Posted on 06/25/2004 7:09:26 AM PDT by ijcr
Should read; one of the books I own that deals with Custer and his Sioux opposites.
The more my wife had to deal with government agencies growing up, the more conservative she became (Silver lining alert).
According to the journals and reports Sgt Kanipe was dispatched to locate the pack train.
Trooper Giovanni Martini was given the Benteen message to carry, the fact of Martini's poor English caused Lt. Cooke to write it down.
The two soldiers were the sole survivors of the Last Stand.
"They awarded something like 24 - TWENTY-FOUR - CMOHs to men at Little Big Horn..."
Really? I never heard that.
Yup.
The Indians took no prisoners and slaughtered all the wounded. Nature of aboriginal warfare, I suppose, but it made for hard feelings.
I doubt somebody like Custer would go insane over losing Troopers. If he was that easily pushed over the edge, it would have happened during the Civil War in my opinion, not 15 years later in South Dakota.
Interesting premise though.
and about ten times tougher than you :o).
I agree.
This is a good book.
It sounds like Custer's troops fought with good unit integrity and fire discipline until their carbines starting suffering from extraction failure. The level of fire fell off dramatically and the Sioux moved in for the kill.
Yep...as was "Little Big Man" and dozens of other films.
And the TV movie from a few years back....can't remember the name.
I think it's controversial, too, and I probably won't like what I see when I visit the site, but as I said - You see that kind of thing at nearly every historical site nowadays. Sad...
(Glad to hear about your wife ;0))
Uh-oh LOL
It took me a minute to understand your comment. ;9)
We lived on the edge of the Yorktown battlefield, we have been to Gettysburg, Big Horn & various battlefields across the south. I am always struck by the energy I feel there even tho the sites are quiet & peaceful. May be my overactive imagination.
** Custer had fought numerous battles against Indians and was almost always badly out numbered. However, due to superior weaponry and to a lesser extent better training and discipline, he was always victorious. Truth is, usually the Indians would hit and then run after a few shots and/or casualties.
** The Indians at LBH was a far more massive contingent then anticipated. This was due to the Indians discussing a change in strategy and tactics (combining forces against a common enemy for example). The Indians made an adjustment in their battlefield tactics, Custer did not. That was his fatal mistake.
** Most of the soldiers of the Seventh Calvary were new immigrants to the USA, many were not fluent in English and thus confusion under pressure, was not uncommon. These men, for the most part, were not highly trained, experienced soldiers. They were instead a mixture of young immigrants who turned to being a soldier to help provide a steady (though meager) income.
** If one goes to to LBH and stands at the monument, facing the river, a better picture of what happened is illustrated by the crosses, memorials to the fallen soldiers. Near the banks of the river where the battle started is the first group, near the top, at the monument is the final group. In between is a line of crosses in an irregular line showing where each soldier fell.
Badly outnumbered, it is clear what their intention was, head for the high ground and fight back to back, with dead horses as coverage. Few made it to the top.
The sight of the crosses and the line they paint of death, confusion, heroism, combined with fear is a very moving sight indeed.
It is sad. The land means so much more to many on the Agency.
"Archaeologists disagree constantly over evidence. Eye witness accounts are far superior."
Sorry, eye witness testimony is simply the most suspect of all in court. Its been shown countless times.
And you are not citing "eyewitness testimony" when relating accounts from the various Tribes involved, you are citing by definition fourth to seventh party "hearsay".
The fact you believe eyewitness testimony is "superior" to forensic science tells me you don't really understand the inherent postives nor the negatives associated with either.
Indeed he did have some luck in previous engagements. However he failed miserably because he was under orders NOT to conduct such an attack, only maintain contact with the Indians so that the main US forces could close in for the fight. Secondly, he divided his forces in a manner he shouldn't have. Finally, he was arrogant towards the resolve and abilities of the Indians. This would/did plague the Army for years as they continually under estimated their abilities as fighters and tacticians.
LOL...you got that right. BTW, she just walked by and say you stink (smile). Check your mail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.