|
Post by grahamew on Aug 28, 2015 3:49:56 GMT -5
Oh yeah. I guess it's a case of not judging a book by its cover. He just takes a different view to the more generally accepted one that Fetterman was an arrogant fool - and he's not the only historian who has come to that conclusion - and thinks Crazy Horse wasn't a decoy (and might not have been there at all), because he hadn't seen Rocky Bear's statement.
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Jun 6, 2016 16:31:49 GMT -5
A very interesting thread. 'Where A Hundred Soldiers Were Killed' is an essential account of the Fetterman Fight. Probably the best book-length treatment to date, whatever you make of the 'decoy' issue. Another very interesting commentary on the fighting at FPK is Francis Taunton's 2004 article 'Carrington and the Fetterman Affair', in the English westerners' society 'Tally sheet'. By the way, John Monnett has a new book coming out later this year concentrating on Indian accounts of the Fetterman Fight. I believe that it will be published by the University of Oklahoma Press.
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 10, 2018 11:56:28 GMT -5
Interestingly, as early as 1887, at least one newspaper correspondent named Crazy Horse as leader of the decoys, courtesy of a book, Red Shirt, Chief of the Sioux Nation... codyarchive.org/texts/wfc.nsp11386.html
|
|
peter
Junior Member
Posts: 98
|
Post by peter on May 10, 2018 13:37:37 GMT -5
Thank you Kingley for your clarification :"Rocky Bear, an old Indian in Pine Ridge Reservation, says that Red Cloud, Young-man-afraid-of-his horses, Red Dog, and Crazy Horse were the principal leaders in this massacre. Red Cloud sent Crazy Horse with eight Indians to the fort to try and draw the soldiers out, they circled around the Fort at the same time firing upon it. This ruse was successful, and as soon as the little command under Capt. Fetterman was seen leaving the Fort, the Indians retreated, at the same time pretending that their horses were lame and tired.” [Cleophas C. O’Hara, “Red Cloud and Rapid City,” The Pahasapapa Quarterly 4 (April, 1915), p. 18; “The Great Chief Red Cloud.” The Indian School Journal 10 (February, 1910), p. 42; Rapid City Journal, July 7, 1907]. Read more: amertribes.proboards.com/thread/1938/decoy-party-fetterman-fight#ixzz5F7hshQszWe also know, according to the military witnesses that Fetterman was sent to relief the wood train and not chasing Indians that were circling around the Fort firing upon it. There is no record of that. Fort Phil Kearny, during its short life was never attacked directly or/and circled around while being fired upon. In fact, the pickets at Pilot Hill, that day, with wigwagging signals reported the wood train being under attack on Sullivant Hills on the way to the pinery. It was then that Carrington made up his mind to send first Captain Powell out to relief the party, then upon Fetterman protest, sent Fetterman himself to the rescue. Fetterman went out to relief the wood train and not after the Indians that were circling and shooting at the fort because it never happened. At the time Fetterman went out, the only Indians that could be seen from the Fort, were the two Indians that appeared on the slope across Big Piney who were watching the events sitting down. The decoy party was completely out of site of Carrington and the Fort. I would take Rocky Bear story with a little grain of salt. Military records do not support his statement. This does not mean that Crazy Horse was not part of the decoy.
|
|
peter
Junior Member
Posts: 98
|
Post by peter on May 10, 2018 15:43:40 GMT -5
Interestingly, as early as 1887, at least one newspaper correspondent named Crazy Horse as leader of the decoys, courtesy of a book, Red Shirt, Chief of the Sioux Nation... codyarchive.org/texts/wfc.nsp11386.htmlThis article is interesting, but historically incorrect. It is strange on how one article on any newspaper could be believed in a blink of an eye and change the history completely.
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 11, 2018 0:59:17 GMT -5
I think it has more to do with where the information came from and I doubt this article, only 21 years after the fight, published in Aberdeen of all places, changed anyone's perception of the fight. It sounds, in basics (and let's face it, we're talking about a British newspaper here) like the Rocky Bear account, talking about the attack on the fort rather than the wood train. Has anyone seen the source of the material, the Red Shirt 'book'? What I find interesting is that this credits an Indian source, however mangled the translation might have been, and it is a mere 11 years after the fight and not, say, 20-30 years later during the period in which the likes of Hyde feel Crazy Horse became sort of legend, so the kernel of truth might be there.
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on Jun 3, 2018 13:09:23 GMT -5
So I guess the Red Shirt 'book' never saw the light of day...?
|
|
natethegreat
Full Member
Long live the Indigenous Tribes of North America
Posts: 117
|
Post by natethegreat on Nov 14, 2018 16:37:51 GMT -5
It is custom in alot of indian societies for every warrior to be his own master. A chief does not issue commands or give orders like the U.S. military. Only those chiefs or leaders who showed in battle the upmost courage and bravery could have a large following of other braves. But for a non-war type of chief to "order" a bunch of braves into battle is not reality. There was no such thing as an armchair chief who gave military orders. One reason why the Native Americans were so successful in evading capture and defeating enemies much larger than them and with better equipment were due to the skill of the leaders on the battlefield.
By the time Crazy Horse was in his early 20's, he was already a well respected warrior. When he was 17 he participated in his first war actions and showed great bravery. Crazy Horse was not your typical warrior. He was quiet, he did not dress to stand out. He did not talk about his war deeds. This was unusual in Lakota society. Which earned him alot of envy from other jealous warriors. Some poeple say Crazy Horse was killed by his own tribesmen.
|
|