| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - January 07 2004 : 12:21:52 AM
|
| I have my own projects, thanks, and high school physics isn't going to solve anything. You're not addressing my arguments except with insinuations of dark intent on Gray's part and stupidity on mine, so I'll wait and see what you emerge with. Thus far, I don't see where you have anything approaching an issue yet, which is disappointing because at one time I thought you might. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
Wrangler
Lieutenant
Status: offline |
Posted - January 07 2004 : 12:26:31 AM
|
| Well just let me know when you are done with your projects and I will continue. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 07 2004 : 11:42:57 AM
|
My projects are long term, one involves LBH and its cult. I'm not doing heavy lifting for the Gray Defamation Project while geared with four trusses for my own. You've implied a lot, but aren't delivering.
I've offered possible counters to your dependence upon official yet obviously hypothetical gaits, rates, and speeds - based on the Cavalry bible - with actual evidence from the West by one of the units involved on similar ground. I've inquired of you and others if logs of actual cavalry expeditions show walk rates dissimilar to Gray's after weeks on the trail with insufficient grain, ideally, but anything real world to judge Gray against. That would be valid info.
The cavalry manual is likely no more reliable for the real world of 1876 Montana than car manuals traditionally are for real world gas consumption and maintenance cost. They don't lie; those actually were the results on the test ground. But they aren't valid in city driving or mountain driving, maybe.
If your only basis for contesting Gray are these compendiums of official notions and wishes, they run aground against such offered evidence. Unless you can disprove it, of course. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Wrangler
Lieutenant
Status: offline |
Posted - January 07 2004 : 12:39:12 PM
|
| At this point, you will get zip from me. Guess you'll just have to live with it in the long term. Adios. |
|
|
|
matthew_ridgeway
Private
Status: offline |
Posted - January 07 2004 : 4:54:48 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wrangler
At this point, you will get zip from me. Guess you'll just have to live with it in the long term. Adios.
Unfortunate. While new to this forum, I have been following this particular thread with some interest. I would like to see where your research will take you with your time & space assessment. I’m not certain why there is this resistance on the part of “Dark Cloud” to looking at Grey’s approach under a different light. Sounds quite fascinating actually. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2004 : 10:51:21 AM
|
Ridgeway, your summation is silly. I was the only one giving Wrangler encouragement, at least on this board, to subject Gray to revision. I have no 'resistence' whatever to it. In any case, with mathematical certainty, Gray will be revised sometime for it is highly unlikely that the first such effort got it totally right. Why it matters is another story.
My problem is that after short tomes, Wrangler's thesis comes down to: Gray uses an incorrect and self serving set of speeds/rates/gaits that are slower and different than the official ones in the cavalry manual. In short, if you use the quicker movements implied by the utilization of official gaits, than Benteen and Reno have much more free time to account for, or at least that is the agenda.
My objection is based on experience with official anythings: they're true in the tub but not in the sea. Gray offers up a week or whatever of DeWolfe's record of Reno's scout with horses and his rate is incrementally over 3mph, not the 4 in (some of) the manuals. I'm not hearing that a plodding walk of horses off their feed after weeks on the trail on a hot, hot day hit the high end of their gaits, which - given the trail - is fine for the rider.
But I'm not convinced Gray's speeds are wrong anyway, although I'd certainly entertain that he meant rates by Wrangler's selected definition. And given the popularity of his two Custer books - and that popularity among many with much horse experience - it is odd that nobody made a ruckus in the last 14 years about garbage in, garbage out. He lived here in Colorado, at least in the end, and I'm under the impression he was a rider himself and certainly dealt with those who were. Clearly, my intuition and memory hardly qualify as evidence, but he's on record and it is courtesy if no more for those who contest his work to prove his numbers wrong. A cavalry manual hardly does that. Your car mileage is what it is, not what the manual says it is, or should be.
Gray DOES seemingly arbitrarily pull 3mph out of his butt for the pack train, but only because there seems to be no official interest in mule gaits, at least in print. If horses - with longer strides, generally, and lighter loads - are puttering around 3, what suggests mules are burning the rubber? In fact Crook - in order to allow pack trains to keep up with horses which they apparently never could otherwise - spent a lot of time on this issue of how/what to pack on a mule. It is clear that Custer, Benteen, Keogh and the rest of the officers (and Army) were clueless how to do this, and everyone's references to the pack train glow with the warm, touching sentiment with which people recall mercury cures, gut wounds, facial disfigurement.
There are numerous references to the Custer Train that inspire a calliope music soundtrack. Lots of halts to pick up, re tie, re group.
The overpowering unimportance of Boston Custer seeing/not seeing Reno in the woods/heading into the woods, given we don't know what his rate was - Gray assumes a trot, reasonable but still a guess - is thus far the only slam against Gray's set of possibles, and this could be accounted for by simple bursts of speed, not implausible.
The additional yardage to be made up by the train over the head of the column simply isn't enough to change anything.
Wrangler challenges Gray's terminology, but he was caught in misuse himself. He implies momentous deductions, but I don't see them arriving. Do you? If so, lay them out. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
matthew_ridgeway
Private
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2004 : 2:56:59 PM
|
“Dark Cloud Said: In 1990, we still had Dr. DeWolf's timed marches of the Reno Scout from June 10 to 19, 1876. He didn't have the huge train, but he did have a Gatling, which had the odometer. There is no way to prove that the numerouos annoyances provided by the gatling equalled the horrors of Arnold & Friends (I've actually grown quite fond of Arnold...is he well?)but I will suggest it.
Two Hundred Forty and one half miles in seventy nine and one half hours of effort over very similar ground and the cavalry's averaged (rate) was 3.03 mph. Is this more valid than the manual, composed by military giant St. George Cooke at who knows what Polo Club while sipping some revolting drink or other? I'd say yes. Gray says this is standard walking speed, "especially on 1/6 forage." I cannot speak for him, but what he probably means is 'real life' speed rate of tired, hot, underfed, and thirsty horses.”
The velocity you have quoted of of 3.03 mph; This is the average rate -- speed -- velocity – dx/dt that was determined from hauling a gatling gun 240.5 miles?
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2004 : 5:56:40 PM
|
Gray, page 175. In 79.5 hours of trail time. That's the miles divided by time. If you multiply the mph by the time you get a slightly different number for miles; that's the nature of the beast. If not the gun, a series of gimp horses might have slowed things down. That's real world. It's always something.
Hauling one Gatling gun, as I say, cannot be guaranteed to equal the drag of a pack train, but probably pretty close. That pack trains are a drag is never denied, and Crook devoted much time to speeding them up. That would mean they walk slower than horses, walk being the most commonly employed gait. So whether horses of the 7th did 3 or 4, Grays 3mph for the train is not threatened, believable over that ground. When mules speed, packs drop more readily. Easy does it. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
matthew_ridgeway
Private
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2004 : 6:57:50 PM
|
| So your answer is “yes”? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2004 : 7:30:34 PM
|
This is the rate between breaks of the Reno scout as recorded by Dr. DeWolfe. Whether the halts were to accomodate the gatling catching up or reflect the speed with, I do not know. For my contention, either way has value.
So strictly speaking, my answer is "no" because I don't know if the gun was allowed to fall behind and arrive after the cavalry had been stopped for a while as packs were. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
matthew_ridgeway
Private
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2004 : 10:06:26 PM
|
If it reflects mounted troop speed when encumbered by the Gatling gun then one would assume that the speed reflects the average velocity of the slowest element of the column. The slowest element would presumably be the Gatling gun. Or are you saying that 3.03mph is the average velocity of a large mounted formation regardless of whether or not it is encumbered by a gatling gun? If this average speed doesn’t represent either mounted troop speed and doesn’t reflect the Gatling gun speed, what exactly does the 3.03-mph represent?
Moreover, if I am reading this thread correctly, the essence of this discussion entails time and distance determination and an assessment of Gray's work in this regard. It would seem that velocity is crucial to this discussion. Since you are disinclined to accept mounted formation speeds presented by Cooke in: “CAVALRY TACTICS: OR REGULATIONS FOR THE INSTRUCTION, FORMATIONS, AND MOVEMENTS OF THE CAVALRY OF THE ARMY AND VOLUNTEERS OF THE UNITED STATES”, what speeds would you feel are most appropriate and why? Citing your references – beyond a reiteration of Gray -- is always nice.
|
|
|
|
El Crab
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2004 : 01:15:59 AM
|
What would be the standard walking pace of a mule laden with how much the most burdened mule would carry? I doubt mules have changed much in 128 years. And I'd imagine a mule walking is about the same as a horse walking, unless the burden is that much larger. But a horse was burdened with a rider and accoutrement. A horse is much faster, but at a walk? I'd guess the issue with pack mules was more due to their being a bit more "independent" than your average US Cavalry horse.
And its very possible, since Kellogg rode a mule and was present with Custer's lead elements most of the time, that the pace was slightly slower than normal.
What was the crux of this thread? Gray offered a timeline, its not gospel, its not the undeniable truth. But it apparently is a plausible and well-researched time motion. Isn't that what we all are doing anyway? Taking all the info and trying to figure out how it all weaves together? We probably will never get it right, and even if we did, how would we know? But Gray offered a possibility. It would be irresponsible to just end there, though. His work should be elaborated upon.
BTW, Wrangler, I dig your style, man. I skimmed over most of this thread as it built up, mostly because my brain just wasn't down with soaking it all in at the time. Its hard to make sense of it all if you don't delve into it. I'll end up re-reading it all very soon, but tonight I wasn't just overwhelmed by it all. So there's a start. I'd love to talk to ya through email or IMs, interested? |
I came. I saw. I took 300 pictures. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2004 : 09:36:33 AM
|
Well, Gray's numbers are based on times and locations written by 7th Officers, and they could be checked against maps. Let's see.
On the 24th, the 7th w/o the Gatling averaged under 3 mph between halts. This doesn't include the train either, because they had to stop for the train. So here is relevant evidence of the famed fast moving 7th, hot on the trail. 2.77 mph. Page 205. Mayber a Gatling would have speeded things up, or maybe Reno got faster time out of the 7th than Custer.
What was the slowest element THIS time? Exhausted horses, probably, exacerbated by the crappy water of the Rosebud. It's always something.
Now, Wrangler has to prove this wrong to cast doubt on the speed rates for the day of the battle, because although the times for the 25th are faster, they aren't fast enough to release Benteen and Reno to additional critique. Is it prudent to look at Godfrey's times and say they cannot be correct, because the cavalry manual gives a faster pace?
They started at that point, ended at this point, and here are the times. Nobody can change beginning and ending times, although they can be interpreted to a degree, or change the distances, but you could take out or add halts to affect the 2.77 mph average rate for the 7th that day. It would have to be significant change to do this, and the only likely candidate of halt removal would tamp down the one segment with notably faster speed. The day rate wouldn't change.
If this highly relevant information to cavalry march speed is bogus, than surely there is evidence from other units to back this up. There were numerous expeditions with officers assigned to record the information. Surely there are reports from Crook or Miles after this battle that correspond to weeks in the field, weather, and heat that would either support or blow Gray out of the water.
Because what Wrangler is saying is that the 7th had to be prancing along at 4 knots after all this time, without all that needed grain, with that alkaline water, because the manual says so. Ridgeway asks what speeds I'm happy with? Plausible and relevant ones, for whatever horses Crook used to obtain his paces from weren't timed after weeks on the march. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2004 : 11:08:42 AM
|
Sorry, corrections for today:
the 205 chart is for three days, not just the 24th
St. Geroge Cook, not Crook
horse are mammalian quadrapeds, not scaly winged creatures
Custer did not start each day dressed in drag admonishing everyone to get ready for a tea party at the rabbit hole |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
El Crab
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2004 : 11:25:54 PM
|
But you're both right, to a degree, at least I think you are.
Average rate of speed is not the same as realtime rate of speed. To explain, if a horse is capable of marching for one hour at 5 MPH with a rider and accoutrement, it doesn't change much when compared to overall daily average of speed. An average of 2.77 for an entire day of marching does not prove that Custer's troops could not move faster for a short duration. I would also contend battalions unencumbered by mules or larger numbers marching to catch a village or engage a fleet enemy would move faster than the average march speed of previous days. Horses that were lagging weren't slowing the battalions down, at least not in Custer's case. Soldiers that could not keep up due to flagging mounts seemed to be left behind, such is the case of Pvt. Thompson and other stragglers, and its why Sgt. Kanipe felt he was sent back to the pack train instead of Sgt. Caddle (I believe), whom was struggling to the rear with a played out horse.
The average also would not be accurate since less halts most likely took place that day. |
I came. I saw. I took 300 pictures. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 12:56:54 AM
|
Well, that's not quite the gist here. Gray did list what he claimed were standard speeds for specific gaits, crediting no source, and they ARE different than the manual of the cavalry, significantly slower. Wrangler implies that Gray did this for a reason, which was to - not protect, since he's savage with them otherwise - grant clemency to Benteen and Reno for having lots of time wherein they did nada.
I don't think the cavalry manual suggested speeds is relevant, and in fact what times we do know for the march indicate Gray (who only presented other's clockings with few exceptions) was closer to the dollar than St. George Cook, at least in the West under actual conditions, as opposed to sea level Virginia around the track with the War Admiral of the cavalry.
The big irritant is Gray saying - with no backup - that the pack train can be the criteria for much else the day of the battle because of its just-so speed of 3 mph. No evidence.
This doesn't mean Gray made it up, but his times aren't referenced, so it's either personal experience of Gray's or information provided by an unknown source. Or he pulled it out of his butt. There are really odd sections towards the end of his book, where I suppose his health got to him, and this could have slipped by.
When I look at what we do know, however, you don't see the train making that speed, but with downhill on the 25th towards water, you could imagine it. Plus all the interconnections, although 'seeing' the train at variable distance isn't a lock on anything. So I thought there would be some evidence to blow this away that would prove important. But all I've seen is the Boston episode which, given that others on Weir Point probably saw Reno's state, couldn't have been a factor anyway in Custer's actions.
I'm seeing an overly convoluted series of mathematical formulations forthcoming to try and cover the fact that the sole cause of this activity is the manual. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
El Crab
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 03:54:06 AM
|
Well, the manual itself is pretty irrelevant, unless these particular mounts were Ford Mustangs with working speedometers...
I've actually never read Gray's book with the time-motion. I really, really need to though. Chances are, like I said, the speeds were not normal marching speeds but what could be expected of a regiment moving as fast as possible to strike a potentially fleet village and fighting force. But that, of course, doesn't really help. |
I came. I saw. I took 300 pictures. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 11:52:19 AM
|
You're in extensive oompany, but you need to read it asap. Like the Bible, LOTR, and the Constitution, lots of folks look at it, reference it, talk knowingly about it and have never read it, painfully apparent to those who have. Governor Dean locating the Book of Job in the New Testament being a recent example of this sort of stuff. George Bush saying he was reading some heavy tome during the last election and couldn't answer a single question about it is another.
It is probably the one essential book on this battle, even if eventually proven utterly mashugga, because of the time lines and graphs and nailing things down. Until Gray, it was possible to say things like "of course, we really don't know what clock time was" and so grant lots of leeway to fanatics with agendas.
Gray, head of medical research teams at Northwestern, was a brilliant old man when this book came out near his death in 1991, and he writes like it in passages, and there is stuff I think him silly on. But as has been said, you can't NOT deal with Gray and convince anyone. He's the gorilla, and you can see how frustrating he is to those with agendas.
That's why I was excited to hear Wrangler suggest there were errors, because that would have been huge. Still may, but not based on St. George Cook any more than My Friend Flicka. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
matthew_ridgeway
Private
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 12:06:19 PM
|
Dark Cloud:
Does the averaged speed of 3.03-mph include rest breaks? Since there is no accounting for this in your original post – i.e. you give only a distance and a time – I suspect this speed doesn’t represent actual gait speed or march speed. Too slow for short distances mixed in with tactical considerations that warrant urgency that were likely present in Custer's final march from from his last referenced position to Custer Hill.
The premise is time and distance relationships over a several mile march after the last recorded information on Custer’s ill-fated band, not an averaged rate over a couple of hundred miles, and several days march. At least that is how I interpret the original intent of this thread. Therefore I am personally less inclined to buy into an averaged speed over a long haul that likely masks the impact of rest periods on average speeds developed from long haul marches. The tactical urgency of the situation may very have entailed a sustained trot over the few miles of Custer’s final march. This could likely push short term speeds to 6 or 7mph for the short haul to Custer’s Hill.
In addition, I would be interested to see whatever reference material you may have access to that addresses march speed relative to ration allotment. You have raised the potential effect this might have on march speed again and again. What sort of information do you have in this regard?
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 2:19:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by matthew_ridgeway
The tactical urgency of the situation may very have entailed a sustained trot over the few miles of Custer’s final march. This could likely push short term speeds to 6 or 7mph for the short haul to Custer’s Hill.
Gray assumes this at certain points. At the time he has Custer passing Reno Hill, for example, he plots him moving at a rate of 7.5 mph. Gray used the standard 3 mph, 6 mph, etc. rates only as a rough guide; no more, no less.
Again, the problem with the critiques of Gray I've seen here is that they're not touching on anything vital to his approach. Most of Gray's conclusions were not made by projecting some arbitrary time rates onto the battlefield, but by working backwards from known historical information and deducting reasonable conclusions for the parts we don't know, from the things that we do.
To accomplish something relevant, it needs to be shown that Gray's methods have led him into something impossible. Wrangler might have something on Boston Custer, but in any case, we're talking about a lone rider who left a very ghostly trail on the historical record, and it wouldn't surprise me if Gray was off on him by 5 minutes or so. More important are the movements of the battalions. If Gray seriously messed up, by underestimating their speed by 20%, then this ought to be demonstrable in the historical record. That is where you start if you want to revise Gray. Goobling about rates and numbers, without applying it to what we know actually happened on the battlefield, is merely counting angels on pins.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 2:20:17 PM
|
Ridgeway:
The times are exclusive of breaks. This is there on the referenced charts, so I'm wondering if you have the Gray book?
I'm not where I can get it easy, but I know I pointed Wrangler to the Gray article on the Veterinary aspects here on the thread. Gray was a doctor and director of medical research and was, at least, knowledgeable about this sort of thing. What I do not know is what, if any, first or second hand quadraped experience or info he had and operated from. I have it in mind I was told about this at length but I can recall neither who told me nor much about it but it sits festering in my RAM that he himself rode.
In any case, I'll go out on a limb and heroically contend, as maybe others could as well, that animals ridden hard for weeks, off their normal feed and with insufficient and bad water, will move slower than under refreshed conditions, especially on extremely hot days over rugged ground. It could be the liquor talking, but I'm a damn hero, I am. The seventh was on 1/6th grain rations to its horses, apparently. Army horses didn't thrive like ponies on the grass.
Plus the several instances of horses collapsing, the Indian testimony they cropped grass during the battle, the bolts for the river, the general concensus that the cavalry mounts weren't as good as their ponies.
Gray could be wrong, of course, but you have to blow those recorded times and distances out of the water, and that's a problem. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
El Crab
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 5:17:59 PM
|
But we're all grabbing at straws. A horse under those conditions could not maintain a faster speed than a healthy, well-fed and rested one. But what would they max out at?
A human who is underfed and tired and exhausted can still do things in short bursts that a healthy man can for a longer period. And those animals would be pushed hard that day, their health be damned. So I think we need to try and establish what a horse can do under similar conditions.
Gray may have been working backwards, working with constraints and known info and trying to plot it plausibly. Its not fact, its his theory. And all theories can be questioned.
I still am not clear on anyone's stance, really. DC seems to think Gray had a reasonable idea as to what happened and his time-motion results are just as good as any other theory. Am I right? |
I came. I saw. I took 300 pictures. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2004 : 11:04:04 PM
|
Well, yeah, but to frame the argument in those terms is to unintentionally demean it. There would be a lot riding on it if Gray were found to be smoking alternative reality weed and his numbers don't actually add up. Not just for LBH, but he raised the bar several notches for this sort of thing, emphasizing the very hard and lonely work it is.
I admit that one of the reasons I get annoyed (hell, really angry) when I see men playing soldier in uniform or sobbing over a found artifact on television and everybody comments on the profound importance of the moment, is that these guys get written up and on tv and the virtually nobody knows or cares about the brilliant old fussbudget who actually did something important. There were others now forgot as well.
He was in full descent of history's great amateurs, but only in a sense was he amateur. He was a scientist and a doctor and knew math and data control and the history.
You have to read this book, or the second half anyway, to understand how elevated Gray is above all that went before, and how every book since has had to deal with it, and how badly they generally do. He draws odd conclusions, in my opinion, and he may be wrong about Weir Point and Sharpshooter Hill (my lone more-or-less original and not-that-important thesis) references, and he dislikes Reno and Benteen where I'm more compassionate (and all in all, a more terrific guy)towards them. Lord, I'm tired.
You can't understand Sklenar's frustrations in trying to nail Benteen till you compare his work to Gray's. It really is formidable and you'll understand my contention that it is Gray, not archaelogy, that is the gorilla in the ring. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Wrangler
Lieutenant
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2004 : 12:19:17 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
The times are exclusive of breaks.
Define break. It is apparent the only march you’ve been on is to the refrigerator for ice cubes during a commercial break.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
I'm not where I can get it easy, but I know I pointed Wrangler to the Gray article on the Veterinary aspects here on the thread. Gray was a doctor and director of medical research and was, at least, knowledgeable about this sort of thing.
Don't worry...I got it right here.
”Today class, as future doctors and directors of medical research, you’re going to have to know about fatigue and cavalry marches at the Battle of the Little Bighorn…now open your books to page 47…the Army Mule…”
Years later…
“Hey Doc, as you start my kidney transplant, I have just one question—How’d ya do on the Custer horsies & mules exam…? Ah good! Go ahead Doc! Put me under…”
Yes, I see.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
What I do not know is what, if any, first or second hand quadraped experience or info he had and operated from. I have it in mind I was told about this at length but I can recall neither who told me nor much about it but it sits festering in my RAM that he himself rode.
I’m sure you will let us know when you find out if Gray rode a horsie or not. Try defragging your disk.
I don’t have to check my RAM to tell you I have first hand quadraped experience. It goes like this. Pitch hay into feeder. Hay goes in front of horse…then…something happens. Hay comes out back of horse. Shovel reprocessed hay from floor of stall. Groom horse. Pat horse. Horse blows nose on you. Horse bites you. Steps on foot. Kicks you in shins. Bonus: ride horsie. Repeat. The circle of life. I learned nothing about the cavalry through these first hand experiences other than horsies are ornery and produce as much exhaust as you do at the click of a key. But I’m sure Gray learned more. Too bad he didn’t share his knowledge of cavalry in his footnotes and bibliography so you could replicate the experience on this forum.
“I ride horsies in my spare time so let me tell ya ‘bout the Battle of the Little Bighorn…”
“Uh Doc?...the kidney…?”
Yes, I see.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
In any case, I'll go out on a limb and heroically contend, as maybe others could as well, that animals ridden hard for weeks, off their normal feed and with insufficient and bad water, will move slower than under refreshed conditions, especially on extremely hot days over rugged ground. It could be the liquor talking, but I'm a damn hero, I am. The seventh was on 1/6th grain rations to its horses, apparently. Army horses didn't thrive like ponies on the grass.
Climb in off the limb gorilla boy and crawl into a book. Cite your sources or are they too festering on RAM?
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Plus the several instances of horses collapsing
I count two. Of the 600+ horses and at least one mule ridden by men of the 7th and accompanying civilians, that would be a slistering .003% of the horsies and mules collapsing. That’s like saying two guys sneezed so the regiment had the flu. Thinkin’s hard ain’t it?
“Doc? What ya doing with that knife?”
“Well son, the last two folks in here had kidney problems…sooooo…I’m jes gonna cut to the chase and cut out yer kidney…makes sense don’t it?”
Yes, I see.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
the Indian testimony they cropped grass during the battle,
Yes…the dreaded Indian lawn-mower detail. What are you talking about? Drop an anchor, dude. You are all over the harbor.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
the bolts for the river,
…and they were looking for Red Herrings?
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
the general concensus that the cavalry mounts weren't as good as their ponies.
And a Jeep Cherokee with a V6 is better than both—or is a dodge better? This worm will not catch a red fishie...have you tried flies?
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Gray could be wrong, of course, but you have to blow those recorded times and distances out of the water, and that's a problem.
Ain’t it though? One thing I did learn about horsies wuz to never look a gift one in the mouth. Soon as yer done with yer projects, I bet you’ll be all over this problem like wet parachute silk! Maybe even use some of that high school physics you were telling us about. Don’t worry though--you won't be alone. I’ll always be here to jump right in and grade your work. I can’t wait for you to get started. Now don’t start snivlin’ like a rat eatin’ onions about me making fun of your obvious lack of expertise in historical endeavors. Just, “Be the ball”…and avoid your usual flensing. Or better yet…just be quiet…or study dinosaurs or something.
|
|
|
|
Wrangler
Lieutenant
Status: offline |
Posted - January 11 2004 : 12:35:51 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
…but he raised the bar several notches for this sort of thing, emphasizing the very hard and lonely work it is.
Dang. That’s Shakespeare isn’t it?
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Well I admit that one of the reasons I get annoyed (hell, really angry) when I see men playing soldier in uniform or sobbing over a found artifact on television and everybody comments on the profound importance of the moment, is that these guys get written up and on tv and the virtually nobody knows or cares about the brilliant old fussbudget who actually did something important. There were others now forgot as well.
Try therapy.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Well He was in full descent of history's great amateurs, but only in a sense was he amateur. He was a scientist and a doctor and knew math and data control and the history.
...and…and he could play Foggy Mountain Breakdown on the ka-zoo! And ya should o' seen him pull a rabbit out of a hat! It wuz truly inspiring! It changed my life that day; I tell you…
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Well You have to read this book, or the second half anyway, to understand how elevated Gray is above all that went before, and how every book since has had to deal with it, and how badly they generally do. He draws odd conclusions, in my opinion, and he may be wrong about Weir Point and Sharpshooter Hill (my lone more-or-less original and not-that-important thesis) references, and he dislikes Reno and Benteen where I'm more compassionate (and all in all, a more terrific guy)towards them. Lord, I'm tired.
Me too.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Well You can't understand Sklenar's frustrations in trying to nail Benteen till you compare his work to Gray's. It really is formidable and you'll understand my contention that it is Gray, not archaelogy, that is the gorilla in the ring.
So this is what all your blithering is about? We defend Gray…so…we can… defend Benteen? Got it! Takin’ one for the Gipper…well…I meant the gorilla. What a guy! I feel your pain now. Yeah you better cease work on that rate o’ march stuff—there’s bad ju-ju there. Gipper wouldn’t like that, no sir.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
John Gray: The Tail That WagsThe Dog--Still
