|
Post by joewiggs on Jan 15, 2010 21:45:33 GMT -5
The battle prowess of the "Rees" who accompanied Reno have been disputed vigorously since the battle. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Jan 16, 2010 0:06:01 GMT -5
For right now, I'd rather discuss the options on this one. I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing.
I think one has to look at what they did with regard to the instructions Custer had given them. It has been my understanding that none of the Indian scouts or guides were to stay once the fighting had started. This is borne out by the 3 or 4 Crows, whichever version one believes there, and they high tailed it out of there, just as they were told to do.
The Ree's were instructed to take away as many horses from the enemy as they could. What struck me was that they were worried about 2 or 3 ponies (the Bloody Knife story comes to mind here), than the hundreds or thousands that may have been there.
The Ree's seemed to start off well, because they started driving, I think they said several hundred ponies away from the enemy camp. But when they got away, they only had something like 38 or so left. Now for me there either was not enough Ree's to accomplish the mission Custer wanted done. Or: Not enough of them tried, and if they did they were more worried about a couple than a hundred.
I think it goes without saying, one would have to have gotten into Custer's mind in order to have known what his intentions were here. But it certainly would seem that he wanted them to spook the heck out of as many of the ponies as they could and run them off.
It sticks in my mind as only 5 or so Ree's out of the 25 that chased that herd up to the bluffs, the question still remains: What were the other 20 doing? If 5 of them could run off 38 or so ponies, how many could 20 more have run off with? 150 or so? For me thats 150 more warriors that may not have had a pony to have rode that day, and perhaps, just perhaps 150 less mounted Indians for Custer to have to deal with. This just decreased that odds figure by 1, perhaps not significant, but if that odds to begin with was only 3 to 1, reducing it to 2 to 1 for Custer may have meant the difference between a victory and the defeat he suffered.
The question is: What were those other 20 Ree's doing?
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Jun 8, 2010 13:59:34 GMT -5
It has been quite a while since I last posted on this site and for that I apologize. I believe that the efforts of the Ree scouts have for too long been ignored. of the three groups that assisted Custer, none of them were expected nor requested to join in the fight. If memory serves me, the only charge to them was to gather up The Sioux head and flee with them. The rationality being that a Sioux without his horse was no threat.
The Rees who actually assisted Custer can be divided into two groups: Valley Fighters With Troops and Valley Fighters With Scouts. Of these 21 "Rees" 5 were killed and two wounded for a 33% causality rate. Compare that figure to Reno's casualty rate in the "charge" in the bottom:Of 140 officers and men, 35 were killed and 11 wounded for the same casualty rate.
There were seven "Rees" we may classify as Pony Herders as they actually carried out Custer' command and retrieved a large heard of Sioux horses on the east bank. They also, some believe, were responsible for the killing of 10 Sioux women and children.
Another 8 "Rees" may be classified as Stragglers, who never crossed the river due to the small ponies they rode and, simply, could not keep up with the steeds of the command. Several of these wound up with the pack train and Reno Hill.
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Jun 8, 2010 14:56:00 GMT -5
Not a problem on the posting, for you, or for that matter anyone else. We all have 'real lives' and this is just a past time. So I have no problems with this for any of you. And I do realize there are 'other' places on the net to go, some more fun than others, some less thrilling than others, and that's the lure for all of us. So pick and choose, everyone is free to do what they want, whether that be just to lurk or post or not. I understand.
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Jun 8, 2010 19:41:01 GMT -5
Thanks Dennis, the reason I wanted to return and give more information regarding this subject is to address the incorrect speculation that several individuals made against the scouts that inferred that their actions were cowardly. They did their job and then some.
|
|