|
Post by Tony on Aug 14, 2005 18:16:39 GMT -6
Ok--I love brining up discussions on this post, because the majority of posters seem to have done some "homework" on this subject--As an Investigator, I look at this battle as a Reconstruction of a crime. So here's an issue that has strong implications, and I would love some feedback.
If we are to believe Martini's testimony, he asserts that he was approximately 600 yards from ford "B" when he was sent back on his famous ride. He goes on to state that he follows Custer's back trail and runs into Boston Custer. He answers Boston and tells him the command is just over the next divide. Boston continues. We all know that Boston makes it to George, due to the fact that he dies on LSH--therefore the warriors could not have surrounded Custer yet, as Boston get's through. Now, Martitn asserts that he hears firing and turns in his saddle to see Custer retreating from the flats at ford "B"--which means Custer is not only already engaged, but retreating. Martini says that when he reaches Weir, he looks down and sees Reno in skirmish line--CONCLUSION--Custer is retreating when Reno is still fighting in skirmish line and before Reno retreats to the timber---so, Derudio's contention that he sees Custer on Weir minutes before Reno retreats into the timber must be false--because according to Martini, Custer is now on his way retreating to Calhoun Hill (Martini has yet to approach Weir Hill). Could it have been Boyer Derudio sees waving his hat--well according to Martini, it can't be, because he, Martini is approaching Weir (remember, Martini says that he sees Reno in skirmish in the valley before Reno retreats---SO, Boyer and Curley could not have stayed on Weir to see Reno retreat either to Reno Hill or the timber OR Martini would have ridden right into them on Weir--So Curleys account is false (if we believe Martini) Bottom line, according to Martini, Custer has retreated to Calhoun Hill and Reno is still in skirmish in the valley--follow so far?--Custer was engaged pretty quick after sending Martini back from MTC, and has already retreated to Calhoun. So--the warriors claim that they saw Custer on the ridges after chasing Reno to Reno Hill can also be false (according to Martin again, Custer has already retreated to Calhoun before he, Martini reaches Reno Hill--so how could the Indians see Custer on East or Luce?--They haven't arrived on Reno Hill area yet! Here's a possibility if we believe Martini--and we have no reason to doubt him as he has no self serving reason to lie. Custer sends back Martini in MTC. He sends Keogh (not Yates) to hold ford "B" and await Benteen. Custer takes Yates ( E and F)further north to seek another ford to the village--ford "D" and intends to return to find Benteen already there and give orders for the attack. BUT, Keogh is immediately repulsed and he (C,I,L) retreat to Luce Cartwright, where they came from. By this time Martini has already passed Weir (saw Keogh retreat) and is passed Reno Hill. Reno retreats to Reno Hill and the following warriors then can see Keogh on the high ridges. The pressure from the warriors crossing ford "B" in mass sends Keogh to Calhoun where he deploys "C" and "L" on Calhoun and "I" for the attack from the East--still awaiting Benteen. Custer now finds for "D" and is mortally wounded there--Yates and Tom now retreat to LSH supposing to get back to Keogh and the rest of the command to attend to Custer--they never get as far as LSH, due to the fact that the 20 minute delay at or near ford "D" to attend to Custer's wound is enough time for the right wing to collapse and head for LSH where they believe Custer is --and still alive. The rest we know. Bottom line, if we believe Martini, then he shoots holds in all other accounts!! I tend to believe Martini and the events he states. It all fits in. Give me some feedback!!!
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 15, 2005 1:34:54 GMT -6
Some very interesting thoughts here. It'll take some time to think them through; it's an ingenious scenario. But, first reactions:
1) I like the idea of Keogh at Ford B, for the simple reason that if it WAS an attack rather than a feint, he'd have been the one to lead it. But there's a difficulty. Indian accounts are positive that the White Horse Troop are in the forefront at the ford. They can't be in two places at once ... Or have I misunderstood? Is your idea that ALL go to Ford B, AFTER which E & F detach to go north while C, I & L stay to hold it?
2) The hat-waving question: personally, I don't have a problem with that being Bouyer. He and Curley are scouts, they wouldn't necessarily stick to the same trail Martini and Boston are using. Given the roughness of the terrain, it would be easy (wouldn't it?) for them to be concealed by some fold or outcrop at the time Martini passes. In fact Martini himself says so, in Camp -- 'they might have been somewhere in the vicinity and I did not see them'. So, not impossible?
3) What's your rationale for the right wing thinking Custer's on LSH if Yates & Tom 'never get as far as LSH'? Or are they just heading for the highest ground?
I do agree, though, Martini's both the last and the most trustworthy witness we have, and his statements are as good a set of clues as we've got. (I love your 'reconstruction of a crime' analogy! Was thinking only the other day how apt the famous Sherlock Holmes dictum is to unravelling LBH: "once you have eliminated the impossible, what remains, however improbable, must be the truth" ...)
One question to all: the ubiquitous White Horse Troop. I said flippantly above, 'they can't be in two places at once', but in the Indian accounts they seem to be pretty well everywhere. Is there a danger that we mislead ourselves, do you think? We tend to hear white or grey horses, and instantly say 'Co. E'. Anyone know how many of the bandsmen's horses were present? We're told that 'the best' of them were taken to replace broken-down mounts; a quick flip through the muster-rolls shows just 13 bandsmen. Say that as many as 8 or 9 of their horses qualified as good enough: do we know if they were distributed evenly throughout the regiment? Or if one particular company got more of them than any other? Given how memorable the greys were, I'm wondering if some Indian references to a white horse company could in fact reflect a batch of greys in a sorrel or bay company -- skewing our reading of who was where and when. Facts would be nice, so if anyone's got definitive evidence on the bandsmen's horses we could prove or squash this theory in seconds ... But otherwise, is it something worth considering?
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Aug 15, 2005 5:28:13 GMT -6
there is a question of time ,custer was fast but had horses not bradleys indians saw custer on east ridge during reno retreat , then after martini 3 crows left then curley , if pressure on custer arrived at cahloun (before custer did not look worried) there was no reason for curley to get away before , i think there is some thruth in his accounts fire heard by martini could be directed to the 5 lakota met by custer in mtc coulee or toward the band of cheyenne Wolf Tooth, the retreating move could be custer moving from mtc colee over luce ridge
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 15, 2005 9:11:04 GMT -6
Liz---as I stated before, Custer could have led all companies to ford "B" as warriors contend. It just could have been that easy, and over the years historians for whatever reason started to look for alternatives. If all went close to the ford. then you would see the "grays". Remember, martini did say that as he and Cook moved aside so Cook could write the message, the entire troop continued on down toward the ford--and at that time they were only 600 yards from the ford. Then after the retreat, "E&F detached and went North to find another ford. The hat waving---Derudio and Curley both said that Boyer waved his hat from atop Weir Hill. If it was them, then Martini would surly have seen this from any part of MTC or Cedar on his ride back--they would have been at an elevation that was impossible to miss--BUT, as I stated, They could not have stayed on weir to see reno retreat to either reno Hill or the timber, because Martini asserts that as he reached Weir he looked down and saw Reno still in skirmish in the valley--if Curley and Boyer were still on Weir to see this retreat, then all 3 would have been on the very same hill--make sense? As for the right wing thinking Custer on LSH, by the time of the collapse, they might have seen Custer there as E&F may have returned by that time from ford "D", or the right wing may have just headed that way in desperation because that is the last direction they saw Custer take. As for the "greys"--my thought is that the greys were a "stand out" and that even seeing one or two greys would in confusion and excitement give the impression that many more were present--this comes from many years of investigatory training.--the mind plays "funny" tricks during confusion, panic and or excitement. After awhile, greys could have been seen everywhere, even if they were not--they were a focal point! Remember, no one sees an event exactly the same!! As for Custer retreating out of MTC to Luce--Martini was exact when he said he saw Custer retreat from the flat at ford "B" to the battleground. And if martini is to be believed, Custer was well at Calhoun when reno stared his retreat--therefore he could not have been on East ridge AFTER Reno's retreat.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Wilk on Aug 15, 2005 9:16:12 GMT -6
Elisabeth, trumpeters also rode grey or white horses. For easier identification in the field. If I am correct, there were a total of ten trumpeters killed with Custer's battalion, including Chief Trumpeter Henry Voss. These men were often used as messengers and orderlies; hence they would tend to be move around quite a bit, carrying orders and communique, creating the illusion of many more greys than were actually there. But when you count E Co. with forty some greys, plus whatever band mounts were there, plus the ten trumpeter mounts, it is quite possible that near 30 pct of mounts with Custer were greys. That would account for their frequent mention by the Indians.
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Aug 15, 2005 9:57:35 GMT -6
we are not sure on any man account , only thing sure is that companies were on luce and nye ridge ,lots of findings ,on flat at the ford findings are so few , maybe 1 company , martini left custer much earlier than 600 yards from the ford , left when custer turned from cedar into mtc coulee , after martini left te 3 crows were wth custer but saw no ford fight
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 15, 2005 10:32:18 GMT -6
Martini showed Benteen where he turned back, and both agree that it was approximately 600 yards from the river
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 15, 2005 11:04:50 GMT -6
Tony, thanks for the clarification: I see what you mean. Neat scenario. Wish I had a decent contour map, though, to understand the layout of Weir Hill properly!
Steve -- thanks -- I'd factored in trumpeters, but was assuming one per company. Hadn't realised there were so many. (Should have checked.) That kind of underlines the point, though, such as it was: that not every mention of greys in the plural necessarily means E. Not quite sure where that gets us, but I want to re-read the Indian accounts with that in mind, to see if it makes any difference ...
|
|
|
Post by prolar on Aug 15, 2005 11:23:02 GMT -6
Tony: It is an interesting concept, but I don't see why you consider Martini so reliable. He didn't allways tell his story the same way. In The Custer Myth he said that the last time he saw the Custer command they were going down the ravine with the gray horse troop in the center. He gave Benteen the impression that the Indians were running. Even if you don't believe Benteen, Edgerly heard him telling another trooper a story that gave the same impression.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 15, 2005 11:47:18 GMT -6
prolar--your right. Martini as all others seem to contradict themselves as time went on. But, Martini seems not to have a self serving purpose to lie, and did not need an interpretor to translate his story--thus less chance of misinterpretation--albeit he did speak broken English. Don't get me wrong, I don't take his story as gospel, but he does add important clues. His sighting of Custer retreating from the flat at the ford has always fascinated me--if true, it holds a key to all other testimony, His statement concerning Reno still skirmishing in the valley also intrigues me--what do you think about those two facts?
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 15, 2005 11:51:58 GMT -6
Liz--what do you think about Martini and his statements? How do you feel it adds to the timing and evidence we have? If Martini is telling the truth, then Curley has to be lying and visa versa--also the claim that Custer knew or watched Reno retreat to Reno Hill is also absurd--if Martini is truthful!
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Aug 15, 2005 14:23:55 GMT -6
Liz--what do you think about Martini and his statements? How do you feel it adds to the timing and evidence we have? If Martini is telling the truth, then Curley has to be lying and visa versa--also the claim that Custer knew or watched Reno retreat to Reno Hill is also absurd--if Martini is truthful! why absurd ? in Camp notes martini never says he saw reno fight in the valley , he says he heard fire from his right and at the moment he talked to camp he though fire came from ford D take away reno still fighting in the valley and many things fit crows saw reno retreat before martini leaving , martini heard fire and hairy mocassin speaks of fire in the flats then the crows left custer crows say curley left before them , he escaped for fear a lot of time before his accounts tell us , now investigating crows accounts i realize curley probably fled and lied but ,one thing is shure , there were volleys fired on luce and nye ridge , these were heard when reno met benteen on the hill and from the herenden company in the wood at the same time ( 1/2 hours after reno retreated from the woods) martini should have heard these heavy volleys if he saw custer retreating , but this volleys were heard at least 25 minutes after martini left custer , the time for martini to join benteen and then go back on reno hill , so with martini something doesn't fit too , i don't believe men who say , i did not tell this because the haven't asked the question
|
|
|
Post by prolar on Aug 15, 2005 16:47:00 GMT -6
Tony since Martini's timeline doesn't fit with anyone else, I would conclude that he is wrong. If Boston had not linked up before Custer retreated, it seems unlikely that he could have, and we know he did. Curly's story of he and Boyer watching from Weir point seems believeable to me.
|
|
|
Post by prolar on Aug 15, 2005 21:40:55 GMT -6
I should say that I think the story of Custer watching Reno's "charge" to the hill is absurb, whether or not Martine is truthful.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 16, 2005 3:09:32 GMT -6
Shatonska, I agree that Martini's 'they didn't ask the question' line is unconvincing! But I'm not sure it, and his inconsistencies, should pull the rug out from all his testimony ...
Tony -- in answer to your question -- I'm growing less certain by the minute! Like you, I've always accepted Martini as one of the few people involved who had no reason to lie. The fact that he doesn't strive to put himself in the best light -- for instance, admitting that he didn't tell Benteen about Reno -- seems to bolster his credibility. At the same time, while not dumb, he's perhaps not the sharpest knife in the box, and is quite capable of getting things wrong. The impression you get is that he was simply riding hell-for-leather, not paying much attention to anything but reaching Benteen in one piece. He couldn't know that his memory, as fallible as that of any of us, was going to be mined for every scrap of recollection and plugged into time-and-motion studies. Chances are that he reinterpreted some genuine observations in the light of what he learned later; that others became blurred and confused over time; and yet others may have been reshaped by imagination or the speculation of his fellow soldiers. (For instance, his perception of Custer 'retreating' from the flat: he may simply have seen a rearward movement, not the actual retreat. And Reno fighting in the valley: he says himself that he didn't pay much attention. Could be he saw dust and moving figures, and heard gunfire; he knew that's where Reno was supposed to be; therefore, it's Reno fighting in the valley.) So no, I don't think he can be taken as gospel; but yes, I think he THINKS he's telling the truth. As always, it all has to be filtered through a layer of scepticism!
Curley is more of a difficulty. Gray did a great job of rehabilitating him, and in his version, what Curley says seems to make sense ... but there is still that question-mark over his head, as Shatonska says.
My own view is, trust that Martini saw what he said he saw, but don't always trust what he understood by it ... Does that make sense?
|
|