the main difference is that the us army had payroll records and the indians didn't the army had estimates of indian casualties some based upon observed burials and others not if there is an event in the history of the united states where the foibles weaknesses and follies of historical research are revealed better than the little bighorn it is a matter of dispute historical research is a great pleasure and requires a degree of rigor we will never get it right but we can try i recommend all read carol reardon's 'pickett's charge in history memory ' chapple hill university of north carolina press isbn frustration will likely remain the lot of the purists as a disgruntled veteran noted in pickett's charge has been so grossly exaggerated and misrepresented as to give some color to the oft repeated axiom that 'history is only an agreed upon lie this the second to last sentence in her book cited pickett's charge national tribuen january dig on ladies and gentlemen we might refine the agreed upon lie