| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - December 22 2004 : 12:07:55 PM
|
| One quote does not make the book anti-Custer. It could be, you know, a statement of fact. If the book has falsehoods that slander Cuser, let's hear them. Quotes, please. Accuracy and truth are neutral. No book doubts Custer was brave, and each would have a quotable phrase to that effect. Does that mean all these books are pro Custer? Please. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 22 2004 : 8:14:57 PM
|
| Dc, your very much drove a point home that I have attempted to confirm for sometime. Prolar, who is not a fan of mine, made note of the fairness in my respose to you; Sadly you do not. You consistently make (demands) requests, you receive responses, you then disregard them totally if they are not in accord with your perspectives. Like a conquering hero you "Veni, Vidi,Vici!" The only difference being you certainly ain't no Caesar. Viola's book is from the Native American perspective and does not glorify Custer. In fact, it relays a negative slant regarding his actions. |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2004 : 01:13:09 AM
|
| The truth of the matter, DC, is that while the 7th was known to be a 'crack' outfit, they were not any better off than anybody else when it came to marksmanship due in part because the government only allowed about 20 rounds per year for training. Now having read this in a number of places, I still find it hard to believe that number. It's just like people throwing around numbers like 'only 13 Indians killed.' If that was the case, and of course I can quote you different sources listing the number of Indians killed to be forty or fifty, too, but if it was the case, something else would have had to account for this inability to hit the target. I propose that it was, in part, a lack of FIRE DISCIPLINE--the ability to control and direct deliberate, accurate aimed fire. I would sooner think that many of the soldiers, got too strung out, often away from their buddies, away from an officer and were found in places that could be construed to be on the 'attack' rather than assuming a strong defensive position under the fire control of an officer. It is true that most of the Indian casualties were probably around the Custer Hill position but I doubt if it was a premeditated position but a corner they were backed into. The British and Napoleon knew that a couple of irregular warriors could probably defeat three soldiers. However, 1000 soldiers could probably defeat 2000 irregulars. This factor, fire control, alone may not have had made the difference overall but would have served to hold off more Indians for a longer amount of time. |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2004 : 10:53:45 AM
|
| "They" say a man is what he eats..maybe so, but I think a man is also what he 'reads.' Given that, argument is easily sustained because everyone seems to have their sources of information from which they draw 'thought' that makes sense to them. Hence, here in this forum the sources from which we all spew out information are varied and some of us are better or worse than others interpreting and writing down the points we are trying to 'bring to the table' so to speak. I know I can't always express myself in a way that you and Mr. Wiggs, the Warlord and others do but that is what makes this fun for me...agreeing or disagreeing isn't tantamount to me but the way you all express your ideas is exciting. Sometime we should agree to read the same manuscript in particular on some issue and then throw out our interpretations...something would have to get accomplished then, I would think. The causes of the disaster at LBH are all moot points and will be debated endlessly....I mean, who counted 13 Indians dead; who counted the 50 Indians dead; who counted the 2 Indians in the LBH river, the 3 in the Deep Ravine and the 2 on Calhoun Hill and, oh, yes, that Indian with 2 arrows in him on the south skirmish line? Who, Injun Joe? We couldn't even find all of our soldiers and I don't believe for a minute that the Indians--all the different tribes--took a head count. Yes, I am 'dense' in my thinking and I will admit it; but I am not gullible. The bottom line to me in numbers is that 'no one knows' and all figures are hypothetical because it doesn't matter if they won by '1' or won by '3000.' A win is a win and the Indians won. And it doesn't matter if they won by 'hook or by crook.' So since SOMEONE has to be blamed let's make this disaster really look like a DISASTER...and I think The General--the knight in shining armor; the national hero, the apple of many a lady's eye; this small-tactics expert who lived under the sole of Mr. Grant's shoe was chosen as the 'scapegoat' by the Grant Administration and the 'timing' of the event was tantamount to its historical 'life.' The expected success of this expedition under Gibbons and Terry and Custer, etc. would have been a glorious, triumphant accolade at the 100th anniversary of the country's history and a political 'shot in the arm' for the administration. But someone forgot to 'emphasize,' to Custer, that this was a politically timed operation. A sort of 'need to know' option. That's wherein my paranoia rests and the place where I have to focus my objectivity. Inertia has done the 'job' to keep the legend going and sustaining a 'negative' line of thought has afforded many a writer to make a good living. I'm not faulting that...that's the American way, right? But it's the numbers that chose this side of the argument that has always concerned me. All things written have motive and I will listen intently to everything you say and write with deep interest even though I may be intrigued from where you are 'coming from' at times, but must say we will most always disagree on the amount of credence given to the 'money trails.' To me, it is at the heart of everything and it would take one super-human to not fall to its temptation of granting fame and fortune. Putting down the General has been the 'fashion' and the way to prosperity for many a person. Besides, he was last in his class at West Point...how good a 'man' could he be. Me, congratulations, George, for graduating from 'the Point.' Wish I could have graduated 'last' in my class from there. (You're finding out how 'wierd' I am....of course, you're suppose to be laughing quite loudly at all this, I hope.) Hope you and yours have a wonderful holiday season. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2004 : 11:08:18 AM
|
Well, I've read those numbers as well and like you keep a keg of salt on the left shoulder.
Whether the numbers of Indians killed were 2 or 100, it's still a bad showing. Why does "something else" have to explain it beyond bad shots? What obligation do you feel to provide "something else?" What possible surety do we have "most" Indian casualties were at LSH? How could anyone possibly know? If soldiers can't hit anything anyway, fire discipline makes small or no difference: they can't fire blindly into a mass of Indians with some surety of success because that isn't the enemy before them. How do you instill fire discipline in troops not all that familiar with their weapons and pretty much incapable of accurate fire who can't see the enemy? Whatever the actual amount of shooting the Army allowed them, it was pathetic.
Again, Edgerly and Benteen - who were not totally united in their opinion of Custer - who saw the field two days after the fact said that it looked like an utter rout except for Calhoun's guys. By what manner can a corpse after stripping and mutilation be judged to have been on the offensive or defensive? It's simply wishful thinking. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2004 : 10:44:07 PM
|
| Merry Christmas D.c., and a Happy New Year! |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 23 2004 : 11:31:41 PM
|
Whistlingboy, I, and my purple prose, salute you. You have written, in a fashion I wish I could emulate, the essense of the Battle 0f the Little Big Horn succintly and with great aplomb. Mistakes were made, men died, and the military failed. A rational explanation for this defeat of the magnificent 7th.{by a hoard of aboriginal heathens) had to be explained.
History has proven, over and over again, that the best scapegoat is a dead one. Unable to defend yourself, others may misinform, lie, and alter facts until fiction becomes reality. Every American Male, female, and child, of the nineteenth century, believed that the Native American would flee in sheer panic upon the approach of a mounted charge.
Ironically, the warriors of this battle may have wished to do the same, but could not because Custer's approach caught them completely off guard. Unable to flee and succor the safety of their loved ones, they elected to stand and fight.Armed with superior arms they wrecked havoc. President Grant was one of the the first to chastise Custer's efforts as a complete "waste" of men. Imagine President Bush making such a remark towards the actions of any general involved in the war of Iraq today. The fall out would be phenomenal, thus was it so with Custer!
Anyone who believes Custer was totally at fault for the outcome of this battle is a Custerprobe (idiot). Anyone who believes he is completely innocent is a Custerphile (Idiot). In summation, Custer did not possess the authority to create, dictate, and facilitate policies of war; he simply obeyed his superiors.
Great post!!! |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 24 2004 : 01:51:39 AM
|
I appreciate you not trying to chase me away yet, Mr. Wiggs. I should emulate you for you write great prose; it is concise and to the point. You know when to be diplomatic and when to be 'upfront.' I will study and learn from you and look forward to your forthcoming posts. I like this forum because many of the people participating are knowledgeable, intelligent, steadfast in their beliefs and not afraid to 'jump in' and kick some points around. I hope you have a great Christmas and a Happy New Year, Mr. Wiggs.
|
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 24 2004 : 6:20:02 PM
|
"...the big priblems here..."
WL,
LMAO, not at your spelling "oops", as we all do that, but that reminded me of the old Star Trek TV series episode, "The Trouble With Tribbles" which was one of the best of them all.
Thanks for the memory!
Merry Christmas to you & yours,
Billy |
Edited by - BJMarkland on December 24 2004 6:20:40 PM |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 24 2004 : 10:41:39 PM
|
| Warlord, Libbie Bacon was the daughter of a pominent Judge, (Daniel S. Bacon). He was often referred to as "Monroe's First Citizen." It would appear that she derived from a family of substantial means. While no father is obligated to sustain the income of an adult, married daughter, surely she received some benefit from his estate. In short, the possibility of "destitution" appears to be remote, in the case of Mrs. Custer. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2004 : 11:13:21 AM
|
Mrs. Custer's debt and reliance on friends for living quarters till she got going is not a hidden or recently uncovered fact. Her letters exist, it's well known. Her inheritance from her father was gone by her husband's death, the life insurance was not enough. I directed you to two two books, Leckie and Utley, as proof, since it's pretty clear Warlord you don't have much of a grasp of Custer's life at all and, in general, aren't well read on the battle itself. Wiggs insists Custerphobe and Custerphile mean things they do not.
In fact, Warlord, aside from your personal attacks against various people, your posts are devoid of any information at all, and what there was turned out to be incorrect. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2004 : 8:08:55 PM
|
Some odds and ends to finish the old year: DC I know it is not a priority with you, but you would have made a better impression by simply acknowledging that Wiggs called your bluff on an anti-Custer book. Ithink you know enough about Viola and the Curtis story to know that Viola's book was not postive on Custer. If you read Nightengale's book you missed the point he made that Benteen and Reno could not admit to hearing firing that indicated Custer fighting, because they both claimed to believe that Custer and his force were dead before Reno and Benteen reached the hill.
Wiggs: I made the purple prose remark, though I don't believe I was the first to do so. Ididn't mean it as an insult or a compliment, just my opinion. I don't think it makes me a DC co-hort.
Larsen: Forgive my ignorance, but what is the Franklin mystery? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2004 : 8:38:31 PM
|
Prolar, if that one quote makes the book anti-Custer, than the term has no meaning. It was no bluff. It's only anti-Custer if there is hypothesis repackaged as fact. Saying Custer did not support Reno is fact. Nothing done an hour or more into the attack is support for an attack.
Virtually every book says Custer was gutsy and led from the front. Does that make every book pro-Custer? The same books say Custer had a fractured and nepotistic command. Does that make them anti-Custer? They're just facts. What in Viola's book, not fact, is anti-Custer? Listing his deficiencies is not a libel, listing his good qualities is not fiction.
Nightengale is wrong. The quotes I read from Benteen and Reno said they heard firing, just not volley firing. And neither they nor anyone can say whether or not it was Custer, and if it was it was a distress signal. Godfrey, who was partially deaf, is most adament it was volley fire. Varnum said it was heavy fire but not volley fire. What difference does it make, in any case? Nobody thought Custer in trouble.
Franklin had the Erebus and Terror trying to find the Northwest Passage and disappeared in 1846, I think. Off King William's Island in Waythefugupdeh. They've found bones and detritus but they don't know what the sailors were trying to do dragging tons of crap in boats across the land. The great lead poison theory went up in smoke since a whole lot of people back in England had the same amount in their systems. Nobody knows. Eerie, though, that story. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 03:13:20 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Franklin had the Erebus and Terror trying to find the Northwest Passage and disappeared in 1846, I think. Off King William's Island in Waythefugupdeh. They've found bones and detritus but they don't know what the sailors were trying to do dragging tons of crap in boats across the land. The great lead poison theory went up in smoke since a whole lot of people back in England had the same amount in their systems. Nobody knows. Eerie, though, that story.
Never heard that the lead poisoning theory was discredited, and doubt that to be the case, since other expeditions, from which people did survive, suffered problems related to lead poisoning, and the cans really were made shoddily which made such poisoning almost inevitable. Hair samples taken from the three dead bodies on Beechey Island showed a heavy increase in lead in their last few weeks of life (as opposed to that present in their bones) which showed it to be a result of something they experienced during the expedition, not in life back home.
It's too easy, though, to blame lead poisoning and call it the magic bullet which killed them all. It was surely a factor, though how much of one is open to debate. Others may have been just as great, or greater. Weather, for one. The crew were forced to abandon their ships in 1848 because they'd been stuck in the ice for two years. 1846 happened to be an usually warm Arctic summer, so they were able to penetrate pretty deeply into the Arctic Ocean, but as soon as winter rolled up the ice came back, and nature never gave them any more breaks. If the ships hadn't stayed ice-locked presumably the disaster never would have happened.
Plus, as at Little Bighorn, there's a command decision that has never made much sense and has inspired a lot of creative effort to make sense of it. That is Crozier's decision to march his men from the ice-bound ships to the Great Fish River, in northern Canada, over extremely rugged terrain which no one back in England, organizing the rescue efforts, thought they would do because they didn't see any way 100 men could survive such a trip (and they were right). They all assumed that if Franklin's men abandoned their ships they'd go to Somerset Island, where cached supplies were available, or other places. That's where they directed their searches. When it was finally learned that the survivors had chosen to head where they went, it was quite a shock to many, and there have been a variety of rationalizations, though none which can quite shake the decision's rank smell of incompetence. Parallels to the competing theories of how Custer ended up on Battle Ridge are, of course, obvious. One even resembles the Custer Wounded Theory: Crozier's mind was imbalanced by lead poisoning.
It's a fascinating story, never definitively told, probably never will be.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 07:05:26 AM
|
Yet again, Warlord, that's incorrect. You could read Ambrose (I recall he has a summation of 'what happened to...' at the end) as well as Leckie and Utley to get Mrs. Custer's financial situation better grounded, along with references to Custer's gambling and ethical lapses about money. She had to work to live and she worked as a secretary for some years in New York after Custer's death. That's three books. I don't have my notes on them at present, but they have indexes and you have libraries. Since you announced no interest in reading them, I have no interest in doing more at present.
As for the lead in Franklin's men, what I've recently read is that most/many people of that era in England had about the same amount of lead from breathing in all this garbage of the early industrial revolution and functioned fine. There's no doubt that the canning process left much to be desired, like the food itself, but it would be hard to say, I guess, that the few Franklin men they've tested were worse off than Mom back home. But it seemed it was hard to say that Franklin's men had more lead than others at the time of the same background. Given the Royal Navy's alcoholic habit and traditions, you could probably formulate a drunken hypothesis as well. "Sure we can do it. Throw everything in this lifeboat and we'll haul it to Hudson Bay. I see no flaw in that plan."
This came hard on the heels of theories that the Roman Empire fell because of lead pipes. It can't be because a better, more motivated army arrived, it has to be because of poison or treason or racial miscegnation or divine punishment or some such. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
lorenzo G.
Captain
Italy
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 10:25:23 AM
|
Dark Cloud, I wonder why you are so spiteful towards Custer, going even through his private life, and, as a Sherlock Holmes, also sectioning every atom of his life just to find some lack. What I don't understand is why when someone says something good about Benteen, you don't mention his private lacks, while you do so with Custer. They was human, both, and both good soldiers. It's true, Mrs Custer was not in a good financial situation when her husband died, but this has nothing to do with her books. You can read all her correspondence, where you find what pushed her to take the pen and write Custer's life. She was destroyed. She loved him. All feelings but not personal interest. The only one, was that people could know the General as she knew him and, like she wrote too, to show what was meaning to be a frontier cavalry woman.
You paint Custer as an unprovided and regardless of his wife's future, but this is not true. His death was unexpected, that's all. (He had so not the time to restore his situation). Unexpected for him, his friends and even his enemies. But though he provided his wife future with a life insurance that guarantee refund of the insurance premium in case of death and death in battle. What happened, indeed. This you don't tell it, and this is written too.
|
If it is to be my lot to fall in the service of my country and my country's rights I will have no regrets.
Custer |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 11:21:09 AM
|
None of what you say is true, Lorenzo.
I have repeatedly described Benteen as a bad drunk, bitter, and a gossip. I never said Mrs. Custer's financial situation at the time of Custer's death had to do with her books, since they had not been written yet. And no, Custer was not a good provider. He lost his wife's inheritance, which became his due to marriage as his debts became her's. The life insurance was not enough. And it was a husband's job to provide for his wife should the unexpected happen. He risked her surety on gambling for the quick and easy buck.
Mrs. Custer, like Mrs. Hamilton before her, developed the cult of a slain spouse for her own financial benefit. I cannot blame them, given there was essentially no honest living to provide for them back then. She was a good writer, but she slandered Benteen and Reno who did not reply in kind as she knew they would not. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 5:09:21 PM
|
Until the New Year, I'm away from the desk, but I have given you three books all of which I know discuss the Custer's financial distress, and I pointed out the flyleaf URL from the University of Oklahoma's Leckie book and today you have Lorenzo's reluctant agreement. That's pretty good for on the fly, and as usual you have nothing that contests it, because there is nothing. It's not the sort of thing that gamesites are concerned with, I guess. Even if you find my offerings insufficient, they are the Alexandrian Library compared to the goose egg you have in your column on this.
I've said before we apparently hold similar opinions of each other. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
bhist
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 5:49:08 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Franklin had the Erebus and Terror trying to find the Northwest Passage and disappeared in 1846, I think. Off King William's Island in Waythefugupdeh. They've found bones and detritus but they don't know what the sailors were trying to do dragging tons of crap in boats across the land. The great lead poison theory went up in smoke since a whole lot of people back in England had the same amount in their systems. Nobody knows. Eerie, though, that story.
I'm also not aware of the lead poisoning theory going up in smoke. I'm interested in where you've found this, D.C.
Just as recently as last month, the great study of this research, "Frozen in Time" by Owen Beattie, et al was reprinted and I'm not aware that they've changed their tune or that it was explained that their research was inaccurate.
|
Warmest Regards,
Bob
www.vonsworks.com
www.friendslittlebighorn.com
www.friendsnezpercebattlefields.org |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 6:09:59 PM
|
Don't misunderstand me, the Franklin guys were laced with lead. But I either read or saw on the HC or Discovery that most everyone in those years was laced with lead. Not just from food, but paint, wallpaper, pipes, water, wine, all sorts of stuff. It isn't like there weren't lots of ships with the same sort of food with crews from the same ports. All I recall is that the upshot was you can't say these guys on King William went mad when these people buried in some grave construction hit in London (Birmingham? I cannot recall)died at 75 with no one claiming they were bonkers. Don't forget, this was the age of the mad hatter and mercury poisoning and all that.
I'm not where I can look it up, and I am not finding support of the WEB, but I do have it somewhere. Whether true or not, I can't say. I do recall that what had been thought a "lethal" amount of lead apparently was not, and Franklin's guys weren't much or any worse than people who lived long apparently sane lives.
Hark! http://homepages.enterprise.net/rogerp/franklin.html
This isn't my recalled source, but it's some support, anyway. I found it through the Russel Potter site: http://www.ric.edu/rpotter/SJFranklin.html |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on December 27 2004 6:29:37 PM |
|
|
|
lorenzo G.
Captain
Italy
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 7:16:17 PM
|
Dark,
the policy amount was 4.750 dollars, and it was not bad for that time. Custer was not lucky with his affairs, and I am not reluctant at all, because those affairs and their unlucky ending don't touch the Man at all. He had advisers for his business, and, if you read Libbie's narrative, she was aware of her husband's affairs and agreeded with her husband chooses; the advisers yet was not good and much times not honest - the worst you can say of Custer, is that he was naive, in those matters. No reluctant agreement then, cause I never said he was perfect. And how much soldier's widow had a decent position after their husband's death in battle? very few, in truth. That was a crowded field, as the humble widows conditions was one of the problems of that century. Not then Custer's problem, but a society problem.
Concerning your way to talk about Benteen and Custer, there is a great difference. You said that once you claimed Benteen was bad drunk. That's true, but this seems not to be important in the opinion you made upon him and his acts. While in the opposite side, you use Custer's lacks to judge him and his acts. This is a great big difference.
Finally, a claim of Libbie can answer to you. She wrote to Russell Alger: "bookmaking is only a source of profit to the publishers and brings but a few hundred dollars to the author".
|
If it is to be my lot to fall in the service of my country and my country's rights I will have no regrets.
Custer |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 9:08:20 PM
|
To Mrs. Custer, they may have been presented as 'advisors' but they were partners. In any case, after batting zero, what was Custer doing continuing in a field he knew nothing about. Well, he was a gambler. And like most gamblers, he mostly lost. You should read Leckie's book as well.
You're playing and fast and loose with soldier vs. officer. Custer, as a General and then a Lt. Colonel, has no excuse for leaving his wife distitute, given her inheritance and his insurance and stipend from the government should have been enough for a childless widow to live well. But he'd blown it all, often without her knowledge, and she had to go to work immediately with debts of a substantial amount. As it was, many were written off out of respect, but not all.
She made far more than a few hundred dollars from her books, Lorenzo. Mrs. Custer played the poor, poor Me role to the hilt, and it required her to libel others to protect her cash cow: Custer's image. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
lorenzo G.
Captain
Italy
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 10:01:09 PM
|
To Mrs. Custer, they may have been presented as 'advisors' but they were partners. In any case, after batting zero, what was Custer doing continuing in a field he knew nothing about. Well, he was a gambler. And like most gamblers, he mostly lost. You should read Leckie's book as well.
Not a gambler, simply a man trying his best. And, they was not partners. You say that. You should read other books too that is'nt of your point of view.
You're playing and fast and loose with soldier vs. officer. Custer, as a General and then a Lt. Colonel, has no excuse for leaving his wife distitute, given her inheritance and his insurance and stipend from the government should have been enough for a childless widow to live well. But he'd blown it all, often without her knowledge, and she had to go to work immediately with debts of a substantial amount. As it was, many were written off out of respect, but not all.He had a great exscuse: he was killed in battle serving his Country. She knew to be wife of a soldier and she knew what could happens. She had knowledge of the situation. They was talking about, and writing about each other.
She made far more than a few hundred dollars from her books, Lorenzo. Mrs. Custer played the poor, poor Me role to the hilt, and it required her to libel others to protect her cash cow: Custer's image.
You're still trying to destroy Custer private image. I feel in your arguments lot of Mr Benteen. |
If it is to be my lot to fall in the service of my country and my country's rights I will have no regrets.
Custer |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2004 : 10:13:24 PM
|
By paragraph:
Lorenzo, Custer was a gambler. Perhaps you can provide an example of such an advisor? I don't know if the book has a point of view I can agree with till I read it. Leckie's is the only academic biography of Mrs. Custer. As I recall, you read the book of their letters and are under the impression they are testimony of the soul. In fact, anyone of stature back then supposed their letters would get printed up and wrote accordingly.
Custer had funds that could have been set aside for his wife. He didn't. He gambled them away. Cards, stock market, same thing.
I'm not, she did. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Responsibility At Little Bighorn
