I am from Waterford, Ireland. Even the county I'm from had at least three men killed at Battle of Little Bighorn.

Your presentations set a high bar. Not only do you add the history, context, and data, your "boots on the ground" approach brings it all together. I enjoyed the the last series but very interested to watch your Battle of the Bulge presentation. I know it will be top notch. Thank you!

I think a large factor was exhaustion and overall health of the 7th Cavalry.

DataMeister: Great video. I think that the tendency for troops to shoot fast is one of the reasons why they switched out the full automatic option on the M16 rifle with the 3-round burst option. When I went through Boot Camp in 1977, our M16A1 rifles had the full automatic option. I carried a Heckler & Koch MP5 in Iraq and loved that weapon because of the full automatic feature.

Thanks very much, that was a very well presented analysis. Also, best wishes for your visit to the Battle of the Bulge, I hope you really enjoy your time there.

Thank you for your videos. I’ve enjoyed the hell out of them and have learned a great deal from all of them.

As both a reformed (retired) engineer and a student of the history of the West, this presentation is right up my alley! Thank you! I’ve read compelling analysis that this defeat was a classic example of the failure of both Intelligence and Command & Control, but your video really helps add to the Big Picture.

Finally! A data driven presentation that's not just someone's opinion. You got me! Subscribed.

Oranges and apples. I served in the USMC as an infantryman in the late 1960s...and later in other branches. In all cases I had very intense and comprehensive "hands on" training. Re rifle marksmanship alone... I sent hundreds of rounds downrange in recruit training and later in combat training...to say nothing of pre-deployment training. Some years, Congress paid for as few as 14 rounds per soldier per year between the end of the end of the Civil War and the start of the Spanish-American War. Between 1866-76 the new 7th Cavalry was often not deployed as a unit and sometimes was scattered about the South on Reconstruction assignments. ... ...A substantial number of privates in the Regiment could walk or trot their mounts...but got their first experience of a hell-for-leather charge in the face of Sioux and Cheyenne warriors... Many had no experience of firing their weapons from the saddle. Bottom line was, that someone who spent two years at Fort Abraham Lincoln would have spent most of that time as a laborer... Daily formations and a bit of drill... but mostly no real combat training... One more reason for a high desertion rate... They were not treated as real soldiers for very long stretches at a time... Wonder is that some of them managed as well as they did... ...Yankee Papa...

Another group of videos about the battle that I have seen were mostly about archaeological evidence from the battle. There were studies made on bone samples of some troopers and the conclusion by the experts in the video was that they were in terrible physical condition. The troopers had been in the field for a long time, were poorly fed, suffering from assorted physical ailments and undoubtedly way short of anything resembling proper rest. I've seen videos with testimony from the Indians that a lot of the troopers were acting like they were drunk, shooting in the air, staggering around, some who were trying to pump their arms and run away weren't going much faster than a walk etc. One would have to think that if they were in such poor condition, any extended maximum effort in that heat, with that kind of stress, the troopers were just physically and mentally incapable of performing effectively.

Two issues: One, the trooper marksmanship was pretty poor as there was very little ammunition allotted for target practice. Two, I have read that the troopers were physically small men of over 21 years old. To be in the cavalry, a young enlisted man couldn't weigh more that 140 pounds and be taller than 5'-6" as the Army didn't want the horses to be fully loaded to over 200 pounds. I think this is backed up by the small size of the cavalry carbines and the reduced loading to 45-55. Correct me if I wrong.

Great video and the intro for the BotB looks cool.

Once again great update 👍

Can’t wait for the Bulge video! My Grandad was in that area about that time.

As if to further demonstrate why the LBH battle brings endless fascination, the Datameister brings new analysis to old facts, proving certain points discussed for 147 years, and effectively advancing our understanding. The 7th was a reflection of all cavalry regiments stationed west of the Mississippi. Some recruits of little experience, all the way to ex-CW, foreign service, lifers. And, there's a reason why the Army has people with two or more stripes, and with shoulder straps. Also, cavalry companies are turned loose when they've ACHIEVED proficiency in horsemanship, shooting, tactics, field craft, maneuvers. No one marches troops out on campaign unless these are trained & well-learned. Anything less is total chaos and disaster, say nothing of mission failure. Were all troops battle-hardened vets? NO unit ever is--even the marines coming ashore at Iwo Jima weren't all vets. But, this is important, ALL the troops reembarking after Iwo were VETS. Continuous battle only creates such units. The 7th was NECESSARILY and SUFFICIENTLY trained.

The comment that they 'were firing fast' does not touch on the fact that one author wrote that the 7th Cavalry troopers devoted very little time (and ammunition) per month to firing their weapons at the range. Therefore, the author implies that the troopers were not very good shots. If true, then when the troopers were under attack, amid swirling smoke and dust, it is unlikely that many of their bullets hit the attacking braves.

Thank you for analyzing and posting the data for the 7th Cav. It was very interesting and gives you a different perspective. I also agree that the sargeant should have maintained fire discipline a whole lot better. I still think that Custer should have kept the 7th together to maintain a concentrated fire. That is one thing that enabled the British to win the battle of Rourke's Rift.

Cory, I stumbled across your post channel today. In looking at the chart on 3:47, there appears to have been a large intake of soldiers who had between 270-300 days of service (looks to be approximately 25% of all privates). This raises two questions in my mind. 1.) Where those troopers evenly distributed across the regiment, or were the disproportionally assigned to certain troops? 2.) What was the 7th Cavalry operational/training program and tempo from September/Oct 1875 to the start of the spring 1876 campaign season? {Even in the post Civil War and Indian War period on the frontier, the US Army maintained a predictable yearly training program of schools/individual training. I don't know if you have looked into the old copies of the US Army Register from the Indian War period, but it includes much information on the individual officers of each unit. Something that I have found fascinating is looking at the 7th and 8th Cavalry in the 1870s. In each unit, between 5 and 8 of the most senior officers had been General Officers during the Civil War. In the 7th Cavalry this proved a somewhat toxic stew, while in the 8th Cavalry, it did not.

Love these videos

Great series! The Plains Indian Wars is my favorite period in American history and one of my favorite topics of study. I've read numerous books covering that period. One of my favorites is Stephen Ambrose's "Crazy Horse and Custer". Have you read it? BTW, Second Lt. George Wallace is a distant relative of mine. He survived the Battle of the Little Big Horn only to be killed (probably by "friendly fire") at Wounded Knee!

Great video, you should do the NCOs next. What was their experience and proportion of casualties? If we assume that the troopers were lacking in experience, the loss of NCOs would be detrimental to the fighting ability and integrity of a unit

Great presentation! What are your thoughts on the standard of marksmanship of the troopers during the battle? I’ve read that recruits received very little target practice before going into the field. Also, I know it’s off topic, but do you think the outcome of the battle might have changed had all the troops carried sabres for close protection? I’m under the impression that ammunition was in short supply and once exhausted all the troopers had to protect themselves was rifle butts and knives.

Another video I watched focused on skeletons found on the battle site. It indicated that many of the troopers were immigrants from Western Europe. The video troopers had an average age of 22, with a few troopers in their teens. The troopers tended to come from impoverished backgrounds. Did the Army tend to evenly distribute new recruits across the Seventh Cavalry.

I've looked at the number of men on detected duty at the LBH and I noticed that over 100 of those detected were from the companies in the Custer Battalion. Not that it would have made a difference as it probably would have resulted in 100 more dead. But possibly one of those men might have gotten away to tell the store of what really happen.

Thank you for this it was real honor . i do think it did have some effect on some the Units within the Regiment, mix in all the other issue that impacted on the battel im not sure the 7th was a fit as some Historians in the past have claimed on that day also the Court of inquiry need to look at with a bit of ok we know what was said but what was the motive for saying it it reads as a bit of a whitewash. By the way have a great adventure in Belgium i be looking forward to the Result and if you get free day????? can i suggest you try a pop over the the field of Waterloo at the ridge of Mont St jean it be worth it even if for research to plan another visit

training was always lacking on the frontier, Ammo was always short for target practice many soldier joined the army so they wouldn't starve to death., Sioux and Cheyenne warrior trained for combat all there lives and reveled in battle.

Great job, very squared away. :)

You failed to document how many of the combatants in the 7th Cavalry had had live fire training prior to the engagement. Mari Sandoz, in her book on the battle, conjectures that many of the troopers involved, regardless of service time, had never fired their weapons in training due to budget constraints and other factors, hence the disorderly fire discipline you mentioned. Had they been properly trained in fire control, perhaps not so many men would have been lost and unit cohesion in Reno's command could have been more properly maintained. The only documented accounts of the battle are from Reno's and Benteen's commands, so it's hard to tell about what happened in Custer's command although Native American accounts tell of disorganized fire control in Custer's command, also. Time of service alone does not equate with experience on the battlefield.

You cannot compare training to that of a modern army. Time spent does not equate to more training. Also, you should look at the general physical health and desertion rate of Custers troops.

Excellent analysis. Individual marksmanship appears to have been lacking.

Observation. While time in service is useful it doesn’t seem to me to reflect training time or knowledge of the theatre both of which were lacking at the Little Big Horn. Time in service could have been spent on guard duty nowhere near the Western front. Is there a way of being able to find this data as it helps qualify the statistics in your analysis a bit further

GOOD VIDEO SIR,I ALSO HEARD THAT SOME OF CUSTER MEN WERE LEFT BEHIND BECAUSE OF LACK OF HORSES.THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE 7TH.CAV. FOUGHT WITH ALL 12 COMPANIES IN THE FIELD.THE INDIANS WON THE BATTLE BUT LOST THE WAR,THE SAME THING HAPPEN WITH THE ZULU WARS.BRAVE MEN ON BOTH SIDES FOUGHT AND DIED FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVED IN AND NO ONE CAN TAKE THAT AWAY FROM THEM. GOD BLESS

Time in service doesn't really mean much. Troopers with combat experience, especially in fighting Indians, would be a much more useful statistic. Soldiers can be in service for years without ever hearing a shot fired in anger.

Tell me a war that has not used new recruits? Vietnam , World War 2 are fine examples

I heard that Custer didn't look after his men, they were badly fed and underweight, same with the horses, not up to weight and badly cared for.

There were other factors to consider on June 25, 1876. Many of the natives had repeating rifles, the 7th didn’t. Custer could have taken Gatling guns but failed to do so. The natives were defending what was theirs and that makes a difference. Custer divided his command and then did not wait as ordered to for other commands to meet up. Also, the 7th went into battle against the finest horse Calvary in the world. Change any of these factors and it may have ended differently

The german troopers all had military training in germany and there were a hole bunch of them in the 7th. I can only speak for them.

Is it true that Custer wore a Arrow shirt ?

Why just privates? In a modern army you’d expect all privates to be relatively new. You’d want to look at the E-4’s and E-5’s because experience in their roles is far more important. Please explain how 1876 was so different.

how well trained ?

Most us army troops in the period after the great war of northern aggression were way more familiar with shovels than trapdoor carbines. The 7th Cavalry was not Cavalry. They were more like mounted infantry. They did not fight from the horse. They used the horse to get to the battlefield and then fought on foot.

The problem was lack of Soldiers on Custer's side, but the rifles they used the Springfield Trapdoor was a miserable weapon. Overly complicated and prone to over heating and the extractor at the time of the battle, often tore the rim of the cartridge off, instead of ejecting it. Also Custer's men had left their sabers back at the fort. If Custer's men had repeating rifles, things might have been different. Some might have been able to shoot their way out. Plus, I've heard that at least 2000ish, of the Indian's had some form of repeating rifle. Custer and his men never stood a chance. The Trapdoor Springfield could fire up to 6 rounds per minute. The rifle the British used during the time of the movie Zulu, was far superior. Plus the British where shooting from cover.

when the army went out again they should have done to them what they did to the troops and other people , i read it was the women that cut the troopers to pieces so that should have been the medicine returned and the use of the gatling gun but i also read G.A.C ordered them to be left with the wagons . mind you what you read and what is true is 2 different stories and we will never know being the 2 that should have been there didn't support him but then we will never know being it's only there word they was trapped

As European it makes me feel uncorfortable that European new imigrants participate on native american genocide, but I understand United States were new nation depending on them and that being soldier was normal career choice back in the day. Responsibility is always difficult to determine.

It wouldnt have made much Difference 800 regular british.troops were killed at islawanda regardless of skills!

Have a great time At the battel. Cant wait to see your results.