| Author |
 Topic  |
|
dave
Captain
Australia
Status: offline |
 Posted - February 15 2005 : 08:33:24 AM
|
Billy,
What was the story with the 10th skeleton from the CNC? The one which didn't seem to fit the mold of a 19th century cavalryman? |
  |
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 09:53:10 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by dave
What was the story with the 10th skeleton from the CNC? The one which didn't seem to fit the mold of a 19th century cavalryman?
Dave, good question. The public portion of the report never discloses what the difference is. The site states that the remainder of the article is for "professional" use only. Perhaps Bob can query Doug Scott regarding what made that one different. It is only speculation on my part but I would think that either age or size-related issues may have caused it to be questioned.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 12:32:12 PM
|
Since the monument and the mass burial, how many skeletons have been found in total related to the battle? Of those, how many had been buried and how many were discovered unburied and probably unknown to those originally searching for them, like the ones down by the river? Is there a map of these locations where they were found?
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 3:43:31 PM
|
| In relation to finding skeletons at a distance from the main battle field.I read somewhere that one little trick the Indians had was to drag dead/wounded troopers around behind their ponies so they ended up wherever the Indian grew tired of the sport. |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 6:48:57 PM
|
A couple of skeletons in the CNC turned out to be Indian women.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 7:07:45 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Since the monument and the mass burial, how many skeletons have been found in total related to the battle? Of those, how many had been buried and how many were discovered unburied and probably unknown to those originally searching for them, like the ones down by the river? Is there a map of these locations where they were found?
I think it's about 10 in all. Henry Mechling visited the battlefield in 1903 and dug up 5 bodies, 4 from Reno Hill, and the other Vincent Charley, and buried them in the cemetery. A skeleton was found south of Custer field in Deep Coulee, 1928, and reburied in the cemetery also. About that time I think 2 or 3 skeletons were also found on Reno's field, in the valley; one of them's buried in a tacky monument in front of the Garryowen trading post and has never been examined by researchers. 2 semi-complete skeletons were found by archaeologists on Reno Hill in 1958, one of which has been identified as Miles O'Hara. A few bones that are probably Sgt. Botzer's were found on the riverbank in 1989.
On pg. 134 of Scott's "They died with Custer" there's a rather generic map, but which shows the approximate locations of most of these.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 8:51:22 PM
|
How did Indian women end up in the cemetary? These were bodies found on the field or in the camp? What, pray tell, happened to all those found warrior bodies in the Indian camp? Read the camp was burned, etc., but did the Army toss the bodies into the river, or desecrate them beyond theft or anything?
And weren't two soldiers found at Reno more or less recently? The ones Ryan mentioned as killed, one while calming a horse? Or was that O'Hara? Maybe during the same dig that found the buried trash? And wasn't Mitch Boyeur found separate from those mentioned? For some reason, I've have this weird feeling that all these separate tales I recall total over 20 odd bodies, and I've wondered if there was absolute certainty that they all were of the battle or - like the casings - possibly not related to it at all.
There are sites that attract suicides, for example, and I'd be surprised if the battlefield wasn't one.
It would be amusing if the Oglala had buried Crazy Horse at the site of his great victory somewhere, and he was now enshrined with the soldiers in the cemetary when his skeleton was found later. Nobody actually knows he's buried in the area where his folks suggested. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 15 2005 : 11:07:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
How did Indian women end up in the cemetary?
There was one skeleton found in 1926, and another in 1941, both on Reno's field, which were assumed at the time to be soldiers. Nobody knew the truth until the graves were exhumed for study about 10 years ago.
quote:
What, pray tell, happened to all those found warrior bodies in the Indian camp? Read the camp was burned, etc., but did the Army toss the bodies into the river, or desecrate them beyond theft or anything?
Gibbon says they were burned; the whole area was torn up for farmland years ago, so I doubt there's anything left.
quote:
And weren't two soldiers found at Reno more or less recently? The ones Ryan mentioned as killed, one while calming a horse?
Henry Voight is one of the guys supposed to have been exhumed by Mechling in 1903. The archaeologists couldn't confirm the ID. I don't know of anybody found on Reno's field since 1989, the riverbank bones. I think the bones of a horse were found on the valley floor within the last 10 years; I remember it because Jason Pitsch, the discoverer, tried to ID the horse as John Sivertsen's, which was pretty daring considering that Sivertsen is on record for saying that his horse survived the battle. His only evidence was a comb with the initials JS, and Sivertsen was not the only guy in Reno's battalion who had those initials.
quote:
And wasn't Mitch Boyeur found separate from those mentioned?
Yeah, he was found through the digging that was done around the soldier markers on Custer field. The guys I mentioned were all found outside the Custer field boundaries.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 16 2005 : 01:19:03 AM
|
Been curious, I went to http://www.cr.nps.gov/mwac/libi/excavations.html and because it illustrates some of my uber complaints about the romance of applying CSI to archaeology to history, want to complain about it.
They have this skull, and they do a clay buildup to construct what the face 'might' have looked like and it seems that it was a distant ancestor of Fred Rogers, only more bland as if in a museum exhibit of Ozzienelson Man. Then they show a picture of Lell and sigh that the resemblance is close. Not to me, by a long shot, is the resemblance close since Lell looks like ....well, not Mr. Rogers. Then, to confirm the point, they superimpose this photo over the skull. In that it's human, and the eyes fall vaguely in the sockets, it could be. Eureka!
Then, reluctantly, they say in the last sentence that DNA doesn't support this. If they hadn't done the DNA, people would be assuring us of the match, and being sheep we'd nod while on our knees to the blossoming science of photo/skull matching. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on February 16 2005 01:20:21 AM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 18 2005 : 09:55:02 AM
|
I hadn't heard that DNA testing had ruled Lell out, but I'm not very surprised. There had always been discomfort with the ID. The height didn't match, the age was somewhat off (Lell was supposed to be 29, the bones were of a man 30-35), and the Lell photo on which the match was based is pretty crummy. The Park Service accepted Scott's conclusion that one set of bones in the Mechling batch was Vincent Charley's, and put a tombstone with his name over them, but they've never done so for the bones Scott thought were Lell's. Appears they've been vindicated.
R. Larsen |
Edited by - Anonymous Poster8169 on February 18 2005 10:28:08 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 18 2005 : 12:43:37 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Not to be Captain Bring Down, but they did do DNA on Mitch Boyeur, correct? To prove both Sioux and French blood?
I always thought that is why you chose the nom de plume of Dark Cloud as you like to rain on parades!
LMAO,
Billy |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 18 2005 : 1:38:49 PM
|
I didn't choose it, really, it was my nickname early on. For those to whom it sounds silly, recall that most of Americans' names aren't translated into English as, say, the Sioux's are. If you're a Samuel, you'd probably not want to be addressed as Beloved of God, its possible translation.
My actual name, Richard MacLeod, can be translated from the French and Gaellic as Brave-Heart Son-of-Ugly. A name like Son of Ugly has kept down the number of racists in the ranks of the MacLeods, I'm quite sure, and makes Dark Cloud perfectly acceptable to me. In any case, people can spell and pronounce Dark Cloud, something not a given with a name like MacLeod. "Mc....Lood??? McCleowd?" And a favorite: "Mc CLoid?"
Partially because of this, I've always felt at home in a sea of Noisy Walking, Hump, Fishface and the thousands of translations that seem perfectly normal to me.
I also think it puzzling that some tribes have their names translated (supposedly translated...) and some do not. Why Cochise and Osceola and Tecumseh, but Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse in the Sioux? Why are only the Indians of the Northern Plains treated like this, for the most part? There are no Dumb Skunks in the Mohawks of history, are there? (They may do it now.) No holy man named Bath Bubble in the Delaware. There keep English approximations of what their names sounded like in their tongues. Mostly, the Sioux and Cheyenne, it seems.
As absolutely fascinating as I am, however, and while I am impressed with Mr. Markland's bait and switch delivered with a sleight of hand and rather impressive soft shoe dance chops (you've studied? Four years of modern, two of tap?), it probably is of more interest that Mitch Boyeur's bones were not subject to DNA testing (by printing of Gray's book on the scout) to establish if both Sioux and French blood really coursed through the vessels and onto Montana soil. Instead, an expert - Dr. Snow - said, according to Gray page 398:
"...the conformation of the facial bones, especially the teeth, identified him as a mixed-blood of white and Indian parentage." Yet, there are, like, five teeth of the upper jaw attached to the lower half of the left eye orbit and cheek. That's sufficient to confirm mixed blood parentage? Really? Identified or fell within parameters that don't conflict......
I admit the bones look like they fit the photo, and I certainly have no proof otherwise, but stepping back and weighing everything, how comfy are we that's Boyeur for sure? (And really, who cares? He fought with Custer, surely enough.) But previously, we'd been assured it was. And who could argue? Science, you know. Reconstruction and application to photo. Science.
And because somewhat more advanced science could detonate theories on skulls attributed to Boyeur and Harrington, you'd think those supposedly interested in the "truth" would be salivating for those tests to be done and, well, paid for. But so much fanciful theory is at risk. (None of it Gray's) Harrington - that pulsating engine of courage supposedly if bravely running for fifteen miles, for example - might not get much acclaim if DNA eliminates bone from guess. And you'd think anyone responsible would have run the test before publishing the book or advancing the theory, even though the skull doesn't prove anything anyway even if it were part of Harrington. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 18 2005 : 1:51:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Not to be Captain Bring Down, but they did do DNA on Mitch Boyeur, correct? To prove both Sioux and French blood?
Not that I know of. They didn't recover much of him, just bits and pieces --- mostly a few skull and facial fragments, as I recall. The pieces of the face that were left was what led them to conclude that he was mixed blood. I don't have a book at hand, but their logic was that since some parts of the face are Mongoloid in nature, and other parts are not ... the man must therefore have been of mixed race. Bouyer being the only victim known to fit that description, and being the right age, and since the pieces of the face can be made to fit into his photograph .... well, they drew lines between the dots.
Clyde Snow was somewhat diffident about the identification, I think; someone who has the book nearer at hand than I do can check, but I remember that his section in "Archaeological Perspectives" wasn't really much of an endorsement. All in all it's likely that the bones ARE Bouyer's, though people have probably been pretending to more certainty than the facts actually warrant.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 18 2005 : 2:08:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
I also think it puzzling that some tribes have their names translated (supposedly translated...) and some do not. Why Cochise and Osceola and Tecumseh, but Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse in the Sioux? Why are only the Indians of the Northern Plains treated like this, for the most part? There are no Dumb Skunks in the Mohawks of history, are there? (They may do it now.) No holy man named Bath Bubble in the Delaware. There keep English approximations of what their names sounded like in their tongues. Mostly, the Sioux and Cheyenne, it seems.
I suspect it's just changing fashion. Through about the 1830s, most Indians in American history are known through English transliterations. (Is Black Hawk the first major one to be translated?) That gets reversed in the 1850s, right about when we began tangling with the Sioux, and the only prominent leader who springs to mind who was not known by a translated name is Inkpaduta. I think the fashion began to flip again in the late 1870s. The Sioux and Cheyenne all get known by translated names, but when you come to the Nez Perce, some names are translated (Kicking Bird), others are not (Ollokot). In the official version of Chief Joseph's surrender speech, Looking Glass is mentioned in one breath, Tu-hul-hul-sote in another. The soldiers were fighting the Apaches in the 1880s, and I don't think many of them, if any, were ever known by English names. Nobody bothered to translate Wovoka during the Ghost Dance craze.
I think that's all it is, fashion, and by coincidence the Plains Indians happened to fall into a brief period in American history when it was considered standard to translate, not transliterate.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 19 2005 : 05:23:22 AM
|
quote:
(Is Black Hawk the first major one to be translated?)
Was King Phillip the translation, or a name the colonists gave to him?
Thanks in advance,
Billy
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 19 2005 : 10:52:32 AM
|
| It was a nick name given. His brother was Alexander, and the two Macedonian Kings were thereby honored. Metacom, Wamsutta were their names. THAT is an interesting guy, and they came the closest to blowing the Brits into the Atlantic all through New England. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on February 19 2005 11:02:14 AM |
|
|
|
dave
Captain
Australia
Status: offline |
Posted - February 19 2005 : 11:30:22 AM
|
Personally I find the King Phillip's war, and some of the other early colonial wars more interesting than the plains wars. If Phillip had won, it wouldn't of course have ended European aspirations in America, but it might have been a severe setback from which it might have have taken the British? (American's) decades to recover from.
Makes for an interesting what-if scenario at any rate. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 19 2005 : 12:30:50 PM
|
I think because the Indians were more interesting, more advanced in many ways. Permanent villages, hunt and fish and farm and trade. If they'd only been able to unite under a confederation, but everyone wants to be king and they turn on each other allowing these tiny groups of Euros to win by divide and conquer, assisted by the odd pandemic. You have the feeling the later Tecumseh and Osceola, who clearly saw the issues and knew what was needed, wanted to swat their peers upside the head and scream at them, and King Phillip must have felt the same, although he wasn't that farsighted.
Also, by the plains wars, the conflict was pretty much reduced to we want the land. In New England, there was the much stronger religious elements and very confused motivations. It hadn't been reduced to just greed at that point. You sort of still have people thinking that the future would hold Indian and Puritan in separate villages with peaceful trade and eventual conversion in this fallen Eden.
Even then, whites left settlements to live with Indians willingly. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 20 2005 : 06:04:15 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
I also think anyone interested in this should review the url I posted from Frontline on genocide and, as well, read the article "1491", referring to the year before Columbus arrived, in The Atlantic Monthly on relatively new studies and finds. If true, and it looks pretty convincing, we really don't know squat about pre-Columbian America, and neither do the Native Americans. In any event, lots of upside the head smacks in that article.
For what it is worth, I discovered yesterday morning while cleaning junk out of the PC that I have the entire 1491 article in Adobe if anyone needs a copy for private reading.
Billy |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 22 2005 : 9:33:31 PM
|
I just scanned, cropped and uploaded the images of the telegrams sent from Washington DC to Gen. Sheridan in Chicago consisting of Terry's initial report of Custer's fight.
The formatting is somewhat rough on the HTML so to get from one section of 5 pages to another, use the "back" arrow and select the appropriate link. I will adjust that later, as well as scan, etc. 13 more pages of the same report "cleaned" up by some attache.
For the people on dial-up, let me know if they load too slow and I will break them up into smaller segments.
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.com/~familyinformation/#custer
Click on the Custer link under Shortcuts and you can't miss the new links.
Billy |
|
|
|
hunkpapa7
Lieutenant
United Kingdom
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 07:13:43 AM
|
Many thanks BJ,keep up the excellent work
A little ode
On yonder hill there stood a coo
It started to rain
And its no there noo
 |
wev'e caught them napping boys
Aye Right ! |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 8:48:30 PM
|
| Billy, I don't know how you manage to continuously come up with these gems but, thank you so very much. |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 27 2005 : 08:39:35 AM
|
Thought you all would appreciate this letter to the editor.
Billy
The Army and Navy Journal
Vol. IV, 6/29/1867
[Trancriber’s Note: Italics are as found in the original.]
To the Editor of the Army and Navy Journal.
Sir: I propose to give, in as few words as possible, my views of Indian affairs in what is called the Powder River country. In June last a so-called treaty was made at Fort Laramie, D. T. I was at Fort Laramie at the time the preliminary council was held, and told the commissioners that the treaty would not amount to anything, but that all the Indians wanted was to receive presents and procure a supply of powder and lead, and then they would take the war path, and would plunder trains and murder emigrants going over the road. A preliminary council was held, at which most of the principle chiefs of the Sioux and Cheyenne tribes were present. They were dissatisfied with the provisions of the proposed treaty, and were unwilling to grant the right of way for an emigrant road from Fort Laramie, D. T., to Virginia City, Montana Territory, and left the fort soon after and returned to their homes. None of the Cheyenne, Arapahoe, or principle Sioux chiefs, who live in the country through which the road runs, signed the treaty. The chiefs who signed the treaty, and the Indians who received the principle portion of the presents, were the “Laramie loafers” and “road beggars” – a class of Indians who hang around Fort Laramie, and gain their living by begging and stealing.
On the 16th of June last Colonel Carrington’s command left for Fort Reno, D. T., the only post then established on the line of the proposed road. On the day after our arrival there, some of these Sioux stole about fifty head of mules and horses from the vicinity of the post.
On the 16th of July the principle part of the command arrived at the place selected as the site of Fort Philip Kearny, D. T. The next day these same friendly Indians, who were said to have made a treaty, ran off eighty head of Government mules, and in trying to recover them several men lost their lives. Three days later a small detachment of officers and men – twenty in all – on their way to join their regiment at Fort Philip Kearny, were attacked on Crazy Woman’s Fork of Powder River, between Forts Reno and Philip Kearny, and one (Lieutenant Daniels) was killed. From this time until emigration ceased passing over the road nearly every train was, more or less, harrassed [sic], and mail and other small parties were frequently attacked.
Now, as to the Philip Kearny massacre, it has been said that the Indians did not approach with hostile intent, but that the commanding officer of the post, mistaking their intentions, fired on them, and thus brought on a fight. This is preposterous. Up to that time the Indians had been hanging around the fort every day, stealing stock on every opportunity, attacking the trains going to the woods, and even stealing up at night and shooting men connected with passing trains, while they were sitting around their camp fires, within one hundred yards of the fort. But a few days before the massacre a train going to the woods was attacked, and in defending it, Lieutenant Bingham, a promising young officer of the Second Cavalry, and one Sergeant, lost their lives. This may be a sign of friendship, but I don’t think so. Every person that knows anything of affairs in this country knows very well that the massacre at Fort Philip Kearny was planned weeks before, and that the Sioux, Cheyennes and Arapahoes had been collecting together, in preparation for it, on Tongue River, until they numbered 2,200 lodges. The intention was to attack Fort Philip Kearny first, and if they were successful to then attack Fort C. F. Smith. At the present time the entire tribe of Northern Sioux are collecting on Powder River, below the mouth of Little Powder River, and their avowed intention is to make a vigorous and determined attack on each of the three posts, and on all trains that may come along the road. Friendly Indians report that they are being supplied with ammunition by half-breed traders connected with the Hudson’s Bay Company. There is no use sending out commissioners to treat with them, as it will be only acting over again last Summer’s scenes. They would be willing to enter into any temporary treaty to enable themselves to get fully supplied with powder with which to carry on the war. The only way to settle the question is to send out a sufficient number of troops to completely whip the hostile Sioux, Cheyennes and Arapahoes, and make them sue for peace. Unless this is done the road had better be abandoned and the country given up to the Indians.
I have been in this country among these Indians nearly forty-four years, and am familiar with their past history, and my experiences and knowledge of them is greater than can be gained by any commissioners during the sittings of any council that may be held. I know that these Indians will not respect any treaty until they have been whipped into it.
James Bridger,
May 4, 1867
|
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 27 2005 : 10:25:06 AM
|
I just uploaded to my site a page from the Army and Navy Journal dated Feb. 9, 1867 featuring details and diagrams of Berdan's modification to the Springfield to make it a breech-loader. Berdan's original modification was accepted but this is a further refinement by Berdan. I will let Dave, Prolar or Paul figure out whether this refinement ever was put into production.
Sorry about not having page 2 of the article but I either did not copy it or it got lost. Irregardless, I will try to get that page next Wednesday when I go over to Ft. Leavenworth.
There are two sizes to choose from. The first link is 2.2 meg in size. The second link will be 768K.
Best of wishes,
Billy
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.com/~familyinformation/fpk/berdanmod.jpg
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.com/~familyinformation/fpk/berdanmod_s.jpg |
Edited by - BJMarkland on February 27 2005 10:28:33 AM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Research Locations
