and possessed innate skills such as an inherent sense of direction, heightened hearing and the ability to see farther at night. Such stereotyping—which Vietnam vet-


eran Tom Holm (Creek/Cherokee) calls the “Indian Scout Syndrome”—continued into World War I and beyond. This assumption often led commanders to place Native Ameri- cans in dangerous positions as scouts, point men and snipers. As American Indians found themselves expected to possess these abilities, they also often volunteered for some of the most dangerous assignments to fulfill mili- tary expectations, follow their tribal military heritage and boost their own self-confidence. As a result, a high percentage of Indigenous soldiers were wounded and killed in combat. The Indigenous skill that did become one


of the most important and unique contribu- tions to the U.S. Armed Forces was the ability to speak Native languages. The idea to use Na- tive language as a “code” that would baffle the Germans was discovered when commanders overheard their Native soldiers speaking to each other in the field. Units in France began experimenting by placing small groups of Ho- chunk, Eastern Band Cherokee and Choctaw soldiers on telephones to send messages in their Native languages; it foiled the Germans. The impact was immediate, as demonstrated by the successes of Eastern Band Cherokee sol- diers in the 30th Division at Montbrehein and Choctaw and Cherokee in the 36th Division at Forest Ferme. By the end of the war, several Native languages were being used at various locations throughout the Western Front. Although the term “code talker” did not ap- pear in Marine records until 1944, numerous military officers referred to the use of Native languages as “code” by the end of World War I. These Native communicators set a


precedent that was expanded upon in World War II. During 1940 and 1941, the U.S. Army recruited small groups of Comanche, Chippewa, Oneida and Meskwaki to create codes in their respective lan-


Choctaw soldiers such as these were among the first code talkers in World War I. This telephone squad (photographed at Camp Merritt, New Jersey, on June 7, 1919) had just returned from fighting. From left: Corporal Solomon Bond Louis, Private Mitchell Bobb, Corporal James Edwards, Corporal Calvin Wilson, Private James Davenport and Captain Elijah W. Horner.


guages. The U.S. Marine Corps began training Navajo to do so in 1942, and the Army formed a group of Hopi soldiers to do so in 1943. In the 8th U.S. Army Air Force, a group of Cana- dian Cree soldiers in the 9th Bomb Command and two Crow in the 97th Bomb Command used their Native languages as codes in Europe.


A SECRET RECIPE


Native soldiers developed two types of Native American Code Talking (NACT). First devel- oped by Choctaw in World War I, Type one NACT contained coded vocabulary, collec- tions of words or phrases that were assigned to military subjects, within their languages. Type two NACT simply used existing Native languages. Both forms worked as codes be- cause they were based on languages unknown to the enemy and, as the new codes were not based on mathematical processes as found in most code and cipher systems, the enemy had nothing to which to compare them. During World War II, Comanche soldiers


created about 250 coded terms, while Navajo soldiers eventually developed more than 700 terms. Many terms were based on everyday things in the tribal communities such as ani- mals, food, material items and descriptions. Examples of code terms include the Coman- che terms for tank (“wakaree’e” or “turtle”) and telephone exchange (“puhihwi tekwapu kahni” or “metal talking house”); the Hopi terms for ship (“pa-a-ki-hu” or “houses on water”) and the M-1 rifle (mouth and one); and the Navajo term for grenade (“ni-ma-si” or “potatoes”). A 1941 edition of the journal “The Masterkey” reports that one of the tribes in the Chippewa and Oneida group developed terms based on the colors of military hat cords and other insignia, with the Native word for


“blue” meaning infantry, “yellow” meaning cavalry and “red” for artillery. The Comanche even had a code name for Adolf Hitler—“Po’sa taiboo’” (Crazy White Man). Hopi, Meskwaki and Canadian Cree also had specially devised code terms, although the number is unknown. Eight Hopi code talkers were in the 81st


Division. Although Frank Chapella, Franklin Shupla and Warren Koopyaquaptewa were all from the village of Tewa, they were both Tewa and Hopi and so spoke both of these tribes’ languages. Frank Chapella’s wife, Elidia Chapella, and his son, Marshall Shupla, recall how these three individuals spoke to one an- other in Tewa (their matrilineal classification through their mothers) and in Hopi with the other five members of their unit. Some Type one NACT groups like the Co-


manche and Navajo also developed alphabet systems, using the first letter of English words translated from Native words to spell out names of individuals and locations. For example, the translation of the Comanche words for pear, ant, rain, ice and snake could be combined to convey “Paris.” While the Comanche used an open system by using any word that translated to the desired letter, the Navajo developed a set vocabulary, such as “wol-la-chee” (ant) for the letter a, “shush” (bear) for b, “moasi” (cat) for c and so on. Later they developed three inter- changeable words for each English letter. Both systems prevented repetition and inhibited breaking of the code. One of the benefits of using these codes


derived from Native language was open-air messages could be sent faster, often in one to two minutes compared to existing encryption methods requiring up to four hours to craft,


PHOTO COURTESY OF MATHERS MUSEUM OF WORLD CULTURES, INDIANA UNIVERSITY


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68