| Author |
 Topic  |
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
 Posted - July 06 2005 : 9:47:03 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by whistlingboy
Since you and Joe don't have any respect for me, don't respond to my posts and ignore me, as that seems to be the immature standard threat on this board, when people don't agree with you.
My great father, the ol' Italian, chain-smoked and cussed every other word and I loved him for it.
I have been an admirer of your threads for some time. They have always been balanced, informative, and void of personal vendettas, and for that I thank you. I am sadden that you believe I have ignored you, I have not. Sometimes, when something is written so well, we assume that the author is cognizant of his/her abilities. let me take this opportunity to thank you for your contributions to the forum. My father, too, was an "ol' Italian" who chained-smoked and cussed. My mother, a full-bloodied Sioux did everything she could to change him. She failed but, she loved him and so do I. WB, keep up the good work. Hoka hey! |
  |
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - July 06 2005 : 9:55:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Warlord
Joe:
That last posting of yours is one of the best I have ever seen put up on this board. It is worthy of printing out and saving. A beautiful piece of literature!!!
One more kind word from you sir, and I will be forced to be eternally grateful. However, be forwarned, such remarks will bring the wrath of my arch Nemesis upon your worthy head. Mi casa es su casa, mi mano es su mano! |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 07 2005 : 09:01:03 AM
|
First, a quick aside to our British cousins on the cowardly attacks this morning. I speak only for myself but I am sure all Americans feel the same way; your pain is felt by all Americans and we will do anything we can to hasten your healing or help avenge the murder of innocents.
OK, back to the topics under discussion: cowardice, to my understanding anyway, often involves the "fight or flight" primitive section of the brain. The true hero, not your comic book characters but the type of MEN who waded through the lagoon in the 2d wave at Tarawa in the face of near-certain death, is the man who conquers the instinctual "flight" impulse and continues to perform his duty. If that, to some, is over-simplification, so be it, as I am a simple guy. My definition fits my understanding of historical situations well enough. Also, while I emphasised "men" above, there are many, many incidents in history where women have done the same, i.e., suppressed the "flight" reflex and did what they had to do.
Training, especially modern military training, recognizes that the unfamiliar often creates the impulse to freeze or run. That is why live-fire exercises are so important in training. As MRW pointed out, the sound of a bullet whistling over your head gives a new preciousness to life. However, having said that, to me, an extremely large intangible, can, in my eyes, be boiled down to simple love of your fellows. Whether the duty involves hunkering down behind your shirt and wading 1,000 yards through waist deep water in the face of machine gun, rifle and artillery fire, or climbing 30+ floors of the Twin Towers pulling fire hoses, the result is the same: the willingness to put your life on the line for your fellow man.
Romantic aren't I? But, I am very comfortable being so.
Best of wishes,
Billy
P.S. And we did not even mention "quiet heroism", that syndrome where every day parents go to work and sacrifice for the love of their families. |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 07 2005 : 09:09:38 AM
|
You know, taking the cowardice thought a bit further using my definition, I wonder if that might not be a contributing influence to the "tactical disintergration" experienced by Custer's battalion? I will have to cross-reference but I am curious as to how many of the men in the Custer battalion were, not new recruits, but men who had not time to bond with their buddies in the company?
Let me mull over that a bit and ask a couple of very knowledgeable posters on other boards about new men in the companies.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 07 2005 : 5:24:18 PM
|
Paul wrote on 7/5 at 9:01:
quote:
"I think I will toss in a word or two about Reno's retreat! Reno's charge bogged down when his indian allied left wing evaporated. There were so many indians he could not retain his forward momentum and the attack stalled unsupported as promised by "the whole outfit" as his commander had promised! This is known in formal military circles as "having your rear end hanging out"! Reno halted the line and formed a skermish line. The horses and every third trooper fell back to the treeline. The skermish line apparently fired numerous volley's into the indians causing the comments about many empty indian saddles by the first Sergeant! Gall also lost his family at this point! When Reno operating under great personal pressure such as trying to wipe his scout's brain matter and blood out of his eyes fell back to the treeline. Reno had obviously been keeping an eye on defensive positions, something Custer had not. He knew the end bluff appeared to be the highest and best spot for a defensive position. He also knew the pack train was coming up and must be defended or they would be wiped out. He hesitated, gave orders, hesitated again, then knowing he could not hold at the treeline he gave the order to retreat to the bluffs. I don't think he really had a choice! He took most of his losses going up that mountain, but the alternative was being wiped out in the trees and having the packtrain wiped out. By gaining the bluff he supported the packtrain and met Benteen. They then had enough troops to hold the indians off.
The idea some armchair warriors paint here that he was a coward, and the troopers were running scared crying for their mommies, I find not only pathetic and rediculous but simply cheap posturing of one's unfamiliar with a fight! Reno's decisions were not only excellent, they probably saved the rest of the command in spite of Custer."
Let's go over this as I have some questions. First, my understanding was that the left wing with the Indian scouts did not start "collapsing" until after the skirmish line was formed. Reno was on the advance, mounted, and the enemy became numerous making him realize that a) they weren't running and b) that's a heck of a lot of Indians out there. Based upon Godfrey's article, all the officers knew that they were likely to encounter up to 1500 warriors so the simple fact that they were not retreating is bound to have given any officer pause, especially with an effective force of approximately 110 men.
"The skermish line apparently fired numerous volley's into the indians causing the comments about many empty indian saddles by the first Sergeant! "
OK, first sergeant of which company? M, A, or G? Was it Heyn of "A", Ryan of "M" or Garlick of "G"? The reason I am asking is that accounts I have read indicate that firing while on the skirmish line was desulatory due to range and the Indians kicking up a lot of dust with their horses. Thomas O'Neil, private Co. G says in Camp's interviews: "...that on the skirmish line there was no very hard fighting and thinks that but few effective shots could have been fired." Sgt. Stanislas Roy, Co. A (awarded Medal of Honor for actions during the hilltop fight) indicates that they were on the skirmish line for about 20 minutes (corroborating O'Neil) and he figures that he shot about 20 rounds (note: 20 rounds, not 4 or 5... ) One of the "...few effective shots..." fired at or on the skirmish line evidently hit Sgt. Miles O'Hara, Co. M as he is stated to have died there. Pigford, private Co. M guessed he only fired 4-5 shots. Herendeen, the scout, indicated 15 minutes on the line.
I simply do not see any indication of consistent heavy volley firing from the skirmish line.
quote:
When Reno operating under great personal pressure such as trying to wipe his scout's brain matter and blood out of his eyes fell back to the treeline.
That occurred while in the timber, after the retreat from the initial skirmish line, not while on the skirmish line.
quote:
Reno had obviously been keeping an eye on defensive positions, something Custer had not. He knew the end bluff appeared to be the highest and best spot for a defensive position.
I can't disagree with you that it was the highest spot for a defensive position but whether it was due to Reno's keen eye or just luck is unknown. What is known is that the troops could not fall back to their original crossing point because Indians were across the route.
quote:
The horses and every third trooper fell back to the treeline.
Every fourth trooper acted as a horseholder not third. There are some Indian reports from the Custer battle of single troopers on Calhoun Hill holding more than four horses indicating that some horseholders may have been detailed to either reinforce the line or take ammunition to Calhoun's company.
quote:
He hesitated, gave orders, hesitated again, then knowing he could not hold at the treeline he gave the order to retreat to the bluffs. I don't think he really had a choice! He took most of his losses going up that mountain, but the alternative was being wiped out in the trees and having the packtrain wiped out.
Many past and present military people conflict on whether the timber could have been held. Personally, I will take the Indian view that if Reno had stayed there that they would not have left en masse to defeat in detail Custer's battalion. Think about it, you had a full troop (abt. 40 soldiers) plus supposedly six men per company with the pack train. That is something like 106 soldiers (40 + (11*6)) with a few civilians and officers. The Indians, in my opinion, would not have left to go after the pack train leaving 3 companies between their rear and the village.
quote:
He took most of his losses going up that mountain...
Simply putting it, if for nothing else, Reno should have been cashiered for "organizing" such a brilliant withdrawal. No rear guard, no cover fire, no flankers. Horse feathers Paul! I, MRW, even DC could stage a hell of lot more tactically sound retreat. It ain't rocket science. Face it, the guy panicked and, unfortunately, he happened to be in charge. Enlisted men indicate that Hodgson tried to get the men to face to the enemy and fire while withdrawing but they took the lead of their commander. Somewhere in the recesses of my mind seems to remember that another officer attempted to do the same-McIntosh?
Gotta go and get the grill going.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - July 07 2005 : 8:55:08 PM
|
| Right on Billy. I believe it was Varnum who tried to persuade Reno to provide some sort of cover for the rout. Reno told him that he was in charge. Despite Warlord making excuses for Reno, there is no evidence that Reno was looking for a better position, protecting the packtrain or anything else other than running and leaving his command to look out for itself. |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - July 07 2005 : 10:10:11 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by prolar
Right on Billy. I believe it was Varnum who tried to persuade Reno to provide some sort of cover for the rout. Reno told him that he was in charge. Despite Warlord making excuses for Reno, there is no evidence that Reno was looking for a better position, protecting the packtrain or anything else other than running and leaving his command to look out for itself.
I honestly don't interpret Paul's comments, regarding Reno, as an attempt to "excuse" his actions. His comments appear, to me, to be an honest refection upon the possible rationale for Reno's actions. A very humane response, as it were, towards an individual who failed to "lead" at a critical time during a critical moment. As I live my life, I thank God that I am not forced to wear the mantle of failure that poor Reno was forced to bear.
Having said that, BJ's summation of Reno's "motives" is the best I have read in my twenty years of study. Had I not known better, I would have assumed he was a war correspondent giving a play by play as Reno did what he did. Billy, it does not get any better! |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 08 2005 : 1:54:11 PM
|
Paul, I don't have time to respond but will simply point out that I was quoting participants of the battle, no personal opinions beyond my observations about Reno's "charge". How about the source for the "volleys which emptied numerous Indian saddles" as I fail to find it anywhere.
Billy |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 08 2005 : 7:04:09 PM
|
quote:
Oh Yeah; another thing starting to complicate my life is I have quite a bit of information on other indian/army fights. So now when something pops up, I am going, now which damn fight was that in? Starting to get complicated beyond my initial plans! I may be forced to do some organizing!
That, my friend, I entirely can empathize with. Now, off to the ballgame.
Billy |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - July 09 2005 : 11:18:29 PM
|
| Warlord: According to Utley, Reno decided to to adbandon his position. He made no particular effort to get word to all his command. He was first or among the first to run. He made no effort to provide cover so that all his command could reach horses and mount, and no effort at any sort of organized defence during the rout. So what were we wrong about? And which of his actions do you call heroic? |
|
|
|
survivor
Recruit
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 10 2005 : 05:01:52 AM
|
War Lord, this is primarily for you. At Reno's court of inquiry two civilian packers, John Frett and B. F. Churchill testified to R being drunk. Reno himself admitted to having a flask of one pint on his person. This does not address what he may have had in the packs. Other officers admit to his possession of alcohol and his willingness to pass it around. Lt. Wallace testified that he did not see any "inebriety", but, of course, this does not preclude the absence of alcoholic beverages, or the influence of same. In addition, under other circumstances, although not at R's court, Fred Girard said R was under the influence.
None of this proves R was under the influence while making the decisions he did while involved in the fight in the valley. Reno adnitted to drinking about midnight on the 25th. Hell, if I'd been there and had access to a bit, or even more than a bit, of 90 proof, I'd have swigged long and deep. {Actually, 86 & 80 proof whiskeys are latter day inventions. Do we need to open a site for the history of whiskey?} That R ran from the woods is clear. What may be argued is did he know where he was going? And was he running for a purpose? WL, you seem to argue that the bluffs upon which R eventually took position was determined by his previous analysis of the terrain. I don"t believe this. He was scattered, shocked, and desparate, and took the line of least resistance. When he left the woods I believe he wanted to get to the ford from which he had crossed. The place where he actually crossed, which you seem to aver was deliberate, was the very worst spot he could have chosen. From the bank to the water was 4 or more feet. The water was so deep the horses had to swim across. In addition, the banks on the opposite side were several hundred feet above the land below. If you review the map of the United States Geological Survey of the entire battlefield, drawn in 1891, you will discover the terrain from which R fled was 3100', and the height to which he retreated was 3500'. Clearly, he crossed at the worst possible place. Why? I have an answer, but before I give it I'd like to hear from you.
|
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 10 2005 : 2:59:04 PM
|
I have been to the LBH battlefield many times spanning many years and have seen many changes all pre-empted, I'm sure, by the on-going 'battle' by the government still trying to secure all this historical area for itself. As you know, Indians still own part of the land so designated as part of the battlefield. For a short time, they set up roadside tables and were selling Indian artifacts and trinklets along the Ridge Road in part of the area they own. Personally, I couldn't blame them but it certainly spoiled the ambiance of the setting because it interrupted the 'drive' as a commercial does a movie. I've seen markers moved, broken, new ones added, new paths put in, fences put up with gates installed to demarcate the Indian landownership, horses allowed to graze, the whole area blackened by fire, new philosophies in the lectures, new plague markers erected (nice), Indian markers placed, etc. So?
My point is that the Little Bighorn Battlefield is a dynamic place--not static. It has always been subjected to dynamic change from the time of the battle. But for the most part, aside from the fire and the meadnering course changes of the river at times, the land surfaces have remained the same. When Reno advanced and forded the river into the valley at the southern end, it is not likely he could have seen up that river and have viewed the terrain all along up to where he eventually dashed across. He may have premeditated a way to escape but I doubt it at that point. Once he turns up the valley only one thing is on his mind and it is not his way out.
Peering right, probably just glancing, he can see the tops of the bluffs but he can't see through the trees and the steep embankments if it is perfectly clear and there is probably dust and debris in the air being kicked up already. What does he know? He knows there is a river to his right flank. He knows there are bluffs and he knows he has to get to the trees before he gets to either of them. He does not know water depth, undergrowth in the trees, fordable crossings, the rugged declivity of the banks but only something about where he crossed the river earlier. On-the-fly and in moments he must gather information (observe the terrain), make a decision and give orders to those that can see him and hear him and, of course, fight off the Indians coming at his front. Reno had just entered the Twilight Zone.
|
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - July 10 2005 : 4:16:17 PM
|
| Warlord: I have never claimed training or qualifications that would have enabled me to command troops. I, like others, believe that to discuss the battle at LBH, we have to discuss the performance of participants including Reno. The point is not how well I would have done, but how well he performed the duties of his position. I notice that you constantly critize Custer's performance. I have to doubt that your training and experience in any way approach his, so what makes you think you could have done better? |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - July 10 2005 : 8:54:08 PM
|
Warlord: You referred to Reno's rout as a brillantly executed manuver. I claimed that he had a responsibility to his entire command, not just the ones in sound of his voice or close enough to see him run. I don't know what quote you refer to.I have read Sklenar but don't recall him saying anything good about Reno. Utley said plainly that some of the men scattered through the timber had no idea that the command was pulling out until they were left. DeRudio couldn't believe it because he heard no bugle or command. Hare said there was no bugle call. Varnum saw the column leaving headed by Reno and Moyland. If you were not excusing Reno, you have my apology. It sure seemed that you were.
Godfrey,Edgerly,and Miles all generals were not critical of Custer's tactics. I believe I will take their opinion over yours. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - July 14 2005 : 5:37:40 PM
|
"Warlord: You referred to Reno's rout as a brillantly executed manuver."
I cannot tell a lie.I must claim credit for that little gem.But I stand by what I said.
The object of the exercise was to get the unit out of there as quickly as possible with as little loss as possible.Forming up in neat lines,asking for volunteers to form a rearguard or to try to negotiate a local cease fire to tend the wounded was just a waste of precious time.Reno's panic was not of the wild variety.It was controlled panic.His order was precise and to the point---"those of you who want to save yourselves follow me".Note he did not shout "every man for himself" ,no he took full responsibility for the rout.It was his rout.This was real leadership in action.The sight of the CO in full flight to the rear must have galvanised many a confused trooper.
|
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - July 14 2005 : 11:08:27 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wILD I
"Warlord: You referred to Reno's rout as a brilliantly executed maneuver."
I cannot tell a lie.I must claim credit for that little gem.But I stand by what I said.
I have nothing but admiration for any man who would accept responsibility for this "little Gem." Such responsibility is indicative of an honorable man who speaks what is own his mind and stands by his words. Kudos to you sir.
Wild:
The object of the exercise was to get the unit out of there as quickly as possible with as little loss as possible. Forming up in neat lines,asking for volunteers to form a rearguard or to try to negotiate a local cease fire to tend the wounded was just a waste of precious time.Reno's panic was not of the wild variety.It was controlled panic.
In military terms, retreating at all costs without deference to the status of personnel(alive,dead,wounded,or simply lost) is synonymous with the definition of a rout(overwhelming defeat)! A commander does not politely "ask" for volunteers to effect a "rear guard" action. Soldiers are trained to do so at command. However, when the commander fails to issue the appropriate order, a "rout" will often occur.
Your reference to "Controlled Panic" appears to be an oxymoron, similar to "Military Intelligence." How does one control panic? Sudden and unreasonable fear which spreads suddenly is not controllable.
Wild:
His order was precise and to the point---"those of you who want to save yourselves follow me".Note he did not shout "every man for himself" ,no he took full responsibility for the rout.It was his rout.This was real leadership in action.
A man screaming inaudible mutterings during combat amid the piercing and blaring sounds of war(Shots fired, wounded men screaming in pain, wounded mounts screaming in agony, and the high pitched tremolo's of thousands of warriors heated into a blood lust of death)is not issuing a specific order to his command. To be followed, an order must be audible and the commander who issues an order has sole responsibility to ensure that the orders have been heard by the entire command. (Thus the bugle system of the 7 th. Calvary.) What Reno did was to emit the indistinguishable mutterings of a man whose eagerness to depart the scene (heard only by a select few In his immediate vicinity)overwhelmed his sense of leadership. Thus, a majority of the command did become "galvanized" as they watched their "Leader" exit stage right. You see, Reno was not particularly concerned about who heard his order, "All those who wish to escape follow me" as he was his arrival to his destination.
Wild:
The sight of the CO in full flight to the rear must have galvanized many a confused trooper.
You have eloquently summed up my point with this potent statement.In a world where men were actually trained to believe that the "Officer's Class" consisted of Homo Superior's who were to be respected, honored, and obeyed upon the pain of death,imagine their dismay when they witnessed their fearless leader leading the "charge" to the relative safety of the bluffs.
Last, but certainly not least,you are a member of "G" troop. Without warning or any notification, orders are given to abandon your position of defense. Suddenly, you observe your commander leading a furious charge away from your position leaving you to a horrible fate. At this specific moment in time, as you are about to meet your maker via the battle ax of a heavy set, blood thirsty warrior, would you describe Reno's "exit" as an exercise
of controlled panic." I do not mean to infer that the results of this battle was the responsibility of Reno. Everyone, including Custer, must be held accountable for his actions. To claim that Reno was responsible for the outcome of this battle is wrong, to ignore his responsibility as a commander is equally erroneous.
|
Edited by - joseph wiggs on July 14 2005 11:29:44 PM |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 19 2005 : 4:50:10 PM
|
Dark Cloud --
Why was it necessary to take an interpreter on a charge like the 'black white man,' one of the wounded left in the trees during Reno's flight, who layed trapped under his horse and died, supposedly, shooting a sportman's rifle? Was that common practice?
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - July 19 2005 : 9:00:15 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by whistlingboy
Dark Cloud --
Why was it necessary to take an interpreter on a charge like the 'black white man,' one of the wounded left in the trees during Reno's flight, who layed trapped under his horse and died, supposedly, shooting a sportman's rifle? Was that common practice?
It was common practice for the military to take along interpreters for a contingency of Indian scouts; Fred Gerard and Isaiah Dorman 'black white man' interpreted for the "Ree" scout,contingency.
Isiah was married to a Santee Sioux and, had served as an interpreter at Fort Rice for five years when his services were requested by General Custer.
In this battle, the Indian scouts were not expected to engage the enemy in combat for several reasons. One of which, the obvious confusion that would emerge when trying to distinguish between friend and foe. However, a contingency of Ree's were requested, by Custer, to gather up the Indian ponies and stampede them, the hope being than Indians without mounts would be ineffective.
On the contrary, any and all non-Indians were expected to engage the enemy. This would include scouts. The scout, Charley Reynolds, lost his life in this battle along with Dorman. Scout George Herendeen was also with Reno's "charge." Left behind in the timber, he managed to subsequently,escape. Several "Ree" scouts were killed by the Sioux in their attempt to capture the heard. Like their soldier counterparts, scouts charged, engaged the enemy, and some died as a result.. |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 20 2005 : 11:24:27 AM
|
Thanks for the response. Reading some different soldiers' personal letters, Mr. Dorman's name popped up and the gory descriptions of his ending moments. Just wondered if anybody knew anything 'inbetween the lines' on this tangent.
WL: You always seem to want to play the game 'one up (thousand) on you.' I was just asking a question. My statement does not say per se that he died still trapped under his horse. Also, I have never said I was going to teach a class on Custer. I might suggest you try that however. I would love to attend it. If you haven't already, you might find how very difficult a task it becomes and, yet, how rewarding. Please explain to me why you can't reply to something that detests your thinking something like 'I don't think you are correct on that' or 'That might be a possibility but others have reported' or 'etc?' I'm trying hard to get a long and still enjoy the site. I respect that most of the board members have been members a long time and keep hashing out the same issues over and over again using the same primary sources. What is so bad about being diplomatic now and again even though some people like me ask. iyo, idiot questions?
The following are excerpts from a paper on black americans. It's interesting and just taken that way. Wouldn't know how accurate it is. Warlord, besides, what source says he didn't die partially trapped by his horse while being mutilated? If his legs could have been full of bullets, as some have reported, it would have been hard to escape before the wonderful and beautiful, knife wielding squaws came to finish him off. Isn't that a possibility?
"On the afternoon of June 25, 1876 as Major Reno lead his hasty "charge" out of the clump of trees to which his initial attack and skirmish line had been reduced, several men of his command both alive and mortaly wounded were abandoned. One such man, Isaiah Dorman, lay dying, partially pinned under his dead horse. He had formerly served his country well as an army scout and interpreter. Now he was to give the most precious gift that a patriot can give to his country- his life. Who was this wasicun sapa, this "black white man" as he was known to the Sioux?"
"Ironically, more has been recorded about Dorman in death than in life. One of Reno's scouts, George Herendeen stated "I saw Indians shooting at Isiah and squaws pounding him with stone hammers. His legs below the knees were shot full of bullets..." Others have described his legs as being riddled with buckshot. By most accounts, he died a slow and painful death. Pvt. Slaper said that he was "badly cut and slashed, while unmentionable atrocities had been commited." A Pvt. Roman Rutten passed Dorman as he escaped from the valley fighting. He described Dorman as being on one knee, firing carefully with a non-regulation sporting rifle. Dorman was stated to have looked up and shouted, "Good-bye, Rutten!" A more fanciful story attributed to Stanley Vestal states that while Dorman lay dying, Sitting Bull happened to pass by and kindly offered his former friend kind words and a drink of water. Sitting Bull is said to have chased the vengeful Indian women away from Isaiah, but after he left, the women returned and Dorman's body was stripped and mutilated. Others have stated that in addition to the mortal chest wound and the wounds to his legs, he was later found with his torso and head full of arrows and according to the memoirs of John Burkrman, had a picket pin driven through his testicles. Obviously all of the Inians did not take too kindly to Dorman being with the invading cavalry."
|
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 20 2005 : 5:33:09 PM
|
Warlord: You're right, re-reading what I wrote could infer your claim that what I said infers that Mr. Dorman died under his horse but I didn't read that anywhere yet to be able to state it that directly. Being in the military, you understand such vague writing though, I'm sure. No excuse; I'll start regaining some old habits like proofreading. You are helping me, though. hehe
My plan is to put on a show with the diorama--a general show at that. My interest is the legend in its mythical proportions. The board is a preparation for those places other than middle schools and high schools. Places like the American Legions and Gun Clubs and the like will hopefully solicit banter deeper than the legend's milder tones. No teaching involved directly; just sharing and soliciting new information and/or ideas concerning the battle. Will treat all participants in the battle with the honor and respect they deserve--both sides. It's an American true story.
The almighty dollar is squeezing the quality out of many things and the teaching profession too. Kids hardly get any attention in many a public school. Don't know about the private ones. Everything is getting watered down and I am in total agreement with your feelings. I am going to take it to the 'streets.' Somebody might be interested. You know a lot, you write good, you can be passionate and interesting. Write and design a newsletter or something. Just practice at not getting to p.o'd at some old lady listening to your talk and she thinks you're all wet! hehe
You treat me fine; you know me, I'm a little sensitive. I've never made a habit of soliciting much condemnation to my face because I've never made a habit of doing it even in kidding. That's because I can't tell a joke because I'm too serious in my demeanor, my wife says. I kid most of the time; nobody catchs on though. So I have to be careful. I've liked you from the getgo (hope you're not crying)
Once last thing, I don't think in a biased way but you know how that goes. Look forward to your posts. Have a great day, Warlord! |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 22 2005 : 2:31:23 PM
|
Mr. Wiggs -
You always add depth to questions which motivate others to respond like filling in some detail on Mr. Dorman. I have been able to find more on the matter; it's an interesting sidelight of unfortunate circumstances. It becomes more credible with quotes like the one by Herendeen. Not sure of the 'Sitting Bull' mention. Have you ever read anywhere else where he had been spotted out among the warriors?
It is difficult to be excited about some of these topics without getting 'carried away' in the language. Most people want posts stated simply and in plain talk. Some posters, on the other hand, want responses that are sensible and truthful. They also want them by category. Nothing wrong with those ideas although many times it is the how and the tone of the response that is important. In promulgating our esoteric cogitations or articulating our superficial sentimentalities and philosophical observations, we must beware of platitudinous pondersity. We must speak with a sense of conciseness, compacted comprehensibleness, coalescent consistency and concatentated cogency. We certainly must eschew all conglomerations of flatulent garrulity, jejune babblements and asinine affectations. It is true that our extemporaneous descantings and unpremeditated expatiations must have intelligibility and veracious vivacity, WITHOUT rhodomontade of thrasonical bombast. We must sedulously avoid all polysyllabic profundity, pompous prolixity, psittaceous vacuity, ventriloquial verbosity and vandiloquent vapidity. Last of all, we must work to shun double entendres, prurient jocosity and pestiferous profanity, obscurent or apparent. Actually, we probably shouldn't use these big words either. hehe
Have a good day.
|
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 22 2005 : 6:52:12 PM
|
Sorry, teacher. I've been reading some of my first posts and I honestly had to say 'Who's this guy?' You've waited too long to get me in line, Warlord. I just got bored and started laughing at myself, wondering 'what in the heck am I doing here?' It's time to do some serious work. (Oh no) ha!
Great post--speaking of the cleverness of it all. DC should get a kick out of that. It was hilarious...made my day. Sorry it was at DC's expense. He might forgive you, I think.
You've missed your calling. If you haven't done any serious endeavors and it is a matter of organization, there are plenty of young people in the colleges who will help you put things together. Of course, it would have to be 'satirical' in nature. How about another cartoon strip?
Time to go....very clever stuff.
|
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - July 22 2005 : 9:52:35 PM
|
WB, thank you for your kind remarks. I truly appreciate them.
One of the most poignant scenarios of this battle is a reference to one of the last actions of Dorman just prior to his demise. Pvt. Roman Rutten recalled, "galloping past him and seeing him down one one knee making a stand. 'Good by, Rutten,' he called out.
Lakota Noon, page 88.
Unhorsed, left behind by his comrades, Dorman bids a calm farewell. To have maintained such composure when facing death is a characteristic, I think, of ultimate courage. Undoubtedly, where I in the same situation, my last words would have been exceedingly different. More towards the line of, "Help me, anybody, please help me." Doorman is truly an unsung hero of this battle.
It was also reported that an iron picket pin was driven through his testicles. Another report claims that his penis was cut off and stuffed in his mouth.
The scout Herendeen reports that from the trees he could see the Indians, "shooting at Dorman and pounding him with clubs." The tale of Sitting Bull offering aid to Dorman/Teat was proffered by the historian, Robert Utley. This story is doubtful. it does not seem reasonable that Sitting Bull, in the midst of a heated battle, would have taken time out to render aid to the enemy who came to kill his family and tribe members. Regarding the rest of your post, I'll get back with you in about two weeks after I figure out what you said. |
|
|
|
whistlingboy
Lieutenant
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - July 22 2005 : 11:43:23 PM
|
Joe -
You are so right in naming this black white man an unsung hero. The Rutten quote puts a lump in my throat. The Dorman details seem to be getting more obscene.
Does Mr. Utley proffer where he ascertained the information on Sitting Bull's whereabouts?
It's a morbid thought but I'm sure you would have displayed great honor.
Sorry about my jejune babblements. Didn't you ever do those kind of exercises with words and their usage in college? Many of those words, of course, come from books on difficult words and/or archaic ones. Look forward to your posts always.
Have a good day and thanks for sharing that info on Mr. Dorman. Did you understand that he was the only 'black white man' with the 7th?
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Responsibility At Little Bighorn
