Keogh

[davel]

Wasn't sure where exactly to start this thread, but thought I'd do it here.

I've always been interested in Myles Keogh and how he seems to have earned a reputation as a combat officer. I know he didn't have a lot of experience in "Indian" fights, prior to the Little Bighorn, but am interested in thoughts/comments or his role/performance during the Civil War. (or elsewhere)

He was part of John Buford's staff, so certainly had the opportunity to learn from one of the best, and I believe he may have been with Stoneman during his raid into southern Virginia and North Carolina.....beyond those two I'm at a bit of a loss.

[joewiggs]

I do not have a whole lot of information regarding Keogh. I do have a theory however. I believe he was the greatest warrior that was mentioned in the annals of Indian lore. This "white" warrior is described as mounted and bravely covering the the soldiers who were trying to escape. I believe that the commander was trying to turn the tide of the collapsing skirmish line of "L" troop.

Much in the manner of contemporary mounted police who have the capability of "turning" a crowd by having their horses twist their haunches to move and disperse the masses.

Keogh was wounded while still mounted as evident by the wound to Comanche which corresponded with the shattered knee of Captain Keogh.

Lastly, he was reported to have not been mutilated, ostensibly due to his medal which was enclosed in a leather pouch, similar to the method that Indians contain their medicine. I don't think so. The warriors had no respect for our religious beliefs. What they did respect and held in awe was the "spiritual" world wherein a great warrior dies in battle while still maintaining the reins of his "warrior" mount;Comanche. Such a man need not be physically mutilated to hamper his ability to hunt in the hereafter, he need only to be respected as the epitome of the most profound achievement available to an Indian;Warrior!

[strange]

Jul 23, 2010 19:05:26 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

I do not have a whole lot of information regarding Keogh. I do have a theory however. I believe he was the greatest warrior that was mentioned in the annals of Indian lore. This "white" warrior is described as mounted and bravely covering the the soldiers who were trying to escape. I believe that the commander was trying to turn the tide of the collapsing skirmish line of "L" troop.

Much in the manner of contemporary mounted police who have the capability of "turning" a crowd by having their horses twist their haunches to move and disperse the masses.

Keogh was wounded while still mounted as evident by the wound to Comanche which corresponded with the shattered knee of Captain Keogh.

Lastly, he was reported to have not been mutilated, ostensibly due to his medal which was enclosed in a leather pouch, similar to the method that Indians contain their medicine. I don't think so. The warriors had no respect for our religious beliefs. What they did respect and held in awe was the "spiritual" world wherein a great warrior dies in battle while still maintaining the reins of his "warrior" mount;Comanche. Such a man need not be physically mutilated to hamper his ability to hunt in the hereafter, he need only to be respected as the epitome of the most profound achievement available to an Indian;Warrior!

Interesting here we have Tom Custer and Keogh who people both think the Indians paid special attention to.

Keogh for his lack of mutilation and Tom for his OVERT mutilation. I think the story is with the religious medallion is that he was also not looted (or less looted?) or they left alone his medallion. I think that is what I recall reading and I hope you'll all correct me if I'm wrong. If such is the case, that is why people speculate they left him alone since generally the clothing and the jewelry are never left idle.

If Keogh were left alone due to valiant fighting, we'd have to make up our minds about where the hell Tom fits into all of this. I've basically tried to weed away myths of the wise old Indian and advise people that some mutilations were just done for the sake of doing them and sometimes improvised. Tradition also applies but its not more important than strategics, or even just personal emotions.
Some bodies will have marks from certain customs while others won't have as much significance.

Strange

[strange]

In terms of his civil war service, he fought well enough to be featured as a significant character in a major film about the civil war (Gettysburg?), without any immediate relation to Custer in that particular film. Thus, Keogh is important enough to be featured in books and films independent of the big cahoona. Since Custer is so controversial, they'll probably eventually make a major film strictly about Keogh himself if producers ever feel the need to tackle the Little Bighorn topic.

I don't know much about Keogh, but he's pretty substantial by all appearances. I should soon read him one of these days, but I think he seems to be overrated as more of an ethnic hero (Irish, Catholic) and he's one of the sidekicks that people cling to when Custer becomes too controversial.
Any time I compliment Custer's good looks, everyone just reminds me that he has big floppy ears and nose, with a receding hair line to boot, and then they tell me Keogh is a lot more handsome. Granted, such is probably true, but I also think its what people retreat to when they feel uncomfortable of someone else is making too big a deal of George Armstrong Custer.

Strange

[joewiggs]

Jul 23, 2010 20:30:56 GMT -5 strange said:

Jul 23, 2010 19:05:26 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

I do not have a whole lot of information regarding Keogh. I do have a theory however. I believe he was the greatest warrior that was mentioned in the annals of Indian lore. This "white" warrior is described as mounted and bravely covering the the soldiers who were trying to escape. I believe that the commander was trying to turn the tide of the collapsing skirmish line of "L" troop.

Much in the manner of contemporary mounted police who have the capability of "turning" a crowd by having their horses twist their haunches to move and disperse the masses.

Keogh was wounded while still mounted as evident by the wound to Comanche which corresponded with the shattered knee of Captain Keogh.

Lastly, he was reported to have not been mutilated, ostensibly due to his medal which was enclosed in a leather pouch, similar to the method that Indians contain their medicine. I don't think so. The warriors had no respect for our religious beliefs. What they did respect and held in awe was the "spiritual" world wherein a great warrior dies in battle while still maintaining the reins of his "warrior" mount;Comanche. Such a man need not be physically mutilated to hamper his ability to hunt in the hereafter, he need only to be respected as the epitome of the most profound achievement available to an Indian;Warrior!

Interesting here we have Tom Custer and Keogh who people both think the Indians paid special attention to.

Keogh for his lack of mutilation and Tom for his OVERT mutilation. I think the story is with the religious medallion is that he was also not looted (or less looted?) or they left alone his medallion. I think that is what I recall reading and I hope you'll all correct me if I'm wrong. If such is the case, that is why people speculate they left him alone since generally the clothing and the jewelry are never left idle.

If Keogh were left alone due to valiant fighting, we'd have to make up our minds about where the hell Tom fits into all of this. I've basically tried to weed away myths of the wise old Indian and advise people that some mutilations were just done for the sake of doing them and sometimes improvised. Tradition also applies but its not more important than strategics, or even just personal emotions.
Some bodies will have marks from certain customs while others won't have as much significance.

Strange

I'm so glad you brought up the question regarding Tom, it gives me the opportunity to present a theory of mine. It is true that Warriors invariably counted "Coupe" during battle which resulted in serious wounds other than those normally suffered in combat. The slashing of the throat, thighs, arms, removal of limbs etc. However, nothing compares to the unbelievable damage done to the body/carcass of Colonel Custer.

When the warriors vacated the Hill they were replaced by the women, children and old folk who were consumed with a bitter need to revenge their loved ones who had been killed by the soldiers in previous encounters such as the Washita. Revenge is a dish best served cold. Coldly these mothers, fathers,sister, and sons of the fallen enacted their own special brand of revenge. The women carried stone hammers which, ordinarily, were used to obtain the gristle from bone to the beat the heads of the wounded and dead soldiers.

Tom was incorrectly identified by these "avenger's" as the "leader" of these soldiers by his dress and distinctive "Eagle" tattoos on his arm. He was probably still alive when attacked as they who somehow,momentarily, survived the initial carnage were, subsequently, identified by the excessive amount of arrows in their bodies and their smashed heads when found by Terry's men.

[strange]

"incorrectly identified as leader"

I like that theory Mr Wiggs.

By the way, who else or how many others had the smashed flat heads?

[joewiggs]

Strange, may I say that you are a true gentleman and a connoisseur of reasonable probability! I do recall of others having their heads smashed in. Let me do some research and find that information.

[joewiggs]

Jul 24, 2010 21:20:21 GMT -5 strange said:

"incorrectly identified as leader"

I like that theory Mr Wiggs.

By the way, who else or how many others had the smashed flat heads?

I found one!!!. In the book, "where Custer Fell, they point out a trooper who had his head smashed in at the area known as Finley-Fickle Ridge. I think it was Fickle!

[stumblingbear]

Just caught this one! If you are right, how did Kanipe identify his friend's smashed face. If Kanipe made a mistake then Fincle could have escaped as he claimed and survived the battle!

[joewiggs]

kanipe was know for speaking of events with a confidence that belied actual knowledge, pro or con. For example his "identification" of Fincle. Kanipe spoke of his dear friend laying near his dead horse which he was very familiar with. This statement gives the impression that the identification, by Kanpur, was absolute;it was not.

The body that lay near the Sergeant's alleged horse was so badly damaged by wounds and harsh climate that identification was not possible.
A true friend of Fincle, Windolph, sought out the sergeant but could never identify his body. A fact that sadden him for the rest of his life.

Fincle may not have escaped and he might have; he was not found on the battle field.

[stumblingbear]

There is a book out about Finkle that claims he was part of the group that was stationed on Calhoun ridge before the real fighting started. He was hit in the shoulder during long range firing and so was his horse. the horse bolted away carrying Finkle with him. I'll find the title of the book and get back with the information.