|
Post by mooned in the face on Mar 30, 2005 9:05:02 GMT -6
Does anyone know how long the stand at Calhoun Hill lasted? I keep getting conflicting reports of this. Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Mar 30, 2005 16:05:04 GMT -6
To most survivors, Calhoun's company appeared to be the only one that showed any semblance of organization and effectiveness. They tried an offensive maneuver downhill, but were driven back. Once that happened, the end came quick, and the survivors headed toward Last Stand Hill.
Of course, since no soldiers survived, no exact time-frame can be stated . . . unless we use Indian testimony and their meaning of time is very different then the white man's.
I will try to get more info on Calhoun's part and the time frame. Right now I'm going from memory.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Cross on Mar 30, 2005 17:30:08 GMT -6
Actually there is evidence, based on the positioning of cartridge casings, that Calhoun did make an advance on foot, however, that did not cause tactical disentegration, in fact it drove the warriors back who had been creeping up all along.
Co L was the rear guard of Custer's battalion, as such they were under fire from the time they left MTC by the warriors coming from the EAST who had been out hunting buffalo. Naturally, Calhoun's troopers returned fire and later used volley fire from horseback to drive the warriors back. Later, the firing became sporadic as the Indians crept forward. The warriors from the east were now reinforced by warriors crossing the LBH and the pressure increased on Co L. With their mission to maintain a line of communication with the rest of the regiment, Co L expended more ammunition than any other company in Custer's battalion. And that led to the tactical disentegration.
Each trooper came to the battle with 100 rounds of carbine ammo and 24 rounds of revolver ammo. Indian narrative states quite clearly that Calhoun sent his horses over the hill for protection. That caused two problems, one immediate and the other reared its head later.
The immediate problem was that 25% of his men were now out of the fight and holding horses. In a company of approximately 40 men, that took 10 out of action. The other problem was that half of his ammunition for the carbines went with the horses!
If you want the math on how long it takes to expend 50 rounds of carbine ammo and 24 rounds of revolver ammo take a look at my post on this forum titled "Ammunition Depletion at LBH" or something like that. Believe me, the ammo didn't last long enough. Calhoun ran out and his company was over run. That caused the collapse of nearly the entire right wing, except for Co C.
Some will point out the Indians stated they found lots of ammo on battle ridge. Yes they did, from Keogh's men, who were engaged only a few minutes before they collapsed. They didn't find any ammo on Calhoun's men, they ran out! Even if Keough had runners taking them ammo from their horses, it was too little too late. There wasn't too many Indians, there wasn't enough ammo. That's why Cooke's message to Benteen read:
"Bring packs. P.S. Bring Packs."
Walt
|
|
|
Post by twomoons on Mar 30, 2005 21:01:00 GMT -6
Okay now let me see if i get this right. Walt's estimates for the ammo useage I believe are in the ball park. From the demonstrations held on tv and in the others i've seen first hand I do think those are fairly accurate figures. Gray in his book puts Yate's men on Calhoun hill at 4:46pm. That means that 12 minutes later these soldiers on Calhoun Hill would be out of ammo. That meant that, using Gray's figures, that the disintegration of this unit began 12 minutes later after their ammo ran out at - 4:58. According to Gray, Curley then left exactly when 1/3 of the ammunition was expendend at 4:50 for the mouth of the Bighorn. It was during this time, at some point that Bouyer was wounded. According to the archaeology they found his body in the south skirmish line. So he wasn't dead yet, just wounded. And he told Curly that Custer (Tom?) said that they were all going to die, or words to that effect. This supports the archaeological evidence no matter what the actual time was. The disintegration of these troops was fairly quick. And I think the evidence here proves that. Now, now Walt don't go spreading rumors!!!! I'll give if you will. I don't believe with the evidence presented that Custer had in any way, plans for Benteens troops, other than "perhaps" (only you could make me say that! perhaps the resupply of ammo to his troops. By that I mean - That he didn't have any tactical plans for thier use other than re-supply. Wouldn't you agree?
|
|
|
Post by Walt Cross on Mar 30, 2005 22:02:42 GMT -6
Well, I'm pretty sure Custer wouldn't mind if Benteen and his troopers picked off a few Injuns along the way. But you can see what would be Benteen's major problem (no pun intended) even if he didn't have to stop for Major Reno...give up?
He was light years ahead of the pack train. He couldn't come on quick and bring the packs even if he wanted to.
Walt
|
|
|
Post by bigpond on Mar 31, 2005 9:20:01 GMT -6
The White Bull/Crazy Horse breakthrough,plus the Gall advance,probarbly ended the resistance,with practically all avenues cut off.The Indians say the taking of Calhoun Hill after the initual repulse/volleys,was very easy Its very difficult to put a time on the action from the start,but I would hazard a guess at 20 mins.
|
|
|
Post by twomoons on Mar 31, 2005 10:33:57 GMT -6
bigpond - The 20 minutes may be right but one would have to include the time that Gray attributed to Custers wing. He said that Custers men fired at the Sioux on the left bank... at 4:38. He may have been presumptious and this could have been Yate's men firing on the lower side of Calhoun Hill. If you include those 8 minutes to the 12 it gives you the needed 20 minutes. Again I think one does need to be a little wary of Grays times. And as he admiitted himself no one really knew. But those times are I believe fairly accurate, and it's the best we have to go on, so far. No Walt not giving up. Benteen demonstrated his allegiance by disobeying the "bring packs" order. He didn't go and get them, but instead did make a concerted effort to follow his commander.
|
|
|
Post by weir on Apr 1, 2005 13:45:26 GMT -6
According to Michno and Indians testimonies, Calhoun Hill stood during 1h20 mn.
16h30-17h50
Gray's analysis of 1976 is very old for now. Michno's analysis is much more credible.
|
|
|
Post by twomoons on Apr 1, 2005 21:58:25 GMT -6
First of all I don't always believe what I read. I think that one has to approach this battle from an unbiased perspective. To do that one cannot have biased views one way or the other about it's participants. We all have beliefs and convictions about what could or might have been. But to truely get at the truth, you cannot assume anything, and know everything! I don't pretend to one way or the other, regardless of what has transpired here in the discussion forums. Sometimes I take a stance contrary to popular belief, and sometimes others whose convictions are solely based upon fanciful theories rebuff me. So be it. That's what these forums are all about. What I cannot defend however is ignorance. When common sense is dissolved into the quamire of a myth just to perpetuate that myth. And as one can easily see, I cannot, will not, forever forgive the ignorance of someone who cannot see beyond their own absurd recalcitrant statements, by simply doing something themselves. To actually see, feel and know whether or not what they are saying is true. I guess ignorance breeds myth, and myth breeds ignorance and both together make the truth.
LAKOTA NOON ~ MICHNO I disagree as I said with many authors, simply because the myths they purport as truth, are in fact not contributory to what took place. Micho is one of these authors. I disagree with many of his ASSERTIONS. And in particular his timing of events!!!
1) He said that the battle lasted 2 hours. This is preposterous. An outright fabrication. Most if not all of the indian accounts do not support his theory, and even the soldiers on Reno Hill said that the gunfire lasted only about an hour. There was nothing slow about this battle, and his timing is all off. It would take a warrior on horseback about 20 minutes to get from Retreat Ford to Calhoun Hill. And once there these warriors are supposed to dismount to hide and fire? I don't think so! That wasn't the way they fought, and everyone knows that. The only one's on foot were those who didn't have horses to begin with. And Curley stated that at MTF there were hundreds of Native Americans on horseback converging upon that ford. A closer estimate this would be. The 20 minutes for the bulk of Native Americans to arrive at the battle ground. And another 20 minutes as many of the Native Americans said it took to defeat Custer. 40 minutes minumum, an hour tops.
2) He makes daring unfounded accusations One is the fact that, because he thinks it lasted so long, he concluded that the observations by Weir and others at Weir Point, not only started but also ended, before the events on Custer Hill, and the so called South Skirmish Line were concluded. While facsinating reading it dangerously distorts the facts, because it implies that Reno and Benteen knowingly left Custer to his fate.
3) Not one Native American account supports his claims. He warps those he can and uses them as evidence. Case in point, John Stands in Timber's 1957 book Cheyenne Memories and the statement that two warriors "were between the two fights." He takes that quote and states it out of context! Had the full statement been used, it would make it very clear that they were some of the last warriors left at Reno Hill, and that they then left and then joined the Custer fight. He openly attacked Hardorff for doing this and yet he himself did it.
4) He tries to discredit Foxes claims in his archaeological study of the findings. Now I don't believe all that Fox "claims" either but there is some good archaeological guidelines in Fox's book that shouldn't be discredited so easily.
5) Michno uses Gall, Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull in an attempt to break through the myths, but in reality these three can hardly be used for any credible evidence. Sitting Bull wasn't even on the Battlefield, and what observations he could have made were at best would have been questionable. Gall's account is, has been and forever will be a fanciful myth who most creditable researchers freely admit was a pile of buffalo chips. And as far as Crazy Horse, he refused to be interviewed, so where did he get that info from? I assume from the horses mouth? pun intended!
6) His dispositions and movements of Custer's men during the stages leading up to the "last stand" is ludicrous. There is no way of knowing, even Fox and Gray admitted that they didn't know! He stretches his timelines and theologies too far to be believable.
7) Lastly, he fails miserably in one area that should put any reader on guard. He fails to compare the enemy warrior accounts with those of Custer's Native American scouts. Why? Easy they didn't fit into his timeline and theology, and would have proved him wrong!!!
Michno's book is like "a box of chocolates, you never know what your gonna get."
|
|
|
Post by weir on Apr 7, 2005 2:01:11 GMT -6
1) He said that the battle lasted 2 hours. This is preposterous. An outright fabrication. Most if not all of the indian accounts do not support his theory, and even the soldiers on Reno Hill said that the gunfire lasted only about an hour.
False. See soldiers statement from Weir Point. At the Reno's Court of Inquiry, Godfrey, Edgerly and Wallace said it was no gunfire. The Reno's Court of Inquiry, as everybody knows, was a great joke. False maps, false testimonies, false petition... Other witnesses, like Private Windolph or Lt Hare said to researchers in the contrary that the fighting was going on. They saw it. Historians have discovered that Edgerly burnt a part of a personnal letter which was about the Weir Point episode. On Reno Hill, soldiers could only hear the gunfire from Medicine Tail Ford, where the left wing was. Scientific anlysis proved soldiers could not hear anything from Last Stand Hill. So it is correct. The gunfire sound was over at MTF in less than an hour, when the Custer's battalion was moving North (about 15h40-16h30)
It would take a warrior on horseback about 20 minutes to get from Retreat Ford to Calhoun Hill. And once there these warriors are supposed to dismount to hide and fire? I don't think so! That wasn't the way they fought, and everyone knows that. The only one's on foot were those who didn't have horses to begin with.
You should. Read the Indians testimonies, not your own opinion on warriors. Michno quoted Indians testimonies, who said the majority of Indians warriors were on foot. Everybody knows, in fact, that Indians fought like hunters. They approached the line and took cover, until soldiers fell back. And a soldiers fleeing "had no more chance to run away than a buffalo". That's the main reason most of the soldiers were killed when they fled and not when they stood in line. Actually, as Wooden Leg and Hump said, Indians charged ("Lakotas" said Hump) but were repulsed on Calhoun Hill slopes. red Feather, quoted in Michno, said soldiers got dismounted and Indians too, and Indians run to soldiers and get covered by bushes and ravines. The Indians charging in open ground happened later in the battle, with White Bull for example, or the suicide boys with Lame White Man in Deep Ravine.
And Curley stated that at MTF there were hundreds of Native Americans on horseback converging upon that ford. And ?
A closer estimate this would be. The 20 minutes for the bulk of Native Americans to arrive at the battle ground. And another 20 minutes as many of the Native Americans said it took to defeat Custer. 40 minutes minumum, an hour tops.
That a personnal opinion which doesn't worth anything.
He makes daring unfounded accusations One is the fact that, because he thinks it lasted so long, he concluded that the observations by Weir and others at Weir Point, not only started but also ended, before the events on Custer Hill, and the so called South Skirmish Line were concluded. While facsinating reading it dangerously distorts the facts, because it implies that Reno and Benteen knowingly left Custer to his fate.
That disturbed you, did it ? And when it disturbed you, you erased all the evidences to bring a perfect mythical way of LBH. Red Horse claimed he feared that the soldiers they fought earlier (Reno) attacked from the rear, but as they did not, he thought they were out of ammo. (quoted in Michno). Red Horse is erased, I think ?
Not one Native American account supports his claims. He warps those he can and uses them as evidence
Indians accounts support this view however, like some of soldiers on Weir Point. Michno quoted 57 witnesses, from Walter Camp and Dr Marquis works as much as all the books about Indians rememberances.
He tries to discredit Foxes claims in his archaeological study of the findings. Now I don't believe all that Fox "claims" either but there is some good archaeological guidelines in Fox's book that shouldn't be discredited so easily.
Fox's view is very funny. He is like you in fact. He discredit all the testimonies he doesn't like. His Deep Ravine explanation is a good example of how Fox partial view gave misunderstandings of LBH.
Michno uses Gall, Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull in an attempt to break through the myths, but in reality these three can hardly be used for any credible evidence.
All the three are not quoted many times, except Gall. Gall said he was looking for his family and didn't take part of the early action, against Reno or against Custer at MT Ford. If you read Michno reasonably you could have learnt that he, Michno, said that Gall's myth against Reno Hill and Custer was, as you said, "pile of chips". But that are ealry testimonies, around 1877.
Gall's account is, has been and forever will be a fanciful myth who most creditable researchers freely admit was a pile of buffalo chips. And as far as Crazy Horse, he refused to be interviewed, so where did he get that info from? I assume from the horses mouth? pun intended!
James Mac Laughin. Captain Poland. Do you know those names ? I guess not. Interviewers of Carzy Horse Gall and many Indians in 1877.
His dispositions and movements of Custer's men during the stages leading up to the "last stand" is ludicrous. There is no way of knowing, even Fox and Gray admitted that they didn't know! He stretches his timelines and theologies too far to be believable.
Michno based his analysis on Indians remarks. Fox could not have a good explanation because of the lack of army cartridges found on the ground (because of relical hunters). Gray is, as I already wrote, a old analysis now. 1976. His statements are mostly debated.
He fails to compare the enemy warrior accounts with those of Custer's Native American scouts.
Michno's analysis has match with Curley or Goes Ahead'es testimonies. Curley said the Indians crossed the river by hundreds and soldiers retreated on the hills in the north, and they fought. After that, if you believe that Curley was on Calhoun Hill and received an order from Tom Custer to get out, that has been already proven as a false account. Compare Indians testimonies with soldier's from Weir Point. With Indians scouts. Don't see the usual false timeline indication ("the fight was quick and so on). Just the facts. Benteen ordered to rise a flag on Weir Point to "indicate our position to General Custer" (Benteen's report, corroborated by reno). Why, if the battle on Last Stand Hill was already over ?
The "Weir Point affair" is really disturbing, I agree. Doens't mean you have to erased it.
Why, for you, did Benteen say in his report that from Weir Point he could not have seen Last Stand Hill, although everybody knows he could have ?
Two Moons, you wrote you don't always believe what you read... No, actually you want to read what you believe.
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Apr 7, 2005 7:07:56 GMT -6
i think that from weir point they could only see calhoun hill , because of the powder , so grace copus whre towards calhoun soldiers , probably last stand part of the battle was not ended yet , i think grey until mtf and after michno lakota noon are the nearer to what really happened ! fox creates only confusion ! you don't even know who is behind a rifle , soldier or stolen by an indian !
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 7, 2005 9:37:56 GMT -6
Fairly soon after the Weir advance got to his named hill, Indians started toward them. The Indians would not have left LSH if there were many, if any soldiers still alive there. More than likely, there were very few left alive, let alone in any condition to fight.
It was probably non-coms milling around, finishing off wounded soldiers that may have been witnessed from Weir Hill.
|
|
|
Post by weir on Apr 9, 2005 12:58:12 GMT -6
shatonska you are correct. But with glasses, despite smoke, officers could see shadows fighting. Anyway private Cubtring said he saw "wite shadows" on the top of the hill. It was not Calhoun Hill but Custer Hill at the time.
And remember, the noise. The noise of the fighting could be (and was accoding to private Windolph) heard. How could Reno and Benteen not hear the noise ? Impossible.
crzhrse Indians testified soldiers came from the south before the fighting has ended on Custer Hill. They said some Indians with Low Dog run into the south to the coming soldiers.
Lt Godfrey said it was not a "serious fighting at all" at Weir Point. Lt Edgerly said that the battalions were not repulsed but retreated after given order to do. Benteen said "I don't know who gave this order [retreat from Weir Point]" but witnesses said it was him.
Indians bands could have runt to Reno and Benteen before the fighting ended on Custer Hill. Indians were 12 to 1 at the time. They could dispatch without losing the offensive.
The "Weir Point affair" is one of the most shameful action of the LBH. Many soldiers denied it. Benteen didn't even explain the Weir Point advance in his first report of the battle.
It seems that the "Weir Point affair" played for Benteen and Reno at the Reno's Court of Inquiry. Many soldiers and officiers lied about the Weir Point action.
|
|
|
Post by twomoons on Apr 9, 2005 20:59:19 GMT -6
"White shadows" What the hell is that? I'll tell you what is was. It was the dead soldiers bodies stripped bare, on a hill that lay over 3 miles away from Wier point! The dust, smoke factors would have made it impossible to discern exactly what these were, thus, "white shadows".
2nd -- Have you ever been to the LBH? I highly doubt it! Because if you had, you would have known better than to make the statements that you made!
"Remember the noise"? The noise, as was testified by all the soldiers, was dying down at the time, about 5pm. Sporadic gunfire would all that would have been heard at the time. And most likely this sporadic fire, was the indians finsihing off the few wounded!
You are confusing and misinterpreting what happened. You said. "crzhrse Indians testified soldiers came from the south before the fighting has ended on Custer Hill. They said some Indians with Low Dog run into the south to the coming soldiers." It proves once again you don't know what your talking about! If you did you wouldn't be so confused!
When the Native Americans finished with Custer they were then on their way back to deal with Reno and Benteen. This is a well known fact. And that fighting didn't die down until after darkness had set in. What did Reno and Benteen see. Probably hundreds of indians between their position and Custer Hill.
And one last fact. If as you yourself suggest there was something mysteriously wrong with the retreat from Wier point. You once again destroy your own hero (Michno's) theology! Because if as you claim there was nothing to stop Reno and Benteen from going to Custer's aid at that time, when the firing was waning, when the now known "white shadow" were already dead, then you once again are proposing that Michno's theory is wrong again! You and Michno can't have it both ways, it was either one way or the other. And once again we see your lack of knowledge and understanding tripping you up once again! Which way was it Xav?
Get off of the fence - ride the horse!
|
|
|
Post by weir on Apr 10, 2005 6:31:25 GMT -6
Private Cubtring said Indians were running in circle on the top of the hill where he, Cubtring, could see "white shadows". He said they were fighting at the time. Private Windolph said "a great fighting was going on". I don't care of what you think, Two Moons. Your theories are just based on what you think.
Have you ever been to the LBH? I highly doubt it! Because if you had, you would have known better than to make the statements that you made!
Yes I have already been. Look, I don't like your manner of beginning each sentence by saying "if you would be..." "if you read more"... I don't know who you think you are, but get back to reality. You are a very arrogant, that is for sure, but just a scholar of LBH. "Remember the noise"? The noise, as was testified by all the soldiers, was dying down at the time, about 5pm. Sporadic gunfire would all that would have been heard at the time. And most likely this sporadic fire, was the indians finsihing off the few wounded!
That is false. You are confusing and misinterpreting what happened.
Again. Sorry if I don't share the great idea that you have from yourself.
When the Native Americans finished with Custer they were then on their way back to deal with Reno and Benteen. This is a well known fact. And that fighting didn't die down until after darkness had set in. What did Reno and Benteen see. Probably hundreds of indians between their position and Custer Hill.
That is the history your parents tell you when you were a child. Crazy Horse on the North is a well knwon fact too, but it is wrong. Alot of things are false about LBh because guys like you, self-called writer of the Truth, are still talking about them.
You once again destroy your own hero (Michno's) theology! Because if as you claim there was nothing to stop Reno and Benteen from going to Custer's aid at that time, when the firing was waning, when the now known "white shadow" were already dead, then you once again are proposing that Michno's theory is wrong again! You and Michno can't have it both ways, it was either one way or the other.
I worry about you Twon Moons. Do you take ectasy before writing ? "White shadows" were not dead at the time. Read carefully before writing.
And once again we see your lack of knowledge and understanding tripping you up once again!
I could write in every post what I think of you. You are a stupid, non open-minded and I guess non-graduated amateur who I still guess never travel outside his country. But I think that's not respectful. In a debate you don't have to attack the person but the things he writes. Give me argumented theories, not you bullshit "own Truth" I really don't care about.
|
|