Posted on 06/25/2008 8:29:22 AM PDT by MplsSteve
Today is the anniversary of one of the more controversial battles in US history - one that has been debated over and over for years.
On this day in 1876, Genl George A Custer and large share of the US 7th Cavalry were killed in a battle near the Little Bighorn River in Montana.
Because many of us on Free Republic enjoy history as well as debating history, I wanted to post this to see what you all have to say about this battle?
Who's fault was it? Did Custer have a bad battle plan? Or did Reno and Benteern not follow orders? What about recent archeological digs showing that Custer's men may have lost because of excessive jamming of their carbines, this affecting their rate of fire? Anything other thoughts you may have?
Comments or opinions - anyone?
Just saw “They Died With Their Boots On” with Errol Flynn the other day.
He didn't plan on the wholesale slaughter part.
Being outnumber 10-1 may have had something to do with it.
Almost as informative as “Little Big Man”...
To be honest, I haven’t done much research on the battle at Little Big Horn (so if my comments sound stupid, please ignore). However, in high school we had almost an entire chapter in our history books devoted to this battle and Custer. The resounding opinion was that it was Custer’s fault for the following reasons: 1. Custer split his forces in an attempt to out-manuever the Indians, and 2. Custer over-rode his men to the point of exhaustion in the days prior to the battle.
Being outnumber 10-1 may have had something to do with it.
He was headed into Red Cloud’s territory. After the Fetterman Massacre at Fort Phil Kearny they knew that the tribes there were very good fighters.
The book, "Little Big man", dealt with the Battle of the Little Big Horn in a serious fashion. The movie, however, was a revisionist cartoon.
Custer appears to have been a good officer who seriously “misunderestimated” his enemy at the worst possible time.
Wonder what the pin or embroidary is in the center of his scarf?
Oh, I know. About as historically correct as “Santa Fe Trail.” I just was commenting on the coincidence.
As I recall he left two Gatling guns and 5000 rounds of ammunition with the pack train. They might have made a difference.
When he left FT Riley Custer told them not to change a thing. So far they haven’t.
Pretty-shield's husband told her that Custer was drinking that day and ignored the scouts' warnings that the Lakota were 'thick as ants on a freshly staked buffalo hide'. Interestingly, the Crows' account states that Custer wasn't killed when and where most people think, but before the main battle, in the water at the river ford along with his standard bearer and a junior officer (which would explain why the battle broke up so quickly into little skirmishes).
Just another point of view, fwiw.
PING!............
I was up there at the park last October. It was kind of a sobering sight to see where the men started dying at the bottom of the hill during the run to reach the top. I can only imagine what must have gone through Custer’s mind when he turned around and the 5000 Indians that didn’t exist came over the top and smashed the troop. The converted “bag and ball” carbines had to be given a long count to “three” before the ejector was pulled down so that the brass case was not pulled in two, after the first volley, most of the troopers were using them as clubs. Not much has changed from the stand point of military supply.
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.