Tag: Crow
This Day in History: October 27
by jessica on Oct.26, 2010, under Today in History
October 27, 1913: Birth of Crow historian and chief Joe Medicine Crow
Joseph Medicine Crow was born and raised on the Crow Indian reservation in Montana. He is the grandson of White Man Runs Him, one of Custer’s Indian scouts.
Like his famous grandfather, Medicine Crow became a scout for the US army when America entered World War II. He holds the distinction of being the last living Crow war chief, having completed the traditional training as a boy on the reservation and fulfilled the mandatory requirements during active duty in Europe: he counted coup on a German soldier, stole horses from a German cavalry battalion, and himself led a successful war party.
Medicine Crow is an esteemed scholar and historian. He was the first Crow Indian to attend college, earning a master’s degree in anthropology in 1939. He has since become widely recognized as the leading authority on Crow history and culture.
As the official tribal historian of the Crow Nation, one of his most important scholarly pursuits was the accurate reconstruction of the events surrounding the Little Bighorn battle. His research was based both on surviving records and the oral accounts of Crow scouts – including his own grandfather – who had witnessed or participated in the actual events, but whose stories had been neglected or suppressed. Although he is a prolific writer and spokesperson, his work in this field has been recognized as his most significant contribution.
Above: Joseph Medicine Crow in his early 20′s.
Medicine Crow has traveled extensively as a representative of his Crow nation and is widely acclaimed as a teacher and mentor. He is the recipient of the Bronze Star and the Medal of Freedom.
Famous Montanans: Joseph Medicine Crow
Medicine Crow was featured in Ken Burns’ documentary The War as part of a profile of Native Americans in the armed forces during World War II. The companion website has a photo gallery and some great interview footage.
Ten Myths of the Little Bighorn » HistoryNet
by jessica on Sep.30, 2010, under JOURNAL: Nature, art, cultural perspectives
Ten Myths of the Little Bighorn » HistoryNet
by Gregory Michno
“The Battle of the Little Bighorn, fought on the banks of the river of that name in Montana Territory in June 1876, is the most often discussed fight of the Indian wars. It has been said that we will never know what happened there because there were no survivors. That is nonsense. There were thousands of survivors. The Indians clearly told us what happened. We need only to listen to what they said.”
This Day in History: June 25
by jessica on Jun.24, 2010, under Today in History
June 25, 1876: Battle of Little Big Horn
There’s not much about this event that hasn’t been said – both true and not so true. It has been studied more extensively, and become more entrenched in popular culture, than possibly any other encounter between Indians and US forces. Maybe that’s because it involved so many influential figures – General Custer, Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse – or maybe because it was so shocking to Americans when it occurred that it was instantly and permanently seared into the public memory. Whatever the reasons, our understanding of the conflict and the events surrounding it have changed dramatically through time. The technologies of forensic archaeology and ballistics have reconstructed the course of events on the Greasy Grass, from the movements on the field to weapons used and the nature of the combat.
Perhaps the biggest change in perception is the shift in bias. The role of the US military, and of Custer in particular, is no longer so glorified as it once was, and the Indians not so vilified. We’ve come to understand how the hunger for gold in the forbidden Black Hills motivated the Custer Expedition of 1876. And with more Native accounts coming to light – and being heard – our understanding of the events on the ground has become more objective and comprehensive.
These changes are relatively recent, however. For most of the 20th century, discussing the legitimacy of US Indian policies was strictly taboo – and so was challenging the objectivity of “official” accounts. (continue reading…)





