|
Post by One Tin Soldier on Aug 17, 2005 20:34:58 GMT -6
"We have shown that Martini left Custer somewhere in MTC (at what point doesn't really matter)"
I'm sorry, but it does matter. Like I said before. You have to be very careful when trying to disprove other's well documented timelines. To ignore this means alot! You have to try to prove what you are saying in the same manner. I'm not saying that you aren't correct. I am saying that you would have to destroy someone's statements about where they were at the time they were there, and/or what they observed or heard there. To prove what follows in your statements requires that, at the very least!
I know you are obsessed with Custer not knowing about Reno's condition. Gray's analysis gives time for him to know. And this is what you are trying to disprove, correct? Then you have to do a time/motion study the same way he and Michno did it to disprove it. There really isn't any other way.
"We also have shown that Custer was engaged and possibly retreating from ford "B" at the same time Reno was fighting in the Valley."
No we haven't! You have tried to prove that, but you haven't yet accounted for the time and motion differentials between your theory and Gray's, or for that matter Michno's! Do the time/motion studies, use Gray and/or Michno's timelines, it really doesn't matter. Then you will see what I mean. It's a most difficult task! But one that I think you are up to! Support your theory with alot of solid evidence, with statements that surround your theory and support it. Also while you are at it see how many other statements that work against your theory and don't support it can be made to support it. If they can't then you have to re-work your theory.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2005 2:11:20 GMT -6
Good discipline, OTS. But I think Tony's point about Reno/Benteen is a good one. Custer sees troops on Reno Hill; he's heard from Boston that Benteen's hot on his heels; natural enough to think it's Benteen he sees. (And indeed it is, as Benteen arrives there at same time as Reno.) Even if he knows Reno's defeated, would he know Reno's gone for the near-unclimbable bluffs? Or would he expect him to retreat back over Ford A? Depends on what Bouyer could see, and how detailed his report was (IF the Curley version's true and Bouyer reported). It goes to explaining Custer's actions ...
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2005 4:30:41 GMT -6
One Tin Soldier -- on your timelines point -- you know what would be really great for this?
Seems to me that the only thing that'll help us see the sequence of possible events clearly would be a DUAL timeline. Set out in two columns. Gray's cavalry timings on the left, lined up against Michno's Indian timings on the right. (Or vice versa.) Then we'd be able to see at a glance the relationship of, say, 'light firing heard from Reno Hill' to Indian reports of light firing at Ford B. (Any elements we don't quite trust, like Curley, could be highlighted by italics or something to indicate that they're not set in stone.) I think that this way, even if it's not accurate to the minute, we'd get some fixed points where the two accounts definitely agree.
Maybe someone's done this already. But if not, maybe one of us should!
What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Aug 18, 2005 6:35:49 GMT -6
we don't need timeline , tens of indian accounts say the same thing , they saw custer on the bluffs east of the river while reno was retreating on reno hill , this is a fact 3 crows left custer and saw reno defeated so they left after martini and custer was not already engaged , i don't know if custer knew reno retreated but surely he was not fighting while reno was in the valley , indians in the valley heard custer fire on luce at 16,25 when martini and benteen joined reno on reno hill at that time valley emptied of the great mass of indians , at this time maybe custer saw the arrival of soldiers on reno hill from luce or nye i stop here this discussion , for me the issue is went custer at ford d ? if he didn't or he was deadly wounded or made the absurd mistake of non forcing a retreat from cahloun towards reno hill curley indicates bouyer suggested this move to custer but was to late , mmm only custer wounded and the impossibility of carrying him on a charge could make that move impossible so they decided to make stands waiting for support
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2005 8:08:00 GMT -6
If it's Custer being wounded that makes Bouyer's suggested move impossible -- wouldn't Curley have mentioned it?
You're right that the Ford D question is rather crucial. If they went to Ford D, then a) Custer's still alive and unwounded (because otherwise they'd have been in defensive mode and trying to pull back); b) Custer's still on the offensive -- suggesting that the positions on the ridges are just temporary holding positions until all five companies can attack via Ford D. But if they DIDN'T go to Ford D ... then what WERE they seeking to achieve? Can only have been a defensive stand, just as you say. It's very, very hard to make out from the Indian testimony whether they did or not. Even Michno is reduced to saying "more corroborating narratives would be helpful"!!!
What does the archaeological evidence say? Any traces of firing at Ford D?
|
|
|
Post by One Tin Soldier on Aug 18, 2005 8:11:28 GMT -6
Elisabeth, I don't know if anyone has done that. It would be interesting to see. I think it would be very difficult to put the two together for a comparison like that though.
The indians had very little concept of time in the same manner as the whites. Stating time increments such as, 'as long as it takes a hungry man to eat his dinner.' Arbitrary elements like these could take as little as 5 minutes, up to, well, god knows when. Then comes thier uncanny ability not to associate time as the whites did, in their own terms. For instance, the term, "noon" was used by many of the indians to indicate the time in which Custer attacked. What exactly is "noon", in indian terms "when sun is above our heads?" Yet in Gray's analysis, he states that according to the white mans time that it began, Reno's anyway, at about 3:18 or so when Reno made his charge. Good grief, that's a 3 hour difference! Then going further, we find that according to Gray, Custer started his attacks at about a little after 4pm and supposedly ended around 5 oclock or so, this based upon the firing heard. Yet the indians claim that this segment of the battle after the whites had retreated to Calhoun, about "as long as it takes a hungry man to eat his supper." Supposedly this is about what? 20 minutes. So measured by another indian who claims that this was how long? A lodge pole casting a shadow measureing this time?!
Spatial time and place references in context with timing, as known by the indians, is next to impossible to percieve and put into anything constructive. That's why for over the last century or so no white man ever tried! That is until Michno. While I applaud his effort, I can hardly agree with everything he says. Quite naturally so, and especially during the 'Custer episode'.
The biggest hole in this is the indians stating that the battle began about noon, and Michno's timing that it didn't end (for Custer) until around 6 oclock. Good grief, a battle that lasted 6 hours until it ended? I don't think so.
Michno did an excellent job, and as I said before, I applaud his efforts. It gives us some semblance of understanding. With contextual references to the "motions" the indians took. Placing them in an understandable order. I feel that what it failed to do was properly address these motions in reference to Gray's work. Up until the time of Custer's twilight zone ride. As I said before, Gray is very difficult to refute.
Two Moons and his actions I have done this with. Matching his statements as to what he did, with Gray's work. Interestingly enough when Two Moons returned to his home, after the Reno fight. The timing comes uncannily close to the sighting of the horses crossing Nye-Cartwright ridge. I don't have the specifics handy right now. But when he emerges from his tent and sees these horses, it appears as though he wasn't seeing MTF, but Nye-Cartwright Ridge!!! The timing puts him at that point after the MTF action, 4:33. So he couldn't be witnessing MTF! A high ridge interrupts his view of any other action concerning the soldiers retreat and indian pursuit to Calhoun. The only thing he could have possibly seen was Nye-Cartwright, right? But get this, what did he see? The white horses!!! I am further researching this. But there is compelling evidence for E troop being on Nye-Cartwright! And if E troop was there, so was F.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 18, 2005 8:19:38 GMT -6
Time lines--time lines---everyone is depending on Grays time line as if he was there and checking every movement by his extremely accurate watch and keeping infallible notes. Go back to the beginning--where and how does he get this incredible time line started--by a troopers watch--what if the watch was wrong from the beginning--then the entire time line is wrong and only gets worse---the same rings true during the Normandy Invasions--we had accounts from many soldiers who participated--all going by the time they looked at their watches--and we wound up with just as many ridiculous time lines--we had the Invasion staring anywhere from 5:45 am to 6:15 am--we had the assault on the beaches staring anywhere from 6:30 to 7:15 am--we had the break through staring anywhere from 3 Pm to 4 pm--all predicated on different watches and different accounts. I know this first hand as my father was there at Omaha Beach--he looked at his watch as he landed (very quickly) and swore for some time about the exact time--then he found out and realized by talking to others that the salt water played terrible tricks on watches (along with the excitement) and that his watch (which he synchronized to others) was off by 20 minutes. It is extremely impossible to reconstruct an event by precise timing by anyones account. The first thing you learn as a criminal investigator is that if anyone, and I mean anyone, comes to you with an exact time when something occurred-either their twisting the event to fit what they want you to believe, or their out and out lying. In Grays, I tend to go with the former. People, never ever believe that someone can reconstruct an event precisely to the exact time--it's impossible!!! Especially after 100 plus years--you would have to be a fool to believe it!! Now as for Martini, the only point I tried to get across is that Custer could not have known Reno retreated to Reno Hill Before Martini was sent back--plain and simple--and unless you believe Curley, that Boyer told Custer,-- he never knew!--I still do not except the fact that Curley and Boyer hung around Weir Hill to watch Reno's retreat to Reno Hill--if they had, Martini would have ridden right into both Boyer, Curley and the retreat--and somewhere in his different accounts, Curley would have mentioned seeing Martini ride by on his famous ride. And as for Custer being engaged at the time Reno was fighting in the Valley--Martini said to his dying day that he saw the command retreating from the river and engaged as he rode back to find Benteen--why would he say that? Did he lye for some reason? Did he just pull it out his a---, because it figured it would eventually cause some confusion? Did he imagine it? I don't think so--I know others are going to disagree, but that is what this forum is all about--we agree to disagree--but for those who disagree--why did he hold to that story? It's not impossible that Custer was engaged at the same time Reno was fighting in the Valley--there were certainly enough warriors to fight both at different places.
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Aug 18, 2005 8:36:02 GMT -6
elizabeth ,curley don't say custer wounded so the other possibility , if this theory is correct , is that custer made a terrible mistake not charging back at that point , there are little evidences near ford d , but there is something , army and indian cases , lots of fire in the cemetery area make me think of a north move ,so as the clear cheyenne accounts that suicide boys charge and repelled company E from the flats over deep ravine , and soldiers bodies confirm this , the john stands in timber book is clear about the north move with wolf thoot cheyenne band shooting companies in the cemetery area from last stand hill before suicide boys charge, michno assertion that company E stayed on flats over deep ravine to make a bridge and hold ground while custer with company F moved to ford d has some sense but proving it is a different thing in this moment i am for the north move and the end of the battle around 18 thin soldier, michno is good for me but his pace is a bit slow , cahloun ended about 17 not 17.25 , weir from weir point could see at least the keogh fight at that time if michno timing is correct , so the last stand action ended at about 18 not 18.25 as michno states , a faster pace to gain those about 25 minutes difference is the mayor problem of michno book , i think michno is the nearer to what really happened , and gray until martini left , maybe until cahloun if curley is true ( and something true there is in curley , the only one to say custer separated the squadron before archeological findings demonstrated it was true )
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Aug 18, 2005 8:41:49 GMT -6
Time lines--time lines---everyone is depending on Grays time line as if he was there and checking every movement by his extremely accurate watch and keeping infallible notes. Go back to the beginning--where and how does he get this incredible time line started--by a troopers watch--what if the watch was wrong from the beginning--then the entire time line is wrong and only gets worse---the same rings true during the Normandy Invasions--we had accounts from many soldiers who participated--all going by the time they looked at their watches--and we wound up with just as many ridiculous time lines--we had the Invasion staring anywhere from 5:45 am to 6:15 am--we had the assault on the beaches staring anywhere from 6:30 to 7:15 am--we had the break through staring anywhere from 3 Pm to 4 pm--all predicated on different watches and different accounts. I know this first hand as my father was there at Omaha Beach--he looked at his watch as he landed (very quickly) and swore for some time about the exact time--then he found out and realized by talking to others that the salt water played terrible tricks on watches (along with the excitement) and that his watch (which he synchronized to others) was off by 20 minutes. It is extremely impossible to reconstruct an event by precise timing by anyones account. The first thing you learn as a criminal investigator is that if anyone, and I mean anyone, comes to you with an exact time when something occurred-either their twisting the event to fit what they want you to believe, or their out and out lying. In Grays, I tend to go with the former. People, never ever believe that someone can reconstruct an event precisely to the exact time--it's impossible!!! Especially after 100 plus years--you would have to be a fool to believe it!! Now as for Martini, the only point I tried to get across is that Custer could not have known Reno retreated to Reno Hill Before Martini was sent back--plain and simple--and unless you believe Curley, that Boyer told Custer,-- he never knew!--I still do not except the fact that Curley and Boyer hung around Weir Hill to watch Reno's retreat to Reno Hill--if they had, Martini would have ridden right into both Boyer, Curley and the retreat--and somewhere in his different accounts, Curley would have mentioned seeing Martini ride by on his famous ride. And as for Custer being engaged at the time Reno was fighting in the Valley--Martini said to his dying day that he saw the command retreating from the river and engaged as he rode back to find Benteen--why would he say that? Did he lye for some reason? Did he just pull it out his a---, because it figured it would eventually cause some confusion? Did he imagine it? I don't think so--I know others are going to disagree, but that is what this forum is all about--we agree to disagree--but for those who disagree--why did he hold to that story? It's not impossible that Custer was engaged at the same time Reno was fighting in the Valley--there were certainly enough warriors to fight both at different places. all indians saw custer on east side when reno retreated on reno hill , we don't need a timeline
|
|
|
Post by One Tin Soldier on Aug 18, 2005 8:52:21 GMT -6
Elisabeth:
"If it's Custer being wounded that makes Bouyer's suggested move impossible -- wouldn't Curley have mentioned it?"
Curley's disjointed sightings seems to indicate that he possibly did see this event. It's rather difficult to tell which ford he may have been referring to. And perhaps only god knows. But he claimed to have seen a man falling from his horse into the river. Who or where is anyone's guess?
The archaeological evidence tends to support some kind of soldier action in this area. Which is to say the least fascinating. Many have suggested that Custer was trying to reach the women and children who were apparently in the confines and protection of a nearby creek. I think it's name is appropriatly "squaw creek."
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2005 9:10:51 GMT -6
I'm glad I'm not the only one who's baffled by this 'noon' business! It certainly bears no relation whatsoever to Gray's timings. And there's one Indian (I forget who) who tells us Reno's attack came at 9 a.m. It'd be good to know exactly how the original interpreters got to these times. Some accounts involve Indians pointing to the sky to indicate the position of the sun -- but who knows, maybe 'noon' simply meant 'lunchtime' or something! (They'd had a late night; Reno's attack would come around the middle of their WAKING day ...)
I'm fascinated that you've tried this Michno/Gray comparison with Two Moon -- and that it throws up surprises. Very valuable! I do agree about Michno, it would have been great if he'd done the work for us. As it is, it's quite hard to follow his sequence sometimes, with all the anecdotal side-trips and the backstory stuff (e.g. with Lame White Man). He tries to help out with those 'last' and 'next' timings, but it's still an icepack-on-forehead task trying to keep track of how the big picture's progressing. Maybe he, too, quailed in the face of the mammoth task of tying it in with Gray. Even so, maybe it COULD be done ... not using the whole of Michno (after all, a lot of the entries are just people saying things like 'I caught a horse' or 'I left the battle') but merely the incidents we can tie to known points in time?
Ah yes, those wretched white horses ... They're everywhere. They're even in the Keogh area, according to Gall: he talks about a mix of blacks, whites and bays. Even allowing for a couple of trumpeters, this seems odd. As Tony said earlier, greys do stand out -- it used to be an old movie trick to stick one grey in the middle of a bunch of ordinary-coloured horses, and gallop it faster than the rest, to create the illusion that the whole lot were moving faster than they were! -- but every time we hear about them, we get the impression of a substantial number together. A wild idea has just occurred to me: going back to the question of the bandsmen's horses. One assumes they'd be distributed wherever they were needed, i.e. scattered across companies. But suppose that, having been used to marching together as a body, they made a nuisance of themselves when separated? And were therefore assigned en bloc to one company? (We have many evidences that the troopers weren't all great horsemen, and that would have to be taken into account by whoever assigned the remounts.) I'm encouraged to this thought by those Indian accounts of troopers, one group in particular, having trouble firing dismounted because their horses were frightened by the noise. Now, a normal cavalry horse would be trained to gunfire -- but a band horse would have less exposure to that, would he not? Plenty of musical noise, but not explosions going off next to his head. Are the band horses the troublesome horses? What I'm getting at is that Two Moon could have seen a 'company' -- a group -- of white horses ... but NOT necessarily E troop? ---- As I say, just a wild thought!
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2005 9:17:56 GMT -6
Sorry, folks, my last was in reply to One Tin Soldier's Reply No. 50, and so fails to address your later postings! (For some reason, it took ages to send.) Apologies.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2005 9:28:44 GMT -6
Shatonska -- thanks, good points.
Tony -- agree totally on to-the-minute accuracy. What I was thinking might be useful was just to line up concurrent events. Like Reno area people seeing Custer troops on bluffs, alongside Indians seeing Custer troops on bluffs. Then simply move events forward from there. There would be gaps, but perhaps some fixed points that would help us ...
One Tin Soldier -- sorry, I was being unclear. What I meant to say was that if Curley reports Bouyer as suggesting the move, and says the move then became impossible, it would mean Custer being wounded while Curley was still present to observe this exchange. In which case, strange he doesn't mention such a pivotal event. His 'ford' evidence is maddeningly vague, I agree!
|
|
|
Post by One Tin Soldier on Aug 18, 2005 9:36:02 GMT -6
Elisabeth:
Can't say that I don't disagree with you. But the compelling evidence for it being E company is that in Two Moon statement he makes specific reference to the fact that they were in four abreast march order with the grey horse company in the lead. I also find it compelling that most if not all of the supposed casualties at MTF were not from E or F company!
Your concept of "noon" is most enlightening. I guess by this standard we could classify noon as being relative to when one awakens, rather than an actual standard of time. And this does seem to be in sync with the way in which they percieved things.
Your right about Michno. I guess after a while, anyone trying to interpret these things could easily be swallowed up by the events and start mummbling about what was where. I know I would be!
It seems like the cavarly's horses was easily spooked. And it seems like it didn't take much to do so. Could it have been the sheer number of indians present that spooked them? The unabated violence of their attack? I have also always wondered about these mounts. There is some indication that all was not well with these mounts and that they could have been new and not tried in battle. Several times during the battle, from Reno's supposed charge up until the end we get accounts stating that this or that horse bolted with its rider! This is a well trained mount? Also when Custer's men were on their way to Cedar Coulee, Custer's one comment seems to support the idea that the horses were causing alot of trouble in that they were more or less out of control. Once again, trained mounts?
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 18, 2005 9:46:28 GMT -6
As I read these post, they only coo berate what I have been asserting. Time lines are suspect to say the least. Even Gray and Mincho disagree on time, as well as Indian accounts. Again, from an experienced criminal investigator--no one can reconstruct an even to the precise minute (especially after 100 plus years)-- there is just to many variables--- anyone who portends to do so has an underlying reason--like sell books---anyone who believes someone can do it, is down right foolish! read my upper post---
|
|