|
Post by quincannon on Jan 23, 2015 21:07:40 GMT -6
Beth: It was the guy standing at Reno's side, holding his quart of booze that fell out of his breast pocket (has it been ascertained that he even had a breast pocket- I couldn't get a pack of cigarettes in mine), taking down every word he said. Now in the noise and confusion of battle just how many could hear him, and were they sure it was him, or was it him saying mount up, while some other officer or NCO was saying dismount at near the same time. I have never seen it in contemporary testimony either. If anyone has a source it is Fred, DC maybe, or AZ. All three tell the truth as they know it to be.
Pretty damned good sis, I guess that is why you're a Colonel in the Texas Rangers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2015 21:24:24 GMT -6
Why do they need to if they have wives, parents, grandparents, sons and daughters looking out for them. They were warriors, they did the fighting. Others took care of the rest. It wasn't about personal riches. It was about fighting. Then why wasn't Davern setting them up? Do you think that they just stood their on that hill top in stop motion until Reno returned? Do you really think that they even needed Reno to say the words "Set up the defenses" On other timelines. I know that this might come as a shock, but others have a reason to make their timeline different to prove their point. Fred isn't trying to prove a point. He is taking reported times, tying them to events to get a common timeline. Remember there was a local time and a headquarters time. What some people will do is that the two most extreme views of the time between event one and two and take it as set in stone. They might be looking at Private John for one time and Corp Doe for another. They want times, to prove their facts, not facts to prove their times. There is a difference. Yes you do have an agenda. You are going on the premise that Custer was the golden boy and betrayed by a drunk Reno and a resentful Benteen. Once you drop that mindset and look at all the information instead of cherry picking what you want to reinforce your view, you will never be open to others. If after you have read all the info out there, the entire RCOI report instead of just quotes, diaries, archeological information and Indian interviews and you still feel that your premise is valid then that's great. You have done your own research and come to your own conclusions instead of taking something that was spoonfed to you by authors who are trying to sell books. Oh and on those authors? Check what else they wrote. Is it a continous series of books about Custer, Indian wars, Western History, or anything else that shows they have done their reseach do they skip around and write about whatever they please. Check their footnotes. Are they citing orginal sources or are they using someone elses work and repackaging it. Finally check their dedications and credits. Seriously, see if they are thanking a lot of researchers or if they are thanking librarians and other people who you would come into contact with if you were doing your own research. Also ask questions of those who know. You don't have to take them for their word but it will help direct you to the enformation you want or need. Beth Beth, Would you consider the RCOI a primary source? The words told us by Reno and Benteen? All of the inconsistencies I pointed out, which are the basis of my opinion, are from the report. No spin on my part. Start with the Reno was drunk. Per the report his whiskey was held by Davern everyday prior to the 25th. Then on the 25th he was carrying it. His words. Not my spin. Add to that witness testimony that says he was drunk. For me it is simple math, 1 + 1 = 2. He was a known drunk. As for his actions and what could have been done better, a good starting point would be a sober leader. I am no fan of Custer by the way. He had his many flaws and made a few mistakes that day too which resulted in the loss of his command. He wore the hat so he bears the accountability. Others held some responsibility in my mind but he was accountable. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 23, 2015 21:35:56 GMT -6
I am not sure that Reno was ever praised for what he did. Most point to it as an indication, that he had lost balance, due to his experience in the valley, primarily with brains being splattered all over him. No one to my knowledge gives him a free pass. Of course his buddy was much closer than the timber area, the valley was still full of Indians, and many of those men left behind opted not to go. Reno was clearly shaken, after all we pick the Renos of the world from the human race. Benteen was obviously the lead agent in the reorganization and consolidation phase. Now mine to you, Tell me based upon your reading how Reno could have done it either differently or better in the valley. Careful here, and please don't tell me he conducted a retreat, or you will be shot before sunrise. Tell me how, given the exact same situation confronting Reno and Benteen, when Benteen arrives how it could have been done better or differently? The ball is in your court. I expect clear concise answers with no I hate Reno, I hate Benteen Custer fanboy stuff. Pure sound tactical decision making. You are the one that says these two were bad boys. Show us how, by showing us what they should have done. It is OK to decline, but if you do, do not open your mouth again about how bad they were. Okay. I am going to try this again but it will be a serious of comments so I don't lose it again. Please be patient with me. First lets look at Reno's charge into the village. First looking at Fred's book. He really does go over a lot of this. Especially the topography like the ditch and ravine. Reno rides towards the village to charge. (check Fred's book for details of order. I am a big picture kind of gal) He gets close and the Indians come out to meet him, not flee as they were expecting. he sends word to Custer --twice for further direction, he gets none. He does not sit waiting for a response, whoever is in charge on an action has to be looking at the now but also think about what is going to happen next. Reno at this point expects Custer to be riding up behind him so he set up a skirmish lines expecting Custer. Custer doesn't come. The lines advance until Reno can't go further. There is a large ditch in his way, he can no longer see and he doesn't know what he is facing. The Indians in the mean time are forcing Reno's line to move towards the timber. People like to clump in a battle, not stand the how many yards apart that makes a line. They want to stand next to each other. As they clump they allow the Indians to get around them until they have no choie but seek the perceived shelter of the timber. Remember on a barren battlefield even a shrub looks safer than standing by yourself. How am I doing guys? Have I been paying attention in class or do I have the reason for Reno's line all wrong? Again, its not about the now, but the what's next. Reno sees he is getting surrounded by a much larger force. He can't retreat because the back door is closed. He can break out or remain. If he remains all will die, if he breaks out, a lot will die. Think of it as a fireman who is faced with a buring building there are 100 people on the second floor and 20 on the third. They know there isn't enough time to get everyone out, they can only save one group and even then they might not get everone in that group out. Which would they do? What would you do? Reno chose the one that will get the most out, knowing that they wouldn't all make it. I think I read once every military action is entered with an idea about what is an acceptable lose and what is unacceptable. Reno took the acceptable over unacceptable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2015 21:46:46 GMT -6
One point to you Beth. Probably not a fair comparison. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with Weir.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 23, 2015 22:20:35 GMT -6
Beth, Would you consider the RCOI a primary source? The words told us by Reno and Benteen? All of the inconsistencies I pointed out, which are the basis of my opinion, are from the report. No spin on my part. Start with the Reno was drunk. Per the report his whiskey was held by Davern everyday prior to the 25th. Then on the 25th he was carrying it. His words. Not my spin. Add to that witness testimony that says he was drunk. For me it is simple math, 1 + 1 = 2. He was a known drunk. As for his actions and what could have been done better, a good starting point would be a sober leader. I am no fan of Custer by the way. He had his many flaws and made a few mistakes that day too which resulted in the loss of his command. He wore the hat so he bears the accountability. Others held some responsibility in my mind but he was accountable. Thanks Yes, the RCOI report is a primary source, but you have to read it all to get the context. You can't just requote something you have found out of context in another source. You need to know which side asked the question, what were the previous questions and what was said further. You can get a Kindle version of the RCOI on Amazon or you can read it from the Library of CongressOn Reno drinking. When did he take his whiskey? does the RCOI say. It was hot, dusty, and they were dehydrated (Have you ever seen those uniforms??) We know now you can't hydrate with alcohol but back then a lot of those canteens had whiskey in them. Read the Indian reports. Also a lot carried flasks. As for being a drunk, yes after his wife died he did drink. So were a whole lot of others on that field that day, Weir and Keogh come quickly to mind. But have you ever EVER heard of another occasion with Reno going into battle drunk? Nope, and why not because he was a professional soldier. Just like you might drink hard on the weekend but Monday morning you are at work sober and ready to do your job. Read about Reno and his life, especially from the death of his wife who he adored. It helps to understand the man before you just throw the label he was a drunk on him. As for the witness--you asked in the other post why he would lie. I will go into that there. The question you need to ask though is why would everyone else lie and say he was't drunk. Many of them didn't like Reno, especially after he was appointed in charge after LBH . He wasn't a particularly likeable person. If he was drunk they would have said it in order to clear up all the pressure they were under by Libby and her forces. You might think Quincannon is rough on that sweet little old lady but that lady was made of steel. Sharp, cutting steel and she was determined no one was going to tarnish GAC's reputation, no matter what the cost. She ruined lives with lies, some I suspect were paid off handsomely. (that is conjecture on my part--nothing to back it up) She also made it difficult to find out facts about what really happened at LBH. Who is going to tell that sweet faced widow "Sorry honey but Autie screwed up" Beth
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2015 22:47:18 GMT -6
Beth, I have a copy of the RCOI. Printed it out. That took a few minutes....
All of the points are directly from the report.
All the whiskey/drunk talk is from direct testimony.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 23, 2015 22:58:44 GMT -6
Beth: Scarface and many of his generation think they are owed respect from jump street.
We are under a lawful obligation to respect his life, his personhood, and his rights, including those contained in the First Amendment that guarantees free speech. That is the law, and our obligation.
What he does not understand is that we have no obligation to respect the opinions he expresses, or the process he may go through to form them. In other words we have no obligation to accept them, and have every right to disrespect them. Respect in this area must be earned and is not freely given just because he shows up. Everyone here has been around the block on these same issues we have lost count. He has not stepped off his front porch and made it to the sidewalk yet.
Scarface, I have been keeping track, and I have not seen one person here who agrees with your opinions or conclusions. Maybe there are some, but they do not post. Now when ten or twelve different people from all over the world, most of whom have never met face to face, tell you that you are wrong a wise man listens to what they have to say, then tests their conclusions through independent research.
As Beth told you the RCOI is primary source. It was also three years after the event. It was also testimony the judge advocate wanted to hear. So by that very fact alone it was incomplete. Now I want to ask you where and how all these enlisted men were privy to officer conversation. In fact if you knew your business, and you don't every effort is made to exclude enlisted men from these discussions. So be very wary of a Private Snuffy who says that he heard so and so say to so and so that thus and so happened. Not on your life Sunshine, not on your life. But you take what Snuffy says as if it was out of the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself.
Memories, and impressions also are altered with time. Martini first says that he left Custer around 3411. As the years passed, he got closer and closer to where Custer got the chop. Thompson says that Custer rescued a maiden from certain rape and pillage or some such nonsense. Thompson was playing with a deck that was missing more than a few Jacks and Queens. Kanipe, was a cowardly peckerwood who deserted his post on the eve of battle, then makes up some bullshit story of being a messenger. and shows up at all the reunions. At one he had the nerve to stand by the grave marker of his First Sergeant Edwin Bobo, the guy he deserted. But people take what all these old men, fools and fakers have to say as if it was Chapter 6 Verse 47 of Saint Luke himself. And you are one of them you damned fool.
PS: If you knew you business Scarface you would know that the whiskey was safer than the water, everyone who could afford it carried some on their person, saddlebags or in the train. They all drank. Some of them later died of the effects of drink. Taking a drink is not the same as being drunk or impared, or incapable of performance. It means they took a drink.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 23, 2015 23:08:43 GMT -6
Beth, I have a copy of the RCOI. Printed it out. That took a few minutes.... All of the points are directly from the report. All the whiskey/drunk talk is from direct testimony. Thanks. I can imagine! And lots and lots of paper. Direct testimony from who though? Do you think they are a reliable person or someone with an axe to grind--not what you've read in another book, but you. Who are the credable witnesses? Who aren't and why? If you don't know the answers read a other people's accounts and recollections of events. Do you think that if Reno was drunk and it caused so many deaths that he wouldn't have faced a court martial long before the time of the RCOI. Remember he is the one who forced the Inquiry. Beth
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 23, 2015 23:12:52 GMT -6
One point to you Beth. Probably not a fair comparison. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with Weir. Which comparison isn't far? The fire captain, or that he was a drunk? Not a confrontation, just want to know because if a simile doesn't work, it's useless and I won't use it again.l Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 23, 2015 23:16:29 GMT -6
Only a man who felt he had done his best, and had nothing to hide in either the areas of personal conduct or performance in the exercise of command would demand to clear his name, by court of inquiry.
Also keep in mind that anyone can initiate charges leading to courts martial. Did anyone, including his greatest detractors level such charges?
The court was a direct result of the slander perpetrated by a vengeful widow whose meal ticket got whacked and her dime novel wantabee, who blew his brains out while walking up the steps in his house (I just can't get over that one)
Now Libby I will whisper secrets in your ear about what happened when we are alone with the doors closed and the curtains drawn, if I don't die of drink first. The drunken bastard had the hots for her bod and was trying to ingratiate himself with her. You bet, you can believe every word he says.
Weir had an obligation, a duty to prefer charges against anyone who misbehaved under fire, or demonstrated incompetence or dereliction of duty. AN OBLIGATION, and not doing so was a violation of his oath. Did he? What can be concluded from that? He was perfectly willing to whisper sweet nothings, we have written evidence to that effect, BUT, he was unwilling to stand up like an officer and a man and fulfill his obligation as an officer if he had observed such conduct. What can be concluded from that?
That's just one. There are probably another ten or so, who said things in private, but who were not prepared to stand and deliver in public. What can you conclude from that?
|
|
shaw
Full Member
Posts: 187
|
Post by shaw on Jan 23, 2015 23:56:29 GMT -6
Beth Herendeen at the Reno Court of Inquiry. A Terrible Glory: Custer and the Little Bighorn - the Last Great ... books.google.com/books?isbn=0316029114James Donovan - 2008 - History These orders to mount, dismount, and mount were heard by Herendeen (Graham , The Reno Court of Inquiry: Abstract, 82). Private William Taylor later wrote ... Of course Herendeen didn't like Reno.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 24, 2015 0:14:08 GMT -6
Let us put this in terms everyone can understand.
You are an employee of a company. You have some reason, which may be anything for an observation to a personal dislike, to conclude that Employee X is stealing from the company.
Now you can tell your coworkers around the water cooler, you can tell you wife, your mother in law, the guy next door, the guy who sells you a Slurpee at the 7-11, and all you have engaged in is gossip and opinion.
Unless you are willing to bring your accusation before your boss, or if he is the one you think is stealing, your boss' boss, and offer something concrete to back up what you say, then you have failed in YOUR duty to that company. You may not have conclusive proof only educated suspicion and circumstance. It is YOUR obligation to outline those circumstances, so that a further investigation can be conducted to either prove or disprove your allegations.
To sum up substance talks and bullshit walks.
No Herendeen did not like Reno Shaw and the feeling was mutual, for I believe Reno thought Herendeen to be a coward.
|
|
shaw
Full Member
Posts: 187
|
Post by shaw on Jan 24, 2015 0:15:16 GMT -6
Reno had it tough. His wife dies in 1874 and he is initially denied permission for leave to attend her funeral. Later on the army grants him leave and he spends time with his son traveling in Europe. Between losing his wife and the LBH battle and its aftermath, one has to believe it effected his general psychological state.
Despite Mosby's ambush, Reno was a brevet Brigadier General by the end of the Civil War. Someone thought he was capable.
At the end of his life he is a poverty stricken ( my words ) alcoholic who gets cancer of the tongue. Even though he has an operation for it, he dies shortly thereafter.
There's a sad black and white movie in there someplace. Paul Giamatti could play Reno.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 24, 2015 1:25:39 GMT -6
I am not sure that Reno was ever praised for what he did. Most point to it as an indication, that he had lost balance, due to his experience in the valley, primarily with brains being splattered all over him. No one to my knowledge gives him a free pass. Of course his buddy was much closer than the timber area, the valley was still full of Indians, and many of those men left behind opted not to go. Reno was clearly shaken, after all we pick the Renos of the world from the human race. Benteen was obviously the lead agent in the reorganization and consolidation phase. Now mine to you, Tell me based upon your reading how Reno could have done it either differently or better in the valley. Careful here, and please don't tell me he conducted a retreat, or you will be shot before sunrise. Tell me how, given the exact same situation confronting Reno and Benteen, when Benteen arrives how it could have been done better or differently? The ball is in your court. I expect clear concise answers with no I hate Reno, I hate Benteen Custer fanboy stuff. Pure sound tactical decision making. You are the one that says these two were bad boys. Show us how, by showing us what they should have done. It is OK to decline, but if you do, do not open your mouth again about how bad they were. I would suggest that you look harder at Frett and Churchill. They didn't just fight. Reno called him out for being a coward, of hiding instead of being out on the line with everyone else. I can see why Reno would get angry, everyone else not wounded was putting their life on the line. Also I seem to recall somewhere reading that Frett and Churchill were helping themselves to supplies. Not exactly a trustworth man and perhaps someone who would carry a grudge and even go straight to Libby's people to provide a weapon against Reno. A number of other people saw Reno that night, talked to him and they all say he was sober. You will have to decide who is credable. First Frett isn't one of his men. He was a civilian packer hired by the Quartermaster's office I believe. Notice Reno goes on to say men and packers. He sees them different. As for skulking. I imagine that was possible. These men were scared, thirsty, hungry and sleep deprived. I imagine that a few of them wanted to find a place to curl up and sleep for even a few minutes. Reno and the other officers had to keep order. They weren't a cheerleaders or camp councilors. First check Fred's timeline if you want to quote 'by all accounts' because that is what Fred does. Very few people had a watch and even the watches there weren't set at same times. You have to go by the event and then tie it back to what everyone says the time was. Reno might have thought that the firing stopped at midnight, someone else at 9. Either or both could be wrong, in the middle of a crisis time seems to move differently. The important part was that he said he didn't have a drink until after the firing stopped. At that time of year, it stays light for a very long time and the sun rises very early BTW. I know QC brought up the problem with drinking water, it really was a serious problem which is why so many canteens were filled with whiskey not water. Coffee was safe because you boiled it first but they didn't much have water and what they had was needed by the wounded. I also seem to recall that other's joined Reno in that drink. I can imagine after the day they just had they needed sometihng strong. Does it matter? Would anything change? it could be Reno gave an order, Benteen didn't hear it and Weir moved out on his own. Remember it's years after the battle, memories fade or get confused. It doesn't mean that Reno or Benteen lied, it just means they have different memories. We don't know what Weir's memory is thought since he died so soon after the battle. Learn to recognize facts from red herrings. Reno. When Reno gave an order he would have given it to Hare who was his adjutant after Hodgson died. Hare would have given that order to everyone else. Think of Custer's note, it was written by Cooke but it was Custer's order. First numerous people claimed they heard it but I believe numerous others didn't, not just Benteen and Reno. I don't know if you have spent time in mountains and valleys but sound can travel weird. It can get blocked so some people can hear it and other don't. Also remember both Reno and Benteen were veterans as well as ohers. They been in one or two battles and Reno and everyone in the valley had just been in a major firefight. I am willing to bet there were a lot of ringing ears on the field that day. I don't know who heard or didn't hear but would it have changed anything? Any how? I believe some of this was covered in other messages. First you need to learn more about Indians and their customs. The noncombatives--women, children, old, maybe even the walking wounded were doing the scalping, mutilating and pillaging. And mourning. Don't forget that they had dead and wounded to take care of. The warriors that could though would have gone back to Reno Hill. They are warriors, it what they do. They are not going to leave their families unprotected from a enemy that wants to kill them, man woman and child and destroy their very lifestyle. As long as they could fight they would. And I wonder if what you think of as celebrating was actually soldiers being fired on to make sure they were dead. Indians weren't stupid you know. Someone could have been faking it and then stab them in the back. Again on the timing, just read what I've said above. No one really knew what time it was and everyone gave their best effort. I believe though that Edgerly actually was one of the few who had a watch or was it Godfrey. I don't expect either one was taking the time to consult it much though. And how was Reno acting at that moment? His usual stony face? Frustrated? Tired? Also you may not know or appreciate it but Benteen had a very dry sense of humor. Once you realize that about him it might put a bit of a different angle on what he says. Remember tone and inflection don't translate to written word. Trot is considered quick, I believe but an expert can tell you if I'm right that a horse can hold a trot longer and cover more ground/distane than in other gaits Benteen didn't dawdle. He actually made good time. Weir probably at that time was upset because he wasn't with his friends and was afraid that all the Indians would be gone before he got there. I've to call on the military people here but I think alienated is a military term just like when Custer said he would be embarassed by the Gattling Guns. He didn't mean it was mortifiying, He meant they would slow him down. Remember these are military men testifying to military men. It could be that no one needed to ask about the papers because they knew it was a given and well as Reno didn't have to mention it because it was a given. The Indians were vacating the area and going south toward LSH. If you read reports of differnt people as they arrived at the Hill, (Benteen, Edgerly, McDoughall) you will see the number of Indians were going down. That is why Reno was able to go down to the river. I believe that others have given you a whole host of reasons why it was important to take care of Hodgson's body. Yes really as other people have explained to you. However I think you posted this message before the other conversation went up. 1. Perhaps Reno could have held for 10 minutes, perhaps 10 minutes would have been too long. We don't know because that didn't happen. You can't change the past. I happened to think that Reno didn't have 10 minutes to wait or the ability to hold the timber for 10 minutes. Do you really think that it would have taken 500 Indians to hold Reno in that timber? They would have drawn down their main force holding Reno in the timber and moved the rest to fight Custer. Heck they could have brought the younger men and the older men to do it. Do your research then make up your mind. Remember though that the moment Custer showed himself at Ford B he became the target and Indians began to make their way up the bluffs towards him. Reno was fighting for the most part the south end of the village, Sitting Bulls people mostly and afew of the other Souix nations. Custer was facing the Cheyenne. There were enough Indians to handle both battles. Remember when you first started posting I mentioned that you should know who's village was where in the village and why they were placed the way their were and what it meant? Have you an answer yet
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Jan 24, 2015 1:32:25 GMT -6
Beth Herendeen at the Reno Court of Inquiry. A Terrible Glory: Custer and the Little Bighorn - the Last Great ... books.google.com/books?isbn=0316029114James Donovan - 2008 - History These orders to mount, dismount, and mount were heard by Herendeen (Graham , The Reno Court of Inquiry: Abstract, 82). Private William Taylor later wrote ... Of course Herendeen didn't like Reno. Thanks! I really appreciate that. I will have to go read it in context. Reno didn't ingratiate himself to the hired help did he. I've read bits and pieced of Herendeen's recollections and sometimes I wonder if he was at the same battle as everyone else. Beth
|
|