Beecher Island

[elisabeth]

Bob --

I wish! No, it's a Thom Ross. Nice, isn't it.

[jeffbroome]

Hi all:
I've been away from the message board for awhile, and wanted to say a couple things about Beecher Island: First, it is a great battle to read about. I would add to the reading list John Monnett's Battle of Beecher Island book (1993), which covers the story pretty good.
Bob Snelson and I have had many discussions about Beecher Island, and he will be one of the speakers at the Denver Indian War Symposium next fall, October 7, talking about Beecher Island.
And anything Elizabeth adds to any forum, along with that of many others, is outstanding, as has been shared here. Thank you Elizabeth for helping me with my current writing project (Custer's 1867 campaign)
But let me say this about Beecher Island: the youngest scout was 16 year old Eli Zeigler (correct spelling of last name), who was the brother of Susanna Alderdice. Susanna 's husband Tom was also at Beecher Island. Susanna was captured in 1869 and later killed at her rescue at Summit Springs (July 11, 1869). Brady's 1904 Indian Fights and Fighters has an interesting 1st person account (teamster, who actually missed the fight but was there at the battleground that night) of her failed rescue. Can you imagine surviving a fight like Beecher Island and only being 16 years old (I verified this in Eli's pension file in the National Archives, and census records going back to the decade he was born).
The grave markers of the two scouts buried in the civilian cemetery at Ft. Wallace and thus left there when the military graves were removed to Ft. Leavenworth when Wallace closed, last year were given military marble markers. I was at the ceremony. They got the new markers because I found a copy of a congressional order in 1905 authorizing civilian scouts at Beecher Island all the rights of veterans (the bill was voted to give them pensions). Knowing from that, that the two men could get military markers, I passed that on to the people associated with the Ft. Wallace museum, and markers were ordered and dedicated. So that is something new to see if you visit the cemetery.
And finally, the traditional battle site, where the battle is remembered each year, is 4 miles east of where the actual battle took place. I submitted the evidence for that (US survey, 1873) in a footnote to my book Dog Soldier Justice. If you actually go to the real site, believe it or not, the island is still there and you can see it from standing on top of Squaw Mountain. History is fun.

[crzhrs]

Jeff:

If you do a GOOGLE search for The Beecher's Island Fight some sites have photos taken early 1900s of the battle and of survivors in old age. Yes Brady's Book is full of info on that fight and several others. I recommend his book.

[jeffbroome]

Yes, those photos come from old Beecher Island Annuals, and they are at the wrong site. The reason is because J.J. Peate, Chalmers Smith and another scout went out there in 1898 to try and locate the site. Settlers did not settle there until the late 1870s, and locals weren't sure where the fight was, when the veterans returned 30 years after the fight. They hunted two places and the old scouts said they thought the one site was correct, and that became the traditional site. Remember, they had only been there one time, either to fight or to rescue the fighters (Peate). The river land there is monotonous, meandering in the valley that attaches to the river bottom. 30 years later they "find" the site? Compare that with the USGS survey, which identifies and names townships in 1873 (I located it in the files of the BLM in Denver, and have a copy), and they draw on the next township to the west, in the NW corner, "here Col. Forsyth had his battle on the Arikaree 1868," and it is 4 miles from the traditional site. Who do you think was right, scouts 30 years later trying to remember terrain (it all looks the same), or surveyors 5 years later. Heck, the horse bones and other evidences of the fight would still be there in 1873 (think Custer battle). So that is the right site (the surveyor's site). And then, if you read Fred Werner's books, what you come away with is something like this: Fred never found a site he could not pull unbelievable amounts of artifacts from, except Beecher Island and Sand Creek (which was also mis located until recently, and it is not the site that the NPS manages). What did Fred pull from the traditional BI site? 2 shell casings almost 2 miles to the east. The real site is 4 miles to the west, and that is why he didn't find anything. Someone might say, "The artifacts were all swept away in the big 1935 flood, and that's why Fred found nothing." To that I have 2 replies: the majority of the bullets fired from the scouts, probably 4,000, and nearly all of the Indian shell casings (probably 3000) were not in the river channel but in the ravines, hills, etc. to the north and south of the riverbed. Those would have been unaffected by any floods. How many of those have been located at the traditional site? ZERO. And believe me, they have been hunted for years by metal detector enthusiasts. Nobody finds anything there, ever. Nothing. And also, the South Platte River had two huge floods 100 years apart, 1864 & 1965. And yet, at three sites on the Denver Trail, west of Julesburg, I have found about 4,000 artifacts from three stage stops/military encampments. They were all under water in the great 1965 flood, perhaps more devastating there than the 1935 Arikaree flood. Floods do not wash away artifacts (most), they put more silt on top of them. No question the traditional site is wrong. I have visited the real site about 5 times, and everything is there that the participants wrote about, and at the proper distances that match the written accounts, whereas at the traditional site the distances do not match. One of the speakers for next fall's Denver Symposium is Col. D.K. Clark of the Fort Leavenworth War College. He has visited both sites, and will present evidence at the symposium for the traditional site being wrong. ;D

[Scout]

Interesting piece of information; Jack Stillwell the young scout who went for help at Beecher Island was the brother of Frank Stillwell [or Stilwell] who was shot to death by Wyatt Earp right after the fight at the OK corrall.

[jeffbroome]

I did not know that. Really neat piece of history. Thanks.

[markland]

Jeff, great information. That explains what has been nagging at me all the years since I first went to Beecher Island. The reports had the Indian non-combatants watching the fight from the bluffs overlooking the valley. Yet, at no point (in my opinion) were the bluffs close enough on the south to see anything and on the north, well they were easily within range of any weapon being used. I had explained it away to myself by thinking that the actual river bed had shifted northward (think Missouri River here) and the real site had been to the south but...

Bob, you have nothing but my respect if you managed to get through Forsyth's report!!! I have read handwriting from the French and Indian wars, the Revolutionary Wars, Civil War, genealogical deeds & wills and that man's handwriting is near the top of my list of things I do not want to read (granted, there are two or three regimental adjutants I have discovered in the project from hell who I hope were captured and slow-roasted by Indians).

Best of wishes and keep the information coming. I am already saving my change for the books you two are working on.

Billy

[jeffbroome]

Billie:
I tried to send you and email in reply to a message you left me months ago. If you didn't get it, let me know.

I had those same concerns when I went to the traditional site at Beecher Island. Squaw Mountain there was in rifle range of Spencers, and Roman Nose ravine was almost 3/4 of a mile closer to the island than participant accounts of the fight.

[jeffbroome]

Just to clarify, the two scouts at the civilian cemetery at Fort Wallace, who received modern military markers October, 2004, are Sharp Grover and Thomas O'Donnell. They were not veterans of the Civil War and thus were buried in the civilian cemetery when they died (Grover in 1869, and O'Donnell November 18, 1868, from his wounds from the fight. When the post closed only the soldiers in the military cemetery were moved to Ft. Leavenworth, which included all the 7th cavalry men killed in the June 1867 fight near Ft. Wallace (Wyllyams, etc.)

[Gumby]

My Beecher Island book is complete and ready for sale! It is titled "Solomon Avengers". So far it is only available on my website www.snelsonbooks.com It sells for $25.00 because it is a limited edition with a one time printing of 350 copies. I will have it out in other locations soon. There will be some for sale at the Order of the Indian Wars conference in Texas next week as well. You can contact me here, at my regular email address [e-mail], or at my P.O. Box listed on my website.

[Diane Merkel]

Congratulations, Gumby!

[Gumby]

Thanks Diane!

[markland]

I am eagerly awaiting my copy...after Bob gets back from dodging rattlesnakes down in Texas.

Billy

[Gumby]

If anyone has attempted to order Solomon Avengers from my website and has not received a confirmation email from me, please cancel the order and try again. Billy pointed out a glitch yesterday and it has been fixed. Thanks Billy!

[bighornbuff]

I wanted to bump this topic to see if anyone else wanted to post anything about it. To me, it is one of the most interesting Indian encounters. Its remote location makes it that much more appealing to me. And it was not a big battle that determined the fate of soldiers or Native Americans, so therein is another attraction---i.e. it is not discussed endlessly....I read the book by Fred Werner entitled, appropriately enough, The Battle of Beecher Island, but have read nothing else about it. The posts on this thread have given me some info to seek, though, in the form of other books on the subject.
Has any reader among us actually visited the Beecher Island site? I know it takes a lot to get to it, being way off the beaten path, up by Wray Colorado, way way north of the Interstate. Wondered if anyone here has visited the site. Not much there but a rock monument enclosed by an iron fence, judging from photographs. But interesting nonetheless, mainly, to me, because of the heroism shown and the actions of Major Forsyth.