|
Post by elisabeth on Mar 5, 2005 7:37:32 GMT -6
Weir,
1) Timelines: I think most people would accept John Gray's analysis on times and distances, which is what I was basing the packtrain's timing on. (Bigpond too, I assume?)
2) Custer's attitude to loss of life: it's not just Elliott -- you're right, he went off without orders, and brought it on himself -- but a whole pattern going right back to the Civil War. Notorious for his casualty rates then. And if we look at the crimes ciited at his '67 court-martial, including a) his treatment of deserters and b) his abandonment of stragglers, we see a pretty clear picture ...
3) Regarding Reno & Benteen going back on the Far West, 'leaving Weir to break the news': according to Shirley A. Leckie in her very well-researched biograhy of Mrs Custer, Weir didn't in fact have to do that. She says that Capt. William S. McCaskey, 20th Infantry at Fort Lincoln, received a message direct from General Terry. 'He called together the other officers at the post to ask their help in informing the widows. Then, accompanied by J.V.D. Middleton, post surgeon, and Lt. C. L. Gurley, 6th Infantry, he went to the Custer home ...' So the news reached the widows before either the Far West or Weir reached Fort Lincoln. There are enough real crimes to tax Benteen with without adding that one.
Custerstillstands,
Yes, those are d**ning figures. Can't argue -- except that if Benteen had obeyed his original orders, and continued 'valley-hunting ad infinitum', he'd have been way out of range to be of any help anyway. Ignoring his fictitious claim of covering 15 miles, and settling on the more likely 5 or so, could he even then have got there in time? And if so, would it have made any difference against such numbers?
My view is, for what it's worth, that he is 'to blame' in the sense of having acted wrongly; but not 'to blame for the disaster'. A whole lot of things came together to make it happen, as Crzhorse has already said. Even if Reno's initial attack had held up, and Benteen had supported Custer, it's hard to see how they could have beaten so many Indians determined to fight, not run ...
TEXTTEXT
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Mar 5, 2005 8:31:57 GMT -6
Weir, Yes, those are d**ning figures. Can't argue -- except that if Benteen had obeyed his original orders, and continued 'valley-hunting ad infinitum', he'd have been way out of range to be of any help anyway. Ignoring his fictitious claim of covering 15 miles, and settling on the more likely 5 or so, could he even then have got there in time? And if so, would it have made any difference against such numbers? TEXTTEXThere is the fact that clarifies everything benteen had only to watch if there where other villages in the south part of the valley not to scout ad infinitum , infact seen thahere was nothing he came back he could reach custer even before the sending of reno against the village ! it is easy to be corageous when you are attached ad risk your life , nobody says he was a coward , he was only a traitor that day , he refused to help custer for the worst thing a soldier can have !
|
|
|
Post by weir on Mar 5, 2005 9:13:02 GMT -6
Elizabeth
1. Custer shot deserters ? He was a member of the american army, and the punishment of desertion in the american army was death. I suppose you think Stonewall Jackson, Lee, Grant, Meade, Stuart, Sherman, Mac Pherson, Longstreet, Ewell, Hill... were guilty of bad consideration of life because they ordered to kill deserters ?
2. The high casualties in the Michigan Brigade were the result of the Custer shining reputation. Custer was considered as the best cavalry man in the Union army, and Sheridan always gave him critical assaults or locations on the battlefield. The Michigan Brigade was the elite. Have you ever considered that the Marines were badly commanded because they have heavier losses than the rest of the military ? It's because they are always under fire. They go where the others couldn't.
The others brigades of the Civil War who had the heaviest casualties were in the infantry the USA Iron Brigade and the CSA Stonewall Brigade. Because they were always sent in the most difficult missions. I think you cannot explain (if you know them) the number of testimonies of privates and officers during the Civil War who venerated Custer. "Another general would have sent (my mother's letter) away, but this general love us". testimony of a wolverine. Major Kidd : "Custer is the most competent general I have ever seen". Private Comte, 5th Michigan to his wife : "If you knew what a soldier could do to follow such a general". Gen. Sheridan : "Custer is the best cavalryman of this army. Confederate general Ruben Gaines : "Custer was the best commander I have ever met. His value was priceless." Confederate general Joseph Kershaw : "Custer is probabaly the best cavalry man this country or another has ever produced." Colonel Nettleton : "Custer was loved by his men, even venerated."
Custer has been one of the best leader of the Civil War. Brigadier-General at 23 years old. Major-General at 25. He is still the yougest division general of the United States military history.
I suggest you to read Gregory J. Urwin, "Custer's victorious".
The Civil War : where the Custer's myth was born.
3.The court martial of Custer was a good way for Hanc.o.ck to hide his failed campaign of 1867.
4. Although that Weir was the commander of the 7th after the disaster back to Fort Lincoln. The two commanders not at the head of the regiment after the defeat ? That's a real shame.
5. Against such number. Custer was 1 to 5 aigainst the Indians with the entire regiment. It became 1 to 30 with the treason of Benteen and the cowardice of Reno. You don't see the difference ? I do. The Indians has been able to concentrate their attacks only on one battalion, while the others were waiting. In a military word we can call that "treason". Grouchy at Waterloo. The Napoleon's strategy was good, but it included Grouchy. And Grouchy rode away instead of giving support.
It is difficult to see how two columns together of 400 men attacking the village by flank while the Indians were fighting Reno with 175 troopers could have win ? The battle of the Little Bighorn cost about 250 Indians, Custer's battalion of 215 men overhelming by 3'000 Indians has killed the major part of this dead warriors. It is not difficult at all to see how the victory could have been gained. By changing the two commanders Benteen and Reno ! Keogh at the head of Reno's battalion and Weir at the head of Benteen's, and Little Bighorn would have been a one-line summarize in the high school books.
The big question I think is to wonder why, if the battle was impossible to win, Benteen and Reno had to invent lies, to give false petitions, false maps of the battle, to make pressure on the witnesses (according to Gerard and Godfrey), all of that stuff which made the Reno's Court of Inquiry the funniest moment of american justice ever except the Warren Commission...
Honest men would have given honest accounts.
Elizabeth, are you wondering why they didn't ?
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 7, 2005 10:21:49 GMT -6
Post by elisabeth on Mar 7, 2005 10:21:49 GMT -6
Hi, Xav.
Just a quick response -- I'm not ducking the argument, honest, but have no time to wade through all the reference books just now! I'll look up direct proofs later, but off the top of my head:
1. Deserters: surely most deserters weren't shot, just jailed. (Interesting to look at the muster rolls of the 7th Cav. at the time of LBH and see just how many men missed the battle because they were in jail awaiting trial on desertion charges.) There was also the question of refusing the wounded deserters medical treatment. I know he claimed, later, that that was just for show, but it's a touchy point.
2. Civil War: rightly do you say 'that's when the Custer myth was born'. True, there was no-one like him for leading a charge, and even his worst critics never faulted his courage. (As Sherman said. 'He has rather too much of that commodity'.) It was in everyone's interests to talk him up as glamorous hero, and his lifelong love-affair with the Press began back then. He was a good fighting leader in the War, under the eye of a controlling grown-up general, and his fellow Michiganders adored him; but many people were pretty startled at his meteoric rise. Buford in particular, and there was no sounder cavalryman than him. (There's the famous story of him being about to hang a spy, when someone suggests he should send him to Washington instead. Buford drily says: 'I daren't send him to Washington, they'll make him a Brigadier-General' ...!)
3. Yes, the Hanthingy campaign needed a scapegoat -- but surely the court-martial was far more embarrassing than simply firing Hanthingy? The nation's darling, hauled before the court on not one but four charges -- and charges concerning his professional competence, such as overmarching his horses and misusing government property: not good. What really shows him up, though, is the way he lied so blatantly in his defence: all that nonsense about cholera and near-starvation at Fort Wallace, totally untrue. And which he then repeats, years later, in his autobiography. He's no saint.
4. I don't know; they were, after all, accompanying the wounded. Might have looked just as bad to turn their backs on them. But I would be surprised if Terry didn't want them under his eye, for a very thorough debriefing (and, possibly, carpeting). If for nothing else, to concoct a palatable version of events before they got back to civilisation.
5. Couldn't agree more about changing the commanders!! The choice of Reno to make the first charge was terrible. He'd shown signs of loss of nerve even on a gentle little mission like escorting the North-West Boundary Survey party; hadn't, I think, done any real fighting since the War. Keogh would have been a far better choice. It's interesting that he rides down to the ford with Reno; partly (with Cooke) to report back, of course, but I suspect also partly to try to brace Reno's nerves. (They weren't friends, exactly, but they'd been together on the boundary survey when Reno got the news of his wife's death; Keogh will have known how vulnerable Reno could be.) As for Weir leading the scout: well, he'd certainly have dashed back to support Custer, as we know. How effective he'd have been, I'm not sure. His record's not particularly stellar, and he can't have been in great shape by then; he died not long after. Someone like Yates might have been a steadier pair of hands.
As for the lies, the maps, etc: no two maps seemed to agree, some for sinister reasons, some not. And almost everyone was lying, or massaging the truth, to some extent or another, from the top down. It's human nature to cover your back. Add to that the guilt and shame the two of them must have felt at knowing what they'd contributed to. (I don't know if Reno visited the battlefield -- I can't recall any mention of him doing so -- but Benteen did, and had to look the corpses of friends and comrades in the eye ...) No surprise if they tried frantically to construct an alternative reality, and possibly even come to believe in it themselves ...
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 7, 2005 11:01:09 GMT -6
Post by weir on Mar 7, 2005 11:01:09 GMT -6
Well we begin to agree ! ;D 1. Deserters : Custer ordered to refuse the medical treatment during one hour. He was supposed to kill them all. He would have better to execute them, and the martial court couldn't have d**ned him... How ironic it is... Desertion was a particular point of the Frontier. Fighting the Indians without recognition from people and even hatred if you lose or win.. I undertsand why the men of the 7th and even Custer were demoralized. 2. Custer was a phenomenon in the Civil War. Everybody said that. And that made some jealous. A 25 years old division general adored by press... Yes I think I would have been jealous too...! 3. This is not a coincidence that only Custer was fired for the H.a.c.o.c.k campaign. He was young and impetuous. The perfect target. In fact, as a man, I understand why he rode so fast to see Libbie... ;D For many reasons Custer had to be blame, but not during one year! many of the facts he was accused were exagerated. I know he is not a saint, but I guess you will agree that this affair can be brought in mirror of the 1876 Grant's scandal. In both case, Custer was, as usual, sent alone on the front line...! 4. Reno was hit back at Fort Lincoln by a 7th member. Weir attempted suicide. Well, I think the Reno and Benteen feared the reactions of the rest of the regiment when it would be time to think about responsabilities. Anger already grew up during the battle, so... 5. Yes, Custer paid his major default : he liked to have his best supporters (except Weir) by his side. 6. "As for the lies, the maps, etc: no two maps seemed to agree, some for sinister reasons, some not." The map presented by Benteen's and Reno's advocate was supposed to be (and presented as) a copy of official Sergeant Maguire's work. Actually, the differences were made voluntarily. "And almost everyone was lying, or massaging the truth, to some extent or another, from the top down. It's human nature to cover your back. Add to that the guilt and shame the two of them must have felt at knowing what they'd contributed to. (I don't know if Reno visited the battlefield -- I can't recall any mention of him doing so -- but Benteen did, and had to look the corpses of friends and comrades in the eye ...) No surprise if they tried frantically to construct an alternative reality, and possibly even come to believe in it themselves ..." That's more galucous than that. If Reno attempted to hide the truth, he was not smart (not a surprise) and he gave the prooves to history, in giving different reports between his 1876 report and his 1879 testimony...! This guy is so... pathetic... But Benteen is the ugliest. To hide the truth, everybody did that (even Sheridan wanted to hide that he had known there were 3'000 warriors since september 1875!!!). The lies of Benteen is not a particular thing of LBH. In Wanutsa, Benteen lied about Elliott, and wrote a defematory article against Custer. Benteen said Custer Hill was not an organized stand. Archeology and witnesses coming after the battle said the contrary. Benteen ca be compared to Edward Wynkoop, another great liar of the Great Plaines who invented testimonies in the Wanutsa to make the people of the East believe it was a massacre. A majority of the things we know of Wanutsa come from a witness, friend of Wynkoop, Leavenwoth, who was not in the battle and has never been on the area. A majority of what we quote about the time-line of LBh come from Benteen and Reno, and we can say that all is lies or half-lies. When you read the pack train arrives at 17h25, check out before the testimonies of soldiers. When you read what Benteen saw from Weir Point, check out the testimonies of the men around. It speaks for itself. [/quote]
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 8, 2005 12:53:41 GMT -6
Post by Tricia on Mar 8, 2005 12:53:41 GMT -6
Sorry, I'll pass on this survey. The parameters are set up completely wrong. We are assuming Benteen "waited," when it could have been the result of tired, thirsty horses and an equally exhausted pack train.
Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 9, 2005 10:40:40 GMT -6
Post by weir on Mar 9, 2005 10:40:40 GMT -6
Sorry, I'll pass on this survey. The parameters are set up completely wrong. We are assuming Benteen "waited," when it could have been the result of tired, thirsty horses and an equally exhausted pack train. Regards, Leyton McLean Benteen stopped once. 15 minutes, horses and men rested. He received an oral message of Kanipe which urged him to come quick. Benteen made a second halt. 15 minutes more. Without logical reason. Finally, Weir became upset and ordered to his company to move on, so he obliged Benteen to move. By trot, despite orders. This first insubordination of Weir, as the second on Reno Hill, proves if it is necessary that the Benteen's behavior was voluntarily to wait. He did already that at the W.A.S.H.I.T.A and will do the same later, after the Little Big Horn. So the survey is including this fact. You can see that all people which voted accepted this fact as true.
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 9, 2005 17:37:14 GMT -6
Post by bigpond on Mar 9, 2005 17:37:14 GMT -6
Elizabeth1. Custer shot deserters ? He was a member of the american army, and the punishment of desertion in the american army was death. I suppose you think Stonewall Jackson, Lee, Grant, Meade, Stuart, Sherman, Mac Pherson, Longstreet, Ewell, Hill... were guilty of bad consideration of life because they ordered to kill deserters ? Then if the above is correct Sir,Custer should have faced the firing squad for desertion ! Not only for desertion,but also for the loss of life which two of his guard suffered at the hands of Indians. He didn't even have the decency to bury them !
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 10, 2005 17:50:19 GMT -6
Post by crzhrse on Mar 10, 2005 17:50:19 GMT -6
Benteen seems to be the one person some have blamed for the disaster at the LBH.
Custer sent him on a scout to the left . . . to search for any Indians that may be fleeing. Some historians have said that Custer did that to "cool off" Benteen from the previous nights "disagreement" with Custer. Some have even said to keep Benteen out of the fight. Reno, by seniority, was sent to attack a "fleeing" village of unknown size and location. Custer, meanwhile was heading downriver, planning as he went.
Anyway you look at it, the attack was based on skimpy infomation, fear of Indians running, and personality issues. When the cavalry realized the village was far bigger than expected, with more warriors than thought, the distance between commands made it impossible to assist one another in a timely manner.
The unexpected stand by the Indians, fighting rather than running, was a far bigger factor than any "plans" Custer may have had.
Custer's division of his command at the Wanutsa worked there mostly because of a winter attack at dawn against a known village site and caught the Indians completely by surprise. But to attack a supposed fleeing village of unknown size and location in the middle of a summer day, clearly points out that Custer was not sure just who and what he was attacking. The Army's phobia of Indians running resulted in the debacle at the LBH.
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 10, 2005 17:54:51 GMT -6
Post by crzhrs on Mar 10, 2005 17:54:51 GMT -6
TO: CUSTER STILL STANDS
RE: Custer fought during 86 % of the battle, with 36 % of the 7th cavalry.
Reno fought during 24 % of the battle, with 22% of the 7th cavalry.
Benteen fought 0 % of the battle with 42 % of the 7th cavalry
If anyone see something bizarre, let tell me... >
The only bizarre thing I see was Custer. He was the one who divided the command without enough info on the exact size and location of the village. Blame him!
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 10, 2005 22:29:34 GMT -6
Post by Steve Wilk on Mar 10, 2005 22:29:34 GMT -6
crzhrs: much is made of Custer not knowing the exact size of the village; however his actions were not in any way out of the norm when it came to the Indian fighting army. In many, many engagements the army attacked Indians without knowing the numbers they were up against. The object was to bring them to battle. Custer did what he was supposed to do. His objective was not the village, it was the Indians fleeing from it.(just as in the Civil War, the Union Army's objective was to destroy Lee's army, not capture southern villages) And they WERE fleeing....until something happened. Reno stopped, dismounted, then retreated. Soldiers going from offensive to defensive gave those warriors a surge of confidence and a feeling that their medicine was strong enough to beat them. When Reno ordered the stampede out of the timber, that is when I feel the battle was lost, or won, as the case may be. Custer was then forced on the defensive when Benteen stopped at Reno Hill; with too few men to carry out such an action on unfavorable terrain.
I often wonder why Custer did not try and reunite with Reno and Benteen....there seemed to be no attempt, from what Indian accounts state. Perhaps Custer, ever the optimist, had faith till the last that Benteen would carry out his orders.
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 11, 2005 8:47:06 GMT -6
Post by weir on Mar 11, 2005 8:47:06 GMT -6
Then if the above is correct Sir,Custer should have faced the firing squad for desertion ! Not only for desertion,but also for the loss of life which two of his guard suffered at the hands of Indians. He didn't even have the decency to bury them ! Absurd. Custer refused to come back to bury the slow soldiers of his column who were ambushed by Indians. If Custer had buried them, he would have been entirely whiped out by Indians who were chasing his command.
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 11, 2005 8:56:43 GMT -6
Post by weir on Mar 11, 2005 8:56:43 GMT -6
The only bizarre thing I see was Custer. He was the one who divided the command without enough info on the exact size and location of the village. Blame him! Why ? Custer wanted to attack at dawn on June 26th, after having scouted the village. But the cookies box lost urged him to attack. So he made a forced scouting operation to the left. But the regiment was not supposed to be seperated in three parts. Benteen was supposed to come back. But he waited. That's why Custer was alone to fight 3'000 warriors. Dividing his command was for Custer the sole strategical and logical plan. Every Indians fighter (Miles, Merritt, Mackenzie, even Crook) agreed with Custer's strategy. The officers of the 7th blamed Custer at the Reno's court of Inquiry to save their careers but agreed in private mails or interviews that Custer was not to blame. It was the standard strategy in the Frontier army. Jesse Lee, officer, responsible of the witnesses at the Reno's Court of Inquiry later wrote to Gen Nelson Miles and judged Custer's strategy at the Little Bighorn : "Another decision from Custer would have been absurd and ridiculous." ----- Another testimony for big pond and the pack train arrival : Godfrey said the pack train reached the Benteen's column at the end of Benteen's first halt of 15 mn ! Sergeant Davern, of Reno's column, said the pack train arrived "a short while" after he reached the Reno Hill, after Reno was routed ! To blame Custer is an easy way to forget the complexity of the battle and the lies of the army about it.
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 11, 2005 9:05:12 GMT -6
Post by weir on Mar 11, 2005 9:05:12 GMT -6
crzhrs: much is made of Custer not knowing the exact size of the village; however his actions were not in any way out of the norm when it came to the Indian fighting army. In many, many engagements the army attacked Indians without knowing the numbers they were up against. The object was to bring them to battle. Custer did what he was supposed to do. His objective was not the village, it was the Indians fleeing from it.(just as in the Civil War, the Union Army's objective was to destroy Lee's army, not capture southern villages) And they WERE fleeing....until something happened. Reno stopped, dismounted, then retreated. Soldiers going from offensive to defensive gave those warriors a surge of confidence and a feeling that their medicine was strong enough to beat them. When Reno ordered the stampede out of the timber, that is when I feel the battle was lost, or won, as the case may be. Custer was then forced on the defensive when Benteen stopped at Reno Hill; with too few men to carry out such an action on unfavorable terrain. I often wonder why Custer did not try and reunite with Reno and Benteen....there seemed to be no attempt, from what Indian accounts state. Perhaps Custer, ever the optimist, had faith till the last that Benteen would carry out his orders. About why Custer didn't try to reach Benteen and Reno, it is an another question to ask : does Custer, or any officer, make a plan including the facts that his two subordinates can disobey his orders...? Custer made a diversion on the village to help Reno and to attract warriors on his front. He thought Reno would have an opened way with Benteen and the pack train to reach him and attack the Indians by the rear. Could Custer imagine that 400 men with an open way to the hills wait, while he was engaged ? Surely not. I cannot explain neither. But blame.
|
|
|
Benteen
Mar 11, 2005 21:05:51 GMT -6
Post by Buggnkat on Mar 11, 2005 21:05:51 GMT -6
Dividing the command was a typical strategy that Custer used regularly agianst the Indians.
But this is one of the few times the indians varied THEIR strategy, they stood and fought versus skirmishing then scattering.
The 7th had no reason to believe otherwise. I am sure Custer thought Reno would engage, the Indians would flee and he would cut them off. Benteen would come along about the time they both would need resupply. But what actually happened is forever in history and lore.
The "love" felt for Custer by the men under his command is well documented. How his soldiers reacted and acted that day reflected it.
There are some very interesting posts and I am enjoying reading them.
Greg
|
|