|
Post by dave on Apr 18, 2017 14:28:07 GMT -6
Thank you for suggesting A Scene of Sickening, Ghastly Horror, which I just ordered. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Apr 20, 2017 16:13:34 GMT -6
Gentlemen,
The trouble in identifying Custers men made me think. When did the Army start giving out "Dog Tags" and was there any form of ID previous to their issuance. I have read where some Civil War soldiers sewed their name inside their shirt so they could be identified.
Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by edavids on Apr 20, 2017 19:57:57 GMT -6
Gentlemen, The trouble in identifying Custers men made me think. When did the Army start giving out "Dog Tags" and was there any form of ID previous to their issuance. I have read where some Civil War soldiers sewed their name inside their shirt so they could be identified. Be Well Dan [ Cold Harbor is where the men pinned paper with their names on them because they felt almost certain they were going to die. Losing 7,000 men in 8 minutes backed up that fear.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 21, 2017 10:22:54 GMT -6
edavids: Excellent question about how to ID the dead on a battlefield. I believe the 7th had their names on their underwear or other clothing which helped with IDing them during "wash day". Still the ID issue is relevant but let's not forget that the Indians would have taken anything of value, whether it was "Dog Tags" or anything else which would have made the point mute.
During the Civil War it would have been SOP not to take ID's from fallen soldiers regardless of whose side you were on.
During the Indian Wars it wouldn't have made any different what ID you had . . . if it was of any value the Indians would have taken it.
|
|
|
Post by wyton1 on Apr 24, 2017 7:45:20 GMT -6
I remember reading that many soldiers were identified by comrades, and the accounts were conflicted. This makes sense to me as most of the dead were stripped and mutilated. Lt Crittenden was identified by his (missing) glass eye, Tom Custer by a tattoo on his arm, etc. There were many conflicting accounts of a particular person's location, so personal ID was probably the reason for that. Trying to identify the mutilated corpses of your comrades leaves lots of room for error.
|
|
|
Post by wyton1 on Apr 24, 2017 10:26:46 GMT -6
No disrespect to Rain in the Face or his family, but Rain In The Face claimed in an earlier interview that you couldn't see your hand in front of your face for all the dust and gunsmoke, so there was no way of telling who was who on LSH. I can certainly understand why he would deny killing Custer soon after the battle, not a healthy thing to admit to. Plus I'm certain Indians who were interviewed knew which side their bread was buttered on. They told white folks whatever they wanted to hear and denied any direct involvement that could get them killed later. Also, Custer had two potentially mortal wounds, a bullet in the left side of his chest and a bullet in the left side of his temple. Not particularly "hand to hand combat" injuries.
Indians fought and acted as individuals, they pretty much did whatever they wanted to. Even a Chief was not a general, he led only as long as the braves agreed with what he was doing. If they didn't agree they just wouldn't follow. So one Indian telling all other indians, regardless of tribe, not to mutilate a body would have gone over like a turd in a punch bowl, even if they could have effectively spread the word to every single Indian, which would never happen. By most accounts, Custer was mutilated- the awl poked into the ears (BY A squaw so he could hear better in the afterlife), one finger was cut off, his thighs were sliced open Sioux style, and an arrow was driven up his penis Cheyenne style.
|
|
|
Post by wyton1 on Apr 24, 2017 11:19:47 GMT -6
Thank you for suggesting A Scene of Sickening, Ghastly Horror, which I just ordered. Regards Dave Me too!
|
|
|
Post by dave on Apr 25, 2017 22:47:52 GMT -6
crzhrs I just finished reading A Scene of Sickening, Ghastly Horror and I found my self surprised at the amount of detailed information was available about the condition of the soldier's bodies. Some very explicit and detailed eyewitness accounts have been either suppressed or lost over time. Great story in and about itself.
It will make an excellent addition to my library and I appreciated the recommendation. I suggest this small treatise to all who have an interest as to what the soldiers really saw after the battle while recovering and attending to the dead. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 26, 2017 13:07:46 GMT -6
dave: Yes, it's quite an enlightening pamphlet about the condition of soldiers with Custer. Very explicit and the information probably not publicly revealed after the disaster or probably not till years after. It is a valuable addition to the Custer Library and doesn't white-wash anything about the scene of the battlefield and the dead.
|
|