The Little Bighorn (1 Viewer)

[Louis Badolato]

As I have stade elsewhere on another thread, Custer did have political ambitions, (sorry Maddadicus, but it is necessary to understand this,) and needed a major achievement to grab the headlines and reinstate his reputation damaged by the Indian Agency enquiry. Within the regiment the officers had settled in to two factions, pro and anti Custer. Reno and Benteen fell into the latter category. Because of this Benteen was sent off on a pointless sweep which would deny him any part in the glory and reno was sent to make first contact and draw off the warriors. custer meanwhile would cut round to the rear, capture the women and children, then charge through the village to take the warriors in the rear and "rescue" Reno, thus enhancing his own part while Reno would appear somewhat inadequate in needing help to do his.
Despite all the hype in the newspapers, largely written by Custer himself, he and the 7th were not the great Indian fighters they were portrayed to be. there had been one major action, the attack on a sleeping village at Wa****a, and a lot of fruitless pursuits with very little actual contact. Because of this Custer was convinced that the Indians would always run and when he found that on this occasion they were not only prepared to stand, but also positively eager to fight he was completely out of his depth. Nothing in his limited experience had prepared him for this, and the Indians came boiling out like gangbusters and overwhelmed his command in very little time. The limited number of 0.45 catridge cases found on the battlefield indicate that the troops barely had time to use their pistols, let alone reload them.
Benteen was right to stay with Reno, whose command had been badly battered. Had he left and tried to find Custer, whose exact position was unknown would have exposed both commands to being destroyed piecemeal, and to have taken reno with him would have meant abandoning the wounded, which was unthinkable.
Custer had spent all his military life puffing himself up to be a great military leader and tactician. His biggest mistake was that at the end he actually believed his own B. S.

Trooper, your post reflects my own study of the subject. The only thing I would add is that because of the fruitless pursuits in the immediate past, Custer was convinced that the Indians would always run, and, as you noted, this was a substantial factor in his decision to split his command - he wanted to prevent yet another escape, when this time, the Indians had no intention of running.

 

[Aleš]

i can not believe how much excuses you all make just to point thta it was not Custer fault.The man was an idiot.He was brave but also crazy.He was not strategy man,he was an action man yes but poor strategy.
I do not understand if so much expirience man like Custer why he didnt rest the horses before he attack.It is his fault.And you say that it was no good terain for cavalry.Well than it was no good terain for indians too,for indian cavalry.
But the most crazy of all is that he (Custer) was scared that indians will run away so that is why he make this three group so that this group can prevent indians of excape.What an jerk.This indians was ready for fight,and he should know that.This indians already fight in great Sioux war from 1862-1872 lead by Red Clowd and the results of this war was peace treaty from USA goverment to the Sioux that Black Hills are their land.So if the Sioux tribe(oglala mostly) battle with USA for ten years,having Crazy Horse for their war Chief,they are expirience much more than this Rookies come from Ireland,Switzerland,Germany,...Custer should know this and he should give some respect to that brave wariors,but nooooooooo he think all the indians are dirty,and what he know if he get war expirience from atacking the sleeping vilage,with childreen and old people,woman,...He have no military expirience with fighting indians,so the thing that he thinking that they might run away can come only from unexpirience man.
This indians have more than ten years of war expirience,they were the best that all the indian nation have that time(Sioux,Cheyene,Arapaho),lead from Crazy Horse who also fight more than ten years with blue soldiers,so he know their tactics,they also have guns,taken from the blue soldiers in this ten years of war,....they were ready alright,and they will not run,Custer should know that.
What i do not understand is this,that indians didnt take advantage of this winning situation and make even more strong army,join forces with other tribes like Crow,Kiowa,BlackFeet,Shawnee,Shoshoni,...and make even larger force.But after that battle they split,they divide their forces,they return home,after that in tha reservations later,....so at the end they make mistake like Custer,they divide their forces.But we all know why,because there was not enough buffalo and food for all(and we all know which fault was that,right)

 

[UKReb]

Ales

Don't take it so seriously just stick with all the Custer movies you'll get more enjoyment watching "stupid Custer" get his comeuppance

Reb

 

[lancer]

Ales, do you have a personel grudge against Custer? No one on this forum is claiming Custer wasn't at fault for various aspects of LBH. They are presenting reasoned arguments for why Custer behaved and acted as he did. Idiot is too harsh a condemnation. Custer was not a military genius, no argument. He was aggressive, maybe too much, but he was reacting to what HE believed the indians were going to do based off his somewhat limited experience. He was the CO and he made a series of decisions that led to disaster. Had he been right we wouldn't be talking about this. Custer had no reason to assume the indians would stand and fight, although in hindsight, maybe he should have allowed for the possibility. He wanted to and needed to act fast, based on his experience, to keep the indians from fleeing. Sometimes decisions just don't work out. As for the indians failing to stay together, that fact that they mustered so many tribes together at all for this one time was highly unusual. Tribes were very individualistic and many of the tribes were old antagonists, so staying together, under one leadership just was not going to happen. At any rate, this is a great thread with much to be learned. -- lancer

 

[binder001]

Ales,

Nobody is excusing Custer. I think we are all in agreement that Custer was an inept and arrogant commander. He succeeded in the American Civil War because, a bit like Stuart, his agressiveness and bravado worked in a "conventional war". He had visions of more glory or personal success in politics and this affected his decisions in the field against a "guerilla" enemy. The plains Indians were excellent light cavalry and often used their mobility to dictate the terms of an engagement. Despite the continuing "war" with the Sioux, most US Army activity was endless patrolling with realtively few major fights. Custer saw just what his mind wanted him to see - a place that would force the Native Americans into frontal combat, where Custer believed (wrongly) that the Army troops would emerge with a major victory. Custer reportedly planned to use that success to start a political career. His arrogance cost him his life along with most of his command.

As to why the native peoples did not continue to stand together - two big factors; logistics and culture. The available food and resources would not continue to support the large amount of warriors and their families. Further, their culture was based on nomadic tribal groups, not on masses. Besides, if they had stayed together the US would have mobilized a larger force and engaged them in conventional battles. Mobility and stealth were some of the Indians biggest assets, large groups gave away those advantages. The bottom line is that they were facing an irresistable force, the only thing they could do was delay their defeat.

Gary

 

[pugio]

I'm writing this on strictly memory so bear with me. A week before the Big Horn battle, Crazy Horse led a band of Sioux and their Cheyenne allies against General Crook and elements of his command. History gives a slight edge to the Indians as winners of this encounter. Plains Indians usually fought for individual honors, but Army survivors of this encounter said they (Sioux)fought as a unit and thus insured their victory. Crook never was able to relay this info to Gibbons, Terry or Custer about the new way the Sioux fought. It was later learned that Crazy Horse and a few other leaders instilled this into their warriors... this was a fight for survival of their way of life, not for individual glory. Also, that amount of people: warriors, women and children not to mention the thousands of ponies, need water and food. They're supply at the Big Horn was exhausted and they had to di- engage into smaller bands for survival.

 

[trooper]

One thing that is often mentioned as being a prime cause of Custer's defeat is the question of the malfunction of the carbines. Benteen's report after the battle stated that only six carbines in the combined Reno/Benteen/ Pack Train command suffered this defect, therefore it is reasonable to assume that Custer's command should have had a similar ratio. Hardly a major contribution to the disaster.

 

[binder001]

The carbine issue certainly didn't help, but it can't be blamed for the defeat. I think it was a combination of the cheap ammunition (the cases were softer metal and the extractor pulled them apart) and poor training (the troopers weren't trained in how to deal with the problems). My only personal experience is from firing a .45/70 trapdoor Springfield rifle with the same action, but I was using modern cases with smokeless powder. Black powder causes more fouling, leading to cases getting stuck more often.

The "legends of Custer" also often mention that the Indians won because they had repeating rifles, but only a modest number of the Sioux and Cheyenne had repeaters. The US Army was out generalled and outfought by an irregular force that was fighting to protect their families.

Gary B.

 

[maddadicus]

On the TSSD site, the owner has an excellent discitation about the battle and the dismissal of Indians superior weapons and the malfunction of the Springfield as some reason for the Custer defeat. Also, as for Ales harshness about Custer, I am giving him some leeway because of the language difference ( no offense intended ). It is something to note that a number of the troop leaders died near Custer and not with the bulk of their men. Also, I have read that Keough ,shot through the leg ( bullet went through and into his horse )was found with most of his Sgt's and troopers, that show some type of organized defense, at least from that troop. Some of the political issues of that day, might have stoked Custer into faster action than the circumstances called for..And some of the reasons given for the banishing of Benteen ,makes some sense..Michael

 

[Njja]

The carbine issue certainly didn't help, but it can't be blamed for the defeat. I think it was a combination of the cheap ammunition (the cases were softer metal and the extractor pulled them apart) and poor training (the troopers weren't trained in how to deal with the problems). My only personal experience is from firing a .45/70 trapdoor Springfield rifle with the same action, but I was using modern cases with smokeless powder. Black powder causes more fouling, leading to cases getting stuck more often.

The "legends of Custer" also often mention that the Indians won because they had repeating rifles, but only a modest number of the Sioux and Cheyenne had repeaters. The US Army was out generalled and outfought by an irregular force that was fighting to protect their families.

Gary B.

........................................................................................................

Yes that is correct, and that is why today we are an indian nation.

It was a difficult battle, fought against impossible odds, with weapons we now

realize were poorly designed for such a situation where rapid fire was required.

It would be nice if we stuck to the facts, with a little less name-calling, and

disrespect for a General that served his country with honor.

We should respect the dead, that cannot defend themselves any longer.

 

[eborris]

The carbine issue certainly didn't help, but it can't be blamed for the defeat. I think it was a combination of the cheap ammunition (the cases were softer metal and the extractor pulled them apart) and poor training (the troopers weren't trained in how to deal with the problems). My only personal experience is from firing a .45/70 trapdoor Springfield rifle with the same action, but I was using modern cases with smokeless powder. Black powder causes more fouling, leading to cases getting stuck more often.

The "legends of Custer" also often mention that the Indians won because they had repeating rifles, but only a modest number of the Sioux and Cheyenne had repeaters. The US Army was out generalled and outfought by an irregular force that was fighting to protect their families.

Gary B.

Not to mention a whole mess of Indians, being out numbered 10 to 1 would seem to be a large factor.

 

[trooper]

Sitting Bull's Sun Dance vision undoubtedly had a positive effect on the Indian's morale. He "saw" troopers falling head first into the camp which was interpreted that they were all dead, so, buoyed up by this the Indian's were convinced they were going to win and so were eager to fight.

 

[Russell]

I've been reading the posts on this thread carefully and it is all very interesting. Thank you all.

Gary wrote,

The bottom line is that they were facing an irresistable force, the only thing they could do was delay their defeat.

I'm afraid that Gary is right. Moving north to Canada was probably the only short term solution.

I found this on the net.

The first of the Sioux tribe arrived in Canada in November of 1876. A dozen scouts from "Little Knife" followed them until they arrived at Jean-Louis Légaré's fur trading post in Wood Mountain. They wanted to be able to sleep in peace. Légaré, realizing the tribe's poverty, invited the Sioux to trade with him. After accepting the merchandise and the thirty dollars that Légaré offered to them to keep them in good spirits, they left. The roads were free, they reported. The next day, seventy Indian groups surrounded Légaré's store.

Following the arrival of the Sioux in Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police learned of Custer's bloody defeat. Major Walsh apprehended Sitting Bull and his tribe with a detachment of 25 men on November 24, 1876. With the help of an interpretator, Walsh explained that Canada was not to be used as a departing point for raids on the United States. A new team of Mounted Police was deployed to Wood Mountain to "maintain the right" amidst the presence of the Sioux.

Sitting Bull and most of his tribe explored the Canadian frontier in May of 1877. They followed the Frenchman river between Val Marie and where Mankota is today. Zachary and Marie Hamilton, in their book, "These are the Prairies", wrote that Sitting Bull "was a man full of good sense, a man of rules." Before establishing himself, he warned the Cypress Hills Mounted Police, which was 200 miles away, about his arrival in Canada and requested a meeting with them. Irvine, two officers, and a few agents went to Wood Mountain where they talked with the Sioux chief.

Sitting Bull produced a gold medal and said: "My Grandfather received this medal in recognition of his battle for George III during the revolution. Now in this odd time, I direct my people here to reclaim a sanctuary of my Grandfather." Irvine advised him that he and his tribe were welcome in Canada, but, like other citizens, if they did not obey the laws of her Majesty, the Mounted Police would deal with them.

The photos are General Custer, Mounties meeting Sitting Bull, Sitting Bull and some of his family.

 

[marco55]

That's very interesting Russell.Does it tell any thing else about the Sioux's time in Canada.
Mark

 

[Aleš]

Yes,i wannt to know why the Sioux return back to the USA from Canada?

 

[Russell]

I don't want to thread jack Michael's thread but you can go to this site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_Mountain_Regional_Park , also just google Sitting Bull and you'll get lots of material.

What becomes clear as you read the material is that the Indians at Little Big Horn were desparate. With the buffalo being killed off they were starving.

The Mountie, Major Walsh , who met Sitting Bull and his band is pictured below. He was born in Ontario

http://www.ripnet.com/sites/colonel_edward_jessup/UEL_Col_J/major_walsh.html

I hope to hear more from the forum members on the battle.

 

[Aleš]

I don't want to thread jack Michael's thread

 

[Spitfrnd]

Anyone who has visited the LBH battlefield and studied the terrain quickly identifies the vastness of the area and trying to locate an Indian village within those thousands of acreage was no mean task. Even the spread of the Custer fight can overwhelm a visitor (it took me one hour and a half to just locate Keogh's marker-although the many signs for "beware of rattlesnakes" makes one tread slowly and carefully.)

Custer followed his orders precisely up to the evening of June 24 following the trail of the Indian for over 70 miles along the Rosebud, in two and half days keeping to the prescribed orders from Terry of 30 miles a day. He was right on schedule on his scouting mission. It then became for him a mission of locate and destroy before the Indian scattered. At a Custer Symposium in 1991 Robert Church put forward an interesting interpretation of what might have been:-

"the combination of events that defeated Custer and the 7th Cavalry was:-
1. The widely accepted idea that Indians would not stand and fight but would scatter when attacked
2. Custer's own command style, centered around chasing Indians
3. The phenomenon of intellectual vertigo-the brain believing what it wants to believe and not what it is told by it's senses."

I have always liked this analysis for example; What if Custer had accepted the evidence of the size of the village? He could have saved his command by following Terry's orders to go farther south and avoid the LBH valley. It also makes a lot of sense when you align this with Crook's defeat at the Rosebud some days before when the Indian did stand and fight (Custer and Terry had no knowledge of this) And as we know Custer did not and now perhaps could not believe his scouts.
And finally an interesting sidebar to whether Custer disobeyed Terry's orders-or not. Are two little known seperate accounts from officers of Terry's staff relate that when Terry stood over Custer's corpse on the battlefield the next day he cried "Dam# him! Dam# him!" and turned away with tears blinding his eyes. Speaks multitudes to me!

I agree with trooper re the Benteen/Reno fight. If Benteen had not taken decisive action to rejoin the rest of the column, if he had in fact, been where Custer had every reason to believe him to be-scouting the hills and valleys to the left of the main column's advance, his order to rejoin the column, brought by Private Martin might have taken many hours to deliver, in fact Martin may not have been able to even contact him. Had this been the case, Reno's command atop the bluffs would most likely have been wiped out along with Custer and his column. When Benteen received the message he rode to the sound of the gun-fire and in doing so provided support to Reno's shattered troops fighting for their lives.

Exactly what happened after Custer led his command into the LBH valley is far from certain. The enigma of its annihilation spurs students of military history (yours truly included) to infinite speculations over why and how Custer met his defeat-but most students of this fight will agree by suffering one of the worst defeats in the history of the Indian wars, Custer won for himself and his regiment an immortality that no victory, however brilliant and decisive, could ever have achieved

Reb

Very interesting and educational post Bob. We can always count on you to improve the historical dialogue here. Would the depth of your knowledge here suggest a new subject for one of your excellent diorama series on the horizon?

 

[Aleš]

Very interesting and educational post Bob. We can always count on you to improve the historical dialogue here. Would the depth of your knowledge here suggest a new subject for one of your excellent diorama series on the horizon?

Yeah!!!!Why dont you(UKReb) make a diorama with photos like you usualy do and teach us what REALY hapened there(at the little big horne)

 

[trooper]

I'll second that. In fact I'll third it as well!!