|
Post by quincannon on Mar 6, 2014 23:30:04 GMT -6
Mac: Everyone here is in the game, but for each getting to the game runs the gamut of motivations from A to Z. My only interest is to find out what went right and what went wrong, and if wrong why. . Regardless of why each player goes on the field, the outcome of the game never changes. So when outcomes are unchangeable the only real question is why.
I seek to tell no stories. The incidents are plentiful. The sidebars more than enough for ten campaigns much less one battle. The personal intrigue is a cross between Days of Our Lives and Dallas. Different sides spring up. Alliances are formed. One, two, or ten are always competing to be King of Custer Hill. In some well known instances Custer is who they are. Custer is all they have. Without Custer life is meaningless. These people squander their lives on having the correct buttons on their make believe uniform. They glory in the idea of being chosen to be on the staff (whatever the hell that means)in some outdoor stage play in a public park, near some significant anniversary of battle. These are the same people whom the idea of selfless service loosens their bowels, and their excuse for not serving is always they were not good enough for me, when truth is that person was not good enough for whomever us is.
Then there are the guys, like Fred, who seeks truth in detail, not for his own sake, but for the contribution to the body of knowledge. Truth that is not made up claptrap to prove this one a drunkard (maybe he was, did it effect performance when it counted), or a coward, when the truth is that all men are cowards sometime (but was he then and did it effect performance). These are the questions guys like Fred try to answer, I would bet Fred will never get rich off what he has done. Considering the time spent if he makes fifty cents an hour, he would consider himself lucky.
Then there are the Berserkers I don't know how to describe them but they all live next door. This is their whole life as well, but it keeps them off the streets and you might have noticed the number of Viking raids have decreased since the invention of the internet.
None of this interests me in the least. I just want to find out why one bone headed Lieutenant Colonel got himself and his men killed on what was otherwise a perfectly lovely Sunday afternoon, so some young soldier won't repeat the mistake and get my grandson or granddaughter killed in some future battle. That's what interest me. Everyone else have their own reasons about detail. .
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 7, 2014 5:45:11 GMT -6
He is as far off base as anyone can be, claiming Cemetery Ravine, rather than Deep Ravine, was where the 28 bodies were found. Way off!
That will do for me Fred.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 7, 2014 6:31:54 GMT -6
Maguire also has the Custer command splitting into two, with one column (probably Keogh) moving from Ford B to LSH via Calhoun Hill, whilst another (probably Custer/Yates) moving from Ford B to LSH via Deep Ravine, so the problem I have with this is why, if they are deflected (as some say) at Ford B, why split into two? Makes no sense to me at all to split when in danger, don’t forget we are not talking of large Battalions here, 200+ men will stay close up and all ride to the same location together, then again if Keogh was riding hard for the high ground, why would he order a stop by one of his Company’s on Calhoun Hill, this certainly would be a suicide mission for Calhoun and his Troop, sort of like “Lieutenant slow them down and this will give us a chance to form up on the high ground” that’s boys own stuff, so would a unit be expected to sacrifice themselves in this way?
The way Fred and Chuck plus a few more see it and how I see it, is the two units acted independently for a while, which would indicate a yellow alert situation. A fracas may have took place at the ford and the Cavalry responded to it.
Now to events near Deep Ravine, Custer has only two Companies, so he deploys one (E) to halt enemy numbers, this fails so he deploys his second Company (F) in the Basin area, he and the HQ move up to the high ground, again I wonder why he split up his small column, I cannot fathom by the maps I have, to try and determine how far back Custer and F Company was from the E Company position, and why did Custer let Indians cut him off, by the looks of it the Basin and Deep Ravine look reasonably close and even with my non-military brain you can see that F should have been covering E in some shape or from.
From the photos I have seen from LSH/Custer Ridge, you have a clear view of the tree lined river, I know that horses must kick up a lot of dust, but they must have been able to see any large incursions by Indians moving over this terrain, and if Custer expected Keogh to come up from the south then once he saw that moving anywhere else was a no no, then he should have kept together and defended the area and not let events take control.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 7, 2014 7:12:01 GMT -6
Chuck, you use the word, game, apt description. A battle is not like a chess game that the Master can play over and over until he gets it right. However, good, I mean very good military commanders are very much like chess masters. Thinking trough moves and counter moves, they play the game 3 to 5 moves ahead, with options for each. This was not Custer's strong suite. You have been good at pointing out Strat. and Tac. weakness and strength.
Fred, somewhere above, you said you guys are making me crazy. Is not that what students do? Not to say you are a teacher. You have put in the work, and if we can avail our selves of that work in one way or another we probably should and will. As I have said in the past, I don't see an agenda on your part, strongly held positions, yes. You have been good about imparting what you have learned. It is up to us to do as we will with that information. Sorry about the dogging you get from time to time, mostly on the other board, but in a way is it not a complement. Think about it!
Chuck, you mention sidebars, think of them as flankers, without them the whole thing could fold in on itself. Side bars interest many people, and bring them to the story and in some cases keep them there. From those side sidebars, some people develop a strong interest in the whole. How many people, tune in to the red carpet, watch every min. then fall asleep during Academy Awards. Then how many find an interesting story line(movie or actor), read the review and go see the picture, and maybe follow that actor in many movies. Then you have the average who watch the red carpet, buy the supermarket rag, develop their opinions, and continue to spout them for the rest of their miserable existence while collecting welfare, and spending food stamps, while the workers(Fred) pays for them. No, I am not saying that anyone here is a welfare wonk. Most people have done the work, paid their dues, and have a real right and backing for their opinion. It is just those with closed minds that I am speaking of.
Regards, Tom(on a tangent!)
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 7, 2014 7:22:36 GMT -6
Ian, great post. As I said above, you have paid your dues, and have every right to those cogent thoughts.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 7, 2014 7:32:45 GMT -6
Hi Tom and thanks, Well the way I work is to throw out ideas and see how others respond to them, I don’t expect Fred or Chuck to keep having to answer my posts (and they know that), most of it are aimed at the new folks on this board, like my last post, now I have been over this subject with both Fred and Chuck more time that I have had hot dinners, and neither is it a way of putting down there theories or ideas, and I expect some to ask why do I ask such questions? And why is this English fool writing inane post every day to try our patience, well it isn’t like that, each new member will I hope have a different idea and answer them in a different way.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by alfakilo on Mar 7, 2014 8:41:00 GMT -6
Fred
Thanks much for the references for DR, these helped me get a better feel for the event...I fear that for all of us, this will likely always be as Churchill said, "a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma".
AK
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2014 13:26:01 GMT -6
I'm curious, without markers how many authors, historians, novel writers, you name it - can make their point? Suppose there were no markers - what else is there but a barren field and loads more questions, absent the markers, historical record is all one can use. Digs around some have shown artifacts and human remains. I think they all (markers) should be given the same treatment realizing cost is a problem.
The visual of the markers is stark to a visitor like me. As I've posted before, the one question I had ,upon leaving the first time, was: how in the hell did this happen?
I understand the markers were not placed perfectly. I've read that Sweet even considered vegetation in the placement. (meaning fertilizer)
The markers do resemble (imo) what Benteen said at the RCOI about the corn scatter.
To me, the markers are what Sweet determined were previous burial places, not where the men fought and died.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 7, 2014 13:54:23 GMT -6
Perfectly? We can go further than that. Notionally is more accurate.
Also, why is the LBH the only battlefield with such markers? It's always struck me that someone made a decision to show specifically where these men died with a point in mind, and succeeding and varied points emerged with new authority through the years. And what precise concept of a border is the fence showing? And why fence it at all? The bodies are under the monument, generally embellished by people standing for a photo and kids and dogs atop the mound. (Fine to me, but the hush, hush about the marble markers is sort of amusing given they are NOT where a US soldier 'fell' but where the ground was soft enough to bury, and that's if we believe the wooden stakes were flawless when Sweet arrived. And we can assume a percentage were not.) Reverence about Custer's stone as opposed to those portions of Custer and men under the monument.
Agree about Benteen's impression. He impresses me more and more as the years pass. He saw ahead, he was compassionate without being so for public acclaim, he could have cashed in big time as a speaker and did not. If it were not for violation of private correspondence, we'd have nothing but his report.
Still think the visual provided by the current fenced in area needs revision in the ways suggested. Specificity isn't important as the thinning out and application of stones to where 1877 and 1879 photos show where the wooden markers were. Two arguable lines, one towards Keogh's group and one down to Deep Ravine and/or heading towards the LBH. Thin and fibrous lines of men with a knot of brass at the top.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 7, 2014 13:57:37 GMT -6
I don’t know about you guys but.. how far would you want to move a rotting bloated body with your bare hands, not to far I suppose.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 7, 2014 14:28:00 GMT -6
Ian, while the bodies we a big concern, the wounded were an imperative. They had materials at hand to move those bodies. They could not have split the command to leave a proper burial detail, due to concerns over NA's potential actions. Those actions would have been attack on burial detail or on troops escorting wounded. Remember, at this point they knew the numbers they were dealing with.
Regards, Tom
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2014 14:42:47 GMT -6
Ian, As a former enlisted man, I'd move it as far as I was told. That's not to be interpreted as flippant; you follow orders.
Best, c.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Mar 7, 2014 15:20:22 GMT -6
And what precise concept of a border is the fence showing? And why fence it at all? I have never been able to figure out why that fence remains, or even why it was put in in the first place. It is shorter than the original, I believe, and the guff I get when I ask is that it was erected to prevent vandalism. Now, I'm from New York, and unless it is electrified and coated with radioactive material, there ain't a fence made someone from New York can't get over. I suspect that holds true for the rest of the country! So to me, the fence is nothing more than an eyesore. This could be an issue. The bodies were thought to be all under the monument in 1984, and they were not. At least not all the parts and one or two nearly complete skeletons. I believe they should do a complete archaeological evaluation of the entire part, every marker, and place them accurately, doing away with the extras. 210 total, no more than that. And correct the names while they are at it. If some of the off-res markers get vandalized, then replace the damn things with the extras. The issues, of course, are will and money. I agree completely. 100%. I agree with you here, as well. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 8, 2014 5:33:06 GMT -6
Chris/Tom; I was talking about the soldiers who arrived on the battlefield on the 27th, they had to bury their dead comrades who had been badly mutilated, these poor souls had left out in the hot sun for two days, now I have heard that Reno and Benteen had only two spades on Reno hill and I don’t know how many Terry had, so I don’t think that they would move the bodies very far from where they were found, you do hear of the odd exception when the ground was too rocky, but I cannot see any Officers giving out orders to shattered men to start hauling their dead friends around, they would just try and cover of bury them almost in situ.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 8, 2014 5:37:07 GMT -6
Fred/DC; I have looked at quite a few images of that battlefield and none of the markers look like corn scatter, they do follow what looks like lines and in certain spots groups, but not spread out over a large area similar to throwing seed around.
Ian.
|
|