Big Horn v. Bighorn

[Yan Taylor]

Well in my defense, I am only using what I have read, of course I cant verify this, the person who made this public will of course fight his corner.
What I can recall is that it was passed down from generation to generation, but hey what do I know

Ian

[herosrest]

^Ducemus

One of books which helped me was Finnerty, babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015014388402&view=1up&seq=288 who was with Crook. He had an interesting life and careers and it's p208, I think, he reports an army interview of a hostile who watched the fight. Par for the course stuff but.... How reliable was the guy. Horned Horse negotiated Crazy Horse's surrender with Lt. Clark and told about the battle. In 1877, was Clark rewarding HH? I think things were the other way around. That's what Rosebud is getting at.

[herosrest]

^Ducemus

I noted mention of the Ford D action a few posts back and would like to briefly get into the difficulties I have with this. Firstly is the record (as such) of Cheyenne accounts given to Marquis through the 1920's and published in several books. His informants include some whom John Stands in Timber uses in his version of events. That is a problem. Then there is the shift in awareness and focus because entry to the cemetery and battleground was from the west and new Crow Agency side. There were re-enactments which portrayed the battle by riding that route to the monument in front of large crowds who nothing about the actual battle and left with the re-enactment embedded in consciousness.

Also, no-one of 7th Cavalry said Custer repeated the Washita tactics. Capturing the families was an impossibility as dumb as it gets, not how the army undertook these campaigns and completely ignored Indian pressure against Custer's command from Weir Pk. after Reno's retreat.

[herosrest]

May 30, 2023 8:40:12 GMT -6 @rosebud said:

May 30, 2023 8:02:43 GMT -6 herosrest said:

I noted mention of the Ford D action a few posts back and would like to briefly get into the difficulties I have with this. Firstly is the record (as such) of Cheyenne accounts given to Marquis through the 1920's and published in several books. His informants include some whom John Stands in Timber uses in his version of events. That is a problem.
Can you give examples of why this is a problem?
Marquis listed his informants in the foreward of the WoodenLeg book. Tall Bull is one, if memory serves although i'm not sure which one. The point is, Cheyenne participants telling Marquis nothing about Ford D and telling John Stands in Timber that stuff did happen there.

 Then there is the shift in awareness and focus  Can you explain what you mean by this? because entry to the cemetery and battleground was from the west and new Crow Agency side. There were re-enactments which portrayed the battle by riding that route to the monument in front of large crowds who nothing about the actual battle and left with the re-enactment embedded in consciousness.  Are you saying that the re-enactors are leaving the new evidence and not the soldiers under Custer's command?

The shift in focus, is visitors, students, scholars, all visiting across the routes in from railway, road, Ft. Custer and Crow Agency, to the site. They become aware of the terrain in a reverse order to the sequence of battle events. I accept that troops may have fled into that terrain in escape and evade with some accounts this happened. That doesn't put an organised march onto that terrain. 

Visitors arrived from the valley across the Ford D area to the entrance road and up onto the National Cemetery once it was established, and the superintendent and growing staff over the years also move over the terrain with that focus. People who visited once and then read and study, orient with what they know and understand. 

Re-enactors left an impression of events. The impression was inaccurate and this was realised at the 50th Anniversary. There's a review document I found a while back, and the author understood that that happened. There were greater fish to fry such as peace and harmony, celebration and fostering the image of wellbeing and brotherhood. 

Also, no-one of 7th Cavalry said Custer repeated the Washita tactics. Capturing the families was an impossibility as dumb as it gets, not how the army undertook these campaigns and completely ignored Indian pressure against Custer's command from Weir Pk. after Reno's retreat.

My personal opinion is that Custer never got near ford D..     I feel it would be possible for some soldiers to be found in that area if they had left Custer hill and were running for their lives.    

Rosebud

[Yan Taylor]

There is a house on that JSIT map which is still there today, the footings are still in situ and on the map the soldiers got turned back just west of where that house was later built.
That map and the JSIT story was passed down to him from his step grandfather, so we have no translator or personal gains to be made, just one Indian to another.

Ian

[herosrest]

^Ducemus

I'll respond to both immediately previous.

There was, over time since the battle, lots of activity and construction across the land west of the monument along the access routes down to the river and fords. There are the footings of a structure on the old d**e property. There were sumps, pump houses, power and phone lines, gas (petrol) supply, water works and pipes, on the flat in the bottom was Curley's cabin, and bridges over the river for rail and road besides dirt roads and then blacktops. Some serious damage occured to river banks and land during floods and ice log jams and God only knows what else. A ton of activity.

There have been numerous influences and interests in being identied with land where the battle was fought. An example
centerofthewest.org/explore/plains-indians/paul-dyck-plains-indian-buffalo-culture-collection/

Dyck wanted to build a museum there for his collection. Just one example. In essence it is Crow land but Cheyenne and Sioux have some strongly held views about the land and history besides the Crows. It is not straightforward.

Theastern markers, for example, that furthest from Calhoun, is documented from 1928 by the Cheyenne Big Beaver. He also drew a map of the battle in 1930.

www.astonisher.com/archives/museum/big_beaver_big_horn.html

The account deals with the end phase in relation to the marker but is the only one I can pin to that terrain besides the WoidenLeg Hill stuff and I have some problems with where that hill actually is and was.

How Keogh fought where he died is a mystery but the Walter Camp stuff giving south to north has some relevance. You cannot see those markers and the terrain without going 'WTF'. No one would choose to fight there and in reserve then horses are to hand. No one doubts that Crazy Horse fought there and Lazy White Bull (Minnieconjou) did also and left several accounts of his fight and making seven coups. He ride in from the bluffs at Weir Peak after pursuing Reno across the river.

If Custer sent companies to western fords, there is no evidence for it. A close read of Richard Fox proves it. Michael Donahue has a talk on the Wester Fords in late June and maybe there is something new. I very much doubt it since this has been his pet project since thirty years or more. Taking hostages in the middle of the battle was nuts. Insane. Somehow he rationalises it in his book and yet it is simply nuts. Combat does not work that way.

I don't pretend the answer but do look hard at others and dispel if I can. If Custer tasked a mission onto the western fords then there wasn't and isn't any archaeology for it. We have simply tales second and third hand starting in the late 1920's after 7th Cavalry used the fords in 1926.

I have an ideal solution. A repeat of the Washita tactics and four battalions striking from the cardinal points. That was not done according to everyone who survived. There is no evidence in 1876 or since that a company or battalion went to the western fords and were recalled as word of Reno's setback reached Custer.

Idle thoughts.

[herosrest]

^Ducemus

I dug back into the northern action ideas. That is troops up around 212 and the Thompson Place. Less is often an awful lot more with this battle and maybe there was some organised fighting up that way, but 6 rifle cases is sparse evidence - from the JSiT stuff with Rickey & Vaughn in 1956 - Typescript of John Stands-in-Timber's account of the Battle of the Little Bighorn River, by Don Rickey.

Six cartridge cases. Then there were six markers by the stone house but of course there weren't. So, maybe Donahue has turned up six companies down on Curley's Ford. Sorry, I couldn't resist. Six cartridge cases down near the Thompson Place. Hope springs eternal.........


SHARYL ATTKISSON interviewed the local historian Putt Thompson. The video is Here.

[AZ Ranger]

May 29, 2023 6:40:59 GMT -6 herosrest said:

^Ducemus

I agree that Harper put some outstanding source data underneath his work and the Companion book is worthwhile, it's previewed here link.

Source material is a huge haul and I don't think anyone will ever pull it all into some worthwhile resource. Fantastic stuff is still showing up in donated collections as they are indexed or auctioned. First hand accounts are still being found as estates go through probate. Which reminds me, the Elizabeth Custer collection was at Garryowen with Kortlander, and probably explains the crazy price the tribe payed to turn the building into a Police Station. It was actually already a Post Office, so the Feds are involved again. I wonder what the plans are for the collection? That is a mountain of source material related to battle participants corresponding with her, besides the work promoting Custer and venting spleen at Reno.

A mountain of stuff is online and a decent example is The Welch Dakota Papers site which is crammed with stuff but time consuming and quite broadly focused. Some of the orders etc. from the period can be useful. The web site format takes a little work and throws up all sorts of surprises.

Source gives building blocks for opinion and theory and argument, and has become vital to any serious work on the battle from what ever angle because there is so much of it. Custer was reporting on improving battlefield communication during ACW, which just makes me smile when the 'They knew nothing brigades' start opining Custer's insane dash to oblivion. The Army had a bad day - that's it! Hmmm........ I like the sound of that

The reason for Gordie's sources separation from the book is that it would be too large, according to the publisher. When I talked with Tori I told her the sources are most important. The publisher agreed to the sources ebook, which is well worth it.

Regards

AZ Ranger

[AZ Ranger]

Ford D is not a specific ford, as Gordie points out. He called them Ford Ds. Some refer to Sioux Ford as Ford D, but you can cross the river at many places north of Deep Ravine. The Old Elks property could be crossed on line. We know artifacts were discovered north of Cemetery Ridge when the older entrance road was developed. They include a Colt SAA revolver. We also know artifacts were found on Battle Ridge Extension north of LSH. It is located due east of Crazy Horse Ravine that was filled in to make the new entrance road. They identified ten different carbines by tool marks on the cases at that site. Of those ten, four were also identified in the Calhoun area. There was a marker along the old entrance road that had been removed. It was for Kellogg, according to Donahue, who showed us a picture taken at the Grand Opening of the new entrance road. That location fits the description of Gibbons and is near his crossing.

A timber area was near there that was removed for agriculture practice and materials for the new entrance road. So if Custer were shot there, his removal back across Cemetery Ridge and to Last Stand Hill would make more sense than being shot at Ford B.

This June, a presentation about Ford Ds will be given at the CBHMA meeting in Hardin, MT.

That being said, on another board, two cavalry offices looked at what might have been a cavalry approach north of LSH. They would move across Cemetery Ridge and Battle Ridge Extension to support each other. Evidence found in the old entrance road and support from BRE is consistent with their theory.

We noticed a Cheyenne event north of the river, which is visible when you go past the timber near the marker. However, the event is not open to the public, and another east of BRE exists—this Crow land and allowed entrance to the Cheyenne only.

I will let you know what I hear this month.

Regards

AZ Ranger

[Jenny]

Wish I could make it to that presentation in Hardin. I'll be at the general meeting on 6-25, but not sure how interesting or enlightening that will be.

J