|
|
Post by inger on Aug 13, 2019 21:38:43 GMT -5
Forts were not constructed for the purpose of inducing Indian attacks. I agree. And they almost never were attacked. I think that in the vast majority of cases they were administrative centers. I don't know if reliable records exist, but most men in the regiments probably were not at their forts most of the time in the West. They had a huge amount of ground to cover and very small forces.
A lot of the cavalry were immigrants, few others wanted to serve in a dangerous and often boring job. The pay by the time was actually pretty good.
I was fascinated to know that the US cavalry came to an end only in 1942. The last known charge was in the Philippines in that year. Crazy that you could actually successfully charge in that era.
Especially since it would not be until 1950 when Diner’s club issued the first credit cards that could be used at various establishments... (More history, folks)... |
|
|
|
Post by utahyank on Aug 13, 2019 21:52:02 GMT -5
Russ.....you are a real trip....let's take my native state of Nebraska....the state is interlaced with rivers and streams...can you believe that those rivers and streams had timber...yes, trees....can you get your head around that fact?
In this timber-scarce land there were the following forts built during the westward expansion......count them:
Camp Sheridan
Fort Atkinson
Fort Crook
Fort Hartsluff
Fort Kearny
Fort Lisa
Fort McPherson
Fort Mitchell
Fort Omaha
Fort Robidoux
Fort Robinson
Fort Sidney
|
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Aug 13, 2019 21:52:52 GMT -5
Wood was scare where most of the Western campaigns took place and there was no point to build wooden forts because the native Americans were not going to attack you there. Even on the Bozeman trail where they were built the Sioux did not attack them directly. Most US cavalry regiments were headquartered far from where they fought. Custer was based in his last campaign I believe in Nebraska and was not fighting anyone in Nebraska of course wrong....Custer was based in Ft Lincoln North Dakota....the war certainly WAS raging in Nebraska....the effective "end" of the war was the surrender at Fort Robinson, Nebraska...strange how all these forts were built in a West that had a scarcity of timber.... You really are misinformed on the timber issue..... Thank you for correcting me on where the HQ was. I have looked at the pictures I can find at the fort and while there were wooden buildings it does not look like there was an enclosed palisade.
My comments about whether forts were commonly made of wood, or fortified at all, is what I have read.
For example:
"When establishing a new fort, the soldiers would sometimes occupy buildings already established, but more often, were required to construct the new fort from materials available in the area. In forested areas, wood was usually used; adobe in the desert, and stone, where available. The typical frontier fort consisted of officers’ quarters, barracks, stables, storehouses, and headquarters buildings, grouped around a central parade ground. Most forts did not have walls surrounding them because attacks were generally unlikely. "
www.legendsofamerica.com/forts-presidios/
|
|
|
|
Post by utahyank on Aug 13, 2019 21:57:32 GMT -5
The various "stories of the West" that have been dramatized into movies, books and lore have, for most of them, some snippet or more of fact woven into that story.....it's not like they have been made up out of whole cloth.... I don't know what your point is directed toward....but....timber was available in canyons and mountains of the West...most of the forts were during the periods of the Great Sioux War, to use one of the terms for that era... If someone wants a mostly factual example of what was faced by the forts, look at accounts of Fort Phil Kearny, one of a string of three forts from Laramie to Bozeman, and the events which lead to a successful massacre of about 50 troops under the command of Captain Fetterman....this is a story of intrigue, deceit, cunning, and bravery....The history seems to be consistent from both the Native American and US Army perspectives.... It is clear from an account such as this that the opportunities for expanding into widespread exaggerations in novels and movies were ripe for the picking...and picked they were... Timber was rarely available in the plains states where most of the campaigns took place. These are almost steppe like in their nature. The forts you mention are on the Bozeman trail which was the exception rather than the rule.
I don't have a point other than what I have read suggests the images of the West had little to do with the West. I find that fascinating. Hollywood in its heyday of Western movies was not really interested in history, although they became much more interested in the sixties (by which time the Westerns were beginning to fade).
This is WRONG!!!!!...……..I typed the list of Nebraska forts.....enough with your narrative of no timber and forts were only built on the Bozeman trail...…..enough... |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Aug 13, 2019 22:04:19 GMT -5
What fighting took place in Nebraska after 1865 Utah? I mean with native Americans. Nebraska forts may have had a lot of wood. But they were not the frontier forts used to fight native Americans as you pointed out previously. Cost was a key driver in much of US army life in the West. The US cavalry in the Civil War had often used repeating weapons notably Henry's and Spencer's. But single shot rifles were adapted in the West although Winchesters were readily available. In fact at the Big Horn native americans had the repeaters. "Rather than blame bad results on the weapons used, historians point toward poor marksmanship training. Prior to 1880s, target practice was nil. Only after George Custer’s disaster at the 1876 Battle of the Little Big Horn did that change, just a bit—the Army issued about 20 rounds per year for training." I had read ten rounds, but even 20 is not enough to train with. truewestmagazine.com/rifles-frontier-era/ |
|
|
|
Post by utahyank on Aug 13, 2019 22:06:17 GMT -5
**SIGH**
|
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Aug 13, 2019 22:11:44 GMT -5
How does that address my point.
My argument is that the forts actually used to engage Native Americans were not of wood. You list forts made of wood that were not the ones that were used to fight them, certainly in the era commonly looked upon as the West. Do you know of any engagement against native Americans in Nebraska after 1860?
But what I read seems wrong in one regard as I posted. There were buildings made of wood on some forts, others were made of adobe or stone. There was simply no palisade. So I already learned something new today.... 
|
|
|
|
Post by utahyank on Aug 13, 2019 22:19:02 GMT -5
How does that address my point.
My argument is that the forts actually used to engage Native Americans were not of wood. You list forts made of wood that were not the ones that were used to fight them, certainly in the era commonly looked upon as the West. Do you know of any engagement against native Americans in Nebraska after 1860?
But what I read seems wrong in one regard as I posted. There were buildings made of wood on some forts, others were made of adobe or stone. There was simply no palisade. So I already learned something new today....
Yes...there were 8 separate and distinct Indian battles in Nebraska after 1860....I will let you research them.... |
|
|
|
Post by inger on Aug 13, 2019 22:37:29 GMT -5
Without listing them, I counted 32 Union (and no confederate) forts in Kansas built for the Civil War. After the war, one of the forts was specifically manned by Confederate prisoners who were freed only if they agreed to go there to fight the Native Americans.
Some of the other forts were used to house the Indian Agencies and to stock supplies. That would be an apt description of the reason many forts were maintained. To house and protect the supplies of the US Army. Makes perfect sense...They were forts, not fly strips hung to draw the enemy...
|
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Aug 13, 2019 22:49:54 GMT -5
I have no doubt at all that forts were built in Kansas and Nebraska for the civil war. And that these were used for administrative purposes after the war as inger states and made of wood and stone. I already made that point. My comments were about forts primarily in the plain states and arizona that were occupied when actually engaging Native Americans in the West. But I already learned one thing, while palisades were commonly not built (and that was my original point although I stated it poorly) many of the buildings were of wood. They just were not enclosed. Or attacked. Which is commonly what is shown in Westerns.
I understand inger's point that movies are made to be exciting. But films made from the late sixties on were exciting, at least to me, and far more historically accurate than in the heyday of westerns from the twenties to the early sixties.
I always thought that one of the best Westerns ever made was Ulzana's Raid which (as far as I know history) was remarkably accurate even if the events never occurred.
|
|
|
|
Post by inger on Aug 13, 2019 22:53:07 GMT -5
Sixteen Forts in Colorado. I’ve thought about making the journey of 150-200 miles from here to Bent’s Fort, out near the Kansas border. I see the outer walls appear to be of adobe, but I also see a strong grove of trees behind the fort in photos.
But who? Who outside of this thread said that fortifications had to be built of wood anyway? Material to make adobe was certainly readily available, and fireproof. Would anyone not an idiot choose a flammable material over a flammable one for a fort?.
More fractured history lessons...
In the end, the soldiers and all the pioneers could not defeat the natives hand to hand on anything near to a consistent basis once the natives saw the mode of attack a few times. The war was won by the buffalo hunters, killing and wasting millions of American Bison to starve the natives out and deprive them of warm clothing and bedding.
Only when they were weakened and their numbers reduced through this horrible and cruel mode of attack was this land “won”. It was as horrible as any one culture ever treated another in World history, equal to any of those that our country points fingers at that occurred elsewhere. And it occurred right on the heels of the atrocity of slavery, proving that slavery did nothing to teach our society about equality of human beings.
Screw forts! They were used to control people, White or otherwise to accomplish the goals of the political/military complex, such as it was (please include railroads)...
|
|
|
|
Post by utahyank on Aug 13, 2019 23:02:24 GMT -5
You would be interested in a tour of Fort Robinson Nebraska.....many of the original buildings have been maintained, including where Crazy Horse was confined, and later murdered by a Sioux guard from another split in the tribe....this is where the end of the Indian Wars were effected....there were not palisades at this location, although I think Fort Laramie on the Mormon trail was palisaded....probably some of each through the West...
|
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Aug 13, 2019 23:20:14 GMT -5
Inger I would add one thing to your comment. Starvation was not the only thing that wiped out native Americans (I am not saying you said that). Disease killed off huge numbers. They had few protection from the diseases brought by the settlers (who died themselves in huge numbers from them. These were the true killers in the wagon train). Even when there was no adobe or stone there was sod. This was used to build civilian houses in the West, not sure if the Army used it. "And it occurred right on the heels of the atrocity of slavery, proving that slavery did nothing to teach our society about equality of human beings." Think about El Paso last week. Do you think we ever learn. There were tremendous bias against native americans and probably those of mixed marriages in the west. The late 19th century was heavily racists and full of the view that some civilizations were inferior to others. The west was no different than the British or French in Africa. Utah some suggest Crazy Horse effectively killed himself by getting the soldiers to kill him. I did not know it was another Sioux. It was common for the US to use one tribe against another. There were Crow scouts I think with Custer. On another topic women are often seen as saloon girls - think gunsmoke. However, I have read that women were never allowed in saloons in fact. I wonder if that is true. This says that while that was true in the East it was not true of the West. www.legendsofamerica.com/we-paintedlady/and this supports that view arguing that while proper women never entered saloons there were women there www.thewildwest.org/cowboys/wildwestwesternfacts/270-oldwestsaloon |
|
|
|
Post by noetsi on Aug 13, 2019 23:32:41 GMT -5
One of the thing I wonder most if if gunman in anything remotely resembling the hollywood image existed. Certainly the shoot outs where people met in the streets and fought it out appear to be rare. One reason that was so is that those streets were likely crowded with people and horses, I imagine it was hard not to get run over let alone shoot it out. In the real world people tried to find their enemies when they were not armed and shoot them.
|
|
|
|
Post by rizzuto on Aug 14, 2019 0:12:30 GMT -5
Sixteen Forts in Colorado. I’ve thought about making the journey of 150-200 miles from here to Bent’s Fort, out near the Kansas border. I see the outer walls appear to be of adobe, but I also see a strong grove of trees behind the fort in photos. But who? Who outside of this thread said that fortifications had to be built of wood anyway? Material to make adobe was certainly readily available, and fireproof. Would anyone not an idiot choose a flammable material over a flammable one for a fort?. More fractured history lessons... In the end, the soldiers and all the pioneers could not defeat the natives hand to hand on anything near to a consistent basis once the natives saw the mode of attack a few times. The war was won by the buffalo hunters, killing and wasting millions of American Bison to starve the natives out and deprive them of warm clothing and bedding. Only when they were weakened and their numbers reduced through this horrible and cruel mode of attack was this land “won”. It was as horrible as any one culture ever treated another in World history, equal to any of those that our country points fingers at that occurred elsewhere. And it occurred right on the heels of the atrocity of slavery, proving that slavery did nothing to teach our society about equality of human beings. Screw forts! They were used to control people, White or otherwise to accomplish the goals of the political/military complex, such as it was (please include railroads)... Check this out. I think you’ll find it interesting: What really happened to the bison? www.tsln.com/news/a-unique-study-of-bison-populations/ |
|
