Post by herosrest on Jan 13, 2017 10:16:02 GMT -6
Ducemus
THE VISITOR CENTRE MARKERS WAS DISCUSSED AND DISMISSED IN AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION - lbha.proboards.com/thread/2311/advance-party-new-markers
IF fRED CAN SOURCE THREE DISCOVERED UNDER THE vc DURING ITS CONSTRUCTION, i WILL EAT A FULL SUNDY DINNER AS QUICKLY AS THE GIVEN DURATION OF CUSTER'S FIGHT.
THOSE WHO CONSIDER CAPITAL CASE TYPING TO BE RUDE ARE IN ERR... sINCE THE KEYBOARD HAS SIMPLY JAMMED IN UPPER CASE. REAL PAIN.
nOW.... that's better..... Kbd working ok - Besides the Pitsch GarryOwen finds, Joe Blummer lived there on that land and told of artifacts discovered there. The later memories of land owners were investigated by Vaughan.
Bearing in mind the realistically short endurance of Reno's fight on the first skirmish line, and the absolute fact that Company M's horses retired into the timber with those of the other companies and the ten men led as flankers by Sgt. Ryan; we as in the entire planet should deeply contemplate the earnest but misguided continuation of Brinninstools misleaing of Kuhlman about the location of the skirmishing.
What am I missing?
What you are missing is the time element and the direction of march.
Again, this is so deeply imbued in people's minds they cannot see how wrong things have been interpreted for over 130 years. Until my book, Strategy, no one had ever taken the time to coordinate every single account we have been left. While that may seem far-fetched, it is nonetheless fact. It does not take a genius to replicate Reno's route; place that in context with the "geography" of the timber; and the description of Otter Creek, and come up with a completely different view of how the skirmish lines formed.
People like "keogh" dismiss too much just so he can feather his own theories. That is not history, nor is it good analysis. Almost everything my friend does, is out of context because he prefers his own ideas. He dismisses LT Maguire; he dismisses SGT Culbertson; he dismisses Jason Pitsch, and instead distorts what people like Doug Scott say.
A prime example of 130+ years of incorrect analysis by virtually everyone is the number of skirmish lines: two. They accept the original theory of the first line; it moving 100 yards or so and stopping, and that stop being the second skirmish line. They accept that-- it has become generic, like "Kleenex"-- rather than the alternative of two completely separate and distinct lines, one in one location made up of two units (companies A and G); and a second line, in a different location made up of a different unit (M Company). That configuration changes the entire concept of the valley fight. When you add in about 5 or 7 accounts that can be construed as M Company maintaining its horses behind its line, you can see how M Company got as far as Maguire thought-- 800 yards from the timber-- and then made it back to the timber rapidly.
There is not a single account, anywhere, claiming the horses of all three companies were kept in the woods. Yet there are several accounts claiming otherwise. So tell me... why would you accept the former?
I will answer the question for you: because it was first posited that way and people did not have access to all the data, thereby rendering that initial thesis as fact. Well... it isn't. The lone tepee is another example of just that type of errant "history."
Best wishes,
Fred.[/font][/font][/quote]
It was perhaps fortuitous that Terry and French did not testify at RCoI but that does not change reality or history. The testimony about Reno's skirmish given in evidence during French's Court Martial is significant and explains under oath, from serving troops, what many students have long suspected. Scouting detail officers clearly saw the tipis from beyond rather than through the timber. Ergo, the command advanced to the point of the timber in order that the western most elements of Reno's advancing line were able to see the mass of tipis.
Scott seems to have changed his opinion with regards to verifying the Pitsch skirmish line as 'the' skirmish line. This will be big news.
As we know from the Ree narratives, some dozen or so troopers rode into a slough and were unhorsed in pursuing the Reno flight and charge into the river. Whilst second source, Eastman Ohiyesi correctly told of the escape of two parties from the timber with the first faring tolerably well and the second being cut to pieces. It may be the second escape which Benten espied as he waited for his battalion to join him at Ford A before riding to join Reno hehind Weir's Peak. I is less likely that it was the party led by Herendeen which Benteen observed but that would allow Half Yellow Face to be available tp Benteen and Godfrey where he could not have been earlier during the Reno retreat.
So, everyone except fred is entirely wrong for the last 130 years and Reno never told lies. To Terry. On 27th June, 1876.
Lovely.
Now, there is only one way in which Terry gained the impression of events of the 25th, which he reported. Lest there be confusion amongst students, set it aside. ADC Smith reported exactly the same on the 5th July in Bismarck during press interview.
Marquis produced an excellently researched map of the village camp sites and many kill sites. Glad to post copy if anyone is interested.
Reno lied to Terry. Perhaps he (Reno) was embarrassed.
THE VISITOR CENTRE MARKERS WAS DISCUSSED AND DISMISSED IN AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION - lbha.proboards.com/thread/2311/advance-party-new-markers
IF fRED CAN SOURCE THREE DISCOVERED UNDER THE vc DURING ITS CONSTRUCTION, i WILL EAT A FULL SUNDY DINNER AS QUICKLY AS THE GIVEN DURATION OF CUSTER'S FIGHT.
THOSE WHO CONSIDER CAPITAL CASE TYPING TO BE RUDE ARE IN ERR... sINCE THE KEYBOARD HAS SIMPLY JAMMED IN UPPER CASE. REAL PAIN.
nOW.... that's better..... Kbd working ok - Besides the Pitsch GarryOwen finds, Joe Blummer lived there on that land and told of artifacts discovered there. The later memories of land owners were investigated by Vaughan.
Bearing in mind the realistically short endurance of Reno's fight on the first skirmish line, and the absolute fact that Company M's horses retired into the timber with those of the other companies and the ten men led as flankers by Sgt. Ryan; we as in the entire planet should deeply contemplate the earnest but misguided continuation of Brinninstools misleaing of Kuhlman about the location of the skirmishing.
What you are missing is the time element and the direction of march.
Again, this is so deeply imbued in people's minds they cannot see how wrong things have been interpreted for over 130 years. Until my book, Strategy, no one had ever taken the time to coordinate every single account we have been left. While that may seem far-fetched, it is nonetheless fact. It does not take a genius to replicate Reno's route; place that in context with the "geography" of the timber; and the description of Otter Creek, and come up with a completely different view of how the skirmish lines formed.
People like "keogh" dismiss too much just so he can feather his own theories. That is not history, nor is it good analysis. Almost everything my friend does, is out of context because he prefers his own ideas. He dismisses LT Maguire; he dismisses SGT Culbertson; he dismisses Jason Pitsch, and instead distorts what people like Doug Scott say.
A prime example of 130+ years of incorrect analysis by virtually everyone is the number of skirmish lines: two. They accept the original theory of the first line; it moving 100 yards or so and stopping, and that stop being the second skirmish line. They accept that-- it has become generic, like "Kleenex"-- rather than the alternative of two completely separate and distinct lines, one in one location made up of two units (companies A and G); and a second line, in a different location made up of a different unit (M Company). That configuration changes the entire concept of the valley fight. When you add in about 5 or 7 accounts that can be construed as M Company maintaining its horses behind its line, you can see how M Company got as far as Maguire thought-- 800 yards from the timber-- and then made it back to the timber rapidly.
There is not a single account, anywhere, claiming the horses of all three companies were kept in the woods. Yet there are several accounts claiming otherwise. So tell me... why would you accept the former?
I will answer the question for you: because it was first posited that way and people did not have access to all the data, thereby rendering that initial thesis as fact. Well... it isn't. The lone tepee is another example of just that type of errant "history."
Best wishes,
Fred.
It was perhaps fortuitous that Terry and French did not testify at RCoI but that does not change reality or history. The testimony about Reno's skirmish given in evidence during French's Court Martial is significant and explains under oath, from serving troops, what many students have long suspected. Scouting detail officers clearly saw the tipis from beyond rather than through the timber. Ergo, the command advanced to the point of the timber in order that the western most elements of Reno's advancing line were able to see the mass of tipis.
Scott seems to have changed his opinion with regards to verifying the Pitsch skirmish line as 'the' skirmish line. This will be big news.
As we know from the Ree narratives, some dozen or so troopers rode into a slough and were unhorsed in pursuing the Reno flight and charge into the river. Whilst second source, Eastman Ohiyesi correctly told of the escape of two parties from the timber with the first faring tolerably well and the second being cut to pieces. It may be the second escape which Benten espied as he waited for his battalion to join him at Ford A before riding to join Reno hehind Weir's Peak. I is less likely that it was the party led by Herendeen which Benteen observed but that would allow Half Yellow Face to be available tp Benteen and Godfrey where he could not have been earlier during the Reno retreat.
So, everyone except fred is entirely wrong for the last 130 years and Reno never told lies. To Terry. On 27th June, 1876.
Lovely.
Terry's report - link Quoting the Brig. Gen. ' Captain McDougall with his company (B) was at first some distance in the rear with a train of pack mules. He also came up to Reno. Soon this united force was nearly surrounded by Indians, many of whom armed with rifles, occupied positions which commanded the ground held by the cavalry, ground from which there was no escape. Rifle-pits were dug, and the fight was maintained, though with heavy loss, from about half past 2 o'clock of the 25th till 6 o'clock of the 26th, when the Indians withdrew from the valley, taking with them their village. '
Marquis produced an excellently researched map of the village camp sites and many kill sites. Glad to post copy if anyone is interested.
Reno lied to Terry. Perhaps he (Reno) was embarrassed.
