|
Post by fred on Sept 19, 2011 10:34:51 GMT -6
Now, who is the hitherto unknown Custer who was a stickler for military protocol? I think on a incident by incident basis you could argue that either way, depending on how it worked for him. He made fun of protocol in dress and other actions, like deserting his command once and, eh, training requirements. DC, No one said GAC was a stickler for protocol for himself; but he certainly was for his command. The coloring of horses is one example. His June 22nd dress-down is a second; and Benteen's protestations to Adjutant Cooke are a third. Battalion and mission assignments become a fourth (organization upon leaving FAL), fifth (etc.), and sixth (etc.). It was all OK for GAC to do what he wanted; it just wasn't OK for everyone else. Personally, I think he believed the Seventh was his own personal fiefdom-- he had exercised de facto command since its inception ten years earlier and did pretty much as he damn-well pleased. Jim Calhoun's elevation in lieu of DeRudio to temporary command is a case in point. When GAC needed "it," he set "it" out for all to obey; when "it" was inconvenient, he ignored "it." Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Sept 19, 2011 10:54:17 GMT -6
Second, I reject categorically even assumption by anyone that Benteen was at or near the LBH at this time or at any other time until the few moments prior to reaching Reno Hill. Fred
While I agree that Benteen was NOT near the LBH at this time.
I reject categorically even assumption by anyone that CUSTER knows this to be a fact. When Benteen states ....without any question....that he decided to cut his left oblique short. I believe him.
And I don't give a darn what you think.....Custer was not a mind reader and would have NO idea that Benteen was changing the game plan.
RB
|
|
|
Post by seeker on Sept 19, 2011 12:46:57 GMT -6
In one version of Sgt Kanipe story of the message:
Just then the captain told me to go back and find McDougall and the pack train and deliver to them orders that had just been issued by General Custer.
"Tell McDougall," he said, "to bring the pack train straight across to high ground -- if packs get loose don't stop to fix them, cut them off. Come quick. Big Indian camp."
The message "to bring the pack train straight across to high ground" could make sense if Custer wanted to keep the packs as far away from the Little Bighorn as possible i.e. wanted it to move north on high ground some 1-2 miles from the river. This would probably reduce the danger of an attack from marauding warriors.
The idea of moving across country to increase speed does not seem make much sense. But it could make sense to cross country to increase security.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Sept 19, 2011 12:55:44 GMT -6
Have you seen that ground? Neither had Custer. It's awful.
But more to the point, this variant appeared decades after the fact. Go to the earliest Kanipe rendition. Much simpler and........different. No mention of 'overland' heroics.
Even more to the point, this was a poorly wrapped train, and crossing all these gullies against the grain of the land would be torture for the animals and they'd have to stop and repack every 15 feet and it would take forever. Unless they were opening a 'share' program with the Sioux.
Third, do you continue to divide already insufficient forces not only in the face of the enemy but at his windowsill?
|
|
|
Post by seeker on Sept 19, 2011 13:34:36 GMT -6
In one version of Sgt Kanipe story of the message:
Just then the captain told me to go back and find McDougall and the pack train and deliver to them orders that had just been issued by General Custer.
"Tell McDougall," he said, "to bring the pack train straight across to high ground -- if packs get loose don't stop to fix them, cut them off. Come quick. Big Indian camp."
The message "to bring the pack train straight across to high ground" could make sense if Custer wanted to keep the packs as far away from the Little Bighorn as possible i.e. wanted it to move north on high ground some 1-2 miles from the river. This would probably reduce the danger of an attack from marauding warriors.
The idea of moving across country to increase speed does not seem make much sense. But it could make sense to cross country to increase security.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 19, 2011 14:06:08 GMT -6
It's not about Kanipe.It's about whether a verbal message can be sent from the column to the packs without the mesenger coming under suspicion. With one exception all messages between units were verbal.I think the last verbal message was from Reno to Weir.Out of the 6 communications sent one and only one was written and that was as an after thought to aid Martin's English. The terrain between the column and the packs was no man's land.The trail back took the messener close to a full scale action. To leave the safety of one's unit and navigate 2 or 3 miles of hostile terrain took courage. Another misconception is that by traversing back along the trail the messanger was heading for safety.He was in fact crossing a battlefield. If Fred's 10 points are the criteria for genuine gallopers from the column then suspicion would fall on every messenger.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 19, 2011 14:10:27 GMT -6
Seeker,
First of all, it is nice to see you post here. The boards can always use another good head.
The problem I have with your Kanipe-McDougall post, is that Kanipe-- if he was supposed to be a messenger-- never delivered the message.
Now some people will say that years later McDougall said something to the effect that, oh, yeah, I remember now... he did tell us; but I reject that as one old Seventh soldier helping another. It holds absolutely no weight and is an even pregnant example of belated tales than the "speak now or shut up" mantra of DC.
The cross-country trek never happened and if Kanipe's message was so important, why not? Why didn't he seek out Mathey and/or McDougall? The requirements to cut off loose packs, to head cross-country, all indicate to me there was some import and urgency in any such demands. If so, what happened?
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Sept 19, 2011 14:18:08 GMT -6
If Fred's 10 points are the criteria for genuine gallopers from the column then suspicion would fall on every messenger. Wild
I agree, and if it is that obvious to Fred. Then Benteen should have smelled a rat right away.
Benteen...." Kanipe what in the hell are you trying to pull. Get your ass back to Custer you chicken crap"
No one in 1876 had a problem with Kanipe as a messenger. This is a witch hunt, as far as I can tell.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 19, 2011 14:42:40 GMT -6
If Fred's 10 points are the criteria for genuine gallopers from the column then suspicion would fall on every messenger. That's a crock and you guys know it! I've given you 10 good reasons why Kanipe could have faked the whole thing-- and could could add an 11th with the business about "cutting cross-country" and "cutting off loose packs" surfacing years later, yet none of you come back with anything other than the usual bromides, attacks, silly excuses, "sullying one sullies them all" nonsense, suspicions being cast on messengers. Gimme a break! Equating this to "all" messengers is nothing but an uninformed and ineffective smokescreen. It's ludicrous. How about some one trying to refute his speed-- here we go again: timing. You believe Kanipe, yet you question Edgerly regarding Boston Custer; you believe Kanipe, yet you question Martini meeting Boston. You believe Kanipe, but you don't believe Mathey or McDougall. I think some of you guys have been reading entirely too much fiction and authors and historians who throw us some fairly shoddy research without thinking things through. The only certainty here is how this subject always ends. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Sept 19, 2011 14:46:52 GMT -6
I agree, and if it is that obvious to Fred. Then Benteen should have smelled a rat right away.
Benteen...." Kanipe what in the hell are you trying to pull. Get your ass back to Custer you chicken crap"
No one in 1876 had a problem with Kanipe as a messenger. This is a witch hunt, as far as I can tell.RB, I have no interest or desire to credit Knipe or discredit him. To me its not that important. I enjoy this discussion simply because it is an interesting topic. I always like to give the benefit of the doubt to the soldier. But to play devils advocate, your question as to why Benteen didn't smell a rat, perhaps that's why Knipe said "Hurah boys we got em" to throw off suspicion. He figured they would think no one would want to leave a victory. OK not the brightest thing ever posted, just nervous about the Giant game tonight and wanted to take my mind off it Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 19, 2011 14:46:56 GMT -6
... Benteen should have smelled a rat right away. Actually, I think Benteen did smell a rat. He paid him short-shrift, waved him off without so much as a howdy-do, and sent him on his way. Benteen could recognize a BSer from 40 miles away. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Sept 19, 2011 15:21:01 GMT -6
You believe Kanipe, yet you question Edgerly regarding Boston Custer Fred
Aw, Fred, You know thats not true. The ONLY reason I give the Boston story any credit at all is because of Edgerly.
If it wasn't for Edgerly saying he saw Boston. I would have to say Boston joined Custer near the divide. And until yesterday, you had Boston leaving the pack train at the divide and giving that scenario a good chance to be the right one.
There is an outside chance that Boston rode past Edgerly near the divide and Edgerly misplaces this in his mind years later.
I flat don't care if Kanipe was a messenger or not. He can still be used in time-lines because there is overwhelming evidence that he got back to Benteen. There is no such evidence with Boston's lone ride.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Sept 19, 2011 16:29:19 GMT -6
So!
Who thinks Boston was with Custer when Martini left NOW?
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Sept 19, 2011 17:18:18 GMT -6
So!
Who thinks Boston was with Custer when Martini left NOW? DC
Yes DC, for years I took it for granted that Boston made that ride. After all Edgerly sees him and tells about it. Martini also talks about it.
I was under the assumption that there were probably many more that talk about Boston going to the front. I never looked because he is just not that big a story. What I didn't realize was Edgerly and Martini are the ONLY ones that even mention Boston. I do find that a little suspicious.
Now on the other hand. Why would anyone really pay much attention to Boston going to Custer? I think we do know this much.....Boston started the day with the packs and ended the day dead with Custer. He had to get there some way. I would not feel comfortable betting on either option.
Danial Kanipe's omission of anything to include spotting Boston on his ride to Benteen only adds to the problem. Another problem is Autie Reed. Why would he be with Custer and not Boston.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 19, 2011 17:36:57 GMT -6
Inter unit communication is routine.Nothing execeptional about the departure or arrival of a messenger. 48 Hours of life and death action involving the annihilation of Custer's battalion and who remembers who delivered what message to whom.Who in god's name remembers precise details of such trifling domestic minutiae?
Martini claimed to be the only messenger Custer sent back. This was in reference to the Goldin hogwash, but Martini never mentioned Kanipe, leading me to believe he never knew of Kanipe's Wild Ride. Proves nothing and could apply to any messenger
(2) Why would Custer send back two almost identical messages within minutes of one another when he hadn't even fired a shot? I thought you and everyone else said the reinforcements were not destined for Custer but for Reno who was hard pressed?
(3) Why would Custer use an NCO at this stage of the event when he was short NCOs, especially with a message of little or no import? It was not he first time he used NCOs
(4) Why did Kanipe make no effort to return, or never tell anyone he was told to do so? Voss returned; Sharrow returned; and Martini admitted he was told to do so if he could. There is no evidence he was ordered to return
(5) Why did Kanipe tell no one who sent him back, until after he knew everyone was dead? Benteen tells us Voss told him that Custer wanted...; same with Sharrow; and we all know about Martini and the note. Who should he have told?For what purpose?Who cares.
(6) How come Kanipe never relayed his so-called message to either McDougall or the pack train CO, Mathey? We think we know he got back that far because one of the civilian teamsters saw him, exhorting them to move more quickly. You don't get involved in exhorting if you are trying to hide
(7) Why would Kanipe be the chosen one? He wasn't an orderly that day and Custer had plenty of them to choose from:None of the sergeants were orderlies but were used as messengers there was still Martini-- who, despite the language problem, got a far more important message to deliver, No Fred you said the messages were identical.
(8) Custer was an absolute stickler for military protocol. Why would he deviate here by choosing a non-orderly? See use of sergeants
(9) Anybody ever do a "timing" analysis of Kanipe's Wild Ride? I have. His is easy. You know where and when he left; you know where and when he arrived: 2.6 miles; 3 MPH. Heady stuff there. Maybe he stopped for lunch. Are you saying he loitered in no mans land? The route back was not exactly a sign posted highway. How good was the trail? If the trails were so clear there would be no mysery about Custer's movements.
(10) Notice he never said anything to anyone-- during the event-- about running into or even seeing, Boston Custer. What does that prove?
|
|