|
Post by herosrest on Oct 6, 2017 7:03:22 GMT -6
HR Until you read Scott's publications and Donahue's you will never be able to form an opinion based on the factual information that is now available. What makes you think that Scott had anything to do with construction of the older entrance road. What date to you for the construction of that road and the findings of those constructing a road? As far as Kuhlman which road construction was he involved in where he could see the results of moving material and disturbing the land? What equipment was available to Kuhlman to make findings in undisturbed conditions? Even Scott needed the fire in order to use his more sophisticated equipment. Opinions are always subject to change with the findings of new facts. You have no ability to determine if Kuhlman would have changed his opinion given all the findings north of LSH. Facts change opinions but opinions should not change facts. Kuhlman only rendered an opinion it is and was not fact. His opinion was maybe the best he could come up with for what he had to work with at the time. Regards AZ Ranger You are joking, right?
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Oct 6, 2017 7:11:26 GMT -6
HR Until you read Scott's publications and Donahue's you will never be able to form an opinion based on the factual information that is now available. What makes you think that Scott had anything to do with construction of the older entrance road. What date to you for the construction of that road and the findings of those constructing a road? As far as Kuhlman which road construction was he involved in where he could see the results of moving material and disturbing the land? What equipment was available to Kuhlman to make findings in undisturbed conditions? Even Scott needed the fire in order to use his more sophisticated equipment. Opinions are always subject to change with the findings of new facts. You have no ability to determine if Kuhlman would have changed his opinion given all the findings north of LSH. Facts change opinions but opinions should not change facts. Kuhlman only rendered an opinion it is and was not fact. His opinion was maybe the best he could come up with for what he had to work with at the time. Regards AZ Ranger You are joking, right? How often to you see me joke here? When you allege these findings are from the 1990s then it is clear you have not seen all the sources of the findings. A cavalry SAA revolver was found by the road construction working on the road that goes from BRE to the old entrance which now parking lot for the admin site. You need to come visit and we can show all of this. Regards AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 6, 2017 7:32:18 GMT -6
What is the serial number. I'll bet that Dyck is turning in his grave about missing finding it himself. As far as smiling goes, try it. It may help. Findings are published and related theory or analyses, critiqued. You prove theory by destroying it. You really do. Like the idea that Custer was on offence when 500 hostiles rode at his command from Weir Peak. Even Sheridan understood this. Custer was cut off by Reno's retreat, forced onto battle ridge and smashed because he went the wrong way. Are you saying that the 800-1000 army cartrides were fired by this discovered pistol. That will be a ground breaking revelation which many will shoot at.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Oct 6, 2017 7:58:31 GMT -6
What is the serial number. I'll bet that Dyck is turning in his grave about missing finding it himself. As far as smiling goes, try it. It may help. My father called me smiley at one year of age because I never smiled. I did in boot camp once and ended up in the duty hut and truly unique experience taught smiling was not a good thing.Findings are published and related theory or analyses, critiqued. You prove theory by destroying it. You really do. Like the idea that Custer was on offence when 500 hostiles rode at his command from Weir Peak. Even Sheridan understood this. Custer was cut off by Reno's retreat, forced onto battle ridge and smashed because he went the wrong way. Not sure what you are saying and I am certainly accused of not be being understood myself. Facts don't change by findings can be added to and complete a true picture. Analysis and critiques are more in the opinion arena and always subject to change.
Seems to me that we agree and Kuhlman's theory is destroyed with facts found on the battlefield north of LSH.
Not sure who states that Custer was on offense when Indians came from MTC and a few maybe from Weir. If you follow the theories I see most recently they have Custer moving north on offense toward Ford D and then do to pressure from the Cheyennes stops his offense and moves back across CR and toward LSH. So any Indians coming from MTC and/or Weir would be fighting Custer who had quit being on offense and was retreating from Ford Ds . With so many Indians and so many crossing places for Indians it was impossible so he ended up fixed and destroyed.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 6, 2017 9:23:33 GMT -6
Being fair towards Kuhlman, he states that his best with the thing would be improved and that he simply was doing his best. In qualifying that, it was a devious best which he produced and one which was fundamentally biased and unreasonable. This is a problem when any area of interest is factional and serves factional interests. In regards the tactical battle which Custer fought with what is understood and what isn't; Reno by his own hand stated that he was the advance. Benteen arrived to support him in the valley and the companies with Custer were poised to swoop on the valley and whatever the outcome because of centenial timing, it was to be a famous affair. Reno disobeyed his orders. Benteen disobeyed his orders. Custer disobeyed his orders. Something isn't quite right, is it. Teryy was told that the seige of Reno Hill began as soon as Reno arrived there. Sheridan was left with the idea that Reno and Benteen entrenched whilst Custer's command was destroyed. Both impressions were and are entire falsity. There's nothing more to say about it. Custer's companies were not destroyed because Weir disobeyed his orders. That they were is the abhorrent kernal, root and branch of Kuhlman. With regards to an offensive Custer , behold - The Elk Tooth dress hunt, theory linkThe Fatal mistake, theory linkThe boggy ground theory linkBenteen blamed linkElk tooth dress hunting revisited linkReno castigated link Temple College Visual Arts Department Chair Michael Donahue was featured in this BBC documentary film on the Battle of Little Bighorn. linklink to TDT News article. 'In July of last year (2013), National Public Radio aired a story, “Little Bighorn Tour Guide Brings Battle to Life.” The story is about Donahue, who was chosen as one of the five best storytellers in the park service. Way up there with Stands in Timber.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 6, 2017 10:18:15 GMT -6
The 2007 BBC documentary, Custer's Last Stand starring Michael Donahue. youtu.be/CDxXvwJosaURedefining Deep Ravine - 1994
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 7, 2017 3:48:06 GMT -6
AZR - You have mentioned that Cheyennes would be want to relate differently to the likes of Marquis than to family and tribal members and this is a roundly central obscurity which may well hold value. Marquis therefore was lied to possibly and it wasn't a long slow fight by any means and Timber knew that perhaps. When ever informants related the battle to students fluent in their tongue then a very different outline of events emerged. I believe firmly that Timber's interest in the battle was political and verdantly stubborn in pursuit of recognition of his forebears on the battleground. This was his prime directive and purpose and the white man was and always will be told what he wants to hear. The Cheyenne in 1876, and even more so today, were a highly sophisticated advanced civilisation who shunned the material world and its sins, called a shovel a shovel, and were extant on the battlefield. Their major failing was of course an inability to accumulate significant capital. The cavalry retreat from Deep Coulee's mouth which climbed through the Finley Hill and Calhoun Hill south to north ridgeline of small hills, did so in contact with its hostile opposition and did so dismounted with mounted led horse holders. At some point the led horses were returned to their riders and this made poor shooting impossible. Or as the French say it, 'impossible'. The idea of a passive hostile mob tamely pursuing an ordered and orderly retreat by column of twos is a pervasive flaw which meanders through minds grappling with what went on. The hostiles rode through and around the cavalry. Some would charge right in amongst the retreating formation and out the other side. Others would gallop around either flank to overtake the retreating formations. In so doing, horse holders would have been a prime objective because it was awkward and possibly impossible for them to defend themselves. Thus, in gallops a Jipala through the backwards walking skirmishing screen of troopers, straight at a horse holder and whoops upside da head..... whack! Horse holder clobbered and dismounted and the four horses rearing about in tethered panics and confusion. Not pretty. I believe that this that is precisely what Yellow Nose of Gary was conveying in his interviews. Remember, he was very brave or possibly simply insane but he did get a guidon and God only knows how. When he did it, his brother White Shield was at the other end of the battleground nailing Custer to his hill. We know this from White Shield. He also told absolutely nothing about slow fighting. Did he? The Yellow Nose Guidon grab was a part of the hostile move onto BR from Blummer. That attack followed retreating cavalry who got as far as Custer's Hill and turned down towards the mouth of Deep Ravine. At the attacks led by Yellow Nose developed, the warriors in the valley swarmed over after retreating companies and swung downriver along Greasy Grass Ridge and then up to Custer's Hill with GOM maneuvre. It was the, Game over, mAN! gAME OVER!.
hOLLYWOOD AT ITS FINEST. i LOVE THIS SCENE.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Oct 7, 2017 7:27:08 GMT -6
Being fair towards Kuhlman, he states that his best with the thing would be improved and that he simply was doing his best. In qualifying that, it was a devious best which he produced and one which was fundamentally biased and unreasonable. This is a problem when any area of interest is factional and serves factional interests. In regards the tactical battle which Custer fought with what is understood and what isn't; Reno by his own hand stated that he was the advance. Benteen arrived to support him in the valley and the companies with Custer were poised to swoop on the valley and whatever the outcome because of centenial timing, it was to be a famous affair. Reno disobeyed his orders. Benteen disobeyed his orders. Custer disobeyed his orders. Something isn't quite right, is it. Teryy was told that the seige of Reno Hill began as soon as Reno arrived there. Sheridan was left with the idea that Reno and Benteen entrenched whilst Custer's command was destroyed. Both impressions were and are entire falsity. There's nothing more to say about it. Custer's companies were not destroyed because Weir disobeyed his orders. That they were is the abhorrent kernal, root and branch of Kuhlman. With regards to an offensive Custer , behold - The Elk Tooth dress hunt, theory linkThe Fatal mistake, theory linkThe boggy ground theory linkBenteen blamed linkElk tooth dress hunting revisited linkReno castigated link Temple College Visual Arts Department Chair Michael Donahue was featured in this BBC documentary film on the Battle of Little Bighorn. linklink to TDT News article. 'In July of last year (2013), National Public Radio aired a story, “Little Bighorn Tour Guide Brings Battle to Life.” The story is about Donahue, who was chosen as one of the five best storytellers in the park service. Way up there with Stands in Timber. Custer was on offense up until shortly before he was fixed. If he had gone on defense we would see a different position of the 5 companies with them all within supporting distance and overlapping fields of fire. The video didn't play but I have spent hours with Michael Donahue at Friends event and the visitor center listening to his opinions. His new book is not far off. Regards AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 7, 2017 8:11:29 GMT -6
Which video didn't ding? Have you had a chance to proof the manuscript? There was quite a feedback loop from the board for his previous work with maps. He seems a very enthusiastic type and that is what an awful lot of people accuse Custer of. Paul dyck wanted to build a visitor centre on his land but didn't manage to pull it off before demise. It would have been an outpost of the Buffalo Bill Center of the West at Little Bighorn. He was a true visionary and brought immense respect to Plains traditions and history. You have sworn to uphold the truth and I suggest that you do it. Custer never went anywhere near the western fords and just cause a few over enthusiastic obsessed want it that way doesn't mean that it was. One of Dyck's Elk Tooth dresses, linkBBCotWlinkYou might enjoy Legend Fades to Myth
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 7, 2017 14:19:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Nape Sintekiya Mani on Apr 10, 2023 12:33:45 GMT -6
The first paragraph is exactly how you move to Ford D following BRE. When you reach the river the bank is two steep to navigate. There is nothing like that at Ford B. Thanks BE There are cut banks beyond Maguire's B, the watering place and too steep to navigate and beyond is Ford B. The one cavalry approached before halting. Halting when an officer was killed. So, there ya go. The photographer Stanley J. Morrow photographed them as bluffs and took his picture of the ford as well. Who was that officer killed, A. Smith or Custer? If he was killed (or seriously injured) at Ford B, how do you explain his body turning up at Custer Hill? Too far to carry a dead man
|
|