An interesting post I found online.
http://lustyvenusianjuuza.deviantar...ghter-Warrior-Culture-and-Team-Work-581995798
Although the writer focuses on criminal activities and civilian violence, he does have a point.
I mean if drunkards in a bar are able to work together in such coordination that one angry customer pins you down while his drinking buddies are stomping on you.......
It makes me doubt the notion the cultures emphasizing individual fighting EG barbarian tribes who lost to Roman Legions such as the Celts lacked any notion of team work. I can understand the military cultures like the Romans being far superior in their coordination and team-based tactics.
But after reading the link's statements about lower class civilians able to work together in riots-despite typically being individual brawlers in most fights they participated in and lacking ANY TRAINING what so ever- it makes doubt that warrior cultures fought completely as individuals who only knew how to battles as one-on-one duelists.
If civilians like prisoners, angry farmers in a riot, and even some people drinking at a bar could work together to surround you and hit you from blind angles or stomp you on the ground while you try to pin down one of them in a BJJ style move, I find it ridiculous warriors who have the "individual one-on-one fighter" mentality wouldn't think of something as simple as "my friends take on those Spanish conquistadors in a melee to distract them while I sneak behind them and behead them".
I mean not just many movie but even many history books even describe warrior cultures such as the Mamelukes lacking the common sense to do something as basic as dogphiling a French soldier who was knocked to the ground and stab said French soldier to death.
Which is sounds utter BS to me because guys at bar do such teamwork all the time. Hell even high school jocks (who tend to be egotistic enough to prefer one-on-one fights) can call their friends to surround you should you prove too tough to take on!
So I seriously doubt warriors who fight for a living couldn't think of something as simple as "Mahican throws stones and spears at colonists to distract them while some other Mahican with tomahawks charge in and hack the distracted demoralized colonist with axes".
I have no doubt Warrior Cultures and societies emphasizing individual toughness tend to train more as dueling and other individualist style fighting and military based cultures like the Mongols and Germans are far better organized in their teamwork. But to claim warriors only knew to fight as individuals and lack any sense of teamwork is a slap in the face against human nature because even untrained civilians who never been in a fight before could work together to overwhelm a much tougher opponent using basic "common sense" teamwork tricks like one of my friends rearchokes the person while I beat him up.
When I was young I seen a gang of little kids younger than 10 can easily surround someone they're mad at, tackle him to the ground, and start stomping on him in a coordinated attack. So are you telling me that the Celts lacked any notion of distracting a Roman scout in the woods while other Celtic warriors sneak up on the Roman scouts and behead them? Or that African tribes man were so individualistic that they would literally take turns trying to fight British soldiers one-on-one in a duel (rather than charging all their superior numbers of strong hunters at once in a flanking attack while calling younger African men to throw spears)?
How can historians seriously believe that Japanese airmen who conducted bombing raids did not know something as basic as protect bombers or surround an isolated ship? That Americans have teamwork in their aerial warfare while Japanese didn't?