|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 13, 2014 18:22:50 GMT -6
There's no mutual exclusive. Swarming on foot to drive bison over a cliff did carry the risk that somewhere, a bull would have a wtf moment and turn inexplicably on them. No doubt the leaders had said if this happens or that happens, do this or that. Fine. That's all local leadership, common sense, and bravery and skill. No question.
But when it's dressed up in western civilization military terms it provides the stone that allows people to raise the next issues of tactics and strategy. Yeah, in a way tactics and strategy, but what is described could easily be so in less elevated terms and, I think, should be. Otherwise we would envision, as movies an novels sometimes do, a stalwart chief focusing on the middle distance and saying 'Cornhole, take a squad to the right and reinforce Laceyboy's 4th Cholera Victims and have them lay a suppressive fire on the enemy's left flank. Expedite!" in an accent fitting for David Niven.
The Dog Soldiers still, I've read, performed the same ritual when they had horses as when they did not. They'd bluster and challenge and dismount and nail a rope to the ground and tie to their leg so that they either win or die in place. Unfortunately, the enemy also had horses and found no need to be fair. I believe that is what happened in the last battle Fred notes for them. That's the kind of thing and decision and tactic that - however you view it - ain't military. Military doesn't want a fair fight. Military wants to win. I hope, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 13, 2014 18:28:16 GMT -6
Hi Mac great thread by the way; if you try a localised how the Indians fought at the BLBH, then try and ask yourself how you would have acted on that day, say you were in a group who you mostly knew from your tribe, so you run to fight the soldiers who are threatening your circle, you see fellow your braves gathering in large numbers all moving to stop the soldiers. When you get to a place where the bullets are flying you try and take up a firing position, you see other Indians moving in groups along the various coulees and ravines, these places provide cover and access and along with the dust and powder smoke they allow you to get closer to the soldiers so you feel your way forward, you are nervous because you are getting close to the soldiers, then you see warriors spring up and charge the soldiers, you see the soldiers run so you join in the charge. Now this could be how many a young warrior felt and what he observed at this battle and how he went along with the events that materialized in sequence.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by mac on Mar 13, 2014 18:50:38 GMT -6
Thanks for your thoughts Ian and DC. I agree let us not "dress" this in military uniform. I still feel that there would be for example Indian tactics/processes for horse stealing etc that may translate effectively to battle also it occurs to me that over the years the Indians probably learned a thing or two from the soldiers and by this time perhaps had some leaders who were more thoughtful about how best to approach this situation. Certainly reports like the "Suicide Boys" would fall into the cultural display of courage category but could nevertheless be seen as tactically useful in the right context. The Reno and Fetterman actions though still suggests to me some good "common sense" fighting. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Mar 14, 2014 7:51:02 GMT -6
I'm going to drop off the deep end here. I don't know squat about the Berserker or bare sark or bear shirt guys beyond the usual crazy, axe-swinging stereotype. But their mention brings into my consciousness the subject of human consciousness or self-awareness (and I'll use those terms interchangeably); that is the view in our minds of a complete universe in which we are situated,coupled with our absolute belief that we are interacting in that universe.
I subscribe to the theory of evolution, believing that self-awareness is an evolved function of the brain but one that comes at a price. That is the cost (in terms of processing capacity) to support a consciousness and the built in time lag for process flow in and out of it. Not to mention the fragility of consciousness and its susceptibility to a myriad of distractions, from ill mood through psychosis. It survived as an evolutionary trait because it offers a superior means to organize ourselves, allowing the huge advantage of cultural evolution.
There's a great deal of study that's been done on the nature of consciousness and how it functions; which animals have it or do not, shortcuts in its sensory arrays, the "back office" of the brain on which consciousness is overlaid, etc. Most interesting to me being research that claims to demonstrate that our decision making is performed in our non-conscious mind and then up-streamed for perhaps final review and vetting, or maybe just on an FYI basis, allowing us the delusion that we (our self-aware we) are driving the bus.
OK, enough preamble, here's why I am dragging this out; the aspect of consciousness that at times of stress we may function without it. Have you ever done something without realizing it, without conscious volition, that was actions more complex than a simple reflex. Say in a high school fight, learning afterward that you had punched a guy in or around the head several times while evading some of his counter punches? If so, I'll guess your reaction was "Gee, how'd I do that?".
This unconscious functioning may be rather prolonged. I recall long ago reading of an episode in the Korean War where a small unit of American soldiers overran an NK or Chinese position with a bayonet charge, obviously an extremely stressful event. The account mentioned that after the enemy were all dispatched several of our troops continued on with the carnage by bayoneting a group of nearby tethered pack animals. The account gave me the drift that these fellows were considered to have been "out of their heads". This leads to the following questions:
Any of you experienced or know of such instances of unconscious functioning, "blind drunk" aside (though I'm not certain such should be an excluded case.)
Are there accounts, especially from the LBH, that suggest any participants functioned at times in such a manner. And let me say that accounts of suicide, singular or mutual, do not suggest to me any lack of consciousness. I am especially looking for instances of fight or flight in which performance was markedly extreme.
Is there any suggestion that slipping into unconscious behavior, if indeed it did occur, occurred more readily among one side than the other?
I realize that given the absence of a clinical setting, inference may have to stretch to its limit re the last two questions above.
Finally, is there any suggestion that the Berserkers, whoever the heck they actually were, functioned without consciousness?
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 14, 2014 9:25:55 GMT -6
I'm going to drop off the deep end here. I don't think you are, but I am not going to include the whole post or to answer all questions. I think in some way we have all had that, " I don't believe I did that" moment or " I really did that?" moment. This is more of a question, than an answer. Did Reno remember, or would he have remembered saying mount, dismount, mount? Could not have the first command have been a man talking to himself, after having brains splattered all over his face, heard by those nearby and they reacted to his command. When he realized what he had done, he countermanded that order, only to give it again moments later properly to the entire command, properly, as assessed their situation. This may not be what you are looking for.
Another example, Capt. French sitting behind the firing line clearing rifles so his troops could continue firing. This apparently went on for some time, the whole time under heavy fire and he seemed not to notice.
These may have not been the type things you were referring to, but nonetheless strange.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 14, 2014 10:19:24 GMT -6
For What it is worth
Berserkers were Norse warriors who before battle would work themselves into a monumental rage to the point that they were considered to gave gone berserk, thus the name berserker. I don't believe I have ever read where they were high on anything, but that could be.
The Moros in the Philippines would get themselves high on something (unknown by me) before they would engage in battle. They would continue on despite being wounded, and were highly dangerous even when mortally wounded. The .45 ACP was adopted at least in part because of its stopping power with the Moros in mind.
The last bayonet charge conducted by the United States Army, the one Mike refers to was conducted by Company E, 27th Infantry (Wolfhounds) under command of Captain (later Colonel) Lewis Millett MOH on ground now occupied by the Osan Air Base, South Korea. Captain Millett was awarded the Medal of Honor for this action, and it is ironic that the man he replaced as commander of Company E Captain Reginald Desidario was also posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for doing essentially the same thing a few months before. The 27th Infantry was THE (no one of about it) best trained and led regiment in Korea, and if you ever wonder why I harp on leadership, discipline and training so much, it is simply that the 27th Infantry under Mike Michaelis was the best led, best disciplined, and became (in combat) the best trained unit in the U S Army. They were advancing when others retreated. They were knocking out T34's when others were running from them. They were doing the job, when the others did not even know what the job was.
Fight or Flight: Camerone, and the last desperate bayonet charge, rather than surrender to keep their promise to Danjou.
PS: The word berserk is derived from berserker, and not the other way around, as you might think from my post.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 14, 2014 11:03:58 GMT -6
Mike Powell,
Concentrating all my actual military knowledge (0) and focusing it on your quite thoughtful post above, I can only respond with this. I would think that all military training - to a large degree - was to install instant, unthinking and unconscious response to known and expected events, from hand to hand combat to larger employs of men and power. This, so that when a patrol gets hit or ambushed, everyone knows their role and how to survive and the others can count on that being done: all in an instant and in the subconscious. That's what I'd think, anyway, it's like high end athletic teams only the losers are killed.
The first sentence of this thread by mac was "In battle the Indians did not follow our conventions of command and control, yet they won. Do we underestimate the effectiveness of their traditional fighting style?" My response might be that the 7th didn't follow our conventions either, and due primarily to numbers the incompetent Indians beat the more incompetent Custer. Understand: incompetent command and control, not incompetent warriors whatever. It really did come down to the fact the Army actually thought, yes, that the Indians always ran but they HAD to think that because years of laughable training and practice demanded it, having precluded much other result, or the Army was toast. The Army could adjust from the top down immediately, and did, but the Indians had no top, and could not.
I'd thought berserkers were German more than Norse, but I was wrong, I now read. I do recall that the Romans coined 'morph warp' to reflect the increase in size the barbarians underwent before their eyes as they stood in a mob before them, which we've all actually seen as guys flex and pose in Mr. Universe or across the wrestling circle because it's a demonstrable effect. If you have to stand at attention in line and just look, it can be scary as hell, I'd bet. I've also read that liquor was an early stimulant to achieve this, mushrooms perhaps, but it wouldn't be needed with experienced warriors who needed that rush and could construct it at will. They went berserk. If the opposition is well trained, it probably results in berserkers being slaughtered by the wall of weapons. When not, it's 476.
Reno mounted his men to charge out, was talking with Bloody Knife and others when Knife was killed. If Reno yelled "Get down!" at the instant, and the instant passed and he told them to mount again, it might be recalled as him having said "Mount! Dismount! Mount!" and made to sound incompetent, and the three word condemnation did come from a third party. What would be the 'correct' thing for Reno to have done in such circumstance? It's all in the spin.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Mar 14, 2014 12:21:53 GMT -6
QC, Tom and DC,
Thanks for your responses. A couple of thoughts:
Unconscious action could occur within a human group, say for extremely drilled, brief athletic plays (the triple play or the lob to the backboard) or perhaps certain crew-served weapon routines. I'm unaware of any instance where humans have cooperated in an ad hoc fashion while functioning from their unconscious. However, complex cooperation is observed among many animal species that are not believed to be self-aware. An extreme example might be hunting wolf packs, though I don't believe any testing for self-awareness has been conducted with wolves.
To the extent the charge at Camerone was planned and initiated it would require consciousness, for consideration of a given pledge and for communication of intent. Once launched and especially after contact, if contact was achieved, then who knows the mental states that were in effect.
I honestly can't see how this (snapping into and functioning from the unconscious state) can be studied at present, aside from review of anecdotes. Sensing brain activity, to understand from instant to instant just where processing is occurring, is pretty much tied to the clinical/laboratory setting and ethical concerns over extreme stressing of human test subjects would, and should, be insurmountable. But can we really be that far away from the helmet-mounted, satellite up-linked MRI?
The foundation of my question about whether one side or the other at LBH may have exhibited greater instances of unconscious behavior lies in the niggling thought that consciousness may be more firmly entrenched in one culture than another or, conversely that a given culture might value loss of self-awareness in particular instances and attempt its manifestation. The Sun Dance comes to mind but with the proviso that my knowledge of this ritual has all the depth of a light mist regarding all dimensions from cultural context to the actual practice and history.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Mar 14, 2014 12:35:12 GMT -6
Most of the info on Crazy Horse comes from interviews with He Dog (CH's closest friend)and some of the people who knew him the best: Little Killer, Red Feather, Short Bull, Carrie Slow Bear, and White Calf. CH was first called The Light-Haired One (obvious reason)but for most of his youth was called Curly. He was given his permanent name by his father (Worm) around 1858 after CH achieved his first great and brave deed against the Arapahoes. Around 1865 he became a Shirt Wearer, the highest honor for a young warrior. Around 1867 CH & He Dog were given the lances of the Crow Owners Society. They were given by the older generation to the younger generation who had best lived the life of a warrior. As for the "Crazy" in CH's first name . . . let's not forget what DC always reminds us about what gets lost in translation and the use of "English" words to describe what Indians did or said. Maybe Crazy didn't mean insane . . . maybe it meant magical or mystical. After all CH was not insane but certainly was a Mystic Warrior. By the way read The Mystic Warriors of the Plains by Thomas Mails . . . it will clear up a lot about Indian tactics, warfare cults, societies, etc. Funny didn't see the word "club" used once in this scholarly book. A short excerpt about warfare: "Each of the war chiefs chose several subchiefs to assist him, and each of these were assigned certain number of the men of the band. Both the experienced warriors and the trainees were called out for instruction several times a week. The war chiefs agreed in a general way as to what they would try to accomplish. Then each subchief gathered his unit around him and outlined the plan, and they proceeded from there. The war chiefs sent their mounted warriors speeding toward the enemy positions, racing and circling in such a way as to confuse the enemy regarding their actual strength and plan. Warriors on foot would coordinate their efforts with other members of their unit. Ambush techniques were practiced. The war chiefs signaled their men by various methods." The book is rare and hard to find, but it is a classic on Plains Indian Culture, not just warfare, but the book makes the point that the warriors were not the untrained or coordinated swarms that some believe. I highly recommend searching out the book for a better understanding of the Plains Indians.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 14, 2014 13:16:08 GMT -6
There is nothing demeaning about calling swarming, swarming. It's what they did. Necessity is the mother of invention; without it, no invention, whether Indian or Scots or Confederates, all three of whom could not adapt to Euro centered culture and the great strength it gave to their war departments and guaranteeing a win sooner than later.
Also. Who said He Dog was CH's best friend? Why, He Dog. And those who later read He Dog in some account or other. Regarding Mails, one of several reviews on Amazon:
"By Jeff Pert on May 22, 2000 Format: Paperback There is no doubt that the author's veneration of the old time Plains Indians borders on hero-worship; and if enthusiasm alone could guarantee accuracy, this would be a great book. Unfortunately, that is not the case here. I have studied Plains Indian culture for more than 30 years, and must agree with the previous reviewer from Montana that this book is riddled with errors from beginning to end. For example, Mails tells us that the Indians made bow cases from the tails of mountain lions. I am currently making a mountain lion quiver and bowcase myself, and I can tell you flatly that the mountain lion never lived whose tail was big enough for this purpose. Instead, the tail was always left as a pendant hanging from the mouth of the quiver. Since Mails' book includes a full page color painting, done by him, of a quiver with the tail hanging down in just that fashion, you wonder how he could make this error - but he did, and many others like it. Most of them could have been avoided if Mails had carefully read the primary sources listed in his own bibliography. This is a big, impressive looking coffee-table type book, and so our natural inclination is to believe whatever it says - an inclination strengthened by the fact that Mails makes every statement with an air of absolute authority. The reviewer from Pipestone, MN says that this book has all the answers, and it does. The problem is that those answers are so often completely wrong."
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Mar 14, 2014 13:33:19 GMT -6
I can cherry pick reviews from Amazon too: "I teach Native American cultures to children and adults alike at the Little Feather Indian center in Pipestone, Minnesota. Ever since I first saw this book back in '95 I have had it by my side when giving a talk. If I don't know the answer to a question, I look it up in this book. I call it my Bible. It is the best source I know for information on the Plains Tribes. The pictures are works of art, and Mails has so much knowledge that he imparts to the reader. If you want to know more about the Plains Tribes do get this book, it is a little bit expensive but worth every cent. I promise."
However, out of the 10 reviews 7 gave it 5 stars, 1 4 stars, & 2 2 stars.
More info on Mails and his book: The Mystic Warrior of the Plains. The book was illustrated by Mails himself and was published by Doubleday and Company in 1972 and is now in its eighth printing. The Mystic Warriors of the Plains has become a standard reference book worldwide for those interested in the culture of the Plains Indians. Mails was listed in "Who was Who in American Art," "Master Index 1917-1993, Artists in Southwest Art," Samuels "Contemporary Western Artists," Samuels "Encyclopedia Artists American West" and authored 14 books on Indian people such as "The Mystic Warriors of the Plains," "The People Called Apache," "Hotevilla, Hopi Shrine of the Covenant, Microcosm of the World," "The Mystic Warriors of the Plains," and "Dog Soldiers, Bear Men and Buffalo Women."
His credentials are outstanding . . . and to cherry pick one negative review from who knows who is grasping at straws to disprove something or an act of desperation.
As far as He Dog, numerous sources claim this: Warrior brother to Crazy Horse, Chief He Dog played a major part in the brief, heroic battle of the Sioux Indians against the entire force of the United States Government.
Side by side, He Dog and Crazy Horse fought many times before their greatest victory, the defeat of Colonel Custer and the Seventh Cavalry at Little Bighorn. The ensuing, massive U.S. military response forced the Plains Indians to reservations soon thereafter; those not ordered were starved. With quiet dignity He Dog continued to lead his people, until his death on the Pine Ridge Reservation of South Dakota at the age of 100 years. Source: Friends of the Little Bighorn Battlefield
If we go by you not believing anything an Indian ever said then every book that used a source by an Indian would be wrong and the author "incompetent," including an eminent member of this forum.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 14, 2014 13:35:10 GMT -6
This is what the Norwegians say about the Berserkers;
The terms "berserk" and "rampage" are found in all Germanic languages - to characterize the violent fighters and killers who acted in a fit characterized rage. The phenomenon existed from before the Viking Age until the Christianization of Scandinavia.
Berserks are often described as people with distinct dissocial moves. It is consistent depictions of warriors or wandering thugs who uncontrollable rage indulge in killing orgies after initial suggesjonsritualer group. "Werewolves" is depicted in sagas, but are not prepared as the same.
Berserk Gang can hardly be dismissed as myth or folklore, there must be a culture-specific psychopathological phenomenon. The condition is most likely a type of dissociative trance through self-and gruppesuggesjon. Pre-Christian notions of the psyche must be a basic requirement for human and society's expectations in terms of suggestibility and propensity to dissociative reactions. "Varulvsyken" (lykantropi) is about something else: partly an archaic type of psychosis, partly superstition about people turned into predators.
Hello Mike, what you described above sounds like bloodlust to me, once those guys got going them didn't know when to stop.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Mar 14, 2014 13:53:38 GMT -6
Well, wonder-of-wonders, my local library has a copy of the book and my reservation is in place. CH, thanks for the tip. DC, I read the same review but discounted it somewhat when I saw the numerated errors were confined to the falsity of making quivers from mountain lion tales. Seemed like something more damning could have been offered. Regardless, I'll read with care.
CH again, I want to echo DC's comment along the lines of no disrespect for swarming. "Handsome is..." as they say, and as a rapid means of allocating fighting resources to the needed locations the swarm sure can be handsome. Nor do I consider it mindless and once those summoned have arrived, common sense and experience acquired from earlier combat and hunting would prevail; you might call it tactics but that may miss, somehow demean, the true art and essence of a style of killing. I've obviously flipped out here but there's something essentially different from (a) a regiment giving from column to line and then thundering home, to (b) a band of brothers carrying out a charge that historians wonder may have really been "a bravery run".
Lord, put me in for a Bulwer-Lytton on the strength of that last sentence.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Mar 14, 2014 15:10:28 GMT -6
Ian,
Thanks for the recitation. That is about as ominous a description as I can imagine. "Pre-Christian notions of the psyche must be a basic requirement", where did you find this?
Thanks again,
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 14, 2014 15:28:40 GMT -6
crzhrs, Come on. Mails is not a regarded historian or academic, but is highly regarded as an artist. www.kosharehistory.org/museum/mails.html He's a fanboy of Native American cultures. That's fine, but he's not an authority. He does, however, exhibit the affection Christians and their religions sects felt for the Indians from the first, and whose support and compassion real or feigned more than offset the numbers who'd cheerfully have slaughtered them all. All the sources about He Dog's relationship to CH are He Dog's accounts through someone else. When did they first appear? Might well be true, but you cannot deny that it's a plus for descendents to be able to claim a family connection to Crazy Horse. I've been surprised that those who claim regard/descent/connection to CH don't gather daily to vomit at the site of that impressive mountain carving, because CH most likely would have as many do at Mt. Rushmore. To imagine Teddy Roosevelt thinking it was environmental to carve a mountain to his or anyone's image is an abortion of logic. Suspect CH might up the emotional response and be humiliated that it's supposed to be him, although we have no real idea what he looked like. And I've said from the beginning that ANYTHING THAT APPEARS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE PUBLIC RECORD BEYOND 1879 about any of this ought to be viewed with cancerous eye as suspect. I DON'T believe most Indian accounts at face value not because they're Indian but because they appear after years of wallowing in the various tales of others, true and not, and through translators, editors and several degrees of separation, most of whom are white and many had their own agendas and world views. I believe Curly's tale as recalled by those on the Far West because it radiates truth and consistency and he doesn't look heroic or anything in it. He was young and it sounds it. I don't believe Martin's later tales, nor Godfrey's, nor any that get more detailed as the years pass. I'm no romantic about Indians or my heritage of Scottish malarkey. I named the Babylonian Fallacy because throughout history, starting with Babylonians, losers in wars physical and cultural go through periods where they claim and often are granted the aura of spiritual supremacy over the winners. All the romantic clanwear and stories were invented by the English in various literary and cultural revivals of a (fake)Scottish history. Indians were often compared to Highland Scots in the early days because we viewed them as the English viewed Highlanders: near human, uncivilized, brutal, but good looking and pipes are romantic at distance. I have the spirituality of a quohog clam, but I consistently apply this to all people, and find it in the Confederacy with their religious fervor late in the war, in my own Scot ancestors, all through. I may be prejudiced but it's against all fantasies that make us feel better that deceive and prevent cultural advance. Japan is awash in it today, but the young seem to be centered and honest about the Emperor and the war despite efforts to revive tradition. Really: does the organization level Mails chats up sound applicable to all else known about the tribes? Twice at the LBH young warriors escaped from the likely lethargic patrol of the societies on police duty. In any case, the societies failed to warn the camp, failed to hit the 7th in Reno Creek where it was most vulnerable, failed to either escape or attack in cohesion, and were saved only by their inability to get going quick and the handy - near impressive - incompetence of whoever was leading the 7th. The LBH is near proof positive that the "military societies" sucked, and that incompetence led to civvy deaths (disputed) but at least civvy panic (unnecessary but undisputed).
|
|