How Much Firing By Custer's Command?

[crzhrs]

The Indians state there was not a lot of firing during most of the battle. This allows Custer's command to not only have more ammo, but to also rearm during the low key sniping.

The surviving soldiers did not mention seeing a lot of cases on the ground. Certainly they would have seen them if Custer's command did heavy firing or ran out. There should have been cases all over the hill, but very few mention seeing any. None state a lot of cases.

Some state Custer's message was a plea for more ammo. But when the message was sent the battalion had not even fired a shot.

[elisabeth]

There was talk of a few piles of cases in Calhoun's area, but not many elsewhere. And some Indians reported retrieving cartridge-belts and ammo pouches that were practically full -- though these, as you suggest, could have been re-filled during the quieter moments.

Some interpret this as lack of resistance. But taken with the reports from the Reno/Benteen contingent of hearing heavy firing and, in some cases, many volleys before it all petered out into scattering shots, it could just as easily be interpreted as pretty good fire control for much of the duration of the battle. (By contrast, Reno's troops on skirmish line in the valley were reportedly firing away like mad -- some men later claiming to have fired about 60 rounds in the comparatively short time they were there.)

On the other hand ... the much-derided Recorder Lee, who nonetheless did know Indians (had he not been an Indian Agent for a couple of years or so before the RCOI?), kept raising the point that Indians would have retrieved the bulk of the cases to re-use. Especially as they'd suddenly acquired all these whizzo new carbines that required different ammo from that used by their own firearms. As the Court established in, I think, DeRudio's testimony, they had ample leisure to do so. Logic says that they'd have gone first to the areas of heaviest fighting for the richest pickings.

There aren't many battles I can think of (maybe somebody else can name some?) where the Indians won a victory and retained possession of the field. Here, unusually, they had an entire second army of women and children on the spot to hoover up absolutely everything of use or value, with no opposition to worry about -- so it's probably hard to judge the nature of the fighting solely from cases left behind ...

[crzhrs]

I am sure it is a possibility, but they would not have picked up the bullets too. That is another way to figure out how much firing is going on and what the positions are of the combatants.

It is clear through archaeology that there were two skirmish lines on Calhoun Hill. Indian testimony suggests the C-D west facing line deployed last. There is no reason to face west if Company C is controlling the situation. The only reason to face west is to aid in a retreat by C. Almost every Indian stated C was routed in Calhoun Coulee, retreated up the ridge and went back to the hill. Archaeology also reveals the men of that company did not fire much, and were in motion (retreating) along the ridge. The body positions also don't show an organized retreat. It looks as if C had lost its stability.

If L is gone then why is C retreating back to the hill? They would be running right into the warriors now positioned there. The fact is C went back to the hill because L was still there. As you can see it was C and not L that fell apart first.

[PhillyBlair]

I'm sure that I sound like a broken record in these posts, but I keep going back to consistent testimony from those in the timber after Reno's retreat, as well as those on the hill with Reno. Their testimony is unified in hearing heavy "volley type" firing at the outset of Custer's fight, and down near the river. The firing then drew further away and became lighter and more sporadic. Indian testimony largely agrees with this. So, to address the question from ear and eye witnesses -- much firing early (organized) -- very little later in the fight (disorganized/panic). I also allow room for strategic maneuvering and little firing before the panic set in.

[Dark Cloud]

Crzhrs,

It is clear through archaeology that there were two skirmish lines on Calhoun Hill. Really? How?

Indian testimony suggests the C-D west facing line deployed last. Again, which of your Indian "testimony" is closest hand? Are any of them made without translation? By who? When deposed? By who?

What Indian "testimony" uses company ID? Name one that says "C was routed in Calhoun Coulee, retreated up the ridge and went back to the hill."

When you say "Archaeology also reveals the men of that company did not fire much, and were in motion (retreating) along the ridge", this is balderdash of the first rank. Archaeology has (how many?) cartridge cases found that do not conflict with that theory, but don't "reveal" it.

We don't and can't ever know the sequence of events, and saying "as you can see" without a shred of evidence to bolster your view is nonsense.

That's NOT saying you're wrong. But you're stating things as fact that barely rise to the level of possibility.

[greenpheon]

I really have a hard time with the shell casing issue and the ammo issue altogether. The LBH battlefield is like a contaminated crime scene. Shell casings removed by Indians, shell casings removed by tourists, shell casings washed away by torrential rain, mud slides etc.

We all are aware of the Indian's penchant for compressing events. If they found full ammo belts at Keough's position, then they found them on Calhoun's. Not necessarily. I'm not saying the shell casing evidence should be thrown out or the Indian narrative regarding ammo belts. If we did, what else would be left? All of it should be considered, but logic needs to be applied too. I have gone over the math on how much ammo Co L troopers had and how long it would last even at a slow rate of fire elsewhere on this forum, so I won't post it again here.

It would not take the entire battalion to run out of ammo for it to be a problem. I think most folks agree that the defeat of Co L was the key to the Indian's victory. Ergo, since Co L was in contact with the warriors for the longest period of time, they ran out of ammunition! When they collapsed, it resulted in the rolling up of Keough's line and that led to the withdrawal of all other elements to LSH. That's the way I see it.

Greenpheon

[elisabeth]

We also have the difficulty that the spare ammo was on four legs, i.e. in saddle pockets -- so that any unit whose horses were run off would be out of ammunition earlier, even at a slow rate of fire, than one that kept its horses. Unless we can know for certain who lost horses and when, the calculation is a difficult one to make.

[AZ Ranger]

The contaminated crime scene is a very good description of what the condition of the LBH battlefield when the archaeological work was preformed. At best it can be used for a theory certainly not a fact. I would also expect bullets fired by the troopers to be found outside the boundary of the NPS area including some in Indians either wounded or killed and removed from the area.

Elizabeth- You're right about running out of ammo sooner if the horses run off. I would also add under heavy fire with no cover the horseholders might withdraw further to protect the horses. One can imagine that under disciplined fire they would run out of ammo close to the same time. Running to the horses for ammo would certainly give the Indians encouragement to attack.

[elisabeth]

That's a very good point. If they operated the same way Reno's men did, with half of a company going back for ammo while the rest stayed on the line, then the other half going back, distribution of bodies could become very misleading. We might think we were seeing a deliberate deployment by platoon when in fact it was a half-company overrun either en route for ammo or waiting their turn to go.

Re horses: from the Indian accounts, it woud appear that Co. E held onto their horses almost to the end. Therefore they had their full complement of ammunition, 100 rounds per man. They're still firing until quite late on. (Though I suppose the Deep Ravine run could have been prompted by having finally used up the last of it.) Of course, we have a dozen conflicting views at least on the duration of the fight, so we can't calculate rate of fire with any certainty. But if it was a reasonably conservative hour and a half, that'd be slightly over one shot per minute if they were firing constantly -- which of course they weren't. On that basis, ammo depletion starts to look like less of a problem. Hitting anything with it, of course, is another matter ...

[greenpheon]

Here is some math to consider: Each trooper carried 24 rounds of ammunition for his Colt pistol. In addition he carried 50 rounds for his carbine in a prairie belt and 50 in the saddle pockets of his mount.

A well trained trooper could fire 12 to 15 aimed shots per minute from his carbine. This rate of fire could be kept up for three to four minutes with his 50 rounds and of course twice that long with his reserve ammo.

During the Civil War a well trained soldier could fire 3 rounds per minute with his muzzle loading rifle-musket. Even at this rate of fire a trooper at the LBH battle would expend his ammo in a hot fire fight in less than a quarter hour.

How much fire discipline do you think Custer's people exercised? How long until Company L, in almost constant contact with the warriors were down to pistols only? And how long would they last against lever action rifles?

Greenpheon

[mcaryf]

We tend in these analyses to think only of the cavalry side. The Indians too could have found difficulty in maintaining their rate of fire. Even if there were plentiful quantities of ammo available in the village they might have had difficulty physically carrying vast quantities around the battlefield. Was it Phil Sheridan who thought the cavalry were in danger of being weighed down with ammo? Equally true for the warriors with high rate of fire weapons.

Someone, was it Herendeen, suggested the Indians left on the 26th as they were running low on ammo. With their new weapons, if they had fired all day at Reno, they would be running out even if they had captured half of Custer's men's allocation.

Regards

Mike

[elisabeth]

Interesting thought. How did the Indians carry their ammo?

[crzhrs]

DK:

The archaeology teams detected two skirmish lines on Calhoun Hill in the 1980's and excavated them under the supervision of Scott and Fox. The cartridge case firing pin signatures were identical in a few shells at both positions proving that the same individuals operated on both lines.

As for the exact Indian, I will have to look it up. It was through translation though. Almost all Indian testimony is. Most did not speak English.

No Indian used company ID? They had no real understanding of the tactics and maneuvers used by the cavalry. The companies did ride on different colored horses though. The Indians state which colored horses went where and did what. As for actual company Id, no real ID is needed if you are a student of the battle. Process of elimination will tell you it is company C. If you can't see that then try opening a book.

As for the C retreat, the lack of cases and the spacing shows the men did not fire much. Indian testimony also states the men retreated back to the hill. That is the movement. As for the exact number of cases, I will need to check. The number really isn't important though when it comes to the Calhoun Ridge Sector. We know what happened there.

Shred of evidence. Open your eyes. Testimony, archaeology and body locations are the proof.

Your last line is laughable. I would love to know your knowledge of the battle.

[Dark Cloud]

Crzhrs,

A-HAH! It's DC. So much easier than MacLeod, which a lifetime has verified 99% of the world won't spell or pronounce correctly (which doesn't bother me), but anyone can spell and pronounce Dark Cloud, which is a nick name of over a half century of use.

By paragraph:

1. THIS is what scares me, your total belief. The archaeology teams did not discover two skirmish lines. They uncovered scant evidence that is not in conflict with there being two skirmish lines. They did not discover that the same individuals operated on both lines. They found evidence the same gun had been fired at both. This isn't trivial.

2. There is - let's say this together - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT RISES TO THE THE LEVEL OF INDIAN TESTIMONY, NEVER, EVER, EVER!!!!! These are stories (that may be 100% true, I admit), mostly told years later through family members or translators or others. If you call an officer's transcript from a deposition under oath "testimony", logic demands (the law does, anyway) that fifth hand 'me too' stories are not. You cannot read any of these stories and be thrilled with the accuracy of the translators.

3. "As for the exact Indian, I will have to look it up. It was through translation though. Almost all Indian testimony is. Most did not speak English." Right. So anything in quotes of such testimony including what could not be known is a "lie" and not even an attempt to be true, and rather insulting in its assumption we'd fall for it, although many have.

4. "The companies did ride on different colored horses though." They did? One sorta did. Even so, they all looked like dust pretty quick. "The Indians state which colored horses went where and did what." They do? There were five companies, there were not five colored groups of horses. Most were sorrel and bay and 99.86% of the people here don't know the difference.

5. "As for actual company Id, no real ID is needed if you are a student of the battle. Process of elimination will tell you it is company C. If you can't see that then try opening a book." Well, hyuck-hyuck, I plum have opened not a few books, and you're way out of line.

6. "As for the C retreat, the lack of cases and the spacing shows the men did not fire much." You don't even know if the cases arrived during the battle or after, that day, that year, that decade.

7. "Indian testimony also states the men retreated back to the hill. That is the movement." No testimony exists.

8. " As for the exact number of cases, I will need to check." Please do. Get back to us.

9. "The number really isn't important though when it comes to the Calhoun Ridge Sector. We know what happened there." No, you don't.

10. "Shred of evidence. Open your eyes. Testimony, archaeology and body locations are the proof." Guesses, supposition, moony adorations, and damage control. A sloppy regiment was able to kill women and children due entirely to the incompetence of the Indian warriors.

11. "Your last line is laughable. I would love to know your knowledge of the battle." Almost zero, like your's and everyone's. Supposition and guesswork. We don't know where the bodies were found, or even if they were found, the marker's are guesswork and 20% inflated. It's pretentious to pretend otherwise.