| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| bhist |
Posted - October 12 2004 : 5:48:37 PM
Hi All:
The highly anticipated new book about the archeological findings of the Sand Creek village by Jerry Greene and Douglas Scott is finally available. You can order it via the Friends of the Little Bighorn website at a savings of 32%. Your purchase helps the Little Bighorn Battlefield.
Go to -- http://www.friendslittlebighorn.com/Archaeology.htm -- to order. The order button will be at the left margin of the page.
|
| 23 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| frankboddn |
Posted - November 02 2004 : 6:07:27 PM
Billy, I pulled out my atlas as I read your directions. Right on. Thanks. Gotta go there.
Frankquote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
Frank, you know what else is near there? The Summit Springs battlefield is outside of Sterling.
OMG, I was able to find my atlas and pull it out from under the stack of stuff without causing anything to fall on top of me. Hmmm, let me see. OK, Beecher is gotten to by getting off I-70 West bound in Burlington, CO and heading north on US 385 until you get to US 36. Take a right (go east) onto US 36 and travel that road for what looks like 4-5 miles and take a left (north) onto what is an unmarked state road on the map. Travel that approximately 12 miles and you will cross the bluff the Indians charged down and then a bridge over the Arikaree and the monument is on the north-western side of the bridge.
OK, Sterling is not where I thought it was. According to the 2004 atlas I have, you can, upon leaving Beecher, continue heading north on that state road until it rejoins US 385. Travel US 385 northward for what looks like 10 miles until you come to US 34 and the town of Wray. Decision point here. Go straight across US 34 and you will end up in Julesburg, 67 miles away. Take a left (west) on US 34 to head towards Summit Springs. Follow US 34 west for 40 miles until you get to Otis, then take a right (northbound) onto Colorado 61 and go north for what seems like about 35 miles. Summit is somewhere around there. I will find the links I had which gave directions from Sterling. It looks like the battle field is almost on the Washington county / Logan county line.
If you decide not to go to Beecher, there looks to be an interesting museum in Cheyenne Wells (south of Burlington on US 385) named the Eastern Colorado Historical Society Museum.
Best of wishes,
Billy
|
| BJMarkland |
Posted - November 01 2004 : 7:27:33 PM
Frank, you know what else is near there? The Summit Springs battlefield is outside of Sterling.
OMG, I was able to find my atlas and pull it out from under the stack of stuff without causing anything to fall on top of me. Hmmm, let me see. OK, Beecher is gotten to by getting off I-70 West bound in Burlington, CO and heading north on US 385 until you get to US 36. Take a right (go east) onto US 36 and travel that road for what looks like 4-5 miles and take a left (north) onto what is an unmarked state road on the map. Travel that approximately 12 miles and you will cross the bluff the Indians charged down and then a bridge over the Arikaree and the monument is on the north-western side of the bridge.
OK, Sterling is not where I thought it was. According to the 2004 atlas I have, you can, upon leaving Beecher, continue heading north on that state road until it rejoins US 385. Travel US 385 northward for what looks like 10 miles until you come to US 34 and the town of Wray. Decision point here. Go straight across US 34 and you will end up in Julesburg, 67 miles away. Take a left (west) on US 34 to head towards Summit Springs. Follow US 34 west for 40 miles until you get to Otis, then take a right (northbound) onto Colorado 61 and go north for what seems like about 35 miles. Summit is somewhere around there. I will find the links I had which gave directions from Sterling. It looks like the battle field is almost on the Washington county / Logan county line.
If you decide not to go to Beecher, there looks to be an interesting museum in Cheyenne Wells (south of Burlington on US 385) named the Eastern Colorado Historical Society Museum.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
| frankboddn |
Posted - November 01 2004 : 6:17:12 PM
Billy, thanks for all the great info. I'd never seen the photos before. they're great.
Frankquote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
Frank, just some quick information regarding Beecher's Island. From what I have been able to ascertain, it is on public land. The source for that is:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~coyuma/data/souvenir/beecher.htm
which states:
quote:
In the year 1899 the Beecher Island Memorial and Park Association was organized. In 1902 a bill passed Congress and was signed by the President granting to the incorporation three quarters of land composing the battlefield. In 1903 the legislature of the state of Colorado granted to the Association a tract of 120 acres, which the State owned adjoining the island. Finally, in 1904, the states of Colorado and Kansas appropriated $5,000 to be used in the erection of a suitable monument. This monument is eighteen feet and one inch high. It was unveiled on September 18, 1905, General Forsyth and four of the old scouts being in attendance. Every year since 1901 reunions have been held, and people come by the hundreds to these gatherings. Full accounts of these meetings are given in the Beecher Island ANNUAL, published every year by the Association, and to be obtained for 10 cents of Robert Lynam, editor, Wray, Colorado. The Association has planted trees on the island, and in a few years the scene of this conflict will be a beautiful park.
Other links of interest are:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/co/costones/yuma/beecher.htm
I will post more as I find it.
Billy
|
| BJMarkland |
Posted - November 01 2004 : 10:02:41 AM
Frank, just some quick information regarding Beecher's Island. From what I have been able to ascertain, it is on public land. The source for that is:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~coyuma/data/souvenir/beecher.htm
which states:
quote:
In the year 1899 the Beecher Island Memorial and Park Association was organized. In 1902 a bill passed Congress and was signed by the President granting to the incorporation three quarters of land composing the battlefield. In 1903 the legislature of the state of Colorado granted to the Association a tract of 120 acres, which the State owned adjoining the island. Finally, in 1904, the states of Colorado and Kansas appropriated $5,000 to be used in the erection of a suitable monument. This monument is eighteen feet and one inch high. It was unveiled on September 18, 1905, General Forsyth and four of the old scouts being in attendance. Every year since 1901 reunions have been held, and people come by the hundreds to these gatherings. Full accounts of these meetings are given in the Beecher Island ANNUAL, published every year by the Association, and to be obtained for 10 cents of Robert Lynam, editor, Wray, Colorado. The Association has planted trees on the island, and in a few years the scene of this conflict will be a beautiful park.
Other links of interest are:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/co/costones/yuma/beecher.htm
I will post more as I find it.
Billy |
| frankboddn |
Posted - November 01 2004 : 09:29:15 AM
Billy, thanks for the info. When I was travelling on I-70 at a rest stop or welcome center, heading west from Kansas, I looked on a map and I seemed to be equadistance from Beecher's Island and Sand Creek. I'd heard Beecher Island no longer existed, since it was basically a sandbar. Do you remember if it's on private land and is permission needed, or can you just drive to it? I'd like to hear about your visit. You can email me or PM me if you like, or just post it here. Thanks.
Frank |
| BJMarkland |
Posted - November 01 2004 : 05:50:17 AM
Frank, I have been to Beecher's Island. I understand from previous reading that the original island was washed away by floods in the late 1800's. The state has a small (at least in '91 it was small) welcome center with some maps, etc. there. It was a good place for a picnic, shady and next to the river.
I will look around and see if I can find the pictures we took back then and also for any old maps to give you the exact directions. I seem to recall we went straight north from the first large town in Colorado (we were coming in from KS) but I will need to look at the map again.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
| frankboddn |
Posted - October 31 2004 : 12:53:27 PM
This is not in response to anything here, but on the subject of Finding Sand Creek, I was wondering if anyone here has ever been to what is thought to be the sites of Sand Creek and the Beecher Island sites? Myself and some friends are planning our next outing and are thinking about visiting them, along with other sites. I know the sites' locations are questioned, and also are on private land. Does anyone know how to go about getting permission to visit them, and if anyone has been there, is it worth the trip? I was within 30 miles of Sand Creek a few weeks ago, and it's way out in the boonies. Any input anyone can give would be appreciated. Thanks. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - October 30 2004 : 8:19:22 PM
Bob, a belated thank you for your continued efforts in supplying this forum with needed and exciting information. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 22 2004 : 7:03:12 PM
Didn't work for Wiggs with his fictional neighborhood children, either, given the posts still on the board and various hard drives under the author's name and IP, or with anyone who can read.
Fascinating stories of Basic Training, though. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 22 2004 : 11:00:07 AM
Best improve your zingers. Wiggs' fictional children could help.
Apparently the Vets don't believe you either? A shock. Such compelling stories vibrant with truth. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 21 2004 : 09:39:14 AM
Sulking, rather, nursing a refreshing beverage and watching reruns of Deadwood. Give it up. |
| Aolain |
Posted - October 20 2004 : 8:04:11 PM
<----Wonders what Warlord's problem is? |
| BJMarkland |
Posted - October 20 2004 : 5:23:24 PM
quote:
Be brave Like larson, state how all you can believe in is a bunch of sanitized century old books written mostly by a lot of fools, all with their own axes to grind.
Unless I failed 1st grade remedial reading last year, Larsen & DC both agree in some respects ("...own axes to grind") with your statement.
While I meant to write you privately, I will say this. While I find DC a pain in the ass at times (and in my opinion sometimes deliberately) I also have found that many times there are some perspectives that I had not considered which he brought out. If I wanted to converse with someone who always agreed with me, I would just talk to myself more often, and I would not be married. As far as genital mutilation, it was a fact of life on the Plains during the Indian Wars. As DC said earlier, it was not restricted to only that period but, and here I am paraphrasing, as long as man has been fighting man.
He and Larsen one? As I told Wiggs several months ago, you only have to read their messages to see the difference. Larsen doesn't go into paroxysms of hyperbole as DC sometimes does. Now perhaps Larsen has a persona where he sheds his Peter Parker skin and becomes Spiderman but I have yet to see it. As far as requesting sources, my opinion, which is worth about 5 cents, is that if you are going to talk about the battle and conditions leading up to it on a message board specifically dedicated to history, you should approach it from a fact-based perspective, UNLESS you specifically state that this is a hypothesis, dream, fantasy, WAG, etc.
Again, as I said earlier, I meant to approach you privately about all this but the salt mines have intruded - not to mention extra inning baseball games - but acerbic/caustic wit is one thing but slander, vulgarities or baseless accusations have no place here. You gave yourself away as playing a part on one message by posting, in proper grammar with well-constructed sentences, your beefs. I have discerned nuggets of good information in some of your less inflammatory postings.
Now, as they used to say in the days of iron men and wooden ships, "For what we are about to receive, we thank you Lord."
Billy
|
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 20 2004 : 3:43:27 PM
"Members" of this board? It's open, and they're reluctant to participate it's their issue. In any case, they'd do better to find a better face man than you to hide behind. If that's true, of course. Always a concern hereabouts.
I have my own site and forum and if people feel the need to yell at me personally they can do so there. I'm not interesting enough to absorb their energy here, and it's to be doubted anyone wants to read it. There are other forums dedicated to alleged Vets and their remarkably similar stories and people interested in reading them. I doubt they come to Custerland to do so. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 19 2004 : 10:19:58 AM
No, Warlord, I don't hate the military since that would require me to hate significant sections of my own family, blood and extended, including flag rank. You see yourself as representative of the military, and you're not. People can think you a fraud and posing blowhard and cast nothing unpleasant on the military. Just you.
In any case, this forum is about Custer and LBH, not you or I, and not a 12 step where the disturbed can finally impress or intimidate someone, anyone, so please take your desperate needs to the Vet halls where you can be believed at face value. Or, beaten to a pulp for being a poseur or for your fetishes, but at least nature serves.
And yes, I make all sorts of errors, never denied it. Cheerfully claim it, if you can read. It is one of the many things that distinguishes me from Larsen, who does not. Perhaps, if he's an attorney, he checks his work. Being a nothing, I don't, having no need. There are so many easy ways to see differences between Larsen and I an actual intelligence "specialist" would note and comment upon. Right off. Odd it is you somehow cannot. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 19 2004 : 12:00:12 AM
That's right on schedule, Warlord: the Great Warrior Friend story. Even if true - and that takes a believing mind, since I've heard similar stories from different people, so apparently it's a template - it doesn't impress and doesn't elevate you or that which you contend. You can find more convincing tales in any VFW hall after the general hilarity dies down. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 18 2004 : 2:09:54 PM
I'm not sure you graduated from high school, Warlord - there's certainly evidence in your posts you did not, starting with punctuation errors - and I disbelieve virtually all your claims which, in any case, aren't relevant, impressive, or supported by your statements, word parse, or writing ability. If you continue in this manner you can expect, eventually, to get called on it.
That the old have difficulties with memory is not bigotry.
I'm not contemptuous of vets. I'm not automatically impressed with them, either. I'm hardly contemptuous of the 7th's soldiers, since that's about 180 degrees different from all I've posted. I am contemptuous of those subject to the Custer Crush, people not children who use emoticons, and who try to wheedle some dignity from the event for themselves.
That your particular fetishes are disturbed will eventually attract the attention you deserve, but not want. And while I have no remote interest in them, my point was that there are an unseemly number of folks attracted to Custer who seem to share them with you. I just don't want to read about it, and would venture most others would agree, but I've been wrong before.
Larsen has indicated he's an attorney. I am not, although I sometimes work with lawyers. I find his claim far easier to believe than Wiggs'implications he was a cop, or yours about forensic/DNA studies, whatever you think that implies. I have made and make no claim or pretense of expertise in any field, and have none. Still, I cheerfully take on all those who claim expertise. I don't win them all, but I do okay. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - October 18 2004 : 09:55:10 AM
Warlord, percentages of the combined sales of these books aren't paying for much of anything. For all you know, and for all it's your business, Bhist might well contribute to the upkeep of this website. If you're going to go on the rampage against him for what probably is an attempt to help authors and publishers break even down the road, you should think about what happens if these books aren't sold. But even the worst case scenario, there is nothing wrong with reviewing books and pushing others.
As for your continued libels against people and locker room ad hominum attacks, knock it off. The fact that you served or not isn't relevant or terribly impressive. There are any number of civvies who've seen more action than you have, there are better informed people than you who've seen none. That can be said about anyone, at any time.
And just as there are pretend soldiers, there are vets who are pretend civvies for any number of reasons which, if you'd shut up and think, would prove embarrassing to you. Further, there are unsuccessful soldiers who exit the forces hardly more advanced then when they entered. And there are those who were drafted against their will, had a careeer of unblemished mediocrity, but have achieved so little since that the only vaguely impressive thing they can talk about in old age is their heroic service. Or, in some cases, alleged service.
You're not qualified to discuss law any more than you are recombinant DNA in Farsi. Detailed knowledge of firearms, or pretend detailed knowledge of firearms, isn't the stigmata of the great war hero or military authority any more than detailed memorization of baseball card statistics and minutiae is the stigmata of the great athlete. It generally indicates the opposite: the poseur.
When you actually elevate yourself to amateur status in the LBH realm, you'd know that ALL the so called oral histories of the Indians are, at best, third hand. None of the Indian vets spoke English, the translators are utterly suspect if known at all, the writers and authors who took this stuff to print often had agendas , and just about everyone was old. Very, very old. For a supposed intelligence specialist, you ought to be able to see that, as the often convoluted English translations of what was supposedly said should raise every red flag you have.
Shape up and fly right. |
| bhist |
Posted - October 17 2004 : 09:02:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Maybe you are the one getting a percentage from sales of this book!
This is the only part of this lamebrain Warlord post that I'll post to, and it’s not directed at Warlord, but to all the other good people that post on this forum. Any referral fees that come from the sale of books on the Friends of the Little Bighorn website go straight to our checking account in Hardin, MT. Our treasurer, Chip Watts, has the report from Amazon that shows all sales of books. I give my time, gratis, to the Custer Battlefield and the Friends 100%. I've been volunteering for over 20 years.
The other non-profit organization I support (again as a volunteer) is the Friends of the Bear Paw, Big Hole & Canyon Creek Battlefields. Again, if anyone orders books from that website the money goes directly into the Nez Perce account in Hamilton, MT.
The only money I keep for sales of books is on vonsworks.com, but no one orders books from there. You know why, I never promote it on this website even though I could receive funds from it.
I will not respond to this evil person, Warlord. He's disgusting and I imagine he's not done one good thing for any cause in his life. I just wish the SOB would crawl back into the vile hole he came from -- spider hole that is.
|
| bhist |
Posted - October 16 2004 : 7:41:16 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
bhist: Yeah, you are bad about wanting to make people order books! Especially a guy like you who is busy running around other threads trying to discredit the books of other people like the Arikara indian scouts narratives with Custer and other's. Now you want to push this book! What a hypocrite you are! Don't try to tell me about oral history versus archeology. Fair is fair! However, it is interpretated by guys like you it's still all horsecrap!
Warlord has given me the best laugh of the day. From what I can understand by his 3rd grade writing, there is nothing wrong with me saying I don't like a book. That is what a book reviewer must do -- you either like the book or not. At least I'm honest about it which is a word that doesn't fit in your vocabulary Warlord.
Do others on this board think I'm a hypocrit? I’m confidant, Warlord, that your pea brain is the only thing that thinks such an idea about me. |
| bhist |
Posted - October 15 2004 : 7:52:29 PM
I know, I'm bad about making people order books!! hehe -- thanks for your order!
My review of the book can be read at -- http://www.friendslittlebighorn.com/Finding-Sand-Creek.htm |
| BJMarkland |
Posted - October 15 2004 : 10:47:34 AM
I did already!!!!
LOL, DC will collapse with apoplexy or even a conniption fit with my multiple 'exclamation points' above.
Billy
P.S. Bob, you are definitely bad for my continued well-being as I ended up ordering three books: Greene's Wa****a and Sand Creek books as well as Hedren's We Trailed the Sioux. |
| bhist |
Posted - October 15 2004 : 02:47:08 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
bhist: I am so excited about this I am all atwitter! I am sure Dark Cloud/Larsen/Jake et al, are too!
If you're so excited about, then order the book! |
|
|
