|
Post by biggordie on Dec 20, 2008 1:57:03 GMT -6
ARRR. They thunked e war deaded an lefted him be.
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by chemo60 on Oct 27, 2010 16:07:52 GMT -6
it seems highly likely from all of the present evidence that Mitch rallied the last troops from Last Stand Hill before it was overrun by the indian force to try to reach the river to effect some sort of escape, i think in their final moments & suffering from battle fatigue, they forgot that this route would lead them into cemetary ravine where another indian force were working themselves up towards the battlefield.
I have always wondered why Mitch stayed with Custer until the end, it seems likely that he was recognised by the sioux before the 5 companies reunited on the reservation for the final fight & in his indian eyes to run away from the oncoming fight would have been deemed cowardice, so he chose to stay & fight it out.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 28, 2010 17:40:28 GMT -6
What evidence - including "all the present evidence" - has Boyeur rallying anyone whatsoever? How does anyone know precisely when or where he died? What would be Boyeur's fate if he'd run and survived?
Doubtful anyone thought they were doomed with Custer till the very end, at which point escape was dubious anyway.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Nov 4, 2010 13:46:58 GMT -6
There's an account in Son of the Morning Star that says Bouyer was seriously injured and couldn't go on much further. It was said he was found still alive by two Sioux warriors near a brushy area. He was so bad off he asked the Indians to kill him . . . which they did.
Then there's Curly's account stating that Bouyer told him Custer was crazy and was going to get everyone killed.
Then there's another account of Bouyer secretly arranging a meeting between the Sioux & Crow to arrange a peace. That's why only a handful of Crow went with the 7th. Bouyer was to signal the Sioux upon the 7th's approach and then assassinate Custer for the terrible treatment bestowed by him on Meotzi!
I can believe the first two 'stories' . . . but the last is a hoot!
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Nov 4, 2010 16:19:05 GMT -6
Boyeur, in a mutually exclusive tale, was deeply hated by the Sioux and so would, like other race betrayers, be treated terribly if he were killed. Yet, they found his body pretty much in one piece and his skull wasn't flattened like TWC's not terribly mutilated to the bone like others. And the body was found down the way. Either the Sioux didn't know or care about him per se. If the two Indians killed him, who were they? One of them must be the story source, if true. Again, if they knew who he was.....
Like the meeting between Boston and Martin, when did Curley start recalling the melodramatic last words of Boyeur's noble sacrifice and permission for Curley - now called a 'boy' at age 17 - to escape whereas there were probably a bunch of mid teen Sioux in battle. Crow as well.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Nov 5, 2010 9:13:31 GMT -6
Most of that inform I got was from SOMS (of course lacking in footnotes & references)
I would agree that the Sioux had a price on Bouyer's head and probably would have not treated his body kindly if they knew who he was. But he did have some ties to the Sioux so maybe that explains the lack of mutilation.
As for Curley's "tales" . . . we have to take them with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Nov 5, 2010 9:27:46 GMT -6
It's good to recall that SOTMS is neither a novel nor a historian's rendering but a consolidation of the tales afoot to 1984. They're great stories, and Connell pretty much just tells them as such, not claiming surety. Like the markers, the tales themselves - even and perhaps especially the false ones - are of historic interest as they are separate from the facts. Sorta.
|
|
Reddirt
Full Member
Life is But a Dream...
Posts: 208
|
Post by Reddirt on Nov 7, 2010 15:55:45 GMT -6
There are stories of some bodies being dragged around the battlefield with a rope, by mounted warriors. M Isn't that how Frank Finckle got away? Played possum till they drug him a couple miles away while holding arrows under his arms and the tail of an arrow stuck in one side of his hat with the arrowhead coming out the other side of his hat. The serious flaw in this theory is the nasty habit of the Sioux to fire live rounds in the bodies if the soldiers whether they were thought to be still alive or not. Finckle must have escaped from the field "En Toto" prior to the end of the battle if he escaped at all. A possible theory is that he may have "departed" prior to the beginning of the battle falling out of formation as others did. Only the "Shadow" knows for sure .
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Nov 8, 2010 6:16:56 GMT -6
Maybe his shadow will visit you
|
|
Reddirt
Full Member
Life is But a Dream...
Posts: 208
|
Post by Reddirt on Nov 9, 2010 16:05:04 GMT -6
He done done that and boy, wuz I bamboozled!
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jun 11, 2011 6:27:16 GMT -6
Is it true that Reno and Benteen heard two loud vollys coming from the direction of the Village, and some people say that this was a call for help not defencive action. I find the Finkle story very interesting, his account of riding unconscious for about 12 hours without falling off his horse is a tale of either good luck or a man who is telling a big fat lie. Regards Yan.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jun 11, 2011 8:05:39 GMT -6
Is it true that Reno and Benteen heard two loud vollys coming from the direction of the Village, and some people say that this was a call for help not defencive action. Ian, Yes, it is true. The only person, however, who claimed the volley firing was a signal-- or may have been a signal-- was LT Godfrey, the K Company commander. I disagree with the erstwhile lieutenant.. And please remember something: just because someone was at the battle, e. g., Godfrey, does not mean all that person's speculations are correct. In reality, we probably know a great deal more about the battle than Godfrey ever knew. That may sound ridiculous... he saw, felt, and witnessed things we could never know about... but all the research that has been done-- including the archaeological work, Indian narratives, etc., all came after Godfrey's death... or at least he did not have access to any of it. I seriously doubt Godfrey, for example, ever heard of Wolf Tooth or Big Foot. It's a "big fat lie." Best wishes, Fred. PS-- By the way, Ian, I just noticed this. Why would you post your comment on this particular thread. One has nothing to do with the other. FCW
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jun 13, 2011 5:25:17 GMT -6
Hi, Fred I am sorry over the mix up, I am trying to sort things out and I am not that hot on how to ask various questions, Quincannon has given me some good advice on how to navigate this site. Regards Ian.
|
|
Reddirt
Full Member
Life is But a Dream...
Posts: 208
|
Post by Reddirt on Apr 1, 2012 17:51:22 GMT -6
What evidence - including "all the present evidence" - has Boyeur rallying anyone whatsoever? How does anyone know precisely when or where he died? What would be Boyeur's fate if he'd run and survived? Doubtful anyone thought they were doomed with Custer till the very end, at which point escape was dubious anyway. " Solid evidence pinpoints Mitch's grave near the middle of the South Skirmish Line. When the archaeologists in 1984 made their first Excavation A around pair grave markers 33 and 34, only 11/4 meters apart, in the middle of the South Skirmish Line, they found artifacts and bones that subsequent examination proved belong to Mitch Boyer."
Gray P. 397Know you know "where" Mitch died! Hope I've been of help.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Apr 1, 2012 19:25:48 GMT -6
Kinda resurrecting old demons here, aren't we? I mean... 2010?
All the archaeology proves is that Boyer was buried there. It doesn't even mean he died there, though I would draw the conclusion he probably did. I would tend to doubt his body was brought there from somewhere else. The problem is, there are too many markers there, some of which are clearly spurious. Accounts place no more than 12-- and probably fewer-- along that line, between LSH and Deep Ravine.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|