HIstory Buffs: Battle of the Little Big horn?

Question

I've done all but 2 of the questions that I'm suppose to answer re: the Little Big Horn battle, but the article they gave me as a resource jumps all over the place...Anyway, I'm super confused and would be grateful for any help you can give.

Here they are:

What did Custer do with his troops, in an attempt to beat the larger
force?

Which group had better guns?

Answer 1

Mistake 1
Custer underestimated the number of Indians.

Expecting an easy victory, Custer was thrown on the defensive, Fox argues, and his command collapsed. "I have no doubt they fought, but it was total chaos, no organization. I'm sure some didn't fight. There was no organization, and that's disintegration in military terms. Everyone was acting on their own behalf."

Mistake 2 Custer was tired and so was his men.
Custer let him down in an unexpected way. He got there a day ahead of time, and had ridden night and day to do it. Men and horses were exhausted when the Seventh Cavalry rode into sight of the Indian Village on the Little Big Horn that cloudless Sunday morning of the 25th. When Terry came up on the 26th, it was all over for Custer and his regiment.

Mistake 3 He divided his forces.
Custer then decided to divide his column. He kept 5 companies, commanded by close friends, with himself. He left Captain McDougal with some troops to guard the rear. He divided the remaining companies between Benteen and Reno. Benteen was sent two miles to the left, and Reno remained between Benteen and Custer. This formed three small columns of 7th cavalry, which moved quickly westward over the divide.

About the guns
Professor Gilbert covered many of the myths and theories about Custer's Last Battle in his discussion. He explained that there were multiple accounts of the event that did not agree, and that the investigation done in 1983 attempted to provide some real data that could help to explain what really happened. For example, Custer's group was literally "out gunned". Custer's men carried Colt 45 weapons and rifles. The Indians at that time had acquired many different types of guns, some of which could fire repeatedly without reloading. Over 410 weapons were collected at the site, over 47 different types and only a few of these types belonged to the troops. The remaining weapons belonged to the Indians.

Answer 2

Custer broke up his force into (if I remember right) one main and two smaller flanking groups, hoping that superior firepower would allow him to hold off and defeat the Sioux groups. It wasn't a very smart decision, even if the Sioux warriors had not actually had more and better guns than the US cavalry. The cavalry were armed with the standard single-shot rifles that the military used at that time (they appear to have scrapped the repeating carbines that they'd used just a few years earlier during the Civil War to such devastating effect). The Sioux, on the other hand, had good numbers of the new repeating rifles, presumably sold to them by gun-runners, and plenty of ammunition. This was determined, by the way, a few years back when there was an archeological dig over the site, where they were able to locate the various positions of the troops involved using metal detectors. The cavalry guns had better range and were more accurate, but there were a lot more Sioux warriors, and they were putting out a lot more bullets. That, by the way, is why armies now use automatic weapons for most front-line troops - the more bullets you put out there, the better the chance you'll hit something. Custer and his group were done for as soon as they were cut off from retreat.

Answer 3

Only about 100 Indians were killed or wounded in the two parts of the Battle of the Big Horn- Custer and Reno's groups. The Americans had a chance to count dead Indians that were left there in burial scaffolds or Tipi's, but had no information on wounded. They just made up a number apparently. As for the Springfield rifles, archeological evidence from the battlefields does not show that they had a problem with the copper cases. No cases were found that had been pried out of a rifle. Cross that myth off. For the best i nformation on the battle read the book on the archeological excavations and scientific metal detection done in the late 80's. They used modern ballistic forensics to trace people around the battlefield by looking at cartridge cases. They even were able to identify one body- Mitch Boyer, scout.

Answer 4

Custer divided his troops to surround or create a crossfire. A huge mistake! He was too confident and communications was impossible. The Indians then had the better coordination in a divide and concur type tactics, by delaying the various groups through skirmishes, while they completely destroyed Custer who was left with a small force.

Actually, it is the Indians had better guns! Custer had Gatling guns, but they were moving slow and he left them behind. The Army regulation gun were Springfeilds. The riffle offers a single shot, then you have to reload. Although the Indians were not uniformly armed, many had fast action "repeater" riffles. They were able to fire off a lot more rounds than Custer, especially at close range when accuracy of the guns was no longer a factor. And guess what, they coordinated their better weapons among their troops as well as coordinating a close range battle.

Answer 5

the goal was to send the Indians or Native Americans back onto their reservations. Custer's group of troops spotted the Sioux on the Rosebud river. He ignored the order and attacked anyway. However Custers army was outpowered x3. So he split up his group into 3 teams to prevent an escape. As far as guns Im not sure.

Answer 6

First (1), Custer divided his force (like Lee at Chancellorsville in the Civil War) in the anticipation that he would out maneuver the enemy (as he had done on other occasions).

Second (2), maybe the Indians! Recent evidence recovered from the battlefield (as reported in National Geographic Magazine) says that the Indians appear to have had a number of Henry rifles, an improvement over the Sharp's the troopers were using.

Answer 7

Custer unwisely split his troops into three groups, two of which later combined to hold off the indians until Terry's column approached--while Custer & co. were wiped out.

The indians had repeating rifles (against the 7th Cavalry's one-shot carbines) plus bows & arrows (allowing arcing attacks without exposure).

Custer and his men were outnumbered, outgunned, and outfought. The fault lies with Custer for recklessness in disregarding scouting reports and bravado that served him well in the Civil War--but not on June 25, 1876.

Answer 8

Since the Native Americans attacking Custer had almost no guns or ammunition for them, they mainly used bows and arrows, spears, hand axes or clubs. What Custer did to cause the whole thing to fail is he split his troops into three different groups. You can probably get more detailed information by asking the librarian these questions at the Library of Congress' website: www.loc.gov.

Answer 9

Custer had no idea of the size of force he was about to face, for him was just going to be another easy victory, he split his force into two groups in order to attack the Indians from two fronts. The US Army always had inferior rifles and ammunition. That battle was a major disaster for the US military.

Answer 10

custer split his force into 3, hoping to attack the Sioux/Cheyenne encampment from 3 directions. The Indians had higher calibre and repeating rifles, which was more than what Custer's men had.