The Other State of Delaware

A catalogue of pre-Independence and pre-U.S. administration political entities that did not evolve into states would be nearly endless, including early colonies like Roanoke and Plymouth; the North American colonies of Spain, France, Holland, Sweden, and Russia; and every Indian Tribe that occupied what is now the United States. 

One Indian Tribe, however, is owed special mention. The Delaware (Lenape) Tribe was the first to negotiate peace with the new United States after negotiations at Fort Pitt in 1778. They took their English-language name from the river along which they had once lived. At Fort Pitt, Congressional negotiators Andrew and Thomas Lewis “agreed” with the their Delaware counterparts (White Eyes, Captain Pipe, and John Killbuck) that “should it for the future be found conducive for the mutual interest of both parties to invite any other tribes who have been friends to the interest of the United States, to join the present confederation, and to form a state whereof the Delaware nation shall be the head, and have a representation in Congress.” 

The provision was presumably included because the Delaware wanted it.  The odds of a Delaware/Lenape state were slim, however, and the window for acting on it was very brief. The Lewises hedged with a proviso stipulating that “nothing contained in this article [was] to be considered as conclusive until it meets with the approbation of Congress.” Lachlan McIntosh, the Continental general at Fort Pitt, attempted to implement the treaty’s provisions, but he had too few troops. Both sides violated the pact through action and inaction. Other agreements have since superseded the treaty, and the Delaware have never attempted to organize a state. Had the Delaware somehow succeeded in achieving statehood, the state would undoubtedly have qualified as “a preexisting, individual political entity transitioning directly to statehood.” In fact, it would have been the oldest one on the list.

Postscript

Though statehood was never considered, a similar promise was made to the Cherokee in 1835 in the Treaty of New Echota. It was made with a minority faction of the tribe, but this agreement also served as the legal basis for the removals during the Trail of Tears. The treaty stipulated that the Cherokee “shall be entitled to a delegate in the House of Representatives … whenever Congress shall make provision for the same.” Congress has never acted to seat a Cherokee delegate, though tribal advocates have pursued it. Several delegates from U.S. territories like Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (in that case called a “commissioner”) participate in House deliberations but cannot vote.

​GABRIEL NEVILLE is the author of The Last Men Standing: The 8th Virginia Regiment in the American Revolution.