|
Post by Diane Merkel on Jan 13, 2017 10:47:36 GMT -6
Here's a nice mini-biography of Reno: "Custer's — and Reno's — last stand: Illinois native took heat for role at Little Bighorn"
Illinois native Marcus Reno was a key player in the engagement better known as “Custer’s Last Stand,” when most of the 7th Cavalry was wiped out in a clash with Sioux and Northern Cheyenne in present-day Montana. Reno, the second-highest ranking man in the regiment, has absorbed most of the blame, though writers continue to debate the fairness of that assessment.
Born in Carrollton [Illinois] on Nov. 15, 1834, Reno was the fifth of six children of James Reno, a hotel proprietor, and the former Charlotte Hinton, an educated woman whose grandfather was a distinguished British army officer. The elder Reno later helped establish the town’s first pharmacy and later served as postmaster. Article: www.mywebtimes.com/life/custer-s-and-reno-s-last-stand-illinois-native-took/article_3ec9f392-2b62-5f1f-bcef-6e0e6c758261.htmlDiane
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Mar 18, 2022 10:05:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by backwater on Mar 18, 2022 15:34:33 GMT -6
Here is Sturgis's charges against Reno, at the bottom... Samuel D. Sturgis—The Untold Story ... by Randy Bender WHAT’S THE SCOOP ON SAMUEL D. STURGIS? * Claim to Fame: Was the first command- ing officer of Ft. Meade, and is the namesake for the town of Sturgis Fact: Camp Sturgis, the temporary military outpost near Bear Butte that built Ft. Meade was named after his son, Lt. J. G. Sturgis, who was killed with Custer at the Battle of the Little Bighorn Visit: A stature to Samuel D. Sturgis at the Sturgis City Park Samuel D. Sturgis, namesake of the town of Sturgis, S. D. COURTESY AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD TRUST Lt. James “Jack” G. Sturgis, son of Col. Sturgis, killed at the Little Bighorn P a g e 3 0C h a r a c t e r s o f E a r l y S t u r g i s & M e a d e C o u n t y The 7th moved down in the Spring of 1878 and set up Camp J.G. Sturgis near Bear Butte, named after the Colonel’s son Jack Sturgis. This was a temporary location while the final site for the new fort was selected. While at this location, Jeremiah Wilcox, a cousin of the commander’s wife, invited Sturgis to invest in a new town to be started in the vicinity of the new fort. Sturgis invested a $20 gold piece in the project, and later ex- panded his investment to include several blocks of lots in the new town. Col. Sturgis was later to prove him- self a friend and benefactor, not only to the town that bore his name, but to the whole region. On July 16, 1879, the Colonel’s family arrived at the newly completed fort, and Ella was once again slated to cause prob- lems for her father. A fire broke out in Deadwood on September 26, 1879. Following pleas for help, Col. Sturgis sent Company C, three officers, and 44 enlisted men to fight the fire. They remained in town to police the area and prevent loot- ing. Sturgis also provided rations to the many destitute people and offered emergency housing back at Fort Meade, although most of the people elected to remain close to their Deadwood gold claims. Always on the lookout for a good investment, he helped form and later became the president of The Fort Meade Hydraulic Gold Mining Company, a major mining and lumber operation in Rapid City. In 1882, it was reported that they had completed a 700-foot tunnel, 10 ft. wide by 12 ft. high, about 10 miles west of Rapid City for the purpose of diverting Rapid Creek for mining purposes. Later he helped Rapid City again, by work- ing to get the military telegraph line routed through the town. When Sturgis returned from one of his frequent business trips, he was surprised to find Major Reno visiting his wife and daughter. Reno had several strikes against him: he was considerably older than Ella, who he was obviously smitten with, he was a widower with a son, he had a reputation for drinking, he had come to the house uninvited, and perhaps worst of all, the Colonel blamed him for the death of his son at the Little Samuel D. Sturgis—The Untold Story Statue of Col. Samuel D. Sturgis in the Sturgis City Park PHOTO COURTESY FILMFREEWAY P a g e 3 1C h a r a c t e r s o f E a r l y S t u r g i s & M e a d e C o u n t y Bighorn. Eventually Reno was court-martialed for being a Peeping Tom and looking at Ella through the parlor window of the commander’s house. The whole story can be found in Bob Lee’s book Fort Meade and the Black Hills.
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Mar 19, 2022 5:50:12 GMT -6
This still bewilders me. If they label Reno a villain due to his actions here, what would they say about the people above him (and GAC, Terry, Crook) who basically manufactured a war? There were hundreds of broken treaties all over the country, and the premiss for this was was a lie. Yet Reno is the "villain"? (I'll not start the whole "Did Reno -insert claim- at the LBH?"-debate again ) Imagine a modern country going about like this today. What label would we use about such it? There is a video game named Fallout 4. In it, the opening sentence is "War never changes". I guess people's take on war and the LBH never does either. All the best, Noggy
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Mar 19, 2022 18:15:42 GMT -6
Everyone deserves respect in adversity and also redemption up to the point at which things simply do not add up. This is so for Reno at LBH which is the topic and matter i'll confine to.
Reno held his shattered command and Benteen's battalion static awaiting resupply, the packtrain and rearguard company before attempting to join Custer.
Sounds great doesn't it but read the report written by Terry on 27th June, 1876 and it is beyond obvious that Marcus loved serving up pork pie.
|
|
|
Post by backwater on Mar 19, 2022 21:40:09 GMT -6
Beans! terry's report... "Reno, forded the river, charged down its left bank, and fought on foot until finally completely overwhelmed by numbers he was compelled to mount and recross the river and seek a refuge on the high bluffs which overlook its right bank. Just as he recrossed, Captain Benteen, who, with three companies, D, H, and K, was some two (2) miles to the left of Reno when the action commenced, but who had been ordered by General Custer to return, came to the river, and rightly concluding that it was useless for his force to attempt to renew the fight in the valley, he joined Reno on the bluffs." After reading bio's, books, and interviews i think that sums it up pretty well. i think Varnum's account is the most believable account. chaotic in the timber, wild ride out, get their act together on the bluff. Not pretty but surely not cowardice. If Reno was blatantly out of control French would have received Benteen as Reno would have been under guard.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Mar 28, 2022 2:54:51 GMT -6
Beans! terry's report... "Reno, forded the river, charged down its left bank, and fought on foot until finally completely overwhelmed by numbers he was compelled to mount and recross the river and seek a refuge on the high bluffs which overlook its right bank. Just as he recrossed, Captain Benteen, who, with three companies, D, H, and K, was some two (2) miles to the left of Reno when the action commenced, but who had been ordered by General Custer to return, came to the river, and rightly concluding that it was useless for his force to attempt to renew the fight in the valley, he joined Reno on the bluffs." After reading bio's, books, and interviews i think that sums it up pretty well. i think Varnum's account is the most believable account. chaotic in the timber, wild ride out, get their act together on the bluff. Not pretty but surely not cowardice. If Reno was blatantly out of control French would have received Benteen as Reno would have been under guard. MAJ Reno executed his job leading the regiment's attack in the valley. The key to understanding LBH is why LTC Custer abandoned his main effort, and did not conduct any other offensive action until killed. Why did an officer build a career on being aggressive, and become so passive and weak willed in this battle?
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 8, 2022 1:57:02 GMT -6
I think the opersit William, I think it was aggressiveness which got him killed.
But a lot of recklessness too, to try and assault an objective blind, is a big risk. He took that risk and went too far against an enemy far greater in numbers.
He basically got out manoeuvred too.
Once custer saw the size of the village, he should have taken stock of his position.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Apr 9, 2022 9:24:03 GMT -6
I think the opersit William, I think it was aggressiveness which got him killed. Ian Ian I think both claims are valid, but he did not really commit to an attack. So Reno's command was just sent into the lion's den and chewn up,and would probably agree on GAC being to aggressive, while his own command just wandered around and/or stood idle, depending on theories you believe, and got blown away. Guess that's only natural when your regiment doesn't act like one, but rather small unlinked units. Geir
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 9, 2022 12:56:03 GMT -6
Hi Geir.
I have always struggled with this passive Custer stuff, he had no intentions of being passive once he mounted the bluffs.
I know he sent Reno off with orders to which he had no intentions of backing up, but it does sound as if he had tunnel vision and cared only about getting his battalion into action on another front.
The battalion moved at speed, that’s why so many dropped out and this was noted by the survivors.
Once the battalion reach deep coulee then that was the point of no return, but Custer never stopped moving north. The battalion was seen by Two Moons and Wolftooth and WT claimed that it moved the full length of battle ridge. Wolftooth survived the day and told his grandson what happened without the need of an interpreter or to curry favour with any newspaper man.
The battalion or elements of the battalion, where stopped on the flats near ford D, the Cheyenne’s mention this in their accounts, they say they knew the soldiers where on their way and waited for them in the benches.
So, Custer hit his straps as he mounts the bluffs and takes his men on a trek to the far end of battle ridge, he did this this to attack, so I can’t see any passiveness in his approach.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by backwater on Apr 9, 2022 16:09:15 GMT -6
So he was repulsed at D then a re-guard action till all dissolved along the way. Custer has issues or to many wounded at LSH and maybe he or who ever is in command sends troops ahead to connect with rest of command. Sorry if I'm covering old news/theories, just interested in hearing your thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 10, 2022 12:51:44 GMT -6
Yes BW, I don't know why this was not a possibility and also why some are dead against it.
If it were possible to get together two or three modern day soldiers who had no knowledge of this battle or Custer and you showed them GACs war record up to the eve of this battle, then give them two descriptions of how we see this battle may have panned out, like all five went north on the attack or three stayed behind waiting to be attacked with two going forward on a scout, then I guess that all three soldiers would go for the first option.
Ian
|
|