Share This Page:

  

Battlefields

General information on Military History.
Jason The Argonaut
Member
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Sat 24 May, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Jason The Argonaut »

The Battle of the Little Bighorn
In late 1875, Sioux and Cheyenne Indians defiantly left their reservations, outraged over the continued intrusions of whites into their sacred lands in the Black Hills. They gathered in Montana with the great warrior Sitting Bull to fight for their lands. Two victories that spring against the US Cavalry emboldened them to fight on in the summer of 1876.

To force the large Indian army back to the reservations, the Army dispatched three columns to attack in coordinated fashion, one of which contained Lt. Colonel George Custer and the Seventh Cavalry. Spotting the Sioux village about fifteen miles away along the Rosebud River on June 25, Custer also found a nearby group of about forty warriors. Ignoring orders to wait, he decided to attack before they could alert the main party. He did not realize that the number of warriors in the village numbered three times his strength. Dividing his forces in three, Custer sent troops under Captain Frederick Benteen to prevent their escape through the upper valley of the Little Bighorn River. Major Marcus Reno was to pursue the group, cross the river, and charge the Indian village in a coordinated effort with the remaining troops under his command. He hoped to strike the Indian encampment at the northern and southern ends simultaneously, but made this decision without knowing what kind of terrain he would have to cross before making his assault. He belatedly discovered that he would have to negotiate a maze of bluffs and ravines to attack.

Reno's squadron of 175 soldiers attacked the northern end. Quickly finding themselves in a desperate battle with little hope of any relief, Reno halted his charging men before they could be trapped, fought for ten minutes in dismounted formation, and then withdrew into the timber and brush along the river. When that position proved indefensible, they retreated uphill to the bluffs east of the river, pursued hotly by a mix of Cheyenne and Sioux.

Just as they finished driving the soldiers out, the Indians found roughly 210 of Custer's men coming towards the other end of the village, taking the pressure off of Reno's men. Cheyenne and Hunkpapa Sioux together crossed the river and slammed into the advancing soldiers, forcing them back to a long high ridge to the north. Meanwhile, another force, largely Oglala Sioux under Crazy Horse's command, swiftly moved downstream and then doubled back in a sweeping arc, enveloping Custer and his men in a pincer move. They began pouring in gunfire and arrows.

As the Indians closed in, Custer ordered his men to shoot their horses and stack the carcasses to form a wall, but they provided little protection against bullets. In less than an hour, Custer and his men were killed in the worst American military disaster ever. After another day's fighting, Reno and Benteen's now united forces escaped when the Indians broke off the fight. They had learned that the other two columns of soldiers were coming towards them, so they fled.

After the battle, the Indians came through and stripped the bodies and mutilated all the uniformed soldiers, believing that the soul of a mutilated body would be forced to walk the earth for all eternity and could not ascend to heaven. Inexplicably, they stripped Custer's body and cleaned it, but did not scalp or mutilate it. He had been wearing buckskins instead of a blue uniform, and some believe that the Indians thought he was not a soldier and so, thinking he was an innocent, left him alone. Because his hair was cut short for battle, others think that he did not have enough hair to allow for a very good scalping. Immediately after the battle, the myth emerged that they left him alone out of respect for his fighting ability, but few participating Indians knew who he was to have been so respectful. To this day, no one knows the real reason.

Little Bighorn was the pinnacle of the Indians' power. They had achieved their greatest victory yet, but soon their tenuous union fell apart in the face of the white onslaught. Outraged over the death of a popular Civil War hero on the eve of the Centennial, the nation demanded and received harsh retribution. The Black Hills dispute was quickly settled by redrawing the boundary lines, placing the Black Hills outside the reservation and open to white settlement. Within a year, the Sioux nation was defeated and broken. "Custer's Last Stand" was their last stand as well.
I recently saw a programme on channel 5 about The Battle of the Little Bighorn. I learned few things I did not already know, one is that it's the only battlefield in the world that markers the place's where the soilders fell and died. Only the US solider's buy the way, I also found out that Custer's last stand at Custer Hill was false. There was no famous stand at that point it was made up to look like Custer and his men fought and died there. The fact is that there were a few who stood and fought with Custer. But the last stand was in a valley a distance away from Custer hill. Where reports from Sioux and Cheyenne Indians say that they killed about 23 or so US troops, but there bodies have never been exhumed.

What I have just wrote was mostly based on this programme I saw, I was detailed and used US historians and a solider from the US army. I know some might not agree with what I have wrote most likely our Americans cousins, but this is just my view, so fill free to pick through what I wrote and correct me if you feel you need to.

Image
Lt. Colonel George Custer

Image
Sitting Bull

Image
I fight for my corner and secondly I leave when the pub closes. - Winston Churchill [img]http://www.world-of-smilies.de/html/images/smilies/teufel/smilie_vampire.gif[/img]
User avatar
chunky from york
Member
Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri 13 Jun, 2003 10:12 am
Location: york, england

Post by chunky from york »

Jason,
Some time ago I read 'Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee' a long but gripping account about just how savage the white man was in North America, I thoroughly recommend it. :o
Chunky from York



I may not be the man I was, but I was
spitz
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 22 May, 2003 6:27 am
Location: Brit in New Zealand

Post by spitz »

Galipolli, I saw the movie, I thought it was pretty good.
Well, its like Harry said, Galipolli has become part of the Australian (and Kiwi) identity, it's the defining moment in Australian history when, because of the sacrifices it made, Australia became a nation and not an out-post of the British Empire.

But it was just a fictional movie based on a historical events. It failed to acknowledge the presence of troops from Britain, France, India, Nepal (Gurkhas), South Africa, and most of the British and French Empires who suffered as much as the ANZAC’s. As a movie I doubt it should be rated as highly as Das Boot or even The Cruel Sea which, although fictitious, remained true to historical detail.

A specific myth perpetuated by the movie was that a particular order to charge was given by a British Officer (which no doubt attracted Mel) but it was false - the actual order was given by an Australian officer. This is directorial license at its worst that directly contradicts historical fact. Galipolli represents 20% fact and 80% Hollyweird, good movie but not a history lesson. :roll:
You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!
spitz
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 22 May, 2003 6:27 am
Location: Brit in New Zealand

Post by spitz »

I recently saw a programme on channel 5 about The Battle of the Little Bighorn
Did the programme mention that Custer could’ve taken a Gatling Gun (or two) with him but chose not too? Big mistake buddy. :angel:

Hindsight is such a wonderful thing. :D
You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!
Jason The Argonaut
Member
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Sat 24 May, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Jason The Argonaut »

Splitz
Did the programme mention that Custer could’ve taken a Gatling Gun (or two) with him but chose not too? Big mistake buddy.

Hindsight is such a wonderful thing.
Splitz mate, I was only stating some fact's they might not all be 100% but that can't be helped, but Hindsight I don't has nothing to do with what I wrote.

chunky from york
Jason,
Some time ago I read 'Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee' a long but gripping account about just how savage the white man was in North America, I thoroughly recommend it.
After the battle, the Indians came through and stripped the bodies and mutilated all the uniformed soldiers, believing that the soul of a mutilated body would be forced to walk the earth for all eternity. For some reason they stripped Custer's body but did not scalp or mutilate it. He had been wearing buckskins instead of a blue uniform and some believe that the Indians thought he was not a soldier. Because his hair was cut short for battle, others think that he did not have enough hair for a trophy scalp.
Thank's for that chunky, I'll have a look for it, as you can see after the battle the Indians mutilated bodies of the soldiers. I also herd on the programme on channel 5 that they also cut or the soldiers feet and hands.. Nasty business. I'm not saying that the US never mutilated Indians bodies, as you said 'Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee' tells all.

Cheers for your input lad's :D
I fight for my corner and secondly I leave when the pub closes. - Winston Churchill [img]http://www.world-of-smilies.de/html/images/smilies/teufel/smilie_vampire.gif[/img]
User avatar
chunky from york
Member
Member
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri 13 Jun, 2003 10:12 am
Location: york, england

Post by chunky from york »

Jason,
I hope I did not give the idea that the native Americans lived in some sort of pastoral, peacefully idyll.

Far from it they were always raiding their neighbors in the most bloodthirsty way. However the practice of scalping was introduced by the invaders, who required the scalp as proof before the bounty for a dead Indian was paid.
Also they did not use biological warfare, the US army (allegedly) gave out blankets infected with smallpox.

But whichever way you look at it the Indian wars were fought ferociously, on a one on one basis.
Chunky from York



I may not be the man I was, but I was
spitz
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 22 May, 2003 6:27 am
Location: Brit in New Zealand

Post by spitz »

Jason I wasn’t having a dig, maybe I wasn’t clear which is highly likely. :oops:
Custer did have the opportunity to take Gattling Guns but chose not too in preference to speed and mobility, it’s something that’s usually missed out in the popcorn culture like TV and movies - so I am actually interested in whether the GG's were mentioned.

The reference to ‘big mistake buddy’ was about General Custard not taking the guns along, a huge mistake on his part all because he lacked respect for the enemy and had an ego problem that got all his troops killed. For all the criticism that Monty gets from the cousins for being too cautious, he would never have the mistakes Custard did. But then hindsight . . . :D
You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!
spitz
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 22 May, 2003 6:27 am
Location: Brit in New Zealand

Post by spitz »

the US army (allegedly) gave out blankets infected with smallpox.
That’s been credited to Sir Jeffrey Amherst, an English lord who was Commander-in-Chief of the British troops in America in 1758-1763, but the evidence hasn’t proved conclusive as to whether it was actually carried out to the scale that has been alleged or that the blankets were distributed intentionally at all.

And before any Elmers start climbing all over me, the British Manuscript Project (1941-1945) undertaken by the United States Library of Congress, have 300 reels of microfilm on Sir Jeff alone and even more on the French & Indian war, some historians believe they’re proof of bio-warfare some don’t, ergo: inconclusive. :agrue:
You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!
Jason The Argonaut
Member
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Sat 24 May, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Jason The Argonaut »

Jason,
I hope I did not give the idea that the native Americans lived in some sort of pastoral, peacefully idyll.
chunky from york I perfectly understand what your saying mate.

spitz, I also was not having a dig at you either mate :oops:, It might of sounded that way because I did not fully understand what you wrote, but now the myst has gone and I can see what your where saying.
Custer did have the opportunity to take Gattling Guns but chose not too in preference to speed and mobility, it’s something that’s usually missed out in the popcorn culture like TV and movies - so I am actually interested in whether the GG's were mentioned.
Well I never new that they had the chance to take Gattling Guns, in all the books and article I have read I never saw a mention of them having Gattling Guns at there disposal I wonder why....:roll:.
I fight for my corner and secondly I leave when the pub closes. - Winston Churchill [img]http://www.world-of-smilies.de/html/images/smilies/teufel/smilie_vampire.gif[/img]
Grunt no more
Member
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed 03 Sep, 2003 9:39 am
Location: Australia

Post by Grunt no more »

im an aussie, im in the military.

the battles at Galipolli, and the ANZAC's are part of the australian folk law, we take alot of pride in what those young lads did 90 years ago. we have a day in the year, that is the aniversary with the beach landing, this day is dedicated to the ANZAC's and is when all the vet's come out and go on public marchres.

The history that Aussies are tought in school history leasons is that the landing at galipolli was a big bristish scruw up, they were supposed to land on nice flat beachs with nice golden sand, not to hard to take with 100,000 + troops, but the brit's got thier surveys wrong, and droped the troops 10's km away from thier designated beaches, with shere clifs overlooking the beach, the ANZAC's stomed the beach and took it, and in the first day, pushed 2-3 km in land, the cusulties at the end of this first day were understandbly massive.

but australia dosent realy celibrate the campain as is, but the retret, the ANZAC's pulled out in 1-2 day(s), with zero cusulties. and the movie "Galipolli" shows the battle of an area known as the neck, sure you probly know that, but 500 lighthorse charged an area no bigger then half a football field, of that 500 no more then 50 were able to met the role call at the end of the day.

well thats my 2 cents, cheers fellas
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." Madison
User avatar
JR
Member
Member
Posts: 2392
Joined: Wed 19 Dec, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Boston,(The Original) UK

Post by JR »

:wink: Grunt no more,The charge of the Australian light horse (3rd 4th 5th light horse) was an epic charge but did not take place at Gallipoli but at Beersheba in what was then the Holy land. not taking any Glory away from the ANZAC's in the Gallipoli Campaign,but we must always remember British Regiments also covered themselves with Glory,Lancashire Fusiliers 7 VCs before breakfast.Aye JR :wink: :wink:
Who needs the World as your Oyster,When you've had the world as your cap Badge
spitz
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 22 May, 2003 6:27 am
Location: Brit in New Zealand

Post by spitz »

Lighthorsemen, much better movie than Gallipoli, possibly because Mel Gibbon wasn’t in it dragging his knuckles thru the sand. :whistle:
You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!
Grunt no more
Member
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed 03 Sep, 2003 9:39 am
Location: Australia

Post by Grunt no more »

i wasn't referring to the charge of the lighthorse, but the men that charged at the "neck" in the movie "Gallipoli". in the moive good old mel gibson plays as a lighthorse men, but the lighthorse fought on foot, not the horse back as you would expect.
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." Madison
Jason The Argonaut
Member
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Sat 24 May, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Jason The Argonaut »

Battle of Krithia
First Battle of Krithia - 28th April 1915

29th Division

By dawn on 28th April, some 20,000 British troops had been landed on Cape Helles. They were opposed by 6,300 Turkish soldiers of the 9th Division. On the evening of the 27th, British and French units advanced without opposition from the beachhead, only stopping with nightfall. However, the supply position was to prove critical: only 28 guns had been landed, and so few pack animals that the infantry were forced to carry all equipment, food and ammunition forward from the dumps on W and V beaches.

Hunter-Weston issued orders for the advance to continue in the morning, with the left flank of the line to reach a point north of the hamlet of Krithia, on the general line of advance on the summit of Achi Baba. Many exhausted units did not receive these orders until a few hours before the advance was due to begin.

The First Battle of Krithia thus began with a desultory bombardment at 8am, and the British on the left flank moved wearily forward against what appeared to be equally weary and broken opposition. But by mid-day, the advance had lost it's early momentum; it was hopelessly disorganised and beginning to incur losses from the heavily defended Gully Spur and the Achi Baba heights. On the right, the French units were held up at Kereves Dere.

On the extreme left, at Gully Spur, the 1st Bn, the Border Regiment of 87th Brigade actually broke in the face of a counterattack with the bayonet, which itself was broken by off-shore bombardment from HMS Queen Elizabeth.

By 6pm, the battle was called off, the Allies having suffered 3,000 casualties of the 14,000 men engaged. The First Battle of Krithia was decisive. The Allies main chance of advancing from Cape Helles along the spine of the peninsular had been thwarted. It would never re-appear.

Since dawn of the 25th April, the British and Dominion troops had lost 400 officers and 8,500 men: of these, 150 and 2,500 were dead. No-one had planned for or expected this. The shock and effect on morale on an army that had anticipited a walk-over was shattering. Meanwhile Turkish strength, particularly in artillery, was growing rapidly.
To think this was the first of three battles of Krithia, The 29th Division was formed during January to March 1915, by bringing together units of the regular army that were on garrison and similar duties around the British Empire when war began. Training and mobilisation took place in the Midlands, in the area Warwick-Leamington-Nuneaton-Rugby. The Division was initially earmarked for the Western Front, but was eventually selected for the attempt in the Dardanelles.
I fight for my corner and secondly I leave when the pub closes. - Winston Churchill [img]http://www.world-of-smilies.de/html/images/smilies/teufel/smilie_vampire.gif[/img]
User avatar
Whitey
Member
Member
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue 12 Aug, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: Dixie, Well my heart anyway

Post by Whitey »

Little Big Horn

Custer had it coming. He was a sorry general really, promoted by mistake and just lucky for awhile which caused him to become a legend in his own mind.

Kit Carson was another "Indian Killer" who should have been put to justice.
Let them call me a rebel and I welcome it, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of demons were I to make a whore of my soul. (Thomas Paine)
Post Reply