mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Jan 22, 2020 11:44:19 GMT
Here are two guys who say Custer was killed at the end of the fight on LSH.
Waterman’s friend Left Hand (Arapaho) Left Hand said the soldiers were demoralized and that one soldier handed him his gun, in token of surrender. “I took the gun and did not kill him, but some Sioux who were behind me killed him,” he recalled. “I went back and took his belt, which had many cartridges in it. Once I saw Custer. He was dressed in buckskin. It was almost at the end of the fight. He was standing up and had his pistols in his hands, shooting into the Indians. I did not see him again until it was all over. I walked around and saw him lying there. He was dead. Most of the soldiers were all dead, but some still moved a little. Waterman (Arapaho) account Custer death Custer, however, and the officers and noncommissioned officers clustered around him fought gamely to the bitter end and were among the last to fall. “When I reached the top of the hill, I saw Custer,” Waterman said. “He was dressed in buckskin, coat and pants and was on his hands and knees. He had been shot through the side, and there was blood coming from his mouth. He seemed to be watching the Indians moving around him. Four soldiers were sitting up around him, but they were all badly wounded. All the other soldiers were down. The next time I saw Custer, he was dead, and some Indians were taking his buckskin clothes.”
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 22, 2020 12:13:39 GMT
Hi Mac, sorry to see your country go through the horrors mate, we are all behind you over here.
We have some claims that this river crossing, at B-C-D whatever! Was made by soldiers on two types of horse, either Sorrel or Grey and that three officers were never found.
C Company rode Sorrels and E rode Greys. Either one of these companies could have attempted to ford the river at some point. Out of Harrington, Porter and Sturgis, with Sturgis being in C, so a group of authors and battle students [god I hate that term], have linked grey horses with the missing body of Sturgis and came up with the idea that C Company made the attack across the river, but wait a minute, didn’t the Indians say that the man who was shot was fished out of the drink and taken back to the high ground? In that case, how was he missing, they took him with them.
Harrington was reported in numerous accounts as being the officer who stayed mounted and directed his men in battle and took a few Indians with him before being shot. Other accounts say that it was Harrington who got away and Indians claimed that the man who got clear had two yellow stripes on his pants, this ride took him clear of the Indians and even clear of the village, because it seems like he rode west, down the bluffs, over the river and clear of the village, before he shot himself.
I would say that Porter died with his company along with Keogh on the east slope of battle ridge. Just because they never identified him, is no proof that he wasn’t with his company.
So no matter which way to look at it, you don’t get any closer to this river crossing and dead officer.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 22, 2020 16:13:18 GMT
"Harrington is reported" Since you did not do the reporting Ian, doing nothing but reminding us what was reported, you have provided me a prime example of what I have been talking about in my last two posts. Follow my reasoning.
Who did the reporting? Certainly not the Indians who would not know Harrington from Donald Duck.
The person doing the reporting then, is doing nothing but reporting his assumption, as there were no White survivors, and Harrington's body was either never found, or ever identified.
The story says an officer, but who among the Indians could recognize an officer with any degree of certainty. What they could and would recognize in the heat of battle is a leader, who does not necessarily have to be an officer, just someone observed in the act of leading and directing.
So what those of conventional thought and locked in opinion say is that leader must have been Harrington, based upon their own vision of battle flow.
I would have much more faith in someone's opinion, had they reported, that Company C occupied a position along F-F Ridge and the Indians reported there was one person of Company C, that showed himself to be a brave and resolute leader, and in all probability that person was Harrington, although there is no way that can be verified.
Anyone opining on this portion of the battle that does not allow himself some wiggle room, probability vs. certainty, is either full of himself, or a damned bloody fool.There are plenty of both about these precincts and they must be called out, if for no other reason than to set the record straight for those who read us. I am very sure the words we speak here, and the opinions expressed had already seen the light of day in some high school term paper, and we have a responsibility to say only fact, and label all else as opinion, and back that opinion up with sound reasoning
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Jan 22, 2020 17:06:48 GMT
I just read the quarterly LBHA mag. a Mister Knorr wrote a what appears to be well researched piece, though he alludes to Bill Rini, as historian, Bill Rini. "Very interesting" as I heard on "Laugh In" years ago. So maybe the folks you allude to above regarding Custer and fords should be directed to his board to be straightened out.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 22, 2020 18:26:55 GMT
Calling Bill Rini a historian is like calling Daffy Duck a brain surgeon.
In fact I would much rather have Daffy Duck operate on my brain, than believe anything that Bill Rini said about history - ANY HISTORY.
That is a pity, as the man has a degree in history, and taught history. Unfortunately, the "that's the pity" part stems from making history up to suit his various purposes.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 22, 2020 21:01:53 GMT
Chuck, the Harrinton stuff came from around FFR, there is an Indian story about how brave this man was when he was charging around on his horse urging his men on and he shot a couple on braves but ended up on foot, there he carried on the fight until they shot him. But Walt Cross says this;
“The bulk of the battalion, consisting of companies E, F, I, and L disintegrated quickly under the Indian assault. But Company C under the command of Lieutenant Harrington charged the surging warriors and then made a fighting withdrawal, staying together as a tactical unit until reaching Last Stand Hill. There, Harrington organized a final mounted breakout after Custer’s death.
I place my thoughts on Porter because I don't think I/Coy went anywhere near any river. But you know the score Chuck, remember how people slated Keogh for the way he positioned his battalion, What!!! battalion, I won't think Keogh positioned anythink that day, I/Coy was on the move and trying to get the hell out of there, but secumbed to Indian fire and forced to go to ground, then Crazy Horse cut then into two and Porter was in one part and Keogh was in an another. BTW; Does Daffy Duck have a yellow pen?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 22, 2020 21:56:52 GMT
No, the yellow pen belongs to Bugs Bunny, but Bugs lent it to Elmer Fudd who is currently using it somewhere in Little Big Horn Land.
How does Walt Cross know that Company C was under command of Lieutenant Harrington or that he did anything that Cross mentioned. It is Fantasy Land writ large Ian, probably by a guy who does not know his ass from a powder puff. Worse yet, he knows enough to be dangerous to the truth.
To KNOW means that what you say cannot be refuted. To know means that to a 100 percent degree of certitude what you have to say is fact. The only fact regarding the Custer portion of the LBH fight is no one knows anything that is to a 100 percent degree of certitude, and cannot be refuted. That is why we must never say we know anything concerning this portion of the battle. We must always phrase what we say in terms of "we think it possible", or "there is a probability that" such and such occurred. If we flatly state we know, like Cross does in that blurb you posted, then all we are doing is misleading those who read us, and are in fact cheating them out of the truth.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jan 23, 2020 9:10:39 GMT
Yeah Chuck i agree with you. That is why I mentioned the yellow pen as not only a reference to Mr. Rini's yellow correction pen but to Walt cross and his attempt to sell his book.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Feb 13, 2020 20:03:30 GMT
For HH, clipped from Lt. William Philo Clark, US 2nd Cav he arrived with Terry and Gibbon. Note he does mention Wikiups and no sweat lodges.
EXTRACT FROM LT. CLARK'S 1877 REPORT
"On June 17th the Indians were camped on a small tributary of the Little Bighorn River about 18 miles above the place where Gen. Custer's troops found them on the 25th. They had at this time about 1200 standing lodges and 400 wickiups, or brush shelters, and numbered about 3500 fighting men.
"After driving Col. Reno's forces across the river, most of the Indians left his immediate front and went down to join those who were fighting Gen. Custer's column-which came down and made an attempt to cross at the mouth of the little stream (Medicine Tail?) and finding it impossible, turned up the ridge, then turned again as the trails leading down to the ford were reached. The Indians had massed in the ravines and opened such a terrific fire from all sides that the troops gave way; the Indians rushed in and made it a hand to hand conflict. The troops attempted to rally once or twice, but were literally overwhelmed with numbers, and in a few moments not one was left to tell the story.
"The temporary respite gave Reno time to gather his forces on a sort of bluff and partially intrench himself. The Indians, believing they had him anyway, in a measure abandoned the attack for the night, and besides, they had a large number of dead and wounded on their hands to care for. If Reno had attempted to succor Custer's forces he would most surely have met their fate. The next day (27th) the approach of Terry's column was discovered, and as Gen. Custer had fallen upon them so much more quickly than they anticipated, they hurriedly broke camp, leaving much of their camp equipage behind them. The timely arrivai of this force saved Reno's party.
"In this fight about 40 Indians were killed and a very large number wounded. They say the white soldiers fought bravely and desperately, and gave instances of personal gallantry which created admiration and respect, even in their savage hearts; but it is impossible to positively identify the individuals from their imperfect descriptions. I am convinced, however, that none were taken prisoners and subjected to torture as has been represented. The Indians say that many of the dead soldiers' carbines were found with shells stuck fast in the chambers, rendering them useless for the time being.
"The small number killed is due to the fact that an Indian has a wonderful faculty of protecting himself, and unless he is shot through the brain, heart or back, there is no certainty at all about his dying, for since I have seen many Indians who have been shot in all manner of ways through the body and still enjoying excellent health, I have been convinced that of all animals they are superior in point of tenacity of life, magnificent horsemen and fine shots-doing about as good execution on the backs of their thoroughly-trained speedy and hardy ponies as on the ground, accustomed from their earliest youth to take advantage of every knoll, rock, tree, tuft of grass, and every aid the topography of the country affords to secure game; and their education completed and perfected by constant warfare with other tribes and the whites, each warrior becomes an adept in their way of fighting, needing no orders to promptly seize, push and hold any opportunity for success, or in retreating, protecting themselves from harm. Each tribe is organized by accident or pleasure into several different bands, each band having a chief, but his powers and authority are, in a great measure, limited by the will and wishes of his people.
"Great prominence has been given Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull in this war, the good fighting strategy and subsequent masterly retreats being attributed to them, whereas they are really not entitled to more credit or censure than many others, so far as plans and orders were concerned; but they headed two of the worst bands on the Plains, and were the two fiercest leaders the Sioux nation has produced for years.
Thought you would enjoy.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Feb 13, 2020 20:11:44 GMT
GENERAL SHERIDAN'S COMMENTS
"There is much interesting information in this report, and Lieut. Clark's description of the capabilities of the Indian for offensive warfare is very accurate; but the narratives of the Indians should be read with a considerable degree of allowance and some doubt, as Indians generally make their descriptions to conform to what they think are the wishes of those who interview them.
"As to the number of Indians in the fight, and the number killed, accounts greatly differ. Thert certainly were enough Indians there to defeat the 7th Cavalry, divided as it was into three parts, and to totally annihilate any one of these three detachments in the open field, as was proved in the destruction of one of them and its gallant commander. The reasons given why Major Reno should have remained where he was driven, on the top of the bluff, that he afterwards fortified and held, are very good; but there are other reasons no less strong. For instance, he could not abandon his wounded, who would have been slain by the enemy, and furthermore, he had no knowledge of the whereabouts of Custer nor of the straits he was in, and it is natural to presume that he supposed Col. Custer would return to his support when he discovered the superiority in numbers of the Indians, in order that the regiment might be reunited.
"The history of the battle of the Little Bighorn can now be told in a few words. The Indians were actually surprised, and in the confusion arising from the surprise and the attempt of the women and children to get out of the way, Col. Custer was led to believe that the Indians were retreating and would escape him; furthermore, from the point he left Major Reno he could see only a small portion of the Indian encampment, and had no just conception of its size, consequently he did not wait to close up his regiment and attack with its full strength, but, ordering Major Reno to attack the village at its upper end, he started directly down the stream on the further side of the bluffs which concealed the river from his view, and hid him from the Indians, with five companies of the 7th Cavalry. Upon reaching a trail that led down to the river, opposite about the middle of the village, he followed it down nearly to the stream, and then, without even attempting to cross (for no bodies of men or horses were found upon either side of the stream near the ford), he went back for a few hundred yards and started directly up the line of the fatal ridge where his body and the bodies of his command were afterwards found, with the evident intention of going to the lower end of the-village and crossing and attacking the Indians there. It was upon this ridge that he was completely surrounded and his command annihilated. There are no indications whatever that he attempted to go back and rejoin Major Reno. Had he done this after reaching the ford above named, Capt. Benteen, having in the meantime joined Major Reno, he would have had his whole regiment together, and could have held his own, at least, and possibly have defeated the Indians. If the Indians had really known that he was coming, they would have gone out to meet him, as they did to meet Gen. Crook only eight days before, in order to let the women and children and the village get out of the way. Again, if Col. Custer had waited until his regiment was closed up and crossed it at the point Major Reno did, and had made his attack in the level valley, posting some of his men in the woods, all the Indians there could not have defeated him. I do not attribute Col. Custer's action to either recklessness or want of judgment, but to a misapprehension of the situation and to a superabundance of courage.
"Enclosed herewith a statement of the battle of the Little Bighorn made to the C. O. at Cheyenne Agency by "Red Horse," a Sioux Indian, who evidently took part in the action, and whose statement of the number killed and wounded of the Indians is greatly in excess of that named by Lieut. Clark's informant.
P. H. SHERIDAN, Lieut-Gen. Commanding.
|
|