Talk:Crazy Horse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[The following entry was made first but only reunited with the rest at 05:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC) via merger of history & content of Talk:Crazy Horse (disambiguation) to here. --Jerzy•t

I've heard that his name actually should be translated as "untammed" horse; is that true? Szopen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Szopen (talk • contribs) 14:39, 23 April 2004 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Page move

(from WP:RM)

216.163.125.121 (talk) 10:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)===Crazy Horse (person) → Crazy Horse === All other articles with "Crazy Horse" in the name are named after this figure, so his article should occupy the primary name. A disambig page is already in place. -- Netoholic @ 04:25, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

That is a bad reason for the move. But a few Google tests quickly establish the only really good reason there could be: references to him predominate among uses by a good margin.
--Jerzy•t 04:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I am hurt that there is no mention of the Kangi Tanka (Big Crow) in this article, nor our families steps to protect "Crazy Horse"s name in U.S. Federal Courts. Nor any information about the sad division of the "Red Cloud's", and the "Crazy Horse's". an essentially artificial division.
We are his inheritors. We have done so much with no recognition. I guess I should try to supe this up.
Brandon Kangi Tanka (Big Crow) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brandon Jay Denny (talk • contribs) 07:39, 8 July 2005 (UTC)

Well 1st. Big Crow was not even Related to Crazy Horse.

    2nd. Crazy Horse was MniHohwoju/Itazicola.(remember the MniHohwoju War Chieftan Touch the Clouds is/was His 1st Cousin)
    3rd. He was by birth in the Hierarcy of the MniHohwoju, His Mother was the Daughter of the MnHohwoju Chief Black Buffalo.

Answer your question?

[edit] Edit Bibliography

Was surprised that the Mari Sandoz biography was not listed. Add it and ordered the bibliography by date of publication, in order to preserve a historical interpretive context. If it becomes too large, I'd suggest ordering it by alpha author. --kradak 00:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Is this true or BS?

"Crazy Horse had hazel eyes and light curly hair (his nickname was "curly"). He also had relatively light skin and freckles."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MelungeonOrigin/message/85 --grazon 19:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

ALL contemporary accounts, EVEN FROM OTHER INDIANS mention his very light color for an Indian, especially a Sioux. And his childhood name translates to "Curly" (although this might be a traditional family name, passed on). There was speculation back then that he was a half-breed or at least 1/4th white, although this is not backed by ANY information we have about his background. Put it down to the vagarity of Genetics and ask him if you meet him on the Riverworld. CFLeon 09:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Surrender?

I don't think Crazy Horse ever surrendered to anyone at anytime. He died in battle with high honor at the age of 27. Stabinator 06:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Source for this statement??? CFLeon 09:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I kindof assume this is a joke, but in any case, I'm sure the wording of surrender can be somewhat disputed. I've never seen or heard of any litterature that support this statement whatsoever. galar71 03:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] crazy horse surrendering

Crazy horse was a well respected man who had high values. He knew that his men were starving and he also knew that most of them were sick. He didn't want to have to surrender but he knew it was best for his men. If his men were still healthy they would have been fighting for many more months. his men knew that they were going to fall if they were fighting while they were sick. They trusted him and they knew he would do the right thing. So, I believe that Crazy Horse surrendering was a smart and honorable notion.

keegan seeman, sioux native and researcher

[edit] Birth year 1234

The top of the article & the box mention Crazy Horse was born in 1849, but deeper in the text it says much earlier. Also, futher on, it mentions that his reputation grew in the 1850s & 60s, which would make the later birth year unlikely.--Robbstrd 02:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Photo Controversy

The surviving Crazy Horse family says no way. In the early days of photography a photographer had to make a living. So mislabeling photos and calling them Sitting Bull or Crazy Horse enhanced the value when they tried to sell them back east. For reseachers: check out the photos of noted old west photographer D. F. Barry. He has photos of Rain In The Face, Sitting Bull, and John Grass wearing exactly the same headdress. Why? Barry was the owner of the headdress and asked his Indian subjects to wear it as a favor. You see most Indians didn't even own one, even many of the head men. But he knew the easterners would pay more for a picture of an Indian that wore a headdress. Because it made them LOOK like a chief...whether they were or not was unimportant to a photographer trying to scratch out a living in a new and expensive business. (You can access these photos online at the Library of Congress or the Denver Public Library) The Crazy Horse family has a detailed drawing by an artist in 1934 based from a description by Crazy Horse's younger half sister, Iron Cedar. Upon looking at the drawing for the first time, she broke into tears and said it was exactly how she remembered him. It has been stored in the family cedar chest for over seventy years. The Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument has a copy of this drawing in their archives donated by the family.---moved here from main article, GunnerJr 14:14, 27 November 2006 (EST)


Why is this photo up if most sources say it's bogus? It should have a link to the picture instead so people who don't read well, won't take the picture and show it off as crazy horse. cary 24.18.104.26 08:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it should be taken down. Since the majority of sources claim it is not verifiable, and since both the section of the article dealing with it and a source in the further reading dispute its veracity, it should DEFINITELY NOT be a featured aspect of the page. It's a little ridiculous that it's still up, actually. 69.145.235.182 23:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved the photograph down to the photo controversy section to cut down on confusion. Cary

24.18.104.26 08:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Memorial Criticism

I added a sentence and a cite about the criticism concerning the CHM. I would perfer that the whole section was not in the article as it seems POV and promotional. If it needs to be in the article at all, it should not have a completly free ride.Edivorce 04:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be here, it's definitely a related topic, and the controversy overlaps the man. I'd also add that I think your addition is an excellent one. I do think that perhaps it should be moved down the page, however, to place it below the photograph section. I'll do this now, see what you think. Maury 21:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversy regarding his death

I have added a short disclaimer to the Bourke/Little Big Man version of the CH death story, which suggests that CH somehow managed to stab himself twice during the struggle outside the guardhouse. This account (collected in 1881 by Bourke) is dismissed as an inaccurate account motivated primarily by LBM's own self-aggrandizement by the vast majority of scholars on the subject, and an offensive deflection of military culpability by Lakota familiar with the story. See Kingsley Bray 2006, Larry McMurtry 1999, Joseph Marshall III 2004, and especially James Gilbert, in Journal of the West (volume 32, Jan 1993, pp.5-21). I would also caution against using military historians like Bourke as single sources for entire sections. In this case, the existence of a "mark" on the guardhouse door verified by a single individual should not be put forward as evidence that substantiates a single-perspective account.--69.145.235.182 23:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I have repaired this section to remove overly non-NPOV comments about John Gregory Bourke and Little Big Man (how is it possible to know he had "no compelling reason to lie?"), as well as a racist implication that because Bourke was the only WHITE to interview LBM about this occurrence, his testimony is somehow more credible. Furthermore, the "deathbed" testimony cited as corroboration of this story and which implies CH's death was his own fault is, to those familiar with the documents, patently fabricated by either Bordeaux, Lee or one of the other white soliders/scouts present.

AGAIN, ADVANCING THE POINT OF VIEW OF ONE SOURCE OUT OF DOZENS IS NOT NPOV!!!--168.103.21.77 18:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


Why is the article stating that Crazy Horse killed himself when Little Big Man released his elbow, if historians don't seem to agree on that? X10 19:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


I propose deleting the Bourke reference as it only serves to muddy the waters, and as the article notes, is not generally considered credible. I'll make this deletion in the next few weeks if no one can come up with a good reason not to do so. --69.146.166.207 (talk) 03:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I've edited the section dealing with the Bourke/LBM account to reflect what most scholars on the subject see as its questionable motives and singular nature.--72.175.96.48 (talk) 03:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Can we get a few reliable sources to that effect to bolster the article, please? CosmicPenguin (Talk) 05:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other wives

The article mentions his "first wife," what of the others? I had read he had three wives during his life. -- WiccaIrish 09:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he had more than one wife, and I remember that information being in the article. Maybe someone removed it at some point? oncamera(t) 18:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)