Post by twomoons on Mar 18, 2005 18:51:03 GMT -6
One of the difficulties in sorting through Native American statments about the battle is the confusion over the ford(s). Yes, fords, There were at least two possibly 3 fords involved where Custers battalion was concerned.
Naturally ford "B" was one of those. And much recently has surfaced about ford "D". There is in fact some hint from Native American sources of another ford near the base of Deep ravine, ford "C". With all of the Native American testimony about "fords" a confusion does arise over which one they were actually referring to when they gave their accounts. The clarification of these issues, in part, comes from none other than "Curley".
His viewing position near the battlefield was in some doubt until Gray's work (Custers Last Campaign). That Curley would be on a high point overlooking the battle is without question. There is some confusion though when reading his accounts, he seems to be referring to several fords, and not one. Without going into greater detail, which for the purposes of this discussion is of course relevant, but to make a point I will only refer to one.
It was reported that from his lookout that he observed soldiers fall from their saddles into the river. From the distance about a mile and a half he couldn't tell who they were. And then he saw the troop fall back from the river and dismount. Who those solders were that "fell" into the river I think is without a doubt at this point. Let me regress here a bit.
What has never made sense is why when Custer approached a ford that permitted him access to the other side of the river, that he never took it, even when lightly defended. Curley did state that at one of the fords, that a crossing would not have been possible because there were hundreds of Indians advancing on that ford. That ford as we now know was ford B. So what about the other fords.
Ford D it has been surmised by many that Custer didn't pursue it futher because from here the village appeared deserted. Many of the Native Americans stated that if Custer had crossed and struck in the direction of Renos command that Indian resistance would have collapsed. So why didn't he, especially at ford D?
If Custer's objective was to capture the women and children, which in all probability it was, (that was the standard tactic of the day, espceially for him!) then he could only have achieved that objective by crossing the river at an undefended or lightly defended area. And ford D provided that opportunity. Turning away from that opportunity just because the area was "deserted" just doesn't make any sense at all, because that would have been exactly what he was looking for!
Here at ford D, it was reported that there was a brief sharp firefight. And specifically that at least [indicating possibly more] two soldiers were shot and fell into the river along with the company guidon. Much has been discussed here just who these men were, and what happened after. The point missed here was and still is the Native American statments that one of those who was shot from his saddle and fell into the river, appeared to be a leader.
I contend that that person was indeed Custer!** And the corroborating evidence is Curley's observation from his hilltop postion that states exactly what other Indians also observed of this event. He further stated that at least one of the solder's horses had bolted across the river and carried that soldier into the Indian encampment, that soldier was, Lt. Sturgis, whose clothing was later found in the village. The other soldier reported to have been hit and fell into the river, just moments after Custer was hit, as was reported by the Indians, was the Guidon carrier.
Curly and Joseph White Cow Bull's statments and/or their observations about this event are almost identical, and I do not believe coincidence. Indian accounts state that some of the soldiers dismounted and drug one of the soldiers (Custer) from the water, while those still mounted provided cover fire. Custer's men then "carried him up the ridge from the river." This also would explain the delay that was analyzed by Gray in his work. They carried Custer up the ridge to a point on the flats near Cemetary Hill, and waited! It wasn't a wait, it was a decision that had to be made.
Any tactical advantage was now lost because of Custer's wound. He evidently was still alive, although critically injured. Why else would they carry him onward to Custer Hill? Sentiment, about not being mutilated would of course possibly have been one, after all there were relatives in his command.
That Custer's Luck ran out an inopportune moment, I think, is without a doubt. And it was now left to the next in command, Cooke, to try to salvage what he could of the situation. Thus a costly shift from an offensive posture to one of defense, one that at that time they were ill prepared to carry out.
** "The man in the buckskin jacket seemed to be the leader of these soldiers...I aimed my repeater at him and fired. I saw him fall out of his saddle and hit the water. Shooting that man stopped the soldiers from charging on...Some of them got off their horses in the ford and seemed to be dragging something out of the water, while other soldiers still on horseback kept shooting at us."
Naturally ford "B" was one of those. And much recently has surfaced about ford "D". There is in fact some hint from Native American sources of another ford near the base of Deep ravine, ford "C". With all of the Native American testimony about "fords" a confusion does arise over which one they were actually referring to when they gave their accounts. The clarification of these issues, in part, comes from none other than "Curley".
His viewing position near the battlefield was in some doubt until Gray's work (Custers Last Campaign). That Curley would be on a high point overlooking the battle is without question. There is some confusion though when reading his accounts, he seems to be referring to several fords, and not one. Without going into greater detail, which for the purposes of this discussion is of course relevant, but to make a point I will only refer to one.
It was reported that from his lookout that he observed soldiers fall from their saddles into the river. From the distance about a mile and a half he couldn't tell who they were. And then he saw the troop fall back from the river and dismount. Who those solders were that "fell" into the river I think is without a doubt at this point. Let me regress here a bit.
What has never made sense is why when Custer approached a ford that permitted him access to the other side of the river, that he never took it, even when lightly defended. Curley did state that at one of the fords, that a crossing would not have been possible because there were hundreds of Indians advancing on that ford. That ford as we now know was ford B. So what about the other fords.
Ford D it has been surmised by many that Custer didn't pursue it futher because from here the village appeared deserted. Many of the Native Americans stated that if Custer had crossed and struck in the direction of Renos command that Indian resistance would have collapsed. So why didn't he, especially at ford D?
If Custer's objective was to capture the women and children, which in all probability it was, (that was the standard tactic of the day, espceially for him!) then he could only have achieved that objective by crossing the river at an undefended or lightly defended area. And ford D provided that opportunity. Turning away from that opportunity just because the area was "deserted" just doesn't make any sense at all, because that would have been exactly what he was looking for!
Here at ford D, it was reported that there was a brief sharp firefight. And specifically that at least [indicating possibly more] two soldiers were shot and fell into the river along with the company guidon. Much has been discussed here just who these men were, and what happened after. The point missed here was and still is the Native American statments that one of those who was shot from his saddle and fell into the river, appeared to be a leader.
I contend that that person was indeed Custer!** And the corroborating evidence is Curley's observation from his hilltop postion that states exactly what other Indians also observed of this event. He further stated that at least one of the solder's horses had bolted across the river and carried that soldier into the Indian encampment, that soldier was, Lt. Sturgis, whose clothing was later found in the village. The other soldier reported to have been hit and fell into the river, just moments after Custer was hit, as was reported by the Indians, was the Guidon carrier.
Curly and Joseph White Cow Bull's statments and/or their observations about this event are almost identical, and I do not believe coincidence. Indian accounts state that some of the soldiers dismounted and drug one of the soldiers (Custer) from the water, while those still mounted provided cover fire. Custer's men then "carried him up the ridge from the river." This also would explain the delay that was analyzed by Gray in his work. They carried Custer up the ridge to a point on the flats near Cemetary Hill, and waited! It wasn't a wait, it was a decision that had to be made.
Any tactical advantage was now lost because of Custer's wound. He evidently was still alive, although critically injured. Why else would they carry him onward to Custer Hill? Sentiment, about not being mutilated would of course possibly have been one, after all there were relatives in his command.
That Custer's Luck ran out an inopportune moment, I think, is without a doubt. And it was now left to the next in command, Cooke, to try to salvage what he could of the situation. Thus a costly shift from an offensive posture to one of defense, one that at that time they were ill prepared to carry out.
** "The man in the buckskin jacket seemed to be the leader of these soldiers...I aimed my repeater at him and fired. I saw him fall out of his saddle and hit the water. Shooting that man stopped the soldiers from charging on...Some of them got off their horses in the ford and seemed to be dragging something out of the water, while other soldiers still on horseback kept shooting at us."