Was Custer Outgunned at Little Bighorn?

By Miss Cellania in Weapons & War on Jun 25, 2009 at 9:43 am

The Battle of Little Bighorn happened 133 years ago today. George Custer and his men were certainly outnumbered, but their defeat may have also been assured by the Lakota and Cheyenne warriors’ superior weaponry.

If the Indians were, in fact, better armed at the Battle of the Little Bighorn, Custer may have contributed to the situation by declining to include Gatling guns in his van. Because he was setting off on what amounted to a search-and-destroy mission, he argued that the Gatlings were too cumbersome and would only slow him down.

At the point where he was surrounded and outnumbered by a ratio as high as 9-to-1, he probably regretted making that choice. In such a dire situation, the Gatling gun would have considerably reduced the enemy’s numerical advantage and may have even proven decisive in turning the tide.

The Lakota and Cheyenne warriors did join the battle with a number of Henry and Spencer repeating rifles, which provided a higher rate of fire than the single-shot Springfield Model 1873 carbines carried by the cavalry troopers.

In the end, several factors led to the deaths of the 197 men under Custer, each stemming from his underestimation of his adversaries. Link


Email This Post
Tweet This Post 
Share This Post on Facebook

Tags: , ,


Neat stuff from the NeatoShop:


  1. Mitch
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 9:50 am

    Sometimes the good guys win.

  2. Gauldar
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 9:54 am

    That’s what you get for having no exit strategy. FAIL!

  3. Sam Saturday
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 10:04 am

    Makes a great Atari 2600 game, though.

  4. caroline
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 10:09 am

    “Well, everyone knows Custer died at Little Bighorn. What this book presupposes is… maybe he didn’t?”

  5. Kalel
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 11:53 am

    “Too bad they couldn’t bring the tank. It would’ve helped…”

    *Twilight Zone music*

  6. Gauldar
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 11:57 am

    I don’t know about you guys, but I would NOT mess with a guy named Crazy Horse.

  7. Foreigner1
    Jun 25th, 2009 at 3:53 pm

    “At the point where he was surrounded and outnumbered by a ratio as high as 9-to-1, he probably regretted making that choice.”
    Custer overheared by some Indians- “Oh darn, I just knéw I’ld regret that…!” …And then he was shot dead by nine Indians toating Henry rifles…

  8. emmiline
    Jun 26th, 2009 at 2:16 am

    custer was a tiny little guy. they have some of his clothes at the little bighorn museum. i’m talkin’ pint sized and dainty.

    but seriously-he got what he had coming.

  9. Jorge
    Jun 26th, 2009 at 3:23 am

    The best part of this battle is when Custer finds the Indian village, finds no warrior in sight and while charging says to his troopers: “We caught them napping!”

  10. Outlawdcm
    Jun 26th, 2009 at 4:06 pm

    Custer was historically very arrogant and did get what was coming to him. He considered himself invincible. As was said earlier sometimes the good guys win.

  11. dixie choppers
    Jun 27th, 2009 at 11:18 am

    custer was a ass and so was his brouther, they broke the treaty not the natives, all for the gold that was found in the black hills. he wanted one more battle so he could run for the president. he would not listen to his scouts when they told him he was out numbered. history likes to hide the fact that he also had a son by a sue captive,he would not waite for the other two armys that were coming, he wanted all the glory. these are the same scum that killed woman and children in the chianne campain. if they could have waited till the winter they could have forced them to surrender. those merdering basters got whot they deserve in the end. now why wont the u.s goverment give back the black hills they stole and defaced with thier mount rushmore, they keep stalling in court, it was never giveing up in anny legal treaty, they are thiefs

  12. Jorge
    Jun 27th, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    There seems to be an argument about whether Custer was shot in the chest during an attempt to cross the river of Little Bighorn or if he died heroically at the top of the valley. Historians like to portray the latter side of this argument. To die in such an unexpected way before the battle started does not seem very heroic. However, throughout the written History of America, Custer has become a hero, so had to die appropriately; anything else would have been unacceptable.

  13. Jango Davis
    Jun 28th, 2009 at 6:58 am

    Custer was right about the gatling guns…I’ve been to the battlefield and am familiar with the land he traversed and I find it very difficult to believe that the gatlings guns, large enough to be considered small artillery, pulled by condemmed calvary horses, as was the practice then, could have traversed the land and kept up wit Custer’s pace.

    However, CUster did act with haste because he desperately needed a batltlefield victory to save his career after being demoted from the commander of the summer campaign of 1876 to just the calvary commander (as a result of Custer implicating Fred Grant, President Grant’s brother, as a corrupt Indian Agent).

    Sitting Bull was right in his assessment of Custer when asked why Custer lost the battle: “Custer was a fool and rode to his death.” Truer words were never spoken…but whatever might be said about Custer that is true one can’t deny that he died for his sins with his boots on…

  14. Jango Davis
    Jun 28th, 2009 at 7:08 am

    emmiline…regarding Custer’s height…he stood 5 foot 8 inches…US calvary troopers average height back then was 5 ft 6. This was because larger men would tire out the horses more quickly.

    Regarding his white buckskin uniform at the museum, I’ve been there too and have a picture of it. Keep in mind that the pants are actually breeches and were made to end just below the kneee so the leg could fit in the high calvary boots better. It’s understandable though that those without riding experience might not know that and therefore judge Cistter’s height as smaler than he actually was.

  15. Neil
    Jun 30th, 2009 at 1:41 am

    Oh, I see. Custer got what was coming to him? Then so collectively did the honorless, misogynist, child-torturing Mongol land-bridge savages who used to occupy the land you’re all likely sitting on. You guys believe everything Hollywood or our self-perceived ‘rebel’ ex-hippie teachers “teach” us, and then just as perplexingly believe yourselves to be courageously going against some establishment social grain in doing so. Pathetic!

    The cavalry were damn tough sons of Europe, their ancestors’ genes hardened in the bitter European ice age. The battlefield fury of the blue-eyed race has sparked legends around the planet and enabled human footsteps on the moon. Its millennia of victories portend the rogue Phoenix to ascend when the materialist yokes of capitalism, socialism and -above all- Zionism are cast off in the rapidly approaching collapse. You’ll be thankful this race of warriors also spawned concepts like rules of warfare and compassion for the conquered.

    RIP CUSTER

  16. Jorge
    Jul 1st, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    Now that is what I call a really bad hollywood script.


Keep track of the comments with Comment RSS

Don't Miss: New Stuff | Bestsellers | The Cute Store
                   Funny T-Shirts

Need a gift? Get unforgettable gifts for:
Geeks | Pranksters | Kids | Hipsters | Shutterbugs

Lijit Search

Old school? Bookmark us! RSS Feed Twitter Facebook Page