ELEVEN HOSTILE INDIANS?

[Larry Koschkee]

Henry Dodge to Henry Atkinson, Fort Union, June 18th, 1832.

...On the 16th, I started from my camp accompanied by two men and reached Fort Hamilton at 8 O'clock. Within about 400 yards from the Fort I met a German on horse back stopped about one minute to talk to him. Eleven of the hostile Indians were lying in ambush within one hundred and fifty yards of the spot. I met the German; I passed on at a gallop and before i reached the Fort i heard three guns. I supposed it was some of Captain Gentry's men shooting at a target...

How did Dodge come up with the number - eleven?

Did he extrapolate the number from the amount of Indians encountered at Horse Shoe Bend?

Did he count body impressions were the Indians secreted themselves in the prairie foliage?

I know the answer may be obvious to most, but in continuing to examine Dodge's correspondence, I do not want to leave any stone un-turned.

[Robert Braun]

Larry said:

Henry Dodge to Henry Atkinson, Fort Union, June 18th, 1832.

...On the 16th, I started from my camp accompanied by two men and reached Fort Hamilton at 8 O'clock. Within about 400 yards from the Fort I met a German on horse back stopped about one minute to talk to him. Eleven of the hostile Indians were lying in ambush within one hundred and fifty yards of the spot. I met the German; I passed on at a gallop and before i reached the Fort i heard three guns. I supposed it was some of Captain Gentry's men shooting at a target...

How did Dodge come up with the number - eleven?

Did he extrapolate the number from the amount of Indians encountered at Horse Shoe Bend?

Did he count body impressions were the Indians secreted themselves in the prairie foliage?

I know the answer may be obvious to most, but in continuing to examine Dodge's correspondence, I do not want to leave any stone un-turned.

Larry... great questions here.

Since Henry Apfel (or "Apple") was ambushed out of Dodge's sight, there really in no way of knowing exactly HOW many Indians were involved in the ambush. It could have been eleven; it could just as easily been three-- corresponding to the number of gunshots heard. We know that Dodge's ad hoc command departed Fort Hamilton and rode perhaps a 1/4 mile to the scene of Apfel's murder. From there, the accounts suggest they used a dog to track the war-party... whcih perhaps accoutns for the distance of the war-party from the ambush site as reported by Dodge.

I have begun to form the opinion that in this report Dodge extrapolated the numbers of Indian "bushwackers" from the obvious Indian dead at "Bloody Lake." Bracken later claimed there were more, and his larger number has become enshrined on the monument at Black Hawk Memorial Park, as well as in other publications.

Some modern historians have questioned Bracken's accounts... particularly in light of his propensity to file lawsuits, the post BHW Parkinson/Bracken "feud" and the literary jousting between Bracken and Peter Parkinson Jr. regarding facts and figures after "Bloody Lake." Parkinson's comments are worthy of examination, as are the accouts of Bouchard and others, whose recollections (when taken together) have tended to support Bracken's higher number.

I believe that Dodge reported the number of Indian slain that were obviously and clearly seen at the pond embankment. His numbers are appear consistant from the stream of "after action" reports. So do his numbers of reported native casualties at Wisconsin Heights in the stream of post-battle reports and correspondence.

Regards, Bob.

[Larry Koschkee]

Thanks Bob... you have given an excellent explanation for Dodge's conservative number of eleven. Unfortunately, the correct number of Kickapoo killed at the battle site remains unclear, and the accounting is as muddy as the bottom of the Pecatonica.

For those scholars, modern or otherwise, that embrace the notion or have a hypothesis that the ratio of militia to Indians was not as high as 3 to 1 in favor of the militia, rather it was near equal... 21 militia and 17 Indians... can they speak with certainity after Robert Braun's information stated herein?

Dodge's conservative number was reported two days after the battle to his commanding officer. It would have been important to be accurate, would it not? That is why Dodge only reported 11, he was uncertain of an additional amount. There may have been more than 11 Indians than Dodge reported and there may have been more than 17 that Bracken suggested 22 years after the battle. And so there lies the rub.

Best regards,

Larry K.

[Robert Braun]

Larry said:

Thanks Bob... you have given an excellent explanation for Dodge's conservative number of eleven. Unfortunately, the correct number of Kickapoo killed at the battle site remains unclear, and the accounting is as muddy as the bottom of the Pecatonica.

For those scholars, modern or otherwise, that embrace the notion or have a hypothesis that the ratio of militia to Indians was not as high as 3 to 1 in favor of the militia, rather it was near equal... 21 militia and 17 Indians... can they speak with certainity after Robert Braun's information stated herein?

Dodge's conservative number was reported two days after the battle to his commanding officer. It would have been important to be accurate, would it not? That is why Dodge only reported 11, he was uncertain of an additional amount. There may have been more than 11 Indians than Dodge reported and there may have been more than 17 that Bracken suggested 22 years after the battle. And so there lies the rub.

Best regards,

Larry K.

Larry... I agree with your observations: "It would have been important to be accurate, would it not? That is why Dodge only reported 11, he was uncertain of an additional amount."

I am inclined to think that Dodge made reasonable attempts to be accurate with his information and assessments. The information that supports this inclination is the apparent consistency of his reporting over time.

In his Pecatonica and Wisconsin Heights reports, Dodge appears to offer numbers of casualties based on what he actually saw, or on the reports of those whom he believed to be accurate. That these statistics appear to be understated might lead one to conclude that Dodge did not overstate the situation; leading one in turn to perhaps infer that Dodge's assessments were and remain reasonably reliable accounts of what happened.

Regards,

Bob.