| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - January 04 2006 : 6:42:29 PM
|
1. It's simple, Wild. We're being told something and we don't and can't know if it's true, but I like to point out the cut and paste technique of theory building by the Custerphiles, sighing at their print of Thoughts of Libby before they drift off......
2. If he's not going to attack because it's stupid, why continue north in wait and be vulnerable? Once stopped... And if the numbers are stupendous, as you say and they probably were, why not wait on Weir for Benteen or, you know, get it together with Reno? I just don't see Custer willingly going to where he ended up. Bad cavalry land, indefensible, away from the enemy but in sight and easily accessible by them.....
3. People continue to think pace represents desire of the commander. Since Benteen didn't, as Gray liked to say about the impedimenta, steeple chase to Custer with the packtrain this somehow shows he was dawdling. They had to pace their animals, and that could be the reason Custer slowed, given that some of his mounts - and nobody else's - collapsed in exhaustion.
4. While I agree more than not, seeing some scouts isn't seeing the 7th by the village, I suppose. It's not compelling, but there's possible logic to it.
5. Well, I suppose the exaggerated example is an attack and discovering you're deficient - or, more bizarre, a FAKE attack knowing that - and taking a 'time out' to await reinforcements where you think the enemy is somehow prohibitted from coming after you till you're ready with reinforcements. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 05 2006 : 1:52:58 PM
|
I just don't see Custer willingly going to where he ended up. Bad cavalry land, indefensible, away from the enemy but in sight and easily accessible by them.....
The village was too strong and the crossing at MTC would be opposed.The river was a serious obstacle.Moving North at a reduced rate allows Benteen to catch him up and gives him a chance to cross unopposed and outflank the village with his now 8 troops.
I know very lame but what other scenario would bring him North? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 05 2006 : 2:18:08 PM
|
| The photos of MTC ford in WCF, taken within a few years, show it as shallow, shallow, shallow. The river wasn't much of a barrier. I don't see another crossing that perfect. IF the Custerphiles and NA's in their mutually agreed upon current scenario are correct, MTC WAS the northern boundary of the village, and crossing there would be 'flanking', if you insist on these terms. Also? Quickest way to civvies, if that's correct. I can't help but think Custer's unit was driven to where it ended up. Don't buy the waiting for Benteen, don't buy on the offensive. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 08:09:20 AM
|
Two things matter here. Firstly, the depth of the river at that time - reported at 3 or 4 feet, if my memory is correct. The ford itself - was there any testimony to the effect that the ford was anything more than a convenient point of crossing in terms of access rather than comparative depth to any other part of the river? Secondly, and I confess I haven't got any to hand, aren't there accounts from Indian sources that a large body of Indians crossed at a point identified as the middle of the Village - with such phrases as "the ford opposite the Minniconjou camp circle" ?
Its a commonly held belief that the Indian herd was sited north and west of the encampment. As warriors were engaged with Reno, the dust raised with Indians going hither and thither, especially those rushing in the direction of the pony herd could have been interpreted by Custer as an attempt by the rest of the inhabitants to escape. Perhaps it came as something of a surprize to see large numbers of mounted Indians riding back rather than away. |
Edited by - Smcf on January 06 2006 09:11:04 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 09:02:21 AM
|
quote:
So, with a number of you reading the book, have any of you flensed out the spurious markers, moved the 28 into Deep Ravine, subtracted out a reasonable number that belong elsewhere in Deep Coulee or Nye or Finley ridge, and moved a reasonable amount of the remainder to where vetted testimony and early photos say the bodies actually were? I think it looks very different and far more like a clueless fiasco than 'tactical' manuevers of a Custer on offense that thrill so many.
DC - Read the first 4 chapters. According to what I read there is potentially 70 spurious markers. If the ones that belonged in Deep Ravine are placed then you come back and double some with the extras you could create almost a company formation. Interspersed with other straggling markers several company formations could be created. As far as finding human remains, I am anticipating some of the questions and/or discussion that may come up. Since there was remains everywhere on the surface and remains were dug up and reburied it would not be hard to believe that the bones of one trooper is in more than one grave. Has any research been done to determine whether this has happened? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 10:37:29 AM
|
We need to use the terms the same way, I guess. "Spurious" I reserved for those markers that should have been at a separate battlefield altogether plus those for bodies not found at all. The others are in various forms of being 'misplaced.' Now that I read it, it sounds pretty stupid, but that's how I've thought of it.
About all I can gather about the corpses themselves is that the Army lied through its teeth time and time again, mostly out of willing ignorance and because there wasn't much they could do for a few years. Not without reason and good intention, but none the less.
On page 128, if you scan in the illustration of the markers on Custer Hill, and have Photoshop you can do what I think helpful. Note the puzzling and unnecessary land enclosed at the bottom, since there are no markers there. Odd.
Although counts varied, possibly depending on what was considered the boundaries of 'the hill' or ridge, take the highest number of 42 bodies from Godfrey. We need to reduce the 52 markers there. Subtract Autie Reed, who was probably not found, and Boston, who was found further away, who knows where. Subtract eight unnamed others. Remove the remaining Custers, Cooke, and the four or five men Custer was found among to the top of the hill where the memorial is. Take seven to twelve markers and string them out OUTSIDE the enclosure south what is now the road, as photos show that's where the wooden markers were.
Okay, now adjust markers to show coherence between what are now three separate groupings. LSH looks a lot like the Keogh sector, with bodies extended along (the same) ridge line with a clump at the memorial and some just under the ridge. Now. Suppose the lesser amounts were true, only thirty something. Take a few more away.
Now, spread the markers for which we don't have photo evidence down the hill, or adjust in any way to represent what the tales from soldiers and Indians suggest. The cozy clumping of LSH is gone, and the bodies strung out.
Even granting Headquarterhood, lot of officers in here.... |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 5:12:07 PM
|
DC
I just don't see Custer willingly going to where he ended up. Bad cavalry land, indefensible, away from the enemy but in sight and easily accessible by them.....
Further.....This description applies to the entire East Bank.You could say you don't not see Custer willingly advancing along the East bank.
The photos of MTC ford in WCF, taken within a few years, show it as shallow, shallow, shallow.
The photo shows a bank/climb of approx 10 feet,scattered brushwood shallow river but boggy ground.The map of the area shows 2 deep cuttings.I imagine this while being no trouble to cross in file at a gentle canter would greatly hinder and break up a charge.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2006 : 9:53:49 PM
|
quote:
We need to use the terms the same way, I guess. "Spurious" I reserved for those markers that should have been at a separate battlefield altogether plus those for bodies not found at all. The others are in various forms of being 'misplaced.' Now that I read it, it sounds pretty stupid, but that's how I've thought of it.
I got your point anyway. Spurious for false markers on the specific battlefield an misplaced for good markers in the wrong place on the battlefield. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on January 06 2006 9:59:25 PM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 07 2006 : 4:45:56 PM
|
2. Not true, Wild. Page 81. What photo on what page are you looking at?
Look at the photo page 81.Boggy ground, stoney shallow river,10 foot bank and brush wood.Map on page 83 shows 2 serious looking ravines which might pose a problem.
That ford would not allow a cavalry charge to be mounted across it followed by a sharp turn South.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 07 2006 : 6:28:18 PM
|
There is no ten foot bank, but a very gentle incline. The river is shallow at the ford, it's not possible for it to be more shallow without being a kitchen appliance. Like a driveway in a rain storm. There is a break in the bluffs, and it's pretty easy down there. Doesn't look like any of the horses are in much over a foot of water. This is about as good as could possibly be imagined for a ford spot on a western river. It's better than either of Reno's crossing points by far. The river ain't a serious problem anywhere, but especially here.
|
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2006 : 10:12:09 AM
|
There is no ten foot bank,On the left of the photo there are 2 Indians up on the bank and they must be at least 10 feet above the river.
It's a good crossing point but 200 cavalry could not charge across it.The Mistake/puzzel was not at MTC but back when he sent Reno across the river and he keeps the main force on the East bank. |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2006 : 10:27:27 AM
|
I'm quite sure that many photo's have been taken of the area. However most accounts at that time stated that the water depth at the ford was not over 2 feet. We do have in our possession here a good photo of the area. However the photographer was more fascinated by the cut banks on the opposite side of the river than by actually photographing the ford itself. The photo is at... http://www.mohicanpress.com/battles/images/mtcoulee.jpg
Once there take a look at the extreme left of the photo. That is Medicine tail ford. Not in it's entirety, but enough of it to give one the impression of what was there to hinder movement... ie... not much! |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 08 2006 : 10:59:45 AM
|
On the RIGHT of the photo there are two Indians, who've ascended a gentle rise who could be described that way, back from the river bank itself. Giving the worst reading to it, it's still a big nada. As you know, routine use very quickly smooths out delicate rises like that.
The newer photo of Benteen is MUCH worse than the previous photos in the book. In any case, gazillions of Sioux found it handy and easy and so did the Cavalry when they had a chance to see it within days of the battle. The river was barely an impediment at all, much less a serious one. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 04:13:19 AM
|
The river was barely an impediment at all, much less a serious one
Perhaps it wasn't one reason that fatally delayed Custer's crossing at MTC but a series of accumulating factors the last of which was the arrival of Boston with news that Benteen was on his way.Add to that knowing that 1500 plus warriors were within a mile of the ford and inability to charge across regardless of how easy it was to walk across.
I don't think any rational commander would have crossed under the circumstances pertaining at 4.00. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 09:30:43 AM
|
quote:
The river was barely an impediment at all, much less a serious one
Perhaps it wasn't one reason that fatally delayed Custer's crossing at MTC but a series of accumulating factors the last of which was the arrival of Boston with news that Benteen was on his way.Add to that knowing that 1500 plus warriors were within a mile of the ford and inability to charge across regardless of how easy it was to walk across.
I don't think any rational commander would have crossed under the circumstances pertaining at 4.00.
Looking at the picture on page 81 and the picture posted by Benteen, it appears to me that physically crossing the river and forming on the village side for a charge would not be a problem for the cavalry. Wild I concur that "but a series of accumulating factors the last of which was the arrival of Boston with news that Benteen was on his way" is key to sorting this out. If we knew the sum total of these factors that were being considered at the time rather then the hindsight position we have now it might be easier to understand why decisions were made. Whether by luck or design Reno with a small force was given instructions to bring the Indians to battle. From possible observations from above one could see that the Indians were brought to battle and there was lots of them. Since it was obvious they were willing to fight rather than run away then ammunition would be a concern. Whether an attempted crossing or feinted attempt at MTC ford it had the effect of pulling the Indians off of Reno. Ammunition and troopers would be needed. ( My belief more troopers than they had available)
Why they continued north from MTC away from ammunition and more troopers is the mystery to me. The factors that were considered if any that required continuing north rather than reuniting the Regiment are lacking for me? I find it hard to believe it was the "civies" running away that was the driving factor.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
|
|
dave
Captain
Australia
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 11:04:07 AM
|
Thanks Smcf, thats great.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 11:57:06 AM
|
Two things happened at roughly the same time. Reno retreated and Custer - doing something or other - made his presence known around MTC. I'm not sure it's fair to say that it was Custer's display that drew the Indians off, because it makes it appear a deliberate act to save Reno, a new cherished theory. It could, for all anyone knows, be true, but it's prejudicial and without evidence. It also stands as an example of the different standards for judging the three top officers. Custer is given every benefit of the doubt.
Godfrey's piece is also in Graham's Custer Myth, is it not?
And Wild, suppose you're correct and Custer decided not to charge but, er, feint and wait. Even SO, you don't retire to THAT bad ground. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 1:57:15 PM
|
And Wild, suppose you're correct and Custer decided not to charge but, er, feint and wait. Even SO, you don't retire to THAT bad ground.
A successful feint was the last thing he wanted to achieve.What bring all the warriors down on top of himself to save Reno?No the agenda was victory ,nothing else would do,no gallant defence,no draw,no fighting retreat.It was to be victory or death .
For cavalry all the East side was god awful terrain but as we have seen with Benteen it could be defended.
At 4.00 or there abouts Custer was snookered.Crossing at MTC was out,going back he could not contemplate,digging in and waiting to be rescued what a joke.One shot left ---continue North and pray that that bugger Benteen moves his arse.
There is a very good photo of MTC in the LBH Remembered.Taken in 1907 it shows White Man Runs Him getting a drink.The book is worth getting for the aerial photo of the Battlefield if for nothing else.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 9:54:50 PM
|
quote:
Two things happened at roughly the same time. Reno retreated and Custer - doing something or other - made his presence known around MTC. I'm not sure it's fair to say that it was Custer's display that drew the Indians off, because it makes it appear a deliberate act to save Reno, a new cherished theory. It could, for all anyone knows, be true, but it's prejudicial and without evidence. It also stands as an example of the different standards for judging the three top officers. Custer is given every benefit of the doubt.
DC The Indians left Reno because of Custer whether Custer planned it or not, Correct? Is there any doubt that some troopers were observed at MTC by the Indians. I doubt Custer was concerned about Reno other than that Reno had brought them to battle. I don't believe Reno knew anything other than he was to be supported in a timely manner and he felt he was not supported. Therefore he withdrew. Benteen would have been negligent if he didn't bring up the ammo and he couldn't go any faster than the pack train. The question I have is why did Custer continue north? He knew by then there was a big village and he must have known the Indians wanted to fight since he asked to bring up the ammo.
I can other understand Reno and Benteen but not what Custer did after MTC. Any thoughts?
quote:
successful feint was the last thing he wanted to achieve.What bring all the warriors down on top of himself to save Reno?No the agenda was victory ,nothing else would do,no gallant defense,no draw,no fighting retreat.It was to be victory or death .
Wild - I can't offer a better explanation though one would question that decision making process at MTC. Victory or death to me means a chance even if small to succeed. I don't see the chance when Custer heads north. How would Benteen ever catch up if Custer keeps moving north? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on January 09 2006 10:04:35 PM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - January 09 2006 : 11:33:37 PM
|
AZ,
I mostly agree. The Indians may have left Reno because he was running away and/or because of Custer. SOME Indians, maybe most, went north because of a rumored new attack. Some may have gone back to check on the folks and kids when Reno retreated. But some stayed with Reno, and I'd bet a goodly number had not clue one what the hell was going on, and no blame to them.
Benteen didn't accompany the train and did leave it because he was between it and the enemy, but confronted with the size of the village and the realization they had zero chance if the train fell into the wrong hands so near the huge village, he did the right thing confronted by Reno.
If Custer was going for the Civvies, he'd go all out for the civvies, not putter down with a company or two, and leave the bulk of his command invisible to the majority of his regiment unless they made it to Weir Point. The theory being that if they have the civvies, the warriors won't attack them, right? And there they supposedly are, right across this essentially undefended crossing, and Custer doesn't do it.
The feint makes no sense unless there was a counter blow planned; attracting the Sioux to the world's worst cavalry defensive position doesn't strike me as a Custer Master Stroke. None of this rings of Custer or of coherence to me. He KNOWS they can't risk the train, and it would have to be defended in approach, and that negates blistering speed.
I'm not a soldier, but isn't it understood that mission remains priority over vanished units? If you know Terry's coming up river, do you retain yourself as a functioning unit or risk it all looking for/rescuing Custer? With the wounded, they had small selection of choices. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - January 10 2006 : 06:05:04 AM
|
quote:
Godfrey's piece is also in Graham's Custer Myth, is it not?
I don't have Graham's book - I ordered it last year but was told it was "unavailable".
His reading of Custer's movements make a lot of sense to me. The map in the article also gives pause for thought. The line north above Calhoun looks a little skewed upwards though, but then again, documents detailing shells along with human and horse bones found on NC ridge are difficult to explain in the "whole column charge down MTC" scenario. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
Topic |
|
Marker Relevance to Battle Scenarios
