Nightengale's Wild West Article

[Mike Nunnally]

Has anyone read Robert Nightengale's article in this months Wild West? I have only glanced at the article but he contends that Custer and company crossed the river and fought in the village and there was a cover-up of sorts in regard to this.

Are there any Indian testamonies to back this up? I haven't read one...this has been sort of one of those rumor myths that has been around for a long time.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Scout

[Steve Wilk]

Have not seen the article but do have Nightengale's book. Benteen, in his July 4 letter, was of the opinion that most, if not all of the five companies crossed the river into the village and were immediately driven out.
Sturgis' and Porter's clothing were found there, as well as charred heads. Three years later at the Reno Court he changed his story. There certainly was a cover up of sorts; the right questions were not asked by Lt. Lee, certain witnesses who could have provided crucial information were not called upon to do so.

The US Army did not like the negative publicity that these Courts of Inquiry brought to them. The army therefore looked to dispose of them quickly, and typically, no one was found culpable. As an example, in 1836, during the Second Seminole War, there was a COI with Gen. Edmund P. Gaines and Gen. Winfield Scott both accusing each other of misconduct. Gaines accused Scott of being the "second officer " to directly aid the enemy (Benedict Arnold the first) when Scott ordered that no relief column go to Gaines' aid when he was beseiged. The army held the court and found both officers blameless. It did not look good for the army to have to publically admit one of its officers, especially a West Pointer, was lacking on the battlefield. Such an admission did not foster the public's confidence.

[Scout]

Steve,

If I might play Devil's advocate for a minute here....you said Benteen believed Custer and Co. crossed the river into the village, but later changed his story at the RCOI....changed his story or changed his opinion? Benteen wasn't with Custer and was working on theory only....and if he changed his opinion why was this a ''cover-up?''.....what was to gain? .....if Lt. Lee didn't ask the right questions.....well, what were the right questions? How many Indian accounts speak of Custer and all of his men fighting in the village......were the Indians involved in the cover-up? I think Benteen's theory is just that....a theory or an opinion. A number of officers and men viewed the same scene as Benteen and never thought this.

[Steve Wilk]

Okay, it was his opinion...that of an experienced soldier who changed his "opinion" at the COI. According to Unger, in his ABCs book, Lt. Lee should have asked Reno:

-why he did not order Benteen to proceed and comply with Custer's written order?

-if he (Reno) countermanded said order and if so, why?

-if he did not countermand the order, why did he allow Benteen to not comply with it?

As for Benteen, Lt. Lee did not ask him

-if he was not under a duty to obey a written order

-why he did not obey it

A very popular war hero was killed with his entire battalion. The public wanted to know why. The surviving officers knew they had better get their stories straight to cover their's and each other's asses. The army did not want this publicity and was more than happy to exonerate Reno. Custer was dead and could not testify. Easy to lay all blame at his boots. End of story. Benteen's testimony, ie opinion, was directed toward that end, to make it look as though he would have made no difference.

[weir]

Mike said:

Has anyone read Robert Nightengale's article in this months Wild West? I have only glanced at the article but he contends that Custer and company crossed the river and fought in the village and there was a cover-up of sorts in regard to this.

Are there any Indian testamonies to back this up? I haven't read one...this has been sort of one of those rumor myths that has been around for a long time.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Scout

I have read Nightengale's book and article.

But every evidences Nightengale used for Custer attacking the village theory are not conclusive, because Nightengale used a map of LBH from Lt Maguire (1876), which is false. The village is 1.5 miles from Reno's first skirmish line, although historians showed that Reno was much closer, and the size of the village was 2 m2 (from the corner of the LBH to Deep Coulee).

Also, with this new perspective, Nightengale's theory falls dawn :
- The burning tepees (seen by Red Horse and Kill Eagle) have been committed by privates from Reno's command whose horse became crazy.
- The Gall's family died in the woods, near the location where Reno crossed. Not in the village.
- Indians said "the Whites attacked in two columns, one charged into the village". It is any of Reno's men, as above suggested.
- The shells in the village and the horses bodies are Indians acts.
- Sergeant Bustard (Cy I) body was probably tortured by Indians (Little Knife testified soldiers were tortured in the village after the battle), like three others whose heads where found by Terry's men.

Anyway, Nightengale was confused with his choice of an original map instead of a corrected map. But Nightengale's work found many good evidences that have been corroborated later :

- The fast arriving of the pack train
- The battle that finished after 18H00
- The Benteen's and Reno's behavior
- The Reno's Court of Inquiry

For all those points, Nightengale's work deserves attention. Nightengale is right for an essential point :
LBH was a cover-up of the truth.

[Gumby]

I have talked with Nightengale personally. He has all sorts of strange ideas that totally contradict the evidence and testimony of everyone. ie He told me that the Indians would never have used the weapons of the soldiers killed at the LBH until they had time to prey over them and all of the other ritual stuff. This inspite of the fact that many of the Indian participants said they took the weapons and ammo from Reno's dead and used them on Custer's men and didn't take a second to prey over them. There simply wasn't time.

Be careful of the conspiracy theories, they are fun but mostly dependant on unproven statements that are being quoted as facts. There is little doubt as to lies being told after the battle by some of the particpants. However, sometimes they were told to protect the reputations of the dead, not the living. Also keep in mind that Reno, Benteen and the others did not see how Custer's fight unfolded either. They were guessing just like we are.

Bob