Major Blunders

[herosrest]

Jan 27, 2013 12:21:42 GMT -6 Dark Cloud said:

AZ in the fight for coherence, honesty, IQ, and linear thought, and on both boards. Appreciated.

It's annoying to interact with them but it's important that someone does to let the unwary reader know that his first impression - that both strange and herosrest are idiots of the first water - was correct and neither are privy to any previously unknown info, nor would they have the ability to understand it if they were. That's my opinion, I don't know AZ's.

The history of the battle at Little Bighorn is littered from its beginnings with false presentations of what took place, why it took place, how it took place and even where what took place, took place. This began with outspoken criticism by a gentleman and officer named Rosser and found broad canvas in accusations levelled by Frederick Whittaker which brought on an enduring blame game, wrapped in pretentions of logic which are simple continuation of fight or flight responses that underpin the events of the actual fighting.

Here is a basic fact of the battle. Maj. Reno was ordered to attack and that he would be supported. Capt. Benteen was ordered to quickly join the attack. When Benteen arrived to join the attack, Maj. Reno had retreated from the fighting. The official record of the bzttle states that Reno's withdrawl and the arrival of Benteen occured between 2pm and 2.30pm of the 25th June, 1876. Benteen did not go to the village as ordered, and advised Terry of this on the 27th of June. Terry accepted this. No action against Reno was undertaken by Terry for the retreat from battle.

Those are the facts, official history of events.

Many people prefer to ignore the official record and develop historical novels about what is a very important historical event and national watershed. Those so doing are blind, blinded by infatuation. and misguided self interests.

A basic argument relates to time because of importance given to an itinery offered two and a half years after the battle, during acrimonious recriminations. The actual itinery, 7th Cavalry's itinery of 24th and 25th June 1876 was provided to the newspaper editor who published and broke the first news of the battle to the world at large. That itinery was, and remains, available to all researchers and historians but is ignored.

[AZ Ranger]

What official report of the battle do you refer to? You make these statements as if there is one official report of the battle instead several reports written by Benteen, Reno, Wallace, and Maguire to name a few. The problem you have is that most estimated time or relied on Wallace for the times.

Reno's report only has one time that he put in his report from personal knowledge if I recall correctly.

There is no accurate official report timeline which is the Bottomline of these discussions.

AZ Ranger

[quincannon]

AZ: I am glad you seem to understand what he is saying. Before I read your post I thought there may have been recently uncovered evidence that a third field grade officer was present with the 7th at LBH - Major (no first name given) Blunders.

[herosrest]

quincannon, it is possible that Blunders was under arms, possibly even in the field, thus i'm checking the official Army Register for 1876 which is online here archive.org/details/officialarmyregi1876unit

AZR, l found Major Shortcomings with the conclusions develooed by John S. Gray and particularly his insights to the whereabouts of Curley and Bouyer, which wafted them about on magic carpets. Also, his in depth consideration of the Ree scouts battle amounted to a single brief paragraph that is high comedy. A considerable body of his technical data is difficult to fault but his appliances of science and military insight is enough to make people faint.

l know that you have long hours in the saddle under your belt, researching the routes of march and terrain related to the information and studies of routes of march.

Gray's stuff has slowly been discounted as critical study examines his solutiins, motives and practice. What was the point of a faint at Ford B, for example. It is neat to apply that tactic to the situation that existed but that is all. It simply does not fly or hold water.

Having studied and ridden the march to battle, would you verify for me, the distances marched fromthe Busby camp by the regiment, direct to Ford A. Just the distance covered by the line of march.