|
Post by harpskiddie on Oct 18, 2007 10:30:55 GMT -6
There was CDV of Chapman on Ebay recently. Fine looking old gent, who could certainly pass as an old scout, or whatever it was he claimed to have been.
Gordie. in a candy shop around the corner, I met a little girl, and I was a goner......................................
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Oct 19, 2007 22:25:14 GMT -6
I wouldn't bet my life on it. Funny! I bought one of those cheap DVDs of Groucho's "You Bet Your Life" shows, hoping it would have the man in question on it. I haven't looked at it yet. I don't think you're the only one who said Windolph was on the show, but my memory is very fuzzy!
|
|
|
Post by bradandlaurie on Oct 21, 2007 12:22:40 GMT -6
All: This was one of the first books I ever had on the subject. It is now rather dated, but nevertheless a good addition to any LBH library. Miller was a most interesting and talented individual, and there is more information on him on other threads, which you might find by using the search function at the bottom of the page. I'm assuming that the Laurie part of the equation is not the one interested in Army ordnance. I have an interesting little pamphlet titled Army Revolvers and Gatling Guns, from the National Armory, Springfield Mass., 1875 , which includes standing orders for the inspection of Colt's, Smith and Wesson and Gatling Guns; price lists, proofing, weights, drawings of parts etc. etc. and blah blah blah.
This is of only passing interest to me, and I think I purchased it as part of a lot of books last year. Who knows? In any event, if you do not have a copy and would like to have this one, just PM me your mailing address and I'll send it along gratis. It's only gathering dust and taking up space here. Someone who might use it might as well have it.
Gordie, the moon may be high, but I can't see a thing in the sky..................................................Thanks for the response! Sorry I didn't reply to you about this sooner. I've seen this title on Ebay, of all places, and will probably go ahead and order it. I'm kind of a fan of ordnance and finding the whole evolution of the Gatling Gun fascinating. Now I am talking to my good friends at the Ordnance Museum at Aberdeen Proving Grounds about the possibility of getting a better look at their collection of Gatling Guns. No, my wife is not nearly as fascinated with ordnance as I am. But she has patiently modeled beside numerous weapons for scale reference. I am a very lucky man...
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Oct 21, 2007 22:41:03 GMT -6
Brad:
Ebay is a great source for books on virtually any subject. I get all mine either on Ebay or from one specialty bookseller, who gets everything and offers small discounts. There are amazing bargains to be had, especially if you're in the U.S., which I know you are. The shipping for my stuff is usually more than the purchase price,now that the US Post Office no longer allows surface shipments.
If you happen to change your mind, just let me know via PM or EMAil.
Gordie, We are not helpless, we are men. What stands between us - it can be set aside and ended........
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Oct 22, 2007 5:56:43 GMT -6
Gary,
Thanks for your tip on the Wayne Sarf dissertation -- my copy just arrived today. Looks great. Since (a) it's loose-leaf and (b) they've printed the pages in reverse order (!) I'll have to wait for a moment of more leisure to sort it out before reading it properly; however, even a first quick dip into it shows that it's full of great stuff. As you said, plenty of sources we don't usually see, including lots from Sully's own reports, plus diaries/letters/reminiscences from far more than just the usual suspects (Barnitz & Godfrey). So thanks once again.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Oct 22, 2007 11:36:36 GMT -6
Hi Elisabeth,
It's a pity your copy is back to front. I agree that being loose leaf makes it unwieldy, that's why I have not quite finished my copy. It's definitely worth the effort though.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Oct 22, 2007 12:15:36 GMT -6
I'm toying with the idea of hole-punching mine -- but it's a bit big even for a box-file. Great stuff, though. Lovely to have so many additional sources -- and so judiciously analysed by Sarf. And by heavens, he does write well.
|
|
|
Post by First Sergeant on Dec 29, 2009 8:26:10 GMT -6
Greetings all,
Obviously late to class with this one, but I just finished reading "Custer's Fall" and found it interesting, at least from the natives POV.
DHM seemed pretty sure that Custer was the one knocked down on the MTC, which ground the charge to a halt and turned into a withdraw/retreat/rout. Why are "we" sure that isn't the case?
Another factoid I found interesting was the use of native "marksmen" to pick off troopers. It was my understanding that the natives, while somewhat armed, weren't the best shots due to lack of ammo/practice?
Also, the 7th is often labled as top-notch "indian fighters", but the description of some HTH fighting left much to be desired on the part of the troopers.
And while I found the story intersting, the obvious literary license useage was a bit much and to associate these comments and statemens and actions taken from guys that were close to 100 yoa is, imho, a leap of faith.
I'm no where near 100, and while I can remember some activities in my 20s and 30s, expecially the exciting ones, but I damn sure can't remember dialog.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Dec 29, 2009 11:02:14 GMT -6
It's the power of language, in that looking for a word to indicate someone shooting a rifle and not wanting to repeat 'warrior' or other less specific but already overused words, the author chooses 'marksman.' It does not likely mean anything, other than a guy with a gun.
In reality, much the same problem exists when Custer formed a group of "sharpshooters" at the Washita. The assumption the naive make is that these guys were really good, when the reality is they were likely the best of a mediocre lot, a conclusion not wobbled by the results of the time taken to kill few warriors or other Indians, mostly on foot. Things were worse by 1876, when the paperwork for expensive ammo and chronic training time with weapons does not exist for the 7th, and the few times it does in the years previous (and after) - generally just before a campaign - the references to it in letters and reports reveal how very rare it was and not sufficient to the need. Same with horsemanship.
The reality was a baseless assumption that Indians always avoided direct combat with the Army. This, despite contrary experience in the Minnesota war a decade previous with many of the same Sioux.
There is also the whiff of Victorian social politeness. All dead soldiers were brave, all women lovely, all children promising, any clown with a loaded weapon is both 'sir' and a marksman. The main Victorian concept, harking back centuries, is the devotion to the Greater Truth. This permeates all literature (and battle reports and letters to widows) and did not start to fade until WWI, which was too horrible for the language to describe as it had past wars. Even so, it pops up again as late as the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
It's also important to realize that Indians had things to excuse as well as the whites involving their general competence. They let a noisy, dust-inducing regiment of cavalry to approach and attack without resistance, and this leading to dead civvies. It was a huge camp. This is why Custerphiles, who also want to excuse first impression incompetence, try to revise the history to fewer Indians in the camp (so it becomes not an error but a plausible attack if not for drunken Reno and traitor Benteen) just as the Indians do (we didn't have the manpower and were still tired from also beating Crook) and so these two normally antagonistic groups have found love presenting a common revised history to the plantlife of late.
|
|
|
Post by First Sergeant on Dec 29, 2009 14:33:03 GMT -6
And yet, "we" continue to comment on the "elite" 7th Cav and the "great indian fighter" Custer, when neither hold up to much serious scrutiny. For much the same reasons as you state - lack of weapons training or horsemanship.
Simply being able to shoot or ride a horse does not one "elite".
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Jan 15, 2010 14:42:50 GMT -6
non not "we" : for me the 'elite' is always native from captain jack to SB to chief joseph to vitorio to let's say shoshone mike!
|
|
|
Post by markland on Jan 15, 2010 21:57:59 GMT -6
non not "we" : for me the 'elite' is always native from captain jack to SB to chief joseph to vitorio to let's say shoshone mike! Actually, I don't believe the term elite applies to any but perhaps the Nez Perce (marksmanship) but I do believe that they (NA's) better understood the ground upon which they fought; thus, that advantage accounted for many of the NA victories. Billy
|
|