Thomas Powers: "The Killing of Crazy Horse"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-11-23/thomas-powers-killing-crazy-horse
Crazy Horse has been called the greatest Native American warrior of the nineteenth century. His victory over General Custer at the Battle of Little Bighorn in 1876 was a bitter defeat for the frontier army of the American West. Volumes have been written about that famous fight, yet the legendary chief remains a mystery. No photograph of him exists and the circumstances of his death have been mired in controversy for more than a century. Most accounts of his story have been told from a white man’s perspective. A new narrative details the Battle of Little Bighorn and Crazy Horse’s final moments through the eyes of Native Americans and soldiers alike.
Guests
Thomas Powers
author of "The Man Who Kept the Secrets," "Heisenberg's War," "Thinking About the Next War," "The War at Home," "Diana" and the novel "The Confirmation."
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Why do you insist on calling Native Americans "Indians"? After 500 years, it is understood that Christopher Columbus was incorrect in thinking that he had landed in India and was incorrect in calling the native people that he encountered "Indians". Why are we still using this term knowing that it is incorrect? Indians are people from India, not the native people that lived on this continent. Please, Diane, begin the change process to call these people a more correct name.
Could your guest comment on President Buccannan's role in taking the focus away from the slavery problem by advocating fighting the Indians.
Did Crazy Horse ever go to Canada?
Would the author comment on the fact that Custer was in some part the author or his own destruction by leading the 1874 Black Hills Expedition, that resulted in the discovery of gold in those hills the Native Americans held so dear?
Also, there is evidence that Custer was indeed in an attack mode as he rode north along the ridge line while Reno was attacking the lower end of the village, and evidence suggests elements of his command my actually have descended to the Little Big Horn opposite the village before being pushed back up onto the ridge line, where the command was finished off.
Custer lost because of government corruption? Wow, what a perfect Republican myth. No way could a white man have lost to a red man, it must have been the gummint's fault! Yeesh.
How does your understanding/account of the Little Bighorn battle compare or differ from that given in the book "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee"?
I think we need to remember Custer had been demoted to Col. because of poor performance in the Civil War. According to Stephen Ambrose Custer broke off with 3oo men to attack Crazy Horses encampment. The topography was such that when Custer broke off he was too far away from the remaining forces which caused him to be surrounded. It was a horrible tactical error. Crazy Horse had repeating rifles which was not expected.
L, Columbus called them "Indios", meaning "of God". He did not think they were from India. That confusion came much later.
Indians call themselves Indians, so I do too. And, "native American" is a dumb term. I'm a native American (having been born here), even though my ancestors came from Europe. I like the term used in Canada, "first nations", or the term used in Australia, "aboriginals".
Study has shown that American Indians do not mind the term and dislike "Native Americans" term.
What is interesting that in Europe, Whites fighting Indians were perceived as negative and not as very bright crowd.
When I was growing up, when we played Wild West, no one wanted to be a"'cowboy".
That perception of Whites and Indians was shaped by German writer Karl May and his Winnetou trilogy which was translated into most of European languages
.
He wrote this book without ever traveling to American West and it has very little in common with actual history of West, yet it influenced generations of Europeans and their perception of American Indians.
Mark from Worcester:
Two questions:
Thoughts on Custer’s hubris: Don’t you think he simply had great strengths that helped him in the civil war, when he was perhaps the best cavalry officer in the Union army, but these same strengths became weaknesses in the particular circumstances of Little Bighorn?
ALSO:
Do you feel like there is a view of Custer as positive or negative depending on the political climate...He certainly has been unpopular for some time, and is unpopular now, but he was made popular by Teddy Roosevelt, during a more positive time for the country, and was treated well in Erol Flynn’s They Died With Their Boots On, after WWII, when there was a feeling of gratitude toward veterans.
Thoughts on how Custer can be a symbol on which we project our national feelings about the military?
Can your guest comment about how the government would intern Indians in FL as a control method and also comment if government planned to send Crazy Horse to FL.
Thank you.
There is much documentation of American soldiers throughout history showing signs of PTSD. Is there any documentation of Native American warriors suffering from PTSD during that time?
this is mark from worcester again...
just wanted to say i am reading the killing of crazy horse right now on my kindle and enjoying it!
mark
Has the US govt. or US Army ever issued an apology to the Indian peoples for the crimes perpetrated against them(which amount to war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, and violation of treaties and plain robbery and murder?
Isn't it about time?
I agree. It is about time to educate our future generations about the world. One billion people are in India and it is important that our kids know that.
It is equally puzzling to me that even the Native Americans calls themselves Indians while objecting to having their names used for football teams.
"Indios" is how you say Indians in Spanish (both those born in Calcuta, and those in the Americas).
I have no claim to authority, but I would guess "Indians" is acceptable to them mainly because it's familiar and specific. I've heard American Indians say the issue about sports teams is that they believe the use of team nicknames such as "Braves," "Indians," "Warriors" and so on trivializes the people, the civilization and the history of an full, rich culture, and also that many such terms emphasize the warlike stereotype of American Indians.
Whoops, I guess I was wrong about "indios". Sorry everybody.
Those who would like to delve into this subject a bit more could do themselves a favor and read less of "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" (this book does bring to the fore the terrible treatment of American Indian people, but it was sensational and poorly researched) and instead read the likes of "The Last Days of the Sioux Nation" by Robert Utley.
"Native American" is a mid -20th century construct. Most people we are refering to do not to seem to get as hung up on the terminology was Whites do. If one really wants to be respectful of these people, consider refering to them by thier tribal names, ie, Sioux, Lakota, Mandan, Crow, Oto, Osage, Navajo (Dine) etc.
I have spent time on two Native American reservations in the US and was surprised to find that often the natives I met called themselves and each other "Indians". While this certainly does not make any technical sense it makes a lot of practical sense considering that the vast majority of immigrants have been using that term for over 500 years. I'm fine with referring to natives by whatever term they choose to be called in a given situation. While it is important to be conscious of the history and to be sensitive to calling a people by their tribe name instead of a generic term whenever possible it is also important to realize that a lot of natives don't have a problem with the term "Indian" as long as they are being treated like a human.
I also spent some time on a reservation in Canada where they refer to themselves as "first nations". I found that term to carry much more respect than even "native americans" as this land was not called "America" to them -they had their own names for the land they knew. In the end, its about whatever they are comfortable with and in my experience the people I met were comfortable with both "Native American" and "Indian" and used "Indian" much more often, almost always.
Excellent topic and conversation Diane! Would love to hear a follow-up conversation filling in the timeline from Crazy Horse to the current day Lakota People.
Check out photographer Aaron Huey's moving photo essay about the Lakota reservation on TED:
http://www.ted.com/talks/aaron_huey.html
Here's the description of the talk taken from TED's website: "Aaron Huey's effort to photograph poverty in America led him to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, where the struggle of the native Lakota people -- appalling, and largely ignored -- compelled him to refocus. Five years of work later, his haunting photos intertwine with a shocking history lesson in this bold, courageous talk from TEDxDU."
I found the interview to be lacking, there isn't much acknowledgment of the genocide and other crimes that took place against indigenous people by the US government. There was a lot of injustice that led up to the death of Crazy Horse that wasn't discussed. On the contrary, the writer almost paints the government as a benevolent entity. I hope the book does a better job. It makes a person wonder how history would read if the Nazis had won WWII.