| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - October 26 2005 : 2:51:07 PM
|
I really do think the more prissy and precise the theory, the easier it is to blow holes in it. Custerphiles have spent decades trying to produce a coherent theory that installs their prejudices, preserve the Last Stand myth, and still makes sense. They're now perfectly willing to let the impulsive Custer of history vanish and a new 'by the book' officer emerge, something Custer was decidedly not. The supposed motivations for what they claim he was doing and the actions supposed are often mutually exclusive, as we touched upon the disconnect between supposed fear of village escape and 'Let's stop a sec and tighten saddles while we prepare a feint before we wait for the train.' Then, when all this free time for Custer to brush up on target practice appears, they have to fill it with oh-so-military offensive moves.
A sloppy retreat because of a plan that can only be dignified by calling it half-baked. A fiasco. Further, once he entered MTC, it was too late, and he was cooked and nudged north and away.
And there was no point to concealment. It merely fills up that time Gray tried to explain away. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on October 26 2005 2:55:07 PM |
  |
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 26 2005 : 3:10:27 PM
|
| I would say I'd have to agree DC. There was no concealment attempts being made. Why else would he parade his whole battalion along a 2/3rds mile prominance called sharpshooter ridge? That's concealment? I don't think so! He wasn't there to hide. Hiding is a defensive move. Is it not? The only reason any stop was made in or near Cedar Coulee was for the cinching of the saddles and preparations out of sight for the attack. Of course I may be wrong. Reno supposedly did this at ford A in full view of the southern end of the village. All the while the mounted warriors out in front of the village saw him. Concealment? No, most definitely not. From the moment Custer gave orders for Reno to attack. There would be no chance for concealment. And most certainly no chance to stop and think about it either. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 26 2005 : 5:38:25 PM
|
Well, no, hiding can be part of ambush and attack. But the fact is since dawn, he thought the Indians had seen him, but he didn't rush to the attack. (Okay for him; Benteen, of course, is a traitor for not....) There had to have been a dust cloud and one half from the 7th, the Sans Arcs ran from them and circled, raising more dust. Surely an assumption could be made the Indians at least had scouted them out. Had a clue. I don't buy Gray's theory that Custer thought he could keep a dust reducing pace and accomplish something beneficial a foot and a half from a huge village that couldn't be bettered by speed, giving Reno incombat and all. He discovers the village size from a rise, perhaps wave, thinks they're unprepared (correct), but doesn't rush to the attack.
Absent whatever the afternoon activity for the 7th was at MTCF, I don't see anything approaching a composed attack. It looks to me like an on-the-fly fumble, foul, and firedrill, and they were driven to LSH, the one landscape they most wanted to avoid. Of course, as I cheerfully and chronically point out, I'm not a military vet. But most actual combat vets I know who've seen the field agree more than not. Even Calhoun's guys don't look so good if you take 20% away from the stones. An already thin line looks........quite scary. But then, I'm a coward.
I don't think he marched the guys across Sharpshooter, but on one side or the other to Cedar Coulee. But who knows.
Really. Look at Gray's map and subtract out ANY 20% and it thins out the lines and clumps so much it looks much worse. Then try it Wild's way, and subtract them all from I and L's locations. Worse. It had to have been terrifying. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 04:48:36 AM
|
Firstly - can anyone tell us whether Cedar Coulee is a sensible way to MTC for a man in a hurry, as Boyer is supposed to have taken a more direct route from Weir Point carving half a mile out of the journey. Even if an alternative route wasn't the best, so what? - wasn't Kanipe's message to the train to get over cross country if necessary, cutting off packs - no stopping etc? In other words "you hurry, but I'll stop here and there and maybe wander down this valley going away from the village". His chosen route down to MTC just doesn't fit with this hurry theory.
Secondly, the markers tell us one thing, regardless of their pattern - where the bodies were not, e.g. MTC ford and its surroundings.
I would have thought the full blooded charge fits a Custerphile scenario as well as any other. Having said that, Custer's penchant for fancy moves and feints were precedented long before. In the LBH case, he made a conscious decision to attack from more than one direction - this isn't disputed. What we also know is Custer's personal belief that Indians would tend to run rather than stand and fight. The mere sight of his troops moving toward supporting villages after he wiped out Black Kettle was enough to send them packing, then a quick volte face and away - neat.
|
Edited by - Smcf on October 27 2005 06:40:14 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 11:04:26 AM
|
Don't forget that some of the markers, about twenty we're told, should be in Deep Ravine where the bodies may still be. They aren't. The markers for the soldiers found in the village? On the field. The ones from the top of Custer Hill and, maybe, on the other side? Moved west and south. Plus, all the Reno guys. Only in a general sense can the markers be said to suggest where soldiers were and were not.
The markers look forlorn and scary enough if you believe them to indicate where soldiers fell. Visualize 20% fewer, and unclog Custer Hill, and hide twenty odd in Deep Ravine. How's it look now? "Firing lines" look way too thin, and the the image of people being shot on the move looks stronger.
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 12:36:35 PM
|
| Fair points about the markers from yourself and wILDI, but the burial witnesses tipped the wink about the bodies in Deep Ravine, no such reference can be found concerning burials near MTC - I stand to be corrected, of course. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 1:29:53 PM
|
quote:
DC ~ I don't think he marched the guys across Sharpshooter, but on one side or the other to Cedar Coulee. But who knows.
You may be right. But then, just where did Reno's men see Custer's column? Many reported seeing Custer atop the ridges from the valley. If Reno's men could see them, then one would suppose that the warriors could to.
quote:
Smcf ~ Firstly - can anyone tell us whether Cedar Coulee is a sensible way to MTC for a man in a hurry, as Boyer is supposed to have taken a more direct route from Weir Point carving half a mile out of the journey. Even if an alternative route wasn't the best, so what? - wasn't Kanipe's message to the train to get over cross country if necessary, cutting off packs - no stopping etc? In other words "you hurry, but I'll stop here and there and maybe wander down this valley going away from the village". His chosen route down to MTC just doesn't fit with this hurry theory.
I think the assumption is that it was Cedar Coulee. This is because of the way Gray and others present the evidence. One would, i suppose, assume that when a trooper reports seeing them "dissapear behind", or "dissapear over" etc Weir Peak that it could mean Cedar Coulee. The question remains. Is that what they meant? The north slope of Weir Peak was also easily accessable. If they moved that way it could appear to those from the valley that they were indeed, "dissapearing behind", "dissapearing over" Weir peak. I think it's become more of a fancy that Custer went into Cedar Coulee. Whether he actually did or not, has not been proven. Custer's column could have easily trotted North or Northwest and then dissapeared behind a lower ridge line that extends from Weir Peak to the west. This is unknown. There is also another coulee west of Cedar which to my way of thinking would have and probably was closer to the actual Coulee where Custer went. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 2:55:39 PM
|
I imagine that travelling via coulees was far preferably than over the broken terrain which would fragment the command and also cause it to become strung out.
My problem is I cannot get Custer from ford B at MTC to LSH by any logical route.
So another theory.He dismisses MTC because it leads right into the heart of the village and proceeds further NW to try his luck at Calhoun Coulee but time has run out on him and this avenue of approach is swarming with Indians.The command turns and retreats up Deep Ravine.The retreat heads for LSH becoming a rout with Smiths rearward troop being cut off and all but destroyed.Keogh and Calhoun seeing the plight of the lead units do not follow Custer down Calhoun Coulee but take a position on Battle Ridge thus giving the impression that Custer had divided his command into two wings.The distance from Ford B to LSH is well over a mile if Custer was forced to retreat at Ford B then the route to LSH would have been littered with dead.The retreat actually begins in Deep Ravine.It kinda fits----No evidence of fighting at Ford B,the dead in Deep Ravine,the running retreat to LSH and the command divided.
|
Edited by - wILD I on October 27 2005 3:13:52 PM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 27 2005 : 3:56:31 PM
|
quote:
Wild1 ~ I imagine that travelling via coulees was far preferably than over the broken terrain which would fragment the command and also cause it to become strung out. My problem is I cannot get Custer from ford B at MTC to LSH by any logical route.
This I think is perhaps the greatest mystery of the LBH. There was nothing logical to it. If logic can't explain it then the mystery deepens doens't it? Much has been made of this. And I think way too much "Custer Glorious" tends to complicate things. Try as we might to pass by or ignore MTF, it's difficult to do? The indians speak of action there. They speak of the soldiers being there. Curley speaks of it. There is no way to get around it. Sadly for Custer, he couldn't either!
Applying logic then. What could have happened?
1) A feint. The question is. Why do this? To what purpose would it serve? A feint will do only two things that I am aware of. a) Perhaps draw off the indians from Reno. And B) Bring the indians across the river in droves. If Custer was planning anything here. What could that have been? Several things are required to analyse this. The most significant is I feel is ~ Time. When would or did Custer try this so called "feint"? 1) Very soon after his arrival in one of the Coulee's near MTC? Or 2) later 40 to 50 minutes later at the same spot.
Personally, from Custer's remarks. I don't think that he would have waited. If that's the case then a "feint" just doesn't make any sense at all, does it? Unless Custer had some kind of trap or counterattack set up somewhere else it doesn't make sense. And then one would assume that if he did have a trap set up. Wouldn't he have used tactics and terrain that favoured his odds of winning. Wouldn't these favoured tactics and terrain have been closer to Reno/Benteen? And not further away?
2) Custer had a full out attack planned at MTF. Now if this was the case. What happened? Little resistance. The Companies all lined up waiting for their time to cross. And suddenly it all falls apart? Why? From the sound of it. And the evidence later reported. Few if any of Custer's men had been wounded or killed there. Why stop an apparently successful crossing? And then to top that off. Why run away from safety, instead of towards it? The answer... is what Curley said. There were literally hundreds (if not thousands) of mounted warriors descending upon that ford. Now... question? Can a column make an "about face" and go back the way it came from? Or does the commander, assuming he's at the head of that column have to turn that column around? And if he does. What direction would that have been? South? North? Custer had only two choices, didn't he? Which way?
The final answer to this is that the indians caught them off guard. And perhaps Custer or whomever was in command didn't see the "hundreds of mounted warriors" until they were almost upon them. This is self evident. Because there is no place evident that a major defensive engagment by the troopers occured there. And just like Curley said there were indians everywhere! They were "on all sides"! Driving them like "buffalo"! It wasn't the indians who were caught napping, it was Custer. What seems like something so logical now turns into the unimaginable, doesn't it? Whatever the end. However it occured. We always have..."the running retreat to LSH and the command divided."
|
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2005 : 07:06:57 AM
|
Benteen
This I think is perhaps the greatest mystery of the LBH. There was nothing logical to it. If logic can't explain it then the mystery deepens doens't it? Much has been made of this. And I think way too much "Custer Glorious" tends to complicate things. Try as we might to pass by or ignore MTF, it's difficult to do? The indians speak of action there. They speak of the soldiers being there. Curley speaks of it. There is no way to get around it. Sadly for Custer, he couldn't either!
I had this discussion with DC some time back but just to reply to the above here is the jist of that discussion again.
Custer did not cross at Ford B MTC because tactically it was of no use to him.He could not form his command for attack in the middle of the village.Even if he did what direction would such a charge take?Half the village would be in his rear or escaping.He had still one shot left in the locker and that was to attack from the north end of the village driving the Indians back towards his reserves.
There is no evidence of anything traumatic occuring at Ford B to force the command NW,in fact its progress NW was somewhat leasurely, taking 40 minutes to cover a mile.I find it difficult to accept DC's contention that Custer was hors de combat and the command leaderless and somehow just wandered aimeless NW.
Custer arrived in the vicinity of LSH with his command in tact and attempts to approach Deep Coulee Ford and runs headlong into hundreds of Indians swarming to attack.He may have been the first casualty here thus the panic headlong retreat up Deep Ravine,all order gone,rout,all over in the time it takes a hungry man to eat his dinner.
|
Edited by - wILD I on October 29 2005 07:09:56 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2005 : 2:28:45 PM
|
See, the newer theories - for whatever they are worth, and only some - contend that MTC was the NORTHERN end of the village on the 25th. But whether middle or end, if Custer was going to attack, I'm at a loss to conceive what advantage there would be to clearing the river and the small woods and getting into the village and.....what? Forming a line? To what end? It would immediately be broken up as horses break their legs rushing into the lodges. It's a close and nasty fight with pistols and carbine, under the impression the Sioux will zoot. If Custer was after the civvies, it's still quicker and more effective to take advantage of surprise in force and rush them (I don't buy that anyway). There is no disadvantage at MTC Ford B that isn't equalled or surpassed by puttering further north and attempting a crossing.
We know some part or other rushed down MTC, there was a brief skirmish and away north they go. Why? There is no evidence or story of a big fight, except maybe from the scouts with Reno, but there are some of an attempted crossing and quick retreat. A wounded Custer family member would explain it, if not Custer himself. Rush to high ground to regroup, the back companies following a parallel course firing cover, they meet under fire and never get organized and dissolve pretty quick.
I find this the simplest thing that would logically explain everything without convoluted and unlikely procedures. Is all. No evidence. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 29 2005 : 2:47:26 PM
|
Wild1 as I said, "You may be right." Just because it doens't fit your theory about MTF doesn't mean that it likewise didn't happen differently than you proclaim, does it?
Instead of rehashing the old arguements and debating unknowns beyond our poor power to add or detract. I offer this:
quote:
DC ~~ I really do think the more prissy and precise the theory, the easier it is to blow holes in it. Custerphiles have spent decades trying to produce a coherent theory that installs their prejudices, preserve the Last Stand myth, and still makes sense. They're now perfectly willing to let the impulsive Custer of history vanish and a new 'by the book' officer emerge, something Custer was decidedly not. The supposed motivations for what they claim he was doing and the actions supposed are often mutually exclusive, as we touched upon the disconnect between supposed fear of village escape and 'Let's stop a sec and tighten saddles while we prepare a feint before we wait for the train.' Then, when all this free time for Custer to brush up on target practice appears, they have to fill it with oh-so-military offensive moves.
A sloppy retreat because of a plan that can only be dignified by calling it half-baked. A fiasco. Further, once he entered MTC, it was too late, and he was cooked and nudged north and away.
And there was no point to concealment. It merely fills up that time Gray tried to explain away.
According to Warrior statements & Curleys observations Custer's battalion was forced from MTF. Read the accounts. The location is clear. The message is clear. The evidence is clear. As I said. They didn't even have time to prepare a proper defense of that area. Or we would have found... Benteen and Reno would have found evidence to support it. The lack of physical evidence both directly after the event is supported by even today's modern methods of detection prove that no defense was even attempted there.
One cannot try to change history from a personal perspective that defy's written testimony. And the written testimony has Custer and his entire battalion going to MTF. Attempting to cross that ford. And retreating from that ford. No feint. No half baked imaginatively modern manoever. Nor the time to do it! No evidence of anything else but a full fledged attack upon the village from that ford. What happened after, is all conjecture. And even then, brilliant time consuming manoevers persist. Time that Custer nor his men had. Time that no one can invent. Try as they might. Ford D's, Deep Coulee Ford, are all pipe dreams of invention that if they happened at all. Those events had to have happened after MTF. And after MTF. Custer knew what every other modern day Custer spiritualist doesn't know, nor even fathom. He had to make a stand. And just as Bouyer said in his statments to Curley at Calhoun hill, shortly after the MTF fiasco. Custer was indeed looking for a place to make a stand. All offensively contrived moves by modern day guru's is just plain hero worshipping nonsense. Especially after MTF. Curley knew it and said as much. The warriors knew it and said as much. And Custer too, knew it and said as much. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2005 : 1:56:53 PM
|
DC/Benteen
Let's deal with your errors first.
Rush to high ground to regroup
There was no rush DC,40 minutes to get to LSH???
According to Warrior statements & Curleys observations Custer's battalion was forced from MTF.
Turning away does not necessarily mean being forced away.
There is no evidence to show that the unit was retreating.If it had been forced away it would not have gone NW but would have fallen back on its reserves.
There is no evidence that it was under pressure or harried.If the action began at Ford B it ment that Custer had 40 minutes to solve the problem.And what was the answer,a mile of festering corpses?What befell Custer was sudden traumatic and terminal and it began and ended in and around LSH.
No evidence of anything else but a full fledged attack upon the village from that ford.
An attack on the village at Ford B ment inserting his command as meat into the sandwich.
Forming a line? To what end?
If Custer had charged into the village in column presenting a front of half a dozen troopers the Indians would have simply parted and closed on his flanks and rear much as they did with Reno.Custer needed a broad front to push the Indians in front of him and prevent them from outflanking him.
Ford D's, Deep Coulee Ford, are all pipe dreams of invention that if they happened at all.
The first serious casualties begin here and lead to LSH.The evidence indicates a hurried retreat from the vicinity of Deep Ravine.
What both of you are suggesting is an attack at Ford B which is twarted with such ease as to leave no physical evidence then to make matters worse a leasurely aimless retreat/advance to LSH to await the chop.I don't buy it lads.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2005 : 3:57:09 PM
|
A disorganized retreat from MTC under fire as theory is hardly threatened by a supposed 40 minutes to LSH, and like everything past MTC, the time lines are just an utter guess, based on logic appended to assumptions that aren't proven. Which is to say, I make no error. Tabulate that. By my count, I'm winning 4567 to 1 (there was radio at Jutland, mumble......). It's such a fullfilling life.
It's awful ground. I cannot recall if you've been there, Wild, but please trust me, the photographs smooth everything out and you don't get the sense of surprise from all these gullies. I think you have to take the simplest and easiest explanation that accounts for everything known before forwarding unlikely scenarios. Nobody can do that without 1.) granting a surety to archaeological evidence that - really - can't even be entered as evidence or 2.) constructing a Custer new to history and/or 3.) disregarding more logical connections between artifacts and known occurences. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 30 2005 : 4:06:07 PM
|
quote:
What both of you are suggesting is an attack at Ford B which is twarted with such ease as to leave no physical evidence then to make matters worse a leasurely aimless retreat/advance to LSH to await the chop.I don't buy it lads.
Not "suggesting"! There is no physical evidence to suggest a defense in the area of MTF. Thus there was no time to make one. This is borne out through Curley's statements to the effect that the indians were indeed all around them and forcing them from the ford area. And all the warriors all said it was like a "Buffalo Hunt". Ya think they were running? Retreating, under pressure? Or casually haveing a going to picnic holiday? The terrain there suggests that it was possibly one of the best defensive features from which to defend oncoming attacks. Yet there was not even the faintest hint that it was tried. The lack of troopers bodies in the area would also confirm their quick, hasty and forced departure.
quote:
An attack on the village at Ford B ment inserting his command as meat into the sandwich. Forming a line? To what end? If Custer had charged into the village in column presenting a front of half a dozen troopers the Indians would have simply parted and closed on his flanks and rear much as they did with Reno.Custer needed a broad front to push the Indians in front of him and prevent them from outflanking him.
Once again you defy Warrior statements and Curleys concerning this part of the fight. Curley as well as the warriors there said that Custer charged that ford "in column". Curley further stated that only the troopers in the lead fired their weapons. The Warriors also said the same thing. This is understandable if only light resistance was indeed there at that time. Which all confirm was true. Curley also said that the gray horse company was sent out in advance of this charge to form a dismounted skirmish line on the river banks. Thus providing the necessary suppressing fire for the rest of the column to pass through the river. Sounds tactically sound to me. What's not to believe?
quote:
What befell Custer was sudden traumatic and terminal and it began and ended in and around LSH.
Again you defy All warrior statements and Curley's concerning MTF. Are you saying that the warriors never saw them at ford B? Are you saying that everything they said was mere nonsense? Warriors spotted them there attempting to cross. Curley said they were attempting to cross. And fill in the rest with the above. No sir. It started at MTF alright.
Custer's Battalion wasn't turned away at MTF. It was forced away! The evidence for their "harried" retreat is in the warrior and Curley's accounts. The action was there. The statements they made about it claim it was there. And your saying ~ NOT?
quote:
"Rush to high ground to regroup." There was no rush DC,40 minutes to get to LSH???
There was a rush, in fact, Curley said that they were surrounded by warriors all the way to Calhoun hill. The warriors stated that this action was like a "buffalo stampede". Rush, I'd certainly say so. Only when the troopers attained Calhoun Hill would there be any semblance of order. Only there, was any evidence of a stand ever found, and indeed made. Only there, did they regroup, recoup or whatever one chooses to call it. And it was there, that Custer knew and said that it was time to look for someplace to make a stand. And please don't use "Gray's nor Michno's use of time here! We don't know the amount of time it took. No one does. And the best estimate is 15 to 20 minutes. And this based upon a "lodgepole" comparison at best. So your saying that Custer had the time is unfair. He didn't. The warriors knew it and said as much. Bouyer knew it and said as much. Curley knew it and said as much. And Custer knew it and said as much.
The first serious casualties begin here and lead to LSH.The evidence indicates a hurried retreat from the vicinity of Deep Ravine.
As I so chose to demonstrate the error of you thinking. I chose to respond in kind. With the last first. You have it backwards. The first serious casualties happened at Calhoun Hill, and then lead to Custer Hill, with the ending of some's lives in or near the vicinity of Deep Ravine. Warrior accounts on this I think are pretty clear.
quote:
What both of you are suggesting is an attack at Ford B which is twarted with such ease as to leave no physical evidence then to make matters worse a leasurely aimless retreat/advance to LSH to await the chop.I don't buy it lads.
What I don't buy is Gray's nor Michno's lame attempts at decribing something that history has clearly shown, didn't happen. Feints, A picnic through the back country by 1/2 of Custer's battalion while, Reno went it all alone!?? Stupid, ignorant, and insane manoevers that Custer neither had the time for, nor would have implemented. He didn't have the time to. Once he had sent Reno to attack that changed everything. There was no turning back. And there certainly was not any time for fanciful manoevers that proved his idiocy and not his heroism.
DC ~ I was posting at the same time. I'm sorry. I didn't see your post. Well said. |
Edited by - Benteen on October 30 2005 4:09:03 PM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 09:39:20 AM
|
Interesting replies,my thanks.
Benteen you suggest that the Indians were in such force at MTF as to force a withdrawal by the command with such speed and efficiency as to suffer no casualties?You go on to suggest a running fight over appalling ground [DC] with the command arriving in good order at Calhoun ridge. Only when the troopers attained Calhoun Hill would there be any semblance of order.This is very puzzling.Keogh and Calhoun are the rearward troops yet they are able to form a defense while the vanguard of Custer and the remainder of the command end up in total disorder?If Keogh and Calhoun can make an organised defence why not Custer?
Curley also said that the gray horse company was sent out in advance
Do you not find it strange that the gray horse troop is also nearest the river at Deep Ravine.Could someone be confusing MTC with DR?
[Did Curley actually walk the ground and point out these features to some creditable historian?]
As I so chose to demonstrate the error of you thinking. I chose to respond in kind. With the last first. You have it backwards. The first serious casualties happened at Calhoun Hill,That lacks logic.Keogh's position indicates he had time the Custer part of the field indicates surprise.Further the bodies of the officers of E,C and F troops are found on LSH not with their troops.This indicates movement away from DR towards LSH.
And please don't use "Gray's nor Michno's use of time here! Well I would not dismiss it out of hand.We can at least say that Custer is still in the game at 4.10 with possibly the main Indian force still 3 miles away.
Meanwhile back at MTC
DC
A disorganized retreat from MTC under fire as theory is hardly threatened by a supposed 40 minutes to LSH,That together with no casualties,strange direction of this rushed "retreat"and as you state the awfulness of the terrain.Why "retreat" away from your reserves and over awful terrain?
I'm inclined to think that while Custer expected the Indians to make a vigorious defense he never expected to be counter attacked with such overwhelming numbers or with such ferocity.Our main difference here is really just location.DR V MTC
I think you have to take the simplest and easiest explanation that accounts for everything known before forwarding unlikely scenarios. Nobody can do that without 1.) granting a surety to archaeological evidence that - really - can't even be entered as evidence or 2.) constructing a Custer new to history and/or 3.) disregarding more logical connections between artifacts and known occurences.In general I agree but would place more credence in such elements as time,terrain,forces,prevailing tactics all of which limit the possible sceanarios.And if you do accept the simplist and easiest explanation [Sherlock Holmes like]why the fanciful retreat NW?
|
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 09:41:26 AM
|
| There are first hand accounts of a trail across Luce and NC ridges, backed up by archeological evidence which can't easily be explained away. A case can also be made that since the ground is so bad, that's all the more reason to stay on the ridges, which is exactly where the bodies were mostly found. From the reverse direction, it would appear from numerous Indian accounts, that those who attacked the troops from the west stayed on horseback only as far as where the gullies took them from the river, and then they proceeded on foot. As Michno puts the Lame White Man attack closer to the north fork of deep ravine, rather than the greasy grass ridge area, that would make a lot of sense in this context. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 11:35:55 AM
|
quote:
There are first hand accounts of a trail across Luce and NC ridges, backed up by archeological evidence which can't easily be explained away.
Source Please!??? I would like very much for you to site a "first hand" first "account" source, for not only the trail, but the "archaeological evidence" as well. I don't want sources that "someone else said", "someone else read" or "someone else wrote that..." Primary sources only please! From these ? sources we need to be able to determine 1) strength in numbers. 2) Confirmation of whether or not it was a warrior or cavalry trail. 3) Solid archaeological evidence that these finding were indeed made by cavalry troopers. And 4) These archaeological findings were true and not salted nor made by some previous movie or re-inaction type thing.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 11:56:16 AM
|
If a charge/feint/afternoon ride was blunted for whatever reason at MTC ford, the front units can't turn on a dime, or stop, without taking unnecessary hits, so they keep moving. The modern road follows a path of least geographic resistance, or something close to it, and Deep Coulee is there, so I don't find the rush to LSH/Custer Ridge implausible or illogical once the decision is made to remove themselves from combat for something or other. I truly think that once the action - whatever it was - was started by Custer, the old saw about no plan survives contact with the enemy took hold, and the momentum of events - planned and unexpected both - on ground precluding easy exchange of commands and info doomed them.
There was a trail of shoed horses across those ridges and supposedly cartridges were found there by the ridges' namesakes in the past more or less indicating mounted volley fire, and there's nothing threatening about any of that, true or not. If I and L had stopped and reformed when the whatever at the ford headed north, it would make sense for them to provide some support riding parallel to the other companies, more or less. Nothing innovative or exciting or particularly brilliant or stupid. Logical and doesn't violate known history or fact. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 12:24:05 PM
|
@Benteen - Godfrey qualifies on the first-hand stakes, having been there - Michno provides references.
@DC - what's innovative but not so exciting is I and L doing all this over a mile away from being able to cover anything, possibly with C, F, Custer et al. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 1:34:02 PM
|
DC
What you seem to be suggesting is that tactics are determiened by convience of approach to target.You also don't seem to grasp the difference between attacking in column and attacking in line.
Tactically ,attacking the middle of the village in column and continuing through it in this formation is just absurd.[look at what happened to Reno].Column allows half a dozen troopers at the head to use their weapons, all the others are masked.The North end of the village is the only location Custer can form up and attack on a broad front.
You suggest Custer used MTC because it was convenient and when things went wrong he used the nearest convenient exit which was Deep Coulee regardless of where it led.A victory of geography over tactics? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 2:21:13 PM
|
Although never in the military, I believe I've grasped the complicated and highly recondite concept, understood only after years of study, of "line" vs. "column" attacks that so distinguishes experienced soldiers - especially all the horse cavalrymen - from mere lay folk like myself: Cowards and not too bright. It seems to me, an idiot, attacking in column is almost always absurd against a lined enemy. Why that's relevant to an Indian camp escapes me. Of course, I'm also foolish in thinking that those in column might be allowed to shoot at those not blocked by their peers in front in such an attack.
I'd also go so far as to say few things affect or predetermine tactics more than geography.
You claim MTC was the middle of the village, yet we don't know that. Some think it the northernmost point at that day and time. It doesn't matter. Reno'd been fighting an hour more or less, by the time Custer merely started DOWN the coulee, perhaps with the idea of bringing something to bear? Who knows.
In any case, the line attack is problematical in attacking a village of lodges as well. A horse holding a line and hitting the first lodge will surely bring it down and surely break his legs often enough. These lodge poles are green and several inches thick at base, tied with leather, and some tribes had the thick ends up; plenty of trip and owie material either way. Ergo, a prissy line formed and then unleashed against Sioux lodges in all the dramatic fury Custerphiles simply wilt imagining would automatically result in significant numbers of that line down immediately. And in fact, cavalry apparently rode into these villages shooting at anything that moved by the easiest way least likely to down the riders' mounts. The whole concept is designed on the assumption the Indians run.
So this line vs. column distinction - while terribly exciting for military minds to ponder while ironing their costumes - isn't relevant. Heavy breathing over who should play Custer in the next movie is far more.......well, eerie, actually, but just as key as this trivia. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on October 31 2005 2:52:59 PM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 4:43:58 PM
|
So according to you it matters not where the blow is to be struck nor the formation used to strike the blow.Simplicity is the key.Where or how are not things a beau sabre would trouble himself with.Now where's me costume?
If the leading horses go down what happens to the horses following?
What % of the unit's fire power can be brought to bear on running Indians if the unit is in column?
How quickly can a column be turned about?
How easy is it to outflank a column?
Where are the officers positioned in a column.?
How do you communicate with the rear units in a column?
Of course, I'm also foolish in thinking that those in column might be allowed to shoot at those not blocked by their peers in front in such an attack.
Ok I want a dozen volunteers to head up this column just one thing to bear in mind the boys at the back will be firing over your heads well most of the time we hope.
You claim MTC was the middle of the village, yet we don't know that.
Reno halted about 500 yards short of the Village so from that point to Ford B measures [roughly]one mile.So let's see that's 800 lodges and 7000 Indians along a stretch of one mile.Nice cosy village?I don't think so.
Always love the humour you bring to these debates DC. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 7:00:58 PM
|
Wild1 ~ You forgot one key and vital reason for ~ and question:
How does one cross a narrow ford? How does one do this in an organized fashion and maintain unit structure and integrity? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - October 31 2005 : 7:46:14 PM
|
See, Wild, my point was that a line attack against a village would devolve into something very akin to columns to enter anyway, and whether it starts out as a column of onesies or twelvesies or in line or whether they formed a bloody dudecahedron or Borg cube wouldn't matter. Get your ass across the river and kill as you move around. What matters is their presence in the village taking lives and names asap.
All those stories conflict, including the size and density of the village, and it moved a little each day. You may not think so, but there's room for a lot of lodges across the width of the bottom land there and many possible configurations. We don't know how many lodges or where, exactly, they were.
Starch, Wild. We judge you on how you dress hereabouts.
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The new myth
