Ever wonder?

[tbw]

Have you ever wondered why so many of Custer's troops were left behind at camp supply? Have you ever wondered about the conditions of the horses at the battle of the Little Big Horn. Have you ever wondered why Reno cut his scout short. These questions and more can be found and answered at: www.kshs.org/publicat/khq/1977/77_3_gray.htm

[tbw]

There is one thing I do not agree with Dr. Gray on & it is this (quoted from the source article above):

Dr. Elwood L. Nye, the only competent veterinarian to study the Custer campaign, has advanced the thesis that Custer, assumed to be far harder on horses than other officers of his day, had so abused them that their failing condition contributed significantly to his disaster. [18] We thoroughly respect Dr. Nye's veterinary expertise, but are compelled to correct some of his campaign facts, dispute his assumption regarding Custer, and reject his conclusion about the battle.

We agree that there can be no doubt that when the cavalry horses reached the scene of battle they were in much less than fresh condition. They had been reduced to one-sixth forage for the four and a half days of marching from the mouth of the Rosebud. It appears that on the climb to the divide the water was unsuitably alkaline, and that the regiment had failed to make full use of the halts to unsaddle and graze the animals. As a result, at least seven mounts in Custer's battalion alone are known to have given out entirely in the final miles, forcing their riders to straggle back to safety.

We cannot accept the conclusion that the condition of the horses significantly affected the outcome of the Custer battle. Reno's attack with 129 troopers, and Custer's with 193, were widely separated in space and time, because of terrain features. Alone, each struck a hornet's nest of fired-up warriors, who dealt them a classic defeat in detail. The rest of the regiment with Benteen and the pack train arrived too late to join any attack. How the horses, even if in superb condition, could have neutralized such odds, especially when practically all the fighting was done on foot, is not apparent.

What is apparent is that these horses had been pushed to hard and to far in the final 48 hours. Reno's cause for his early return had to have been his concern for his horses, and not just because a few of them were shoeless. Benteen also exhibited what has seemed to be an unexplained slowness to respond to Custer's orders. Again his concern over the well being of his horses seems to have been the cause, because he did let them water far longer than Custer or Reno's men did, at least 15 to 20 minutes.

The conclusion is I think undeniable in light of these facts. That had their horses not been pushed so hard, Custer's men may have been able to have advanced down the right bank faster and have attacked much sooner in supporting Reno's valley action. Benteen's men may have been able to have advanced faster had they had fresher horses, of that there is no question, and little excuse. Had this been the case; and the horses were the cause, then Dr. Gray's critical analysis of Dr. Nye's expert veternary assessment was wrong.

[joewiggs]

The horses may have been pushed as the men were also pushed but, the reality is this, the condition of the horses had nothing to do with the fatal outcome. The horses got the command to where it needed to go. The outcome of the battle was not a result of the horses or men being exhausted, it was the result of the troopers being overwhelmed by the warriors who had greater numbers and a more profound commitment towards winning..

[crazycanuck]

Custer(THIS TIME) pushed horses further per standard in lead up to LBH(he was an excited boy). " The painful warrior famous for fight (Custer), After a thousand victories (Custer),once fail'd (LBH), Is from the books of honor ( My Life on the Prairies 187?, Boots and Saddles 1885, Following the Guidon 1890, Tenting on the Plains 1893) razed quite (A Terrible Glory), And all the rest forgot (Civil War record) for which he toil'd" (not quite we are still obsessing)....Shakespeare

[cinnamon]

If you look the Cavalry Army Tactics book, Into force in 1876, you will realize that Custer did not go far beyond what is described in the manual. You will also find that the horses were watered as requested.

[crazycanuck]

That may be true Cinnamon but it wouldn't of mattered if Custer and his men were all riding a Secretariat the outcome would of been the same.

[cinnamon]

I disagree. The outcome was due to lack of ...steadiness...

[crazycanuck]

I agree the unexpected unfolded suddenly and Custer and his men faltered and lost control of the offence. The best defence is offense ( which Custer relished and savoured in the past but lost it here ). Gall and Crazyhorse took the intiative and the rest is history.

[cinnamon]

He just was on the offence but coincidences, dark coincidences started he had just to try standing llonger as possible. Regarding how long the battle lasted, look at Graham: Reno attacked at 3.15, and Custer sent for Benteen at 3.15. Martin said the battle started soon after he left the column, around 3.20, in fact he had his horse shot. Reno arrived on top at 4.00, soon after arrived Benteen. Meanwhile officers, Weir too, claimed hearing heavy firing (45 minuts after the first shot on the couley). 4.30, Weir started to Weir point, and at 5, they saw indians running and shooting the last men. Even so, the battle lasted at least 1,45 h.

[crazycanuck]

I agree but there is a missunderstanding and thus the confusion ,you are including Nye- Cartwright,Calhoun Hills action . I'm talking LSH,cemetary ridge.Last Stand Hill with 40 odd men was less than 40 minutes(20 minutes) . It was a turkey shoot.

[cinnamon]

It was a final standing, and 40 minuts against all indians with 40 men it is much more than a turkey shot. However Don Horn suggest that those men (much indians testimony too) stood up there "long" until they end cartridges. Then the final attack.

[crazycanuck]

Sounds reasonable.

[Cutter]

Good, spirited conversation there gentlemen.

[joewiggs]

Nov 16, 2010 14:03:33 GMT -5 cinnamon said:

I disagree. The outcome was due to lack of ...steadiness...

You bring up a poignant point Cinnamon. There are many factors that play into the final results of this battle. I suspect (but can not substantiate) that if the troopers had displayed more "steadiness" as you suggest, things may have ended differently.

[Cutter]

Well, when you look at the battle field, the hilly terrain is not conducive to cavalry offensive maneuvers until you ford the river and engage on the other side. When they were repulsed by enemy fire, they had to dismount and skirmish, thus losing the offensive posture, and take on a defend, and orderly retreat/hold mode.
That reduces their fire power by 25% because of the horse holders. That would've been fine, if there were not so many of the enemy. What they had in reserve would have been fine if there hadn't been so many of the enemy using surprisingly aggressive tactics. You add the equal/better firearms, along with the arrow, it became a close range battle in a short time.
Only a time machine could tell what actually transpired, but given that GAC lost all his tactical strength in a short time, against an unusually strong foe, the outcome was pretty much a done deal. Whether or not Benteen would have made a difference, well, he did on Reno Hill, on Calhoun, last stand hill is a question for the 'ol time machine.
As far as Custer being jerk, nope, in my opinion he was a fine cavalry officer. Thru time, folks seem to put what happened in the past, and place it in the setting of the present. That's second guessing the past, and giving the present way too much credit for knowing better.