The Enigma

[joewiggs]

I have long been puzzled by a proposed "fact" for many people who are convinced that the battle was lost due to Custer's impetuousness fin that he charged a huge village with thousands and thousands of hostile Indians with his little band of men! Even an idiot with no experience in warfare knows that Custer was so out gunned and out maned by such extraordinary odds that his rash and foolish attack warranted, at least, a court martial to say the least.

What has me puzzled even further is identifying the "group" that is responsible for arriving at this rather embarrassing conclusion? Does the honor lay with historians of today, the past, or we, the students, of the battle.

Maybe the following passage may help us:

"Two days prior to departure, Terry shared his estimate of Indian strength with Sheridan, derived from scouts as 'fifteen hundred lodges' and they 'are confident and intend to make a stand'. As each lodge was assumed to support two to three warriors, this indicated that Terry anticipated encountering between 3,000 and 4,500 warriors."
But wait, this does not make sense. The belatedly admonished Custer was held responsible for attacking such a heavily armed village by these very same individuals!

It gets even more interesting:

' As hostile Indians in any great numbers, cannot keep the field as a body for a week, or at most ten days, I therefore consider-and so do Terry and Crook-that each column should be able to take care of itself, and to chastise the Indians should it have the opportunity.'Well they were right about one thing, Custer did have the opportunity.

Noe for the enigma;how does the above, factual information translate into Custer being an idiot? IT appears that the "Dunce" hat belongs to his superiors!

Can anyone out there give me a hand with this quagmire?

[whitebull]

I think I got an answer for you Mr. Wiggs. What you have described is the same thing that has been happening since then and, the same thing that has be going on for many a year since. The bosses make the plans and the flunkies carry them out. If the flunkies (no disrespect intended) do good, they and the bosses are happy and everything is just fine. If the flunkies don't do good they get to take all the responsibility for the failure on their backs. It's been that way since the first order was given and it will never change partner!

[stumblingbear]

How very sad. Politics then, and now, are history changers that we known nothing about unless someone finds in a book written by an author who spends months and months of digging and scraping to find the truth. In the meantime, people who are interested in this subject are certainly influenced by "changed" history which jumps out at you by the "changers" while information of what really happened is slowly discovered and published.

Joe, could you post the book you got this information from. Thank you! ;D

[joewiggs]

Gladly! The book is entitled "Red Sabbath" by Robert J. Kershaw.
The page of information I referred to is page 59. The entire book was a good read with a section on the Fetterman battle and Crook's battle as well.

[whitebull]

I'm no brainiac but, how cum I don't read or hear that Terry or Sherman, or Sheridan being greedy or crazy or foolish for coming up with that great game plan? I don't often go in for "conspiracy' theories but the more I read about the fight the more saw that everyone blamed one man.

It ain't often that any battle that fails is the fault of one man. Every subordinate follows orders. Right?

[joewiggs]

W.B, it is critically vital that the mind set of the white race during Custer's era be explored and understood before any sense of what happened may be comprehensible to the inquiring student.

Little, Rock Arkansas's perception of Blacks in the 60's had nothing on the white perception of Indians of the "West" during Custer's era. The following is certainly not a pleasant excursion into the minds of the frontiersman of the old West but, nevertheless, a factual one. With rare exceptions, the Indian was viewed as a smelly, savage, heathen whose primary aim in life was to rape white women and lift scalps from all. They could not be trusted and it became common place for the citizen of the West to take from them anything that was considered to be valuable;land being most prominent particularly if that land was discovered to have gold upon it. It is psychologically easier to mis-treat another human when the human is de-humanized. Their truism has been long known to the military. For expel, "Jap" for Japanese!

As can be imagined, the Indians became resistant to this infringement upon their lives and the lives of their children so they resisted. Ironically, overtime,me they resisted they were classified as even more savage, smelly, and heathen.

In the occasion of the Sand Creek incident (notice I declined to use the word "battle") friendly Indians under the trust and protection of the U. S. government were shot down like mad dogs for the sheer thrill of it. Volunteers (unscrupulous civilians) laughed and joke as they placed bets on which shooter could knock down the most screaming and sobbing Indian children running helter skelter in unimaginable terror.

A few of the volunteers worn the vagina's of Indian mothers and girls as hat bands. Later, at the battle of the Little Big Horn, survivors of these despicable acts (particularly the women) were waiting!

President grant made many,albeit, unsuccessful attempts to do the right thing for these people but greedy rapacious "Indian Agents" and unsympathetic citizens scorned the man for doing so.

In summation, in order sate a National greed, Indians were reduced to a non-human status. As such, an idea was conceived that the mere thought that these "savages" could muster up a thought process to even compete with the White man's military strategy was not only ludicrous it was inconceivable!

Indians simple did not have the thought processes and the ability to wage war like the blessed white Christian of this God fearing Country. This philosophy was tarnished with shock and disbelief after Custer was defeated! How could it have happened?

Thus, a scapegoat was created. All scapegoats should be dead so as not to create confusion by being alive to defend oneself. The Indians won because a scapegoat got to anxious. No one could help him because he got himself in so much of a jam that assistance could be fatal to the remaining forces. that justified and rationalized the fact that not even an attempt to succor Custer was attempted;Weir's movement excluded.

[stumblingbear]

I have read about Chivington and this battle and the terrible acts that were committed against the people of that tribe. Isn't odd that images of soldiers being cut with knives and scalped fill your head with disgust but, when you read about Indian women and children being slaughtered the images are disturbing but not as disturbing as the other. That's scary!!

[whitebull]

Aug 25, 2013 11:53:04 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

W.B, it is critically vital that the mind set of the white race during Custer's era be explored and understood before any sense of what happened may be comprehensible to the inquiring student.

Little, Rock Arkansas's perception of Blacks in the 60's had nothing on the white perception of Indians of the "West" during Custer's era. The following is certainly not a pleasant excursion into the minds of the frontiersman of the old West but, nevertheless, a factual one. With rare exceptions, the Indian was viewed as a smelly, savage, heathen whose primary aim in life was to rape white women and lift scalps from all. They could not be trusted and it became common place for the citizen of the West to take from them anything that was considered to be valuable;land being most prominent particularly if that land was discovered to have gold upon it. It is psychologically easier to mis-treat another human when the human is de-humanized. Their truism has been long known to the military. For expel, "Jap" for Japanese!

As can be imagined, the Indians became resistant to this infringement upon their lives and the lives of their children so they resisted. Ironically, overtime,me they resisted they were classified as even more savage, smelly, and heathen.

In the occasion of the Sand Creek incident (notice I declined to use the word "battle") friendly Indians under the trust and protection of the U. S. government were shot down like mad dogs for the sheer thrill of it. Volunteers (unscrupulous civilians) laughed and joke as they placed bets on which shooter could knock down the most screaming and sobbing Indian children running helter skelter in unimaginable terror.

A few of the volunteers worn the vagina's of Indian mothers and girls as hat bands. Later, at the battle of the Little Big Horn, survivors of these despicable acts (particularly the women) were waiting!

President grant made many,albeit, unsuccessful attempts to do the right thing for these people but greedy rapacious "Indian Agents" and unsympathetic citizens scorned the man for doing so.

In summation, in order sate a National greed, Indians were reduced to a non-human status. As such, an idea was conceived that the mere thought that these "savages" could muster up a thought process to even compete with the White man's military strategy was not only ludicrous it was inconceivable!

Indians simple did not have the thought processes and the ability to wage war like the blessed white Christian of this God fearing Country. This philosophy was tarnished with shock and disbelief after Custer was defeated! How could it have happened?

Thus, a scapegoat was created. All scapegoats should be dead so as not to create confusion by being alive to defend oneself. The Indians won because a scapegoat got to anxious. No one could help him because he got himself in so much of a jam that assistance could be fatal to the remaining forces. that justified and rationalized the fact that not even an attempt to succor Custer was attempted;Weir's movement excluded.

I'm trying to see the picture you've been painting partner and you do make a point. But, the hell the Indians dealt with can not be compared to the hell blacks of this country have been facing for a hundred of years.

We don't have to slight one race to point out the wrongs of another!

[joewiggs]

WB, I assure you that it was not my intention to "slight" anyone. A critical problem of discerning past events is comprehending the mindset of the historical persona's who interact during these historical events.
Such a perspective enables us better understand the "whys" of history beyond a mechanical aspect based upon the desire for land and gold. Such a study as I propose tells us of the psychological perspectives that enable a superior race to treat, what it perceives, an inferior race so cruelly.

I did not intend a comparison analysis to determine which race was handled the worst. Man's Inhumanity to Man has been constant since the dawn of time. Only by acknowledging these cruelties may we, in turn, hope to fully understand how to rectify this darkness.

[stumblingbear]

All people who have been treated unfairly because of their race, creed, or ethnicity live a life of horror. This is a fact of life and anyone who says that they are not aware of this sickness are living a lie!

I understand the idea behind Joe's statement. The Indian was seen as less than human and more like animal during the 19Th. Century. So were others like the Mormons. "Kill them all, nits make lice" was used against both of them.

When the Indians fought back, they did it in the way they had always done it. They were wild, ferocious and not very forgiven. It is hard for members of the white race to take credit for the not so nice atrocities of the past. But, they happened!

[joewiggs]

I would add another thought that is critical to comprehending the elements of this battle and how they transpired. As Custer moved forward to battle, his mindset and the confidence of the men who followed him was high and, they were eager to succeed;they had faith in their commander. Those led by Reno were apprehensive from the onsetand had no real faith in the Major or, what minuscule amount of faith that may have had preserved soon evaporated.

Benteen quickly realized that Reno had flunked out, Reno's men were demoralized and Benteen's men were effected by that demoralization.

As a result, two thirds of the troopers stood aside while Custer died. Plain and simple.

Later, this disgraceful action had to be whitewashed and Custer's reputation sacrificed to ensure that the U.S. Army and it's leadership would not be shown for their incompetence in directing this battle.

[whitebull]

Getting a little bit off the subject, I got a question for you Joe. I either read or someone told me that on Reno hill somebody (officer?) was crying like a baby but, wound up getting it together and saying something like,"gentlemen, I think Custer has made a terrible mistake."

Can you tell me who that person was?

[joewiggs]

That would be Miles Moylan. Benteen described him as crying like a "Whipped Urchin" when Benteen arrived. he was also given an embarrassing sobriquet from other soldiers as her, allegedly, hid behind a saddle during the entire fight.

[joewiggs]

Another mystery. today, many years after the battle, students will argue the necessity of whether Custer should have "scouted" Tullock's Creek (upper part) as ordered by Terry. Custer did not do so. This action, for some, helps to illustrate Custer's impetuousness to make a kill and snatch the glory for himself. Some students will argue vehemently that this is so. Let us read what one participant of the battle has to say about this pertinent issue.

Captain Edgerly, 10 year anniversary of the battle.

"When we arrive in the neighborhood of Tullock's Creek we ran on a hot trail that led straight to the Indian village. It would have been useless to scout this creek, for we knew the Indians were in front of us."Custer Myth, Page 336

Let us say that Custer deviated his right from the "Hot Trail" to make the scout as ordered. Let us further suppose that while doing so, the Indian village became aware of Custer's presence, scattered into a thousand different directions, and escaped.

What would have been Custer's plight?

[tbw]

Oct 10, 2013 15:30:40 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

Another mystery. today, many years after the battle, students will argue the necessity of whether Custer should have "scouted" Tullock's Creek (upper part) as ordered by Terry. Custer did not do so. This action, for some, helps to illustrate Custer's impetuousness to make a kill and snatch the glory for himself. Some students will argue vehemently that this is so. Let us read what one participant of the battle has to say about this pertinent issue.

Captain Edgerly, 10 year anniversary of the battle.

"When we arrive in the neighborhood of Tullock's Creek we ran on a hot trail that led straight to the Indian village. It would have been useless to scout this creek, for we knew the Indians were in front of us."Custer Myth, Page 336

Let us say that Custer deviated his right from the "Hot Trail" to make the scout as ordered. Let us further suppose that while doing so, the Indian village became aware of Custer's presence, scattered into a thousand different directions, and escaped.

What would have been Custer's plight?

Like most things in the battle, the "overlooked" factor on this one defies explanation. He was "ordered" to send that man back "with his findings" and his intentions where and when Terry ordered him to do it - period. There would not have been, and wasn't any condition for him not to do as he was ordered to do - period.

Terry as the overall in command needed information, desperately, and Custer and his command was the most forward element of his command, of those he charged with being his eyes and ears, otherwise he was deaf, dumb and blind. You might try blaming Custer here, because he was supposed to do as he was clearly ordered to do to send that man back.

"When we arrive in the neighborhood of Tulloch's Creek we ran on a hot trail that led straight to the Indian village. It would have been useless to scout this creek, for we knew the Indians were in front of us"

Did Terry know where those Indians were? He suspicioned in his letter of instruction that's where Custer would find them, didn't he? If you don't think so, read it again. Now, right then and there, if Terry suspicioned it, which he did, and then Custer found out that they were, which he did. What gave Custer the right to disregard that order and not send Herendeen back? Just who or what would it have been useless information for? Custer? Or Terry who requested that confirmation?

Terry never knew for sure whether they were on the Tullochs or not, and Custer not sending that information back to Terry was a direct disobedience of orders, and had Custer lived to tell about it he would have been severely reprimanded, if nor court martialed for jeopardizing the mission and disobeying that order. Terry did in fact send men up the Tulloch's to make that contact with Herendeen, but they didn't go all the way, after all Herendeen was supposed to have met them. Terry expected Custer to obey that order, he didn't, and there's not one man then or now who can defend Custer for his dereliction of duty in this matter, no matter how hard they try.