Retracing Fighters’ Steps at the Battle of the Big Hole

Yellow Wolf and Many Wounds at Big Hole National battlefield. Yellow Wolf is studying a sand drawing of the nimíipuu camp tipi layout during battle, as drawn by Many Wounds. Courtesy of Washington State University, McWhorter collection.

In 1846, the US and Great Britain ended their dispute over what was then known as Oregon country. Settlers began pouring into the newly created Oregon Territory and Washington with little regard for the Native American communities already living there. After the Treaty of 1863 reduced the size of the reservation that had been promised to the nimíipuu (Nez Perce) from 7.5 million acres to 750,000 acres, hostilities broke out between the United States Army and a band of the nimíipuu who were denied sufficient time to relocate from their ancestral lands in northeastern Oregon to Idaho Territory. The Nez Perce Flight of 1877 saw five bands of nimíipuu’s search for asylum span over 1,170 miles and many confrontations with the US Army.

One of these deadly encounters occurred at what is now Big Hole National Battlefield in southwestern Montana. The Battle of the Big Hole is exceptionally well-documented due to testimonies from soldiers, civilians, and nimíipuu witnesses. The recounts of Yellow Wolf and other nimíipuu informants tell of the shock of the attack and the fury with which warriors fought for the lives of women, children, and each other. However, individuals are rarely privy to an entire fight, and memories are not always reliable. Archeological research at the battle site illuminates the decisions, actions, and reactions of the two forces that culminated in the nimíipuu’s bittersweet victory.

An Overview of the Case

On August 9, 1877, midway through the five-month conflict with the nimíipuu, the 7^th US Infantry led by Lt. Colonel John Gibbon launched a pre-dawn attack on the nimíipuu camping on the banks of the north fork of the Big Hole River. The first shot killed Natalekin, an older nimíipuu man who was checking on horses pastured on the hillside above the encampment. As they charged, some soldiers shot into the encampment’s shelters and deliberately burned tipis. Though initially disoriented, within an hour the nimíipuu regrouped and repelled the soldiers. They besieged Gibbon’s men until the evening of August 10, at which point the remaining warriors dispersed to join those who had already fled.

Ambiguities remain regarding how these events unfolded. A major contributor is regular pot hunting that occurred after the battle and into the mid-1900s, resulting in the removal of many artifacts from the site. Sporadic attempts at inventorying battle-related artifacts started in the 1950s, but only in 1991 and 1994 did extensive surveys try to resolve debates over combatants’ behavior and the battle’s order of events.

Three types of recovered buttons—general service brass buttons, trouser fly and suspender buttons, and civilian style buttons—reflect Infantry soldiers’ regulated manner of dress. The presence of two hooks from hook and eye assemblies divulge the soldiers’ less obedient side, since not all the men complied with Colonel Gibbon’s order to cache all unnecessary equipment with the wagon train.

Thirteen brass rings were recovered, seven from the Siege Area and six in the encampment. It is possible that the early attack forced nimíipuu men and women to abandon their jewelry, most of which they would have taken off at night. Infantry soldiers also left behind personal items, including artifacts like pocketknife fragments, harmonica reed fragments, and a five-cent piece.

Five Fogs’ bow and arrows. Courtesy of Washington State University, McWhorter collection.

Most of the recovered artifacts are directly associated with warfare. Five Fogs’ bow, quiver, and several arrows found on the battlefield prove the bow and arrow were not insignificant in the fight, though firearms were the primary weapons. Altogether, a minimum of 147 individual guns comprised of nineteen types of arms, including shotguns and cartridge guns, were identified from on-site cartridge cases and bullets. Further firearm analysis revealed that at Big Hole, the nimíipuu’s firearms exhibited a higher rate of cartridge case failure. The Army blamed this same issue for their defeat at the Battle of the Little Bighorn over a year before—though it does not seem to have stopped the nimíipuu from winning the Battle of the Big Hole.

Reconstructing Their Routes

Archeology can articulate where the historical record falls short. At Big Hole, artifact concentrations and their distributions give shape to the positions and routes of both US Army and nimíipuu fighters. These can then be used to verify—or correct—the different historical accounts of the battle.

US Military axe head found by L.V. McWhorter at Big Hole National Battlefield. Courtesy of Washington State University, McWhorter collection.

The 7^th US Infantry initially followed established military techniques, as matched cases distinguish at least five separate firing lines west of the encampment, show some Army soldiers’ deployment along a given line, and pinpoint defensive rifle pits dug by soldiers. A couple of companies took advantage of the dense willows to disguise their movements, though some men later broke ranks to avoid entanglement in the thickets. Case matches in the southern encampment area are more randomly distributed, which means the initial attack may have been more orderly in the northern area, whereas case groupings suggest the shooting to the east was more haphazard than previously thought. Together, this evidence indicates the Infantry attack may have started closer to the river, not at the edge of the willows.

The encampment area east of the river yielded a minimum number of 58 individual guns, a portion of which show movement from the encampment to the Siege Area as Colonel Gibbon and his force retreated from the nimíipuu warriors’ heavy fire. Although retreat was a recognized military maneuver, the intermingling of cartridge cases indicates the 7^th US Infantry’s organization broke down once they entered the dense willows. At least one skilled nimíipuu marksman was likely responsible for harassing the retreating soldiers, which the bullet patterning around a location known as the Twin Trees supports.

View from the twin trees at Big Hole National Battlefield. NPS photo.

Some soldiers were struck down or injured in hand-to-hand combat along the way. Others were wounded and killed by nimíipuu fire into the Siege Area. Once in the Siege Area, soldiers took cover and mostly stayed in place in riflepits, where their cartridge cases have been recovered.

Gibbon’s soldiers were demoralized, but they were not entirely without aid. Contrary to the assumption that the Infantry’s reserves were all sent into the fray, the trail area north of the Siege Area yielded cartridge cases and loaded cartridges. A small group of men likely moved down the trail, firing at even intervals to support their companions. A six-person crew of enlisted men and two civilians guided a 12-lb. Mountain Howitzer mounted on a mule-drawn carriage, arriving in the late morning of August 9. They fired just two rounds before a group of nimíipuu overtook them, which is confirmed by the nimíipuu cases and bullets found surrounding the soldiers’ ammunition. The nimíipuu then disassembled the Howitzer’s carriage and scattered its parts. To this day, the event serves as the inspiration for the nimíipuu song and dance known as “Duck and Dive.”

Grieving nimíipuu families returned to the encampment in the afternoon to mourn and bury their dead. After subduing the Army soldiers the next day, the shaken nimíipuu continued their trek south into Idaho. For the surviving soldiers, reinforcements arrived quickly on August 11, though they solemnly departed with 29 fatalities, including those of civilian volunteers. The nimíipuu, despite winning the day, lost between 60 to 90 lives, at least two thirds of which were women and children. The actual total count of nimíipuu wounded and killed is still unknown, but there is no doubt of the devastation to both sides.

Reconciling the Past and Present

Just as the activities of nimíipuu fighters and Infantry soldiers often overlapped at the battle site, more recent artifacts are often mixed in with ones from earlier periods. At Big Hole, among these intruders are a fiddleblack style iron spoon that is likely associated with picnicking, a mid-1900s barrette in a floral design, and 20^th-century coins that were undoubtedly dropped by park visitors or staff. This motley collection comes from the recreational and residential post-battle uses of the battlefield. For example, a US Forest Service barn and a museum building sat atop the Siege Area site, in addition to multiple picnic sites in or adjacent to it. A homestead found in the willows area west of the river and a blacksmith shop in part of the southern camp area also likely interfered with artifact patterns at Big Hole.

Bullet holes in a lodge pole pine tree. The bullets have been removed by visitors to the scene. Courtesy of Washington State University, McWhorter collection

The archeological record can also be intentionally disturbed. Uncounted pieces of debris, cartridge cases, and bullets have been the focus of relic collectors for over a century. Tree rings in the Siege Area are even scarred where souvenir hunters carved bullets and bullet holes out of the trunks. Despite these disruptions, archeology at Big Hole National Battlefield refines details contested by eyewitness accounts and adds specificity to the fighters’ positions, the types and quantities of firearms, and the overall sequence of events. Even though these findings do not change the outcome of the battle, they provide new insight into the nimíipuu’s victory while honoring both sides’ losses and the commitment to peace that endures.

Sources

Beal, Merrill D. A History of the Nez Perce Campaign 1877.

Cultural Landscapes Inventory, Big Hole National Battlefield, 2008. National Park Service.

Howitzer Capture Site. National Park Service.

McWhorter, Lucullus V. Yellow Wolf: His Own Story, 1940. Caxton Press.

Scott, Douglas D. A Sharp Little Affair: The Archeology of the Big Hole Battlefield. Reprints in Anthropology, vol. 45, 1994, revised June 2009.

The Flight of 1877. National Park Service.