|
|
Post by melani on Jan 20, 2010 0:46:55 GMT -5
I think the ride itself was about six hours--there were horse trailers at the highway, so we dismounted and handed the horses over there, and then were driven back to the Trading Post, though we probably could have walked it in ten minutes or less. (Well, maybe not in cavalry boots!) The "state line" remark was of course a joke--we just went really way far around the back.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Jan 21, 2010 0:23:26 GMT -5
All in all it sounds like you had a good time. I want to go back to the battlefield, been wanting to go for some time now. Went back there in 06 and went on to Yellowstone. Had a very good time. I didn't have enough time the last time I went. One supposes that they never do. When we were there the LBH was at flood stage, it was in early June. Maybe someday we'll get together at a covention or some such event. I haven't been to one yet, but always wanted to go. Do you know when the next one is?
|
|
|
|
Post by melani on Jan 21, 2010 17:06:35 GMT -5
Well, I go out every year for the anniversary to work the trails for the Friends. I really like all the party atmosphere and stuff going on--CBHMA has a symposium every year, which I have yet to attend, and the Friends always have some special event and a BBQ. This year we're going on a Deep Ravine field trip with a ranger, to places the public can't go. So why not join the Friends (if you're not one already) and come along?
|
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Jan 21, 2010 23:05:53 GMT -5
They are a good organization. But no, I am not a member. I would like to go though, but that would depend upon when the date is? And of course my significant other has to apply now to get vacation time - at that time, that is, if it already isn't taken.
|
|
|
|
Post by melani on Jan 22, 2010 14:55:54 GMT -5
Just checked the Friends' website--the Deep Ravine trip is already sold out--that was fast! But they have a limited number of spaces. Join up anyway and come out for the anniversary--there's a ton of stuff going on, and you can volunteer as a "trail guide" if you are a member, and get to show off your vast knowledge to the tourists. My absolutely favorite tourist inquiry of all time, two years ago: "So--the main Indian leaders were Sitting Bull and Comanche?" Ya gotta be polite, so I didn't burst into hysterics. But now there is one guy who knew next to nothing who now knows a little more because I got to talk to him. That's my favorite part. Friends of LBH: www.friendslittlebighorn.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Jan 22, 2010 23:07:05 GMT -5
I doubt that they'd agree with what I know, and most 'experts' that would overhear what I had to say, would counter with the same ole same ole.... as my "flow" of battle doesn't match theirs. As for the "Comanche" remark, that one would have taken quite a bit for one not to have laughed. But then, he probably knew that already and thought he'd catch you in a weak moment. Now me, I probably would have said something like this:
Yeah, he was here alright. And he performed bravely. Shot 7 or was it 8 times and still survived. Now there's a brave - Brave's story if one has the time to hear it. He was last seen by the White men on Custer Ridge somewhere there in the Keogh sector (pointing). And I hear tell he wandered around after the battle, down by the river until someone found him still alive. Well, he went on to survive the battle, and lived a long full life, and you can most likely find a book just about him in the visitors center, so on your way out, just stop in there and ask one of the attendants about the brave "Comanche", and whether or not they have any books on him. Questions anyone? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by melani on Jan 23, 2010 12:59:03 GMT -5
Oh, you're incorrigible! ;D No, the "Comanche" guy was perfectly serious, not trying to catch me out, and is a fine example of the people who come there. Many of them are on their way from Billings to Sheridan, or the other way around, and go, "Oh, look, Martha, there's the Custer Battlefield--let's stop!" All most of them know is that Sitting Bull killed Custer, and most of them think the entire regiment was wiped out. Thanks to the efforts of Miss Libbie, Custer is probably the best-known 19th century American officer--probably even more than Lee or Grant. They may make silly jokes about him, but everybody knows his name. As for your opinions, nobody cares if we all disagree. When I went out there in 2006, for the first time since the '70's and the second time in my life, I had already joined the Friends online. I found a bunch of the Friends acting as trail guides. I am a docent at San Francisco Maritime, and I love to talk history to tourists, so I asked, "How do I get to do this?" I was told, "Just show up and say you want to do it." I was astonished--at SF Maritime, we had to take five days of classes and pass a test to be docents. I was told, "Well, we figure if you've paid money to join this organization, you probably know more about the battle than most people or you wouldn't have bothered. And since nobody knows exactly what happened, there is no official Park Service version--just don't say Mitch Bouyer assassinated Custer at MTC and everyone will be happy!" My mouth fell open at that point--I hadn't heard the one about Mitch Bouyer, but was assured there is even a whole book on that theory. (It's currently about #9,000 on my reading list! :  But the point is, you don't have to agree about details of battle flow or (as my husband would say) whether Custer's horse had hangnails, or whatever. As long as you tell people that this is your opinion and others might disagree, that's great. The only thing they wouldn't like would be messing with the poor guy about Comanche, as you outlined above--tourists who know nothing about it will go away believing that. I totally see it as a public service to talk to these people. |
|
|
|
Post by tbw on Jan 23, 2010 14:28:00 GMT -5
Not that some haven't tried, mind you, but the incorruptiblity of the incorribigle is what I find most laughable. To say that I would or would not do that to the poor man and not laugh about it for days after, and about my own humble humility in the whole affair, and not have the decency to ask if one of the attendants had recieved such a request would I think be worth the price of the expression and words recieved when such a query was asked. The due correction would then be made upon perusing the proper book upon the subject and everyone gains. He gains the proper knowledge. The store gains the profits. and we gains a few laughs. Its a win, win win situation as I see it. ;D You'd think that if people would live in the area that they would have gone there a long time ago, especially from Billings or Sheridan. But one supposes that there are more joys to be found going over Bear Tooth Pass to Yellowstone than taking the easy route to the Nat'l monument. For most people, wars and battles are the last thing one wants to think about when on vacation, especially when there is beautiful country to be seen not so far away from their back doorsteps. What you mean he didn't?  ......  Well, the way I view history, especially "this history" is that when one does not know it for certain, 'whats the harm'? If someone asks, or said that they heard that a scout 'shot him', what is one suppose to say, "no he didn't"? I think the proper answer is, "we don't know, but..." There were enough Indian stories about the men shooting each other, that such a thing may have occurred, and for us to say that "it didn't" isn't letting the whole history of this battle be told, and that isn't "history" but fiction, in my humble opinion. Now for that comment, I would have to meet your better half! This guy knows more about the battle than all the rest of the Custer community put together. He has put his finger on the pulse of Custer's battle and knows doesn't he? Now you have got to ask him, if Custer's horse with rider went from the divide to Custer field without stopping, how long would it take for that rider to get from the divide to the monument? Conditions? Sure, in a rain storm. In the fog. Or in a blizzard. Or better yet in 100 degree heat. And 1) with a 'hangnail', or 2) without. ;D Yup, that's what would make it worthwhile, and worth my time too. |
|
|
|
Post by joewiggs on Jun 13, 2010 15:35:26 GMT -5
I've often wondered if Reno every addressed his "charge" to the bluffs outside of the Inquiry. I was surprised to find the following:
"Reno, however, did in a candid moment admit for the first and only time his movement pot of the valley wasn't a charge. he told Lt. Frank Baldwin with the 5th. Infantry, in the summer of 1876, that (Reno) gave the order to retire by the right flank which was done with more rapidity than discipline or the good of the service would admit of."
Jim Brust, "Baldwin Talks With Reno," greasy Grass, Vol. 9, may 1993,20-21.
|
|
...... 
Well, the way I view history, especially "this history" is that when one does not know it for certain, 'whats the harm'? If someone asks, or said that they heard that a scout 'shot him', what is one suppose to say, "no he didn't"? I think the proper answer is, "we don't know, but..." There were enough Indian stories about the men shooting each other, that such a thing may have occurred, and for us to say that "it didn't" isn't letting the whole history of this battle be told, and that isn't "history" but fiction, in my humble opinion.
