|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 18, 2017 5:33:23 GMT -6
Richard I think both the Trading Post and the Museum/bookstore/gift shop are way above the description you imagine. I think the Park Service store is geared toward the tourist but also at least some other books. When you have to pay over $100 for a book it is well beyond what the average tourist buys. There are lots of books in the $30-$75 range that the average tourist would not by. I bought Roger Darlings --Benteen's Scout to the Left-- for $50 and it was well worth it. It included a map which we used as a guide for our ride. Do you know if these books are more reasonable priced if bought online? Over here, even books like those of Donovan and Philbrick are impossible to find in bookstores, so all my literature on the LBH and Indian Wars in general have to be bought on the net. This fall a friend is visiting from the States and I`m hatching an Machiavelian plan in order to maybe get her to bring a couple of books with her, if they can be found and arent more expansive than say on amazon etc. |
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 18, 2017 5:46:56 GMT -6
As a former soldier but still active hunter, line of sight is a big deal. For me, not having been to the battlefield yet (but soon!), I often find myself dependent on others statements on what could bee seen from where, which in my opinion is an important factor. If Custer saw "millions" of warriors massing in front of him and Keogh, I`d never buy the trip North-theory. But but descriptions of the terrain as being easy to hide in for the warriors and things like Fred`s timeline for when the larger groups started moving in on Keogh makes the thought of a hasty recon to the North much more plausible. It will be amazing to finally get a clearer picture of what both soldiers and warriors could have seen from certain areas. I have seen just about precisely 17 244 pictures from and around the battlefield, watched all of CusterAppollo`s videos plus others, and studied maps. But it`s not the same as looking for one self.
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 18, 2017 5:48:08 GMT -6
Fred
You and I will never see eye to eye and I will never take prisoners on this subject from those I respect.I will try to test theories to the full.
But I will always salute courage and honesty wherever I find it. So keep up the good work
Best
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 18, 2017 6:00:07 GMT -6
Hi Noggy
I did pose the question could the Indians have massed sufficent warriors to intercept Custer in his advance North.
Custer covers 3.7 miles along the "flank" of the village to "termination" at LSH. A trip that will take 30 mins. Is it possible for 200+ mounted troops to cover that distance in that time without being seen?
It is the nature of cavalry to try to achieve critical mass. The suggested recce achieves the very opposite critical dispersion.
Cheers
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jul 18, 2017 8:26:29 GMT -6
I think it is Cortlander at the Garryowen site. I saw it this year again. I did not see it at Putt's. Steve, I spoke to Putt about it; even gave him the details on where to find it from the publisher. I thought at the time I was talking to a pile of dust and it seems I was correct. Like I said, I am over it all. To be very honest, when I get compliments from people like Richard ("wild") and even "herosrest," I know I have hit the "big time." We do not need to agree: their compliments, however, speak volumes to me. And there are many others I have really enjoyed, even more complimentary, more precise, etc. I only hope my future work can draw the same kind of interest... and you can be assured it will be controversial!!! I can see it already. Best wishes, Fred. |
|
|
|
Post by shan on Jul 18, 2017 8:34:57 GMT -6
Noggy,
Greetings. I was in the same position as yourself before 2002 when I finally went to the battlefield, { I live in the west of England.} I too had a life long interest in the battle, and as as a painter, I had made various paintings about the battle throughout my life, but I'd found that no amount of reading, or looking at other peoples photographs had really helped me when it came to trying to envisage the terrain. So, I saved up my money and went. When I got there, I hired a car and camped nearby, and then spent 10 days, 5 or 6 hours a day walking the battlefield, { Very hot and very windy,} Whilst i was there, I did a lot of drawings and left myself little messages on a
small portable tape recorder ~~ all I heard when I got it home and played it back, was the sound of the wind ~~ but now here we are 15 years on, and I'm afraid I can remember very little other than how spread out the battle was. I suppose I had expected it to have been more compact, but it wasn't.
Given that I was on foot, and not on horseback, what I could see, and what I saw would have been very different from the men who were there that day, even so, I got a feel of how it might have been. The funny thing is, when you read about it, things seem very different when your there, especially distances. For instance I found the view from Weir Point to LSH didn't seem so far when I was there, I could clearly see cars over on Calhoun, and, though I won't swear to this now, I thought I could see them around the monument. Having said that most of the days were very sharp and clear, probably due to the wind. The Keogh sector was almost as I imagined with very clear sight right from the swale where the horses were hidden, right up to LSH. Likewise, the view down to Deep Ravine from LSH, and indeed back to Calhoun, which again, didn't seem to be so far as some descriptions had had me believe..
But look, I'm rambling on, when all I meant to say was save your money and get yourself there. One last thing though. I've generally found that books are a little cheaper in the States than over here, but then the costs of having them sent over here to Europe are very very high ~~ almost more than the book in some cases, so I have some friends who live over there and come to visit every couple of years, and I give them a list of what I want, and they kindly buy them and bring them with them. The other tip is, if you wait long enough after the book has been published, say a year or so, you can often find them on Book Search second hand. Hope that helps.
Fred, if you read this, thanks for the info on the use of a recce/ recon unit. In some ways it answered my question, in that, if he Custer, decided against useing them to recce the fords D, then one can only think that he must have had something else in mind to go there himself, which, given that he took two companies, sounds to me as if he was hoping to cross, and then attack something or some one from there.
Best wishes David
|
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Jul 18, 2017 9:16:25 GMT -6
Richard I think both the Trading Post and the Museum/bookstore/gift shop are way above the description you imagine. I think the Park Service store is geared toward the tourist but also at least some other books. When you have to pay over $100 for a book it is well beyond what the average tourist buys. There are lots of books in the $30-$75 range that the average tourist would not by. I bought Roger Darlings --Benteen's Scout to the Left-- for $50 and it was well worth it. It included a map which we used as a guide for our ride. Do you know if these books are more reasonable priced if bought online? Over here, even books like those of Donovan and Philbrick are impossible to find in bookstores, so all my literature on the LBH and Indian Wars in general have to be bought on the net. This fall a friend is visiting from the States and I`m hatching an Machiavelian plan in order to maybe get her to bring a couple of books with her, if they can be found and arent more expansive than say on amazon etc. I think in general Amazon prices are competitive and if you want it as soon as a book comes out they are great. What you can't beat is those books that are discounted. Another source that I use is the various meeting that occur and the book for sale at them. The Ford Dealership in Hardin Montana clears out his showroom and they sell books along with other things. Regards Steve |
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Jul 18, 2017 9:31:33 GMT -6
Fred
My opinions are always subject to change because I am building resources to draw from in order to form a truly informed opinion. I have heard you say you have a top 10 or 8 of sources and if had to choose only 3 you would be in that group for me.
My latest opinion is that Custer took a risk going to bluffs and could not find a suitable unopposed crossing before time ran out.
This year we went in on the old entrance road as far as the park boundary on one fork and close to Ford D on the flat on the other fork. Been going there for many years but had never been there before.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jul 18, 2017 9:36:53 GMT -6
Fred, if you read this, thanks for the info on the use of a recce/ recon unit. In some ways it answered my question, in that, if he Custer, decided against useing them to recce the fords D, then one can only think that he must have had something else in mind to go there himself, which, given that he took two companies, sounds to me as if he was hoping to cross, and then attack something or some one from there. David, I believe Custer wanted to see all these fords and the valley for himself and not rely-- however much he might agree-- on the word or descriptions of others. Only by seeing himself could he get a good idea of what he was confronting. While my own personal experience is hardly comparable, that is the way I operated whenever I went on patrol, either in Germany or in Vietnam: I needed to see for myself and not rely on the reports or judgments of others, however good they may have been. By taking two companies, Custer was merely being cautious knowing opposition was building and not knowing what he would be confronting when he reached the river and the ford. He did that at B and he did it again at D. It was merely good tactics... and a show of strength would cause the enemy to pause. Best wishes, Fred. |
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jul 18, 2017 9:58:10 GMT -6
Fred, Shan, et al:
Seeing for yourself is wonderful for a company grade officer. It is incorrect for a field grade officer.
There is a point where you have to trust company grade officers to do their job. LTC Custer had about 5 weeks experience at company grade and not a single day at field grade. This crippled his ability to lead 7th Cav.
It is hard, I had years of experience as a scout, mechanized and foot, conventional and unconventional. I had great difficulty in a certain rotation, because I was a combat replacement, and my scout officer was doing this for first time, and many many mistakes. I had 4 KIA directly due to this person's errors.
I assigned this person as my FOB commander, and replaced him with a medium grade sergeant (E-6, Staff Sergeant, vice a captain). I managed to get his master sergeant sent home, and revoked his tab.
Field grade officers must trust subordinates to do their jobs. LTC Custer was unable to do this. This means he could not manage company grade officers, nor was he capable of being a competent field grade officer.
LBH failure is in large part due to the inability of the 7th to execute field grade officer functions..
For our LEO members, this means operations involving many organizations, like the Boston Bomber train wreck. I was there, but rather not discuss why. I will say local police fired 2000 rounds at unarmed suspect, and didn't kill him. I had a rifle with 3 rounds, and would have killed target with one round. Range was 80 meters. I was with 2 other trained snipers, one from Salem, one a Statie, but we were told to stand by.
|
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 18, 2017 10:41:18 GMT -6
Custer went to the Crow's Nest to see for himself what was reported to him about a large village. From accounts he stated he could not see anything and there was no village. Yet, there was and he failed to listen to his scouts.
He also failed to listen to his scouts (White/Red) about the size of the village and what the command could expect to meet up with.
It was said that Benteen told Custer that it would be better if the command stayed together rather than separate and Custer refused to listen.
It's one thing to be confident about your knowledge of Indian Fighting but it's another thing to refuse to listen to scouts and fellow officer's recommendations.
As we know Custer and his entire command was wiped out . . . due to a number of reasons, including failure to listen to advice from others.
A Know-It-All doesn't know-it-all . . . after all!
|
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 18, 2017 11:23:18 GMT -6
It is the nature of cavalry to try to achieve critical mass. The suggested recce achieves the very opposite critical dispersion. Cheers Richard Hello, WIld Indeed, but Custer didn`t seem to think that way when he separated his regiment into three? |
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 18, 2017 11:36:09 GMT -6
Noggy, Greetings. I was in the same position as yourself before 2002 when I finally went to the battlefield, { I live in the west of England.} I too had a life long interest in the battle, and as as a painter, I had made various paintings about the battle throughout my life, but I'd found that no amount of reading, or looking at other peoples photographs had really helped me when it came to trying to envisage the terrain. So, I saved up my money and went. When I got there, I hired a car and camped nearby, and then spent 10 days, 5 or 6 hours a day walking the battlefield, { Very hot and very windy,} Whilst i was there, I did a lot of drawings and left myself little messages on a small portable tape recorder ~~ all I heard when I got it home and played it back, was the sound of the wind ~~ but now here we are 15 years on, and I'm afraid I can remember very little other than how spread out the battle was. I suppose I had expected it to have been more compact, but it wasn't. Given that I was on foot, and not on horseback, what I could see, and what I saw would have been very different from the men who were there that day, even so, I got a feel of how it might have been. The funny thing is, when you read about it, things seem very different when your there, especially distances. For instance I found the view from Weir Point to LSH didn't seem so far when I was there, I could clearly see cars over on Calhoun, and, though I won't swear to this now, I thought I could see them around the monument. Having said that most of the days were very sharp and clear, probably due to the wind. The Keogh sector was almost as I imagined with very clear sight right from the swale where the horses were hidden, right up to LSH. Likewise, the view down to Deep Ravine from LSH, and indeed back to Calhoun, which again, didn't seem to be so far as some descriptions had had me believe.. But look, I'm rambling on, when all I meant to say was save your money and get yourself there. One last thing though. I've generally found that books are a little cheaper in the States than over here, but then the costs of having them sent over here to Europe are very very high ~~ almost more than the book in some cases, so I have some friends who live over there and come to visit every couple of years, and I give them a list of what I want, and they kindly buy them and bring them with them. The other tip is, if you wait long enough after the book has been published, say a year or so, you can often find them on Book Search second hand. Hope that helps. Best wishes David Hello shan England has become my second home, kind of. I have no illusions about going there will somehow "crack the code" or anything. The terrain has been altered, vegetation come and gone etc. But it will be good to erase some mental pictures who are of no use and finally get to see the area. I imagine it
Books are with whisky and music things I rarely seem to be economical about; if something pop up I will buy it straight away. But yes, buying second hand both online and...eh, off-line is great when one doesn`t have to charge in and buy straight away. |
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jul 18, 2017 13:13:52 GMT -6
Somewhere, I think Wild mentions above GAC could not conceal his command from the village. Richard correct me if I am wrong, But, he could conceal his command by staying east of battle ridge and north of BRE as it turns toward Ford D. The new entrance cuts through BRE. So what we see today is not how it was in 1876. Now Custer's command was harried by a group of NA's that were already out of the village and also north and west of Battle Ridge.
|
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Jul 18, 2017 14:00:01 GMT -6
Somewhere, I think Wild mentions above GAC could not conceal his command from the village. Richard correct me if I am wrong, But, he could conceal his command by staying east of battle ridge and north of BRE as it turns toward Ford D. The new entrance cuts through BRE. So what we see today is not how it was in 1876. Now Custer's command was harried by a group of NA's that were already out of the village and also north and west of Battle Ridge. Tom, As you have been there recently I certainly accept your judgement that had the troops followed the path you suggest that they could be hidden. The Indians may not have been able to actually see the soldiers, but what about the dust. 210 horses on a dry June day are going to be kicking up an awful amount of dust. Do you think that would cause the Indians to know where he was. Be Well Dan |
|
