|
Post by fred on Nov 10, 2007 15:00:03 GMT -6
As Custer's column... ... reached the egress of Cedar Coulee into Medicine Tail Coulee, it turned left, toward the Little Big Horn River and the Indian encampment. [MTC: this is the upper-middle section, taken from below Weir Peaks. The column would be moving right to left toward Ford B.]After moving down the coulee, Custer probably saw an easy route up to the heights forming the north wall of the ravine. It was just about where the middle branch of MTC joins the main flow. [Still in MTC. The coulee's middle branch enters from near the center of the picture. Custer's command probably rode up the gentle slope (to the left) to Luce Ridge.]From here, most historians and writers believe Custer left one battalion (Keogh's) on the ridge and continued down toward the river. Most believe he traveled back into the coulee, though Greg Michno presents a solid case that the Yates battalion rode along the high ground to the LBH. Many feel Custer remained back on the ridge, others say he accompanied Yates and Algernon Smith to get a closer look at the camp. [MTC. Luce & Blummer's (Nye)-Cartwright ridges are in the center.]There are some accounts of a handful of Sioux who preceded the troops to the ford, crossing it and warning the northern-most part of the village. Looking back up Medicine Tail Coulee, this is what they would have seen before soldiers filled the area: [Looking up MTC in the direction from which the troops would be coming.]Across Ford B, several Cheyenne warriors waited... [Ford B from the valley side. Luce and Blummer's (Nye)-Cartwright ridges would be to the left.]Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Nov 13, 2007 21:00:41 GMT -6
Excellent pictures Fred. This begs the question though, if Custer's troops spent so much time in the MTC close to Ford B and then didn't attack is it because he changed is mind? i.e. Was he originally planning to attack at Ford B and then changed his mind? And if he did change his mind about attacking at ford B, then where else did he plan to attack? I may also post this under Custer Tactics.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 14, 2007 4:13:59 GMT -6
Hi Fred
I was interested to see how green your pictures are. I attended a CAGB (Custer Association of Great Britain) meeting last weekend where they showed a video shot at the 2006 re-enactment which was staged by Realbird near MTC. They had about 70 cavalry participants and about the same mounted Indians. They performed several episodes showing the evolving relationship between whites and reds leading up to the LBH battle itself. Thus the arena area endured quite a few manoeuvres by a number of mounted men that probably equated to a cavalry battalion.
Even in the final LBH scene I was struck by the lack of dust being thrown up by all the horse traffic.
Would I be right in thinking that the dust which is mentioned at LBH would relate to where the village had passed over and to a lesser extent where the herd had grazed?
If so would this mean that the Reno fight would have been obscured and impacted to a much greater degree than any action on Calhoun or Custer Hills?
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by gocav76 on Nov 14, 2007 5:12:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by fred on Nov 14, 2007 6:58:28 GMT -6
I was interested to see how green your pictures are. I attended a CAGB (Custer Association of Great Britain) meeting last weekend where they showed a video shot at the 2006 re-enactment which was staged by Realbird near MTC. They had about 70 cavalry participants and about the same mounted Indians. They performed several episodes showing the evolving relationship between whites and reds leading up to the LBH battle itself. Thus the arena area endured quite a few manoeuvres by a number of mounted men that probably equated to a cavalry battalion. Even in the final LBH scene I was struck by the lack of dust being thrown up by all the horse traffic. Would I be right in thinking that the dust which is mentioned at LBH would relate to where the village had passed over and to a lesser extent where the herd had grazed? If so would this mean that the Reno fight would have been obscured and impacted to a much greater degree than any action on Calhoun or Custer Hills? Mike-- A very, very clever pick-up, I must say. I was actually wondering if someone would notice that, especially when I posted these particular pictures. It is interesting: the first view of MTC, above, was taken in April, 2006. The bottom 4 were taken on June 13, 2007. Remember, the Indians were camped in the valley and their herds had been eating the grass in the foothills for a period of time-- short, but still, with that number I do not think it would take very long to graze off the top grass. Also, the village had traveled down the same valley as Reno's command and if earlier indications mean anything-- the comments by participants about how the Rosebud valley had been chewed up by travois poles, unshod ponies, etc.-- then I would think there could be tremendous dust clouds raised. The testimony at the RCOI also points out huge dust clouds and the Indians obscuring their village and themselves by raising as much dust as they could. To my belief, that would have had a greater impact than on the Custer field, but again, that's a matter of translation. In my scenarios, I believe Custer moved unobstructed, and dropped off Keogh's command. The action unfolded slowly and it wasn't until the pell-mell panic and heavy battle set in when any real dust would have been raised (wasn't it alluded to by the men on Weir Point when they were seeing the final mop-up?). I must say, Michael, you have your finger on this stuff. Very nice indeed. Thanks. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Nov 14, 2007 7:08:11 GMT -6
... if Custer's troops spent so much time in the MTC close to Ford B and then didn't attack is it because he changed is mind? i.e. Was he originally planning to attack at Ford B and then changed his mind? And if he did change his mind about attacking at ford B, then where else did he plan to attack? "bc"-- It is my belief that Custer came down MTC and then-- somewhere in the vicinity where that middle branch comes into the main coulee-- mounted the slopes up to Luce Ridge. It was from there that he viewed the valley and saw the Indian families scattering downriver. That was when he decided to move farther north. He dropped off Keogh's 3-company battalion on Luce, then took Yates' 2-company battalion and busted it to the Ford B area (and I think he stayed on the ridges rather than go back into the coulee itself) just to get a better, closer look at the extent of the village and the opposition. By leaving 60+% of his command that far back, it tells me he nnever intended to cross or attack at Ford B. His rear was not threatened at that time, so why the heavy force that far back? Custer re-united his command by either heading back up those ridges-- but more to the northern side-- as Keogh moved north to Blummer's (Nye)-Cartwright. They either joined there (which makes more sense to me) or they moved across Deep Coulee and re-joined in the vicinity of Calhoun Hill. From a military perspective, I would have preferred to re-unite on the ridges, then cross Deep Coulee, but that's a toss-up. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 14, 2007 8:41:19 GMT -6
Hi Gocav76
Thanks for Little Big Man clip link - good for showing dust, poor for showing realistic Custer!!
Hi Fred I understand the LBH has a lot less flow thse days due to irrigation etc so the MTC crossing would probably have been wider.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by fred on Nov 14, 2007 8:53:18 GMT -6
Mike--
You may be right about that, but when I took that picture, we were all with Fox and his brother and they both remarked about how high the river was that day. If I recall, it was lapping at or even above the banks, so I am not sure, but it is a very interesting point and something that should be taken into consideration.
That is especially so when you read the RCOI testimony and realize how steep and how high that so-called "brow"-- the empty channel-- was. Very interesting.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by shan on Nov 14, 2007 8:54:43 GMT -6
mcarfy, you touched on something that occurred to me when I was on the battlefield several years ago. During the time I was there I walked the battlefield from end to end on several occasions, { the rangers were most put out and thought I must be ill,} often stopping off to have a think about what may or may not have happened at that spot, and put my thoughts in order. There were two occasions when I spent some time watching riders herd or tend horses or cattle, once from the Reno defence position, they were down in the valley, off towards the area Renos men would have been scrambeling hell bent for the river, and once when I was sat close to the spot Butlers body was supposedly found. While I was there several riders crossed at MTC to check me out, curiousity I suppose, and given that they came close enough, I could see that they were obviously Indians, as were a number of children cooling off in the river. On neither occasion did any of the riders, or the stock they were driving raise much in the way of dust at all. Now I realise that the numbers of men and animals on the day of the battle would be considerably greater, incidently, this was a week before the anniversary of the battle, the days were very hot and there was a fairly brisk breeze, in other words the conditions were fairly similar to the accounts we get from a number of men who took part in the battle. Freds point is well made about the conditions down in the valley, but like you, I suspect that the fight up on the higer ridges was much less dusty due to the denser growth of grass and other vegitation. Of course things would have changed towards the latter part of the fight when the numbers of those engaged grew. In other words, I suspect that both sides could see, and note certain individuals, especially during the early part of the fight. Incidently, I too like the way you have approached many of these questions, I would have liked to have attended the recent meeting in Birmingham, but as usual things got in the way. Apart from the back log of posts on this board, do you have anything of yours elswhere that I might read? Shan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Nov 14, 2007 9:07:58 GMT -6
... like you, I suspect that the fight up on the higher ridges was much less dusty due to the denser growth of grass and other vegitation. Of course things would have changed towards the latter part of the fight when the numbers of those engaged grew. In other words, I suspect that both sides could see, and note certain individuals, especially during the early part of the fight. Shan-- I completely agree with you here and especially so since I think the Custer portion of the battle unfolded fairly slow. Nicely done. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Nov 14, 2007 9:12:37 GMT -6
From statements made by LBH survivors when burying Custer's dead we get info about the condition of the soil. It was hard, very dry and difficult to dig in. That would support meager vegetation on the ridges as opposed to more lusher growth along the river.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Nov 14, 2007 10:24:25 GMT -6
Thanks Fred, I am beginning to draw a better picture of things and sometime down the road I might learn where the Indians came from and how the troops ended up on both sides of the ridge at and by LSH. I have a relative, James Troy, who was in Keough's troop I. I always assumed he was part of the I company skirmish line east of the ridge.
This may not be the time or thread for this so I won't be offended if no one responds. When you are fighting in the open like they were, you always seek any type of cover you can. At LSH for instance, troopers were on the east side of the hill and no bodies were found on the north and east sides suggesting they were being attacked from the north and east, however if they were being attacked from the north and east, then troopers defending the hill would be virtually on top of or just behind the crest so they could return fire and thus the bodies would not have been found as far down the hill as they were (although technically they were not that far down the hill) but they were still found far enough from the crest that they probably were not returning fire to the north and east. So if they real threat from the NAs that eventually killed them was from the south and west, then why didn't any troopers cut and run over the top of the hill unless of course they were already surrounded as they moved towards LSH.
Again this may be the wrong thread and I won't be offended with no response but what were Keough's troop I doing on the west side of the ridge? The markers for the bodies suggest they were too far from the crest of the ridge to be firing to the west and if they were being attacked from the east, they would have been found on the other side of the ridge. Since there was troopers on the north slope of LSH, then I troop was either positioned to repel boarders coming from the east side of Calhoun hill which does not seem very likely or else they were part of a movement, either to or from, LSH and Calhoun Hill which is probably more likely.
Regarding the green grass, despite the drought in CA and the Southeast, this has been a bumper year for rain on the plains. Kansas & Nebraska especially (this the radar I normally pay attention to) has really had a wet spring. Everything is green and we have a bumper crop of hay in the fields.
I recall the time about 20 years ago, we left Cody, Wy for LBH. The map showed a road (a 1 hour short cut) going north on the west side of the Bighorn river and recreation area. The map showed it was paved. Well it was paved for about 5 or 7 miles. It then turned into a dirt road. The town in Montana shown on the map was nothing more than a couple trailers and a ranch we drove through. We kept going north by east untill the dirt ranch road began splitting off and going northwest. Finally I spotted big power lines which I knew must be coming from the spotted tail dam by LBH. We drove under the lines all the way to the dam. However it was all dry scrub brush and we raised a lot of dust as we drove bumpity bump at 5 to 10 mph over that stuff in a 4wd Bronco. The ground did seem hard and there were no remnants of any tracks that the power line builders might have left for me to drive in. That was probably a dry year. We were a long ways from the river though and usually closer to the river it gets greener. Anyway the 1 hour shortcut ending up being a 6 hour ordeal by the time we were done.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Nov 14, 2007 10:25:13 GMT -6
From statements made by LBH survivors when burying Custer's dead we get info about the condition of the soil. It was hard, very dry and difficult to dig in. That would support meager vegetation on the ridges as opposed to more lusher growth along the river. Horse-- That's true, but the valley had been chewed up by the vast, moving column of Indians. The seeming lack of dust in the higher elevations points out to me my contention that the battle unfolded slowly because there are no reports of any dust being seen other than at the Ford B area and I think that was much later in the battle, wasn't it? Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 14, 2007 12:53:31 GMT -6
Hi Shan There is an article of mine on the net here: homepage.ntlworld.com/adam.fox57/MikeFox/LBH/LBHmcaryfHi bc The top of Custer Hill was supposed to be much flatter than it is today and some of the bodies including Custer's were on the flatter top so i guess they could have been firing to the North. The fact that Keogh's men were down the slope is one of the reasons why my namesake RA Fox thinks they might have been held in reserve with the horse holders. The other thought is that Keogh might have been wounded earlier - his leg was shattered with a corresponding wound on Comanche. He might have been brought down to a more sheltered position and his men formed a defense around him. With respect to how dry it had been there were reports of heavy rain impeding some earlier movements of the Montana column so I do not think it would have been drought conditions unless that was very localised. Regards Mike
|
|
|
Post by fred on Nov 14, 2007 15:25:09 GMT -6
The top of Custer Hill was supposed to be much flatter than it is today and some of the bodies including Custer's were on the flatter top so i guess they could have been firing to the North. Mike-- Are you sure about this? I thought they sheared off the top of the ridge so they could build that monument. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|