| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - February 22 2005 : 12:41:56 PM
I decided to start this thread to discuss a lot of the stuff that seems to get lost in other discussions--not only the "personal" stuff of GAC, LBC, TWC--but also any other member of the Seventh ... from grunt to adjutant.
For example: When I first began studying Custer, one of the craziest things I ever heard was this strange rumour that somehow, Custer learned that Meotzi/Monaseetah was in the Indian village by the Little Big Horn, and as a result, he led his battalion to certain death, rather than to kill the mother of his "child."
Yikes! Where do people come up with this stuff? Talk about a made for tv movie!
Regards, |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - July 01 2005 : 10:15:57 PM
Hey everybody, Lorenzo has his own web site http://www.regional-tv.com/a-hp/lorenzo/index.htm He is a great singer and his site presents an opportunity to hear him. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 25 2005 : 2:41:57 PM
The line is Amundson's, I believe. Not mine, in any case.Ah what a pity I thought for a moment it was original |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 25 2005 : 2:16:29 PM
The line is Amundson's, I believe. Not mine, in any case. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 25 2005 : 1:58:06 PM
Incompetants have massacres.Competants have adventures.Read something of Shackleton. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 25 2005 : 11:53:47 AM
This was chatted about before. Along with Amelia Earhart, Scott, Custer, and others a compilation of the Romance of The Incompetent, based on the assumption that people who have 'adventures' are by definition incompetent. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 25 2005 : 07:18:36 AM
He was approaching middle age
Held a senior commission in the armed services
He was fearless.
A strict disaplinarian who inspired in his men equal measures of loyalty and hate.
He had no faith in his 2i/c
He underestimated his opponents.
His command was not trained for the mission.
It was a last chance for glory
He was tactically incompetant and split his command resulting in disaster for his group and near disaster for his support.
He put his ambition before that of his men's lives.
The manner of his departure from this life overshadowed anything he achieved in it.
And his wife stood guardian to the fallen hero's honor while the real heros were forgotten.
I speak of Scott.Sound familiar.
Scott and Custer are interchangeable both interlopers in the Pantheon of heros
Leading Seaman Tom Crean,Col Frederick Benteen.
Front and center. The stage is now yours.
Take a bow.
|
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 3:21:32 PM
Oates said awful things to his mother about Scott but he said awful things about a lot of people to his mother, or so Huntsford (?) said. In the event, did Wilson or Bowers mention Oates' death in their diaries? I didn't know that. Thought only Scott had.
Markland said 'era' and 1912 ain't in it. What are called Victorian values aren't always. The upper classes protected each other and their social station by inflating things. Nobles weren't barking mad, they were 'eccentric.' Nobility didn't do Minerver Cheevy's, but heroically sacrificed themselves for something or other. That people committed suicide was sometimes puffed up to heroic sacrifice because of the condemnation. You see remanants of this in Custerland, where they now make the claim Custer sacrificed his five companies to save the regiment.... |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 2:58:21 PM
Victorian era ended 1901. Edwardian Era ended 1911. This, 1912, was Georgian. It may or may not showcase exclusively Victorian values, but not era.
I think it was an age we were discussing not a reign.Anyway Victoria's 64 years would take more than Edwards 10 to erode.
having only Scott's heroic description
I know how picky you are about historical accuracy so just to point out that you are wrong.There was also Wilson's Diary.And of course Oate's papers where he makes his feelings about Scott plain.He thought he was an asshole. |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 2:27:46 PM
Victorian era ended 1901. Edwardian Era ended 1911. This, 1912, was Georgian. It may or may not showcase exclusively Victorian values, but not era.
It's more likely just puffing the memory of someone who may have simply died and been left(what else could they do, and that's what they did with Evans previous). We don't know, having only Scott's heroic description. There are days missing in Scott's diary, and he describes Oates' death on his 32nd birthday, which may or may not be true. It's a good story, but true or not doesn't actually matter. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 2:02:48 PM
But Oates died two monarchs away from Victoria,
Social standards and preferences don't end with the death of a monarch.In fact death prolongs, enhances and adds certain nostalgia to the age.
and heroic sacrifice was viewed differenct from suicide in despair, and that's probably why Oates was honored by that story of Scott's.
Ya think Oates wasn't in despair?
|
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 10:09:02 AM
But Oates died two monarchs away from Victoria, and heroic sacrifice was viewed differenct from suicide in despair, and that's probably why Oates was honored by that story of Scott's. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 24 2005 : 04:45:18 AM
Suicide was, and is, not "accepted" and during the Victorian era, equated to a lack of moral strength.
Not at all old chap it was the honorable thing to do.Stiff upper lip and all that.Staggering out into the blizzard saying "I may be some time chaps" |
| BJMarkland |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 5:52:50 PM
Thank you for the information MRW!!
quote:
But it is funny how GAC does relate his cause of death on the official forms. Perhaps a bit of CYA on his part?
No, I suspect that the "cover" part was in deference to Cooper's family. Suicide was, and is, not "accepted" and during the Victorian era, equated to a lack of moral strength. For all we know, they did not know of his alcoholism and that would have been a double-whammy.
Again, my thanks.
Billy |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 4:13:49 PM
Billy--
Re: Wycliffe Cooper's suicide
From Merington, pgs. 204-05, 'Custer's notes, June 8, 1867, at Medicine Lodge Creek, thirty miles from the Platte River, Kansas:
"The officers of the 7th--the entire camp, is wrapped in deep gloom by the suicide of Col. Cooper while in a fit of delirium tremens ... I had just risen from the dinner table where I had been discusssing with Tom Col. Cooper's actions, when Col. Myers came rushing in .... Calling Dr. Coates we hastened to Col. Cooper's tent, and found him lying on knees and face, right hand grasping revolver, ground near him covered with blood ... body still warm, pulse beating, the act having been committeed but 3 or 4 minutes before ...
"Actuated by what I deemed my duty to the living, I warned the officers of the reg't of the fate of him who lay dead. All felt deeply, particularly his intimates who shared his habits. May the example not be lost on them ...
"Another of rum's victims ..."
But it is funny how GAC does relate his cause of death on the official forms. Perhaps a bit of CYA on his part?
Regards, |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 1:55:14 PM
Participants of the battle, still with us. And no. I'm utterly unique. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 12:59:16 PM
This is an open request to the entire forum, help me to understand how a democracy who maintains a military force in a world of petty tyrants, Iran, Bin Laden, Suicide bombers, 9-11 terrorist attacks, North Korea, and Al-Queda, is considered "odd" for doing so?
Well the breathtaking arrogance of those last two posts.It may come as a shock to you Joe but many in the world today would place the US at the top of that list of petty tyrants.It's for another board but it might be no harm to just check out who overthrew democracy in Iran and supported a petty tyrant.
DC
The interest, as I've said, comes primarily from those who see a metaphor to themselves or something close to themselves within it. Most of the participants are personable and recognizeable types still with us, from Custer to Korn, and transference is easy.
And what recognizeable type are you DC? Sitting Bull.
|
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 23 2005 : 10:06:05 AM
Much better, Wiggs. By paragraph.
1. The issue isn't a military force, it's a professional military force. Militaries are socialistic systems requiring adherence to authorities in conflict with democratic ideals, for a lack of a better term. Military justice isn't anything like the civilian justice it defends, for example. It's the nature of the beast.
2. "Human" adds nothing to "rationality", Wiggs. There is hardly anything to be called a mystery. What are called mysteries are of the nature of what individuals or small groups did in very short amounts of time that didn't matter very much. Did Adam eat the apple with his left or right hand, type of thing. We actually know more about this battle than a lot of modern ones. The interest, as I've said, comes primarily from those who see a metaphor to themselves or something close to themselves within it. Most of the participants are personable and recognizeable types still with us, from Custer to Korn, and transference is easy.
3. Learn the difference between "effect" and "affect", although 'effect' is now used as a verb and may have become accepted as military derivitive. "...the final solution of America's recourse" means what? There was no final solution to the Native Americans, in upper or lower case.
4. Gobbledegook. It attracts people for different reasons, but most are males seeking salve or, worse, posing as one who deserves it. Just like computer geeks are authorities on digital trivia but rarely programmers, and baseball card statistic nuts aren't themselves remotely athletic, Custer Lit and Studies provides an outlet for those who want to pose as historian or authority on something, anything. They get very angry when their shallow depths are plumbed by shoelace.
5. Hint: using sequencial modifiers in threes, generally redundancies, makes you look stupid, Wiggs. You do it a lot. Further, I hardly think Custerphiles are Idiot Savants, but substantial numbers are idiots. Custer shouldn't be burdened with them, and I don't, and some resent that because they want to be seen as his props and rewarded for it. I don't think Custer was remotely an idiot. He went to the well once too often. Big deal, in the scheme of things. He was an overrated but still terrific soldier. Custerphiles erupt when his failures or inconsistencies are presented, but it's about them, not him.
6. Inaccurate. I don't think Custer did anything past MTC because he was incapacitated. I cannot believe he would take his men to LSH and pass up a crossing. I don't understand the sequential orders to Benteen, given that anyone could compose clear orders to do what was wanted. But before that, I don't understand the refusal to use his scouts to find and tabulate the village, check the southern approach, and to keep the regiment together till he had a remote clue as to village size and the lay of the land. I don't get that.
I do have issues with those who fail to realize that Custer cannot be patted into shape to serve their own emotional needs and still be an accurate representation. Custer can never be sick, tired, confused, momentarily stupid, or concerned with anything except the attack, unless "thoughts of Libbie", and whatever failures he had were done for the best reasons. That's not a human being. And not true.
7. For reasons I've previously stated, among which was not letting the LBH become exclusive to the Custerphile. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - March 22 2005 : 9:43:19 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
In many cases, not all, not reading the material being discussed would automatically discredit any conclusions drawn, although people who haven't actually read Gray pretend to have all the time on this board, obvious to those who have.
But Custer Lit operates outside of this convention. There is very little designed to solve anything, because there is little if anything left to "solve" within human ability or even CSI verification. In fact, the last thing desired is a solved "mystery" contrived in the first place. It serves as a procedure for people to dress up other issues - Vietnam, Hippies, Communism, Patriotism, European annoyance that the US looks down on them these days, the odd but necessary presence of a professional military in a democracy, excuses for their own failures and unimportance - under the guise of "my studies" devoted to solutions to questions unimportant to anyone.
This is an open request to the entire forum, help me to understand how a democracy who maintains a military force in a world of petty tyrants, Iran, Bin Laden, Suicide bombers, 9-11 terrorist attacks, North Korea, and Al-Queda, is considered "odd" for doing so? Is it not beneficial for all of us that this great Country maintain a military presence under such circumstances? In fact, wouldn't it be "odd" to do otherwise?
Further, to state that there is little of this battle "to be solved" defies human rationality. How then do you explain the enormous interest in an event that,in actuality,is comparatively inconsequential when compared to other, world shaking confrontations such as the Battle of Hastings that determined world altering events that effect us to this very day.
This battle did nothing to effect the final solution of America's recourse. Although it was the ultimate in the final solution of the Native Americans.
The Battle of the Little Big Horn exemplifies Americana. It is who we are, for the better or the worst, the good and the bad. It encompasses the pioneer syndrome that fascinates so many of us. That is why, despite your obvious distaste for it, it continues to intrigue us beyond the norm.
What I don't understand is your consistent, unfaltering, inexplicable, and domineering dogma that anyone who would dare believe that Custer was anything but an idiot is a buffoon, a believer in fairy tales, an "Idiot Savant" who would better serve as a greeter at the local Wal-Mart.
When challenged with any accusation of being a Custer-phile you always respond with, "I never called him an idiot," which is true; you never have. However, you've spent an exorbitant amount of time describing Custer's every move during this battle as idiotic or puzzling. Every request he made to his subordinates was senseless or impossible to comply with. May I offer an honest and personal opinion? You appear to have issues with every member of this forum who may feel that Custer was anything but a complete incompetent.
I will agree with you on one important issue, when you say that the least, desired wish concerning this battle is a "solved Mystery" I am in complete accord. I thrive upon the enigma of the Battle of the Little Big Horn, that is why I am here. Those who disagree with my perspectives only serve to encourage me to delve further into the facts of this battle. I enjoy honest disagreement. Why are you here? |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - March 22 2005 : 5:41:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
And what, pray tell, is on the top of your heap above Gray?
In progress: Michno's 'Mystery of E Troop,' Leckie's 'Elizabeth Bacon Custer,' Jerome Greene's 'Wash-ita,' and Hoig's 'The Battle of the Wash-ita.' Since you seem so worried, DC, allow me to convey this goal--I'll get to Gray 'afore this year's assault on LBH.
Then of course, there are all them manuscripts I read each day and all that useless 19th Century Russian history stuff ...
So much to read--so little time ...
|
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 22 2005 : 5:25:02 PM
And what, pray tell, is on the top of your heap above Gray?
A |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - March 22 2005 : 3:48:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Lavender Boy: The above posting is one of your most inane and inaccurate to date. It is amazing you think you are providing anyone on this board with anything in the way of meaningful information! It is only rambling, about how intelligent you suppose yourself to be. By paragraph.
1. It is obvious even I have read more about Custer than you, at this point. Many here are real scholars of the subject compared to you at a grade school level.
2. Most all here have read Gray. I think many of us are just not that impressed.
3. America is not a democracy as you should know!
I really wish you would go back to school!
Warlord--
I'll come right out with it, I'll admit! I have not yet read Gray. However, DC's incessant ramblings about the guy's theories caused me to buy the volume about Mitch Bouyer and the 1876 Summer Campaign. It's in the pile of other Custer stuff I haven't yet gotten to--it just hasn't made it to the top of the heap.
America's not a democracy? Now you're talking!
hoka hey ... ? |
| Dark Cloud |
Posted - March 22 2005 : 12:54:55 PM
I haven't bothered to read the Classics Illustrated takes on the battle, nor 99% of the disturbed novels that deal with it, nor hardly anything in Wild West Magazine anymore since the Nightengale horror. I have yet to see a tv program that increased my knowledge or, for that matter, wasn't utterly bogus on its face, that covered the Little Bighorn.
In many cases, not all, not reading the material being discussed would automatically discredit any conclusions drawn, although people who haven't actually read Gray pretend to have all the time on this board, obvious to those who have.
But Custer Lit operates outside of this convention. There is very little designed to solve anything, because there is little if anything left to "solve" within human ability or even CSI verification. In fact, the last thing desired is a solved "mystery" contrived in the first place. It serves as a procedure for people to dress up other issues - Vietnam, Hippies, Communism, Patriotism, European annoyance that the US looks down on them these days, the odd but necessary presence of a professional military in a democracy, excuses for their own failures and unimportance - under the guise of "my studies" devoted to solutions to questions unimportant to anyone. |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - March 21 2005 : 9:20:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
"...and feeling betrayed that childhood understandings aren't true and could never have been ..."
Are you making an insinuation against the veracity of the Easter Bunny?
How low will you go in your efforts to destroy all that is good!!! Pretty soon you will come out with that old wife's tale about there being no Santa Claus.
Billy
Billy--
Well, personally, I've always believed in the Cubbie curse and the Tooth Fairy. Getting back to the point of the discussion that was hijacked by Dark Cloud's opines about something he has not bothered to read, I found another source for Wycliffe Cooper's "suicide." Unfortunately it is from ANOTHER high school teacher, which should make us all run for cover, right??? Wert: pg. 258,
"The only tragedy on the march had been Major Wycliffe Cooper's suicide, which Custer attributed to alcohol."
Wert also lists Frost as a source, but more interestingly, gives Merington one as well, pg. 204--I have the book around here, and as it as close to a primary source as we can get with GAC/LBC, I'll dig through the piles in my hovel for it ... he also cites Hutton.
Lemme check on Merington ...
hoka hey! |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - March 21 2005 : 7:02:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by wILD I
I would view it first before condemning it as unmitigated B.S.
If the source is a bull is it necessary to check out the S***?
Wild, I surrender! One can not argue with your logical deduction! An hypothesis reduced to its lowest denomination. |
| wILD I |
Posted - March 21 2005 : 06:08:31 AM
And just for balance.
Now, if any pedestrian crypto-military wannabefinds himself with opportunity to write a pamphlet using his attraction to the Custer fiasco
If someone aspires to being a"crypto"anything the last thing they are going to do is write pamphlets.
|
|
|
