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.
*sign*....go ahead, pick on me. I deserve it...no excuse for bad sentence structure.
Custer didn’t wait for his scouts to come back with information about just how badly he was outnumbered, and he split his command of about 360 men. There were over 10,000 Souix and Cheyenne in the area and over 4000 were warriors....not a good situation for Custer.
Custer expected the Indians to resist (and odds are, they would have.) They had left the reservations. The biggest thing that Custer didn’t know was that the Lakota, Cheyenne and Arapaho had made an alliance and were camped together.
Tactically his strategy was clever enough - basically have Reno create a distraction and then hit the Indians from behind.
The problem was Reno realized he was outnumbered and began to retreat. This freed the Indian army up when they were told that another column was approaching from behind.
Recent archeaological digs have led to the belief that there was no “last stand”. What they think happened was that on Custer’s side of the battlefield him and his men set up skirmish lines. The Indians used their larger numbers to charge right through his lines.
Based on the account of Indian witnesses some of Custer’s men panicked and began to flee the onslaught. Others threw down their weapons and tried to surrender only to be cut down anyway.
Recent digs have indicated that the Indians had better weapons than the 7th cavalry. I guess Custer’s weapons tended to stop working when they overheated.
If the US military was doing this to terrorists in the desert of Iraq today, it would be called “war crimes”. Since it was done to white people by Indians (that we’re taught to feel sorry for) it’s considered “a great victory” which just goes to show that when it comes to race, not all pigs are equal.
When you do not adapt to changing conditions, you risk loss. That was the case here.
This was a battle the Indians won, in a war that they lost.
Yeah. I saw it too. Haven't in a long time. The movie tended to portray Custer in the most positive light possible. If memory serves -- in the movie -- he was attempting to relieve infantry when his command was wiped out. I'm no expert on this historical event but I enjoy reading what others post about the matter.
Neat. I’d love to visit the park. I have seen Custers grave at West Point.
But it could be almost anything, because Custer was renowned for NOT being in a proper uniform as a general rule.
I visited Little Bighorn in 1999 and would recommend it to anyone that gets within 300 miles of it. It is hard to really understand what happened and how it could happen without being there. Nothing much has changed in 130 years. Everything is out in the open and there is seemingly no place to hide, but just cross over a seemingly insignificant hill or ridge and you could hide an entire division.
Radio communications would have made all the difference in the world.
The Gatling guns were left at the fort because they would slow him down (and some say he did not like the mass killing concept); their sabers were left behind to lessen the noise. Also, The terrain was considered to rough for the cannon (or Gatling) carriages.
And Custer had never dealt with a unified Indian force of many tribes before. Plus the repeating rifles on the Indian side.
IMHO, if Custer had slowed down and taken the Gatling guns, he might have had a chance, but he believed the Indians would run from him so he wanted speed; and overwhelming numbers might have got him anyway!
One conjecture is that Custer was disliked so much that assistance was deliberately delayed.
Interesting also that he had his troopers leave their sabers behind also.
He was not that good a commander. Even during the Civil War, he was considered impetuous, responding to any enemy maneuver with a charge.
What is interesting is that the British suffered their version of
Custer’s Last Stand a few years later at Isandlwana.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Isandlwana
About the only contrast is that some of the British did manage to
escape/survive the debacle.
PBS’s “Secrets of The Dead” did a decent investigation on the
“how/why did the British lose?” topic.
Aside from poor distribution of ammo, the Martini-Henry rifles
would have serious cartridge jams after the guns started to heat up;
accuracy was also poor with increased fouling.
And they had too many gaps in their firing line in trying to defend
too large of a perimeter.
Of course, this battle was just the prelude to Roarke’s Drift (as seen
in the movie “Zulu”).
Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse et al countered with their own maneuver, known as "Ricky, Racky, Rass...Knock 'em on their...", well, you get the idea!
Seriously, Custer was a self-serving, ego maniac who never got over the fact that he had been reduced in rank at the end of the Civil War when the Army down-sized.
He also was a disciple problem, having deserted his command to go to the side of his ailing wife. Soft heart aside, it was a damned stupid thing to do and if his commander had done the right thing, the Defeat at the Little Big Horn would probably not happened.
His refusal to perform a proper recon, (HIS FORCES OWN DAMNED JOB!), his refusal to bring along the two Gattling Guns (Not glamorous enough!) and the worst, under-estimating his enemy, provide the classic, text-book example of incompetent leadership!
My late Dad, a retired Armor Colonel, knew Custer's Grand Nephew. They were both in the Retired Officer's Association, and Dad put a bumper sticker on his Luv Pickup that really aggrevated the guy. It said, "Custer Had It Comin'!"
“Custer was renowned for NOT being in a proper uniform as a general rule.”
General Officers were allowed to design their own uniforms. He had been a General in the Civil War, but postwar reverted to the downsized army’s permanant rank of Colonel. However he was stilled called ‘General’ by some as a courtesy. And having been a General he kept his eccentricities, LOL.
But I've never heard that he shot himself (wouldn't that be kind of like committing suicide by being shot three times in the head? A heart shot OR a head shot would pretty much incapacitate you.)
‘Did Custer have a bad battle plan? ‘
Custer planned on the go. Hey, it always worked for him before!
I think he saw himself as a "Cavalier" of the English Civil War . . . romanticism can get you killed.
Pretty-shield said that he "had to go, because he had to die." I know what she meant -- Scots Highlanders call it "fey" - seeing your own death ahead of time.
I’ve not read it, but understand that this latest book on Custer’s
Last Stand is pretty good (4.5 stars with 35 reviewers).
A Terrible Glory: Custer and the Little Bighorn -
the Last Great Battle of the American West
by James Donovan
http://www.amazon.com/Terrible-Glory-Custer-Bighorn-American/dp/0316155780/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-9320296-9239912?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214409979&sr=1-1
Out-gunned, out-commanded, out-fought and out-foxed. The Sioux and Cheyenne had just given Crook the scare of his life at the Rosebud... and they were the best horsemen in the world. In battle, Indian and horse were one...the warrior firing his Winchester/Henry from under his mounts neck. Indian and horse were painted in the wildest colors... warriors blowing their eagle bone whistles and yelling the Ki-yi-yi!
As squaw-man Frank Huston said... “It sure put the fear of God into you.”
Custer was thought to be an arrogant, flamboyant fool. At LBH perhaps he was. However, at Gettysburg, his efforts were vital to Union victory and should not be overlooked or forgotten.
I saw the grave a West Point as a lad. I’m still impressed by the man.And I couldn’t care less what guilt ridden contemporary hand ringers say. Custer was a brave and genuine American hero and an excellent officer. He is a credit to the US Army.
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.