ninety were wounded, which is probably near the truth. The Indian force
engaged in this action has been estimated by different writers, at from
eight hundred to fifteen hundred men. It is probable that the number
did not exceed eight hundred. They were led on by some bold and warlike
chiefs, among them Cornstalk, Logan, Elenipsico, Red Eagle, and
Packishenoah, the last of whom was killed. Cornstalk, the chief in
command, was conspicuous for his bravery, and animated his followers in
tones which rose above the clash of arms; and when a retreat became
necessary, conducted it so successfully and with so much delay, as to
give his men an opportunity of bearing off all their wounded and many
of the killed, whose bodies were thrown into the river. The loss of the
Indians was never ascertained. One of the historians already quoted,
speaks of it as "comparatively trifling." The character of our troops,
many of whom were experienced woods-men, familiar with Indian fighting,
the long continuance of the action--from the rising to the going down
of the sun--the equality in numbers and position of the contending
parties, the known usage of the Indians in hiding their dead and
carrying off the wounded, the number of killed found on the battle
ground the following day, and the severe loss of the Virginians, all
forbid the idea that the loss of the enemy could have been trifling.
The Ohio and Kanawha rivers afforded them opportunities for concealing
their dead, while the plan of retreat,--alternately giving ground and
renewing the attack,--was no doubt adopted for the purpose of gaining
time to remove the wounded across the Ohio. It is fair to assume that
the loss of the Indians was not far short of that sustained by the
whites.

All circumstances considered, this battle may be ranked among the most
memorable, and well contested, that has been fought on this continent.
The leaders, on either side, were experienced and able, the soldiers