| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - September 04 2006 : 11:56:47 AM
|
There is no evidence that this was the "the greatest conglomeration of hostiles ever known." It was the biggest any of the survivors had seen, is all. Just like calling the Indians the world's greatest cavalry is bogus on its face, because nobody had seen even a meaningful plurailty of the world's military horsemen. Hyperbole, and a kindness to the fact they rode without saddles. In any case, the world's greatest cavalry seemed to lose all the time.
Custer was no scapegoat for the campaign. Even at the time, the blame for the campaign's failure was not put on Custer. Crook's battle couldn't be blamed on him. Custer is the scapegoat for the Battle of the Little Bighorn only, with reason and hard to argue against it.
How does accepting the army's hardwired belief the Indians would run allow one to "begin to understand..."
1. Crook's appreciation of his foe.
2. The Sioux running from Terry and Gibbon
3. that Custer was slaughtered....
....that the facts alone didn't provide?
Custer could have retreated right up to the point he crossed MTC. His decision to do else was his error. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2006 : 12:09:55 PM
|
| DC, if it wasn't" the greatest conglomeration of hostiles", what would rival it? Crook was able to justify his withdrawal by claiming to have exhausted his ammonution in his all day fight. Could Custer or any other leader justify withdrawing without a fight, and still expect to have a career? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2006 : 4:52:05 PM
|
Again: assertions have to be proven, the negatives cannot be. It may have been the greatest village size in that year or of the Sioux, but we really do not know, and it further conflicts with the "new" evidence that the village could only field about the same as the 7th. This, for the PC reason that the Indians need to be less numerous to excuse their incompetence and allowing civvies to be killed at the village, and granting Custerphiles permission to say Custer's plan would have worked if not for Reno and Benteen.
And, it also requires an exact definition of "hostiles." Some of the Sioux claim they were a peaceful village and they would have surrendered if not attacked, etc. Was it bigger than the village at Kildeer Mt.? At the various treaty signings and gatherings? Since the pandemics killed off more than 90% of the population of the Americas in the years after Columbus, there's certainly room to picture huge villages of temporary duration.
It's just thoughtless hyperbole, like 'greatest light cavalry' and 'bravest soldier.' Which is to say: nonsense.
I don't follow your point beyond that. Custer had many options beyond what he did, and he ignored them. For choosing a method that failed badly, he shoulders the blame, but for his battle only. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2006 : 8:12:05 PM
|
| OK, DC, there probably was a larger gathering of hostiles somewhere on the continent at some point in history or pre-history so you have made your point.It was you who said that Custer had the option to retreat.A retreat is a withdrawal, right? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2006 : 8:56:59 PM
|
That's not my point, although it works. The newish claims that the village was a lot smaller than the commonly held opinions have some potential to be true. We don't know, one way or the other, and that's why these repeated sureties are annoying.
Correct, after which he could have reformed the regiment and gone on the attack on decent cavalry ground on the west bank. Battles are composed of attacks and retreats, and it's silly to pretend that if Custer retreated to redirect his efforts he'd be canned for that momentary change of direction unless he kept going. I think it would have had to have been a dramatic victory for him NOT to be canned, at that point, but he had many options. If it was a village of the size you apparently hold (and I hold; I bet it was huge), Custer made a really stupid decision. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2006 : 11:17:55 AM
|
| DC, I thought the current estimates of the village size was 1500-2000 warriors. The only claim of even numbers that I know of is from some AIM militants.As you say, we can't know. You allways oppose assuming, but you are assuming the Indians would allow Custer to retreat and reform.They didn't allow Reno to do so. Of course the results for Custer couldn't have been worse,but running from Indians wasn't anyone's idea of a smart move. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2006 : 12:52:14 PM
|
Well, just to retain to the point, I'm saying that it's wrong to claim this the biggest village of hostiles - however defined - ever, and that we don't know the numbers, and logic and oral evidence provides substance for a huge range. I tend to think it at the upper end solely because of camp's point, and SB's wish to stick it to the Feds, and because it would appeal to a lot of young warrior types.
Reno was already engaged when he retreated/charged/vacated his digestive tract, and even so the Indians did allow him to reform on the Hill. Custer, at Weir, was NOT under attack and could have rather easily retreated to gather up Reno and everyone and crossed over, and this to charge down the valley into the village as a unit. Not claiming it would have worked or that they would have survived, but he had that option. Why he did what he did after hitting MTC, and the felt need to excuse it by the FanBoys, is the nub of the conflict about LBH. For he neither charged with vigor nor retreated, and it strikes me the 7th was nudged to where it ended up without knowing what was going on. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on September 06 2006 12:53:28 PM |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2006 : 8:05:12 PM
|
| DC, Crook was not engaged when the warriors attacked him. Reno could not have regrouped without help.I never made the claim of the largest village anywhere, though I did defend it. Other than that I probably have to agree with you, much as I hate to. |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - September 06 2006 : 8:17:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
Again: assertions have to be proven, the negatives cannot be. It may have been the greatest village size in that year or of the Sioux, but we really do not know, and it further conflicts with the "new" evidence that the village could only field about the same as the 7th.
I don't recall how many men were in Custer's column and, unforgivably,I am simply to lazy to seek the necessary information before posting a response. I believe he had 600 men or there abouts. However, I must admit I was somewhat startled by your proclamation regarding the ability of the village to only field, "about the same as the 7Th."
Could you please post your sources to support this supposition?
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2006 : 5:44:35 PM
|
Prolar,
I don't get the Crook reference. What you say is true, but so what?
Reno was already regrouping under light attention from the Sioux when Benteen arrived.
There are those who claim less warriors than 1200, and I believe recent gatherings produced papers to that effect. I tend to believe Herendeen and Indians who are said to have claimed it was the biggest they'd been part of, with 1800 lodges and over 3k warriors. A small village could have run. A moderate village could have fought and lost or won in a messy battle, a huge village could have done what happened in the time frame allowed. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2006 : 9:23:50 PM
|
| DC, Crook was attacked while far from the village. You say that Custer could have withdrawn at will, bot he was much more of a threat than Crook at that point. The Indians didn't press Reno's disorganized force on the hill because of 1.Custer's approach at MTC which was a threat to the village,and 2.Benteen's approach with a possibly strong force.From what I have read most of the survivors felt that Reno would have been wiped out if the Indians had pressed their attack. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 07 2006 : 9:51:05 PM
|
That's true about Crook; I just don't get the import to this.
Custer could have withdrawn at any time before and for much of his whatever-the-hell he was doing at MTC. Once in serious contact, no. But from the time he got to high ground - Weir or Sharpshooter - he knew all he needed and he was not under attack at all. They dismounted after he descended to tighten their saddles. You don't do that in a gully under any fire.
I agree Reno would have been wiped out had the Sioux central command and they'd portioned off the needed men. Still enough to deal with Custer, in my opinion. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 08 2006 : 6:19:51 PM
|
| I agree that he was not under attack for some time. Why should they attack while he was approaching? He was coming to where they wanted him. To me that doesn't mean they will allow him to manauver at will.They didn't allow Crooke within miles of the village. Why would they ignore Custer until he was ready to attack? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 08 2006 : 10:09:46 PM
|
You credit the Sioux with more organization than they could have had. They should attack during his approach because the best place to nail the 7th was in the Reno Creek area from two sides, and it was far enough away to shield the civvies. The stories we have from the Indians don't indicate a plan whatsoever, I don't think they wanted Custer as close as he got if it occured to them at all. They were incompetent, but not as bad as Custer that day.
They weren't in any number about him while he waited at Weir Point, and from what he saw, he could have turned around and trotted back to Reno Hill or further, gathered Benteen and train and bailed out Reno or made - finally - a charge in support. Martini's later story about Custer under attack as he left is muted by Boston successfully joining him and making it to LSH. They wouldn't ignore him, but its not like they had a clue what was going on except soldiers were there on the east bank. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 10 2006 : 10:31:18 PM
|
You both have good points. If the Indians did not know of the approach then how did they meet Reno before he reached the village.
If the Indians did know they were coming then why not take the battle to them as they did Crook. Did they also know of Terry and did not want leave the village? |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 10 2006 : 11:45:37 PM
|
| I am not one of those who believes that Custer was doomed regardless of what he did, but I think there were too many young warriors looking for a fight to allow a retreat. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 11 2006 : 09:58:04 AM
|
| If Custer had a truly defensible position he could have held off till Terry arrived. From MTC onward there was no good defensible location. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 11 2006 : 11:38:27 AM
|
| AZ, just speculating, but do you consider it possible that Custer could have found a loop in yhe river that would have provided some cover, access to water, and maybe a water barrier on two or three sides? Reno's timber position looks pretty good. The weakness was lack of fire control and maybe not enough manpower.Custer with five troops could have avoided this. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 11 2006 : 12:14:41 PM
|
I'm unasked, but it's iffy to view LBH as a water barrier. Good cover for approach, as well. Also, the myriad weakness of Reno's timber position were being burned out (possible), running out of ammo at night, and losing mounts precluding alternative moves, conveniently stationed in the center to take shots from all sides.
We have it from military giants that when cavalry is stopped, they have major issues, and I don't think anyone would deliberately get that close to such a large home of enemy with intent to go on the defensive and wait. Custer, least. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 11 2006 : 7:03:06 PM
|
| DC, agreed, it would only have been a desperation move. I don't know that such a position existed or was in reach.If it was most of the problems with Reno's position wouldn't apply.If you are holding out for rescue, the health of horses doesn't matter.The river is certainly a barrier to fire. Conservation of ammo would be necessary, but with saddlebags they had 100 rounds per man plus revolvers. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 16 2006 : 10:38:39 PM
|
| I don't believe that Custer would want to obtain a defensive position without knowing where the pack train was located. He may have thought Benteen was securing it but he wouldn't know. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - September 18 2006 : 11:17:50 AM
|
| AZ. I don't believe that he would either,but I was replying to your statement that was no defenseible position past MTC. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 22 2006 : 12:10:19 AM
|
| Prolar I just don't see the terrain suitable for a defense against a larger group of Indians. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
shadymist
Private
Status: offline |
Posted - September 28 2006 : 3:04:28 PM
|
Indians did have saddles . . . not like the white mans' . . . but still saddles. There are all kinds of Indian saddles in museums.
It was probably the greatest conglomerate of Indians known to whites at that time in North America . . . (Seeing IS believing)
The Indians may not have been the greatest "cavalry" but they were undoubtedly better horseman than most whites . . . and that may have been what most whites meant.
You seem to love nit-picking everyone's opinions . . . why is that? |
Edited by - shadymist on September 28 2006 3:05:22 PM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 28 2006 : 8:59:35 PM
|
By paragraph.
1. In museums because of their rarity. Few - if any - free Indians rode with saddles in 1876. Statistically unimportant to the point: they were much better horsemen on average than the whites, and their reputation as cavalry - which is not the same thing as being excellent horsemen - was inflated because of their bareback ability and no stirrups, the innovation that allowed William to win at Hastings against the previously impervious shield wall.
2. It surely was not. Mexico City was far bigger when Cortez saw it. (You know Mexico is part of North America, right?) Chohokia. Places polished off in the first pandemics. Put a wig on a pig and it was probably the most attractive woman most of those guys had seen as well.
3. Which is what I said, pretty much. And again: horsemanship is only part of good cavalry. And Indians did not fight as units, so in every sense a silly claim.
4. Incorrect. I don't like seeing absurdities repeated become dogma, and the Indians as "greatest cavalry in the world" isn't forgiven or excused by their (generally) vastly superior horsemanship over post Civil War recruits.
Some people use new User ID's when embarrassed by their interactions under the old. Why is that? |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Responsibility At Little Bighorn
