|
Post by elisabeth on Apr 1, 2007 3:52:57 GMT -6
We don't know where Boston started from, however. Hardy says he was "with the five cos when Reno separated", which at first glance would seem to be North Fork. But it might not be. It might equally well be at the "separation" of battalions just after the divide crossing -- in which case the first leg of his round trip would be comparatively short. It would make more sense as a time to change horses, after all ...
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Apr 1, 2007 4:17:54 GMT -6
Hi Elisabeth
I have tended to think that it might have been at Lone Tepi as that is really where they separated from a command perspective.
If this was at 2.15pm (as per Gray), then McDougal is probably about 4 miles back although of course he too is travelling towards Boston. If their closing speed is 8-9 mph (3 + 5/6) then that 4 miles is covered in just under 30 minutes and Boston is 2.5 miles back from Lone Tepi. He spends a few minutes changing his horse and talking to McDougall and is back near the Morass at about 2.55 to meet Benteen. This fits my later timeline for Benteen (at the Morass a bit before 3pm) but is a problem for John Gray's 2.35pm. It is 6 or so miles from the Morass to Cedar Couley so it would not be possible for Boston to do that to be on Weir Point with Custer at 3.30pm but just about possible to meet Martini near Reno Hill at 3.38.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Apr 1, 2007 11:27:49 GMT -6
One can, as I have pointed out, allocate actions in order to fit a particular theory, which is exactly what you are doing here, Mike. You have no evidence of where Boston turned back to change his horse, no evidence for where McDougall was, no evidence for the closiing speed, so there is no point in indulging in Gray-like time and motion study.
Go from the morass, if Google Earth can tell you where that was, with Benteen's command being there when Boston passed on his way to rejoin his brother's command, and not being there when he went back to change his horse. And where is this Lone Tipi from which you measure distance to the morass and pack train and McDougall's company?
You have Boston riding back 2.5 miles to McDougall, who is ostensibly at the rear of the train, which if I recall correctly you once stated was strung out for three miles, with the morass somewhere between the Lone Tipi and the end of that 2.5 mile ride. I would plot this on a map, were I able to......................................
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Apr 1, 2007 12:32:16 GMT -6
Boston's ride is relevant only if he could bring to Custer information not otherwise available to GAC, but essential to the support of one theory or another. We assume Custer did "Y" but would not have done that unless he knew "X" ("X" usually being the location or nearness of Benteen), and he could only know that if Boston brought the information, therefore that proves Boston brought the information. In short, "X" proves "Y" which in turn proves "X". I think this is called circular reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Apr 1, 2007 12:56:22 GMT -6
The only info Boston could have brought was the relative positions of the packs and Benteen, both of which Custer had already ordered forward. Boston's info would have been superfluous, and I doubt very much that Custer would have based any actions upon it, or did so.
Boston's passage is helpful in timing events, but only if the basics are known and adhered to.
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Apr 1, 2007 13:06:24 GMT -6
You start with the sworn testimony. Nobody has provided evidence that Martin reported he'd met Boston till decades after the battle. And then, the story grew more detailed. Boston passed when Benteen's group was just hitting the creek above the lone tipi. If firing was heard, and Boston had a relatively fresh mount, it's not unlikely he broke into a faster gait than a trot to join his brother. A slow gallop could cut his time in half. Benteen doesn't have any added time.
Boston could have brought news of Reno's action as well, and the issue is whether or not the couriers had left yet before Boston arrived. Martin had an injured horse, so Kanipe would make better time, and they may not have left so far apart, especially if TWC sent Kanipe and GAC sent Martin under uncoordinated circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 1, 2007 13:28:03 GMT -6
Martini stated he tried to make his horse go faster, but couldn't. Apparently the horse was worn out.
It seems everyone at the COI ASSUMED Martini meant Custer's brothers--TC & Boston, and probably didn't ask just exactly who the brothers were. Why couldn't Martini have been confused and/or mistaken by labeling Autie Reed as a brother, or even the brother-in-law as brother?
Martini said his English was "not so good" later in interviews . . . and if it wasn't good in 1879, it must have been even more not so good three years earlier. Very easy for an immigrant with limited knowledge of English to use "brother" in the broadest terms.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Apr 1, 2007 14:42:04 GMT -6
In order to use the term "brothers" he'd have meant the brothers. He separately identified Autie Reed as the nephew. You're assuming Calhoun was with them, and there's no evidence for it, or explanation why he would be there and not with his company.
It's possible that it's a language foul, but unlikely given his omission of meeting Boston on the way. Why does that tale, which everyone lept upon when it was revealed, not appear till the next century? What other aspect of the battle involving a Custer would be accepted at face value from a participant that only appeared so late? Surely, he would have told someone all this, he had opportunity. We should entertain the possibility that he wasn't that bad at English and exaggerated it later to explain his stories vs. testimony and to excuse his exaggerations to Benteen's group on arrival.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Apr 1, 2007 15:14:31 GMT -6
Hi Gordie
If you care to read Elisabeth's post which was the one before mine, which you have criticised, you will see that there was some evidence as to where Boston might have set off back to the train. The most rational interpretation of the evidence is that it was when Custer ordered Reno ahead in pursuit of the Indians from the area of the Lone Tepi as this represents the time when the two commands were last actually together. The North Fork or Divide ideas floated by Elisabeth are plainly too late or too early for Boston to encounter Benteen's column for which meeting we have good evidence. The precise location of the Lone Tepi in question is of course in dispute but it was not likely to have been too far from the point where South Reno Creek joins Reno Creek and below the White Bluffs. The relative position of McDougall is based on the idea that he and the rear of the train set off some 20 minutes later than Custer, to which he testified, and were probably proceeding more slowly than usual in an attempt to minimise dust, to which Mathey refers. Thus their speed would probably have been 1 - 2 mph slower than Custer.
All of this gives some idea of where the various parties might have been. It is not really too hard to use the example of John Gray to try to pull together useful items of evidence to give a general framework of where individuals might realistically have been.
I guess the trick is to try to avoid having to distort or exclude quite as much evidence as he did in order to make the framework fit his own preconceptions.
With respect to the remark you attribute to me about the packs being spread over three miles, I guess you are thinking of what Lt Mathey said which I quoted in my paper. Here are the precise words:
βThe packs were very much scattered. I judge it scattered two or three miles from the front to the rear of it.β
This was in his RCOI testimony and I do not think it is inconsistent with the time and distances I have used in this thread.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Apr 1, 2007 22:02:51 GMT -6
Mike:
Actually, I did read Elisabeth's post, but I must have missed the evidence it contained. I still don't see how McDougall could have been only 2.5 miles from the lone tipi when Boston encountered him, even if it had been where you think it was. But then again, your evidence has convinced me, and I yield.
I never read your paper..........................
Gordie Giving up and riding off into the sunset, which is farther west than anybody ever thought..........
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Apr 2, 2007 7:31:10 GMT -6
Gordie Giving up and riding off into the sunset, which is farther west than anybody ever thought..........
If you ride far enough west you end up in the east.
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Apr 2, 2007 7:52:51 GMT -6
"If you ride far enough West you end up in the East."
You have also earned membership in The Order Of The Golden Dragon.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Apr 3, 2007 18:22:34 GMT -6
We're not wondering. He used a plural. It's in a vetted transcript made under oath. Witnesses, defense, recorder all got to read it and correct errors.
Also, no mention of meeting Boston.
Further, you and Markland use the angels on pin illustration to mean "annoying argument." That's not what it means, really. It means pointless, especially in regards to terms not defined. Anyone taking up the argument is admitting to angels. I'm not sure how this corresponds to your objection.
I'm not sure the court misinterpreted anything, and what you're basing that on. Either the recorder or the defense may have. In fact, I think you misread what was happening, which was Martini was being hammered to say what the parties wanted him to say. Apparently, they were unsuccessful. I find it hard to believe that Martini was as bad at English as we've (me, anyway, and certainly Gray) assumed at that point. I now get the feeling he was playing the role when I read his testimony, but never lying and actually a bit ahead of his questioners.
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Apr 3, 2007 21:55:17 GMT -6
DC---Re: Martini. His one flaw, and I do not regard this a flaw, was that he answered the questions asked, and did not elaborate. Up until he met Benteen his descriptions of terrain and/or distances compares well with any other person who testified.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Apr 4, 2007 6:03:03 GMT -6
The big problem with Martini's evidence is the section about the pack train. He volunteers the information that Benteen gave him a message to take to McDougall and then there is a whole set of questions relating to that including meeting McDougall at the front of the train.
Thus the pack train incident is not forced out of Martini but volunteered by him. Since both Benteen and McDougall deny that it happened as did Martini later in life, I do not see how you can sustain an argument that he was a good witness.
Plainly not everything he said was wrong but it has to be examined with some degree of caution.
Regards
Mike
|
|