| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - December 16 2005 : 11:46:00 AM
|
quote:
My question was "Which Indian knew Custer and said this?" The issue is not that there were Indians who had met and known Custer - there were - but who knew him and said he'd been driven back over the lip of LSH to where he fell? I'd never heard that.
I'm not aware Custer had fought the northern Cheyenne as he had the Sioux previous to this battle. Had he?
The only rumored Cheyenne sex slave of Custer's I've read about was the already pregnant 16 year old obtained at the Wa****a, a high caste daughter of a chief with the Southern Cheyenne, of which Black Kettle's band was part. Menotoseh or something like. Later on, she was rumored to have also birthed a white-ish kid called Yellow Bird or something that was supposed to be Custer's child. There is zero proof it was his kid (could have been, maybe)or that he actually existed at all. These stories reached various zeniths with Menotoseh and Yellow Bird somehow being at the battle and easing Custer's death in a burnished Pieta/Arthur-Modred-Morganna LaFey tableau.
I interpreted your question as meaning, "How could they recognize him?" The Monaseeta relationship is well attested -- although her child may not be Custer's. Custer was well known among the Cheyenne of both septs, since they visited back and forth. Even those who had not seen him knew what her looked like -- and the Cheyenne were well-placed to have had their women visit the field after the battle. |
  |
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - December 16 2005 : 2:35:23 PM
|
| What part of the Monahsetah relationship is well attested? And other than the two unnamed women in Kate Bigheads story, who among the Cheyenne claimed to recognize Custer alive or dead? |
|
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 16 2005 : 2:52:45 PM
|
quote:
What part of the Monahsetah relationship is well attested? And other than the two unnamed women in Kate Bigheads story, who among the Cheyenne claimed to recognize Custer alive or dead?
Here's a family geneology:
quote:
Ninth Generation
EMANUEL HENRY CUSTER 9b: 10 December 1806 Cresaptown, MD d: 17 November 1892 Monroe, Monroe, Mi) married MARIE KIRKPATRICK WARD (b: 31 May 1807 Burgettstown, Washington, PA d: 13 Jan 1882 Monroe, Monroe, Mi) daughter of JAMES GRIER WARD and CATHERINE ROGERS on 23 February 1836 in New Rumley, Harrison, OH. Their children:
1. ISRAEL KIRKPATRICK CUSTER (b: about 1832 New Rumley, Harrison, OH)
2. CUSTER (male) (b: about 1834 New Rumley, Harrison, OH)
3. JAMES CUSTER (b: 1836 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 1837)
4. SAMUEL CUSTER (b: 1828 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 1839)
5. GEORGE ARMSTRONG CUSTER (b: 5 December 1839 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 25 June 1876 Little Big Horn, Big Horn CO, Mt) m: (1) Elizabeth Clift Bacon (2) Monaseetah
6. NEVIN JOHNSON CUSTER (b: 29 July 1842 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 25 February 1915 Monroe, Monroe, Mi) m: Ann North
7. THOMAS WARD CUSTER (b: 15 March 1845 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 25 Jun 1876 Little Big Horn, Big Horn CO, Mt)
8. BOSTON CUSTER (b: 31 October 1848 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 25 June 1876 Little Big Horn, Big Horn CO, Mt)
9. MARGARET EMMA CUSTER (b: 5 Jan 1852 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 1910 Detroit, Mi) m: James Calhoun (d: 25 June 1876 Little Big Horn, Mt)
|
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 16 2005 : 2:53:57 PM
|
Wild, stay away from your Big Books of Historic Horror.
DC
You have a big book phobia but you should remember that the most influential text ever written appeared on two great big lumps of stone.
You have done much to undermine the end game theories of the battle based as they are on the position of the markers.But you have gone too far.
There is little doubt that Sweet marked out the extent of the bone yard.There is little doubt that being prominent members of the regiment the officers were recognised as opposed to the lowly ranker who was only known to his bunkie and one or two others.Benteen recognised Custer and never cast doubts on where he fell.And it would have been so easy to have placed markers for the missing officers but this was not done which suggest a certain authenticity.
So we can locate [with caution]the HQ group the troop commanders and the extent of the last positions of the regiment.Minor details such as movement of groups of survivers might be lost to us but that is all.Given what we have it is still possible to put forward a scenario depicting the death throes of the regiment |
|
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 16 2005 : 3:02:55 PM
|
Here's a note from Margaret Custer Ford, the family geneologist: quote:
I am so glad to hear from you! According to information I have received, Yellow Bird was born in January. Gen. Custer and Mon-a-see-tah met in November. So it is doubtful that Yellow Bird was his child. I have a book which I will search for, that gives some facts, and will tell you where you can find it as soon as I can get into my den. The whole house is torn up as I had a ceiling leak and all the furniture is shoved up against things so I can't get to the book shelf.
Write me to let me know that you have received this message, and also whatever history you might have on your grandmother as I am very interested.
Thanks for writing!
Margaret Custer Ford
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 16 2005 : 7:00:21 PM
|
That's not the story I've read. The 16 year old girl gave birth to a Cheyenne baby the winter after the Wa****a, and supposedly a lighter skinned version within a year after. Even Mrs. Custer wrote about it. No clue if true.
In any case, the tale of the southern Cheyenne 'wife' being at the LBH is not a given and entirely too coincidental.
From whose family geneology is that contention of Custer's bigamy and violation of his first wife taken? Why are we to believe it at face value? Custer's father had two wives and other children I think, but this mentions only one wife.
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - December 16 2005 : 7:06:42 PM
|
| Vern. I'm not trying to be disagrreable, but there is a limit to credibility. "It Ain,t necessarily so because someone puts it in a book. Custer being the father of a child borne by a Indian girl 7 months pregnant when he meets her is an example. The marriage is another. He was allready married to Libby. Do you suppose Libby was the matron of honor at the wedding? As for the Cheyenne recognizing him , there is a lot of testimony that they did not. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 12:05:23 AM
|
quote:
Here's a note from Margaret Custer Ford, the family geneologist:
I found a quote from her also.
Gen. George & Libby Bacon Custer had no children. However, it is rumored that he had also married an Indian woman whose name was Monaseetah, and had a child whose name was Yellow Bird. Is this what you are looking for?
Margaret Custer Ford |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 12:19:13 AM
|
I also found this on anglefire.com http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/custer/george.html
quote:
Prepared by: Orene Ehlers Custer
Date Prepared: 18 December 2003
Information from FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service
The information contained in these pages pertains to Mark Douglas Custer's family genealogy and is the most correct I have found in my genealogy searches. I continuously search and update the information as I obtain it.
Tenth Generation
GEORGE ARMSTRONG CUSTER (b: 5 December 1839 New Rumley, Harrison, OH d: 25 June 1876 Little Big Horn, Big Horn CO, Mt) married (1) ELIZABETH CLIFT BACON (b: 9 April 1842 Monroe, Monroe, Mi d: 4 April 1933 New York City, NY) daughter of DANIEL S. BACON and MRS. BACON on 9 February 1864 in Monroe, Monroe, Mi and (2) MONASEETAH (b: about 1851 TX d: 1922 TX) on 17 November 1868 in Texas. Children of George and Monaseetah:
1. YELLOW BIRD (b: about 1869 TX)
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 11:24:22 AM
|
Might be true, but what once was Shame is now Cool, and it's fun to brag about notorious relatives, and I, of course, believe family geneologies as God's word (my grandmother's efforts proved we went back to every Scottish King and no bastards by wandering eye, nary a one....all the men were handsome and all the women had money....no, wait..) as, eh, I believe government press releases in time of war. When Manaseetah's brood are allowed to speak for their Custer family at a future battle observance, I'll wobble. That, based on DNA. Also? TWC was rumored to share the blanket as well.
If you believe this, you're giving significant props to Benteen, the only one at the time who cheerfully talked about it. This adds greatly to his cred and detracts from The Greatest Love Story Ever crowd and Custer's value system, starting with how he cared for her and his son. It's not like he was away from his wife at that point. So, I certainly would enjoy it if true, and doesn't shock me any.
Still, I'm curious how the bodice ripping novelists and the Italian Fan Club are handling this shocking contention by the Custers themselves their most famous relative is guilty of, of, (what then would be called )miscegnation with a savage. Therapists are standing by, call the number on the screen.....
You can sorta understand Libbie's by God intent to wring something good out of her marriage to the deceased who left her with less than she brought and wasn't remotely faithful on top of that. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 11:45:52 AM
|
Wild, sorry got distracted. There were three lumps of stone, but he tripped on the way down and broke one, so we missed the commandments on avoiding Disco and Bold Enforcer in the fifth at Pimlico.
When you see these Fouche photos (I had not before, myself), you'll find yourself agreeing with me, I wager. Only a year after the fight, where there are stakes there are now no stones, and where now stones are few or no stakes. Also, the authors (who have some thumping errors, nonetheless)quote descriptions of the field dead that bear zero resemblance to what is there. Also, I REALLY think once you've been on this huge, empty feeling, sprawling field, your opinions change. What looks on the map like tight clumps of bodies are much more spread out in reality, and when you subtract out the spurious and move them about more to reflect actual burials (insofar as that means squat), it looks less like lines and more like panic. The Custer part of the field, Wild, is a bit larger than a square mile, with no trees, and looks much bigger. Even with the spurious stones, looks awfully frightening.
I don't know how I've gone too far, for I claim nothing else as true, only offer possibility. TWC was NOT recognized except for his tatoo. Imagine how the others were recognized without clothing or face. Benteen did say he recognized Custer, but where he recognized him isn't so clear. Regarding conflicting stories, there is one testimony in this WCF book saying Custer had two wounds and the HEAD wound was the fatal shot because it had bled down into his mustache and mouth. That's utterly distinct from other stories, but from someone as believable as any. All of this suggests to me conflicting templates to pat everything into shape for remembrance, and they emerged to everyone's surprise and discomfort. No ill intent, make the widows feel better, inspire their peers, don't dwell on the bad but learn from it, get the job done. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 11:46:19 AM
|
| DC Actually I don't believe it is true at least as far as Yellow Bird. What I was pointing out was that Margaret Custer Ford" the family genealogist" in 2003 stated that she heard a rumor of it which is not same as knowing it and including it in the genealogy. Yet in the genealogical data provided by the other source it gives "on 17 November 1868 in Texas" as an exact date of Custer's second marriage. I find that a little suspect myself. The person displaying that genealogy traces himself back to George Washington also. I tried one of the genealogical websites listed but they wanted money. Imagine that. You put in a name and then for money they will show you a relationship. The question is is it real. I decided to save my money. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 11:55:44 AM
|
"When you see these Fouche photos (I had not before, myself), you'll find yourself agreeing with me, I wager. Only a year after the fight, where there are stakes there are now no stones, and where now stones are few or no stakes."
DC- You have peaked my curiosty. Still waiting for my WCF copy from amazon.com. They are slow this time of year. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 1:21:33 PM
|
Yeah, I was surprised these photos existed. I still think the 'evidence' for Custer's northern journeys are weakened by this rather than strengthened, and I'm curious as to what others think.
Further, their reconstruction of where the photos were actually taken weakens existing theory as well. Morrow's famous 1879 "unknown" photo on Custer Hill shows stakes where no stones now stand as well. Also, Camp's opinion that the stones between LSH and Deep Ravine were placed to give the impression of a line...... That's sorta contested, but not really.
Nobody, I note, has jumped on the photos of a 'skirmish line' with groups of four...... |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 1:46:00 PM
|
quote:
Nobody, I note, has jumped on the photos of a 'skirmish line' with groups of four......
I guess I will take the bait. The infantry didn't have horseholders so all four squad members could be on the skirmish line. As far as the closeness together I don't have the same tactical concerns about the deployment of skirmishers in a closer than manual proximity to each other in the rapidly occurring events of this battle.
quote:
And, in 1886 on the LBH battlefield, infantry formed skirmish lines and fired for benefit of photographer Barry for the 10th anniversary (this from Where Custer Fell) that shows soldiers in groups of four quite close together, and an empty space equal to the amount each four occupys between them. The photographs are there, and are supposed to replicate what Custer was doing that day. This photo matches no description of such tactics on this thread, although I do understand a squad was four men back then. A second photo shows a line with soldiers kneeling and firing about six feet apart, then a gap, another group, and the mounted officers behind the left side. Page 124 and 125
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 17 2005 : 2:22:50 PM
|
| To repeat: I have no clue. I'm just saying that the photos suggest that if the 7th divided and fought as squads of three plus horseholder, that's a new presentation here. I'm under the impression we've been visualizing lines of twenty odd on a company line with horseholders to the rear. IF this photo in 1886 accurately depicts how Custer's men would have formed, that is. Dunno. But my continuing harp is that going to 19th century manuals (without yearly updates, I'd bet) to divine Custer's procedures didn't seem to reveal this possibility previously in my memory. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 18 2005 : 09:01:45 AM
|
| In earlier posts infantry tactics were brought up. While looking for something else I saw some photographs of infantry on a rifle range. They were lying prone on their backs with one leg across the other. They had Springfield Trapdoor rifles. The rear sight was elevated. This gives the impression of long range target practice. If they could be effective at beyond 500 yards that might be something to be "afraid of". Since infantry didn't have to spend all their time with horses maybe they were better shots. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 18 2005 : 1:04:30 PM
|
Wild, sorry got distracted.
Never mind DC ,I know that I can't compete with deaf squaws and who ever impregnated Custer's horse.
I'm at a huge disadvantage in that I have never seen the field and the photos I have are of poor quality.However having said that let's not lose sight of the fact that the placement of the stakes indicated a rout.The markers wheather placed where the stakes were located or not also indicate a rout.So Sweet did the 7th and Custer no favours.
Morrow's famous 1879 "unknown" photo on Custer Hill shows stakes where no stones now stand as well.[including imfamous boot]There is absolutely nothing in that photo to indicate where it was taken.It could be any part of the field.
The stake with the "unknown" is interesting as it seems to indicate that the others are known.
Imagine how the others were recognized without clothing or face.Wild was recognised as it seems was Keogh and Sturgis.[photo evidence]I think I recall you posting that Sweet was perhaps influenced by imagining no one had any interest in the field and sure let's just dump these stones anywhere.Well if he thought that he was greatly mistaken for just 10 years later there we have the likes of Mrs Benteen posing with her husband on LSH.Benteen never expressed any doubts about the placing of the markers.
All of this suggests to me conflicting templates to pat everything into shape for remembrance,
Yes by all means attack the template but not by undermining Sweet's efforts.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 18 2005 : 5:24:33 PM
|
Well, what they did is do comparison photos of these old shoots. The one with the sign saying unknown is shot from about Custer's marker looking south, and there is a modern photo of the stone markers for comparison. That one was by Morrow, and they're mostly stereoscopics. It's amazing they found the exact spot, but the land and benchmarks are dead on.
There were some that were recognized, but most not. Sturgis was not one as his body wasn't found. His 'grave' was a known fake put up to placate his mother, possibly by order of the father, the 7ths' Colonel, when she visited the field. There's a photo showing where the fake grave was.
I think you've misread me. I don't think Sweet just threw them up willy-nilly, but as the photos show, he CHOSE to insert extra markers when he had to have known that Reno and Benteen needed about 40 down there. In fact, he did put two down there, and didn't put up one at all (Sturgis? Can't recall) because he knew the body had not been found. So I find it hard to congratulate him for putting up spurious markers without noting which they were. I think, taking out the spurious and spreading the dead to where they were actually buried, that Custer Hill looks WAY officer topheavy, way more separated, and not so heroic, push comes to shove.
This is what needs to happen, I think, for using the markers as consideration.
1. take out ALL spurious markers and put them on Reno field. Over 40 right there
2. take out the markers for those Custer men who were killed on Luce and Nye/Cartwright ridges, found over the years off field, in the river, or elsewhere. How many? Bout 25, I'd guess, but pick a number. Up to 65 now.
3. place the 28 markers in deep coulee where they can be acknowledged as people in transit or at least not a skirmish line, since they can't fire out of the coulee, and acknowledge the sought skirmish line is dominated by higher ground. That's 93. Not less than 75, though. That's a significant amount.
4. move markers to where photos suggest stakes were.
5. adjust marker clump amounts to bring it into line with testimony.
5. now tell the various stories with a straight face. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - December 19 2005 : 08:22:44 AM
|
DC Wrote:
"Also of note. Those who claim there couldn't have been an attack or much of one at MTC ford use as proof the relative lack of bodies. These tend to be the same ones who claim Custer was north and west of Custer Hill going for the civvies and forming a firing line when called back to protect Keogh.......although leaving no dead there. But this theory keeps Custer heroic, sacrifing a sure win to save others and it's all due to: Benteen and Reno."
I don't think those (and I'm not one of them) who claim all that stuff based on the "John Stands in Timber" story claim that there was an attack, or much of one at the supposed northern ford either. If there had have been, then I would have expected bodies reported by the original witnesses there too. I'm not even sure that the Deep Ravine ford wasn't the focus for all of these stories. Remember the Gray Horse troop cropping up in similar reported action at both venues and the Cheyenne encampment was supposed to be traditionally near Deep Ravine, undergoing recent re-location to MTC ford area by the likes of Michno, but in either case, its the Cheyenne accounts which elaborate on any action near (sometimes not so near) a ford. None of these accounts support any real attack. If Deep Ravine was the reported ford area, then there is some field evidence supporting accounts of a dismounted skirmish and there are real bodies some ways up to fix real action there. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 19 2005 : 11:49:14 AM
|
| That could well be true. I don't know, but I just want to point out that applications of logic to discredit one theory not favored by Custerphiles is notably absent when they enthusiastically propose another. It's a corollary to my mantra: find standards consistently applied to the actions at LBH, and Custerphiles/Custer loses every time. The illustrative example of this was the huge enthusiasm, as demonstrated on the LBHA forums, for when Where Custer Fell came out last October. Then? Silence. Not a word about it since. They can't make the new book's info work with these working theories to re-elevate Custer using new evidence. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 25 2005 : 08:55:49 AM
|
I don't about the philes but I haven't received my book yet from Amazon.com.
MERRY CHRISTMAS to all |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2005 : 2:34:32 PM
|
Many happy returns AZ. Have a happy festive season.
Got my copy of WCF.As I'm head cook here I have not had the time to study it in great detail as yet.First impressions the old photos are in many cases better than the later ones.The photos avoid close ups of the graves and it appears as if the command just broke apart into forlorn little groups. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Springfield Carbine
