Let The Common Soldier Speak

[joewiggs]

I found it interesting that personal letters written after the battle by enlisted personnel cited a description of the battle that was significantly different from the circumstances testified too by the officers. Almost, as it were, as if these men described two different battles. Below is an example:

"It is no use pretending that the men here on the hill, from Reno down, were not disorganized and downright frightened. It had only been the grace of God that let them escape across the river with their lives."
Sgt. Windolph

Windolph was not asked to testify at the inquiry which was probably a good thing for Reno. This paragraph written by someone who was actually there is fraught with a reality and truth that is staggering. It describes a movement that was sans officer leadership, soldiers turning their backs to the enemy with no regard for their wounded nor dead comrades, a mob led by Reno who precipitated this "charge" by failing to "lead" as opposed to simply running away!

[joewiggs]

"The first Sergeant of Co. "M" directed me to go one way and one of the drunken officers another. I am writing this not without proper proof. With my own eyes I saw these officers open a bottle of whiskey and drinking enough to make an ordinary man drunk. I then witnessed the greatest excitement among the intoxicated officers I ever saw.

Sgt. Charles White, 7TH Cavalry "M" Company.

I realize that it is difficult to rationalize the "silence" of the regular troops and the inexplicable misdirection, exaggeration, and forgetfulness of the Officer testimony.

It's hard to wrap ones head around such naked dishonesty (if true) and the horrific lack of support for General Custer by his troops.

It was hard for me, at first, until I began to realize that the "Officer Class" continuously said one thing and the "grunt/enlisted personnel said quite another. According to the officers the men were too tired and the horses to exhausted to engage the enemy, Custer had no idea of the actual location of the village, had no battle plans, and could only assist Reno from the rear.

Any member of this forum who believes these points of contention see me, I have some land (swamp) to sell you!

Why is it that information that is generated by those who contradict the officers is merely glossed over by the majority yet, the type of testimony that Wallace offered is accepted when historical facts prove him to be in error?

Methinks that "class distinction" may be hoovering in the windmills of our minds.

[stumblingbear]

I have been trying to take a little time out of my schedule to read the Reno Court of Inquiry and I admit that Wallace seems to be stuck on testimony that only makes Custer look foolish.

Sending Reno to fight with only 112 men.
The horses and men being too exhausted to go on.
Custer never issued any plans.
He rode next to Reno.

I have check several books and all of them say that Reno had 140 to 150 men not counting the scouts.

The horse and men were tired but that is what happens on marches like that and the men did fight once the battle began, they did not pas out from exhaustion.

Enlisted personnel knew of a battle plan but were ignored by the board.

Wallace did not join Reno until after Reno got his orders to charge.

Why did Wallace go out of his way to paint such a picture based on what was not true?

Something was being hidden. What and Why?

[whitebull]

I understand where this might be going but, I don't see how Wallace saying he was with Reno instead of Custer can be so important. If the officers were willing to sell Custer down the chute, what did they get out of the deal? Could they have hated him so much.

Not saying you are off base, just asking is all.

[joewiggs]

To answer both of your questions regarding Wallace I proffer the following. Public outrage would have been tremendous should the truth have become known; various officers succumbed to disorientation and acts of cowardice abetted by the consumption of alcohol; a sea of it.

This truth predicates the comprehension and rationale required to achieve an understanding of the why the military could not allow this to happen. At the time of this battle, Congress was extremely adverse to supplying much needed funds to the military. In fact they were dead set against it. The reason for this stance by the political leaders is not complex, it was then as it is today. Politicians vote along the lines of their constituency in order to stay in office. Make sense?

Everyone involved in the planning of this battle, from Sherman to Terry had it all wrong and planed accordingly resulting in a sad and terrible blunder. Is it not human to decline taking the responsibility for such a fiasco?

In the gentile mindset of the 1800's, the defeat of whites by aboriginals was just not acceptable. If this historical truism is not understood by we of today, then coming to grips with the enigma of the battle can not be unraveled. Although it is not politically correct to infer that blacks and Indians of Custer's era were considered to be sub-human, sadly it was so!

While it is true that such a racist stance is passe today, it was virtually gospel then. That is why an explanation of feigned culpability had to be created and placed upon the shoulders of someone who was unable to defend himself;Custer!

The premise that was created at the inquiry that would be acceptable to the society of that day was the Army have handily won if their leader had not acted incompetently;class closed! The solution? Place the blame on him who could not defend himself;the dead Custer!!

Reno was a willing pawn in this subterfuge, so was Benteen. Wallace was an up and coming "good ole boy" to the members of the military hierarchy (Sherman and Sheridan)and could easily be influenced to "see the light." The character and intestinal fortitude of the 7 TH must not be besmirched. He was, therefore, selected as the mouthpiece to "report" what happened by placing him "next" to Custer and, thereby, placing him in the envious position to hear or not to hear all orders given or not given.

If orders were not issued or were impractical, then Reno and Benteen could not be held accountable for what occurred.

If Wallace said it was so, all counter testimony was disregarded by the board regardless of testimony to the contrary!

[stumblingbear]

I have always wondered why those who testified insisted that no one had any idea as to what General Custer was doing or trying to do. Reading the testimony you get the impression that everything was the fault of Custer, that he was a little "off" yet, Reno was pictured as calm and collected.

I thought too that Reno saying that he had no confidence in Custer was a bit strange because no one seemed to have confidence in Reno.

It's hard to understand today how people thought back then but, figuring it out must be important.

[whitebull]

Bottom line! Things went wrong, the Indians won, soldiers died, and it had to be somebodies fault. Why not Custer?

[joewiggs]

Speculation for sure Whitebull, but I really believe he was selected because he was unable to defend himself and he was, afterall, the Leader.

The Boss always takes the blame when he has been silenced.

[joewiggs]

We all know that Reno claimed and testified, under oath, that he never heard firing coming from the Custer killing field. Trumpeter Martini was with Benteen when they initially arrived upon Reno hill. Within feet of Reno and Benteen he heard the following:

"We heard a lot of shooting; it kept up for a half hour or maybe more. It sounded like a big fight was going on, and the men thought it was general Custer, and that he was whipping the Indians.

Capt. Weir had some words with Col. Reno (brevet rank) and I could tell by the way he was acting that he was excited and angry. He waved his arms and gestured and pointed down the river."

Here is what I find absolutely interesting. Why is it that information such as this is often ignored yet the testimony of Benteen, Reno, and Wallace is believed?

Martini had no ulterior motive to make his statements, the others certainly did.

[joewiggs]

"Martin stated in an intercourse with Walter Camp that Benteen had asked him if Custer was being attacked, and he responded yes without elaboration. He was positive that he had not used the term'shedaddling', a word or recent coinage that seems unlikely in the vocabulary of a man with little English, but Benteen's own distinctive verbal style."
Touched By Fire, P293

When you read all that you can little gems like this one are garnered from the murky stream of history. what you have here is Benteen's Freudian slip in which he assumed the Indians were "shedaddling" and must have gotten sick to the stomach when re realized that he was terrible wrong and, as a result, his actions (slow response and failure to send a courier) would be questioned later.

So convinced was he that Custer had the Indians on the "run" that he believed he had been cheated of his portion of possible glory. At Custer's death his resentment toward Custer knew no boundaries and only grew larger with the passing of time, as did his drinking.

You see, in a perverse way, everything was Custer's fault! Benteen's life, pride, and ambition was as much a victim to as Custer's death was to Libby.

[joewiggs]

"In a letter written to Godfrey nearly thirty-five years later, Private William O. Taylor captured the essence of what must have been a general feeling among the soldiers, even those who blessed Reno for his nonmilitary inspiration"

'Reno proved incompetent and Benteen showed his indifference--I will not use the uglier words that have often been in my mind. Both failed Custer and he had to fight it out alone....Among the several things that impressed me greatly;one was the general demoralization that seemed to pervade many of the officers and men, due in great measure, I think to Major Reno. When an enlisted man sees his commanding officer showing greater regard for their personal safety than anything else, it would apt to demoralize anyone taught to breathe, almost, at the word of command.'A clear message is revealed here for those who wish to truly understand what occurred in Reno's "charge" to the bluffs. Military discipline instantly dissolved into a mad dash of panic to escape because the soldiers witnessed their "leaders" running for their lives.

To Hell With Honor, P.261

This too, is the reason why officers were willing to let a dead man (they can tell no tales) take the wrap for Reno as the true exposure of Reno's meltdown would only make things worse. Faced with the alternative of admitting that officers of the 7th. acted cravenly, they stood numb allowing Custer (whom some did not like anyway) holding the bag.

[whitebull]

If what you say is right that would make Benteen guilty of not doing his duty which is something I ain't going to believe. Reno may have been drunk enough to make wrong decisions but Benteen was sober and a brave man.

Benteen went back to Custer's trail because he could not find any sign of Indians to his front. While going back he heard the sound of shooting right after leaving the morass.

Soon after he rode up the same ridge that led to Reno's Hill and practically saved the day.

[tbw]

Nov 20, 2012 15:08:08 GMT -5 joewiggs said:

"In a letter written to Godfrey nearly thirty-five years later, Private William O. Taylor captured the essence of what must have been a general feeling among the soldiers, even those who blessed Reno for his nonmilitary inspiration"

'Reno proved incompetent and Benteen showed his indifference--I will not use the uglier words that have often been in my mind. Both failed Custer and he had to fight it out alone....Among the several things that impressed me greatly;one was the general demoralization that seemed to pervade many of the officers and men, due in great measure, I think to Major Reno. When an enlisted man sees his commanding officer showing greater regard for their personal safety than anything else, it would apt to demoralize anyone taught to breathe, almost, at the word of command.'A clear message is revealed here for those who wish to truly understand what occurred in Reno's "charge" to the bluffs. Military discipline instantly dissolved into a mad dash of panic to escape because the soldiers witnessed their "leaders" running for their lives.

To Hell With Honor, P.261

This too, is the reason why officers were willing to let a dead man (they can tell no tales) take the wrap for Reno as the true exposure of Reno's meltdown would only make things worse. Faced with the alternative of admitting that officers of the 7th. acted cravenly, they stood numb allowing Custer (whom some did not like anyway) holding the bag.

Joe,

I've heard that. That is, that they let Custer get his without the demoralized incompetent assistance he deserved, and even turned a blind eye in indifference when they heard the firing downstream. Do you think Custer knew his subordinates well enough to know that they would have or could have done that to him?

[tbw]

Jul 7, 2012 10:17:39 GMT -5 stumblingbear said:

I have been trying to take a little time out of my schedule to read the Reno Court of Inquiry and I admit that Wallace seems to be stuck on testimony that only makes Custer look foolish.

Sending Reno to fight with only 112 men.
The horses and men being too exhausted to go on.
Custer never issued any plans.
He rode next to Reno.

I have check several books and all of them say that Reno had 140 to 150 men not counting the scouts.

The horse and men were tired but that is what happens on marches like that and the men did fight once the battle began, they did not pas out from exhaustion.

Enlisted personnel knew of a battle plan but were ignored by the board.

Wallace did not join Reno until after Reno got his orders to charge.

Why did Wallace go out of his way to paint such a picture based on what was not true?

Something was being hidden. What and Why?

The old Cavalry, just right after the close of the Civil War could easily engage the Indians and defeat them no matter what their numbers were. The reasons for this was weaponry. The Indians couldn't inflict any long range fire and had to close on the Cavalry to engage them at close quarter fighting. As time went on the Indians started acquiring the white mans weapons and by the time of the LBH, had significant numbers of them.

It does seem odd to send 100 against a 1000, or for that matter 250 against a 1000. But that's what they were used to doing as the Indians just didn't have the weaponry to stop them. Did Custer underestimate, not their numbers, as has forever been interpreted the cause of his demise, but rather than that, did he underestimate their number of white man's weapons in their possession?

[whitebull]

I get what you are saying and , you ask some good questions that need to be answered if we are gonna understand how this battle unfolded.
What I can't wrap my head around is that is it not true that Custer was sent to capture the Indians with just what he had?

In other words, how come no one figured out he was out manned and out gunned before they sent him out to capture a village to big to be captured in the first place?