| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - August 01 2004 : 10:31:04 AM
|
It was of course, a theoretical possibility. In my view a long shot and not worth sending 143 men to find out--but at least theoretically possible.
Given the conflicting versions of what his verbal orders were, what do you suppose he would have done?? Pitched right in? Stopped, reported back to Custer with a "What Now"?? OR--??
And Custer--what would HE have done?? Called him back anyway, since the "main" attack was getting underway?? Or just let him "pitch in" and hope he didn't need help. Or figure there were just too many Indians in too great an area and just pulled back altogether??
OR--??
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 01 2004 : 1:27:48 PM
|
Speculation, but if Benteen met Indians escaping up the valley, then probably they all were, to different degrees. Your question seems to assume that if Benteen found some, the village still would have been sitting there to be served up for a "main" attack, but I'm not sure Custer would have assumed that. After all, he started the attack prematurely on the assumption that the Indians had been alerted to his presence and were preparing to leave. They weren't, much to his delight, but at the time he sent Benteen off, he may have envisioned D, H, and K meeting the lead elements of the fleers, and stopping their way, while he and Reno attacked from the rear and/or flank; the rear could have included people in the village still packing up, or not.
There are obvious problems with this though. Even if Custer was thinking along those lines, there still seems a strong chance of defeat-in-detail. Benteen could easily get overwhelmed, like Reno and like Custer, if he had to start the attack by himself, out of range of timely support. And vice versa. Still, I think something like it may have been in Custer's mind. It's the best I can think of. Any other ideas?
R. Larsen
|
  |
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 02 2004 : 06:22:30 AM
|
You're right of course. I sort of assumed any Indians Benteen encountered would have been just another part of the big "suprised" village ripe for attack. But very likely they would have been "escaping" and on the move.
And my own view is that Custer probably did intend for Benteen to "attack" if he encountered hostiles. In my minds eye I just envision Custer, Reno AND Benteen all engaged at more or less the same time, none able to support or aid the others. |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 02 2004 : 10:36:02 PM
|
| Because of the fatal outcome of this battle, it is reasonable to assume that any contact with the Indians by a portion of Custer's command would have resulted in defeat. This is certainly understandable, after all the soldiers were defeated and died. However, in the beginning, every trooper involved in this battle, from the command staff to the youngest grunt, were convinced that the warriors would flee when approached. It was this false conception that encouraged Custer to divide his troops when he shold have kept them together. This does not make Custer an idiot. During this era, all white men felt the same way. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - August 03 2004 : 03:16:39 AM
|
It was this false conception that encouraged Custer to divide his troops when he shold have kept them together. This does not make Custer an idiot.
Oh yes it does.
A cavalry regiment is in fact a system.The dynamic for this system is not assumptions.There would have been a set of precedures for a regiment on the move,in attack,in defence etc.Custer worked to no system and as has been pointed out here on numerious occasions chanced his arm and lost. |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 03 2004 : 07:19:50 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wILD I
It was this false conception that encouraged Custer to divide his troops when he shold have kept them together. This does not make Custer an idiot.
Oh yes it does.
A cavalry regiment is in fact a system.The dynamic for this system is not assumptions.There would have been a set of precedures for a regiment on the move,in attack,in defence etc.Custer worked to no system and as has been pointed out here on numerious occasions chanced his arm and lost.
What military grouping is not a system Wild? From the fire team upwards, to and including Army Groups, each are "designed" to operate as an individual entity as the mission, and circumstance, dictate. With each component, while on the offensive, the end result is to place your critical mass against the enemy's weakest point. There is a great German term for it which for the life of me I can not remember. I think it is 'shewrpunk' or something like that. As far as dividing forces and gambling, Custer was a piker compared to Lee at Second Manassas and Chancellorsville.
Custer was as much a victim of his country's niggardliness of appropriations for the post-Civil War army as he was of his poor tactics. That is not an excuse, just a statement of fact. Ahhhh, the first taste of the first cup of coffee in the morning-wonderful !!! Sorry about the digression 
General question: Has anyone read anything to imply whether Custer was aware of the failure of and subsequent fallout from Reynold's Powder River campaign the previous March? Something in the back of my mind is trying to make a linkage between the tactics of that campaign and those of the LBH.
Getting back to the subject of the thread. If the Indians had retreated and Benteen had continued his "valley hunting", they would likely have been on a collision course. From that point on, it would have been a matter of a) whether Benteen could have found a good defensive position and b) whether the Indians would have done more than send enough warriors to hold Benteen in his position while the village escaped.
Oh well, time to go to work. Later on folks.
Best of wishes,
Billy
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 03 2004 : 09:13:13 AM
|
I don't know if the Powder River fiasco had been studied by Custer. But, in truth, compare Reynolds to the Wa****a.
Reynolds supposedly had to retreat because, after NOT utilizing the enemy's food and clothing but burning it all, he had to, although it's unclear if it would have been wise to follow stocked up. In any case, Custer had done much the same at Wa****a. Custer lost far more men against a similar sized camp, but retreated as well. It's all in the presentation, isn't it?
In any case, seeking analogy to a frigid winter attack against low carb civvies and their scrawny ponies at dawn provides what helpful information to instruct an attack against a relatively huge camp in mid afternoon in summer against well fed and rested and motivated people with an out of proportion number of young men under the spell of Sitting Bull who, if I read right, was pretty well furious against the whites? I can see one, maybe two differences that might suggest a different approach than that against those squalid little towns on the Wa****a and Powder.
Coffee. Yes. Coffee....... |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 03 2004 : 9:31:30 PM
|
| In any military engagement, a critical proponent of battle is the gathering of intelligence prior to the actual engagement. The disposition and strength of the enemy must be ascertained. In a historical era sans radios, satelite transmissions, and other mechanical wonders, a surveillance of the enemy in large groups was perfectly acceptable. This was a means of gathering information while maintaining sufficient strength to hold one's own should the foe approach in great numbers. In 1876, this tactic was acceptable and expecteded, therefore Custer was not an idiot for utilizing it. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 03 2004 : 10:50:10 PM
|
| Should anyone ever call Custer an idiot, your insights (thanks for the reminder there were no satellites in 1876) will prove devastating. It's those of us who are quite sure he was NOT an idiot who find his orders puzzling. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - August 04 2004 : 03:16:55 AM
|
Hi Billy
Custer was a piker compared to Lee at Second Manassas and Chancellorsville.
The risks Lee took were calculated.There was nothing calculated about Custer's tatics and Reno was no Stonewall.
Hi DC
Should anyone ever call Custer an idiot, your insights (thanks for the reminder there were no satellites in 1876) will prove devastating. It's those of us who are quite sure he was NOT an idiot who find his orders puzzling.
Perhaps if he had been an idiot we could grant him a fool's pardon.But for accuracy, let me withdraw the claim that he was an idiot and just make the observation that his actions that day resembled those of an idiot.
|
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - August 11 2004 : 9:21:54 PM
|
| I believe that Custer was not the only individual, that day, whose actions may have resembled those of an idiot. He had company. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Suppose Benteen HAD encountered Indians??
