|
|
Post by grahamew on Jul 12, 2015 11:57:26 GMT -5
I notice we've touched on this aspect of the Lakota/Crow relationship earlier; though there's nothing in this to conform or deny White Swan's participation, the potential seems to have bee there: amertribes.proboards.com/thread/1019/pretty-bull |
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jul 13, 2015 16:39:40 GMT -5
Good afternoon all...some quick follow-up:
1. "Shoes" versus "boots" in battle art - I just went through all 200 paintings and drawings in Rubbing Out Long Hair and note that Amos Bad Heart Bull portrayed with boots and spurs, Red Horse used mostly shoes and some spurs and an occasional individual boot adjacent to a dismembered figure, White Bird showed boots and no discernible spurs, and White Swan...well, its a mix! In some versions he shows boots and others shoes for the same event. Kicking Bear's soldiers are all dressed in "parade" uniform with forage caps. And in a portrayal yet to be understood, Red Horse showed Reno's troops attired with sabers in the attack but not in the retreat! In any case, while garrison uniformity was, like today, a strict requirement, it appears from tales of the times that "field" uniforms in some cases were personal preference.
2. All five portrayals show the soldier - sometimes one and sometimes two striper - armed with a hand-held weapon and a sling-held weapon. I know of no case, at least officially, where such individuals would be armed with two shoulder-fired weapons, especially when one could be a poorly drawn handgun/pistol. The Spencer repeating carbine was the weapon of choice for mounted forces during and right after the Civil War. It was a very potent weapon at close range (powder charge of the cartridge limited effective range) as seven rapidly fired rounds could be fired off in seconds. Is White Swan showing a Spencer or was he just not a very good drawer of pistols? His mnemonic here is that he counted coup with his crop on a well-armed individual who just happened to be in the uniform of a US soldier. That's the story...we just have yet to figure out where and when.
3. Only one of the five show any indication of the soldier being wounded - the Gilcrease painting. In all five the soldier is falling backwards which is a conventional way of showing death.
4. Yes, it is the potential that is enticing. I've checked unit records of all the casualties from 1877 (White Swan recuperated at least until then) until 1885 (his last combat mission was 1880 on the Musselshell and I added four years just in case). Casualty causes are all noted with none that even remotely relate to such an event. That's what makes pre-1876 so enticing. On the other hand, there is the Nez Perce campaign and a Crow force showing up unexpectedly during the Canyon Creek fight on 13 September 1877. He enlisted in October 1877. I've found no record that he "carried the pipe" on any scouting mission while in US service thus negating any association of the event while a scout. This did not happen in the Mussellshell fight in 1880. In the end, I'm almost forced to look BEFORE 1876 and probably no earlier than the mid-1860s. Noticeably, Crow narratives are silent on all this or at least the ones I'm familiar with. That timeframe, those forces - both Montana militia and US mounted units - were armed with Spencers and like uniforms. The militia the more likely to not follow a "conventional" armament.
Our belief stands this did not happen at the Little Big Horn.
Would it be in practice for a 16 to 18 year old Crow warrior to be carrying a leader bundle into a fracus with US forces (regulars or militia) or not? If the answer is yes, then we continue with the pre-1876 search and if no, well...it's back to a whole lot of "already plowed ground."
Thanks everyone...and please have a great day!
|
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jul 13, 2015 16:40:39 GMT -5
My apologies...hit the send button too quick. Should end with
Regards, Rod...
|
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on Jul 14, 2015 11:33:39 GMT -5
For anyone who wants to know more about the Crow and Red Cloud's War and can't go digging in the archives, there's a good pdf here: mhs.mt.gov/Portals/11/education/docs/CirGuides/Rzeczkowski%20Transportation.pdfKingsley Bray's essay on Lone Horn's peace with the Crow is here: www.nebraskahistory.org/publish/publicat/history/full-text/1985-1-Lone_Horn.pdfI don't suppose it's too surprising that there's not a lot of material from the Crow about their involvement in the Powder River fights when they were doing their level best to disassociate themselves from the Lakota and Cheyenne and keep in the white man's good books. In the late 1870s, the Arapaho at Red Cloud would complain about the Lakota being a bad influence and say how they wanted to keep away from them in the hope they'd get their pwn agency, although on a practical level, they continued to socialise with them and commemorate their past close friendship - and were then rewarded by being sent to the agency of their former enemy, the Shoshone! Dumb question, I know, Rod, but you've ruled out any possible involvement in all the build up to the Sword Bearer 'outbreak', even if he wasn't involved in the final skirmish in November? Dumb question No. 2: is there not also the possibility that there was some minor engagement through the 1880s, perhaps as a result of a Crow party leaving the reservation to raid the Blackfeet for horses or the Yanktonai at Fort Peck? These raids seem to have gone on all through the decade. |
|
|
|
Post by hconroy on Jul 14, 2015 17:41:17 GMT -5
Thank you Rod for bringing this subject up for I feel that it needs to be addressed. Given the incidents that had been occurring between Crows and trespassing miners, most notably the Stuart party, during the 1860's, it is certainly believable that young Crows would slip out of camp to fight with the Sioux even at the risk of physical punishment should they be caught leaving without permission. The Sioux were busy trying to persuade the Crows to fight as their allies during this time period and I have no doubt that some young men among the Crows felt that perhaps the White Men were the greater threat. Given this, it seems perfectly acceptable to me that young Crow warriors could have been present at the Fetterman battle, against the wishes of their Chiefs.
As I have stated before, I distinctly remember reading that a party passing through the area met two Crows returning to the Crow camp from the Fetterman battle. So far I have not been able to find it again but I will keep looking.
Amos Bad Heart Bull was 8 years old at the Custer battle. Red Horse fought in it. I do not know how relevant this is but Red Horse seems to consistently portray the long pants. All circumstantial!
At any rate, based on all the information given, I believe that the vignette shown above depicts a battle prior to Custer, which most likely would have been against Fetterman.
|
|
|
|
Post by dT on Jul 15, 2015 8:46:38 GMT -5
Rod Thomas ... I would have to go back and check the rifles used by the US Army at the time of the Bighorn - and before. One of the rifle designs had a real problem with reloading. When the gun was hot, from firing many bullets, often the reloaded bullets would jam. Therefore, misfires and firing problems became more common in the heat of battle.
Crazy Horse (Lakota, not Crow) was aware of this. He was a very smart tactical thinker. I believe this is why Crazy Horse delayed his entry into the BigHorn battle. He allowed other Indians to engage first (mainly the Cheyenne), knowing that this would make the soldiers' guns hot - and give him the opportunity he was looking for.
These things do not directly affect your comments about the Crows. But they are relevant to some of the things that you said.
dT
|
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jul 16, 2015 15:46:31 GMT -5
For anyone who wants to know more about the Crow and Red Cloud's War and can't go digging in the archives, there's a good pdf here: mhs.mt.gov/Portals/11/education/docs/CirGuides/Rzeczkowski%20Transportation.pdfDumb question, I know, Rod, but you've ruled out any possible involvement in all the build up to the Sword Bearer 'outbreak', even if he wasn't involved in the final skirmish in November? Dumb question No. 2: is there not also the possibility that there was some minor engagement through the 1880s, perhaps as a result of a Crow party leaving the reservation to raid the Blackfeet for horses or the Yanktonai at Fort Peck? These raids seem to have gone on all through the decade. Thanks! Question 1: I ruled out the Sword Bearer incident as both soldier deaths were well documented, occurring at the fight on 5 November. A corporal and a private were both killed in the fusillade by the Crows before retreating. I'll go back over the lead-up events and the fight itself once more just to be certain in this decision. Question 2: Yes, and I've tried to locate an army response to such events where a soldier was killed. Casualties were onesy-twosy and well-documented in unit reports. None fit this depiction, at least in my analysis. The last Crow war party against tribal raiders was also in 1887 if I recall correctly. Somewhere I have a photo of the four men said to be involved in that action. Good questions and on times and events I had earlier discounted. Another look will not hurt. As I have stated before, I distinctly remember reading that a party passing through the area met two Crows returning to the Crow camp from the Fetterman battle. So far I have not been able to find it again but I will keep looking. Read more: amertribes.proboards.com/post/18542/quote/480?page=6#ixzz3g5NlUlWlI'll look also but at the moment have not the faintest idea of that narrative location. Let's hope it is located! I would have to go back and check the rifles used by the US Army at the time of the Bighorn - and before. One of the rifle designs had a real problem with reloading. When the gun was hot, from firing many bullets, often the reloaded bullets would jam. Therefore, misfires and firing problems became more common in the heat of battle. Read more: amertribes.proboards.com/post/18542/quote/480?page=6#ixzz3g5QsBm1HdT, thanks...White Swan was issued, as were the others, such a carbine by the Second Cavalry when the scouts reported for duty with Gibbon's command. I've held it in my hands. I've only found one image of a jammed Springfield and it is in Mike Cowdrey's Arrow's Elk Society Ledger, plate 108, page 154 - attached. While I have believed the weapon to have been given a bum rap for a long time, I've not heard the Crazy Horse delay point expressed that way before. I've no doubt that his direct assault was probably timed and had to do with soldier rate of firing and this brings a reason for that timing. Thanks for sharing that. Thanks again everyone...we may yet figure this out! Regards, Rod... Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on Jul 17, 2015 10:20:54 GMT -5
Dumb question number three: Are we sure he killed the soldier and didn't just club him or count coup?
|
|
|
|
Post by dT on Jul 17, 2015 10:36:16 GMT -5
Grahamnew - Whether he killed him, clubbed him or counted coup - when you are THAT close - you are in the heat of battle! Hahahahahahaq!
Rod - I have the book about Crazy Horse by Kingsley Brae. A good book, by the way. I would have to go back to dig through the details. There was one battle (well before the BigHorn) where Crazy Horse rode three times in front of cavalry fire. It's not clear in the book what he is doing - a demonstration of bravery. But I think Crazy Horse had already learned that these carbines were not reliable after a lot of firing. He was actually testing the theory - literally using himself as the target. It was an incredibly brave action - borderline insanity. But it worked, and he learned what he needed to know. And he survived - unscathed.
At the BigHorn, it is reported that Crazy Horse delayed action so he could prepare himself with the Medicine Man. I am sure that was probably true. I don't want to take anything away from Crazy Horse - in terms of his commitment or ceremonial preparations. But I also think that in the back of his mind - he knew the delay (his own entrance into the battle) was a tactical advantage.
dT
|
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on Jul 17, 2015 12:22:47 GMT -5
The point is - a killed soldier would be a recorded death.
|
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jul 20, 2015 13:11:03 GMT -5
Dumb question number three: Are we sure he killed the soldier and didn't just club him or count coup? No, not 100% certain but almost. Keyser, Brownstone, and others all suggest the "falling away" posture of coup victims indicates death. All five depictions have the soldier in this posture. Noted above, only the Heard depiction shows any blood flow, a for certain death marker. All depictions show White Swan counting coup with his riding crop, no visible weapons other than this, and of course, the bundle. This is what has made understanding of this event so enigmatic. Still re-looking all that we've talked about in this thread and will try to come to some closure soon. Well, closure enough for this particular biography. Regards, Rod... |
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jul 20, 2015 13:33:49 GMT -5
Grahamnew - Whether he killed him, clubbed him or counted coup - when you are THAT close - you are in the heat of battle! Hahahahahahaq! Rod - I have the book about Crazy Horse by Kingsley Brae. A good book, by the way. I would have to go back to dig through the details. There was one battle (well before the BigHorn) where Crazy Horse rode three times in front of cavalry fire. It's not clear in the book what he is doing - a demonstration of bravery. But I think Crazy Horse had already learned that these carbines were not reliable after a lot of firing. He was actually testing the theory - literally using himself as the target. It was an incredibly brave action - borderline insanity. But it worked, and he learned what he needed to know. And he survived - unscathed. At the BigHorn, it is reported that Crazy Horse delayed action so he could prepare himself with the Medicine Man. I am sure that was probably true. I don't want to take anything away from Crazy Horse - in terms of his commitment or ceremonial preparations. But I also think that in the back of his mind - he knew the delay (his own entrance into the battle) was a tactical advantage. dT The fight with three "bravery" or "courage" runs occurred in August 1872 on the Yellowstone River against the railroad survey escort forces under the command of Major Baker (of Marias River infamy). Several others did these runs and Crazy Horse's was shot out from underneath him on the third run. These soldiers were armed with the Springfield rifle and Spencer carbines. In 1873, again escorting railroad survey crews along the Yellowstone, army units (especially the Seventh Cavalry) were engaged by the Lakota led by Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, and others. This time the 1873 carbine had just been received by some units and in at least three engagements performed as designed. A well-trained marksman could get off six to seven shots with this carbine (and the rifle as well) in a minute. But these results were test results under controlled conditions. Other engagements, to include the Crook Rosebud fight a week before the Greasy Grass fight, again the weapon performed as designed. In the engagements after the Greasy Grass there are no known cases of cartridge jamming causing tactical failure which is often cited as one of the reasons for the army defeat on the Greasy Grass. Now, what is most interesting is archaeological results from the Little Big Horn revealed the about the same percentage of Indian weapons had cartridge jamming as did the cavalry! Roughly 5% of all cavalry cartridge cases recovered from both the Custer and the Reno-Benteen sites showed results of extraction failure. Doing the math, about 30 cavalry weapons failed to fire and under extreme close-in combat conditions. The same surveys and studies showed about 8% of Indian fired cartridges jammed on all the identified Indian firing positions. Douglas Scott's book Uncovering History: Archaeological Investigations at the Little Bighorn gives a great summary regarding all findings and conclusions in this area. Scott's methodology included use of Indian narratives and in the end substantiate much of those. I'm not sure, like many, why Crazy Horse entered the fighting when he did. But when he did, most seem to time it with a reduction in soldier firing. Circumstantial or deliberate not sure. PS: at the Baker fight first mentioned above, Sitting Bull rode out to within range of the soldier weapons, dismounted, lit a pipe, and calmly smoked as the soldiers shot at him. When done, he calmly mounted and rode back to the heights overlooking the encircles army forces. Now's that's special! Hope all is well and thanks for the discussion! |
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Aug 29, 2015 19:30:35 GMT -5
Greetings all...and hope everyone is enjoying a grand end of summer day...
I've discounted the Fetterman Fight (1866) as the setting for the "fighting a soldier" vignette. My reading and understanding of Crow bundles suggests a more mature and senior person would be entrusted with a leadership bundle and a more seasoned warrior would move forward with a horse or other bundle. For certain in a situation that would place him in combat with a US cavalryman. I still look more at events or occasions after 1876.
Thanks for everyone's help and who knows...like most questions, the answer will come from hard work, intelligent use of resources, insightful compilation of circumstantial evidence and, in my case, pure dumb luck!
Happy weekend...
Regards, Rod...
|
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jan 12, 2016 19:14:45 GMT -5
Happy New Year everybody! Hope all is well with you. So, will get another proposal in the mail in a week or so once done with revisions. As with Rubbing Out Long Hair, publishers are engaged by the story but not by the production costs - color, quantity, etc. We'll keep trying. We do have permissions for ALL the known and alleged works and have worked hard to establish provenance, background, etc. I think, but then I'm the biographer, this will be of great help to others trying to tell these stories. But I digress... Our trail about the "attacking a soldier" incident continues despite significant progress and findings about who the "victim" was. We're close - I can feel it. We'll go to press with what we have then and if not for certain well, the next person riding that way can hopefully identify it. It's the bundle. That's the clue. And any thoughts about it and why he was carrying it will be appreciated. Lastly, back in 2009 jinlian and WY Man engaged in a discussion about some White Swan information WY Man had found. While some of the information was discussed, WY Man did not note the location of the papers. That is unfortunate as he has been sentenced to Federal prison for some rather heinous conduct. The information then helped fill out the story although the possibility of a recorded interview, not previously discussed, does provision us enough to find this document. I've attached a file of the 2009 conversation and any help on any part of it is appreciated. Burgan Jinlian Exchange 2009.pdf (136.01 KB) Again Happy New Year to all and look forward to many discussions. Ahoo Regards, Rod... |
|
|
|
Post by rodthomas on Jan 26, 2016 20:11:13 GMT -5
Hello everybody! Jinlian - are you out there? I've sent several emails directly with no response and hoping that this message might get a response. Hope all is well and please have a great day!
Regards, Rod...
|
|
