| Author |
 Topic  |
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
 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,
|
movingrobe |
|
|
lorenzo G.
Captain
Italy
Status: offline |
Posted - February 22 2005 : 1:08:24 PM
|
| Hollywood Hollywood! |
If it is to be my lot to fall in the service of my country and my country's rights I will have no regrets.
Custer |
  |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - February 22 2005 : 1:42:15 PM
|
| I read somewhere that Calhoun owed Custer big time and had promised that if he [Custer]was ever in a fix he could always count on his support.Thus when that moment came at the LBH he was not found wanting.Perhaps he could have escaped but stayed ro repay a debt of honor. |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 22 2005 : 4:30:57 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wILD I
I read somewhere that Calhoun owed Custer big time and had promised that if he [Custer]was ever in a fix he could always count on his support.Thus when that moment came at the LBH he was not found wanting.Perhaps he could have escaped but stayed ro repay a debt of honor.
I guess he owed GAC for Maggie? Hmmm ... never thought of it like that before. Or was it something else?
Regards, |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 22 2005 : 9:01:09 PM
|
Wild, you are correct. On April 23, 1871, Calhoun wrote to Custer:
"I have just received my commission as 1st Lt. in the 7th Cavalry, and it reminds me more vividly than ever how many, many times I am under obligations to you for your very great kindness to me in my troubles. I shall do my best to prove my gratitude. If the time comes you will not find me wanting..."
Son of the Morning Star, page 308 and 309.
One wonders what gifts, promises, or thoughts of mutual acceptance may have been exchanged between the two men that resulted in Calhoun's eternal gratitude to Custer. Given the benefit of doubt, perhaps it was something Calhoun really, really appreciated. Or, maybe it was just his getting hitch to Custer's sister. What ever it was, he died for it. |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 11:33:51 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joseph wiggs
Wild, you are correct. On April 23, 1871, Calhoun wrote to Custer:
"I have just received my commission as 1st Lt. in the 7th Cavalry, and it reminds me more vividly than ever how many, many times I am under obligations to you for your very great kindness to me in my troubles. I shall do my best to prove my gratitude. If the time comes you will not find me wanting..."
Son of the Morning Star, page 308 and 309.
One wonders what gifts, promises, or thoughts of mutual acceptance may have been exchanged between the two men that resulted in Calhoun's eternal gratitude to Custer. Given the benefit of doubt, perhaps it was something Calhoun really, really appreciated. Or, maybe it was just his getting hitch to Custer's sister. What ever it was, he died for it.
Thanks for the cite, Joe! Now, weren't Maggie and Calhoun married after the date of this letter? Sorry, all those trips back to Monroe start blending together after a while ... ugh.
Hoka hey!
|
movingrobe |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 2:44:14 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Joe: I don't find Calhoun's allegiance and attempt to save Custer unusual or odd at all. If you have a brother-in-law you are fond of, would you want to go home from a battle without him and explain it to your wife. Don't think so!
Obviously Calhoun's word meant something.
On this, I would have to agree with you. This was the Army, after all--and it was, uh, kind of expected to obey your commanding officer, even if it is your brother-in-law. |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 5:15:54 PM
|
| Wait a second ... wouldn't have Calhoun's immediate superior at LBH be Keough? |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 7:24:54 PM
|
What romantic garbage. What were Calhoun's options? Leave his men? (Hands: how far would a fleeing officer get before being shot?) Lead his men away from his immediate commander and back to Reno? Maybe his unit was the last under fire and he had time to get his men in line to fight in an organized fashion. He was an officer and it didn't require all this tearful promise of feudal fidelity for him to do his job, and apparently do it well. He was grateful for his commission to his Brobylaw, and the letter? That's pretty boilerplate for the era.
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 8:17:46 PM
|
Paul,we are in complete accord. Calhoun's allegiance to Custer need not be questioned. My reference to the possible exchanges between the two were merely whimsical meanderings about a topic we can never have knowledge of. No greater love has a man then he who is willingly to lay down his life for his fellow man.
My post was meant to offer praise for this relationship, not censure. Men have followed orders and paid the ultimate sacrifice for doing so. Other men, forfeit the same grievous lost out of love.
Paul, thank you for giving me an opportunity to clarify my previous statement. |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 8:19:51 PM
|
"Romantic Garbage"
No comment need be made. |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 23 2005 : 8:52:58 PM
|
OK, Paul, you are out of time-out.
Simply put, it is romantic balderdash to imagine Calhoun sacrificed his men and himself for GAC.
Calhoun was an Army OFFICER and they are held to different standards than most humans. And I use the word "humans" deliberately.
Calhoun's job was to fight and delay the aggressor.
He died performing his duty.
To me, that says it all.
Yes, I will have a rain cloud appear talking about Wounded Knee, etc. but quite honestly, if a superior officer to GAC had been present and ordered Calhoun and company away, my opinion is that Calhoun would have heartbrokenly obeyed the orders.
With respect,
Billy
|
Edited by - BJMarkland on February 23 2005 8:53:51 PM |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 08:37:25 AM
|
MRW, thanks for starting this thread.
What does anyone know of Peter Thompson. From bits and pieces of reading Camp, he seems to have claimed to have been the last man to successfully leave Custer's battalion. Camp mentions two points that seemed to lessen his veracity but does qualify his statement that without those two points, his story does follow the known facts.
Speaking of Camp, in Hammer's compilation of Camp's notes, someone mentions one of Custer's men whose horse ran away riding through the village and joining Reno's battalion. I will have to dig that up but not today, or at least it doesn't seem possible. Got a sick kid as well as a clogged up drain so my day is somewhat full.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
Edited by - BJMarkland on February 24 2005 10:03:06 AM |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 09:17:30 AM
|
Billy--
My friend is a kind of expert on Peter Thompson, as is his research partner. They presented a paper at the CBHMA last June--most of it regarded their evidence that Peter "told the truth." It's amazing: they've gone over PT's story of the LBH word by word, even using a geologist to decipher some of the places he covered--they also have some interesting theories, albeit still developing, about the "Custer" he saw at the river ... they're quite close with the Thompson family--in fact, I had the opportunity to meet his granddaughter and great-granddaughter last year.
A review of their stuff should be avaliable at the CBHMA this year (the 2004 Symposium Review). I can give you more information if you should like.
I think they might be doing something at the LBHA convention this year about Private Brandt (sic), the guy who died the day before receiving his MOH.
Regards, |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
dave
Captain
Australia
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 09:32:26 AM
|
Billy/MRW,
Please tell me more. I've never heard of Peter Thompson, and it already sounds like a fascinating story from the few hints that the two of you have dropped. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 1:18:02 PM
|
| Trooper Peter Thompson was a member of C coy with Custer's batt.He was one of the dozen or so stragglers who managed to join up with Reno.He claims to have been the last man "to leave" the Custer column.I doubt it though because if he "left " after Martin his chances of getting away on a played out horse would have been nil |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 2:59:41 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
BJ: As usual you are mixing up duty, battles and tactics. Nevertheless, you are a very good researcher, perhaps better than any I have seen in the last few years.
On the other hand, don't presume to lecture me on orders which I lived by most of my life and duty to God, Family and Government which is in that order. For over thirty years I worked with men who carried Iron for the Government in one occupation or another. They were prepared to lay down their lifes if need be. Almost never said, never talked about, always accepted as part of the job by all of us!
Of course, Calhoun followed his orders and did his duty! I did not say he sacrificed his men and himself intentionally anywhere. That does not discount a likely superherculan effort to save his family! "Romantic Balderdash" is not a term to be used in connection with Capt. Calhoun, likely one of the great heroes of this battle!
BJ: Your problem is one of the thin skinned. I appreciate your great sensitivity. But you often jump to a conclusion and mis-apply it. Try to toughen up just a degree or two. Nice to see you talking to me again.
Err, I was talking only about the duty of an officer to follow the lawful orders of his commanding officer as opposed to the starry-eyed view that Calhoun sacrificed himself only because of his great personal loyalty and some unknown obligation to Custer. I believe it was you who did bring up a great point (and I paraphrase), i.e., would you like to be the man to go home and tell your wife that her brother died? I am sure that and the unknown obligation were an influence but in my mind, it was mostly his professionalism which kept him at his station when the situation was rapidly going to Hades in a handtruck.
I wasn't meaning to lecture, just be emphatic. There is enough romantism about this battle without introducing more, thus the "romantic balderdash" statement. And by the way, I happened to agree with most of your original post. Sorry about not having made that clear.
Oh, and I am not thin-skinned by a long shot. As I told you and the others before, you don't survive twenty-five years in tech support being thin-skinned. That being said though, I do reserve the right to temporarily muzzle the BS sometimes being spewed. But, I save the last nerve for you, as you seem to get on it more frequently than others; thus the time-out feature  Just must be a talent you have.
Agnostically yours,
Billy
|
Edited by - BJMarkland on February 24 2005 3:02:04 PM |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 5:35:36 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wILD I
Trooper Peter Thompson was a member of C coy with Custer's batt.He was one of the dozen or so stragglers who managed to join up with Reno.He claims to have been the last man "to leave" the Custer column.I doubt it though because if he "left " after Martin his chances of getting away on a played out horse would have been nil
Thompson also was one of the men to have been awarded the Medal of Honour for his actions in gathering water for the Benteen-Reno battalion up at the entrenchment site. He wore that thing everywhere he went! He eventually retired to the Black Hills (I think Lead, SD)and Alzada, MT. I believe his story is entitled "Memoirs of a Private Soldier at the Battle of the Little Bighorn."
Some people have actually thought of Thompson as a kind of deserter, using the "lame" horse excuse to avoid the big fight. I don't think he even made it to MTC--I think the horse petered out right after the turn from Cedar Coulee ...
Regards, |
movingrobe |
Edited by - movingrobewoman on February 24 2005 5:39:01 PM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 9:50:41 PM
|
What dozen or so stragglers? You're probably thinking of Connell's mistake because he didn't apparently know about the six men per company in addition to a complete company assigned to the train, and couldn't explain it otherwise.
There were the two guys whose horses gave out, is all, I think. True? Not? |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 10:02:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
What dozen or so stragglers? You're probably thinking of Connell's mistake because he didn't apparently know about the six men per company in addition to a complete company assigned to the train, and couldn't explain it otherwise.
There were the two guys whose horses gave out, is all, I think. True? Not?
I think Thompson only mentions himself and a guy named Watson in Custer's battalion; they were forced to lead their mounts towards the river by foot. Of course, I am (silly me) assuming that PT was telling the "truth." Some rabid "Custer idiots" think the dread horse excuse was a cover for out-and-out desertion ... as some regard Kanipe, who "carried" that message for the packers ... just in time to avoid certain death. Funny how PT was a member of C company--the company which, over time, suffered the largest amount of desertions. Does that say anything about TWC's guidance?
Regards, |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 24 2005 : 11:47:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
Speaking of Camp, in Hammer's compilation of Camp's notes, someone mentions one of Custer's men whose horse ran away riding through the village and joining Reno's battalion.
Gustave "Yankee" Korn. He was Comanche's handler until killed at Wounded Knee. Some guys who were asked about the story believed it, but others who were there insisted that Korn had always been with the pack train.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - February 25 2005 : 12:05:46 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
What dozen or so stragglers? You're probably thinking of Connell's mistake because he didn't apparently know about the six men per company in addition to a complete company assigned to the train, and couldn't explain it otherwise.
There were the two guys whose horses gave out, is all, I think. True? Not?
Four (though all these have been accused by somebody or other of doing it out of cowardice). Thompson, Watson, Brennan, and Fitzgerald, all of C Company. Also Korn, if you want to count him; some people do.
C Company seems to have taken rotten care of their horses; you have those four who played out, plus John McGuire (whose horse went lame near the divide by his own account, which got him an order by Harrington to join the pack train detail), and Kanipe's account of Sgt. Finckle's horse going out shortly before Tom sent him off with that message. Martin also met a straggler from C Company as he was starting out for Benteen; this man might have been one of the guys already mentioned, perhaps not. Whatever the matter, that's a lot of evidence for horse trouble, and no other company comes anywhere near matching it.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 25 2005 : 01:27:49 AM
|
quote:
Funny how PT was a member of C company--the company which, over time, suffered the largest amount of desertions. Does that say anything about TWC's guidance?
MRW, I distinctly recall from either the Ft. Abraham Lincoln records or the Regimental Return that Tom was in another company previous to being placed in command of C co. Let me look in my notebooks as I think I notated it.
If I don't find it, I will try to hunt it down maybe tomorrow or Sunday at Ft. Leavenworth. And that reminds me, I owe you guys data on desertions 1866-1867. I will try to get that also from the Regimental Returns.
Billy |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 25 2005 : 02:33:20 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by BJMarkland
quote:
Funny how PT was a member of C company--the company which, over time, suffered the largest amount of desertions. Does that say anything about TWC's guidance?
MRW, I distinctly recall from either the Ft. Abraham Lincoln records or the Regimental Return that Tom was in another company previous to being placed in command of C co. Let me look in my notebooks as I think I notated it.
If I don't find it, I will try to hunt it down maybe tomorrow or Sunday at Ft. Leavenworth. And that reminds me, I owe you guys data on desertions 1866-1867. I will try to get that also from the Regimental Returns.
Billy--
I believe that you are absolutely right. Tom was at least in one other company before "commanding" C. Though I'm less than overwhelmed with Roy Bird's "In His Brother's Shadow," he relates that TWC was first assigned to A troop. Can't remember the reason for the change--though it (adjustment) seemed to happen often, given the ebb and flow of personnel, in the Seventh. I do know that TWC brought Comanche into mythology, straight from the heart of Louisiana.
Regards, |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 25 2005 : 12:22:45 PM
|
Trying to maintain thread topic rationality here, in response to MRW on another thread.
These stories that Benteen tells about Custer and his sexual exploits aren't contradicted by anyone in a position to know and do so, including Godfrey. That doesn't make them true, but it might just be that Benteen disliked him enough to chat about it openly and didn't make it up. Others commented as well, I think, with no particular connection to Benteen. Through all the years, nobody has yet proven Benteen lied about anything. Lots of innuendo and wishful thinking in place in hopes it can eventually be proven he had.
The evil motivations of Benteen as presented by Custerphiles make small sense. He's been accused of letting Custer and his group die without rescuing them out of spite or jealousy or something in that vein. In reality, rescuing Custer and his men would offer the most succor, honor, and satisfaction to Benteen and his reputation and diminish Custer's, without allowing the pointless killing of friends and peers, and if it were possible he'd surely have done it. It puts a surviving Custer on the defensive with his own soldiers likely to be grateful to Benteen. That would drive Custer batty.
The stories told of Custer by Benteen do not violate the known Custer's character or past actions, and are in fact perfectly in keeping with it. There's nothing awful or exceptional about it by the standards of the time or, as recent revelations show, ours. Without it, in fact, Custer's desertion of his duties to return to his wife to get bonked (there's no question he fibbed about the cholera deal) looks even worse and more selfish. And certainly pretty arrogant and stupid.
Thank you, Larsen, for the C horse status. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on February 25 2005 12:32:54 PM |
|
|
|
movingrobewoman
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 25 2005 : 2:55:34 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
The evil motivations of Benteen as presented by Custerphiles make small sense ... The stories told of Custer by Benteen do not violate the known Custer's character or past actions, and are in fact perfectly in keeping with it. There's nothing awful or exceptional about it by the standards of the time or, as recent revelations show, ours. Without it, in fact, Custer's desertion of his duties to return to his wife to get bonked (there's no question he fibbed about the cholera deal) looks even worse and more selfish. And certainly pretty arrogant and stupid.
Like you, I don't know what all the fuss is about. In my attempt at writing, I have devolved Custer into a guy with ADD, never settling at being settled--and in response, takes on that "reckless" image that we all know and love/hate. And I would assume that this character trait did continue with the wominx. He certainly followed girls about New York! From Utley, Custer's flings might have begun in 1866 (gack, 1866? I thought I had made that up, fair and square) and seemed to come to a boil in a letter written to Libbie whilst she stayed Kansas City (I think this was when GAC was being examined for his Lieutenant Coloncy) Then of course, there was that period of separation around Christmas of 1869. To skip out on spending Christmas together, and they were pretty tight as couples go, it must have been something serious. That may have been when he penned "all women are toys" in comparison to his wife. Was he asking for Libbie's tacit approval?
But as I have said before, this type of behaviour exhibited by Custer doesn't leave me gasping that he was satan or less in love with his Libbie. After "straying," he always came back to his "little One." The so-called virtue, as I think you have pointed out on other threads, embodied by the Victorian Era was just a smokescreen for the continual antics of humanity.
Regards, |
movingrobe |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Meotzi Mania and Nagging Personal Issues
