|
Post by HinTamaheca on Oct 1, 2009 8:45:32 GMT -6
On 25 and 26 June 1876, the Lakota and Northern Cheyenne Peoples fought to defend their cultures against what was thought to be the most preeminent "Indian-fighting" unit in the United States Army. On 27 June 1876, the battlefield told a different story. To this day, the American Indian history of this battle remains largely ignored and for no good reason. Bias against their narratives, some poorly interpreted and others sometimes steered toward support for already made conclusions, has only recently been seriously considered.
The warrior art, some created within days after the fight in keeping with centuries old fashion, has been even less appreciated for what it can "tell" about the battle. Now, for the first time, Colonel Thomas brings together all known art of the battle along with narrative interpretations that tie together art and word. Others have provided narratives and others have presented some of the art but none have captured it like this. Over 250 images, most in color, are presented. Some of these images are quite well known. Others not so. Some will be seen here for the first time. Extensively researched and documented in over 300 pages, Rubbing Out Long Hair is the major reference about the battle art. Available November 2009. ******* Elk Plain Press, imprint of Susney, Inc., is pleased to announce that its newest publication, Rubbing Out Long Hair: The American Indian Story of the Little Big Horn in Art and Word, is now available for pre-publication orders. Orders may be made from the Susney website via PayPal or checks/money orders sent to the company home address in Spanaway, Washington. In final preparation, the book is slated for release in November, 2009. The pre-publication price of $39.95 plus tax and shipping is available until November 1, 2009. Regular price is $59.95 plus tax and shipping.
Rubbing Out Long Hair is the first reference to publish all known Indian art of the battle of the Little Big Horn River in 1876 in which Lakota and Northern Cheyenne people successfully defended their way of life. 26 Indian artists are showcased in over 230 images, most in full color and are coupled with appropriate narratives from both sides to tell a more complete story than ever before. Some of the art is well known to the general public while most of it is not.
Leslie Tillett's Wind on the Buffalo Grass in 1976 published the works of seven artists (mostly Amos Bad Heart Bull) and provided narratives from 15 participants. Sandra Brizee-Bowen's For All To See in 2003 published 52 of 177 then known pieces of art by 12 artists and integrated testimony from 19 participants. Rubbing Out Long Hair showcases 26 different artists, 194 paintings/drawings with most in color, and incorporates most of the extensive participant narratives. Where allowed, images have been enhanced for study and appreciation.
Among the 194 images are the 62 Amos Bad Heart Bull drawings about the battle shown for the first time together outside of Helen Blish's A Pictographic History of the Oglala Sioux, two Standing Bear muslins not seen before, a White Swan muslin misattributed for a century, and the missing Red Horse drawing, shown of course with the other 41 in the set.
Colonel Thomas has crafted a superb reference from which, as he notes in the Preface, a more definitive understanding of this event can begin. He goes on to say "This is not another book about Custer and may in the end be better recognized for providing the current state of the Indian resources for study." Extensively researched and documented in over 300 pages, Rubbing Out Long Hair will be a major art and battle history reference for quite some time. There simply is no other work like it. For more information, go to: susney.com/ROLH.htm
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 1, 2009 13:51:56 GMT -6
That should be interesting, at least so long as those that are drawn by actual participants within a reasonable amount of time are considered. Otherwise, same problems.
These drawings were not meant for a huge audience, but the tribe and sometimes just the family because there was no standard written symbolism between the tribes, which would be a literacy unclaimed and unlikely. Just the Red Horse drawings suffice for evidence of that. Nobody seems to know who the drawings are of or what, exactly, is the information being offered. We can reasonably guess, but that's it, as I've read no indication anyone has gone on the record with surety of translation from graphic to written word.
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Oct 2, 2009 14:20:21 GMT -6
well at least they did not have to report to their superior commanders and blow up the indian casualties and lower theirs and hide their mistakes in sought of their carreer. except for memory flaws i don't see how a lakota could lie on drawing of what happened. then again i agree with you that it has to be recent after the fight drawings and not second hand 50 year too late interpretations. DC i red your latets review of the 'bevo' section and I applaud for your remarks on custer yellowstone and his experiences, the cheyennes and the hunkpapa %, washita and other : I can't help but thinking you are reconsidering slightly the 19th indian sense of matters, I hope I did help you with that ;D this was a 'mutual feather'
by the way sitting bull could learn as little from history as did the euro-american alliance in 1933 or 1938 or the same in 2009 facing iran. it is not because it is written we learn from it. might as well write nothing and go by instinct and let them fall into your camp. best regards
thansk hin for the link, will order the book (and scann for wallpaper!)
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Oct 2, 2009 14:23:35 GMT -6
hin who's is the frontpage ledger from again and what is the interpretation
|
|
|
Post by rgthomas on Oct 6, 2011 10:58:35 GMT -6
Good morning...as the author of Rubbing Out Long Hair I was just made aware of this thread and thought I'd take some time and address the misconceptions above. First I'd like to annouce that the book was awarded the 2010 G. Joseph Sills Jr Book Award by the Custer Battlefield Historical and Museum Association. Now to the issues raised as to the art form by the individual "Dark Cloud" above. Then we'll discuss the cover drawing and its history.
This genre, better known for the last 100 years or so as "ledger art" or in a more accurate vein, "pictographic art" has also been termed "warrior biographic art" by several scores of scholars both Indian and non-Indian. This art first decorated clothing, tipi liners, hide robes, tipi covers, and rocks. In short, regardless of media it was "for all to see" as evidence of a man's war-fighting and hunting skills aided by his powerful spiritual helpers.
There was an agreed upon "conventional" means of protrayal of actions and deeds and to such a degree of sophistication that often times, especially on shields, rock carvings/paintings, and smaller items such as shirts, a developed style of shorthand was used to denote certain actions. In short, this was all braggadocio and recognition of powerful helpers that could be "read" by all the Plains tribes who had adopted this manner of expression.
Common characteristics include such "translators" as the protagonist is almost always on the right and the victum is almost always on the left of a vignette. The cover drawing by Kills Two is a prime example of such a convention. This holds true even for large, multi-event protrayals on buffalo hides and lodge covers. Tribal warrior-artists even agreed on how to portray each other so that Crow could be differentiated from Cheyenne, Lakota from Blackfoot, etc. In short, enough people talked and researched with enough "makers" so that a lot of this art is understandable to this day. Several scholars have published "dictionaries" if you will to aid modern students. In short, there are hundreds of published articles, papers, and books that detail what the art "says." Those that pertain generally to the art form and to the Little Big Horn are listed in the bibliography of ROLH.
I would suggest that newcomers to this art form start by reading anything by John C. Ewers, Candice Greene, James D. Keyser, Janet C. Berlo, James Mooney, James Walker, to name a few. Michael Cowdrey's exceptional work with the Southern Cheyenne warrior Arrow's Elk Society ledger book (still in print) set a standard for publishing. Helen Blish's book of the Amos Bad Heart Bull ledger book of Oglala history is a vertible gold mine of that tribe's events. In short, published discussions of the art form are legion. I will be happy to provide a copy of the ROLH bibliography to any who wish it for their own study of the art and Western history.
The cover drawing was done by the Oglala Kills Two who, in order to support his family, produced in pictograph style, artwork to sell to tourists, agents, soldiers, etc. This particular drawing is a rather well known and oft-used illustration of Little Big Horn writings, Indian and White histories, etc. It tells nothing about the battle and was not meant to. It is simply an illustration. It does give us one more protrayal of Crazy Horse. THat's what we say with a bit more detail in the book. It is also one of the reasons why we chose it as the cover illustration. Custer sells.
Since publication, recognition of about seven additional pieces that are probably about the battle have come to light. The Maffet Ledger in New York is one of these. That is one of our goals with this book. Find more art and hopefully more narratives that have not received attention in the past.
Red Horse was mentioned by "Dark Cloud" and his 42 drawings as evidence of Dark Cloud's awareness. However, not only did we find the missing drawing (there are only 41 on the SIRIS website and only 41 in Herman Viola's Little Big Horn Remembered, we also uncovered the chart guide to all the drawings by Dr. McChesney that had never before been published. The missing drawing is know by the chart AND by the publication of Colonel Garrick Mallery's "Picture-Writing of the American Indian" in 1893 in the Tenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology. The chart guide helps line up all 42 drawings WITH Red Horse's narrative. In short, Red Horse's drawing/narrative portrayal of the Little is one of BEST documented stories of the fight by a participant on record. There's lots more in the book but enough for now.
We're working on a biography of White Swan, the only Crow scout to be wounded and only one of two Crow scouts to actually have fought that day and is due in late 2012. His 17 portrayals of the battle is the third largest number of works, Amos Bad Heart Bull with 63 being the largest and Red Horse's 42 being second.
We're also completing research for the Field Museum on a Nez Perce hide painting about that campaign and on a Lakota painting for the National Musuem of the American Indian dealing with Wounded Knee.
I hope this helps clarify a well known and increasingly used source of American history. Everyone please have a great day.
Regards, Rod Thomas...
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 6, 2011 13:12:03 GMT -6
I'm the individual known as Dark Cloud.
Still haven't read the book, or many of the ones mentioned, but I retain hesitations as expressed which aren't really negated by what you here post.
Since I have expressed doubt of the value of accounts of the battle, graphic or written, that first appear years after the event by anyone, white or red, my concern would be for those produced by the end of 1879 and the Reno RCOI.
Your use of 'all to see' isn't really in conflict with my "These drawings were not meant for a huge audience, but the tribe and sometimes just the family...." This because any drawn by 1879 or thereabouts would be by someone unfamiliar with the reach of the photograph (b&w anyway) or books and newspapers. All to see in person, but doubtful the author's inner publicist would imagine the other options.
I say "... because there was no standard written symbolism between the tribes, which would be a literacy unclaimed and unlikely." You say there were conventions, which I do not doubt, but that's not the same as standardization of language. For example, you mention the protagonist generally appears on the right. Would that be because most are generally right handed? Were southpaws responsible for the unconventional placements? Do we know?
Indians with Custer interpreted a rock drawing of this type as a message from the Sioux claiming thus and so in their present time relevant to 1876, but the rock drawing - still extant - had been made in pre-history, I read. That doesn't speak to sophistication of this language, or at least to the sophistication of those Indians. That's an error of thousands of years.
I don't mention the Red Horse drawings to demonstrate my awareness of anything beyond their mention in the post immediately above. It's two years in the past so I cannot recall exactly my thoughts. But, if memory serves, Red Horse had anachronisms in his drawings that suggest less than precise recollection of the event or enemy participants. Swords, for example, and national flags upside down. The one lodge opening opposite the others.
Would agree that's trivial in the main, but I've not read where the events in individual graphics have been assuredly appended to events known to have occurred. I don't think there's every been doubt that recollection of specific Indians and their clothing and weapons that day was probably pretty good.
Still, this is five years after the battle when it appeared, and I think it a bit much to conclude that anyone had such photographic memories, or were immune to melding with the tales of others, or any of that.
And certainly the recollections of a few do not speak, necessarily, for the many there.
|
|
|
Post by rgthomas on Oct 6, 2011 14:43:37 GMT -6
Dark, ok. Perhaps your "I've not read where the events in individual graphics have been assuredly appended to events known to have occurred." might be assuaged if you do read the book. Please, check it out at the Denver Art Museum or the Denver Public Library. Perhaps even an interlibrary loan to Boulder might be in order. You might also then check out the book on the Cheyenne Dog Soldier ledger art for comparision and further growth. It was published by the Colorado Historical Society and is collected at the Denver Public Library.
All the references cited address all your concerns and answer all your questions - they just have to be read.
Please enjoy a great day.
Regards, Rod...
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 6, 2011 19:59:22 GMT -6
Fair enough, but we've veered from specific art about the battle accounts to ledger art in general. I'm cynical as hell about Custer stuff, and wonder if you would you be willing to cast some light on one of the issues I recall? No full explanation, but the gist. To wit, the swords and flags issue in Red Horse.
This, because it's easier to change religion than deal with library loans of valuable books.
|
|
|
Post by rgthomas on Oct 7, 2011 16:08:50 GMT -6
Richard, thanks and sure. Before we talk about Red Horse in particular, there are a few points about the book, my approach, and my understanding of the art form and its use as a historical source that I’d like to point out. Had it not been for the gracious support of the University of Nebraska Press in allowing us to use the Amos Bad Heart Bull art at a greatly reduced price this book would still be a dream. After a decade plus of study, research, and good old fashion “rootin’ around the cellar” for more art we were able to publish. The goal of the book was to present all the art about the battle that we could find and to see what, if any, lessons it might teach us about the people and the event. If none, so be it. But it did in several ways.
I am very aware and stated it several times in the book that much remains to be researched and understood. In the chapter about the genre I quite uncategorically say that there is no way a 21st Century white man can begin to understand the mind of a 19th indigenous warrior especially when it comes to that person’s form of expression. I can learn of what others posit and build on that but if no meaning can be imputed then none would be. Feedback about this approach has been positive especially from both academic and tribal readers. I remain quite clear that incongruities exist in the art much like those in the narratives – both white and Indian by the way – and that they remain as such until better understood. In short, I know my limits, biases, and the limits of the art in increasing our understanding of, again, the people and the event. Frankly, multiply your cynicism by 10 and you have my level of concern and just not only on this battle.
Red Horse. McChesney was not the first person to whom Red Horse gave his narrative. The first time was to Colonel W. H. Wood on February 27, 1877 and I found only one reference that cited it – Graham’s The Custer Myth. When compared with the 1881 McChesney narrative little difference was found. I concluded the Red Horse chapter thusly: “Much remains to be researched and studied about these drawings. Some things, like the number of Lakota casualties, may never be reconciled or understood. Meanings of items or symbols in the art need to be discerned. In any case, Red Horse’s narrative and his art stand as one of the more complete descriptions of this battle.” There are more “unknowns” in this set than the sabers and flags.
Flags. The US flag shows up mostly in Lakota battle art. It is often shown upside down. There have been a few studies done as to why that portrayal with no clear answer. The immediate reaction from us in the 21st Century is that it shows the Army forces are in distress or defeated or some other modern view. Frankly, pictographic portrayal of defeated usually shows in the victim dressed in whatever spiritual helpers (shields, wotaws, etc.) and honorific dress (crooked lance, warrior sash, bonnet or split horn headdress). Using this conventional way of describing the significance of the warrior’s prowess, many think the use of the flag is done in the same way. The Indians noted the fierce fighting to protect the flag and in the Indian way of things it was a very strong spiritual helper. Why upside down? Don’t know. Did upside down mean the spiritual power of the flag was drained? Lots of speculation but no definitive answer. The distress signal came way after the start of the reservation period so that’s not applicable. This remains under research and several of us have a group trying to come to some understanding better than what we have at the moment. It usually is something simple as well. So, Red Horse here does nothing out of the ordinary in HIS manner of showing the company guidons. The two best references for flag study so far are Richard Pohrt’s The American Indian, The American Flag published by the Flint Institute of Arts, Flint, MI in 1975 and The Flag in American Indian Art by Toby Herbst and Joel Kopp published by the University of Washington Press in 1993. I’m working with several flag portrayals in White Swan’s biography and hope to include a more detailed understanding of such imagery in that book.
Sabers. I noted in the book: “In the five drawings of Reno’s approach to the village, all the soldiers are carrying sabers. As noted before, the sabers were shipped back to Fort Abraham Lincoln before proceeding up Rosebud Creek on the 22nd. None of the soldiers are armed with sabers in the ten images of the Reno retreat and of the Custer column fighting. The reason for the difference is not understood at this time.” And it remains not understood to this day. I can’t even wildly speculate why they are shown and then not. I still don’t think it significant enough to research more. It does not aid in clarity about Reno’s retreat.
There are several other areas of question in Red Horse’s work but this is probably gone on long enough at least for now. Do either of these lessen the impact of his graphic portrayal of a battle? I don’t think so especially when his narrative is used alongside the art. Hope this helps and I could go on lots longer. The last point I’d like to make is this is an effort to use the art, along with narratives, to come to some additional understanding of the event and the people. I put a stake in the ground and said this is what I think it is saying. Enlightenment depends, I think, on rigorous examination and forthright discussion. Academics demand it. I know there is a reference out there somewhere that will be the key to answering these two issues. We just need to find, accept or discount it, and go on to the next point. I am still searching for such works and art…
Everyone please have a great day.
Regards, Rod Thomas…
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 7, 2011 19:00:54 GMT -6
The thing is, there were no American flags at the battle, nor swords. There were guidons. He colors most of the soldiers with blue piping, which was infantry, whereas cavalry had yellow. It suggests he didn't recall much about the soldiers (and they look alike to Indians) and was refreshed by the soldiers about him when he was drawing. If so, understandable. He was traumatized as well. In aggregate it doesn't suggest reliability above the norm, though.
Or just fluffing out stories he heard, illustrating them, but he didn't see them as they happened. His tale in Graham is mostly in the third person, and when "I" appears it sticks out.
The translation provides helpful tidbits by the translator. "Civilian" and "officer" and "Northeast" and specific counts, 160 and 136. Indians had no such need for specific numbers in that range, and while the language today has them, there's never been indication they had them back in the day.
It's only seven months after the battle, and I'd suspect the "bravest man" tale, given the needs for 'greater truths', may have been invented or inflated at the least by the whites. No evidence for that, but what is described doesn't sound like the sort of bravery admired by the Indians, "turning on his horse" to face the Indians several times. No personal combat. Does sound like the sort of thing whites raised on Roland and Arthur would admire, though.
Will try to get the books, including yours.
|
|
|
Post by shan on Oct 8, 2011 5:19:30 GMT -6
Rod and DC,
When one looks at a lot of ledger Art as I have done over the years, several things do become clear, but, as Rod has just pointed out, there are a number of small cultural and artistic conventions that we will probably never completely understand as these things have been as lost to present day Native Ameericans as they have to the rest of us.
One thing that may pertain to the sabre issue is the convention of showing a man in the regalia that he was well known for, i.e. face and body paint, clothing and personal adornments, favourite horse and type of weapons he favoured and so on. Thus in many of the paintings of the battle of the LBH we see various well known warriors wearing this type of apparal they were known for, when it would have been virtually impossible for them to have time to have either locate it, or put on. So the convention was to represent them as they would like to have been seen, not as they actually were on the day of the battle.
Theyalso applied this rule to their enemies where possible, thus the Crows Shoshones and the Pawnees are represented in all their finery in various depictions of warfare between the tribes; and we have to remember that most of these battles were very small scale affairs, ones that that kept re-accurring over a number of years , so they would have become familiar with the personal appearence of any particularly brave individual on the other side, warriors who maybe shamed them, menthey would have given their right arm to kill.
I thing the sabres and the types of uniforms depicted may fall into this catogory. The uniforms may well have been a mixture of those they saw around the reservations during later years, likewise the flags which they may have assumed must have been carried during the battle. The sabres would have been an item they coverted and admired, and like the flags may have thought that some of the soldiers must have carried them.
That said, I don't think this is a reason to dismiss these artworks out of hand as containing nothing of value with regards to information concerning the battle. For every error you can point out there may well be a telling piece of observation. As I've pointed out before, Standing Bears various depictions point out several episodes during the battle that people on these boards still continue argue for and against; the run for Deep ravine, the driving off of the greys, the flight of four mounted troopers to mention just to name a few.
One last point. many of the men who made these paintings took part in the battle, they did these works for themselves and their fellow tribsmen for the most part, and any boasting on their part of their own actions would have been held up to scrutiny and poo poohed if they were found to have been a little too liberal with the truth.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by shan on Oct 8, 2011 5:24:04 GMT -6
I forgot one thing.
DC, the turning the horse incident you mention may well have been true, it was something that braver warriors might do when fleeing the enemy in order to give the rest of their people a little extra leeway, thus it was indeed something that was admired.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 8, 2011 6:29:40 GMT -6
I must say, this is the type of discussion I first bargained for when I joined these boards about six years ago.
I know very little about this subject, but I must congratulate you, Rod, for being so reasonable; you, David, for joining in with your extremely savvy comments; and you, DC, for your usual brilliantly critical and reasonable comments.
Man... what a pleasure it is to read you three fellows. I hope it continues.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Oct 8, 2011 7:10:39 GMT -6
I must say, this is the type of discussion I first bargained for when I joined these boards about six years ago. I know very little about this subject, but I must congratulate you, Rod, for being so reasonable; you, David, for joining in with your extremely savvy comments; and you, DC, for your usual brilliantly critical and reasonable comments. Man... what a pleasure it is to read you three fellows. I hope it continues. Best wishes, Fred. Fred, Yes Capt, I agree with your entire sentiment. This is a new and refreshing vehicle to explore this battle. One I have never looked into. I join you in thanking these gentlemen for a most interesting and learned conversation. I also hope that on the other forum people put away whatever bias they may have and take your advice to tune in. It would be their loss if they don't. Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Oct 8, 2011 7:23:45 GMT -6
Also on the other board there is a gentleman, screen name warrior, who has done extensive research with Jason Pitsch and sharing his findings and thoughts with the forum. As they would say good day at Black-rock. Sure beats the heck out of arguing does a mule travel at 3 MPH or 3.5 MPH
|
|