Who to blame? Custer, Reno, Benteen or other?

[crazycanuck]

Hypothetically speaking if Custer knew that there were no Indians to the southeast and he kept Benteen,Reno and himself together would Custer of had a better chance of succeeding in fulfilling his orders at the LBH. In other words if Benteen had been kept closer to Custer and Reno would Custer of had a better chance to succeed ?

[tbw]

Not sure if anyone can answer that one Crazy. It may not have mattered one way or another. I think it would have depended upon the warrior reaction, the terrain, and many other factors that we don't know.

[moderator]

I'll give it a go....

Benteen certainly thought that the regiment had ought to have stayed together. What is interesting about his perspective he shared that thought with Custer prior to the battle, or so he said. He seemed to be consistent in that thought throughout his testimony at the COI, of course that was in hindsight on his part, at that time. To second guess Custer's thought process as to whether or not taking the advice of Benteen would have changed anything, its difficult to say. One thing that would have made a huge difference would have been whether or not they could have pulled off a surprise attack with that many men in one place, and any kind of surprise was equal to success, especially against the hit and run tactics of the plains Indians. The other thing that would have to be considered is the logistics of such an operation. What would have to change in order for them to have attacked in that manner? For instance, would the pack train have had to have been a lot closer before initiating that attack? And if it did, would that have caused a serious delay in forming the attack? The terrain itself would have had to have taken prime consideration before trying to get that many men organized into some semblance of organization so that they wouldn't be bunched up or occluded by impending terrain features from engaging the enemy. All of this and more, may be the reason Custer preferred the 3 pronged attacks, they were smaller, faster moving, hard hitting outfits that didn't require a lot of logisitic consideration before the attack was made.

Both Reno and Benteen leave the distinct impression that the Indians had waited in ambush, not just for them, but for Custer as well, and if this was the case, which it may have been, would it have made any difference in the outcome? In other words, if we take all 600 some men and rush them down the same way Reno rode to attack the village from that end, could 2000 - 3000 some Indians have isolated them the same way about 500 - 600 warriors did the 100 or so of Reno's men? I think its still a pickle if the odds cant improve better than 3 to 1, and they don't.

The other logistical problems associated with attacking as a regiment was the 'run' factor. If they attacked on one end could the Indians have escaped the other way? And this just wasn't going to happen, not to Custer's outfit. And remember there was a consensus among the men and officers alike that the Indians would run. This may have been the deciding factor in why Custer chose to attack the way he did.

There is a heck of a lot to consider, but I think it would have been a logistical nightmare for anyone to have attempted it. They weren't fighting Johnny Reb anymore, they were attacking plains Indians who didn't honor any military thought about drawing battle lines and having at it.

[crazycanuck]

Sounds pretty good thank-you, but how about hypothetically speaking of course, if Custer knew there were no Indians to the southeast, and he knew the Indians would not scatter, and Custer kept Benteen and Reno with him, and waited for Gibbon and Terry, do you think Custer would of had a better chance of succeeding in carrying out his orders with the help of the gatling gun and triple the soldiers ?

[moderator]

This sounds more like what Custer may have been attempting before his columns were discovered. Terry and Gibbon of course didn't arrive until the 27th, so even if Custer had attempted to wait that long he surely would have been attacked had he tried to wait that long. I think to get a clearer picture of what you're trying to hypothesize on, one would have to know the starting point for Custer's trek down Davis Creek, and whether Custer could have possibly disobeyed Terry's order by going on ahead on the 25th.

From the sound of your question, it assumes certain factors that places Custer at or near the Divide and after Varnum and the scouts observations from the Crows Nest... "if Custer knew there were no Indians to the southeast..." He did know that there were no Indians there, none were ever reported, and if there had been, it would have been reported and known by those who had been to the Crows Nest. Varnum never did say anything about Indians being in that direction, had there been, he most assuredly at some point have mentioned it, he never did.

Knowing whether or not the Indians would have scattered or stayed and fought, I think is what they all were trying to determine. And like these discussion boards, the general thoughts usually turn to some kind of consensus (even if it is wrong), the consensus at the time, as was known by the men and officers alike, was that they would scatter and run. Were there other voices that said they wouldn't or thought they wouldn't? I think from the sound of Benteens own suggestion to keep the regiment together, that he may very well have been in the other camp on this one. Mitch Bouyer may have been another, and if he was, it seems implausible that Custer not heed his warnings. If anyone should have known, it would have been Bouyer, and this may be what Benteen was alluding to when he said that Custer didn't believe his scouts. There is something to remember about this. Not all Scouts and Guides thought that way, as they didn't "change clothes" until much later when it was obvious to them that they would be fighting a quite sizeable number of enemy Indians and they didn't want to die in white mans clothing. Had they thought differently at the Crows Nest, they surely would have changed out of white mans clothing, right then and there.

The scattering and run issue then would have to be decided, and a plan implemented, one way or the other, before progressing down Ash Creek. There is no way around this, in spite of what Reno and Benteen said about Custer having "no plans". Because if Custer thought they were going to scatter and run, he would have to do something like what he did do, split up his regiment to prevent it from happening. OR, if he thought because of the size of the village, and whether or not they could surpise them, to implement a regimental charge on them in the early morning hours on the 26th. This, I don't think was at all possible on the 25th, there wasn't enough time, logistically speaking, to implement it, and I believe Custer had no choice at that point. Was it a right or wrong decision based upon our hindsight analysis? Each person has their own thoughts on this, and it is rather difficult to say.

The rest of your question, I think, would have Custer continuing on as Terry suggested (thought), and not turn down the trail at Busby, as you mention Gatlings, Terry, Gibbon etc.

There were some people who did state that Custer disobeyed Terry's orders by turning and following the trail. But there was a lot in Terry's letter of Instruction that allowed a lot of leeway. One of the things that Terry mentions right off the bat is that he is sending Custer "in pursuit of the Indians." Now if Custer was to quote "pursue" them, how could he be disobeying any order that allowed Custer that privilege? The part where Terry essentially told Custer not to go down that trail found by Major Reno, was all "thoughts" and "suggestions" and not as definite a set of statements as that lead in line, where he did state that Custer was to quote "pursue" them. Thus your analysis that he didn't legally disobey the letter of instruction but "spiritually" did, may be appropriate.

Your question then further postulates, I assume, as to what could have happened, if Custer had not followed the trail and continued as Terry "thought" he should have.

This one is, I think, way out there. Way too many unknowns, one of which may have been that the village may have been packed up and long gone before Custer and/or Terry-Gibbon's arrival there. And if I'm not mistaken, according to Indian statements would have occurred, so no LBH battle. As to further speculation, choose a place and time its a crap shoot from there.

[crazycanuck]

Crazy ! Good stuff, thank-you .

[crazycanuck]

But lets say you had a choice of one of only two answers, and you had to pick one answer only, and the question is, if Custer had known there were no Indians to the southeast,and he kept Benteen and Reno together with himself, and waited for Terry and Gibbon,and the Indians didn't scatter and run, and the Indians didn't attck the troops on there way to the LBH,would Custer of had a better chance of carrying his orders out with the added gatling gun and increased troops as well ? Your choice of answers are A. Yes Custer would of had a better chance or B. No Custer would not of had a better chance. Would you pick A or B ?

[joewiggs]

Under the restrictions you've placed the choices and the options selected by Custer which did not occur, I would select A.

[crazycanuck]

Come on give Custer more credit. Gump Worsley goaltender for the New York Rangers was asked who gives you the most problems in the league for you as a goaltender. He answered my own teamates give me the most trouble. The Rangers were perennial last place losers always putting the puck in there own net in the old six team league of the early sixties. The same could be said for Custer, thats why he rejected the help from Gibbons company, because they and Terry would of given him trouble accidentally taking out Custers men with friendly fire and made things worse at the LBH. Custer and the 7th could open a can of whup A$$ and beat those Indians themselves,but he had a bad day.

[stumblingbear]

Crazy, there is a slight possibility that your namesake is very, very, very, appropriate!

[crazycanuck]

Thanks Stumble,and be sure you don't trip over your own feet ,he he.

[tbw]

Come on give Custer more credit. Gump Worsley goaltender for the New York Rangers was asked who gives you the most problems in the league for you as a goaltender. He answered my own teamates give me the most trouble. The Rangers were perennial last place losers always putting the puck in there own net in the old six team league of the early sixties. The same could be said for Custer, thats why he rejected the help from Gibbons company, because they and Terry would of given him trouble accidentally taking out Custers men with friendly fire and made things worse at the LBH. Custer and the 7th could open a can of whup A$$ and beat those Indians themselves,but he had a bad day.

I see nothing wrong with the way Joe answered. It must be remembered that not all of us view this battle the same way. I know Joe and I don't always see eye to eye, and that is a good thing. We do achieve consensus on a lot of issues and that also is a good thing. Joe has consistently stated that he thinks the numbers of warriors had something to do with their victory, which very well may have been, I don't see anything wrong with that view either. It's a view that is presented time and again by a lot of LBH enthusiasts, researchers & book writers alike. In believing this, it is for them quite natural to assume that it would NOT have been a bad idea for Custer to have accepted the Montana battalion of the 2nd Regiment or for that matter the Gatlings you mentioned. Had you asked that of anyone who so believes that there were quote, "too many Indians" for Custer's Regiment to handle, you would be likely to get as many replies as Joe's and that is probably more common than one thinks.

[crazycanuck]

True , Joe says those options didn't occur but I say Custer should and could of made them occur, and if he had, the Indians numbers wouldn't of mattered. "Say it ain't so Joe", er I mean say it is so Joe.

[tbw]

Well, first of all how would you propose Custer force this supposed agenda?

The problem, I think, exists in the way you stated the question.

1) "if Custer had known there were no Indians to the southeast"

This presupposes that Custer should have known or tried to find out about whether there were Indians there before he or his agents arrived at the Crows Nest? That was impossible to do on the evening/early morning hours on the night march. Nothing could be known until the next morning, and I believe that he did everything he could to properly scout not just that area but all the other areas leading up to the battle. So this is saying that your question presupposes that we make this decision based from the Crows Nest on, right?

2) "he kept Benteen and Reno together with himself"

Which again presupposes and relies totally upon #1, which analysis begins again at the Crows Nest.

3) "waited for Terry and Gibbon, and the Indians didn't scatter and run, and the Indians didn't attack the troops on there way to the LBH"

This is the open loop to your question. Waiting for Terry/Gibbon how, when and where? At the Crows Nest? For 2 days? Without being discovered and attacked? Hell, that wasn't possible on the morning of the 25, how the heck were they suppose to conceal over 600 men & mounts without being discovered on the Indians own back trail for 2 days when they couldn't do it for 2 over hours? What, don't drop the cracker box? They herded those pack animals, they didn't have a man on each one, and for Custer to have issued orders to his men to cover that contingency would have made the moral problem worse, not better.

The other option would be 'not to go to the Crows Nest, which presupposes that Custer do what Terry thoughtfully requested. And to do that Custer would not have known about the other conditions that you did list, which cannot occur until he or his agents gets to the Crows Nest, "no Indians to the Southeast" and thus, because of and wherefore there were no Indians there, he coulda, woulda, shoulda kept Benteen and Reno with him if you recall.

A better stated hypothetical would be more appropriate, don't you think?

[crazycanuck]

1.You send scouts through the night to the southeast like Custer marched his troops in the night and the scouts report no Indians to the southeast.2.Thus now no need to seperate Benteen and Custer. 3.That's right you wait at the Crows nest and you time with Terry's arrival, and by the way, the Indians seen in that area were not going to LBH, they continued to go away.