|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 3, 2013 18:30:03 GMT -5
No writer has garnered more respect and public acknowledgment regarding his respected work on this battle than Mr. Graham. I have often read of other authors who recommend that the novice read Graham's book thoroughly prior to forging ahead to other written tomes. While I failed to follow that advise myself, I concur.
Graham puts it all in there, even theories that he does not agree with. The historical documentation is priceless. Although I am an ardent admirer of the Colonel, I do not agree with him en Toto. I have the fortune to have been born sometime after him and, as a result, have been the recipient of information unknown to the master during his time.
In these thread I propose to to refer to some instances wherein a difference of opinion will come to light. I hope that the other members of the forum will make note of these comment and comment when appropriate.
The following seen occurs on June 25Th., at approximately 8:00 AM as later relayed by Sgt. Martini,During an interview with Graham) who has just be assigned the task of orderly trumpet for General Custer. This assignment, of course , enables the Sgt. to hear and see the below described comments and actions:
"The General ordered the Indian scouts to follow them (Indians) , but they refused to go. Then the General motioned to Col. Reno, and when he rode* up the General told the Adjutant to order him to go down and cross the river and attack the Indian village, and that he would support him with the entire regiment. He said he would to the other end and drive them , and that he have Benteen hurry up and attack the center."
[*Graham inserts an asterisk of explanation regarding Martin's usage of the word"rode" and changed it to the following:"While he was riding up" would better express Sergeant Martin's meaning. Custer did not speak directly to Reno, and the latter never was informed of the Generals intention to bring Benteen up to attack in the center -Author]
Graham could not have know these facts personally, his change of Martin's wording was based upon the statements of Reno and Benteen two men who held an incredible antagonism toward Custer and were not beyound any comment that would damage Custer's name.
Today both would be labeled "Hostile"witnesses and, as such, their testimony would lack credibility in todays courts.
With Benteen's sarcastic bellyaching about Custer's orders being "senseless" and not making any sense now becomes understandable because Benteen did receive orders "Hurry up and attack them in the center" which he refused to follow simply because he believed that Custer was attempting to keep him out of the battle to embarrass him! He,therefore, turned away from the valley which led to the village and returned to Custer's trail arriving 10 minutes after Reno.
Unfortunately, after the inquiry, facts were distorted and altered to make Custer look like a raging lunatic ; so eager for battle that he would rush his men into death without even forming a plan of action. A false accusation still believed to be true by many today.
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 8, 2013 20:41:31 GMT -5
Just a quick reminder of clarification, I am not proposing that Custer was an infallible hero who could do no wrong;he could and he did. What I am proposing is that history was changed when the officer class of the battle sought vindication from their less than stellar performance by stressing Custer's actions,orders, and involvement in the battle while "whitewashing" their actions. After the smoke cleared, all involved parties were aware that a terrible 'blunder" had occurred. Who was responsible? All who could no longer defend themselves if need be.
In "Archeology and Custer's Last Battle by Fox, we are presented with a vivid description of the complexity, terror, and critical mental debilitation that can reduce soldiers to shivering, psychopathic, and hysterical entities whose soul aim is to escape death when death is thrust upon them.
Later, when the smoke clears and the survivors look upon the tattered bodies of their comrade who did not survive, they began the age old custom of finding/creating a scape goat to remove the burden of responsibility from their own weary shoulders. Why is it necessary to blame others? Because no man can live with the knowledge that he will be forever labeled forever as a "coward" because of one mortal moment of fear. If you don't believe me ask Whitebull.
For example, fox addresses the condition of "Disintegration" which develops with lighting quickness. When the attack of the enemy is sudden and overwhelming (as in Custer Hill and Calhoun Hill) the resulting combat shock can be so shocking that men may quite fighting and, "die on the spot."
After the battle, those responsible for placing such men in a fatal situation must, of course, justify their issuance of the very orders that place the soldiers in such a predicament. As a result, responsibility is soon place upon those who are unable to defend themselves.
It is toward the identification of those individuals who actually formulated the plans that Custer followed and those who failed to carry out those plans that this thread is dedicated.
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 8, 2013 20:59:39 GMT -5
How many Indians were there?
Col. Robert P. Hughes (Gen. Terry's Brother-in-Law) recalled an incident that occurred on Reno Hill shortly after Terry arrived. When Terry asked how many Indians did the survivors face, all responses pivoted around 1,500 to 1,800.
Seven(7) days later, Benteen wrote a letter to his wife stating that 3,000 warriors were there.
Eventually the number of warriors reported exceeded 9,000.
Why? The more Indians involved in the battle the greater Custer's culpability for ordering the charge and the greater his "sin" for doing so.
According to the mores,customs, and expectations of that historical era Custer's failure to obey orders to attack the village, regardless of the number of warriors, would have resulted in his Court Martial. In the ethnocentric philosophy of the white man's superiority over the "heathens" 600 hundred soldiers would have been expected to defeat 20,000 Indians.
Only after defeat, was this silly philosophy of superiority discarded for the idiocy it truly was!
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 8, 2013 21:45:57 GMT -5
Let us now review Custer's "Idiocy" for attacking the village and placing poor Reno in a position in which he could not possibly handle. what did Custer's "Boss" say about such a fatalistic meeting with the Indians?
A few hours before the conference on the "far West" General Terry sent a dispatch to Gen. Sheridan that ended with the following words:
"I only hope that one of the of the two columns will find the Indians."
Please note no fear of defeat, overwhelming warriors, a rendezvous on the 26th with the rest of the command, Don't be greedy Custer,too many Indians to whip, is mentioned in the dispatch. No doubt that complete success was anticipated by the man (Sheridan and Sherman as well) who sent Custer and company to the Little Big Horn!
Terry,obviously, believe that any one of the two columns could defeat the Sioux. Only after it was all over, only after hundreds of men lay rotting in the June sun, did Terry experience a revelation of sanity. Only then did Terry issue edicts that proposed that Custer acted in haste.
Hey, somebody had to be at fault;right?
|
|
|
|
Post by strange on Feb 9, 2013 10:44:55 GMT -5
I think Fox is full of crap. There was all kinds of maneuvering going on, there was also enough time to tie a note around a bulldog's collar and try to send him for help. Custer was boxed in and cut off but he was not immediately overrun. The Indians didn't show up in full force all at once, they didn't attack all at once, there was too much land between the massacred areas and it took time to move back and forth. Fox is full of crap.
Strange
|
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Feb 9, 2013 11:09:19 GMT -5
Dude, I get the feeling that you really, really, really don't like Fox! I hope he don't feel the same way about you!  |
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Feb 9, 2013 11:19:06 GMT -5
Let us now review Custer's "Idiocy" for attacking the village and placing poor Reno in a position in which he could not possibly handle. what did Custer's "Boss" say about such a fatalistic meeting with the Indians? A few hours before the conference on the "far West" General Terry sent a dispatch to Gen. Sheridan that ended with the following words: "I only hope that one of the of the two columns will find the Indians." Please note no fear of defeat, overwhelming warriors, a rendezvous on the 26th with the rest of the command, Don't be greedy Custer,too many Indians to whip, is mentioned in the dispatch. No doubt that complete success was anticipated by the man (Sheridan and Sherman as well) who sent Custer and company to the Little Big Horn! Terry,obviously, believe that any one of the two columns could defeat the Sioux. Only after it was all over, only after hundreds of men lay rotting in the June sun, did Terry experience a revelation of sanity. Only then did Terry issue edicts that proposed that Custer acted in haste. Hey, somebody had to be at fault;right? If what you say is true Custer still could have changed his mind when he met up such a large number of Indians. His scouts told him there were to many to fight and still he went in. When does common sense come in? Field officer change tactics all the time don't they. when its necessary you got to do what you got to do! |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 9, 2013 12:20:38 GMT -5
I think Fox is full of crap. There was all kinds of maneuvering going on, there was also enough time to tie a note around a bulldog's collar and try to send him for help. Custer was boxed in and cut off but he was not immediately overrun. The Indians didn't show up in full force all at once, they didn't attack all at once, there was too much land between the massacred areas and it took time to move back and forth. Fox is full of crap. Strange Ironically, Dr. Strange, you and Fox have a great deal in common regarding the tactics that were utilized by both Custer and the Sioux. Custer was boxed in, as your propose, but not initially. His movement from Ford "B" to "B1" (near squaw Creek) and the return trip to the Last Stand Hill environment were pretty much unimpeded until the sudden onslaught of warriors that occurred in the area of Last Stand Hill. It was at that moment that the unanticipated firepower of the warriors decimated Custer's ranks;hence, mental debilitation and chaos. Fox agrees with you 100% percent that Custer was not immediately over run. You are also correct as the the exorbitant amount of time involve in this battle. Enough time to do a lot of things, like wait for Reno who never came. Indian testimony states that Custer's troops positioned themselves in the basin just below last Stand Hill and north of Last Stand Hill for quite sometime. |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 9, 2013 19:05:46 GMT -5
Let us now review Custer's "Idiocy" for attacking the village and placing poor Reno in a position in which he could not possibly handle. what did Custer's "Boss" say about such a fatalistic meeting with the Indians? A few hours before the conference on the "far West" General Terry sent a dispatch to Gen. Sheridan that ended with the following words: "I only hope that one of the of the two columns will find the Indians." Please note no fear of defeat, overwhelming warriors, a rendezvous on the 26th with the rest of the command, Don't be greedy Custer,too many Indians to whip, is mentioned in the dispatch. No doubt that complete success was anticipated by the man (Sheridan and Sherman as well) who sent Custer and company to the Little Big Horn! Terry,obviously, believe that any one of the two columns could defeat the Sioux. Only after it was all over, only after hundreds of men lay rotting in the June sun, did Terry experience a revelation of sanity. Only then did Terry issue edicts that proposed that Custer acted in haste. Hey, somebody had to be at fault;right? I'm going to take this opportunity to delve into the social mind-set of the average, American, white-male who lived during this historical era of the battle. Such a discussion is germane to understanding the motivation of the U. S. Government regarding the war with the Indians and the mind-set of the cavalry leaders of the historical era. This explanation will not include the "Manifest Destiny" philosophical cover for the atrocious greed of the government snatch Indian lands. Rather, the obnoxious, racist belief of that time period, that whites were so superior to the "Red Man" that it was virtually impossible for the "whites" to be defeated by "them" unless;a very critical exception occurs here, the "Whites" are out numbered by at least a hundred to one or the white commander is idiotic. When Fetterman proudly boasted that given 80 men he could ride through the entire Sioux Nation, no one disagreed with him! Sure he could! Why not? When the theory was soundly disproved, no one called Fetterman nor Brown idiotic for disobeying orders (they did) primarily because no one survived to place blame on them. When Custer and his men died following orders (unlike his counterpart Fetterman) he had the "albatross of stupidity" placed upon his shoulders thanks to the earnest and misguided efforts of Reno and Benteen. Again, please heed my earnest request to remain patient with me. There is a method to my madness. Neither Reno, Benteen, nor Custer were solely responsible for the fatal outcome of this battle. However, to insist that Custer should not have attacked when he did is not the answer either. To have not attacked when he did would have been in direct violation of his orders which, in all probability, would have led to his own Court Martial had he survived. This battle turned out as it did for a myriad of reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 9, 2013 19:24:05 GMT -5
Let us now review Custer's "Idiocy" for attacking the village and placing poor Reno in a position in which he could not possibly handle. what did Custer's "Boss" say about such a fatalistic meeting with the Indians? A few hours before the conference on the "far West" General Terry sent a dispatch to Gen. Sheridan that ended with the following words: "I only hope that one of the of the two columns will find the Indians." Please note no fear of defeat, overwhelming warriors, a rendezvous on the 26th with the rest of the command, Don't be greedy Custer,too many Indians to whip, is mentioned in the dispatch. No doubt that complete success was anticipated by the man (Sheridan and Sherman as well) who sent Custer and company to the Little Big Horn! Terry,obviously, believe that any one of the two columns could defeat the Sioux. Only after it was all over, only after hundreds of men lay rotting in the June sun, did Terry experience a revelation of sanity. Only then did Terry issue edicts that proposed that Custer acted in haste. Hey, somebody had to be at fault;right? If what you say is true Custer still could have changed his mind when he met up such a large number of Indians. His scouts told him there were to many to fight and still he went in. When does common sense come in? Field officer change tactics all the time don't they. when its necessary you got to do what you got to do! Whitebull, I hope that I can explain my position to you in such a way that you may understand what I'm trying to really say. Custer failed to change his mind about "charging" when he met "such a large number of Indians" because he believed (rightly or wrongly)that the amount of Indians he faced could be defeated by his command; the entire command that is. Such a command would include, of course, Reno and Benteen who failed to join the party at an appropiate time. At the very moment Custer realized help was not coming, simultaneously understood (I think) that it was to late to do anything except what he did do;fight and die. Actually his scouts insisted that he attack rather than wait until the morning of the 26th as Custer wished to do. He, instead, acquiesced to these demands and the result is history. You are right, Field officers do make plans. Plans that are contingent upon available man power. When a substantial amount of man power turns up missing, unexpectedly, you do what you got to do. He did just that! |
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Feb 10, 2013 19:17:48 GMT -5
I still say and will always say that there was just to many indians in a village that stretched over three miles for Custer to take on, even if he had twice the men he actually had. It was just impossible to win this battle.
Why not take stock of a situation, see what you are up against then change the game plan a little? Custer was to sure of himself that he could win the fight by himself. He didn't have enough men to do that and the rest is history.
Now for sure, Reno, Moylan and a few others fell apart and a bad situation got even badder. Once they got to the hill, Reno and Benteen could not move forward without the packs. They had no choice but to wait and that's just what they did.
After the packs came up they went fporward but it was to late to save Custer from his own mess that he made.
Last but not least, for every soldier who did not act well or due his duty (even Moylan) none of them would have been in that position if it was not for Custer! I rest my case dude and dudette!
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 17, 2013 19:11:00 GMT -5
WB, the village was not three miles long nor did it possess the amount of Indians proposed by Benteen and others. Benteen's approximation of village inhabitants grew with the telling until he reached the fantastic number of 9,000 warriors.
Let us propose that at least 3/4 of the village men were married. the addition of 6,750 wives increases the number of inhabitants to 15, 750 souls. Now let us add two children per family, rs 29, 250 people!
This number does not include Aunts, Uncles, cousins, friends, etc. The social value of some Indian sects (most of them)were depended upon the amount of horses each family possessed. If each warrior (9000) owned 4 horses, a herd of 36, 000 ponies would be devouring grass for miles and miles. What if the warriors own 5,6,10,or 20 horses?
The rationale behind Benteen and Reno's "numbers" is simple, the more Indians the greater Custer's stupidity for engaging the enemy thus, absolving them of any blame for the final outcome of the battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by whitebull on Feb 17, 2013 19:21:41 GMT -5
O.K. Joe, you have thrown a whole new light on the picture for me. No way could so many Indians get enough food to feed a small city and no way was there enough water for drinking and hygiene purposes. What I still don't get is why Benteen and Reno exaggerated the numbers. what purpose did it serve.
What I can't get over is how this wrong info got accepted by people who should have known better through all them years since the battle? How was it that soldiers lied or kept quiet about the facts as they happened and just playing the blame game on one person?
Man. I'm cool with you but I still just don't get it!
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Feb 17, 2013 19:36:40 GMT -5
WB, Sherman and Sheridan were the two master planners of this entire battle. Convinced that the only flaw in their plan of a "prong attack" is that the Indians would assuredly "run" at the mere approach of the 7Th Cavalry, any Cavalry for that matter.
Ironically the Indians did run at Reno's initial approach. when Reno needlessly relinquished the psychological advantage of his "charge" due to his false perception that the Indians were preparing a "trap", all was lost. Reno's failure to "charge" would have rendered him a Court Martial without a doubt had Custer survived. Benteen too would have suffered the same punishment for failing to enter the Big Horn Valley from the south had Custer survived. Both men quickly realized that their personal dislike for Custer influenced their decision making process and, as a result, rendered them both guilty of a heinous crime;failure to follow orders while in combat.
As a result, the only way to absolve them of responsibility was to show that they could not follow orders because none were given;that the number of warriors involved in the battle were so numerous that it was impossible to win; and, finally, that Custer's division of his command resulted in total failure!
|
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Mar 2, 2013 20:57:11 GMT -5
Page 200, Graham's quote from Benteen regarding the conduct of Capt. Moylan:
" I didn't know that the men of the regiment had such an aversion to Mylie Moylan, but my! how correct they were in so having!
On 25th June, 1876, when my battalion got to crest of hill where Reno took refuge from his "charge" (quotation marks are Benteen's not mine)from bottom, the first thing which attracted my attention was the gallantly-mustached captain of Troop "A" blubbering like a whipped urchin, tears coursing down his cheeks."
This description of a Captain action's in the battle was described by Benteen in a letter to T. Goldin after the battle. What do you suppose the reaction would have been from board of the Reno Inquiry had they heard this? They didn't! Benteen was too busy hanging fault on Custer.
|
|
