|
Post by shan on Feb 26, 2012 11:18:23 GMT -6
Fred,
Just to clarify. When I talked of a previous battle or skirmish involving the Crows that supposedly took place in the LBH area, I wasn't referring to the exploits of Custers Crow scouts during the battle. The fight I was referring may have taken place a few years before. Now whether it was one, two or three years before, or maybe even more, I'm afraid I can't remember.
I'll have a hunt amongst my books but I seem to remember that there's mention of it in Helen Blish's book, ' A Pictographic History of the Oglala Sioux.' That said, it maybe one small line in many thousands, so the chances of locating it indicate that this would be a needle in a haystack job.
Thanks for pointing me to Ephraim Dickson as a source for your information on Low Dog, can you suggest any particular articles I should try and find?
The two differing death dates, one for the Oglala, the other for the Brule have led to some confusion, even a fine researcher like Richard Hardorff got the two deaths mixed up in one of his books. For my own part I think it pretty conclusive that the Oglala Low Dog: the one that most people will know from that famous photograph, died in 1894, a year or two after his release from prison, and whilst he may have spent time at Pine Ridge, he was initially arrested on the Cheyenne River reservation, and escorted back there when his prison term ended. So I think it likely that that is where he died.
Poor old Michael Kitchen. He's found himself rather typecast after his work in Foyle's War, indeed I think those little tics he used to flesh out the character became so ingrained on his face he may have had trouble shaking them off when he was offered other parts
Yes, I'm 100% with you on Brando. Now that I think back, we spent way too much time in various pubs during my youth doing the, 'I could've had class Charlie' speech to try and impress the girls. Come to think of it, the sideways twist I still have on my mouth, and the raised, quizzical eyebrows I used to try and look like my hero maybe an early case of ' Kichenitis.'
regards Shan
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Feb 26, 2012 13:07:46 GMT -6
There was a fight AFTER the Custer battle with Crows on the battlefield or immediate vicinity.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 26, 2012 13:33:06 GMT -6
There was a fight AFTER the Custer battle with Crows on the battlefield or immediate vicinity. Then that would explain to me those bones. It would be my guess they were from that fight, not the Custer battle. Thanks, DC. The fight I was referring may have taken place a few years before. Now whether it was one, two or three years before, or maybe even more, I'm afraid I can't remember. I'll have a hunt amongst my books but I seem to remember that there's mention of it in Helen Blish's book, ' A Pictographic History of the Oglala Sioux.' Shan, DC has found it, above. On the way. For my two farthings, Hardorff is about as good as you get, yet I would agree with you, I have found a number of... misconceptions?... I hate to say mistakes... in his work. I should be so good, however. I retract Pine Ridge and substitute Cheyenne River. Knowing he was an Oglala made me assume Pine Ridge. Sloppy of me. As much as I love his work, I am not bleeding for Mr. Kitchen and being typecast as anything. All the more reason to continue the series. I saw him in one of the newer James Bond movies and his character did not appear to be much different than Christopher Foyle. Unlike Brando or DeNiro, some actors portray themselves in every role. That takes nothing away from their brilliance as actors, but instead it brings additional credence to the part they play. Pure and simple, I just think Kitchen is marvelous and when you run into him you may feel free to give him my highest accolades. I hope they never stop that series. You know something...? I love his hats, the green one and the blue one. Where the heck can I get one of those? I had never seen a flat-rimmed fedora before and they are so cool. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Feb 26, 2012 15:15:09 GMT -6
Casualties have been a long term interest of mine. Or rather, the lack of casualties.
DeRudio and Thompson both claimed they killed Indians. There is no Indian accounts that in any way correspond with their accounts. I agree with CLW that the Indians would have noticed KIA and WIA.
The firing on L/C/N ridge really happened,but apparently caused no casualties on either side. I believe that the 7th fired severaltimes in this battle far beyond effective range. They wasted a lot of fire, and with small on hand ammo supplies, this was a fatal error.
Areas where I see ineffective fire are L/C/N, Calhoun Hill and the valley fight. During the ranged fire fight parts of these engagements, there are few accounts on casualties for either side. (Otter Creek wasn't full of bodies like Antienam or Fredericksburg, for example. Hardoff records about 2-3 Indians hit, with US losing O'Hara just at the end of this phase).
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Feb 26, 2012 15:26:52 GMT -6
Casualties have been a long term interest of mine. Or rather, the lack of casualties. DeRudio and Thompson both claimed they killed Indians. There is no Indian accounts that in any way correspond with their accounts. I agree with CLW that the Indians would have noticed KIA and WIA. The firing on L/C/N ridge really happened,but apparently caused no casualties on either side. I believe that the 7th fired severaltimes in this battle far beyond effective range. They wasted a lot of fire, and with small on hand ammo supplies, this was a fatal error. Areas where I see ineffective fire are L/C/N, Calhoun Hill and the valley fight. During the ranged fire fight parts of these engagements, there are few accounts on casualties for either side. (Otter Creek wasn't full of bodies like Antienam or Fredericksburg, for example. Hardoff records about 2-3 Indians hit, with US losing O'Hara just at the end of this phase). Colonel, Don't know who Count no account could have hit from behind whatever rock he was hiding, and Thompson is, well, Thompson. Although your thought on targets being out of range certainly makes sense, I believe that the low causality number among the warriors was do to the fact that the soldiers were over-run so quickly they didn't have a chance to use even the ammo that was on their person, let alone accurate fire. In fact the low number of warrior casualties is another reason why I believe this was a quick rout Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 26, 2012 15:55:00 GMT -6
The only person other than Thompson who would know for sure what happened or did not happen is Watson. What happened to Watson? I think he died fairly early but am not sure. Did the Thompson story pre-date or post-date the demise of Watson?
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Feb 26, 2012 16:17:15 GMT -6
The only person other than Thompson who would know for sure what happened or did not happen is Watson. What happened to Watson? I think he died fairly early but am not sure. Did the Thompson story pre-date or post-date the demise of Watson? Colonel...There is no date of death listed for Watson, however this from Pvt William Slaper, Slaper questioned the timing of Thompson's tale (He saw dark significance in the fact that Thompson's battlefield companion Pvt James Watson was already dead by the time Thompson told his story). Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 26, 2012 18:28:49 GMT -6
I think I would too. I also find it strange that the Thompson/Watson adventure was not immediately related to the commander. This is not idle chit chat. If what Thompson says happened as he related it later, this information was vital to the conduct of the battle. I stated on the other board that I rated Thompson a six on a 1 to 10. It just slipped below 5 and how far below I have not yet determined.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Feb 26, 2012 20:20:11 GMT -6
I think I would too. I also find it strange that the Thompson/Watson adventure was not immediately related to the commander. This is not idle chit chat. If what Thompson says happened as he related it later, this information was vital to the conduct of the battle. I stated on the other board that I rated Thompson a six on a 1 to 10. It just slipped below 5 and how far below I have not yet determined. Colonel, Just to add to your ratings system, Walter camp met with William Slaper who told him" he remembered distinctly that on the evening of June 25, 1876. Watson came in with the rear guard, under McDougall, leading his horse, and explained that his horse had played out some time back.. and that he had waited until the rear guard came along and then walked with it, leading his played-out horse. Slaper says that Watson never at that time, or any other time, told him of being with Thompson. Source ,Capt Freds book taken from ( Hardorff, "On the LBH with Walter Camp") Be Well Dan
|
|
Gerry
Junior Member
Peter
Posts: 63
|
Post by Gerry on Feb 27, 2012 6:59:13 GMT -6
I think I would too. I also find it strange that the Thompson/Watson adventure was not immediately related to the commander. This is not idle chit chat. If what Thompson says happened as he related it later, this information was vital to the conduct of the battle. I stated on the other board that I rated Thompson a six on a 1 to 10. It just slipped below 5 and how far below I have not yet determined. Colonel, Just to add to your ratings system, Walter camp met with William Slaper who told him" he remembered distinctly that on the evening of June 25, 1876. Watson came in with the rear guard, under McDougall, leading his horse, and explained that his horse had played out some time back.. and that he had waited until the rear guard came along and then walked with it, leading his played-out horse. Slaper says that Watson never at that time, or any other time, told him of being with Thompson. Source ,Capt Freds book taken from ( Hardorff, "On the LBH with Walter Camp") Be Well Dan Dan, Slappers story of Watson coming in with McDougall would be correct. As Thompson and Watson came up from the valley floor they were met by Co B moving toward Capt. Weir. Soon after the halt was called and returned to Reno original defensive position where Pvt Slapper was and he would have seen Watson coming in with Co B. Thompson and Watson were separated after being picked up by Co B., Thompson heads back to the south to get his horse that was picked up as told by Sgt Knipe, apparently Watson's horse was also picked up and Thompson never mentions Watson after that point. Gerry
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 27, 2012 8:11:44 GMT -6
The only person other than Thompson who would know for sure what happened or did not happen is Watson. What happened to Watson? I think he died fairly early but am not sure. Did the Thompson story pre-date or post-date the demise of Watson? Published after Watson's death I believe according to Slapper. There are accounts of Watson's fellow troopers that Watson did not tell them what Thompson said occurred. Seems to me if you read Thompson about returning to Reno's troops there is not mention of Watson. Watson was ahead of Thompson according to Thompson yet not even Kanipe states anything other than finding Thompson's horses and Thompson himself. How does Watson without horse get back without notice if Thompson's account is correct? Did Weir and company ride past Thompson's location before he came out of hiding? Where were the Indians that were observed in Thompson's narrative above him when Weir rode along the bluffs?
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Feb 27, 2012 9:33:24 GMT -6
It's the arms akimbo in the photo with Kanipe and his blushing bride on the battlefield that killed Thompson for me. Inspirational distrust at first sight.
I really do not see how anyone could read Thompson and believe a word.
Also, I'm talking off the top of my head about the fight with the Crows after Custer's, but I don't recall there were huge casualties or anything that would provide a deserted corpse.
And, it's an issue not often brought up, but not a few people committed suicide over the years at the battlefield, and it may continue. These were whites with actual or notional attachment to the men or battle. Why is not possible that Crows or Sioux through the years did the same, alone or with friends to bury the body? Or, when their time came, asked to be left there for whatever reason?
|
|
|
Post by Margaret on Feb 27, 2012 16:21:47 GMT -6
Just to clarify. When I talked of a previous battle or skirmish involving the Crows that supposedly took place in the LBH area, I wasn't referring to the exploits of Custers Crow scouts during the battle. The fight I was referring may have taken place a few years before. Now whether it was one, two or three years before, or maybe even more, I'm afraid I can't remember. ...I wonder if you are thinking of the big 1873 fight that took place near the mouth of Pryor Creek. A large Crow village camped near Pompey's Pillar were joined by a smaller band of Nez Perce. Together this combined camp moved to 'Shooting-at-the-Bank Creek [Pryor Creek] to prepare for the expected onslaught from the Sioux, who the Nez Perce had spotted and were then camped along the Little Bighorn River, probably near where they were in 1876. According to Tom Le Forge:- ''The Sioux appeared the next morning on the distant bluffs and on the valley below them.....To me it looked like an immense throng'.... ...This had been the most extensive battle between Crows and Sioux since the advent of guns among them''.... If there was another fight between the Crow and Sioux in the Little Bighorn vicinity, shortly before or some time after, I would very much like to know about it if anyone could tell me that please. Le Forge who was scouting from Fort Custer in 1877 frequently rode over the Little Bighorn battlefield, both in Autumn 1876 and Spring 1877 and in his memoirs there is no mention of any other fight and he lived with the Crows of course.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Feb 27, 2012 18:04:32 GMT -6
What I'm referencing is a fight between the Army and some disgruntled scouts. It was not a big fight, but as I recall it was in the cemetery area and thereabouts and this a few years after the battle. We talked about it on this board some years back. That's literally all I remember, and I remember it solely because it was yet another source of cases and stuff that, found today, ought not to be incorporated into a Custer battle scenario. Sorry, battle model.
Surely there are those here who recall it since I don't want to look it up.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Feb 27, 2012 23:18:45 GMT -6
Dark Cloud,
Don't worry I got your back on this one. Yes there might have been some minor battle between scouts and cavalry but you don't have to look it up. I saw it on the History Channel. The battle was between the Cavalry and French naval Officers. The French naval Officer came up with the idea to shoot low and hit rocks and that would make the bullets act like shot gun shells and go in all directions . He was right and defeated the Cavalry. But the Cavalry commander would be remembered for this defeat more than any of his victories, by his famous saying which is still in the halls of West Point to this day " The smoking lamp is lit"
I ask for no thanks, it is my pleasure to help anyone with my outstanding knowledge of Military History
Be Well Dan
|
|