|
Post by Dark Cloud on Feb 12, 2010 8:30:57 GMT -6
In history, as elsewhere, when you control the definition of words, the glossary of terminology, you control the thought of your opponents, who often have to relentlessly explain their definitions. conz tries to make everyone respond to his often idiotic definitions so he can weasel back and forth and pretend to knowledge he does not have. Others, as well.
It can backfire.
Look at the recent poll about gays in the military. When the public was asked if they approved of 'homosexuals' in the military, the majority said no. When asked essentially the same question about 'gays and lesbians,' they said yes, it was unfair they were discriminated against and the rules need be changed.
The upshot is that those against changing Don't Ask, Don't Tell will continue to use the word 'homosexual' and those wanting to change it will use 'gays and lesbians.' This doesn't speak well of the Great American Plant Life whatever their opinion on the actual issue.
To the point, this sort of thing happens in Custerland a lot.
A good example is the term 'the field', which you'll see often in discussion of what was seen from Weir Point of Custer's battle, if anything. If the ' Custer field' extends from LSH to Luce Ridge, activity surely was seen. Just LSH? Dubious, if dust was as reported by both sides. This atop the issue of land deceptive even after long visits, never mind only once under trauma and expected to be flawlessly recalled in memory.
Also, 'the hill' in regards to LSH, where boundaries expand and contract at need. 'North' which often means northwest or just downriver and not the cardinal point on the compass at all, although, it may sometimes. This does not explain those who still claim Benteen was 'west' of Custer at some point.
Also: 'volley' is used to mean disciplined firing at command by various size groups or a shot by one guy. Depending upon definition, Reno and Benteen could be said to have lied when they said they heard no 'volleys' if one guy can fire a volley. They heard shots.
Time. The terms noon, midday, lunch, when the sun was highest are used interchangeably by people with different criteria at different times through the decades, yet many insist that the terms mean exactly the same thing to everybody.
Drunk. Incapacitated by alcohol or merely had a drink of alcohol?
It's the avoidance of granting specificity to words that betray the lack of interest in truth (and that's a word with issues anyway) or history. Words are just toys to play with by mood.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 14, 2010 18:37:06 GMT -6
This is a dictionary of political terms, and it adheres to the sort of Glossary of Terminology LBH discussion should have so that everybody is talking about the same thing when using terms like 'volley' and 'Custer field' and 'medicine man.' politicaldictionary.com/They get 'czar' wrong, since Speaker Reed was called Czar way before their 1918 example. It simply means an executive answerable, seemingly, only to God for the duration of his appointment, susceptible to no outside pressure.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Dec 2, 2010 20:51:11 GMT -6
I was asked recently for a glossary of the abbreviations we use on these boards, which is a great idea. For example, the gentleman said it took him a while to figure out that MTC meant Medicine Tail Coulee. We all refer to MWC -- Men with Custer: Biographies of the 7th Cavalry -- quite a bit, and I'm sure there are others who are new to LBH [Little Bighorn] who would find such a glossary helpful.
DC [Dark Cloud], will you please add others as they occur to you? I'll eventually gather them up and post them alphabetically.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Dec 3, 2010 9:59:15 GMT -6
Here are terms that arose today with some others that have provided controversy or just need to be provided.
Valley (specifically of LBH) - has shoulders and may or may not include drainage valleys. Tributary valleys (a tributary is a consistent water flow above a seasonal drainage - what is Ash Creek?) have their own valleys
MTC - Medicine Tail Coulee, called Reno Creek till? and by ?
MTCF - Medicine Tail Coulee Ford, called Ford B
Ford A - Reno's advance fording spot
NORTH (because some use the compass with specificity, some just mean downriver)
CN - Crow's Nest
CH - Crazy Horse
SB - Sitting Bull
G - Gall
Volley - I'd want military buffs to handle this, but this term illustrates the problems. If one man can fire a volley, then Reno and Benteen lied when they said they'd heard no volleys but random shots. But there is no need for the word volley to sub for shot. SOME use it as a vaguely hyperbole fluffing as in "I fired a volley", whereas the term is mostly used to indicate controlled fire by multiple people, as a salvo is in naval terms. A writer might and has used 'salvo' to amuse to describe lonely sound of a man's gun fired into a wall of enemy. The point being, whatever definition is chosen may well run aground once you start moving back and applying it to how folks used it.
Field - Important as in what people meant by 'field' when describing what they saw on that 'field' from Weir Point on June 25. Nearby ridges or through the smoke and dust to LSH?
Custer Field - can mean the whole vista from Weir Point or the currently and strangely fenced area and everything in between. This is of major importance in sifting through the accounts.
Lots more, but others need to kick in.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Dec 3, 2010 13:06:25 GMT -6
Dark Cloud,
On the other board Fred put up 2 lists that were outstanding.One dealt with military terminology and the other about items that dealt with the LBH.Both are of great help. I'm not good with a computer so I don't know how to type in the www. stuff but if you go over there and find it ,it is well worth it.
Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 3, 2010 14:11:18 GMT -6
It takes me all of 30 seconds to post this and after five solid days of doing nothing but indexing-- 7 AM to 11 PM-- I need the break. I do not know if this is what you are looking for or even if it is helpful, but it is something I have put together over the years... and it may take more than one post to fit it all in, but here goes: DISTANCES, LOCATIONS, PLACE NAMES, SPEEDS, TIMES, and VEGETATIONTimes1. 15° of longitude—east or west—equals one hour. • Based on 15°, the time difference between St. Paul and the LBH is approximately 57 minutes. 2. Custer Battlefield: 107.3° West Longitude, 45.5° North Latitude. • From the U. S. N. O.: Billings, MT: 108° 32' (108.533º) West Longitude, 45° 47' (45.783º) North Latitude. 3. St. Paul, MN: 93.1° West Longitude, 44.95° North Latitude. 4. Civil twilight begins at sunset. 5. Civil twilight ends when the sun reaches 6° below the horizon. Light is now insufficient to read. 6. Nautical twilight ends when the sun is 12° below the horizon. At this point, a mariner can no longer set a sextant on the horizon and we have full darkness. • The United States standardized its time zones in 1883, after the Prime Meridian Conference held in Washington, D. C., standardized zones based on Greenwich Mean Time. Times and dates: • “ultimo” or “utl.” refers to the past month, i. e., in July, when referring to a June 25th date, it would be, the 25th ultimo; of last month. • “instant” or “inst.” refers to the same month, i. e., on July 5th one would call July 1st, “the 1st, instant.” SpeedsOn February 25, 2008, the History Channel ran a program about ancient weapons of death, and they ran some tests on a “scythe chariot.” The chariot was pulled by two horses around an arena of about 250 yards. There was one man in the chariot and they had him dressed in armor of the period. They used a radar gun to clock the speed. In the straightaway, the horses attained speeds of 20 and 23 MPH. It must also be remembered that a man running a four – minute mile runs at a speed of 15 MPH. A 26 – mile marathon can be run in about 2 hours. That is 13 MPH. In 2007, the New York City men’s marathon—26.2 miles—was won in a time of 2 hours, 9 minutes, 4 seconds, approximately 12 MPH. Pony Express—April 3, 1860, to late – October 1861. • Average speed 10 MPH. • New horse every 10 to 15 miles • New riders every 75 – 100 miles. From the Website— www.ultimatehorsesite.com/info/horsespeedmph.htm• Horses speed varies with their stride length, body build, and other factors, but here is a basic idea of how fast—in miles per hour—horses move at their various gaits: o Walk: Roughly 3 – 4 MPH. A pleasure show horse can go as slow as 2 MPH. Gaited horses—that do not trot—can do a “running walk” as fast as 15 MPH. o Trot: The trot is roughly 8 – 10 MPH. Again, a shorter striding horse could trot slower, and a horse with a long stride could move faster. o Canter/Lope: 10 – 17 MPH. o Gallop: This depends on the horse’s condition and athletic ability. Some horses are not built to run fast and may only do a fast canter at their best; however, the gallop is about 30 MPH. Thoroughbreds, which are bred for running distance but not speed, have been clocked at over 40 MPH. Quarter horses, bred and raced for short distances at speed, can reach 50 MPH in short bursts according to the AQHA’s website. Re: An Ultimate Alternative: Post by benteeneast [Steve Andrews] on May 29, 2008 at 9:31 AM:I believe in a hurry up mode of mixing the canter (military gallop) and trot they could come up with 9 – 10 MPH and be sustained for 10 miles but it must have the change of gait from the canter. I do not believe they did military gallop for 10 miles without losing a lot of horses. Re: An Ultimate Alternative: Post by benteeneast on May 29, 2008 at 9:45 AM:The best resource I have found for horses speeds, gaits and distance average for cavalry is Boniface, The Cavalry Horse and His Pack. Re: An Ultimate Alternative: Post by lozen on May 29, 2008 at 10:05 AM:Fred it IS possible to run a horse for 10 miles. It's been done, but always with little, if any, horse left over. I also did some checking on the Pony Express. What I find says the 10 MPH average recorded was based on a combination of trotting and galloping, the trot periods being needed to allow the horse to recover their wind. Here is as close a description of what would have been asked of those horses as you will find. I've abridged it for clarity. Maybe it proves your point, maybe it proves mine, but I hope it's useful. Endurance/Cross-Country Phase of a 3 – Day Event The starting flag lowers... thoughts center on the clock, maintenance of speed, allotment of walking, trotting and galloping according to the difficulty of the terrain. The main thought is to save energy and get to the race track [or the battle—remember this was developed as a cavalry competition] with a horse still possessing some go. • Phase A (roads and tracks) - approximately three and a half miles of walk and trot as a warm-up, going right into the next phase. • Phase B (the steeplechase race track) approximately two and one-eighth miles at a gallop over approximately eight steeplechase fences, at an average speed of 24 MPH, then proceeding to the next phase. • Phase C (the second roads and tracks) - This phase consists of approximately seven miles as a recovery from extreme effort of the steeplechase, sometimes the rider runs along the horse. During this phase, the horse must recuperate from the hard gallop, because the most difficult phase lies ahead. • Phase D (the cross – country) The gallop begins! Five miles of hills, underbrush, woods, open meadows, with the constancy of one obstacle after another; the horse at a long hunting gallop of over 20 MPH [optimum time around 11.5 minutes]. It will now become evident if the resources of the horse are sufficient to master the many obstacles over hugely varying terrain, or perhaps the speed on the rack track was too much. The obstacles are solid, the options are to take them or fall. Both horse and rider must be bold and smart and possess much stamina. The last half of the cross country test is a marathon. Effort reaches the limit of confidence, loyalty and ability wherever that limit is. In Olympic and World Championship competition, the total mileage to be covered on this four-part speed and endurance phase can be up to twenty miles. Re: An Ultimate Alternative: Post by conz on May 30, 2008 at 8:18 AM:As to cavalry pace, I think LT Boniface is as good a source as any for such matters, so for those who don't have that reference, he has a chapter on marches... "Habitually the route march in the American Cavalry is made in column of fours...it may be added that the column of twos is used almost invariably when the command consists of a squadron or less. In large columns the double column of fours is sometimes used, and sometimes regiments or brigades are marched in parallel columns near each other to shorten the column... "On starting from camp in the morning the first two miles or so is generally made at an easy walk, generally at a less rate than the regulation four miles an hour. At the end of this distance the command is halted for ten or fifteen minutes, to enable readjustment of the packs and to allow the men and horses to relieve themselves... "After the first hour of marching, there should be a halt of about five minutes every hour... "The gait generally used in the American Cavalry when on the march is the walk and trot alternating, the most favorable ground being selected for the trot... "The rate to be taken on the march must be governed by circumstances, such as the condition of the animals and the state of the road, the object of the march, etc.; but it is the custom in the American cavalry service, under favorable conditions, that after the first halt the march will average a rate of five miles an hour, alternating the walk and trot as has been said, and occasionally dismounting and leading for short distances... "The walk during the march should be at the rate of four miles, and the trot at not less than six and a half miles an hour..." "Generally, a non-commissioned officer is left with any trooper who has to fall out during the march...” A very typical cavalry "quick march" is to trot for two miles, walk for two, trot for two, etc. Re: Benteen’s Dawdling: Post by benteeneast on Mar 20, 2010, 10:01 PM:Found this on conditioning a horse for distance. This is for out of shape horses entering an endurance race for the first time and how to condition them. Notice the trot for 15 miles at 10 MPH. 5th week—Ride 4 to 5 days this week. Take a 15 – mile ride in one hour and 30 minutes. Trot fully extended beside a car for a mile. Are you going 10 MPH or over? Walk a measured mile—aim to do it under 18 minutes. Be sure you have a good organized routine for cooling out your horse. Re: Testimony of Maj. Reno Post by benteeneast on September 21, 2010 at 6:45 AM:A fast trot could be close to 9 – 10 MPH. Re: Testimony of Maj. Reno Post by benteeneast on September 21, 2010 at 10:00 AM:I believe horses that are used a lot for long distances can trot as fast as most canter. Why wouldn't the cavalry train to move their horses at a fast trot since they didn't have ammunition to practice with anyway. I can't believe they only practiced close order drills. From the University of Montana's website: Horse Locomotion - Trot Characteristics = One diagonal pair of legs are raised before other pair touches ground—suspension of all feet. Period of suspension—longest at the extended trot. Leg sequence unchanged at ordinary, collected, or extended trot. Average speed 7 – 10 MPH; extended 10 – 30 MPH. Believed to be a dominant genetic trait over pacing. Is a natural gait. Unless they are in error they have trot speeds up to 30 MPH. Re: Testimony of Maj. Reno Post by benteeneast on September 21, 2010 at 10:18 AM:The speed of a regular working trot is averages 8 to 12 KM/H (5 to 10 MPH), up to 19 KM/H (12 MPH). Re: Testimony of Maj. Reno Post by benteeneast on September 21, 2010 at 10:33 AM:What did the cavalry consider a fast trot if the normal was 6 – 8 MPH? My horse trots at 7 – 8 MPH and when bumped without going into a canter 10 – 11. So for my horse the fast trot is 10 – 11. Distances, Locations, and Place NamesNOTE—In an article by Bruce A. Trinque titled, “Elusive Ridge,” January 1995, Research Review, Vol. 9, No. 1, Trinque calls the “Luce Ridge” referred to by John Gray, Robert Utley, and Richard Hardorff as “East Ridge,” and Richard Fox’ “Luce” as “West Ridge.” According to Connell (1984)—“U. S. highway 94 parallels [Custer’s] route to the Yellowstone and follows it almost exactly to the junction of Rosebud Creek.... At this point Montana 447 branches south and then southwest, occasionally angling across the creek... a brushy creek sometimes narrow enough to hop across. “Beyond Lame Deer, near the present town of Busby... [t]he approximate site of his final camp is marked by the Busby Post Office, G & J’s store.... “ gas station with a Happy Motoring sign. Beyond this landmark General Custer angled southwest toward the divide, while the present state highway continues due west—rising gently toward the ridge...” [Son of the Morning Star, p. ?].
Fort Rice was located 30 miles south of Bismarck.
The Red Cloud Agency was known by the Cheyenne as the White River Agency. • According to Wooden Leg, the White River Agency became known as the Pine Ridge Agency [Marquis, Wooden Leg, p. 324].
The Cheyenne called the North Platte River the Geese River.
Pryor Creek was known as Shooting At The Bank Creek by the Cheyenne.
The Rosebud River was also called the Sweet Briar (by Boston Custer, in a letter to his mother) [Willert, LBH Diary, p. 201].
The distance between Muddy Creek and Lame Deer Creek is 7 miles.
Crow’s Nest to lone tepee: 9¼ miles, straight line. • 4½ to 4¾ miles from Crow’s Nest back to Halt 1. • The Crows Nest pocket is 3/10 to 4/10 mile (525 – 700 yards) southwest of Halt 2, depending upon which site is accepted for the halt area. • The Sioux village was about 15 to 15½ miles from the Crow’s Nest. • Crow’s Nest—map reference, Thompson Creek NW, block 34 (NW corner), at elevation 4440 (unmarked).
Halt 2 was about 3½ miles from Halt 1. • Halt 1 was approximately 6½ miles from the Busby camp. Heski says 6.7 miles (his map shows 6.2 miles [“Don’t Let Anything Get Away,” Research Review, pp. 16 – 17]). o The Busby camp was approximately 11.5 – 11.9 miles from the divide. • Heski puts the distance between Halt 1 and Halt 2 at 4 miles [“Don’t Let Anything Get Away,” p. 25]. • Heski’s Halt 2 is approximately 1.7 miles east-southeast of the divide and 1.1 miles from the foot of Crow’s Nest hill [Heski, p. 31, FN 147]. • “Officers’ Call Knoll” to the area on the divide where Custer may have viewed the LBH valley using DeRudio’s field glasses, i. e., Vern Smalley’s “Varnum’s Lookout”—is about ¾ mile. • Halt 2—map reference, Thompson Creek NW, block 27 (northern section), along the trail between elevations 3923 and 3893 at the confluence of Davis Creek and an intermittent rill running due north and south.
The divide to the morass is about 7½ miles. • It is ¾ mile from the morass to the eastern “lone tepee” [Gray]. Darling figured 1.4 to 2.4 miles from morass to the “lone tepee.” Smalley says 1 mile. • The divide to the divide halt was about ¼ mile (440 yards); divide halt to the mouth of No – Name Creek (at Ash or Reno Creek), approximately 6.7 miles (this is the creek Benteen moved down when he finished his scout). • From the divide crossing to the confluence of No – Name Creek and Reno Creek is 6.9 miles. • From No – Name Creek to the LBH is about 5 to 5.4 miles. • Therefore the distance from No – Name Creek to the morass was only about ¼ mile (440 yards). • South Fork is about 1 mile below No – Name Creek and at Reno Creek about 4 miles above the LBH. o My figures are 1.05 miles between where No – Name joins Reno Creek and where South Fork joins Reno Creek. • Smalley places the morass approximately 5½ miles from the Little Big Horn. • South Fork to Ford A is 4.32 miles. • South Fork to Gerard’s Knoll is 2.62 miles. • Gerard’s Knoll to Middle Knoll is 1.1 miles. • Middle Knoll to Cooke’s Knoll is 0.38 miles (670 yards). • The western side of Middle Knoll to Last Stand Hill is approximately 5.71 miles. • Distances from the Custer – Reno separation point: o Reno’s route to the Ford A crossing was 1.62 miles. o From the Ford A crossing to open LBH valley is approximately ½ mile. o From the separation point to where I believe Cooke met Custer was approximately 1 mile. o From the Cooke – Custer meeting to where I believe Custer may have watered, 335 yards (2/10 of a mile). o From the watering point to the peak on the bluffs, 670 yards (.38 of a mile). (This would have been the first “high point” on the bluffs along the river north of Reno Creek valley.) o From the peak on the bluffs to “3411,” 1½ miles. • The divide crossing to Ford A is 11.81 miles along Reno Creek, almost straight-line except for one or two sharp bends in the valley. • Divide crossing—map reference, Thompson Creek NW, block 28, along trail and between large 4,400' elevation and a smaller rise to its south. • Morass—map reference, Lodge Grass NE, block 16 (northern half), just west of the confluence of No-Name Creek and Reno Creek.
Ford A ↔ 1.7 miles ↔ Gerard’s Knoll/“lone tepee” (in the “flats”) ↔ 2.3 miles ↔ South Fork ↔ 1 mile ↔ No – Name Creek ↔ 6.9 miles ↔ divide crossing. Total distance: 11.9 miles.
Reno Creek has been known also as Benteen Creek, Ash Creek, Trail Creek [Lakota], Little Wolf Creek, Medicine Dance Creek—or Great Medicine Dance Creek—and Sundance Creek. It appears the Sioux also called it Spring Creek.
The flats were about 2¾ miles from the eastern “lone tepee.” • The North Fork—also known as Custer Creek—was another ¼ to ½ mile more. • The eastern “lone tepee”—map reference, Lodge Grass NE, block 8 (SW corner), in the vicinity of the 3,282 elevation marker.
Varnum’s lookout (south of the flats) [from Liddic's description]—map reference, Lodge Grass NE, block 13 (in the middle), on the 3,405 elevation marker.
Ford A crossing point approximately 102 miles from mouth of Rosebud. • Ford A is about 4 to 4½ miles from the eastern “lone tepee.” • Ford A is about 1.7 miles from the real “lone, burning tepee.” • The Indian village was approximately 3 miles from Ford A. o Reno dismounted to form his skirmish line about 2½ miles from Ford A. o His command fought dismounted for about 30 minutes. o It took about 15 – 20 minutes for retreat to river and bluffs. • Ford A to “Gerard’s Knoll,” located in “the flats,” is approximately 1.7 miles.
North Fork (or Custer Creek) to Reno Hill: 1.3 to 1.5 miles. North Fork is about 2 miles from “3411” based on an easier route, not quite straight line.
Reno Hill to Ford B, crossing the LBH and going through the valley and the Indian villages is about over 3.3 miles by horseback. If the Indians crossed the LBH going towards Reno Hill, then reversed themselves and rode to MTC, the distance would be a little over 3 miles. • Weir Peak is 1¼ miles (2,200 yards) along the bluffs from Reno Hill. • Varnum’s sighting of E Company [Liddic]—map reference, Crow Agency, block 34 (lower half of the block), just south of the south end of the 3,400' – marked elevation (Sharpshooter Ridge).
Weir Peak “rises rather steeply about a mile and a quarter from Reno Hill. The point is in effect a group of three promontories that resemble a sort of an ‘L’ on its side. There are two points along the river’s bluffs, west of the present road and parallel with the river. The other peak lies east of the road and presents a round ‘sugarloaf’ appearance. At the time of the battle, the eastern and western projections were connected by gradual sloping sides that have since been graded down for the present road bed” [Liddic, Vanishing Victory, p. 131]. • The distance traveled by the three Crows from Weir Peaks along the bluffs to the so-called Boyer’s Bluff above Ford B was 1.3 miles (2,275 yards).
Cedar Coulee— • The head of Cedar Coulee is approximately 9/10 of a mile (1,600 yards) from the center of the Reno Hill complex. • This “bend” is about ½ mile (880 yards) from the head of the coulee. • Cedar Coulee is about 1 1/8 miles (2,000 yards) from its head to its emptying into MTC. • From the top of Cedar Coulee to the top of Luce Ridge, following a probable route is 2.6 miles. This would be made up of a 1 – mile trip down MTC and .48 mile (850 yards) up the slopes to Luce added to the 1 1/8 miles of Cedar Coulee. • From where Cedar Coulee meets MTC, it is approximately 9/10 of a mile (1,600 yards) to the beginning of the slopes leading to Luce Ridge. • The bottom of Cedar Coulee is approximately 1.4 miles (2,450 – 2,500 yards) from the top of Luce Ridge. • Cedar Coulee was also known as South Coulee.
Fords— • Ford A to Ford B is 4.3 miles, not straight line. • From Reno’s retreat crossing ford around the river loops and through the village to Ford B, it is about 3.4 miles. It is another 2.48 miles to Ford D, a total of 5.88 miles from the retreat crossing to Ford D, not straight line. • Ford B to the Deep Ravine crossing is 1.43 miles (2,500 yards), not straight line. • Ford B to Ford D is 2.48 miles (4,375 yards), not straight line.
We refer to the deep, dry streambed that led Custer to Ford B as Medicine Tail Coulee, but the Indians never called it that. It was also called Muddy Creek and referred to frequently as “the watering place” during the RCOI. The Sioux and Cheyenne had several names for it: • Muskrat Creek (referred to by Standing Bear [M]). • Dry Creek (Soldier Wolf [C]). • Water Rat Creek (Fears Nothing [O]). • Luce Ridge to is approximately 6/10 mile from the bluffs above Ford B.
Ford B to the top of Calhoun Hill is about 1.1 miles. • Ford B has also been referred to as Minneconjoux Ford. • Almost ½ mile (880 – 900 yards) wide at its mouth. • Ford B to Nye – Cartwright Ridge is .86 mile (1,500 yards), but up slopes to the ridgeline. • Ford B to Custer’s Bluff is 2/10 of a mile (350 yards). • For Indians crossing at Ford B, then riding up Deep Coulee to hide their horses, the distance could have been as little as 650 to 670 yards. From there along an infiltration route, they would have had to move ¾ of a mile (1,340 yards) to reach a point in Calhoun Coulee. It would then be some 4/10 of a mile (670 yards) to the top of Calhoun Hill. o In a test on a high school track-- then repeated in the Vermont woods-- ¼ – mile was completed in crouching, jumping – up, running, and dodging fashion in 5 to 6 minutes. The experiment added as much as 1/8 – mile to the distance because of the way we crouched and ran in various diagonals. This would mean that an infiltrating Indian, under optimal conditions, could move at a rate of 2½ MPH to 3 MPH or as much as 3¾ MPH to 4½ MPH. o For the Indians to close to within 100 yards of Calhoun Hill – Battle Ridge via Calhoun Coulee using infiltration tactics from as far out as 670 yards, it would take 5 minutes – 8 minutes to move the 570 yards (.324 miles). • From the North branch of Medicine Tail Coulee across the ridges and into the coulee that empties into Deep Coulee near Henryville, Indians would have traveled some 1.14 miles (2,000 yards).
Nye – Cartwright Ridge to Calhoun Hill is .86 miles (1,500 yards), down a ravine and straight across the Deep Coulee flats. • Custer’s Bluff to Nye – Cartwright Ridge is 2/3 of a mile (1,175 yards). • Luce Ridge to Nye – Cartwright Ridge is ¼ mile (440 yards).
Custer Ridge (also called Battle Ridge)— • Runs roughly parallel to and about 1 mile from the LBH, and is about 6/10 – 7/10 of a mile (1,050 – 1,225 yards) long. • The C Company charge off Battle Ridge into Calhoun Coulee may have gone for as long as 650 yards (.37 miles). • From the middle of the presumed dismount area in Calhoun Coulee to the lower part of Finley – Finckle Ridge is approximately ¼ – mile (425 yards). • From Battle Ridge, east, to Crazy Horse Ridge, is approximately 1/3 of a mile (600 yards).
Calhoun Hill is approximately 1,000 yards (.57 miles) from the top of Greasy Grass Ridge. • If the C Company men dismounted and then ran by foot from a point 650 yards deep in Calhoun Coulee to Finley – Finckle Ridge, then up onto Calhoun Hill, across into the Keogh Sector, and then onto Custer/Last Stand Hill, the distance from that point would have been approximately 9/10 to 1.15 miles (1,585 – 2,025 yards). • If C Company men reached Finley – Finckle Ridge, they would have had to go 4/10 – mile or 670 yards to reach Calhoun Hill.
Calhoun Ridge is also called Finley Ridge or Finley – Finckle Ridge.
Custer Hill (also known as Last Stand Hill) is about 2/3 mile from Calhoun Hill— • Custer Hill to Reno areas: about 4 3/8 miles (all straight – line distances). • COL Nelson A. Miles visited the battlefield in 1878 and measured distances and times from point to point: o Reno Hill to Custer Hill measured at 4 miles. o Miles took cavalry horses between the 2 points and found the distance could be covered in 58 minutes at a walk and 15 minutes at a variable trot and gallop. • Custer Hill is about to 3 miles from Weir Peak. • On 22Aug1878, CPT J. S. Payne measured the distance from Custer Hill to Reno Hill. The straight – line distance was 4 miles, 160 yards. • Calhoun Hill to Ford D is approximately 2.33 miles via the Keogh Sector, then down the coulee north of Cemetery Ridge.
The distance from Ford D to Cemetery Ridge using the route that Custer probably followed is 1¼ to 1½ miles.
The South Skirmish Line (SSL): • “[R]oughly 720 yards from the monument on Custer Hill to Deep Ravine following a line down from the monument to Marker 54, then along the Deep Ravine Trail, which meanders a bit, touches near most of the remaining gravemarkers, and continues to its end at the lower trail crossing near gravemarker 7” [Michno, The Mystery of E Troop, p. 234]. • At 720 yards, this would make it 4/10 of a mile from the top of Custer – Last Stand Hill to Deep Ravine. This would make it a run of some 550 yards to 875 yards off the general Last Stand Hill area to the ravine. • The actual “line” itself “begins about 200 yards down from Custer Hill at Markers 52, 53, and 54 in the upper reaches of Cemetery Ravine. It wavers down the ravine and then climbs up obliquely across the ravine’s south bank, following the grave markers in descending order. The Boyer cluster, Markers 33 – 39, is near the divide and about 180 yards from the start of the line. Markers 29 – 32 are the last stones on the Cemetery Ravine side of the divide and are about 200 yards from the head of the line. About 220 yards along the trail there is a soft crest where the trail begins to dip down into the upper Deep Ravine watershed. At 270 yards is another cluster, grave Markers 24 – 28. The South Skirmish Line has been heading roughly north to south, but at this point a branch of markers diverges to the southeast. This branch consists of 7 more or less isolated stones, numbers 20 – 23, 255, and 1 – 2 [emphasis mine]. The latter two are down in the upper reaches of Deep Ravine, far above the headcut” [pp. 234 – 235]. • The formal SSL terminates just below the low divide in the 24 – 28 group of markers. • Markers 7 – 19 are considered the “fugitive” markers. • From markers 24 – 28, “the southeast branch splits off, the trail and fugitive lines follow the markers another 190 yards to stone 7 at the edge of Deep Ravine. The total length of the line—formal and fugitive… is about 430 yards.”
Deep Ravine—From the monument to the “headcut” is 640 meters, straight-line. The headcut is slightly above where the interpretive trail enters the ravine and it is slightly above that area where the bodies are believed to have been found. “Kanipe and Logan had remembered the bodies near the ravine headcut” [Fox, Scott, and Connor, Archaeological Perspectives on the Battle of the LBH, p. 42]. • “Deep Ravine near the headcut… is narrow, with high, steep walls…. Goldin, recollecting in 1928 and 1930, described the ravine that trapped the men as a cul-de-sac with high banks in front and on both sides” [Fox, et al., p.42, citing Goldin/Carroll, Benteen – Goldin Letters, pp. 19 and 27]. LT Bradley also noticed a cul-de-sac. • “[G]eomorphology has shown, despite the lack of artifactual data, that in 1876 the ravine structure near the South Skirmish Line formed a cul-de-sac. People who shortly after the fight observed the cul-de-sac saw that it contained bodies and they saw it exactly where we found it, some 2,000 feet (610) meters from the monument of Last Stand Hill” [Archaeological Perspectives, p. 47]. • Deep Ravine extends approximately 700 yards from the “headcut,” the area where the ravine forks as it approaches the western edges of the Battle Ridge area, downstream to its mouth at the LBH. From head to mouth it measures about 1,000 yards. • The headcut is about one-half mile from the LBH [Fox, et al, Archaeological Perspectives, p. 43]. • From the Deep Ravine ford, up the ravine to its headwall, and then on to Battle Ridge, is approximately .76 miles (1,350 yards). • The floor of the ravine is from 5 to 15 yards wide, with grassy sloping banks about 3 to 6 yards high and angling up between 40° and 60°. • The floor of the ravine below the “headcut” is practically flat. • The ford crossing at Deep Ravine is called Cheyenne Ford. • The drainage extends northeasterly 1,340 meters (4,397 feet) from the mouth to near the divide on LSH [Fox, et al., Archaeological Perspectives, p. 226]. • Calhoun Coulee branches off, southeasterly, at the lower fork, 350 meters (1,148 feet) from the mouth [226]. • The bend occurs 550 meters (1,805 feet) above the mouth [226]. • A small headcut occurs 120 meters (394 feet) above the bend [226]. • The upper fork occurs 190 meters (624 feet) above the bend [226]. • The floor is 5 to 15 meters (16.4 – 49.2 feet) wide [226]. • The banks are 3 – 6 meters (9.8 – 19.7 feet) high [226].
Shoulder Blade or Box Elder Creek was also known as Big Shoulders. In Lakota Recollections, p. 40, FN 9, Hardorff surmises that another name for Shoulder Blade Creek was Muddy Creek.
Squaw Creek is also called Chasing Creek and Shavings Creek.
The Cheyenne name for the Little Big Horn River was Little Sheep Creek or the Goat River. The Sioux called it Greasy Grass Creek or Pa-zees-la-wak-pa. o Wooden Leg referred to a Greasy Grass Creek emptying into the LBH. It seems the Cheyenne name for Reno Creek was Greasy Grass Creek.
The Sioux, Cheyenne, and Arikara called the Yellowstone River the Elk River.
Vegetation at the Little Big Horn
o Most precipitation occurs during May through July, only 10 to 12 inches per year. o Shortgrass prairie o Buffalo grass, spreading by aboveground roots, rooting as it spreads, with tufts of green grass. It can grow as much as an inch or two a day. o Blue grama grass, taller than buffalo grass, 6 to 20 inches high. o Western wheatgrass o Needle – and – thread o Locoweed o Plains wallflower o Gumweed o Prairie clover o Sunflower o Sagebrush o Some prickly pear cactus and yucca o Trees grow primarily in sheltered coulees and along riverbanks: o Mostly cottonwood o Aspen o Chokeberry o Mesquite o Juniper o Some cedar o Ash
In 1876 the valley was thick with dust from a drought. In 1877, the year Sheridan and Nowlan went to the battlefield to re-bury the dead and mark the officers’ graves, “flowers were in abundance and luxurious grasses grew as high as the horses’ stirrups” [Michno, The Mystery of E Troop, p. 188].
“‘Coulees intervened, trees and shrubbery masked the Indians retreat along the river bank below; tall, heavy sagebrush, since cropped by sheep, covered the battlefield at a height that would conceal a lurking savage.’ All of which gives weight to the contention that the topography of the country in the vicinity of the hostile village had more to do with Custer’s defeat than any other factor” [Stewart, Custer’s Luck, pp. 436 – 437, citing Edna L. Waldo, Dakota, p. 197, in FN 22, and Burdick, Last Battle of the Sioux Nation, p. 40, in FN 23].
On p. 197, Michno mentions Robert G. Rosenberg, a Wyoming historical consultant with a background in forestry and western history. The trees everyone calls cedars are actually Rocky Mountain junipers, very common in this region. They grow as tall as 40' to 55', but are more commonly 10' to 25' tall. These are the trees that line Cedar Coulee.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Dec 3, 2010 15:16:49 GMT -6
Judas.
Not bad for a quick dash down of top of the mind thoughts.......... Kidding. That's excellent. It doesn't exactly address my concerns, but it is the template we'll probably use. There's a whole lot there I not only did not know, but did not know I did not know, or should know. You have no idea how annoying that is, which is why I won't admit it.
That said, what I'm primarily concerned with is what accounts and testimony reference in using terms. If somebody used Custer Field to reference the general area north of MTC, and another was more specific to that area north of Calhoun and east of Deep Ravine (as an unintended Illustrative Example, I originally typed Deep Coulee), and people today try to meld their tales, you can see the problem. I think it important that a geographical definition be established that requires the fewest asterisks and explanations. Some clearly use Custer Field that includes the Deep Ravine, SSL area and further, given Boston and Autie's location of corpses.
The 1877 photographs don't really support the lush grass in Michno, which quotes were probably referencing the grass in the valley, not the torn up battlefield. Looks to be a LOT of dust and space between the plants, not lush grass. as now. There were areas of near sand at Reno Hill for a long time according to the photos in Where Custer Fell. Given they did a poor job of burying the dead, over emphasis on the flowers to console widows and public might be an explanation of need.
It would be of use to get a straight line march mileage between the two monuments, 4 miles and 100 feet apart. Bet real life ground adds a half mile or more. It would be handy to gauging how many actual miles Benteen covered in his jaunt to the south.
Why do so many insist Benteen was "west" of Custer, do you think?
Consider the term "Reno Creek." Understand that when these terms were changed, there was no memo sent to announce it. For some years, Reno Creek was MTC. Okay. When someone, say an Indian Scout, was asked years later about his activities, which Reno Creek was he referencing? Because it can seem a lie if people think it the new RC rather than MTC, which might make far more sense. And this above normal error and confusion. Someone knowing this might later reconfigure accounts to reflect the change whether or not the account giver approved or even knew, which could provide endless mystification to him if he was asked about his story from a media source that now placed him well away from what he'd thought he'd said. There's room for a lot of confusion.
As of 1990, on Gray's map, Custer Creek is where Curly hid after the battle two miles and more east of LSH. Apparently the name now applies to the North Fork of the newish Reno Creek, formerly Ash. Wasn't Deep Coulee once north MTC? If so, what does the term MTC mean in accounts?
For an update as how this can confuse, you're under the impression I hate Captain Keogh. I do not remotely, despite the fact I'm not an adoring sort and the gooey Keogh adoration society annoys. BUT, we have 'keogh', the heroic Living Historian and ROTC vet for a whole year, who might be mistaken for Keogh in my posts, which would be bad because I find his avatar offensive and ridiculous and I think Keogh a good soldier if a mercenary at heart as he was in fact so many years.
I try to keep them distinct by the lower and upper case use, but if I make a mistake - I'm sure I have - I could leave the impression I detest Keogh, when I detest - not too strong, nor inaccurate a word - keogh, who diminishes respect for the namesake while trying to bask in it. Keogh wore an earned uniform, keogh wears a bought costume, and that distinction is enough to prevent any risk at my end for confusing one for the other.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 3, 2010 21:52:34 GMT -6
Thank you; I appreciate it. I was thinking of posting the glossary I put together for that book project of mine, but I believe that might not be ethical at this point. Besides, that glossary deals primarily with the obtuse acronyms or abbreviations we see so often.
Generally, I do not care for abbreviations-- I will never abbreviate Crazy Horse to CH, for example, so I fully understand your annoyance here.
The business about the "Custer Field" is also very annoying. I seldom use that term, but when I do, I make it well-known that I am referring to anyplace where men who rode with Custer died, Deep Coulee northwards. I much prefer to identify each area by its name, i. e., the Keogh Sector; Finley - Finckle Ridge, and so forth, though even some of that can be a pain in the posterior. I no longer refer to Battle Ridge as "Custer Ridge," and I am trying to get away from calling Last Stand Hill, "Custer Hill." The "Deeps" are a real source of annoyance, as well.
You are also correct in saying Custer never went into "the valley" proper (nor did Benteen). Also, I have no idea why people say Benteen was west of Custer; that is utter nonsense and people who make that claim have no idea what they are talking about.
Also, I would be surprised if you do not see a straight-line distance between the middle of Reno Hill and the top of Last Stand Hill listed in that stuff I posted. If you do not see one there, I will give it to you tomorrow (I am about phased out for tonight!).
You are also correct about the confusion arising from the various names for a single feature, the Reno Creek business being a good example.
I also seem to remember something about Gray's reference to Curley and this so-called Custer Creek. The problem I have with all of that however, is I do not believe a word of what Curley had to say and everything I am doing considers that Curley never made Weir Peaks, but back-tracked after Custer began his trek down Cedar Coulee. So I am at a loss when people-- authors and the like-- constantly refer to Curley's descriptions of battle. He could be describing the men's room wall at some pizzeria for all I know.
And yes, I also believe Deep Coulee was once referred to as North MTC. There is, however, a fork entering MTC just before the slopes leading to Luce Ridge. That fork has also been called North MTC!!! Go figure!
Actually, no I am not. I tend to doubt you hate anyone; you may not care for everyone-- I certainly don't-- but I detect a certain understanding and I can see your annoyance in sainthood. I like GAC, but he ain't a saint, not by a stretch and I think Fred Benteen was a far better soldier. Also, from my own personal aspect, I appreciate your comments over the years about many of those who have worn a uniform. My erstwhile derogatory comments about you were misguided and out of place and I would like to take this moment to apologize for offending you... or hurting you. My memories of those days are sullied by experiences and sometimes I take it out on people who do not deserve it. I hope you can accept this as it is meant.
By the way, the distance Benteen traveled on his scout can be measured, variously, at between 6.7 and 7.6 miles, depending on the angle one believes he traveled once leaving Custer. If you look at a topographical map and choose the easiest route based on the contour lines you can pretty much figure his line of march. Because he was using horses, he would tend to move up more gentle slopes and those are the ones he would head for. That also ties in with comments from a couple of his men about bearing more to the right as the terrain became more difficult.
The angle I have used-- and Steve and Terri may agree with me here-- brings him out on No - Name Creek about 2.9 miles above its confluence with Reno Creek. That considers a trek of 4.2 miles once leaving Custer... 7.1 miles, total, from separation to Reno Creek.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Dec 5, 2010 11:44:58 GMT -6
There are two goals of the proposed Glossary: one, is to establish the correct title to geographic areas and enforcing their correct application forward.
Second, to use that stability in deciphering what the past accounts referenced. Descriptions of various 'fields' from Weir Point as recalled from the 25th, and use of the word 'field' as recalled from the 27th.
I'm not trying to be picky, honest, but there is a potential issue when you say "The business about the "Custer Field" is also very annoying. I seldom use that term, but when I do, I make it well-known that I am referring to anyplace where men who rode with Custer died, Deep Coulee northwards." Reasonable, that, but Deep Coulee reaches the LBH or close to it depending upon who decides. Do you mean, and would others agree, that action around MTCF is the Custer Field, or field? Because arguably you so contend.
Which is fine, but people had a concept of the field when they composed accounts of what was seen from Weir Point (or not....) and what was seen on the 27th that might not correspond.
Today, I suspect most consider the square mile Custer Field, and some slice off the Calhoun, Keogh areas for separate consideration.
"... I have no idea why people say Benteen was west of Custer; that is utter nonsense and people who make that claim have no idea what they are talking about." Thank you. I wish you had said that in years past when I stood, it seemed and seems, all alone and get stoned for picking on people who said that, time and again. May still. I don't enjoy being viewed as a thug, and it sometimes feels that others who don't want the blow back are perfectly happy to let me do it and be above the din themselves. That's a whine, I know, but it gets old.
The reason they say that is because of the terms 'left' and 'right' which appear and have to be applied to the initial direction of the column in question and then applied to when the column changes direction. Benteen was left of Reno and Custer when they were going down Reno Creek. When Reno and Custer headed north, Benteen, on the left in their minds, is west of them. That, plus they think north is downriver, which it is and isn't. It's hard not to utilize the word "stupid" sometimes, but its need arises here.
I did see the straight-line distance between the middle of Reno Hill and the top of Last Stand Hill listed. What I'm assuming is that the 4 miles, hundred odd feet, is a straight line on a map, not the walking distance, up and down, in reality. I think AZ and Zekesgirl pretty much demolished conz' contention of dawdling by their first hand and utterly plausible explanation that illustrates the benefit of such knowledge. People break out the calculator to estimate travel time from Reno to Custer's supposed rescue based on nonsense. You posted a photo of the land between Weir and LSH that by resolution and shadow showed what a horror the land is. The 4 mile stuff is moronic: you make better time atop the ridgebacks where you're a shooting gallery at distance, or you travel up and down - probably have to traverse the ascents and descents - the straight line assumed. The packs, already a joke, would be high comedy, absent the blood, to witness hurrying to rescue Custer.
In defense of Curley, I think Gray is correct in saying he most likely told the truth originally, but the translators and newspaper needs deformed it. Later, when he understood gravitational pulls on buttered toast, he succumbed and then got slapped for it. What lies there are probably did not originate with the terrified kid, but he did try to work it later. Who could blame him? But, I agree his stories are such at this point it makes no sense to utilize them for anything but color.
As to Captain Keogh, you did express the opinion I could not stand the man on October 7. Here: "Little to no chance. I tried more than once, but she won't "enlist." I believe Elisabeth and Diane were fairly good friends; they certainly got along, but Elisabeth and "darkcloud" didn't. I don't know why he went after her; I think part of it was Elisabeth's fascination with Keogh and of course darkcloud can't stand the man... but it was more complicated than that. Elisabeth simply followed an exodus from Merkel's boards."
The search function works, fred, most of the time.
There is no need for an apology for anything, but thank you.
What annoys, though, about the exodus theory is that people left after they were caught out in something, embarrassed, and - to a one - tried to deflect attention from the VERY specific issue - with my opinion evidenced - by broadening it to character defect on my part. An attack against a contention by someone is evidence of my bigotry against any opinion held by someone of the same background. Bigotry ranks high in that scenario: I hate Indians, Irish, Scots, soldiers, American soldiers specifically, and the fact that I couldn't be a soldier myself, according to them.
Thus when "Hunk" Papa didn't know what 'honor' was, or 'semantics', he tried to hide behind purported research in the Oxford. When he realized I was going to look it up, because I could not believe the Oxford had an incorrect definition, he suddenly tried to sub another book, also without citation. Rather than just say, 'oh, you know? I'm wrong' which I do a lot, and you have and others, he refused to admit error or the possibility of it. It's ALL still up. That's annoying, and blood in the water.
mcaryf misread a quote about Grant Marsh, wouldn't admit it, and because the correction said substantially opposite of what he was contending, made him look foolish. Never admitted error, but he discovered I'm bigoted against Indians because I don't think anyone picking up a watch for the first time would know how to work it, read it, grasp the global implications of time zones, etc. Also, before contending that someone who mentions time is to be trusted, did that person have a watch anyway? Or is he referencing someone else?
E and Doyle never impressed me, and their site regarding Keogh is gooey and a romanticized shrine. E exhibits all the symptoms of the adoring groupie regarding him. Big deal, but if mentioned, in aggregate with the other (again: specific) confrontations with the east side of the Pond, I'm anti-English, Irish, whatever.
I'm anti the pompous assumption that someone cannot be wrong. Gray can be wrong, but I have some idea - and you do, too - of the boring, annoying work that went into his time lines. That was a cosmic shift in how the event HAS to be studied from that point on. That is important, and for that I admire him, especially considering he was dying, which I think shows in certain areas. You know from the beginning that I disagreed about Benteen with him.
But the lovely 'keogh' contends I worship Gray and Little Big Man, for which zero evidence exists, because it isn't true.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 5, 2010 13:48:43 GMT -6
I agree with your definition of what a glossary should include and what it should be like. The glossary I have included in my project does not fully fit that bill simply because the book is not that type of book. A separate effort will be considerably more explanatory; this first one attempts simply to clear up “acronym-speak.” But I am learning as I go along… sort of like the GD indexing program for MS Word for Macs.
As a word of explanation for my own view of the “Custer Field,” yes, it is as you said: it includes the MTC ford area, northward. Period; case closed, as far as I am concerned. I am, however, a mere wolf crying in the night. As for others, I do not know and my voice within this so-called “community” carries little if any weight, so no one would pay attention anyway to how I might want to name things. You and I—if that damn “search function” works properly—are in agreement regarding a number of these issues, not the least of which is the marker business. Not only are they specious, but they give the wrong impression entirely to newcomers and neophytes—which is one of my primary objections to the stuff “ConZ’ is wont to post. As for their own “historicity”… well, that be damned, for this is a site of great suffering, death, and the penultimate beginning of the end of a peoples’ way of life, and not the site of a historical mistake of stone – slab – placement. That latter mis-achievement is worthy of nothing more than a footnote on a tote board and not commensurate with the unfolding of a semi-iconic event of American history.
The glossary issue is well taken and it does need to be addressed properly.
I have never viewed you as a “thug,” though some of my past comments have been less than gracious, but much of that is because I believe you are carrying too much weight on your shoulders. I learned a long time ago that I cannot win every battle, but more importantly, not every battle is worth fighting. There is an untold number of imbecilic comments made daily on these and other boards, and I have reached the point in life where it is much easier to merely walk away and let the fools wallow in their stupidity. The “left” and “right,” “north” and “south” issues are a perfect example and I might address those issues only if their use distorts reality… or at least reality as I see it. While I am siding with you on this, I cannot recall specifically where they arose or in what context. I do not, however, read a lot of the posts—especially, as “BC” has said—if they become too long or too argumentative (funny, coming from me, right?). I also get extremely frustrated—very quickly—with some of the more outré theories and nonsense, and so I elide, elude, and eliminate, and go on to something more reasonable or more entertaining. My own ideas and theories are beginning to gel more—solidify—so I have less patience and—if I may quote Mrs. Merkel—suffer fools less well today than of yesteryear.
Very few people pick up the difference between “straight-line” and “ground movement” distances, so my hat is off to you, as well, on this. I have quit preaching the “speed – distance” issue, simply because—with few exceptions—few people’s eyes are clear when I try to explain it. (Mental “Skype” is great, isn’t it?) It is considerably longer—up hill and down dale—than the purported 4 + miles from Reno Hill to the monument, but try to apply that to Benteen’s scout route, to people other than the AZ’s and ZG’s of the world. (Do they count as abbreviations? I don’t think so!)
You are correct about the “Captain Keogh” business, but I will equivocate here (read, “excuse”) by saying that “can’t stand” the man differs from “hate.” I can’t stand Theodore Goldin, but I do not hate the man… I have neither reason nor justification to “hate” him. As I said… equivocate… nothing more than an excuse. In a further feeble defense, I may add that you are not always the clearest person to understand.
I will also say this… regardless of the hyperbole… you may want to check out that search function again!... I have never considered you a bigot. Never! If that word ever crossed my writing—my posts—then I most humbly apologize. Some may feel that as groveling, but I don’t much give a crap. There are certain words we use that are extremely hurtful and unless we use those words with much aforethought it is unwise, unfair, and irresponsible to do so. The most important thing to me—something drilled into my head by my mother when I was very young—was to be acutely aware of people’s sensibilities and feelings. I don’t always remember those strictures, and for that… well, for me, there is always the Confessional, something I haven’t used in 30 years. Calling someone a bigot is part of that; it is sort of like calling someone a Nazi. You better damn well be sure before you hang that mantle on anyone.
As for you and my own personal impressions, “bigot” doesn’t fit. Not with the other things I have read and the caveats I have seen used. The problem is that you come off as too obtuse at times and the more slight-of-minded do not always pick it up.
And… “the exodus”!! Oh, my! I cannot—and will not—speak for others. My own exodus was simple. Mrs. Merkel and I had a good relationship (I will state this one last time, publicly, and will not discuss it again with anyone!!), but it soured because I defended one or two people she did not care for. (This is my take of it.) Things changed and anyone following closely on one particular, “Benteen dawdling”-type thread on these boards, could sense it. Then there was this Custer book published in Finnish and Mrs. Merkel posted a thread about it. I made light of the book—it being written in an unintelligible—to me!—language, but my post was meant honestly to be tongue-in-cheek—and I am very serious about that. The response to my post was taken by me as the throwing down of the gauntlet and I recognized that as the beginning of the end. Never one to run from a good confrontation, I accepted the challenge—as I saw it. When it reached the tit-for-tat breaking point—in my mind—I departed. It may have been the easy way out, but it seemed to be time, everything considered.
Some time later a post arose that I considered extremely offensive and I took it to be the worst kind of character assassination. I had already left here and responded over there, but everyone knew what and who I was responding to and about. I would very much like those days to be over and forgotten about.
This is all getting a little out of hand so I will try to end it here… with John Gray. Despite the fact I disagree completely with Gray’s decision-making and conclusions, I have always believed he set the standard for these so-called time-lines. Or actually, time-line, singular, since no one other than the idiot, me, has wasted the inordinate amount of time it takes to develop one properly. It has been almost a daily, three-year quest. I fault Gray because I believe his was theory – driven (the theory driving the interpretation of the data) rather than data – driven (forming the theory from the data). It is a matter of context versus theory, something I have been unable to drive home to either “ConZ” or “keogh.” I have always “caveat-ed” my criticism with the acknowledgment that Gray’s was a technical masterpiece.
And “wrong”? Hell… I am struggling to keep that part of my life in the 49% - range. It’s like a Hall of Fame baseball manager with a winning percentage of .501.
Also… one other last thought. There was need for an apology… and speaking only for myself and the things I have said… you deserved one. Not regarding some of the smaller things that may have been a simple misunderstanding—like the Reno retreat business, for example—but certainly the name-calling and the spiteful digs. That crap is and was uncalled for. There is no need for animosity… and I hope anyone reading this can understand that. You have made some extremely valid and very important points along this journey, points that have caused me to think a lot. I believe it is a matter of delivery. Again... there is a time and a place for a battle. There is a little extra room in this foxhole... just to the right of my wife....
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by markland on Dec 6, 2010 16:59:31 GMT -6
This door was left too wide open for me to not walk through:
Fred stated:
Fred, that heavy weight on his shoulders is also known as having a fat head.
Now, in the name of decency and to spare adults from projectile hurling, would you two get a room?!
Billy
P.S. 10-6.....3-9.....Coach fired...It couldn't happen to a nicer team...unless it happened to Oakland.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 6, 2010 19:13:35 GMT -6
Yeah, it does seem a little smarmy, doesn't it?
Well... from my perspective I never have looked for a fight and I do not believe darkcloud does, either. I think he has extremely high standards, something I respect greatly, and while I still have a problem with the way he feels about Elisabeth and Robert Doyle, I understand the viewpoints of all three, and I understand exactly what DC means in his criticism of various viewpoints, theirs notwithstanding.
The bottom line here is that I have committed the classic military blunder of underestimation... and I do not consider Richard MacLeod as an enemy. Strangely, as I consider what I am writing, I never have. What I have come to realize-- grudgingly, I might add... with considerable egg on my face-- is the truth. I once-- or twice-- called him a coward, and I have come to understand that he is the antithesis of such a thing. He is unafraid to express an opinion because he feels-- believes-- in truth and unlike many of us, he expresses it. He cuts away all pretension... and quite frankly, Father Markland-- S. J. ?-- I wish I had the guts to do that. The computer is impersonal and my problem is that I have personalized it. Sometimes manners and standards conflict; darkcloud has found a way to circumvent that conflict; I have not. I suspect he is smarter than I. And I also recognize his vigil is lonely; sometimes it is better, as I have said, to compromise... not specifically in that word, but that's what I mean.
If you ever have the chance to watch Ken Burns' series on the Civil War, there is one segment where the magnificent Shelby Foote refers to a great American trait: compromise. Some of us do it better than others. I suspect "some" have less courage than "others," though that is not necessarily a bad thing. It is kind of a shame because of the woman I am married to... I should have recognized true courage before I resorted to calling someone a coward.
But enough... this should be about the Little Big Horn and George Custer.
Now leave me alone, Markland, and stop trying to be my conscience. I have enough problems. Anyone know what a good glossary should contain?
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by shan on Dec 7, 2010 5:57:37 GMT -6
Dark Cloud,
Whilst I'm not going to form a cuddly threesome with the current lovefest that's going on, it's good to see it happening, but even more importantly, it offers the possibility that there may be some serious discussions generated out of it.
Which brings me to a question. You say quite rightly that in many ways we know more about this battle than a good many others in history, so why do we all cling onto these particular boards in the hope that somebody will arrive with the key that will unlock that last stubborn door to those final moments? Is it about more than the bare facts? Yes I think it is, and I think we have to be grown up and admit to the fact that in many ways it is those grisly details that are part of the attraction. They are after all the banner headlines that illuminate what we believe to be not only a clash of cultures, but the last dying battle between the two very different elements that arose in our psyche when we first settled down and started farming--namely, in our heart of hearts do we want to be nomads or farmers.
You and I have always been in agreement about one thing. Many people respond to the story of this battle in mythic terms. Why that should be is harder to understand. There are other battles that have been fought between two very different ethnic peoples, the Zulu wars being a prime example, but colorful as they are they don't seem to have the psychological bite that this one does. For whatever reason, it is more often than not the thickly varnished vision of a golden haired, white hero dying at the hands of a dark skinned enemy, an enemy whose perceived savage ways are the dark sides of ourselves that appears to be the attraction. This was an ideal that was much beloved of the Victorians, and indeed many of the paintings that represent the Last Stand have a real Victorian look about them. The Arthurian connection with our dying hero hardly needs mentioning, but I don't doubt thatit finds echoes with some people---these things are buried deeper than we think---and may well be the reason why so many people become so entrenched in their need for a glorious end, they willfully ignore any evidence that goes against.
I happen to disagree with your theory that the command crested the ridge and received a volley that disabled most of the officers--sorry if I'm abbreviating it to the point of caricature--but then, as far as we know it's as valid as any other theory. I happen to think that the end came very quickly and that the dead were scattered far more widely than the stones would suggest, in this I think Benteen was pretty much on the button with his " throw a handful of corn into the air and see how they fall," comment. Sorry, my paraphrasing is in need of some rigorous examination today.
But back to that question. And I hope you'll believe me when I say that this is in no way a poke at you, I ask it because I'm genuinely interested. Given that you have pretty much stuck to your theories since I first joined these boards several long years ago, why do stay on and let other posters and their inane theories drive you to distraction? To be honest it's a question I ask myself. Pretty much every day throughout those years I've logged onto both boards and read the newer posts. Why do I do it? Why do I waste so much of my time when I have other things I want to be getting on with? I suppose in my case the answer is that I do it in the hope that someone will provide another piece of the jigsaw, a piece that I've overlooked. It doesn't happen very much, but it does occasionally.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by shan on Dec 7, 2010 5:58:27 GMT -6
Whoops,
posted it in the wrong place sorry,
Shan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 7, 2010 8:02:08 GMT -6
... Is it about more than the bare facts? Yes I think it is, and I think we have to be grown up and admit to the fact that in many ways it is those grisly details that are part of the attraction. They are after all the banner headlines that illuminate what we believe to be not only a clash of cultures, but the last dying battle between the two very different elements that arose in our psyche... You and I have always been in agreement about one thing. Many people respond to the story of this battle in mythic terms... I happen to disagree with your theory that the command crested the ridge and received a volley that disabled most of the officers--sorry if I'm abbreviating it to the point of caricature--but then, as far as we know it's as valid as any other theory. I happen to think that the end came very quickly and that the dead were scattered far more widely than the stones would suggest, in this I think Benteen was pretty much on the button with his " throw a handful of corn into the air and see how they fall," comment... But back to that question. And I hope you'll believe me when I say that this is in no way a poke at you, I ask it because I'm genuinely interested. Given that you have pretty much stuck to your theories since I first joined these boards several long years ago, why do stay on and let other posters and their inane theories drive you to distraction? To be honest it's a question I ask myself. Pretty much every day throughout those years I've logged onto both boards and read the newer posts. Why do I do it? Why do I waste so much of my time when I have other things I want to be getting on with? I suppose in my case the answer is that I do it in the hope that someone will provide another piece of the jigsaw, a piece that I've overlooked. It doesn't happen very much, but it does occasionally. Dear heavens! Finally, an intelligent voice of reason, here or elsewhere. I hope you can cut me some slack for my introspection, but it is Christmastime, and I have longed for a decent one for many years... this one may be fitting the bill. More than that, however, this dénouement has been long overdue; the bickering should stop. This, at least, is my contribution and it is serious and heartfelt. If I remember the past correctly, Darkcloud and I differ over the dénouement (twice in one post!!) of this event. First of all, I believe it began unfolding fairly slowly, then evolved into two separate events, the first beginning to pick up some semblance of immediacy, the second, finding that immediacy a number of minutes later. The last reasonably accurate sighting of any part of Custer's command took place when Keogh was on Luce Ridge. This sighting was reported by the three Crow scouts, Hairy Moccasin, Goes Ahead, and White Man Runs Him. A time of day can be assigned to that event, a time based on the reporting of other events in related areas of the field. The last reasonably accurate reporting of an event from the Luce Ridge or "Custer battalions" sector was the volley firing. It was seen by at least one of the Crows, supported by others, and enforced by reports of several others in different areas. A time can be placed on that event, as well. That gives us a starting point. We also have a reasonably decent amount of data that gives us a conclusion-point or end-time. We have to backtrack somewhat, but distance and the purported unfolding of events allow us to place a reasonable time on that conclusion/end-time, as well. That means that everything that happened north of Luce Ridge (notice how cleverly I avoided the use of the phrase, "Custer field") can fit into that time-frame. We know of certain events, i. e., body placements point out movement; Indian reports point out areas and therefore distances; other Indian reports point out speeds, locations, and movements; etc.; and how those events unfolded. It is now simply a matter of plugging in reason and logic. I eschew the "Custer-shot-at-the-ford" theory, simply because it makes little sense to me. I would be willing to concede the wounding of Algernon Smith at Ford B for a couple of reasons: (1) Indian reports (two of them, I believe); (2) I believe it was Smith's command that provided a screen for Custer when he was at Ford B, and that would place Smith himself in the vicinity; and (3) the final body placement of Smith, vis-à-vis, the rest of his command. Had it been Custer shot there, I doubt seriously that the command would have continued on, especially since the wound-- a chest wound-- would have been disabling or certainly debilitating in the extreme (the head wound makes no sense; it would have been fatal immediately). Getting back to my original point of two separate events, one unfolding more quickly than the other... we have-- despite the "Goldin/Korn"-type Indian bluster-- some reasonable accounts of how the Indians reacted once Custer arrived on Calhoun Hill. We can also tie in various arrivals based on distances and circumstances, as well as white testimony in other areas of the battlefield, i. e., Indians leaving Reno's battlefield not arriving in-- poof!-- spectacular time (as we read in so many posts on the LBHA board). Again, based on some experimentation and cursory "field" exercises, we can determine how long an infuriated warriors may have taken to ride across Ford B, move deep enough into Deep Coulee, sequester his horse, and infiltrate the known distance into Calhoun Coulee in time to arch an arrow into a static military command atop a ridgeline. That spins out the time-line somewhat and since we are bereft of Western movie-style mounted "circling-of-the-wagons" testimony, we go with what we have. When considered, this is all indeed reasonable and logical because we must now deal with the other action, viz, Custer's move toward Ford D. Again, using distances and reasonable estimates of speed of movement-- would Custer walk at 4 MPH to Ford D? I don't think so!-- we can place Custer at a specific point (based on reported body placements) to tie-in with events on the other area of the field. Putting all of this together, we now come to your point, Shan, of a violent end, a point that makes perfect sense because of our original "beginning-and-ending" times. In other words, we have a start and we have an end. So we have a finite time. We deduct from that all the movements and the time based on distance it took to achieve those movements. That slams us in the face with some sort of violent conclusion reeking of panic (based on reports from the field!, both Indian and white) and disintegration. And by the way, there is only one scenario I have ever been able to fit into these parameters: a counter-clockwise arc resembling a pince-nez with a straight bridge. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|