Red Sunday: The Story of the Battle of the Little Bighorn
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 07. 2018
- From the circa 1970s promotional materials: "Still photographs, paintings and live action are sensitively and imaginatively merged into a study of the conflict between two cultures. On one side - the inexorable white advance across the continent, spearheaded by the United States Cavalry, characterized by an appetite for land and a zealous belief in Manifest Destiny, accompanied by the beat of gold fever and the boom of conquest. On the other side - Indians, inhabitors and possessors of the land, questioning the white tide and resisting compromise, with pride thousands of years old and a culture that rang with independence. The two cultures met on the Little Bighorn in a clash that has reverberated for 100 years. Lt. Col. George A. Custer and the 7th Cavalry, riding for glory - and 3,000 Sioux and Cheyenne warriors flaming with injustice. Sunday, June 25, 1876. Red Sunday. Narrated by John McIntire and sponsored by the Montana Travel Promotion Unit, the North Dakota Travel Division, and the Montana and North Dakota Bicentennial Administrations, RED SUNDAY was filmed for distribution through 1975 and the Bicentennial Year 1976 - which is also the centennial year of the Battle of the Little Bighorn." (collection MOV 0099)
The Montana Historical Society is the owner of this film and makes available reproductions for research, publication and other uses. Written permission must be obtained from the MHS Photograph Archives before any reproduction use. The Society does not necessarily hold copyright to all of the materials in the collections. In some cases, permission to use may require seeking additional authorization from the copyright owners.
This video, especially the narration, transports me to a simpler time...
The documentary is older, but it is really one of the better documentary's on the events leading up to the Battle.
well said !!!
enjoy the narration of John McIntire, a great old time, Irish American actor, with a strong clear baritone voice, and easy to understand.
we dont have to be the same to be equal...in 2020 these words are gold
Soon I will be here no more
You`ll hear my tale
Through my blood
Through my people
And the eagle`s cry
The bear within will never lay to rest
Wandering on Horizon Road
Following the trail of tears
White man came
Saw the blessed land
We cared, you took
You fought, we lost
Not the war but an unfair fight
Sceneries painted beautiful in blood
Wandering on Horizon Road
Following the trail of tears
Once we were here
Where we have lived since the world began
Since time itself gave us this land
Our souls will join again the wild
Our home in peace `n war `n death
Wandering on Horizon Road...
" I still dream every night
Of them wolves, them mustangs, those endless prairies
The restless winds over mountaintops
The unspoilt frontier of my kith n`kin
The hallowed land of the Great Spirit
I still believe
In every night
In every day
I am like the caribou
And you like the wolves that make me stronger
We never owed you anything
Our only debt is one life for our Mother
It was a good day to chant this song
For Her
Our spirit was here long before you
Long before us
And long will it be after your pride brings you to your end "
Powerful ... ^v^
excellent
Excellent. I have been to the Greasy Grass twice. I hope to again.
No, it should go by it's true name The Battle of the Greasy Grass, the name it had for thousands of years.
@@commonsenseisnt2dimesandan729 excellent observation !!!
the arrangement of those tombstones gives indication of what a panicked retreat it was...only Kehoe's men appear to have held firm...
awsome video...my 5th great grandfather monoquet is featured at 8min 36 sec mark...thank you...monoquet is a potawatomi chief from the northern indiana area..the town of monoquet ind is the former site of his main village..
Really that is so awesome
Is he the one wearing blue or red plumes on his head?
@@MsZoedog66 at 8 min 35 seconds..sorry I had to check the time..his face has a blue band across the top half..holding a pipe.his image is on the thumbnail pic also..
8:36
@@MsZoedog66 he was also a signer of the 1833 treaty of chicago..the removals in the 1800s of our people is the reason my part of the family is in canada..a son of chief monoquet came to canada so not to be removed from the homelands...he married the daughter of chief mitigwab of the saugeen territory in canada..
Winning a battle is small compared to winning the war which is small compared to winning the peace.
Very Nice Thank You.
After the Indian victory, Cpt. F. Benteen estimated that there were 8,000 warriors at the battle, and Lt. W.S. Edgerly stated that he estimated there were 7,000 warriors at the battle.
i love history
Very informative information. Well done!
No! The government didnt cede the Black Hills to the Lakota. 1868 treaty recognized the fact that the aera belonged to the Indians only to take it from them in 1877 illegaly . Gold!
Especially the Spanish introduction of horses to the plains- then the Indians
became a European subculture of power, property, territory and conflict.
this narrator could only be John Mcintire. great job.
This battle changed the way military strategy would be fought for many years to come.I thank the 7 th Calvary for dieing so my descendants may also roam this land.I an one eighth Cherokee I do feel torn how the treaties were continually broken and the Tribal way of life would soon diminish due to the rapid rise of the Iron horse and westward expansion.
And exactly how did it "change military strategy"??? Glad your descendants got to roam the Black Hills, "their" land. Land that they got by killing and driving off Crow and Arikara natives. Hope you pray for those descendants also.
'Dying'...
@@jeffsmith2022 tool
1/8th of you is torn.
1/8 you either are or are not there is no such thing or part measurement of who you are!
Good documentary great pictures
most informative, truth well done. Thank you.
(Check time, 10:56 to 11:00 the uniformed officer on the left appearing shocked at the murdered and scalp man, laying prostate upon the ground. While the civilian says, I told you so :::::)
John McIntire's Red Sunday is not in need of history revisionists- it concludes that itself.
Thanks for uploading!
in 1991 the new name is the Little Big Horn Battlefield
Crazy keyboard music from Monty Python and the Holy Grail opening credits kicks in @2:33!
Legend has it, Custer was heard to say; Bring me, my brown pants!
Because he shat them
When 70% of your command stays out of the fight, even after receiving direct orders to, "Come Quick"...Things are bound to turn out ugly.
Divide your command without intelligence and tell no one your plan. Don’t support your attack and watch them get overwhelmed and carry on beyond your lines of communication and supply. You think the Indians would have let Reno Benteen and the pack train to reach the 5 companies led by Custer? Your mind is gone. I served in the army and with the seventh in Korea. Custer is not liked very much in the NCO club.
@@SeanRCope I know this is a waste of 5 minutes, but here it comes again. Custer (and most officers in general) knew that Indians try and avoid a head to head encounter if possible. The the 3 columns were supposed to surround the Indians and, in this case, surprise was achieved by the 7th. The Indians...knowing it was too late for flight decided on a "holding maneuver" to buy time for the women and children to escape. After Reno panicked and fled to the hills the Indians were focused completely on the Custer battalion and enervated to take the offensive; with deadly results.
@@richardschaefer4807 Reno was flanked by superior numbers... Reno might have held with two of Benteens companies assigned to him at the very start. One to form a blocking force at his left flank and one in reserve.... but that didnt happen.
A simple two pronged pincer might have worked... splitting three ways was too much....
Asking Reno to make the first contact, and hold while custer made his attack, was wishfull thinking. If custer need packs (ammo) why wouldnt Reno also need Benteens support. Reno had fewer men, engaged first.
Only an asshole would expect Reno to do better than custer with less men.
If custer had formed a defensive position with the majority of his men, he may have held out until relieved, but he either did not, or could not...
It should be noted, custer did not bring heavy weapons or sabers and lances. This means his men were fighting as mounted infantry.
@@richardschaefer4807 Typical Custer fanboy.
@@SeanRCope I am no big fan of Custer...ego was too big and relied too much on dash and daring - "Custer's Luck".. That said, Reno was a coward and a drunk, and Benteen made no secret of the fact that he hated The Boy General's guts, and he knew that he could hide behind Reno's skirts...."I was only following orders."...Now where have I heard that before?
I would love to continue this 145 year old argument; but I realize that it has no end and my time is ebbing away....I was at the '76 Centennial...I was also at Wounded Knee Centennial and at Pine Ridge in '73...(barely made it out of that one)...My life was similar to Forest Gump's....you wouldn't believe what I have done and where I have been. Adious
In those days, murder got you land. Today, murder gets you in prison...
tell that to laura bush or jason ravnsborg
@@TheSeeohhdee - the charge of murder requires criminal intent.
@@mchapman132 or reckless conduct displaying a conscious disregard for human life... please dont argue on the internet unless you know what youre talking about.
@@mchapman132 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
@@TheSeeohhdee - Less than impressive response. I’m disappointed really, your original post was interesting, and subsequent post made a good point. I expected a good debate. Too bad.
Custer was obviously overconfident based on past experience. No two situations are the same.
Can Anyone show me a picture of Benteen 4:12 that was taken during the Civil War?
The best account of the attitude of Custer, the events leading to his unwise attack on the village, and of the battle itself is "The Battle of the Little Big Horn" by Mari Sandoz.
Why did Custer attack the village?He knew the warriors would be away grouping for the fight and would attempt to capture woman and children to be used for negotiation- his cowardly tactic.
People tend to judge Custer by his Indian expeditions, which to his dismay, we're somewhat uneventful. Indians didn't stand and fight like the European Napoleanic tactics. Which might describe his over-eagerness when he came across the camp of the Lakota and Cheyenne. One needs to also study his Civil War duty to get a better sense of the man.
@@jimbrew4529 The US army often attacked Indian villages in winter, at dawn, or when the men were away hunting. As for the Civil War, Custer was under Sheridan, famous for the burning of the Shenandoah Valley in which barns, homes and ,crops were destroyed leaving many women and children to starve and freeze in the winter cold. The attacks on Indian villages were merely an extension of these tactics and imo Custer couldn't grasp the difference between a village of women and children and an encampment full of warriors.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Sheridan
Tear down the homefront and weaken the resources of food and support of the tribe. In the end the US had the advantage which is why these rebels got the shit end of the stick. The Indians temporarily got a leg up that was short lived.
A little over two years later was the Battle of Isandlwana, when a whole regiment of British troops were wiped out by local Zulu warriors.
the Brit's tried their best to diminish the effect of that one...concentrating instead on the successful defense of Roarke's Drift...bit of deflection there....
At the Battle of Isandlwana (22 January 1879), an Impi of 25,000 Zulu warriors descended on the British encampment, defended by 1,744 personnel, of which only 650 were red-coated Imperial troopers of the line. The remainder were assorted colonial units, such as the 1st Natal Native Contingent (NNC) under the command of an Irishman, Lt-Col Anthony William Durnford, Royal Engineers (RE), the Buffalo Border Guard and the Natal Mounted Police (NMP). Not a single Imperial trooper survived the battle; to a man, they fought and died where they stood and their bones lie upon the battlefield to this very day, covered by cairns of whitewashed stones.
For the Zulus, Isandlwana was a Pyrrhic victory, with their suffering an estimated 3,000 dead. King Cetewayo (also spelled: Cetshwayo) said mournfully afterwards: "A spear has been thrust into the belly of the nation".
The right wing of the Zulu impi - which had played very little part in the battle itself - seeking battle honours, then crossed the Mzinyathi ('Buffalo') River against the express orders of King Cetewayo to remain on the Zulu side of the river, and attacked the British supply base at Rorke's Drift. Some 4,500 warriors of four amaButho ('regiments') under the command of the King's half-brother, Prince Dabulamanzi ka mPande ("He Who Cleaves The Water") attacked the 126 British military personnel stationed at the drift, of which 18 were bedridden and unable to fight.
After a battle lasting 14 hours, largely conducted during the hours of darkness, Zulu forces withdrew from the field after suffering losses of approximately 1,200 men dead and an unknown number of wounded. British losses were just 17 dead, mostly of B Company/ 2nd Battalion of the 24th Regiment of Foot (2nd Warwickshires). The defenders of Rorke's Drift earned a total of 11 Victoria Crosses (VCs) between them - the highest award for exceptional gallantry "... in the face of the enemy ..." that can be won by members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces.
This remains the highest number of VCs won during a single engagement, during the entire history of the UK, the Commonwealth and the Empire.
British Forces (under the overall command of Major General Sir Frederic Augustus Thesiger, the 2nd Baron Lord Chelmsford) then withdrew from Zululand in order to regroup, before re-invading Zululand on 3 June 1879. After a pedestrian advance, Zulu forces numbering some 20,000 were engaged on 4th July 1879 by British forces now numbering 4,200 plus 1,000 African auxiliaries (the latter to be deployed only in mopping-up operations).
The Battle of Ulundi lasted barely 50 minutes, with Zulu forces being driven from the field under withering rifle fire from British infantry. But Zulu forces displayed incredible bravery and awe-inspiring discipline, pressing their attacks repeatedly, at one point reaching almost within touching distance of the British square.
But by 9:00 am, the battle was over and mopping-up began. British losses were 10 dead and 87 wounded; Zulu forces lost 1,500 dead and another 1,000 wounded.
Cetewayo was spirited away by his loyal iNdunas ("officers") but was finally captured on 28 August, and taken into exile. So impressed by Cetewayo's dignity and magisterial bearing, the British officer on the spot ordered his soldiers to form an honour guard and present arms to the King as he walked with great solemnity and calm into captivity. Cetewayo was taken first to Cape Town and then to London, where he then lived - free and unrestricted - for three years.
During his exile, King Cetewayo took to wearing western dress and became a great favourite in London society. The King earned much respect with his considerable intelligence, kind demeanor, unaffected grace and his sartorial elegance. Ultimately, he even enjoyed a private audience with Queen Victoria at Osborn Palace on the Isle of Wight, in 1882.
In his absence, his Kingdom of Zululand had been divided by the British Governor of the Cape Colony into 13 separate districts, under Chiefs who had each been one of Cetewayo's lieutenants. But Zululand was not faring well, with much discontent and internecine violence resulting. Much reconciled after many meetings and discussions with King Cetewayo, however, the British Imperial Government in London restored Cetewayo to his throne and asked him to return to Zululand, re-unite the 13 districts and resume his rule. Cetewayo arrived back in Zululand in January 1883 and ascended once more to his throne but died a little over a year later on 8 February 1884. It is presumed that King Cetewayo died of a heart attack but there is evidence he may have been poisoned by one or more of his former lieutenants, who - having grown accustomed to power - did not wish to become Cetewayo's subordinates once again.
The mutual respect between British soldiers and Zulu warriors was immense. The respect of the ordinary British soldier for his Zulu foe can be read about in the letters British soldiers sent home, expressing their admiration for their Zulu counterparts, which letters were collected into a book titled: "The Red Soldier" edited by Frank Emery and published in 1879.
Two years later in 1881, the British author and historian, Bertram Mitford, travelled alone and unharmed through Zululand, escorted only by the occasional Zulu guide and reliant for the most part upon Zulu hospitality for overnight accommodation. During his travels, Mitford spoke with many Zulu veterans of the Anglo-Zulu War, some of whom had fought at all the Battles of Isandlwana, of Hlobane, of Kambula and of Ulundi. Mitford collected the stories he heard, and edited them into a book titled; "Through The Zulu Country" published in 1883.
Of all the anecdotes Mitford collected from Zulu warriors, one in particular stands out for its poignance and emotive power. When discussing the Battle of Islandlwana, one Zulu veteran remarked unprompted:
"Those red soldiers!" said the Zulu with great emotion. "Like lions they fought. Like lions they fought and like stones they fell. They were brave, brave men and we respected them very much."
Both "The Red Soldier: Letters From The Zulu War" by Frank Emery (1879) and "Through The Zulu Country: Its Battlefields And Its People" by Bertram Mitford (1883) are available through Amazon.com, if you're interested.
Lastly: eight years after the Battle of the Little Bighorn, Chief Sitting Bull ("Tathanka Iyotake") of the Hunkpapa Lakota Sioux spent four years in Canada between 1877 and 1881 under the protection of Queen Victoria, whom Sitting Bull called: "The Great Grandmother".
After returning to the United States in 1881 and living for over three years on the Sioux Reservation, Chief Sitting Bull joined Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show in late 1884. Three years thereafter, Buffalo Bill's show toured England for Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee in 1887. At a special performance of Buffalo Bill's show, staged for and attended only by Her Majesty, Queen Victoria asked specifically to meet the Native American members of the cast after the show was over.
Thus, it came to pass that the Chief Tathanka Iyotake of the Hunkpapa Sioux came to meet the Great Grandmother, whose hospitality and protection he had enjoyed five thousand miles away and so many years before. Queen Victoria described the Lakota as "... the best-looking people she had ever seen". In return, Sitting Bull with affection remembered Queen Victoria as "very kind" and "very fat".
If Chief Sitting Bull had only made the journey to England five years earlier, he would likely have crossed paths in London with none other and no less than the Zulu King Cetewayo. Might Sitting Bull then have joined Cetewayo at that private audience with Queen Victoria at Osborn House? And might the three of them then partaken of afternoon tea together?
It never happened, of course, but the mere prospect of such an occasion is wonderful to imagine.
Yes Custer was wounded at the ford. Not only is there the account of White Cow Bull but the evidence supports the facts. Why did the troops suddenly stop the advance towards the village? Custer never would stop a charge because of a few soldiers shot, but if he was the charge would be stopped. Several men fell at the ford, his headquarters flag has never been found or the regimental flag. Where are they? In the river?
My understanding is Custer’s body had two wounds one to the left breast the other to the temple of his head, both fatal. If this is the case would he have simply been killed in the ravine or attempting to cross the river? Where is the wounded theory coming form?
@@andrewwood6285 ... Both the wounds would have been fatal but that does not preclude that he was first shot in the chest, carried up to the hill, still alive but dying and was then shot in the head so that he would not be captured alive. In any case, when the hill was overrun, all the soldiers were certain to have been shot, stabbed or clubbed to ensure they were dead. Native accounts do say that he was shot from his horse at the river. But no-one wants to admit that that could be true. It would ruin the narrative of his famous " Last Stand ". As it was, the battle ended with the killing of the 28 men who tried to escape the hill down Deep Coulee, so that ruins the narrative anyway. Perhaps that is why no headstones are placed there. Your guess is as good as any.
@@louisavondart9178 yeah that sounds plausible.
Custer was in fact shot in or near the ford as Chief John Grass reported. Gall and crazy horse only worked in after the job was pretty much done it took place so fast. Chief Grass was actually the big star and did alot of the killing including identifying Custer as he rode down then minutes later his body where he had been hauled up. If you look at the drawings of the council held later viewing out over the battlefield you will see Chief Grass was one of them with the other Indians in a large arc around the leaders. yet he is stricken from history.
why is that Jc
So Crazy Horse and Gall were glory seekers along with Custer. No surprise as all men have flawed human nature.
@@lavictoire1960 Man With Crazy Horse was not a glory seeker at all. Gall was incited to tomahawk attacks because his wives and a child were butchered by Reno’s stalled attack.
You are dead wrong.
That's the story of several eye witnesses. Custer was first shot trying to force a river crossing into the village at Medicine Tail Coulee. Shot in the chest near the heart. Later they found a hole near his temple as well. Probably shot himself is my guess as many contemporary Indians of the time said they witnessed men killing themselves. Custer's body was found heading up the hill from the river. The belief is that family members tried to carry him out but gave up probably due to being under heavy pressure from the attacking force. Evidence suggests Custer was shot during the crossing by White Cow Bull who had no idea it was Custer who he shot.
"Stated simply, Sioux warrior White Cow Bull appears to be the man who killed George Armstrong Custer. The second most likely possibility is that Custer killed himself. Either of these top two scenarios could be true, but White Cow Bull is the prime suspect, based on the eye-witness record of the battle."
The narrative taught, one that Custer fought heroically until the end is far fetched and pure fantasy at best.
/
The person responsible for the massacre was Custer himself. In search of glory only for himself, as was his way, he distanced himself from the troops of the Chief General Terry and hurried to reach the Indians. He had few men and yet he divided them into two more groups. He was faced with a huge concentration of Indians who also had rifles and horses. Divided and isolated, the soldiers of the 7th cavalry were easily exterminated. In his haste to reach the Indians first and keep the glory to himself, Custer underestimated the enemy and put aside all caution, thinking that his small group of soldiers would easily win the fight.
True statement. However, Custer was as brave as a warrior this country has ever known.
Yes Custer was a selfish Glorified Narcissist . But he was one of the bravest man alive .
@Kim Bim Actually, for close to a century, Custer was known as a great American hero. However, the last fifty years have not been so kind to him. This is a perfect example of how "history" is dynamic (at least how we view it).
Some other writer called Custer very brave , but I will never . He referred to the Washita as triumphal , but he killed children, women and old people
Cluster was given the remit to ride ahead with the 7th under his command to reconnaissance and locate the "hostiles" Lakota and report back his findings. At no time was he given orders to engage. His ego, delusional invincibility and gross underestimation of the opponent's strength in numbers and resolve to stand and fight drove him to his death along with over a third of the 7th.
Greasy grass, was payback for custer’s actions on wishita…
PEOPLE, let people live!!! Mind your own damn business. Simple
Always been my philosophy. Best one to have in my opinion 👍
Question for all you Custer nerds out there: When I was a kid (mid 50s) I visited a Ripley's-Believe-It-Or-Not exhibit purporting to show a necklace made from the trigger fingers of all of Custer's men killed at the battle. As a credulous kid in those innocent times, I believed it, and was enthralled to see it. As an older, more sceptical adult in these jaded times, I'm inclined to disbelieve it. Was right then, or now? Has anyone else ever heard of such a thing?
Yes reported display at Chicago worlds fair also
I like to know what Custer’s last words were?
"Oh shit!"
@@bobgoldie8886 - LOL, said worse than that.
“I offered Custer the battery of Gatling guns,” Brigadier General Terry explained, “but he declined it, saying that it might embarrass him, and that he was strong enough without it.”
" we might be fucked"
YAAAAAAAHHHIIII!!! AIIIEEEE!!!
Actually they were no words.....
Fiele si e' offeso ! Little Big Horn!
Make Paper Talk .!
Custer used Reno as bait, yellow hair got his just desserts
The real story is much more complicated than that Mike. Reno and Benteen were both lucky not to be courtmartialed.
I know of only one documented incident where blankets from persons with smallpox were given to Native Americans with the intent to inflict the disease upon them. This was during the period when the French and British and various Native allies were fighting for control of North America in the 1700's. I challenge the idea presented as a more widespread practice; not because of any nobility of the Whites, but due to a quite limited understanding of disease. Otherwise, one of the better videos on the subject.
At 26:42 the narrator states "Sitting Bull was killed" implying that he was killed during the battle of the Little Big Horn. In fact, Sitting Bull was killed in 1890 by Indian agency police on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation during an attempt to arrest him, at a time when authorities feared that he would join the Ghost Dance movement.
I took it as though he was killed after. Like there was a hit list after Custers death. Some revenge.
@@bobabooey4537 If there was a "hit list" I took them 14 years to execute it! And did so only after Sitting Bull was peacefully residing on the reservation.
The Indian agent had the (probably false) idea that Sitting Bull would join the Ghost Dance movement and accelerate tensions between the Indians and the Whites. They sent out 43 cops and volunteers to arrest him. Sitting Bull refused to go with them, and other Sioux from the reservation came out to protest. A melee broke out during which one of the cops shot Sitting Bull, possibly unintentionally. See:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sitting_Bull#Ghost_Dance_Movement
Murdered.
SB DID join the Ghost Dance movement!
@@donaldcarpenter5328
bottom line is there was no way to avoid what happened. There was a massive amount of millions of square miles of land and it was not practical that indians who migrated all over the place according to season and herds of bison could have prevented lock up the entire country. As the ancestors of the indians came over the land bridge from China and along the shores so did the white man. The indian ancestors that were strongest and most advanced defeated and ran out other tribes as the video says. So it was when the whites arrived from Europe with space ships and televisions and magnets who met a people living in tents still using the sharp edges of broken rocks for tools and weapons. It is not logical to think those that arrived in ships and strong medicine should then have been forced to go back to living in caves. Their fate was sealed. Nothing could have changed it the details mean little.
Bravo! A realistic, sober account of the situation. You should teach history!
@@lavictoire1960 thanks and I do have a degree. The problem is that its as a machinist. I am often told I should have been a geologist. I went into the wrong field and I regret it now.
No mention of the army moving in to send Indians to reservations because of the Black Hills gold find, breaking the treaty.
Who gives a s$4_ about the gold, actually???
If it wasn't gold, it would have been something else.
A stone-aged group came into contact with a more technologically advanced group.
Even in the INDIAN SOCIETY...the strong Indians either destroyed a weaker group...or forced it to flee from desired land
I know all about this and I'm determined make the world open up her ears again. The truth will set you free. They used alcohol and control to take everything from the rightful beings here.. the veil is shattered... and will come crashing down soon.. do not fear this. Only the ones that have the white man's bloody mouth will be dealt with accordingly to Great Spirit if Spirits. The dead are coming..I have seen the Buffalo spirit running free again. They are few, we are many.. even the soldiers are sick of fake missions looking for weapons that don't exist.. their using this to control everyone..its time to stand up for your rights..bill of rights..bill being the main word. Acts of congress..bs Shakespeare said the world is a stage and we are the actors.. he was absolutely correct. They call us puppets on strings..I'm telling them.. I'm the storm and I'm coming for you..karmic winds are coming swiftly.. to bring justice and relief, joy and peaceful times again.. They will not use the weapons again..
Of course no mention of breaking treaty.🤬
@@leeshackelford7517 the country needed that gold...and it was Custer who went looking for it....
Prospectors by the thousands invaded black hills, the army ordered to protect them. Government tried to buy/lease the black hills. Indians rightfully said no, so the government took the area
Scarier than the insurrection of their day
Lakota Nation lives forever Sitting Bull lives forever hawah
I am not sioux : the truth is the truth
A'HO
Not sure if "live forever"...but definitely remembered forever as a warrior and leader
He did his best in a lost cause....
Battle not massacre..
I've read about this on mamy occasions. And it's my belief is this. There is fault to be found by CusterBenteen and Reno. Custer was chaseing glory. And Benteen and Reno failed to support him. It could be blamed on Clusters lust for glory. Renos jealousy and resentment of Custer. And Benteens hesitation to question or disagree. Was it inevitable that Custer would be doomed to failure. That's a question that may never be known for sure. It's hard to separate yje facts from the Legend.
yes and President Grant did not want Custer coming back.
@@kennethclaar922 I really don't understand what the heck you mean. Grant didn't cause Custers death or had any connection to it. Custer was chaseing glory as he always did. Not saying he was incompetent. But Custer was a glory hound. Was it for political ambitions? Maybe but from what I've read he really never had any political ambitions. That's not to say he didn't. But in any case Grant was considered a hero and even though his entrance into politics was rocky to say the least. Grant was not a politician by training or temperment. As for Custer he probably did hold political ambitions. He was a ambitious individual and I have no doubt he thought he could be better as president than anyone who had been elected. But what caused Custers downfall and caused he and his entire unit to be wiped out was his ambitions. He made mistakes and ignored warning from his own scouts that he was outnumbered. And he ignored one of the basic rules of warfare. You don't split your force in enemy territory without knowing what forces your faceing. And by splitting his forces into three separate units. ignoring his own scouts and disregarding his orders. He basically set the stage for what happened. But some blame also rests on major Reno for not supporting Custer when directed. And from what I've understood captain Benteen wanted to reinforce Custer. But was overruled by a ranking officer. And it's almost impossible to separate the facts from the Legend. And may never really be known the truth on the truth of what actually happened that day. And to blame Grant is one outrageous stretch of imagination and credibility.
i believe that but the our government is l could see where grant told the other guys in charge turn your heads when he gets crazy .
@@philipfreeman2863 Custer was supposed to be in charge of the whole campaign i think but Grant took that away after custer bud mouthed his brother .
Custer was never in charge of that operation. And he told Custer not to go chaseing glory. Because he knew Custer and what he was. S glory hound. And basically he on his own split is command into three parts. And went off on his own. And Custer had been warned by his scouts that a large number was in the encampment. And Custer refused to believe it. And even though he called for Reno and Benteen to come up and support him. I'm not sure it would have been of sny help. Besides Reno hated Custer with a passion. So in the end it cost Custer his life and the lives of the men in his command. Will the truth ever replace the myth of what happened on that ill-fated Expedition. I highly doubt it. As someone once said. Print the myth and forget about the truth.
That last statement put Me in mind of Rodney King {He took a beating from many cops for speeding}, = (L. A. Riots). ~ "Can't We all just get along"? Yup! G-G
The Sioux was a cruel..savage enemy. Torturing prisoners was normal for them
true enough ...they were an aggressive, abrasive bunch...one of the few tribes Lewis and Clarke had trouble with....
Elders say,Custers men Butchered and Scalped old men,women and children for their scalps and body parts as trophys (Bounty-hunters: 1835-1885) at the Battle of the washita,a peaceful village that signed treaties with the goverment,but elders say, tribes considered him and his men cowards,as he took servivors of women and children as hostages as the other tribes gathered in mass he ran to the walls(Forts) leaving some of his men to be slaughtered,the women and children killed there were Southren Relatives of the Northern Cheyenne & Araphos in sittingbulls camp...they wouldnt take their women and children there.
..US soldiers made purses out of the vaginas of Native American women. That was normal for them.
@@louisavondart9178 Nonsense
George Custer broke his promise and he was very disrespectful towards the Indians many of us men did not like Custer
I would argue that there was a good possibility that Custer was setup from the beginning. Grant wanted revenge, and Custer made some very powerful enemies in exposing the corruption of Grant and his son peddling food and arms on the black market.
may be so, but Custer also had a HUGE ego. He was largely the blame, not to mention his officers who didn't like him. He was ALWAYS reckless.
Grant's son died at Little Big Horn.
@@mikeoveli1028 didn't know that! thanks
yeah...possible, but Custer was into HIMself. Even during the Civil War he was always reckless
@@mikeoveli1028 Grant's son was on the expedition, but missed the battle. He died in 1912, of cancer. Custer's younger brother died in the battle, however.
it s a god story
🤠😎❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Sometimes older documentaries are better.
только не совсем понятно.от куда города и военные заводы и к чему железные дороги в некуда.ведь была фотография .а вы все в рисунках. что ?врем как старый цыгонин.
Tutti i bimbi come me han qualcosa che li fa tremar
Ok, couple of things. Selling alcohol to Indians was frowned upon to illegal. No smallpox blankets were spread, that was a French and Indian war thing (and obtusely the Smallpox epidemic of 1774-79, which the western spread came up through Mexico City.)
Democrats angry at peace attempts by Grant? Interesting......
Don't believe that comment- it comes from history revisionist.
Let's not get emotional about an event/military battle of history. The building of the United States involved so many great events, not unlike the Hebrews development of the Levant. To me the only question is where does mankind go from here?
Except that much of the “Biblical History” is false narrative. The Hebrews were never slaves in Egypt, the 40 years in Sinai never happened, Hebrew slaves did not build the pyramids, and Noah’s Ark is a complete fantasy, easily disproved by genetics, lack of historical documentation, lack of physical evidence, and the impossibility of a wooden vessel of that size holding 7 of every animal, or even holding together once afloat..
Custer was a war criminal
@@robbiesdad1 is scalping a war crime? should be.
@@lavictoire1960 Custer murdered women and children, most of the torture and such that the Apache did, was learned from the Spanish .
@@swtbbyjms3806 keep believing, that, but the is evidence that proofs there was a massive flood world wide at one time and it is
In the sediment record
Of the earth.
These things happen when taking over someone's land. People on both sides smile then do what they want later. Problem is in America it was going on for hundreds of years by taking over other tribal lands amongst themselves. Weaponry became too easy for the conquerers as was the case for the Lakota's use of repeating rifles on Custer's Last Stand. The Indians signed a treaty because they knew their opposition had the upper hand otherwise Little Big Horn would have been the deciding battle all over America.
I hate how in the newspapers Custer and his guys were described as „victims“. They were basically out there to inflict exactly the very same destiny to the Natives and got screwed first and better.
Binge watching documentaries about the fightings in the West one of the essential things I learned is, the bluecoats should have been treated the Little Big Horn way much more often. Much more.
Remembering the story of „Dances with Wolves“ John Dunbar made just one mistake: he didn’t bring with him 10 Gatling guns and enough ammo to last into the 1920ies to give to the Natives.
Ignorant comment. I highly doubt you've been binge watching any real documentaries on the Indian wars. Just pushing PC BS.
you pop-up to shoot...4 or 5 guys pop-up to shoot back...the outcome was assured
Custer needed one more victory over the Indians- he was setting himself for a presidential run on the Democratic ticket.
"They welcomed missionaries." Big mistake.
For some Natives the missionaries were strange men in black, for others a threat , for others just entertainment. They made jokes about them.
@@rudolfkraffzick642For others, like the Nez Pierce of the Bitter Root valley, having heard of them and their teachings sought them out.
And then the air get white man carves presidents faces into their mountain. Unbelievable.
The eternal question. Why did Custer lose the Battle of the greasy Grass? I think that 2,000 very angry Native Americans had something to do with it.
Colonel Custer in the way that he was killed, couldn't happen to a better guy.He was a egotistical maniac,bent on political ambitions.A big victory for the natives,but it was a sad ending.
I am English we had an Empire , we were not totally fair in the World .
But eventually lots of countries got " Home Rule " That never happened in North America .Britain withdrew from most of our colonies , But Europeans never withdrew from North America I wonder why ?
It's because they were ' Outcasts ' from their European Countries .
Take England Pilgrim Father's did not Conform with England's National Church American Contradiction Is ;: ' Founding Father's ' .
What did they find There were people in North America already living there . Look at the damage done by The Spanish & Portuguese ?
K in
🏴 .
Guns vs arrows was that a fair fight an they won the natives are fighting for their land
umm, the indians had superior rifles!
The Sioux were "fighting for their land"?? And how did they come to get that "land"? How was it the Sioux claimed the Black Hills as their sacred land?
Indians were just good fighters and horsemen. Plain and simple
@@TWS-pd5dc so many people buy into the myth that Indian vs Indian warfare was bloodless or limited in scope.
If they actually read accounts FROM Indians (written down at that time accounts) regarding that warfare....they killed as many as they could...battle survivors were ones who ran faster than the pursuit.
They also buy into the myth that stronger Indian tribes didn't steal desired land from weaker tribes
I find it interesting that the film basically castigates the European settler as forcing the adaption of others but fails to include the Sioux and particularly the Comanche in doing the same or worse to other tribes. Although it does give a nod to the fact all societies practice this process. Let's face it the Indians were a set of stone age societies facing a pre-industrial society with the outcome almost a foregone conclusion. Note that a representative group of this set of societies had already dealt with European invades when they found the Vikings on their shores.
Oddly enough rather than destroying these cultures the US set up reservation to assist in preserving these people. So although unintentionally at the time we have preserved the culture of these stone age people. But because we did we have borne the scorn of many who reside here.
@Kim Bim You base this on what? The Comanche literally wiped out opposing tribes long before the the colonies moved past the Appalachians. The Anasazi and the Hohokam were violent destroyed long before the Europeans arrived. As for genocide where are the Anasazi and the Hohokam? You have no problem finding Sioux, Crow, Cheyenne, Navaho, Pueblo, Apache, Arapahoe, and the list goes on. That actually is the point when the tribes made war it was death or depart. The only ones absorbed into the victors tribe were young males and females, typically as slaves. The natives here were and are no different that any other group of humans.
@Kim Bim Tell me what other country has preserved the culture of vanquished foes? Are there cultural centers in Canada or have those tribes been totally assimilated into the English speaking culture? You complain about genocide well you can see it there. Point to another country that has made such an effort. As stated before and just now the US defeated the tribes and yet their culture remained. You want to see genocide look at Nepal, Mongolia, and Tibet where the CCP is systematically destroying those cultures by forced integration and co-habitation.
Robert St. : The reservations were not set up to save Indian tribes or cultures.
The aim was to destroy them by enforcing and teaching white american culture, forbidding traditional customs and native languages and religions. Corrupt agents hold back food and didnt mind if natives died by starvation and despair.
By 1900 the native population, once several millions had dropped to 250.000.
Sorry, I call this genocide, not generous treatment. But there are people who consider it generous, that the Natives were not completely wiped out.
@@rudolfkraffzick642 I can’t be called genocide Rudolf, by definition. Many were killed by diseases they had no resistant to. But the idea that this was deliberate policy isn’t true. First of all there is no evidence at all, just as the ‘infected blanket’ story is a myth: germ theory at that time was not understood, and any attempt at it would have been more dangerous to the perpetrators, if one thinks about it. On the other hand the tribes were very often blood enemies. Which is why slavery and something close to genocide often existed between them. So many native Americans fought or worked as scouts with the US Army against the Lakota who stole their lands: Crow, Arikara with Custer for example.
Usually in the Spanish Empire the conquest of new territories was carried out by native americans allied with the the Spaniards... This was the method used by Cortés in Mexico or Pizarro in Peru (alliances with tlascalans or chachapoyas, respectively). I'm not a Native American, but I wouldn't mind if I were though... 🙄😜
It's very telling that the Spaniards thrived living together with native Americans (different Apache, Comanche, Navajo, or Pueblo tribes), and it is very obvious that the average anglo-saxon & protestant won't take the reponsability for the genocide of native amerindians, it's happening right now in states such as California, where the name Frémont is known only as a city....
Turn off your s--_
The stone age Indian, was contacted by a more technologically advanced group... European
The end result was inevitable....
And...the Indians had been massacring weaker Indian groups and stealing the land from weaker Indian groups... WHENEVER they chose.
Turn off the guilt trip.
Odd thing..the Indian scouts, used by the cavalry...were helping VOLUNTARILY.....take a guess why?
Or heck, go back even further...pre-revolutionary war
The French and Indian Wars.....Indians allied themselves with whites...not out of friendship to whites, but because they wanted help attacking enemy INDIAN groups..and get territory and kill ENEMIES
The truth, the Indians whine and whine about what the whites did....while for CENTURIES they were doing it to themselves.
If you Indians were so frakjing friendly and peaceful TO EACH OTHER..... you'd have joined ALL TOGETHER against the newly arrived white "tribe"
Some did...but others preferred maintaining their hatred towards historic INDIAN enemies
Regarding the Spanish.....go look at their behavior in Central and South America....then ask yourself "Why was the behavior different?" Or...STFU and RESEARCH why it was different.
@@leeshackelford7517 Not very different here, in the Spanish Empire, new territoriy was usually conquered by means of alliances with local tribes: for instance Cortés and Pizarro made pacts with tlascalans in nowadays Mexico, and cañi or chachapoyas in the area of the viceroyalty of Perú. Indeed the interpreter (Doña Marina) who served in Cortés army was a native. The Spanish and tribal nobilities intermixed and gave birth to noble children from the American and European point of view, and were regarded as such by the Crown, in the new viceroyalty of New Spain or in Peru. That made the difference. French and English settlers found more convenient to refuse those children.
@@MrFeynmanDiagram the Spanish brought Aztec warriors and their families with them to the Philippines, to help control the local people. To this day many Nahuatl words still pepper the local language Tagalog. My wife, a native of the Philippines, has Native American ancestry, thanks to Ancestry DNA.
You're joking right? Spaniards brought SMALLPOX to the Native Americans and reduced them from 20 million to 500,000 in just a few years. Missionaries would cut off the foot of an Native who didn't want to stay under the domination of the " church ". Every deal the Spanish made with the people they conqured was broken in their lust for gold, silver and precious gems. They destroyed their cities, their culture and even their language. Go learn some real history.
@@louisavondart9178 surely you're joking, since you have just repeated (once more) the main points of the black legend against Spain, invented by dutch rebels and then publicited by french, german or english impressors. Infectuous diseases probably reached american soil thanks to flocks of migratory birds. Thinking in blankets infected with smallpox handed to Delaware natives, one could think in Jeffrey Armhest as the first english military that proposed this method... right?
HE DID THE BEST HE COULD WITH WHAT HE HAD
So he wanted to run for President.....ON THE DEMOCRATIC TICKET.....Who would of think that.....(I am be coming an old man and nothing surprises me..)
I'm an old man now retired and can only look back on the magic cool days that I spent in North Dakota much of which was on the Berthold Reservation locally known as the rez.
Whatever the great Sioux Nation once was one would never know bye who and what they have become today. Having lived among them for 3 years was one of the greatest disillusioning periods of my life. When I arrive there I was filled with white guilt and compassion for the suffering and the changes that my race was solely responsible for and just three short years later I left there with nothing but contempt for next to the Japanese some of the most racist people I've ever met in my life who's misfortunes today can only be explained as self-inflicted. Though it is true that over 100 years ago the white man was responsible for setting them on a course to disaster however ever since I was born in 1953 they have received and sold away several fortunes at the cost of their environment their traditions and left them with a way of life that is alien to anything anyone ever intended to them. Once the shepherds of this great land for millennia they lived in harmony in a lifestyle that only a fool would criticize or not be in total envious awe. It is nothing short of heartbreaking to see how they have all into the race of men and women that they are today.
Despite trillions of dollars of income from gambling government grants and the wholesale rape of the lands that they once held so dear by turning it over nearly Lock stock and barrel to the petrochemical industry for all of this they are left no better off than they were before with a legacy of suffering which their racism can only blame over and over and over again on the white man.
It was with stunned disbelief that I witnessed the misery in which they lived primarily at their own hand. When it comes to everything bad they lead every other socioeconomic group in our nation and every bad way conceivably possible child abuse domestic violence drug abuse drug manufacturing drug distribution animal abuse and every other form of abuse so you can imagine it's taken for granted as inevitable and all white man's fault. I left there with a broken heart and wondering to myself when will they ever get over their hatred of the white man and what he has done to them and finally begin to take responsibility for what they are doing to themselves have done to themselves and apparently will continue to do to themselves. On the subject of racism just before I left I was told by a Redman with blue eyes but I needed to go back to where I came from. I was born in New Orleans I'm as American as he is and according to his blue eyes quite possibly as much a native American as he is.
Ironically one of the wisest things I've ever heard in my life also came from the lips of a red man. Sitting around a campfire lamenting man's in humanity to his fellow man and the sorry state of our environment as a result of the hatred that existed between our peoples he after a long silence looked at me across the fire and said you know everything you said is true but you need to think of this the important thing is we are all here now. It took some time for that to sink in but the simple truth of the matter is we are all stuck on the same spaceship and until we find a way to throw our hatred down and learn to live together and peace and harmony the future of our species is not just uncertain it's doomed.
I'd like to add something that I learned from all of the many hours that I spent researching the history of North Dakota and of the many battles that took place there. Many things have been said about Custer I believe he's as much a myth as a historical legend in his own time. We worship our heroes build statues to them give them medals and honor their great sacrifices as long as they are at war but one thing I've noticed that is held to be true about every warrior after returning home from the war his place in society often is not is an uncertain one. Anyone willing to criticize men like Custer who have never faced the enemy with bullets as crazy horse once said flying around him like angry bees they can never appreciate the real sacrifice that they make as it is so seldom that their courage is seen as anything but unacceptable butchery too barbaric for pleasant company... Despite whatever shortcomings we may see in them or not for their sacrifice the luxury of our pleasant company would not exist. So it is with all due respect that I put forth one ironic criticism about the status quo of the times that these battles took place. It's easy to say that Custer was an egotist self-serving and bound to take advantage of all glory of his making however by doing so we fail to realize the perspective that existed at the time that he neither created nor was responsible for. A perfect example of that one which in fact may very well have cost him his life and the outcome of the battle is the hierarchy that existed in the military at that time. The calvary and the artillery were two completely separate units with the calvary full of the bravado that they deserved for leading the charge while the artillery relatively new to warfare only having its infancy and the recently ended civil war always bringing up the rear due to all of the excess equipment that would accompany them. Logistics demanded that they do so. It is for that reason that Custer on the day of office departure from fort Lincoln in Bismarck decided not to wait for new artillery pieces that were due to arrive that morning but we're late. Insisting that he had no time to wait he left without them with the instructions that they follow along behind and catch up if they could. This move was seen as an example of his arrogance when in fact it is the kind of behavior that would be expected of any Calvary officer of the day. What is the irony you wonder well the irony is the pony soldier was at that time in the setting Sun of its existence while the artillery was in the dawn of its career that places it as a centerpiece and all military operations in the future. Hopefully by now I have created enough curiosity in you to wonder just what two pieces of artillery did he leave behind.
In a battle where what were once vastly Superior tactics were for the first time overwhelmed by a landscape that it was never intended to be used in rolling hills instead of open plains and buy a superior firepower as a result of the weapon that won the West the Winchester repeating rifle. Most historians would agree that those were the two most significant factors that resulted in Custer's defeat. Had Custer only known what he had left behind would have changed the outcome significantly because what he left behind were two of the most state-of-the-art and sophisticated killing machines ever devised by man the machine gun. It is true that the Gatling gun the precursor to all machine guns was a far cry from the machine guns of today however that weapon of choice for the day that legendary Winchester would have been no match whatsoever for the wrapped fire 30 caliber Gatling machine gun. With its rate of firepower had Custer and Reno both been able to deploy one of those weapons each on top of those knolls... Well we can speculate all we want.
I just found it interesting how much history can have been changed by a matter of moments or hours. To be quite honest after what I saw of how the once proud and Noble Sioux Nation is existing today I can't help but Wonder if they might not have been far better off having lost that battle that day. A return to the reservation would have saved countless lives in the long run and perhaps just perhaps sitting Bull and crazy horse could have led their people to better lives instead of being hunted down and killed for having participated in the defeat of one of the greatest American heroes of that time.
I've always believed and always will believe that it is unfair to our ancestors to judge them by the standards that we have today. We can't possibly get a true feeling for their perspective if that perspective it's based on morals and codes of ethics that we take for granted now that never existed for them.
My example for that would be the automobile and when one considers what a devastation the petrochemical industry has done to our environment as a result of the automobile what will our grandchildren think of us for being so barbaric as to casually drive around in them destroying the environment they will depend on for their own survival.
That's a good friend of mine once said, " sooner or later it all gets real. "
I was dictating and as a result this computer isn't nearly as good at it as people let on... But it's late but it is late and I'm too tired to fix any of it I hope you get the gist of what I was trying to say either way good night
remember stopping to ask directions at a bar in Wyoming just across the line from Dakota....only to realize it was an Indian bar!...what followed was like that scene in "Animal House"....as I nervously left the place I remember thinking to myself "This must have been how Custer felt".....
Winning that battle really made little difference, as most ended up returning to the reservation, including Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse. The battle really did little, the buffalo were gone, the railroad had come through, and life on the Plains was was over - even before the battle.
@@jimbrew4529 it made a HUGE difference for all the surviving chiefs... One by one they were all killed for taking part in the battle.
Military justice American style.
Statistics and advanced archaeological research shows that the Native Americans weren't all that much different than the white man in many ways.
Worse in some. Genocide was no stranger to them as their numbers of dead in battle dwarfed those of the white man. It wasn't uncommon for one tribe to kill every member of another tribe save the young boys under puberty.
Tribes of the southwest totally defoliated huge sections of forest and bruning in the east was so extensive rivers became baron and flooding eroded entire water sheds.
Round and round and round we spin...
@@catmanlll Actually, Sitting Bull came back to the reservation and joined the Wild West Show. He lived a full life. Crazy Horse surrendered and was killed when wrestling with guards, within a year of LBH.
Where Custers troops became disarray. He was struck as never before . Shows where he was 1st shot as the Indian says
Io non faccio all'amore per mestiere!
Te la do io una lezione!
I'll take Custer's heroics over the antics of our men today. Most don't even know what gender they are, and struggle to get off the couch. The only thing heroic about them is how many cheetos they can eat while watching family feud.
Friend this thread is about failed military strategies- pls no testimonials
Yea and in AC
.... some people might dislike their gender but it sure beats the hell out of getting shot, stabbed, clubbed, scalped and dismembered. Heroes are people who get other people killed.
All the wrong uniforms.
And so it goes; the strong take the weak, it’s not a matter of if, only a matter of how long it takes.
If aliens landed on earth tomorrow with superior weapon technology and decided to wipe out the existing inhabitants and colonize earth, we would all learn what it feels like to be the Native American tribes.
Right... look at Russia and Ukraine. It's a dog-eat-dog world, people. Apologizing for events happening 150 years ago is senseless.
Come mai ha capelli neri cosi' lisci ed occhi azzurri?
Libano?Forse.
The Natives are just like the British. Both enjoy the same things. They kicked the natives out of Europe. They came here… now the white tribes came here again..
This is not done well at all
custer was a coward.
Bull Shit...
Nope. Had he been a coward and not a brave fool, he would have known he was in deep shit and retreated to the south. Fast.
Study history.....far from a coward
@@larryjessee6504
custer ordered others to go fight and took the cowards way out to harass women and children.when it all turned to shit he lost!
Colonel Custer in the way that he was killed, couldn't happen to a better guy.He was a egotistical maniac,bent on political ambitions.A big victory for the natives,but it was a sad ending.