June 25, 1876: Custer Massacre

[italiansport]

I had a highly probable Custer unit Springfield carbine in for appraisal last year. Frankly handling it somewhat gave me the creeps. I was actually relieved to return it to its owner and get it out of my place.
Jim

 

[Bajadoc]

When I want to remember those who gave, I think about Iwo Jima, 7000 Marines dead and thousands crippled. Thousands of children left fatherless. Thousands of wives left to raise children by themselves. Blood all over the place.

 

[Absalom]

Poor LTC Custer. I can't think of a single American serviceman killed in action who is so regularly belittled.

There is an old German saying, "Viel Feind', viel Ehr'", meaning "lots of enemies, lots of honor".

We Americans are a bit peculiar about "heroic" military leaders: we love to worship them, but on the other hand we also have a thing for revisionist versions of history that tear them down.

In Custer, these two tendencies slammed into each other with a vengeance.

Take the spectacular nature of the event itself, a routine round-up of some wayward tribes for return to the rez turning into a most humiliating disaster. Now on one side there is Libby Custer, devoting her quite lengthy remaining lifetime (she died in 1933) to defending and polishing her dear husband's heroic image. On the other side there are, starting immediately after the battle, many officers and politicians who need explanations and a scapegoat, preferably a dead one. Very public events such as the trial of Major Reno in 1879 did their part.

Add to that the fact that for over a century after the battle, nobody knew what really happened with the Custer battalion in the final hours. As we all know, we absolutely love historical mysteries; just mention JFK. Basically, historians and an enormous number of amateur "historians" produced 120 years of books and articles, reinforced by Hollywood, that created a largely distorted public image of the fight, because the evidence wasn't available.

Since the comprehensive archaeological excavations after the fires in the 1980s, a lot has changed. You'll have to read up on this yourself.

The picture of Custer's likely decision-making that emerges is quite complex. Mistakes were made, opportunities were missed, and not just by Custer. But as events unfolded, generic vilifications of Custer are unhistoric and pointless.

 

[REM 3200]

Everyone is down on Custer. He only made one small tactical error.

 

[Iggy]

The studies after the fire were fascinating, and illuminating.

Paths of the various troopers and Indians indicated by cartridge cases tell quite a tale. Carbines dropped by fallen troopers early in the fight, picked up by warriors and used against the troops on the hill are interesting. The number of rounds fired by the Indians and the troopers also very telling about the single shot Trapdoors carried by the trooper vs the Henry repeaters used by the Indians.

 

[growr]

Are you talking about the grass fire in 1983? It revealed many artifact trails and I think the remains of two troopers that they had no idea of their final resting spot.

Artifact trails indicate that what the Indians said happened was probably what happened.

Randy

PS. Never mentioned is what the Indian dead toll was.....

 

[cmort666]

A terrible waste of good men.

A terrible waste of badly lead, poorly trained, indifferently supplied and equipped men.

 

[cmort666]

Poor LTC Custer. I can't think of a single American serviceman killed in action who is so regularly belittled.

He's belittled for the same reasons that people in the know belittle the Japanese at Nomonhan and on New Guinea.

If you fight with such little regard for the essential elements of enemy information, crushing defeat is usually the result. Supreme arrogance only drives in the final nail.

 

[Texas Star]

Are you talking about the grass fire in 1983? It revealed many artifact trails and I think the remains of two troopers that they had no idea of their final resting spot.

Artifact trails indicate that what the Indians said happened was probably what happened.

Randy

PS. Never mentioned is what the Indian dead toll was.....

So, does anyone KNOW the Indian dead total? I'm sure it was nowhere near what the Zulus lost at Rorke's Drift.

Prior to attacking Rorke's Drift, the Zulu had wiped out over 1,000 British troops at Isandhlwana in a debacle that begs comparison to the Custer disaster.

 

[Absalom]

..
PS. Never mentioned is what the Indian dead toll was.....

The absence of any European-style concept of record-keeping on the part of the Indians makes that impossible. In addition, the various tribal groups camped together in the valley of the LBH had only joined temporarily, small groups were constantly coming and going, and no "chief" probably had any idea who all actually was present when Custer showed up.

The general consensus is that Indian casualty numbers were likely quite low, based on Indian testimony and comparable battles. Due to the individualistic tactics of the Plains warriors (basically, forget the photogenic horseback mass charges invented by Hollywood), fatalities in Indian battles generally were low by 19th century standards unless one side disintegrated and was annihilated.

For example, General Crook's fight against the same Lakota and Cheyenne warriors who killed Custer, on the Rosebud the week before, involved over a 1000 soldiers and Indian scouts vs. up to 2000 warriors and lasted most of the day, and fatality estimates, which vary, average in the 20's for each side.

 

[Watchdog]

Custer had it coming.

We all have it coming, kid.

 

[Peak53]

Since we are talking Indian battles, there is one that few have ever heard about. It is the Milk Creek fight in northern Colorado. Answering a call for help from Nathan Meeker, troops were summoned from fort Steele in Wyoming. About 10 miles before they got to Meeker, the Utes ambushed the troop. The Utes were above the surrounded trooper who were caught out in the open. The Utes were pouring fire down upon the troopers who lay behind their dead mounts. Unable to get water in the hot sun, the battle lasted several days IIRC. At night volunteers were sent out for help. I think every movie about the Calvary being pinned down and no help coming was written about this fight that few have ever heard of. When relief arrived the dead were buried and the troop left. The land is private and the soldiers are still buried there. All attempts to relocate them have failed as the land owner thinks they are just fine where they lay. Now take the facts with some skepticism as it have been years since I read about this battle as well.

1879. If I recall correctly, the Utes got bored after 5 days and went home. The Army invaded the reservation in clear violation of treaty terms and lost 13 men killed after the Indian agent ordered the Ute's horses killed for going buffalo hunting on the southern plains of Wyoming. Eleven soldiers were awarded the Medal of Honor. For this, the only engagement ever between the Utes and the US, they lost virtually the entire western slope of Colorado and were marched out of the state in 1881 at gun point with settlers in wagons literally right behind the army.

 

[Absalom]

....
Prior to attacking Rorke's Drift, the Zulu had wiped out over 1,000 British troops at Isandhlwana in a debacle that begs comparison to the Custer disaster.

The Zulu were in a way the opposite of our Plains Indians. While an Indian warrior followed no one he didn't want to follow and decided for himself when to go into battle, where and how long to fight, and when to take a break and have lunch, the Zulu fought in disciplined units, using formations, organized tactics like the "buffalo horns", and employing quite modern concepts like strategic reserves, all based on the tight tribal social organization and the authority of the chiefs.

That allowed disciplined mass attacks pressed home in the face of significant casualties, like at Rorke's Drift, where the Zulu lost hundreds of dead.

Compare that to an Indian "chief". At the LBH, Crazy Horse might have said, let's try sneaking up this gully; and many warriors would be willing to follow him due to his reputation. But others may have just as likely said, nah, looks too iffy, we'll head around the hill here and check out the other side, and that would be okay, too. And yet another might say, I need a potty break, and head for the village. This may sound a bit silly, but if you spend some time reading Indian sources, that's really what it was like.

 

[30-30remchester]

Now that we are debating Custer's last stand, what does the forum know and think about the theory of a sole survivor? I am not a conspiracy nut and truly believe Oswald, Ray and Sirhan acted alone. George Bush was not complicit in the twin towers tragedy. But there is enough evidence to give serious thought to there being one trooper that escaped. If you have not heard this before, I assume the net is full of research.

 

[Watchdog]

PS. Never mentioned is what the Indian dead toll was.....

Probably because by the time other military units got to the battle site, the Indians had packed up and left. Given the time and opportunity to remove them, Indians very seldom left their dead and wounded behind.

The Indians possibly took their time about leaving. Keep in mind, Terry's reinforcements didn't even get there until a couple of days later.

 

[Watchdog]

Now that we are debating Custer's last stand, what does the forum know and think about the theory of a sole survivor...there is enough evidence to give serious thought to there being one trooper that escaped. If you have not heard this before, I assume the net is full of research.

Well, there's this guy.

Then there's Frank Finkel, whose claims seem to have a measure of credibility.

And of course, we can't forget Jack Crabb, whose exploits were celebrated in the novel Little Big Man, by Thomas Berger, and in the film of the same name.

Oh, and a horse named Commanche survived the battle, too.

 

[CATI1835]

This is an extremely complex subject. Many myths about the battle were started shortly after it happened and some still get repeated today. There has been an earlier thread on this last year.

The Little Bighorn...

Some good information here.

 

[Watchdog]

One thing that might have saved Custer and his men would have been gatling guns.

Custer declined to take the gatling guns along on his expedition because he felt they were cumbersome and would slow him down.

Custer was determined to get to the Indians before Crook and Terry. He saw this as his last chance for glory. In fact, Terry had ordered Custer to wait on him and Crook, but then qualified his order by saying something like, "...unless you believe you have reason to act on your own." I can't remember the actual quote and don't feel like looking it up right now. But in other words, with that qualification of his order, he was basically telling Custer to do as he pleased if he found the Indians.

Custer did do as he pleased, of course, with disastrous results.

 

[LSWC]

Custer was likely both good and bad. He was a national hero for about 70 years after his death and then went into decline. Whether he was good or bad makes for interesting discussions. I have visited Last Stand Hill and walked Reno's first and second positions - didn't hear the strains of "Gary Owen" although it was in fact creepy. My recommendation for those that are interested: Son of the Morning Star by Evan Connell.

 

[Old 44 Guy]

I know about Custer but on June 25 1875 my Grandfather was born in Penn. So he was exactly one year old when Custer bit the dust.