|
Post by mchlwilson on Oct 2, 2015 7:29:00 GMT -6
If you've ever walked the Deep Ravine trail you'll know it's farther from Last Stand Hill than one might think. It's not all downhill, either. You first go downhill but then have to go up and over an intermediate ridge before resuming the downhill trend to the ravine.
Question: How is it possible that approximately 29 men reached the ravine if they had to go so far through the Indians and up and over the intervening ridge? I would expect they would all have been cut to pieces before they made it there.
|
|
|
Post by edavids on Oct 2, 2015 7:51:41 GMT -6
Playing cat & mouse perhaps. There is a story of several warriors seeing a trooper try to hide in the river breathing thru a reed. They watched for a while before killing him. This may be similar on a larger scale.
Another possibility is they may have caught the na's by surprise a la Reno's escape from the timber before regrouping for the kill.
No doubt several people here have more definitive answers but these are food for thought.
Best,
David
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 7:52:39 GMT -6
If you've ever walked the Deep Ravine trail you'll know it's farther from Last Stand Hill than one might think. It's not all downhill, either. You first go downhill but then have to go up and over an intermediate ridge before resuming the downhill trend to the ravine. Question: How is it possible that approximately 29 men reached the ravine if they had to go so far through the Indians and up and over the intervening ridge? I would expect they would all have been cut to pieces before they made it there. Michael, I have walked it several times and have even walked in the ravine itself. There are a few thin gs you need to consider. First of all, the head-cut in 1876 was probably a good 50 yards closer to the river than it is today, so when you stand on the small bridge looking into the ravine, that was all flat land back then and the end of the ravine was somewhere around where you see the bend today. Next, do not minimize the dust and smoke. Indians claimed they could barely see one another and even wound up shooting their friends because they could not make them out clearly. Next... that fenced-in area containing the troops' markers is very, very deceiving. The men who were killed were killed along that sloping area to an extent much farther down than the end of the fence, so the "resistance" area-- the "last stand" area-- was much greater than we see depicted today: probably by a good 100 yards or so. I think the bodies farthest down may have been Autie Reed and Boston Custer and I believe-- I would have to double-check my notes-- it was remarked they were some 250 yards from the top of the LSH knoll. One last thing... men in desperate straits are known to do things quite out of the ordinary, so I am not surprised at almost anything regarding this battle. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by mchlwilson on Oct 2, 2015 11:05:39 GMT -6
If you've ever walked the Deep Ravine trail you'll know it's farther from Last Stand Hill than one might think. It's not all downhill, either. You first go downhill but then have to go up and over an intermediate ridge before resuming the downhill trend to the ravine. Question: How is it possible that approximately 29 men reached the ravine if they had to go so far through the Indians and up and over the intervening ridge? I would expect they would all have been cut to pieces before they made it there. Michael, I have walked it several times and have even walked in the ravine itself. There are a few thin gs you need to consider. First of all, the head-cut in 1876 was probably a good 50 yards closer to the river than it is today, so when you stand on the small bridge looking into the ravine, that was all flat land back then and the end of the ravine was somewhere around where you see the bend today. Next, do not minimize the dust and smoke. Indians claimed they could barely see one another and even wound up shooting their friends because they could not make them out clearly. Next... that fenced-in area containing the troops' markers is very, very deceiving. The men who were killed were killed along that sloping area to an extent much farther down than the end of the fence, so the "resistance" area-- the "last stand" area-- was much greater than we see depicted today: probably by a good 100 yards or so. I think the bodies farthest down may have been Autie Reed and Boston Custer and I believe-- I would have to double-check my notes-- it was remarked they were some 250 yards from the top of the LSH knoll. One last thing... men in desperate straits are known to do things quite out of the ordinary, so I am not surprised at almost anything regarding this battle. Best wishes, Fred. Fred,
Many thanks for your response.
About the dust and smoke reported by the Indians: I have always imagined that this was probably more true in the Calhoun & Keogh sectors, where a lot of soldiers would be in flight and Indians were everywhere on horseback running them down and kicking up a lot of dust. As for Last Stand Hill, in my mind's eye, I see things as a little more static once men are hunkered down there, and the Indians begin slowly to creep closer and take up better positions. A lot of smoke from the weapons, but I'm imagining a lot less dust than in the Calhoun and Keogh sectors.
About the men on LSH being beyond the fence line: Your views on this sound correct to me. While on this subject, I would like to know your opinion about an idea of mine. That is, that in an early stage of the battle troops may have been in the big basin of LSH firing to the southwest at Indians in the Greasy Grass sector. This photo shows the feasibility of that:
Thanks!
Michael
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 11:56:07 GMT -6
While on this subject, I would like to know your opinion about an idea of mine. That is, that in an early stage of the battle troops may have been in the big basin of LSH firing to the southwest at Indians in the Greasy Grass sector. Michael, I am not sure about Greasy Grass, but I am a big believer that troops were in that basin area... at least if we are talking about the same one. Firearm artifact analysis indicates seven discrete Indian positions: 1. The so-called Henryville area near Calhoun Hill. 2. A small knoll some 200 meters northeast of Last Stand Hill. 3. Two positions on Greasy Grass Ridge. 4. Three positions on the lower end of Greasy Grass Ridge and the flanks of the upper portion of Deep Ravine. • Government cartridge cases were found at these three positions, but it is possible these cartridges could have been retrieved from either the Rosebud fight or the Reno valley fighting. • [This would give a good indication of the tribes involved. Probably Sioux at these locations, rather than Cheyenne.] I am unsure of the location of the "second" GGR position, but I see no reason why you couldn't be correct. Remember... with the ravine's head-cut that much farther west in 1876, it gives troops in the basin a much wider and longer field of fire against anyone coming out of Deep Ravine. A lot of people made faces at Richard Fox' supposition that troops (Yates' company) moved from Cemetery Ridge to that basin area. I have adopted the Fox thesis here and put it in my book adding my own take on it, for to me, it makes eminent sense, especially with the head-cut that much closer to the river: you want to cut off that flow of warriors into the gap separating you from your other troops!!!! That is what a lot of these skeptics do not understand or simply do not know... or want to believe. The change in terrain changes a lot of speculation. Personally, I have no issue with your theory: it makes sense and it is certainly feasible. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by mchlwilson on Oct 2, 2015 13:19:26 GMT -6
While on this subject, I would like to know your opinion about an idea of mine. That is, that in an early stage of the battle troops may have been in the big basin of LSH firing to the southwest at Indians in the Greasy Grass sector. Michael, I am not sure about Greasy Grass, but I am a big believer that troops were in that basin area... at least if we are talking about the same one. Firearm artifact analysis indicates seven discrete Indian positions: 1. The so-called Henryville area near Calhoun Hill. 2. A small knoll some 200 meters northeast of Last Stand Hill. 3. Two positions on Greasy Grass Ridge. 4. Three positions on the lower end of Greasy Grass Ridge and the flanks of the upper portion of Deep Ravine. • Government cartridge cases were found at these three positions, but it is possible these cartridges could have been retrieved from either the Rosebud fight or the Reno valley fighting. • [This would give a good indication of the tribes involved. Probably Sioux at these locations, rather than Cheyenne.] I am unsure of the location of the "second" GGR position, but I see no reason why you couldn't be correct. Remember... with the ravine's head-cut that much farther west in 1876, it gives troops in the basin a much wider and longer field of fire against anyone coming out of Deep Ravine. A lot of people made faces at Richard Fox' supposition that troops (Yates' company) moved from Cemetery Ridge to that basin area. I have adopted the Fox thesis here and put it in my book adding my own take on it, for to me, it makes eminent sense, especially with the head-cut that much closer to the river: you want to cut off that flow of warriors into the gap separating you from your other troops!!!! That is what a lot of these skeptics do not understand or simply do not know... or want to believe. The change in terrain changes a lot of speculation. Personally, I have no issue with your theory: it makes sense and it is certainly feasible. Best wishes, Fred. Fred, In reading your response I'm not sure if I was clear in my original statement. I'm speculating that when Indians were on GGR and in its vicinity they were being shot at by Custer's men (E and F) who were on the western slope of LSH (the basin). This was in addition to being fired at by C-I-L on Battle Ridge. In other words, I am speculating that the Indians that were on GGR and emerging from Calhoun Coulee were confronted with flanking fire from LSH and frontal fire from Battle Ridge. Perhaps a better way to say it is that Custer's defense had some depth to it. (I am not saying soldiers were on GGR)
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 13:40:58 GMT -6
I'm speculating that when Indians were on GGR and in its vicinity they were being shot at by Custer's men (E and F) who were on the western slope of LSH (the basin). This was in addition to being fired at by C-I-L on Battle Ridge. In other words, I am speculating that the Indians that were on GGR and emerging from Calhoun Coulee were confronted with flanking fire from LSH and frontal fire from Battle Ridge. Perhaps a better way to say it is that Custer's defense had some depth to it. (I am not saying soldiers were on GGR) Michael, I think I understand what you meant... or at least I do now. The main Indian presence on GGR was the southern end, the end overlooking Calhoun Coulee. The only effective fire GGR could provide would be against troops on the lower reaches of Finley-Fickle Ridge and I doubt any were ever there until the Calhoun Coulee debacle. The ridge forming that coulee's northern side (I call it Harrington Ridge, but as far as I know it is unnamed) intervenes, so the troops in the basin wouldn't be able to get those warriors in any sort of crossfire. No weapon on that battlefield that day could put any sort of effective fire on either GGR or Calhoun Hill, if positioned on either of those heights. If memory serves me right, any firing toward those heights could have been effective if the targets were massed, so to me, at best, it was a lucky shot... and by the way, keep your head down, not much more. Are you a LBHA member? If not, I urge you to join because the upcoming Research Review-- the organization's journal-- will have an article on the fighting in the Keogh Sector... obviously written by me. Plus I go into fairly good detail in the book this phase of the fighting. If I have not answered your question satisfactorily, I am going to try to post a map here that was in the book... try to point out the specific areas you are talking about and I will try to answer as best I can. Let's see if this works... Well that worked. Tell me what you think. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Oct 2, 2015 13:41:16 GMT -6
Anyone have the weather report for this day? Terry having someone log it? Maguire? Bradly's diary? Sorry to be lazy but a lot have things downloaded in their brains. June is not the dusty time of year. I have no idea how much black powder smoke don't recal if Indians tried lay smoke in this secter. Foot note in Reno hill secter (?) the grass would not sustain a fire. The "ballistic" and pictographs don't indicate much firing to produce smoke. Your cruising for a bruising on visibility issues unless the Indians are building a bon fire somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Oct 2, 2015 13:56:21 GMT -6
If I have not answered your question satisfactorily, I am going to try to post a map here that was in the book... try to point out the specific areas you are talking about and I will try to answer as best I can. Let's see if this works... Well that worked. Tell me what you think. Best wishes, Fred. Thanks for most excellent topo, I was looking for the Finley-Finckle. Anyone is there a name for that commanding ridge running from Calhoun Hill to deep Ravine. Why in God's name would you not put your skirmish line there? {just back of the lip}
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 13:56:31 GMT -6
Anyone have the weather report for this day? The temperature was estimated to be in excess of 100° and there was a slight northern breeze blowing. It was sultry, cloudless and relatively windless. What little movement of air there was, was from north to south, as Gerard remembered it from the drift of the smoke where Reno had first fought in the valley, and where the Indians had fired the grass after the retreat of the troops. Engineer sergeant James Wilson recorded temperatures of a maximum of 91º, minimum temperature of 63º. LATE EVENING AND NIGHT—It rained on and off. No moon. JUNE 26, 1876—MONDAY—Some scattered showers early, then plenty of sun and heat. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 14:09:38 GMT -6
Why in God's name would you not put your skirmish line there? {just back of the lip} Not sure where you mean.... Remember something: you don't position a skirmish line where it can be surrounded on three sides and has no means of escape. That's why these guys claiming Keogh set C Company on that ridge have no idea of tactics. A line there could be assaulted from Deep Coulee flats, from GGR, and from the rear, Calhoun Coulee. Their only means of escape would be climbing up to Calhoun Hill, an absolutely ridiculous assumption. When Reno set up his lines in the valley, he was only fronted and when the left flank became threatened, he pulled back to the timber. On Finley-Finckle or "Harrington" ridges, you are stringing these guys out like they are on a weak tree branch: only one way to go to safety. ... and by the way, my daughter made that map. Not bad, eh? Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Oct 2, 2015 15:21:37 GMT -6
Why in God's name would you not put your skirmish line there? {just back of the lip} Not sure where you mean.... Remember something: you don't position a skirmish line where it can be surrounded on three sides and has no means of escape. That's why these guys claiming Keogh set C Company on that ridge have no idea of tactics. A line there could be assaulted from Deep Coulee flats, from GGR, and from the rear, Calhoun Coulee. Their only means of escape would be climbing up to Calhoun Hill, an absolutely ridiculous assumption. When Reno set up his lines in the valley, he was only fronted and when the left flank became threatened, he pulled back to the timber. On Finley-Finckle or "Harrington" ridges, you are stringing these guys out like they are on a weak tree branch: only one way to go to safety. ... and by the way, my daughter made that map. Not bad, eh? Best wishes, Fred. Daughter did an excellent job. There are men on Custer ridge, men on the South Skirmish Line Ridge, that runs from Custer Hill to deep Ravine. If I place men on the Ridge from Calhoun Hill { F#$& the Calhoun Ridge) to Deep Ravine I now have a horse shoe defence. Anyone that comes up Deep Ravine, anyone that breaches my skirmish line and continues will fall in elevation and into a potential cross fire from all three lines. My 3 ridge lines are 1,500 yards. I have a man every 15 yards it's the only chance I got. If you try to breach one of my skirmish lines and roll one up I can engage you from 2 other skirmish lines and yes I may hit my own but your first wave are dead men. Of course if you can coordinated and engage all my 3 ridge top lines I can't support. I have no reserve, I chose 5 horses for the holders but F#$& the horses I can't take them with me let them go boys. If Calhoun f#$&'s this up I will kill him. Darn he has, his men are trickling down hill like water and we are screwed. Let's run for cover down to Deep Ravine. Don't believe just look at Satalite view.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2015 15:37:09 GMT -6
Why in God's name would you not put your skirmish line there? {just back of the lip} Not sure where you mean.... Remember something: you don't position a skirmish line where it can be surrounded on three sides and has no means of escape. Fred, There's a curved skirmish line at the Rosebud that was recently discovered. Does the fact that it's curved mean that there was a fan of firing or were they still positioned to all fire forward? A kind of dumb question I guess. Pete
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 15:47:51 GMT -6
There's a curved skirmish line at the Rosebud that was recently discovered. Does the fact that it's curved mean that there was a fan of firing or were they still positioned to all fire forward? A kind of dumb question I guess. No, it's not a dumb question, Pete; not at all. I believe the skirmish lines on Calhoun Hill were curved. I am not familiar with those at the Rosebud and I do not know very much about that terrain. Skirmish lines are effective only with firepower and distance and if the flanks and rear are not threatened. I do not know if today's army still buys the concept, but I was taught at Fort Benning that when you are within 50 yards of your target, you get everyone up, form a skirmish line and advance. The first time I tried that hoo-hah in Germany under Bill DePuy, my ass was chewed unmercifully. So the concept is clearly flawed and useful only in certain situations. Terrain is critical and like I said when Reno was advancing in the valley, things were fine. You had a line of constant steel, advancing, forcing the bad guy to pull away. Once the Indians were mounted in sufficient numbers, then were able to threaten the troops' flank, things changed. If you strung out a line on Finley-Finckle, it would have been long and exposed... exposed on three sides with a retreat route uphill, the retrograde exposed as well. If we criticize Reno for his retreat, you see a certain similarity: Indians on both sides and in his rear... a strung-out line of horsemen. For all practical purposes, the cynic could call Reno's retreating troops a mounted skirmish line in movement. So terrain rather than the actual shape of the line is critical. An arc covers more firing fields and quite frankly I would prefer that type of formation to a straight line. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2015 15:59:13 GMT -6
The position is located on the lower part of Crook's ridge, and the skirmish line heads NW towards the upper reaches of the Ridge, and towards Indian positions on the right flank, too. Both regions are within areas given by a viewshed analysis. Best, Pete
|
|