| |
Sitting Bull, that’s a name you know. Crazy Horse,
too, and perhaps Red Cloud, all Lakota leaders of fame. Gall, perhaps
not; he is now obscure. There was a time, though, when this barrel-chested
Hunkpapa was heralded not only as the “Fighting Cock of the Sioux”
but also as a man of realistic vision, capable of leading his people into
the new world dominated by whites.
Gall: Lakota War Chief is a new biography from the University of Oklahoma
Press. Its author, Robert Larson—who also has written a biography
of Red Cloud—restores Gall to his place in the history of his people.
To a good degree, anyway. One problem is that for much of Gall’s
life, documentation is lacking. Sometimes in the book Gall drops out of
sight and instead we hear what Sitting Bull or Bear Coat Miles or others
are doing. If the documents are not there, that’s a problem, but
it’s one that Larson might have eased by going into the field. He
might have gone over the ground, and he might have interviewed present-day
Lakota about their recollections and traditions. There is nothing like
boots on the ground to bring a subject alive.
Still, it’s a good biography that places Gall clearly for us in historical
memory. He was a great war chief, although never so stubbornly hostile
as Sitting Bull. One day Gall might be waving scalps in front of daunted
troopers, the next he might be loitering around a trading post trading
yarns. During the days of staunch resistance by the northern, non-treaty
Indians, Gall was second only to Sitting Bull as a war leader.
As for his role in the Battle of the Little Bighorn, it may have been
exaggerated. Gall came out to fight like all the other men from the camp
on the Greasy Grass, lost track of his family, and when he found them,
five family members were dead. After having driven back Reno’s men,
Gall raced to join the fight against Custer’s column, hatchet in
hand, revenge on his mind. He didn’t kill Custer, but he led a key
charge that deprived Miles Keogh’s detachment of their horses, hastening
the end.
Gall for many years was depicted as the foremost attacker against Custer,
for two reasons. One was that he came back to the battlefield for the
ten-year reunion, in 1886, and toured the site with Brigadier General
Edward S. Godfrey, who had been with Reno on the fateful day. Gall told
the story of the battle his way, with himself figuring prominently, and
thereafter so did Godfrey. More important, Gall’s agent at Standing
Rock, James McLaughlin, consistently lionized Gall as a war leader and
the star of the Custer fight. He did this in order to exalt Gall, who
was cooperating in the beginning of farming on the reservation, and thereby
erode the influence of Sitting Bull, who was much less cooperative.
In the aftermath of the Custer fight Gall took refuge with Sitting Bull
in Canada, but it was there that the two of them fell out. Gall insisted
that the people were starving in Canada and needed to go home and surrender,
whereas Sitting Bull was more determined to hold out, despite the suffering
of his people. Gall headed south to surrender, and eventually Sitting
Bull had to follow. At Standing Rock thereafter, Gall advocated his people’s
interests, but also cooperated in the encouragement of agriculture and
the establishment of a legal system.
It’s interesting that writers today seem to regard the Indians of
the northern plains as chic. New biographies and histories keep coming,
while the Indians of the southern plains are relatively neglected by writers.
Another interesting trend is how authors are redefining virtue among Indian
leaders. It is no longer most admirable to be an implacable warrior. Instead,
the historians now like leaders who see what is going on, adapt and negotiate
well, and most important, take care of their people. You know, we might
learn quite a bit from these old-time leaders and their biographers.
This text and audio may not be copied without securing
prior permission from Plains Folk.
|
