| Author |
 Topic  |
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 01 2005 : 03:43:46 AM
|
Benteen
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?
Spot on Benteen.You don't because you can't maintain structure and integrity.DC suggests you charge across,any old direction will do any old formation will do and fight as individuals.That way you end up with 1500 individuals against 220 individuals.
If the 7th had one advantage that day it was organisation but according to DC this must be disregarded with everyman for himself.
All those stories conflict, including the size and density of the village, and it moved a little each day.
We know where one end of it was that day.Easy enough to figure out that 800 lodges will stretch way beyond MTC.
Starch, Wild. We judge you on how you dress hereabouts.
Starch in a kilt? |
  |
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 05:10:29 AM
|
An intention to cross the ford is supported neither by evidence nor testimony. The latter has the column spread out and dismounted for a skirmish, the former has a retreat virtually without loss. Yes - a ford would be in column, then a form up before charging. If the ford was well north of the village, then it might be worth looking at seriously. But it wasn't, so it isn't. However, another ford north of the village - nothing odd about that or the route Custer chose to find it. He didn't make it, that's all. The Custer of history? - sounds a bit like "forget the weight of evidence, and I want him with his sabre".
Custer gives Keogh C, I and L. I and L are strung out on the ridge, with some of C close to I. Custer gives E and F to Yates, and E is almost certainly going down MTC with possibly F. Certainly a pattern, in my humble opinion - a plan. Just didn't work - he was caught out. |
Edited by - Smcf on November 01 2005 05:21:24 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 08:20:45 AM
|
Wild, all I'm saying is that the advantage to cavalry is speed and surprise. Forming line to go down MTC: fine, good order. Throwing out skirmishers to cover the crossing at the not-that-narrow-a-ford: smart, standard. Crossing into the trees, firing. Eh.... Waiting for all companies to cross......hurry up.... Forming lines in the trees and now taking serious casualties. Then charging, with your columns/lines going to hell to make it through the trees and further disintegration when you enter the village around the lodges without overrisking your mount......iffy. All this form and reform under fire makes small sense when you're losing the shock of surprise - and giving them time to adjust sights and breath while squeezing off shots.
So what is the point of all this when you get to the point of skirmishers and then don't cross? None. Zero. Stupid. You've alerted superior numbers to your intent. All surprise is lost, all point to rushing to another crossing is lost given there is no longer any surprise and the enemy is more prepared. It's why I think something happened - a wounded Custer family member - that effectively set the actual command structure into effect over the official one.
All these scenarios after Custer leaves Weir Point are designed to show Custer had a coherent, preferably winning plan if only someone else had done something. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 09:10:29 AM
|
| Superior numbers? - there weren't superior numbers facing them at that time, that's what all the evidence suggests. That's why Gray and other experts came up with a decoy. For what reason, we can only guess given a dynamic scene down there which most of us can only see in staccato episodes. |
Edited by - Smcf on November 01 2005 09:16:03 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 09:16:34 AM
|
quote:
An intention to cross the ford is supported neither by evidence nor testimony. The latter has the column spread out and dismounted for a skirmish, the former has a retreat virtually without loss. Yes - a ford would be in column, then a form up before charging. If the ford was well north of the village, then it might be worth looking at seriously. But it wasn't, so it isn't. However, another ford north of the village - nothing odd about that or the route Custer chose to find it. He didn't make it, that's all. The Custer of history? - sounds a bit like "forget the weight of evidence, and I want him with his sabre".
Custer gives Keogh C, I and L. I and L are strung out on the ridge, with some of C close to I. Custer gives E and F to Yates, and E is almost certainly going down MTC with possibly F. Certainly a pattern, in my humble opinion - a plan. Just didn't work - he was caught out.
-------------------------------------------
Meaningless Meanderings:
I find it interesting that you feel Custer went directly from Weir Peak to the battlefield. Which by the way "is supported neither by evidence nor testimony." What does taking his whole command to the battlefeld prove? What does it do? Whether that route is temporarily by way of MTF and then a oops decision and a further ride down stream. Or whether it is by fanciful manoevers, by one route or another. This is simply a foolish move. Unsound in the extreme and perfectly insane. It goes against all the warriors statements. It goes against what Curley said. It goes against what Martini said. In fact it goes against everything Custer wanted to accomplish.
Only if one eliminates all the warrior statements, Martini's statements and Curleys observations does your theory make any sense. Yet they were the ones who fought it. Who do I choose to believe. Certainly not you, nor Gray whose meddling caused all of this insane babble. So much mumble jumble garbage (Gray, Michno, etal...) has came down to us recently that all the true facts concerning this battle makes it more mysterious than it really was.
-----------------------------------------------------
Warrior Statements: The lakota arrived at MTF and saw the latter part of that action. When the troopers were retreating on the ridges. From their perspective then, the troopers never came anywhere near the river. The Cheyenne were there and told the beginning of the action that happened at MTF. And seen them down by the river trying to cross. One quite simply compliments the other when it comes to explaining the MTF incident provides a clear concise reading of events there.
-----------------------------------------------------
Chasing phantom fords & Benteen:
Why not go further down stream to look for another crossing? Once the attack commenced with Reno. A full commitment to battle was made. And sooner, not later. Sooner at MTF, than later ~ trying to find some ford that may not have existed! Custer knew this. And he was too shrewd of a commander not to have known what to do. Feints, delaying actions and fanciful manoevers were out of the question. It was obvious that he didn't have a clue as to Benteen's actual whereabouts when he sent Martini. Thus, he would not have known how long or how far away he (Benteen) was. Remember, Boston didn't arrive until after Martini had left. So naturally at the time of issuance to Martini. Custer had no clue as to Benteen's actual whereabouts. What did Custer do after Martini left? According to Martini and Curley they left for the ford. Both of them witnessed this action. And both of them told you what happened. Yet you still choose to believe a lie. And Not the warriors, Curley nor Martini.
----------------------------------------------------
The hapless, hopeless Benteen notes:
Why would Custer wait for Benteen? Think about this carefully.......... According to Gray, who happened to need such an alibi. So he contrives a nice little story about the wait of what 40 to 50 minutes? He goes on to contrive the split in command and his insane idea of feinting at the ford. Ask youself. What does waiting accomplish? Was Custer so inept at command that he would have done this? He waited for the "napping" indians and gave them the time to organize a proper defense. He waited until Reno was swarmed under and had to retreat. He waited so that he could throw a lame feinting manoever at the ford. And last, he waited for Benteen. Did he really do this? Was he so incapable of a commader to really do this? And then to top all of this off, he does what???? He splits his command to do what? Attack thousands of indians with meagher forces spread out over god knows where? Through unseen fords that are as yet unlocated. And all of this happening after he waited? And just what was Benteen supposed to do once he arrived at the scene? Charge all those stirred up warriors at the ford? With what? 130 to 140 troopers? No orders were ever issued to Benteen on this, were they? The reason was. Because Custer wasn't expecting Benteen to arrive in time. Otherwise after Boston's arrival, another messenger would have been sent to relay those orders. But Custer didn't send another, did he? And if Custer wasn't expecting Benteen to arrive in time. Would he have really split his command, and made feints? For what purpose? Think carefully about this....... The object was to attack the village/warriors. And to do it in a manner consistent with strategy and tactics that would give him victory. Not defeat.
Custer did attack MTF. He did this with the whole battalion. It failed, and his troopers were forced in the direction they took by circumstances. Custer had only two ways to retreat at the ford. North or South. The southern route could have been dangerous. Why? Because of the high escarpment and ridge line lying in that direction. And he quite simply didn't know what was there! The north was a much better choice because it was easier to make a quick get away, and see early enough what was there! Once that decision was made there was no turning back. And the warriors seen to that! Curleys description of this event is telling. Read it! Does this sound like something that wasn't forced?
-----------------------------------------------------
Duty, Honor Country:
Why do I choose to believe the warrior statements, Curley and Martini's? Not only because they were there. Not only because I beleive they were telling the truth. But because of an even more sensible reason. Custers glory. Most know that I haven't shown a lot of sympathy for Custer. Most know that my take on these events have shown that I think him vainly glorious. No matter what I think of the man. No matter my preferences for discussing this with you. There is one thing that leads me more than anything else to believe that it happened the way I have presented it to you. The words are: Duty, Honor, Country
It was Custers Duty to himself and to his men to place their best interest first. I was Custer's Honor that was at stake. His honor to uphold the very words that he had said to Reno, "the whole command will support you." And he was fighting to uphold his beliefs in what this Country was and should be. Custer didn't hesitate for one moment when he saw Ford B. He went there to attack it. To honorably support Reno. He did it with his whole battalion, because anything less just would not have worked. To seek a quick end, before all the warriors were awake to prepare a defense. "Hoorah boys, we've caught them napping. We'll finish up here and go home to our station." Moments later he attempted just that. And failed.
To believe otherwise. One places too much trust in other's thoughts and modern day notions, and not your own. To believe otherwise. And one has to simply believe that he was a blinking idiot. Not honour bound to Reno, nor Benteen. A glory seeking fool, who rode around the field directing great and bold things that never occured. Indeed looking for phantom fords by which to make an attack. Even if that took him 4 miles from any other unit on the field? Not to mention the time to do it? I don't buy that.
I would rather believe. That he did as the warriors claim. As Martini and Curley said. For only then does his words to Reno make any sense what-so-ever. Only if one permits to happen what was said happened. Does it give any meaning to his death and his honor. Something that I can see him doing!!! He didn't fail Reno, and he didn't have the time to wait for Benteen. That was his error. His burden that he took into battle that day with him. Not Benteen's! Benteen knew it, Reno knew it, and so did Custer. Sadly for him, whether by design or not. He died. But I personally would rather believe those who were there. I personally would want to give him the benefit of the doubt when it came to his own words. Both directly before his descent into the unknown," Hoorah boys...", and those words in which he was responsible to his subordinates, "the whole outfit...." This evidence does jive with what Curley, Martini and the warriors claim happened. And I for one, believe it to be quite 'simply', true.
---------------------------------------------------------
Lastly:
Only when the troopers attained Calhoun Hill would there be any semblance of order....."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?" Very good question. Ever wonder why? Was Custer alive, or in a position of command at that time? |
Edited by - Benteen on November 01 2005 09:21:01 AM |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 09:33:16 AM
|
Very long post, Benteen - just on your first point, it was two transcripts of a Curley interview which both stated Custer went in a different direction to the Gray Horse troop at MTC. Gray also argues a case for Custer remaining to lead the larger contingent which stayed over a mile away. Again - the tracks all over NC. Try and visualize that. I can't remember where I saw it, but there is a painting depicting the retreat from the ford looking east, the troops on the ridges were just specs in the far distance. The statements of warriors at MTC ford area, corroborated by each other to some degree agree a scenario which is concordant with the physical evidence and goes against the thinking (your thinking also) at the time. That's what makes it so interesting to me.
He did split his own column command - that's not in dispute, he did it 15 miles away.
Martin couldn't have seen anything like an attack at the ford, he would've been well on his way to Benteen, if not even on his way back at that time - just check Reno/Benteen timelines for that.
|
Edited by - Smcf on November 01 2005 09:40:35 AM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 10:02:12 AM
|
quote:
two transcripts of a Curley interview which both stated Custer went in a different direction to the Gray Horse troop at MTC. Gray also argues a case for Custer remaining to lead the larger contingent which stayed over a mile away. Again - the tracks all over NC. Try and visualize that. I can't remember where I saw it, but there is a painting depicting the retreat from the ford looking east, the troops on the ridges were just specs in the far distance. The statements of warriors at MTC ford area, corroborated by each other to some degree agree a scenario which is concordant with the physical evidence and goes against the thinking (your thinking also) at the time. That's what makes it so interesting to me.
This is "supported neither by evidence nor testimony." There is no way of knowing whether or not those tracks was just an earlier scouting party of 4 as was reported by some of the warriors, or whatever. The number of tracks and their direction to use anothers quote, "mean nothing"! Absolutely nothing with out the archaeological evidence of the findings supposedly claimed to be at NCR. Even then there is no proof that this supposed "split" occured before MTF and not after! Which is much more likely? I'd say after. Again a forced separation. As for the archaeological information, produce it! Where is this information at? I've never seen it. Only through hear-say evidence. Until I have confirmation from legitimate sources. It never happened, or was someone's attempt to salt the evidence.
quote:
He did split his own column command - that's not in dispute, he did it 15 miles away.
Oh please. Dont give me this BS! You know what I'm talking about. We are talking about Custer's supposed split of "his battalion", not his regiment. Give me a break already!
quote:
Martin couldn't have seen anything like an attack at the ford, he would've been well on his way to Benteen, if not even on his way back at that time - just check Reno/Benteen timelines for that.
Gray had an agenda. That agenda didn't include the truth. It ignored the warrior evidence. It ignored Curley's statments as stated, heck he even twisted several of Curley's statments to make it fit. And finally he ignored Martini's evidence. Just so that he could make the timeline from that point on into what he wanted it to say.
-----------------------------------
aj ~ Modern historians have breeched the walls of insanity when it comes to this battle. The truth was written over a 125 years ago. Yet most still believe this trifleing nonsense babble that spews from the mouths of modern authors just so that they can make a fast buck!
I wouldn't say cowardice. They were being overwhelmned by superior numbers of warriors in a short period of time. I doubt any of us would have looked brave that day had we been there. Life any life is precious. And when one's own life is threatened like it was that day. It's difficult to say that whether or not it was cowardice or simply "I don't want to die this way." They knew the didn't have much choice really.
No offense taken. I'm glad to have been able to answer your question.
|
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 10:34:05 AM
|
| Hey man, take it easy. BTW - I don't see his splitting of his column in any way BS to this discussion, I see it as germane to the argument. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 10:55:49 AM
|
Much muddier than even that. Martin claimed Custer was under attack on the East side when he left for Benteen. Given his wounded horse, may have been true, but his story altered through the years.
I don't agree about your opinion of Gray, 'Benteen.' First, cut him some slack, he died before the book came out. Second, he'd probably had his fill of the 60's and 70's Custer presentations that were simply moronic as well as palpably incorrect, and his books did much to bring that around. He makes no claims for surety past MTC, and all he says is that this is a scenario allowed by the time lines based on testimony given. He was defensive about Custer being presented as an insane monster, is all. He surely didn't like Benteen or Reno but I can understand that.
I don't agree with his conclusions, and sometimes his build up of evidence suggest things to me nearly the opposite of where he ends up, but he deserves all the credit in the world for doing those fussy timelines that so annoy those trying to wrench things around. That was work well done, and the surest thing we have about this battle.
But I don't think it can be said enough: we have no first hand testimony from warriors. We have tales that went through translators, themselves of unknown quality. Verbal constructs and names - of people and geographic landmarks - along with units of measure and cavalry jargon appear in these tales as evidence that rational assumptions - giving the most innocent possible spin - were made by the alleged recipients. Or, as bad, the stories emerged long after the fight when the teller knew other stories and tried to incorporate them into his own, making his own assumptions of meaning.
This is not saying that anyone is lying, but language translations are not code but encryptions with entirely different ways of indicating time and identity subject to interpretation within the language itself. It takes a very believing mind to attach a lot of weight to these stories, especially related to linear time description.
Whatever Custer's motivations were, the West Point motto was most assuredly not it. This was a man who'd left soldiers to their own before, he'd been courtmartialed and convicted of lying and leaving his command himself. And even were it true, his Duty and Honor obligated him to have done a better job than he did planning this thing out. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - November 01 2005 : 3:19:33 PM
|
Huge post Benteen unfortunately I don't have the time to highlight all your errors.Just one example.Indeed looking for phantom fords by which to make an attack.Ford B was a phantom ford it just happened to be the first phantom ford he came to,as you point out--- Both directly before his descent into the unknown,"
Now as DC has demolished your reasoning on Custer's motivation for the "attack" at MTC you are left with defending his tactical reasoning for an attack there and I look forward to you doing that. |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 05:03:17 AM
|
| @Benteen - two things; I mis-read your post just as you mis-read mine. The column I'm talking about is the column of 2 batallions Custer took to his battlefield, under Keogh and Yates. That split also occurred at the divide. Secondly, Michno sources the unpublished Carwright/Luce letters and manuscripts in his Lakota Noon biblio - mostly at the National Archives. If you haven't got the book, then I'm sure it'd be no problem to post them here. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 07:33:40 AM
|
Although, two guys discussing finds aren't really the finds themselves. What happened to these casings? Maybe used on LSH to salt the field? Who knows. Who owned that land then?
Regarding Michno, recall that his condemnation of Camp for failure to support Michno's current prejudices misses the main issue. We're to believe that, fifty years after the fact, anyone who was allegedly at the battle had not only complete geographic familiarity with land they couldn't have seen much or maybe since, land that looks a lot like 90% of the west, as well as photographic and temporal memory of what happened when. At that point, not only are they trying to be polite to the whites, they're also incorporating what they've heard over the years from others. All this even before issues of translation.
Apparently, Indians are unlike any other people, and if allowed in dotage to chat about their youth, Truth emerges as glistening, unassailable marble about themselves. Only other, lesser people exaggerate, cover up memory lapses, fabricate out of whole cloth, and become more interested in telling a coherent, complete story - starring themselves - but Indians, or at least LBH participants, are blessed with higher standards. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on November 02 2005 07:35:28 AM |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 08:20:41 AM
|
I suppose someone (contemplating writing a book, perhaps) might go along to Washington and see how far a research trail leads on the issue of the NC cartidges, bones and other artifacts.
As regards accounts, they'd have to be given some weighting in relation to weightings of field evidence, as reported at the time, as would later reminiscences, archeological findings etc. I think Michno makes this point very well. The subjective aspect to all of this is the amount of weight to be applied at all levels, hence the scope for such wide differences of opinion. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 08:37:10 AM
|
DC ~ My opinion of Gray's research is that he did a fab job. Having said that. What he then proceeded to do was plant in everyone's mind his expert opinion of what happened to Custer's battalion. A false imprint about those "conclusions" that has left everyone today believing that Custer was the dithering idiot, and Reno and or Benteen was to blame. Which simply wasn't and isn't true!
Wild1 ~ No, I don't believe, and didn't ~ that DC destroyed any theory. He was making observations that while true. Didn't destroy anything, but re-inforced the unknowns. In fact I beleive his statements were more directed at the frustrations that one encounters in this insane babble.
Smcf No I didn't mis-read your interpretation. While Custer took the supposed "two columns" into battle. He did take them into battle as one unit. There was never and is no evidence to suggest that he knowingly split those elements once he passed into the twilight zone. In fact there is more evidence to suggest otherwise. Saying that he split them just because some unknown trail existed. Or because he simply previously assigned them to his battalion. And then pre-supposing that because of "covered up", concealed and exclusive evidence that no one can have direct access to. That Custer supposedly because of this evidence. Split his command is ludicrous and proves nothing. There is no basis of fact here! And even if by some miracle this evidence (NCR) ever does see the light of day. Where exactly was it found. And is there any evidence left there today to corroborate their claims? Was the trail made by indians on "shod" horses after the battle was over? There are a thousand and one questions that need to be looked at. With regards to the trail and the supposed evidence of Nye-Cartwright shell casings and claims. But until those primary sources are revealed for all to see. And not just some fly by the night imaginings by some amatuer book writer, who has an agenda. Then we can evaluate that evidence by direct quote and discuss it in detail. But until that time ~ it never happened!
Although we would like to believe that what the warriors said was incoherent, confusing and gratifyingly supportive of nothing. Most warrior accounts speak of MTF. There is no confusing this. The ford spoken of was clear. The action spoken of there is also clear. And the outcome is clear. And has been for well over 125 years. |
Edited by - Benteen on November 02 2005 09:41:04 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 09:13:01 AM
|
There is potential for warriors having confused this. If any warrior used the term MTF or MTC, they're not a virginal field of info. But they didn't, because they could not have. In fact, it's annoying to realize that MTC was early on, and appears on Maguire's map, the one used at the Reno inquest, as Reno Creek, later applied to the runoff further south that issues from around Crow's Nest.
I can't destroy any theory, and have no particular interest in doing so. I find the emotional need to find out what exactly happened beyond MTC far more interesting - and disturbing - than the battle itself, and more revealing about the American Character than a battle which, push to shove, is unlikely to have been much different than any other. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 09:29:02 AM
|
| I never said DC destroyed any theory, I don't speak for him or wILD I for that matter. If you didn't mis-read my post, then I don't understand your BS reference. Explain, or apologize. Secondly, I don't expect thanks for supplying you with at least some of the info you asked for, but a good mannered acknowlegement would have sufficed. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 09:50:12 AM
|
Smcf ~ Duly noted and corrected and appologies applied to mistaken id's. Any gratification on my part for services rendered, thanks. As for bs...
BS? I fail to see what relation between a regimental decision made 15 miles away has any bearing upon what happened later. Just because someone could have ordered a regimental schedule for when to take a pee. It Doesn't necessarily mean that this decision is thought and action is to be carried on into battle. There is no relationship to circumstance between the two. One does not have bearing upon the other. Once battle lines are drawn all this is just nonsense justification for one's own petty beliefs.
|
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 10:28:51 AM
|
"doesn't necessarily mean" is ok, BS is not. I don't say "prove" either, note. Its a valid line of thought, is all. If you can't see it, then fine - to each his own.
What I find disturbing after MTC, and I hesitate to mention it, is the idea of mass suicide, put forward by Wooden Leg (shudder). |
Edited by - Smcf on November 02 2005 11:19:39 AM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 1:34:12 PM
|
Benteen
Custer didn't hesitate for one moment when he saw Ford B. He went there to attack it. To honorably support Reno. He did it with his whole battalion,
Just to take you back if I may to this supposed full battalion attack at Ford B.
A cavalry attack relies on shock and momentum.A body of 230 troopers charging down MTC would have enough impetus to carry them over the river and into the heart of the village particularly when unopposed by anything resembling a defence.But they never got their feet wet never mind getting into the village.So what happened?You and DC suggest Custer was shot and Custer going down brings this headlong rush to glory to a screeching halt.The pile up would have the Keystones cops looking organised.The confusion of this sudden halt is somehow straightened out and the battalion does a brilliant V turn and for the next 40 minutes wanders aimlessly NW for its rondeveu with destiny.Ya gotta come up with something better than that lads.
Why would Custer wait for Benteen?
You recall the message "come quick"well that introduces the element of time into the maneuverings.Now unless something else more urgent turns up is Custer going to dilute the "quick" portion of his order?
I can't destroy any theory, and have no particular interest in doing so.Changed your tune DC? After destroying 4567 of my theories?Still must keep our allies sweet in this debate.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 2:00:35 PM
|
No, we don't. The people who claim there was all this fighting either in the village or at the river like the Scouts in the Bullrushes also claim the volley firing at Custer Hill (shave and a haicut being a favorite) went on till late at night interspersed only by clearly heard screams for "Assistance, Reno, pretty please! Today! Oh, woe is the courageous commander with such cowardly subordinates!" and Keogh's "No ice? What do you mean, no ice?" If we believe the forty minutes is sure, than we must believe also that there was an exchange of prolonged fire near the river, perhaps across it. I don't think you've been to the field, because the forty minutes wouldn't bother you so much when you see it and walk it. But it's not sure and never claimed as such by Gray.
Custer 'waiting' with a strikable foe so close is a difficult image to entertain. I don't think you're sufficiently entertaining the actual vs. the professed chain of command under Custer. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 2:16:30 PM
|
Custer didn't hesitate for one moment when he saw Ford B. He went there to attack it. To honorably support Reno. He did it with his whole battalion,
quote:
A cavalry attack relies on shock and momentum. A body of 230 troopers charging down MTC would have enough impetus to carry them over the river and into the heart of the village particularly when unopposed by anything resembling a defence.
Precisely my point! Something happened to stop that charge. Now whether one chooses to believe Custer being shot, hit, and or killed is "irrelevant" to the conversation. Imagine this for a moment.
Curley said that hundreds of mounted warriors were seen converging upon that ford. Suppose, just suppose that Custer didn't see them until he began his crossing. This assuming that he's in the lead. All of a sudden these warriors come over the rise on the benchlands to the southwest. Now, he's been caught with a rod and no reel. He has his troops lined back up in the valley and waiting to cross. He would know that he couldn't continue, right? So what happens next? His men are in no position to offer a concerted defense of this area, are they? Your analogy of the "keystone cops" doesn't end with the sudden halt. Custer was a victim of circumstance. And no strategy would have helped from that moment on. In short. He was up the creek without a paddle. And was a boatload shy of oars.
His charge was halted for obvious reasons. Charging the relatively undefended village and ford was one thing. Charging headlong into several hundred mounted warriors was another! And it was obvious that he didn't see them until they were almost upon them.
quote:
The confusion of this sudden halt is somehow straightened out and the battalion does a brilliant V turn and for the next 40 minutes wanders aimlessly NW for its rondeveu with destiny.
And what's worse is that the confusion from that time on only got worse, not better. It never was fully straigtened out. And there was nothing brilliant about getting out of the way of several hundred steam rolling mounted warriors. It was self preservation in the face of the fact that the warriors caught him midstream in column trying to cross what he thought was a "napping village."
quote:
Why would Custer wait for Benteen?
You recall the message "come quick"well that introduces the element of time into the maneuverings.Now unless something else more urgent turns up is Custer going to dilute the "quick" portion of his order?
No, "quick" doesn't add time to the equation. You want it to be. Because you as well as others want blame placed where it never was meant to be! You have Custer doing fanciful manoevers that he didn't have time for. You have him going away from safety in numbers for something that wouldn't have supported the other members of his command. Some have thought him foolhearty. And perhaps he was. But he wasn't foolish enough to try to find another ford, when he already had one. And if your trying to blame Benteen. Where was the orders for what he was supposed to do once he arrived at MTF. Or where the heck else you would have him appear, what then? Your brilliant guess is as good as mine. That's because there was no orders for it. That's because Custer couldn't plan anything until he saw the whites of Benteens eyes. And once Custer did a belly flop at the ford, it wouldn't have mattered any way, would it?
quote:
I can't destroy any theory, and have no particular interest in doing so.Changed your tune DC? After destroying 4567 of my theories?Still must keep our allies sweet in this debate.
I am quite sure that DC and I have our differences. Just because we happen to agree on this issue doesn't mean that you have to degrade someone, does it? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 3:34:41 PM
|
Goodness, I don't think Wild meant anything by it, Benteen. Given he's just granted me the highly unlikely string of 4567 victories on this board with him alone.
After all, I've been here some years, and I must have more than that. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 5:46:36 PM
|
Precisely my point! Something happened to stop that charge.Oh you silly billy you miss the point entirely you can't stop a charge.A cavalry charge commits the unit to attack.If a charge had been made down MTC by the entire battalion ,the death of Custer would not have stopped it,numerious individuals Indians would not have stopped it and it would have reached well into the village before running out of steam and being overwhelmed.
But in support of your theory all you can offer is "something happened"and like in some old silent film you extracate the unit with "one bound the battalion was free".
Curley said that hundreds of mounted warriors were seen converging upon that ford. Suppose, just suppose that Custer didn't see them until he began his crossing.
How could the ubiquitious Curley have seen them and Custer or for that matter no one else saw them?
Charging the relatively undefended village and ford was one thing. Charging headlong into several hundred mounted warriors was another! And it was obvious that he didn't see them until they were almost upon them.And these several hundred mounted warriors allowed Custer to withdraw in good order not losing as much as a man?
This gets worse come back WB all is forgiven.
No, "quick" doesn't add time to the equation.
If A orders B to come to him quick and A then takes off in the opposite direction it dilutes "quick".
I am quite sure that DC and I have our differences. Just because we happen to agree on this issue doesn't mean that you have to degrade someone, does it?
I wouldn't degrade anybody Benteen but I will have a go at your posts.
|
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 6:38:16 PM
|
quote:
Precisely my point! Something happened to stop that charge.
Oh you silly billy you miss the point entirely you can't stop a charge.A cavalry charge commits the unit to attack.If a charge had been made down MTC by the entire battalion ,the death of Custer would not have stopped it,numerious individuals Indians would not have stopped it and it would have reached well into the village before running out of steam and being overwhelmed.
The manner of protocol in such instances when the cavalry made their charges. Wasn't one of Head to tail formations! Each unit, in this case, a company. Were separated, at length, from the other companies. Thus if a charge was to be halted for emergency situations. A replay of the Keystone Cops wouldn't have been necessary. It would have been relatively easy for any commmander to have halted that column on a moments notice. The follow on companies would likewise have been alerted and stopped in time. So no, once a charge in column formation was undertaken it could have been halted fairly easily and quickly.
quote:
But in support of your theory all you can offer is "something happened"and like in some old silent film you extracate the unit with "one bound the battalion was free".
That "something" was offered to you. Your continuation of that "something" is continued below.
quote:
Curley said that hundreds of mounted warriors were seen converging upon that ford. Suppose, just suppose that Custer didn't see them until he began his crossing.
How could the ubiquitious Curley have seen them and Custer or for that matter no one else saw them?
Doubting Thomas? His observations of that phase are quite interesting. Try not just reading them sometime, but instead try studying their content. I very sure you will be enlightened.
quote:
Charging the relatively undefended village and ford was one thing. Charging headlong into several hundred mounted warriors was another! And it was obvious that he didn't see them until they were almost upon them.
And these several hundred mounted warriors allowed Custer to withdraw in good order not losing as much as a man?
This gets worse come back WB all is forgiven.
The bench that was mentioned in that post was approximately 1/2 mile from the ford. I am not too sure about the length of time it took them to reach the ford, nor for that matter how fresh their horses were. Given this information. I think it possible that Custer could have had enough time to reach the northern slopes of MTC, before the mounted warriors in strength arrived. As to casualties. I'm sure there were some. Just because no evidence of bodies were found there, doesn't mean that there weren't any.
quote:
No, "quick" doesn't add time to the equation.
If A orders B to come to him quick and A then takes off in the opposite direction it dilutes "quick".
You said it, I didn't! :) What quantity or quality of time does "quick" mean? What if. Custer's orders read. ~Benteen there's one huge village over here. I want you to come as quick as you can and plug the ford about a mile from where Reno now is.~ This is time? Do you see just how ludicrous "quick" is in relation to time?
quote:
I am quite sure that DC and I have our differences. Just because we happen to agree on this issue doesn't mean that you have to degrade someone, does it?
I wouldn't degrade anybody Benteen but I will have a go at your posts.
:) If we can maintain our composures. I suppose there is no harm to it.
|
Edited by - Benteen on November 02 2005 6:40:57 PM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 02 2005 : 9:23:34 PM
|
Wild1, you need to get a better map. Charging down MTC, there is a wide opening at the river. Then the river itself, then trees and shrub on the other side, who knows how deep, then maybe the first lodges. Custer doesn't have to get hurt in the river or across the river, but could be hurt deep on the eastern side and it's not that hard to take a sharp right on the bottom land. Coming down by company, "Benteen"'s correct, it's not that big a deal to avoid a pile up. It IS if they wanted to retreat back the way they came, of course, but the land and probably the enemy nudge them north, not back up MTC. I suspect I and L did that when Murphy's Law entered and refused to leave. Maybe C as well. Who knows.
Curley is with Boyeur on Weir Point, isn't he? Looking down on all this, seeing what they cannot. I thought that was the accepted scenario, and if true there's no conflict. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The new myth
