|
Post by mchlwilson on Sept 6, 2015 18:25:06 GMT -6
Have any of you ever tested DeRudio's claim that he could identify a particular individual on 3411?
Or, have you heard of someone else doing it?
I would like to attempt this some time. I may be returning to LBH in October. If anyone would be interested in participating, let me know.
Michael
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 7, 2015 5:20:35 GMT -6
My five buddies and I go to the LBH every other June, though this year we missed the trip because of a number of personal issues. We plan, however, on making it out there next June, going to the LBHA's conference in Rapid City, then FPK, and the LBH.
We have found and tested the 3,411 site several times, and yes, you can identify people up there from down in the valley. The biggest issue is finding 3,411. As usual, the road grading has changed things and the original ridge culminating in the high point has been altered, so it is not as easy to locate as you may think. It is outside the park gates, but a bit of traipsing around and you can figure it out.
The bigger issue is trying to locate where DeRudio was when he saw the riders. Mike Donohue seems to think you cannot spot or ID people from there, but he is incorrect. You can and we did. Again, the problem is DeRudio's location. Many people think he was on the more northern end of the timbered area, but again, that impression is wrong as well. A Company manned the southern end of the line and if you read DeRudio's accounts and testimonies, Indians closing the circle were the ones he ran from in the guidon incident. That places him on the southern end with his company. From that general area, 3,411 is clearly visible.
We actually positioned a couple of us in the red fort parking lot-- much farther away-- and we could ID them. If you go, make sure you take Dale Kosman's photo with you. It's the best there is.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 7, 2015 12:13:31 GMT -6
Michael The distance from 3411 to the Garryowen loop where Reno was engaged is nigh on 1.5 miles. If someone is standing on the skyline you could just about see his silhouette against the sky . Knowing Custer was up there then the chances are it is him.I imagine it was that sort of identification . I would file DE Rudios claim along with Kanipe's claim under "interesting". Cheers
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 7, 2015 13:12:46 GMT -6
... to the Garryowen loop where Reno was engaged is nigh on 1.5 miles. Reno was not engaged in the Garryowen Loop. And neither was DeRudio. That is a fiction brought about by "keogh" on the other boards. And he should be ashamed of himself for it. That nonsense is well below his standards. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 7, 2015 15:34:52 GMT -6
Hi Fred Perish the thought that I would use Keogh as a source .No! I was using the Vaughn/Pitsch map depicting the Reno engagement. One of the suggested positions is anchored on the Garryowen loop . Now if De Rudio was in the Timber when he saw Custer then Custer must have realised that Reno was at least hard pressed and this has a knock on effect on Custer's suggested Recce . Best Wishes Richard
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 7, 2015 18:10:05 GMT -6
Perish the thought that I would use Keogh as a source .No! I was using the Vaughn/Pitsch map depicting the Reno engagement. One of the suggested positions is anchored on the Garryowen loop . Now if De Rudio was in the Timber when he saw Custer then Custer must have realised that Reno was at least hard pressed and this has a knock on effect on Custer's suggested Recce Richard, Okay... that makes more sense. I do not think I would argue that point too much. Without looking at my own work, I think the Loop may have been the forward-most position on the A - G line. The problem here is DeRudio. He went into the timber long before he claimed. His watch work proves it; plus, Wallace never corroborated DeRudio's tale and DeRudio never explained what happened when he supposedly grabbed those men to chase Indians in the timber. Then the question would also be, why? since there were already plenty men-- under Reno-- already in the woods. And what happened to the Indians he was chasing? And why was he sitting down looking up at the bluffs? Methinks Ol' Carlo got a case of the shimmy-shakes... cold feet. He was in the timber long before Reno's skirmish line was in any trouble. You complimented me on the book. Go back and re-read that timeline. Like I have always said, the times tell the tale. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Sept 7, 2015 18:19:45 GMT -6
Fred when you and your pals did the testing at 3411 did you do it approximately at the same time of day as Custer would have been there?
|
|
|
Post by dave on Sept 7, 2015 19:16:30 GMT -6
Beth I wonder if any cold beverages were enjoyed while viewing 3411 and anyone near there? The pictures Fred posted shows a pretty scuffy group, don't you think? Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Sept 8, 2015 6:10:28 GMT -6
I would throw in a third site. bc named it fencepost. It would be hard not to look from there and it sits on the skirmish line or closer to directly across the red roof building. 3411 has the troops being seen as they come up to the bluffs and that fits. But it doesn't mean that was only place they took a look from.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Sept 8, 2015 18:09:21 GMT -6
Fred,
When you and your companions recreated DeRudio's sighting, what would you say the straight line distance was from your position in the valley to those on the skyline at 3411? Do you have any pictures you might post of such that would aid those trying to visualize this?
Thanks, Mike
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 8, 2015 19:15:07 GMT -6
When you and your companions recreated DeRudio's sighting, what would you say the straight line distance was from your position in the valley to those on the skyline at 3411? Do you have any pictures you might post of such that would aid those trying to visualize this? Mike, I think I estimated 1,400 yards, even further than DeRudio's own estimate. Since we were unable to figure DeRudio's precise location within a completely changed timber area, I had to use the topo map. The distance, straight line, measures closer to a full mile than it does DeRudio's 1,000 yards. So, I would say 1,400 + yards would work. I believe Beth asked if we were on 3,411 around the same time of day as Custer and I seem to remember that being a "yes," we were. We ran a little test. Michael Olson and I... and Scott Nelson ("treasuredude," here) may have been with us... stood atop 3,411 and watched as two of our friends pulled into the parking lot of the red fort down in the valley. That distance is longer than DeRudio-to-3,411, and we were able to make out which friend was which as they stood in the lot. One was heavier than the other, but we could make them apart anyway. Remember too, Custer, Cooke, and the third fellow were all silhouetted against a blue sky and were mounted. Custer's horse was a bay or sorrel (I think) and Cooke's was a gray or white: easy to figure. That is another reason to doubt the Martini gibberish of looking into the valley with Custer. Martini was a trumpeter and rode a white horse (or gray) and DeRudio would have probably noted that when he ID'ed the riders at the RCOI. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 8, 2015 19:16:28 GMT -6
I wonder if any cold beverages were enjoyed while viewing 3411 and anyone near there? They left the amenity wagon with the pack train. < G >Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Sept 9, 2015 12:57:57 GMT -6
Fred,
Thanks for the info. Now I've just got to grab a buddy, head for the Flint Hills and give it a shot at that distance.
Thanks,
Mike
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Sept 17, 2015 7:52:30 GMT -6
I have often thought if you could get permission and leave some electric torches (on ten foot poles, different colors, different numbers, different spacings of lights up at the key positions) on the ridges and then go down to the "skirmish" line at night and move around and see what can be seen. In 1876 there could have been an opening in the cottonwood canopy at many points especially in the glade.
I am using Maguire number one,which can be seen on the inside cover of O'Taylor. I have noticed on Google earth a large high (in reference to the bottoms) area not unlike a talus slope between the ridge/cliff and the river an area supporting little to no vegetaion and no trees. Note: Maguire's treeless area uncut by historical river action. Line that up with Google Earth's "talus" slope. On that alignment now peer down (google earth) on where the skirmish line is on Maguire one and you'll see the Isiah Dorman grave go down stream a few hundred yards and you'll see the ditch follow the ditch note how it's often straight and most important where it is not. Now in this country if you have a cattle trail or pickup trail to water it usually goes very straight and unfortunately often causes very significant erosion (I have seen 10 yard by 3 yard deep erosion of a trail at/ and around my families ranch). Note this ditch does not cross the field at right angle and is not a farmer made ditch as if it was it would follow the least distance. Now I don't have the 1891 (?) topo but there is a map on google with just the railroad that shows a waterway crossing about where this one does. The "ditch" is not parallel with the skirmish line or perpendicular to the river valley but no one ever said it was.
What's the beef with Martini? It would be great to have a point by point list to study. I know the yards verses miles but anyone brave and ambitious enough to give me a list?
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 17, 2015 8:24:32 GMT -6
I am using Maguire number one,which can be seen on the inside cover of O'Taylor. I have noticed on Google earth a large high (in reference to the bottoms) area not unlike a talus slope between the ridge/cliff and the river an area supporting little to no vegetaion and no trees. Note: Maguire's treeless area uncut by historical river action. Line that up with Google Earth's "talus" slope. On that alignment now peer down (google earth) on where the skirmish line is on Maguire one and you'll see the Isiah Dorman grave go down stream a few hundred yards and you'll see the ditch follow the ditch note how it's often straight and most important where it is not. Now in this country if you have a cattle trail or pickup trail to water it usually goes very straight and unfortunately often causes very significant erosion (I have seen 10 yard by 3 yard deep erosion of a trail at/ and around my families ranch). Note this ditch does not cross the field at right angle and is not a farmer made ditch as if it was it would follow the least distance. Now I don't have the 1891 (?) topo but there is a map on google with just the railroad that shows a waterway crossing about where this one does. The "ditch" is not parallel with the skirmish line or perpendicular to the river valley but no one ever said it was. What's the beef with Martini? It would be great to have a point by point list to study. I know the yards verses miles but anyone brave and ambitious enough to give me a list? First and most important... welcome to these boards. It is obvious you have done some work on this and have a great interest. It is a delight to have you here and I hope our relationship prospers and grows. Now... let me get to your various issues as I think I understand them. First of all, there were two skirmish lines: separate and distinct... separate being the key word. One skirmish line was formed by M Company and the other by A and G companies. Initially, they went in different directions, eventually splitting. This business about one skirmish line and the second 100 yards away, is fiction... 139-year old fiction. This is all supported by first-hand accounts, but is ignored because most people cannot seem to tie all these accounts together. If you look at the testimonies and the accounts, dispassionately and-- to use the hoary expression, "think out of the box"-- it becomes evident. Next... I believe you are referring to Otter Creek, which is the now-dry (and probably intermittent creek, then) ravine that runs roughly diagonally to the river, culminating at the river below Reno's timber, but above the Garryowen Loop. If you take a look at the fairly new book, The Strategy of Defeat at the Little Big Horn, I believe it becomes quite clear. You are 100% correct that it is not parallel to the skirmish lines-- ultimately. It was also a perfect route from the upper village through the Loop and then into this ravine from there. Reno's route down the valley was not in a straight line, but flowed generally, with the river and he therefore came up to that ravine as his column swung in that direction. As for Martini, I do not know what you are referring to, but essentially-- in my opinion-- anything he adds after his 1879 RCOI testimony, is nonsense. It changes and contradicts his testimony, and it embellishes his own role in the whole thing. Again, it is really nice to see you here. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|