| Author |
 Topic  |
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - September 04 2008 : 10:48:20 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
And THAT"S where he made the greatest mistake of all. Custer assumed too much. Once he saw the size of the village and once he knew that Reno had been stopped (meaning the Indians were ready for a fight) he should have realized then and there that his grand plan for chasing scattered warriors, women and ponies was no longer valid.
Along with recalling Benteen to him, he probably should have returned himself to the general "starting" area where the command might reunite.
I'm not really sure anyone knew exactly what it was they were supposed to do, and when things headed South, no one was able to cope. No one really understood Plan "A" and there was no plan "B".
And I still think Reno shouldn't have supposed Custer and 5 companies should be able to take care of himself, when he with 3 was soundly whipped in a very short period of time.
I think there were to many assumptions that were wrong that ended up being to much for the Regiment to handle and the officer's style were a mismatch for the role they played.
I have not found a source that states any more than 50 Indians observed when Reno was sent on his mission. Anyone have a source for a higher number.
I don't think Custer went on the defense until it was inevitable that a large loss of life was going to occur because there was overwhelming numbers of Indians willing to fight.
Reading Godfrey in RCOI he states they moved out as soon as the whole pack train moved up which is within the message from Cook. There was not enough time to recover from starting with the Regiment scattered in 4 or 5 groups when confronted by so many Indians willing to fight at close range.
If Herendeen is correct in his testimony the Custer heavy fighting began within 20 minutes of Reno leaving the timber. Herendeen estimated 3,500 Indians capable of fighting. Benteen's command saw hundreds of Indians still in the valley. That leaves me to believe that there was sufficient Indians to destroy Custer even without the help of one that engaged Reno.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on September 04 2008 10:51:14 AM |
  |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 04 2008 : 11:25:46 AM
|
Fun fact. Compare Sgtmajor's earlier writing quality to recent posts.
Second, it's helpful if:
1. what people said they thought at a certain time is not assumed to mean they thought it before that time or hold it still.
2. that time and place be attached to such statements as "Reno thought....." As AZ knows and has remarked upon, it tends to calibrate thought. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on September 04 2008 11:26:12 AM |
|
|
|
Sgtmajor109th
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 04 2008 : 2:37:55 PM
|
The only numbers I know of is what Lt. Hare had seen about a
hundred yards from the Lone Tepee and the LBH. He said he had
seen 40 or 50 Indians on a rise. This said at the COI.
Is it know how many Indians were killed in the valley fight with
Reno. |
Sgtmajor |
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 06:40:10 AM
|
My guess is that 3,500 warriors is a gross over-estimation.
Anyway--does anyone think (besides me) that when Custer learned that Reno had been stopped (meaning that the Indians were putting up a fight) the prudent course would have been to abandon the earlier "Let's round them up" plan? And reunite the command? And why wait for Benteen? Could he not have moved his own command BACK to the vicinity where Reno and benteen were? he knew the terrain there--he did not know it where he was headed. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 09:22:09 AM
|
What was the total warrior population available to have been there? If they weren't there where were they? Of the tribes, bands present there is only how many? Without knowing the total population how can we guessimate to any degree of accuracy?
Herendeen was there and he was experienced and defined the parameters on whom he considered able to fight. Does any participant estimate the population at 800 warriors?
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 2:52:16 PM
|
It's all a guess and from all the published guesswork I've seen, 1,500 warriors of fighting age seems to me to be reasonable. In fact, it's about the # Custer estimated he'd be facing.
Herndeen saw what he saw on the field where he was--he was in no position to count heads. It's merely an estimate which I think is way off. The more of the enemy you estimate, the less bad it tends to look when you are whipped. I think that had a lot to do with his estimate, along with those others that give the Indians thousands more warriors than they probably had--. |
|
|
|
Sgtmajor109th
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 4:40:27 PM
|
Brent, not to long ago I was reading an article call the "Casualties
At The Little Bighorn". In that article Gall said there were about
a 1000 warriors in the fight. How true this is I have no idea, as so
many have placed different numbers on the amount of fighting warriors. |
Sgtmajor |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 8:25:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Fun fact. Compare Sgtmajor's earlier writing quality to recent posts.
Second, it's helpful if:
1. what people said they thought at a certain time is not assumed to mean they thought it before that time or hold it still.
2. that time and place be attached to such statements as "Reno thought....." As AZ knows and has remarked upon, it tends to calibrate thought.
The reality of life is simple and, not nearly as complex as you would have it to be. When people say a thing we can only assume they mean it. Not privy to internal thoughts, how can we think otherwise? That is why you must assume that they mean what they say until they say differently. |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 9:33:57 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
I feel sorry for anyone that believes that just because it is in a book it is credible and truth. If I believe everything people have told me there would be no criminals. Books reflect their authors. Ask DC sometime about how he describes the contents of a Custer book without having to read it by knowing about the author.
Joe Wiggs
Please don't feel sorry for anyone, theres no need. No one on this forum said "that just because it is in a book it is credible and true." What was said that, fortunately, there exist a small group of people who have spent a great deal of time researching this battle, gathering information, and substantiating that information with footnotes and references. As a result, they have made millions of dollars selling that information to me and you because, quite frankly, neither you nor i have the time or inclination to do the same. Sgtmajor's message was quite clear. Take advantage of the skills of those who have done so much to present so much information to us.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2008 : 11:01:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
I feel sorry for anyone that believes that just because it is in a book it is credible and truth. If I believe everything people have told me there would be no criminals. Books reflect their authors. Ask DC sometime about how he describes the contents of a Custer book without having to read it by knowing about the author.
Joe Wiggs
Please don't feel sorry for anyone, theres no need. No one on this forum said "that just because it is in a book it is credible and true." What was said that, fortunately, there exist a small group of people who have spent a great deal of time researching this battle, gathering information, and substantiating that information with footnotes and references. As a result, they have made millions of dollars selling that information to me and you because, quite frankly, neither you nor i have the time or inclination to do the same. Sgtmajor's message was quite clear. Take advantage of the skills of those who have done so much to present so much information to us.
Just wanted to preserve this |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 07:19:55 AM
|
SGTMAJOR:
My take on the # of warriors lessened after reading Mincho. He at least makes an attempt to ascertain how large that village might have been, and from what I got out of that, it may not have been as large as many claimed. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 09:29:08 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
My guess is that 3,500 warriors is a gross over-estimation.
Anyway--does anyone think (besides me) that when Custer learned that Reno had been stopped (meaning that the Indians were putting up a fight) the prudent course would have been to abandon the earlier "Let's round them up" plan? And reunite the command? And why wait for Benteen? Could he not have moved his own command BACK to the vicinity where Reno and Benteen were? he knew the terrain there--he did not know it where he was headed.
Lt George Wallace 9,000 warriors
Captain Myles Moylan 3,600 warriors
Captain Benteen 4,000 warriors
Graham 4,000 warriors
Van de Water 4,000 warriors
Dustin 3,000 to 3,500 warriors
Kuhlman 3,000 warriors
Stewart 3,000 warriors
Miller(who interviewed 71 participants) 4,000 warriors
Berger 3,000 to 4,000 warriors
Marshall 800 to 1,200
Fox 2,000 warriors
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 12:31:44 PM
|
Mincho-1,000
Charles Eastman-1,000
Richard Hook-2,000
Utley-2,000
Wert-2,000
And wasn't Benteen's original estimate at 1,500? And his later estimate at 8,000-9,000?? |
Edited by - Brent on September 06 2008 12:37:03 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 3:22:16 PM
|
The numbers I gave you were from Michno - Lakota Noon
Eastman states the Indians did not crush Custer it was a fair fight.
I got some ocean front property in Arizona.....
Utley depends on which book you read. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on September 06 2008 3:27:25 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 3:35:32 PM
|
Eastman is talking about the Sioux he also states the forces that repulsed Reno numbered not 500....Of this number probaby 100 went over to the Custer Batte, but they were a litte late.
Custer Myth page 96 Dr. Eastman's Story of the Battle |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 8:53:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
SGTMAJOR:
My take on the # of warriors lessened after reading Mincho. He at least makes an attempt to ascertain how large that village might have been, and from what I got out of that, it may not have been as large as many claimed.
Excellent call SgtMajor, if the village had been as long and as wide and fully packed as claimed it would have contained a million persons. The reality is a portion of the village was already in the process of moving when the attack occurred. A portion of the camp had packed up and moved northwest down the valley during the day and a half of the battle. Michno points out, "the remnants of the post-battle village gave the impression of a camp perhaps twice its actual size.
The soldiers exaggerated the size and amount of warriors to justify their failure to "chastise" the heathens. It appears that Russell Means may have been closer to the truth than I previously suspected. |
|
|
|
Sgtmajor109th
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 9:43:29 PM
|
Custer had asked Fred Gerard how many Indians he thought he would
have to fight, Gerard told him not less then 2,500. In Gray's book
of Custer's Last Campaign" page 226,(he soon corrected this figure
to 1,500 to 2,000 fighting men, which was uncannily accurate).
|
Sgtmajor |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2008 : 11:38:12 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sgtmajor109th
Custer had asked Fred Gerard how many Indians he thought he would
have to fight, Gerard told him not less then 2,500. In Gray's book
of Custer's Last Campaign" page 226,(he soon corrected this figure
to 1,500 to 2,000 fighting men, which was uncannily accurate).
There is no accurate figure. Period
The dimensions of the village are meaningless since 5,000 Tipi's would fit in a square mile. So whether 6 miles, 3 miles or 1 mile in length it could hold over 5,000 warriors easily. How did the Indians count how many warriors there were in the camp?
Since all the troopers there knew what 600 plus looks like they should all be better at estimating numbers
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 11:03:21 AM
|
I understand what you are say AZ and I agree with you to a point. The incorrect size dimensions do have some meaning as their exaggerated sizes have greatly confused and hampered us in ascertaining the true size of the village. The actual dimensions allow us to see how the size of a large village meta-morphed into a ludicrous proportions. I refer to Michno:
"For our purpose, we will construct a tipi a bit larger than average, 23.4 ft. across. (Seems reasonable) Its area is about 48 square yards. How many 48-square-yard tipi could we fit into an acre of land? An acre contains 4,840 square yards. If the tipi's were packed in with their sides touching (as generally testified by "White" witnesses)we could fit one hundred 48 square yard tipi's almost perfectly into one acre.
There are 640 acres in a square mile. Packed to the limit, we could fit 64,000 tipis in that space-192,000 of them in three square miles. The number of people per lodge has been estimated at three to seven. At five per lodge, this village could contain 960,000 people."
If we chose the minimum number of warriors per tipi (1) that would leave us with a minimum of 64,000 warriors meeting Custer that faithful day. What the above shows that the village was not as big as portrayed by "White" witnesses. The Little Big horn village was enormous only in "the imagination of the participants and chroniclers who, consciously or subconsciously, wanted to or had to see it that way."
In an era when it was thought to be an impossibility for a band of "heathens" to defeat an "elite" unit like the 7th., a giant village attacked by a glory seeking idiot became the P.C. explanation for what was perceived as the inexplainable. |
Edited by - joe wiggs on September 07 2008 11:04:06 AM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 11:12:13 AM
|
| The 7th was not elite in 1876. The Indians were a warrior societies. The theme of the camp was one last free roamers camp and let the fights begin. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on September 07 2008 11:15:38 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 12:19:10 PM
|
The accounts and testimonies of the people who were, you know, THERE, and trained observers should get priority if not exclusive authority. They'd know. AZ politely offers them separately, nobody notices.
There were political and nefarious reasons for the lower numbers of later compilers, stretching from incompetence to the need for Custer not to have been insane for attacking so huge a village, and to have been the "victim" rather than the boinked incompetent. On the other side, the need for the Indians not to have bolluxed it and incompetently allowed civilians to be killed atop allowing a slow and noisy cavalry regiment to attack at all lowered their group recollections. The last is especially pathetic considering the numerous spots along Reno Creek the entire 7th could have been wasted had the Sioux been alert. And remotely as competent as the defeated Army and romantics insist upon.
You also have to extrapolate 'warriors' from 'Indians' from accounts and testimony and what people used which word when. Even so, memory, fear, and confusion - all innocent and forgiveable - can affect accounts. And, it's possible to just subtract a flat percentage from the estimates of those who were there. We know through all subsequent wars that soldiers see more and bigger than fact often allows.
You notice the low counters weren't there, including Michno, a devoted Custerphile fluffing up every sprained finger as an example of the dangers of the west found nowhere else. He impresses Wiggs by destroying a straw man of grossly inflated images.
Then, you have to have a grip on the memory of Indians, who are human. How many times a year did they break camp, travel to a new one, set up? How many times did they camp in the same place? Forty years after the fact, how many camps would that be? How accurate would their memory be of places they saw only once, or flense the numerous different times they camped in the same place, or accurately recall the lodge placements of neighbors? While I grant them discernment lost on whites, the West still looks an awful lot alike, and they could easily be forgiven melding memories of long ago camps.
This really is a battle where the slightly less incompetent group won, and to use it as an example of military elan and brilliance diverted by treason and cowardice is - besides being unlikely and certainly not fair - rather grasping for a glory that cannot be attributed. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 6:49:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by AZ Ranger
The 7th was not elite in 1876. The Indians were a warrior societies. The theme of the camp was one last free roamers camp and let the fights begin.
Joe Wiggs
I was being facetious. I am perfectly aware that the 7th was anything but "elite." I am equaly aware that the Indians were not "Heathens." These terms are anachronisms used by the ethnocentric public of that era. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 6:51:25 PM
|
| He Dog said there were 1800 lodges. He was there in the camp. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 7:22:41 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
The accounts and testimonies of the people who were, you know, THERE, and trained observers should get priority if not exclusive authority. They'd know. AZ politely offers them separately, nobody notices.
Joe Wiggs
The accounts and testimonies of the people who were "there" can be located and perused in several tomes under the Reno Inquiry. There you will find more mis-information, prevarication, I forgot-itis, group class discrimination that discarded critical testimony and, subterfuge unimaginable. This "sworn" testimony is akin to a script of a soap-box opera. Is this the "exclusive" authority you are referring to? By the way, I notice every thread that AZ does, he is very informative.
D.C.
There were political and nefarious reasons for the lower numbers of later compilers, stretching from incompetence to the need for Custer not to have been insane for attacking so huge a village, and to have been the "victim" rather than the boinked incompetent. On the other side, the need for the Indians not to have bolluxed it and incompetently allowed civilians to be killed atop allowing a slow and noisy cavalry regiment to attack at all lowered their group recollections. The last is especially pathetic considering the numerous spots along Reno Creek the entire 7th could have been wasted had the Sioux been alert. And remotely as competent as the defeated Army and romantics insist upon.
Joe Wiggs
I have no idea what he said???
D.C.
You also have to extrapolate 'warriors' from 'Indians' from accounts and testimony and what people used which word when. Even so, memory, fear, and confusion - all innocent and forgiveable - can affect accounts. And, it's possible to just subtract a flat percentage from the estimates of those who were there. We know through all subsequent wars that soldiers see more and bigger than fact often allows.
Joe Wiggs
Your "extrapolation" of warriors from Indians is an extremely convoluted and obvious criteria for intelligent discussion but, I agree.
DC
You notice the low counters weren't there, including Michno, a devoted Custerphile fluffing up every sprained finger as an example of the dangers of the west found nowhere else. He impresses Wiggs by destroying a straw man of grossly inflated images.
Joe Wiggs
You mean Michno was not there? Well I'll be flabbergasted. And all this time I thought... To show you how impressed "Wiggs" was I have no idea who the "straw man" that you are referring to; honestly!
DC
Then, you have to have a grip on the memory of Indians, who are human. How many times a year did they break camp, travel to a new one, set up? How many times did they camp in the same place? Forty years after the fact, how many camps would that be? How accurate would their memory be of places they saw only once, or flense the numerous different times they camped in the same place, or accurately recall the lodge placements of neighbors? While I grant them discernment lost on whites, the West still looks an awful lot alike, and they could easily be forgiven melding memories of long ago camps.
Joe Wiggs
Now I'm,admittedly,really confused. How does the number of times a Indian village conglomerates than disintegrates have to do with one moment in time at the Little Big Horn. The long ago memories of the camp took written form within days of the battle.
DC
This really is a battle where the slightly less incompetent group won, and to use it as an example of military elan and brilliance diverted by treason and cowardice is - besides being unlikely and certainly not fair - rather grasping for a glory that cannot be attributed.
Joe Wiggs
I'll give anyone on this forum ten bucks for a written translation into English of this last paragraph. This does not include you DC.
|
Edited by - joe wiggs on September 07 2008 7:29:46 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2008 : 9:19:37 PM
|
Joe the first few tickets I wrote I could remember each name and detail. Now they blend and I am not even close to knowing what year they occurred. When I tell stories of past patrols to new officers I have no ideas what year they occurred.
So if the fact that camps are formed and dissolved many times per year and then extended over 10s of year then it would be hard to remember exactly who was in camp. It wasn't the first time camp occurred on the LBH even in that exact location.
Here my shot at your ten bucks. Both sides were incompetent that day. The Indians made fewer mistakes and won. To say Custer was brilliant except for the action of Reno and Benteen would have had a glorious victory is a joke.
AZ Ranger
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Reno and Custer; friends?
