|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 6, 2018 17:14:17 GMT -6
Stupid title, but couldn`t find a better way to formulate myself.
Most, if not all Indian accounts, mention several other named warriors or other people. As in "Me and X went so-ans-so and met Y and Z, and we saw K killing a soldier" etc. WCB mentioned of course just about everybody who were at the battle, and as most of you I don`t put to much into his story. But do any other warrior accounts mention WCB being around during the fighting? As in somebody mentioning him by name, in an circumstance for that matter. There are so many accounts I haven`t read but i know people here have read just about everyone. Any answer is hugely appreciated.
All the best,
Noggy
|
|
|
|
Post by shan on Jul 7, 2018 6:55:20 GMT -6
Noggy,
you raise an interesting point. Over the last ten years to fifteen years I read a number of books, not to mention countless posts on various boards which tend to either dis-regard White Cow Bulls accounts, or else called him an outright liar. Now this is only a guess, but I think that this could be a case of someone deciding that he couldn't trust WCB's accounts and basically calling him a liar, and that ever since, most of us have just accepted that this must be true.
Now I've read those accounts numerous times, and whilst I can see that some aspects of his story seem ridiculous, I don't see why this should mean that everything he says is untrue, especially his account of what may, or may not have happened around Medicine Tail Ford.
I think that most of us have either known, or else met people like him at sometime in our lives, fantasists if you like, but not everything they say is a lie. When I was younger I had a friend exactly like that, some of the things he said were simply outrageous, indeed on some occasions he even had the cheek to involve me in some of his lies, but, I knew him well enough to know that A. he couldn't help himself, and B. he had a desperate need for people to both like and admire him. Even so, as I said earlier, that dosen't mean that everything they say is a lie.
To answer the last part of your question, I'm afraid haven't read any of those accounts for a while now, and I can't lay my hands on my books at the moment, but if I remember correctly, I think one or two of the other men who were down at the ford at the time, did indeed mention him by name.
regards Shan
|
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 18, 2018 14:27:10 GMT -6
Noggy, you raise an interesting point. Over the last ten years to fifteen years I read a number of books, not to mention countless posts on various boards which tend to either dis-regard White Cow Bulls accounts, or else called him an outright liar. Now this is only a guess, but I think that this could be a case of someone deciding that he couldn't trust WCB's accounts and basically calling him a liar, and that ever since, most of us have just accepted that this must be true. Now I've read those accounts numerous times, and whilst I can see that some aspects of his story seem ridiculous, I don't see why this should mean that everything he says is untrue, especially his account of what may, or may not have happened around Medicine Tail Ford. I think that most of us have either known, or else met people like him at sometime in our lives, fantasists if you like, but not everything they say is a lie. When I was younger I had a friend exactly like that, some of the things he said were simply outrageous, indeed on some occasions he even had the cheek to involve me in some of his lies, but, I knew him well enough to know that A. he couldn't help himself, and B. he had a desperate need for people to both like and admire him. Even so, as I said earlier, that dosen't mean that everything they say is a lie. To answer the last part of your question, I'm afraid haven't read any of those accounts for a while now, and I can't lay my hands on my books at the moment, but if I remember correctly, I think one or two of the other men who were down at the ford at the time, did indeed mention him by name. regards Shan Shan How did I not see you post when checking this board near daily?? So sorry! WCB most definitly was at the Bighorn, so I too would never say all his statements are lies. His story regarding especially Ford B is a concern to me, as many other warriors there remembered each other but as far as I have read not WCB. He`s shooting tons of soldiers in the river and elsewhere, and sees Custer`s corpse guarded by his prisoner mistress according to his own account. It might be that someone mentioned him as being seen during the battle in general, but as for the Ford B action it seems to be rather blank. If that`s a correct use of the word. I have not cross checked everything said or written about the battle, but I believe Michno says that at least during the Ford action nobody else could recall WVB being there. I`d love to learn more about this, however, always assuming I`m terribly wrong in everything. Hope your summer is great! All the best,Noggy |
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 18, 2018 14:43:44 GMT -6
You may want to check out this website for White Cow Bull's "story" of the LBH: www.astonisher.com/archives/museum/white_cow_bull_little_big_horn.htmlThere is enough corresponding accounts to back up what WCB said. Check out what WCB said in Custer Myth (Graham); Custer's Fall (Miller); Lakota Noon (Michno) Remember many of the accounts of what took place at the LBH were done years after the battle with most combatants on Reservations and found it was best to tell the White Man what he wanted to here rather than the true. In addition many participants or inhabitants of the village at the LBH were reluctant to reveal too much in fear of reprisal by the government. Even today, many elderly NAs whose grandparents or even parents who were at the LBH won't say much to outsiders because of what they think the White Man will do to them. The Battle of the LBH is not ancient history, there are many NA descendants whose relatives were in the village or who took part in the battle or have been told stories passed down through oral history that won't be told to outsiders. I'm sure there is lots of info regarding the battle that is kept secret. I can't really blame the NAs for being reluctant to reveal much considering the horrendous history between the two cultures and how they have been treated over the past decades. |
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 18, 2018 17:25:15 GMT -6
You may want to check out this website for White Cow Bull's "story" of the LBH: www.astonisher.com/archives/museum/white_cow_bull_little_big_horn.htmlThere is enough corresponding accounts to back up what WCB said. Check out what WCB said in Custer Myth (Graham); Custer's Fall (Miller); Lakota Noon (Michno) Remember many of the accounts of what took place at the LBH were done years after the battle with most combatants on Reservations and found it was best to tell the White Man what he wanted to here rather than the true. In addition many participants or inhabitants of the village at the LBH were reluctant to reveal too much in fear of reprisal by the government. Even today, many elderly NAs whose grandparents or even parents who were at the LBH won't say much to outsiders because of what they think the White Man will do to them. The Battle of the LBH is not ancient history, there are many NA descendants whose relatives were in the village or who took part in the battle or have been told stories passed down through oral history that won't be told to outsiders. I'm sure there is lots of info regarding the battle that is kept secret. I can't really blame the NAs for being reluctant to reveal much considering the horrendous history between the two cultures and how they have been treated over the past decades. Hello and thank you for your answer. Lakota Noon is one the reasons I ask this question. Is there aredifference in what WCB said in the three mentioned books? Michno makes a rather big deal out of nobody mentioning WCB as being around Ford B. Or anywhere else? WCB seems not to be mentioned by name. Other warriors around mentioned many others by name. WCB seems to be like me at prome night; not noticed. (Not true, but I digress) So what a single person (WCB) says is in my opinion, at least when trying to map all this together, rather useless when warriors openly admitting to fighting soldiers around the river and after are remembering what named comrades did but can`t remember him? WCB claims to ha shot an officer in the river, others claim they did not come to the river at all. Is WCBs story to overturn the others who 1. did not see him but did see others (by name) around the river, and/or 2. claimed the fighting never reached the river, but have the So Lakota Noon I know, but do the other books you mentioned contradict this? As in WCBs statements being more valid than the others? And I for one also believe without a doubt that tons of oral information is still withheld. The cultural warfare waged against Natives in the US is/was worse and more destroying than what the US Army`s campaigns could ever be. I loved btw what you said about LBH not being ancient history. I told mye dear mother, who was born in 1954, that she was alive at the same as a survivor of LBHA. Kind off startled her. Aøll the best, Geir PS: On my way to a concert in Oslo and not sober now, sorry for bad language |
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 19, 2018 6:39:54 GMT -6
Noggy: I'll have to go back over the other books to see if there are any discrepancies. Normally someone's original "story" will be used as reference for following books and/or articles so there may not be any difference.
However, it's how someone's story is interpreted that could be the issue . . . or even how someone "read" into the account. Lots of Indian accounts may have been interpreted in a way that fit the interpreter's feelings and an important factor is that NAs spoke in metaphors like "they fought so poorly they must have been drunk" (not really drunk but certainly they must have been to give up their live's so cheaply) and so forth.
As far as ancient history, I'm a bit older than your Mom and there were many participants still alive when I was born, not only NAs but a number of soldiers . . . which either makes me ancient or not really THAT old!
What's even more astonishing is there is film of a number of Indians who fought at the LBH including the Cheyenne Two Moons!
|
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 20, 2018 14:49:17 GMT -6
Noggy: I'll have to go back over the other books to see if there are any discrepancies. Normally someone's original "story" will be used as reference for following books and/or articles so there may not be any difference. However, it's how someone's story is interpreted that could be the issue . . . or even how someone "read" into the account. Lots of Indian accounts may have been interpreted in a way that fit the interpreter's feelings and an important factor is that NAs spoke in metaphors like "they fought so poorly they must have been drunk" (not really drunk but certainly they must have been to give up their live's so cheaply) and so forth. As far as ancient history, I'm a bit older than your Mom and there were many participants still alive when I was born, not only NAs but a number of soldiers . . . which either makes me ancient or not really THAT old! What's even more astonishing is there is film of a number of Indians who fought at the LBH including the Cheyenne Two Moons! I`m on holiday now and can`t quote exactly what Michno writes in LN about WCB, but it`s pretty close to calling him a liar due to nothing apparently backing up what he said. I`ve given up agreeing with myself about the concept of time and history, as (unless you believe the Old Testament) everything which has happened to us as a race is "new" compared to the planet itself. Getting PTSD now from my one philosophy subject at University... As for the Indian wars, it`s so much closer in time than most people understand. The film you mention is a great example, I must try to find it. "Wild"/"hostile" Apaches were probably still roaming the Sierra Madres during WW2, living like they had the last 400 years in a time atomic bombs, jet planes and hangars were around and Citizen Kane was made. All the best, Geir |
|
|
|
Post by shan on Jul 21, 2018 4:57:39 GMT -6
Noggy,
I've just had a read of the relevant section in Lakota Noon, and as I thought, yes, there are three or four Indians named, { I won't name them as you can look them up for yourself,} as being down at the ford, but not WCB. But I don't think that that necessarily means that he wasn't there. And the reason I say that is because there were several others there who were never named either, including those five Sioux warriors who were reported as having been chased back down towards the ford by troops who were advancing beside MTC.
I think in this regard Michno is being a bit hard on WCB. after all, we can't expect men to remember every detail of what is going on around them when they were in the middle of a fire fight, and that includes the names of everyone who was present, in fact if you read between the lines, there seems to be some agreement between as to which side of the river they were when the shooting started.
Now as I tried to point out in my previous post, I'm not saying that everything WCB said is true, or even that any of it is true for that matter, I'm just saying that all we we have to rely on, are the opinions of a number of writers who A. weren't there, and B. have their own prejudices.
As to what happened to company C ~~ well, once again that's a matter of opinion. When I first started reading about the battle, it was generally accepted that there was a mounted movement of troop that came off the ridge in order to push back encroaching Indians ~ we know this because a number of Indians mention it ~ but in those days the general consensus was that this was E troop, and that they came down from the ridge and formed the South Skirmish line. Then, some time later, opinion swung in favour of it being company C, who were said to have been ordered to flush out increasing numbers of Indians who were using Calhoun coulee to get nearer to the troops. I suppose the one thing we can say about this even with some certainty, is the fact that Indians definitely saw what one might loosely called a mounted charge, but unfortunately, because they never gave us any specific landscape features, or at least ones that we can be sure of, we can't really pin it down to one spot or another.
Now I know that there will be some who will argue that we can say exactly where it happened because of body placement, i.e. there are in fact a number company C men who have been found in and around the Calhoun coulee area, as well as those up on nearby Findley ridge. But whilst that's a good beginning, I'm not totally sure if we can rely on body placements in every case. Yes there are parts of the battlefield where we can, and we all know where they are, but there are other areas that remain something of a mystery, the south skirmish line being one.
Shan
|
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 21, 2018 12:55:24 GMT -6
Shan I too am reluctant to just say every word from WCB is bs. It is however strange how in the years before many warriors mentioned each other by name, but not him. (I`m pretty sure there are more than 3-4 mentioned by name.) He, on the other hand, could remember things other warriors did but apparently did not care to mention when interviewed or remember themselves. He seems to have been everywhere, also. Strange nobody saw this whirlwind of a fighter as he blew across the battlefield  It may ofc be that he was not well known, and/or just lied about shooting the officer in the river and other feets, therefor not being remembered by the others even if he was there. All the best, Noggy |
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 21, 2018 13:31:19 GMT -6
Check out this video supposedly of Libbie Custer. She shows up around the 3:30 minute mark: www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNhkr3li0OoI remember seeing a video of Chief Two Moons explaining in sign language what happened at the LBH. I can't find it anymore on-line but if you can it's quite amazing to see an Indian who fought at the LBH on film! Many of the participants of the LBH survived well into the 20th century . . . well within the memory of many elderly people . . . that's mind-blowing |
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 21, 2018 14:59:41 GMT -6
crzhrs: Very cool if it is Libby. Since I can`t say if it is her or not, I`ll go for it being her. I browsed quickly (as fast as the connection out here at my summer place allows) an found a clip from the 50 years anniversary www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wld_WJ7oKCc). Can`t identify anyone unfortunately, not strange since it`s from 1926. As for the 20th century, there`s a video of a Cheyenne retelling how her father experienced the exodus of 1879 at least. Two Moons I have yet not found but i`ll really try, sounds fantastic. Even though Michno is again a little unsure of his story once again  All the best, Noggy |
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 22, 2018 8:20:10 GMT -6
Re: White Cow Bull: Richard Fox whose excellent book on the archeology of the battle quotes WCB several times. Fox is an eminent author and wouldn't use sources without checking them.
As far as videos of Libbie and Two Moons they are also in the PBS documentary Last Stand at LBH which is available on-line or for purchase. That's where I saw Two Moons using sign language to tell the story of the LBH.
|
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 22, 2018 13:30:06 GMT -6
Re: White Cow Bull: Richard Fox whose excellent book on the archeology of the battle quotes WCB several times. Fox is an eminent author and wouldn't use sources without checking them. As far as videos of Libbie and Two Moons they are also in the PBS documentary Last Stand at LBH which is available on-line or for purchase. That's where I saw Two Moons using sign language to tell the story of the LBH. Still, him being several places at the same time and shooting soldiers a mile away etc are impossibilities. And if he shot soldiers in the river, it would be nice to know why many other around Ford B said the soldiers were turned away long before reaching the water. And so on and so on. All the best, Noggy |
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 27, 2018 19:09:29 GMT -6
On the side note: Speaking of old film tapes, this is from the US in 29. It interviews elderly people, including a CW veterans. This part i quite interesting, and I know many here are into the ACW. Maybe someone here will enjoy it : www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FE30a4J38Q |
|
It may ofc be that he was not well known, and/or just lied about shooting the officer in the river and other feets, therefor not being remembered by the others even if he was there.