|
Post by elisabeth on Jul 13, 2006 6:02:38 GMT -6
It's from p. 249 of The Custer Myth; I'll have to quote it at length to include all the possible clues, so please bear with me!
Kanipe says:
"When we reached within a quarter of a mile of the junction of Benteen's creek with the Little Big Horn I sighted Indians on the top of the range of bluffs over the Little Big Horn river. I said to First Sergeant Bobo, 'There are the Indians'.
General Custer threw up his head about that time and we -- Troops 'C', 'E', 'I', and 'F' -- headed for the range of bluffs where we had seen the Indians. Tom Custer, brother of the general, was captain of my troop, 'C'. We rode hard, but when we reached the top the Indians were gone.
However, we could see the tepees for miles. The Crow Indian scouts with our outfit wanted to slip down and get a few ponies. Some of them did slip down, but they got shot for their pains. Chief Scout Mitch Buie (Bouyer), Curley, a Crow, and 'Bloody Knife' Reeve (Ree) stayed up on the bluffs with us.
Well, sir, when the men of those four troops saw the Indian camp down in the valley they began to holler and yell, and we galloped along to the far end of the bluffs, where we could swoop down on the camp * * * * (four words illegible -- W.A.G.).
I was riding close to Sergeant Finkle. We were both close to Capt. Tom Custer. Finkle hollered at me that he couldn't make it, his horse was giving out. I answered back: 'Come on Finkle, if you can'. He then dropped back a bit.
Just then the captain told me to go back and find McDougall and the pack train and deliver to them orders that had just been issued by General Custer."
... And then he goes into the wording of the order, etc., before adding:
"I went back. I thought then that was tough luck, but it proved to be my salvation. If Sergeant Finkle had not dropped back a few minutes before he would have got the orders -- and I would not be telling this story."
Graham points out in a footnote that there are many inaccuracies in his story, two of which manage to show themselves in even these few paragraphs -- the assertion that Bloody Knife was along, and the omission of Company L. So we'd obviously be rash to take it all as gospel. But what he seems to be saying, accurately or not, is a) that he's riding with his company (as the other two sergeants are there), b) that Tom, as its captain, is nearby, and c) that he, Kanipe, had no pre-ordained messenger role, but was chosen purely by chance.
That doesn't preclude the possibility that Tom is with HQ and Co. C is riding close to HQ ... but from the way it's worded, it seems equally possible that Tom is relaying an order that's come to him via Cooke, or one of the HQ orderlies.
Next question: does Kanipe say anything more definite anywhere else? Unfortunately I'm working at the moment, so daren't take the time to look up every single possible source; does anyone remember whether his other statements would bear this out?
|
|
|
Post by greenpheon on Jul 15, 2006 4:45:36 GMT -6
Thanks Elisabeth; Yes, like many accounts it does leave questions unanswered doesn't it?
Greenpheon
|
|
|
Post by blaque on Jul 17, 2006 9:11:56 GMT -6
In Shadows along the LBH, p. 9, Richard Hardorff quotes Hammer and Graham when saying this about Kanipe: Of excellent character and neat appearance, he was frequently assigned to headquarters as Custer’s orderly. On the day of the battle, however, Kanipe was with C Troop commanded by Captain Thomas W. Custer. If true, Tom’s choice of Kanipe would seem a bit more appropriate, or less casual.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Jul 17, 2006 9:43:44 GMT -6
Thanks, blaque -- that's useful.
|
|
|
Post by blaque on Jul 19, 2006 5:58:27 GMT -6
Short of an official document from Fort A. Lincoln’s files showing that Tom was appointed ADC to his brother, we cannot say for certain that Tom was acting as such on June 25th. But it’s very likely that he did so. First we have the statements by Sgt. Hanley and Pvt. Thompson of C co. about Harrison commanding the troop during Reno’s scout; the reason for this, as given by Thompson, was that ‘the captain of our company… was on his brother’s staff’. Then, Greenpheon’s reference (above) to a letter from TWC telling of his joining Headquarters on May 25th; and lastly, a letter from Aileen Harrington to W.J. Ghent, dated April 19 1938, where the 2nd Lt.’s daughter states that ‘Father was in command of Tom Custer’s troop that day, as Tom was acting as aide to the General’. We could safely conclude that he was attached to headquarters –but not with 100% certainty.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Jul 19, 2006 6:32:19 GMT -6
I didn't know about the Aileen Harrington letter. That is a positive statement. Of course, it would be nice to know where she got the information: whether from the horse's mouth, e.g. from one of the C Company survivors, or simply from the same set of assumptions we've been working from.
It's that Kanipe incident that nags. If it weren't for that, the chain-of-command sequence relating to the hardtack box affair -- Curtis tells Yates, Keogh hears and says Custer must be told, then Tom (not Keogh or Yates) tells Custer -- would seem to clinch an ADC role for Tom up to and including the 25th. As you say, likelihood ... but not 100% certainty.
Frustrating stuff, this, isn't it!
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 19, 2006 7:25:14 GMT -6
Again, I don't think the procedure for an official chain of command is relevant to the question, which is did Custer family members act outside the chain and form, in fact, an actual chain of command outside the official one? Why, after all, did officers stock their staffs with family if not for this added benefit? Grant on down did this, and it wasn't the rank of Grant's son that allowed him to drink and party with Custer's staff. Family was way more important back then, as Benteen's constant references makes clear.
I don't think TWC taking the box info to his brother necessarily means he was in 'headquarters' but that his brother needed to know right off. It was assumed and okay with everyone.
As possible evidence I point to Boston Custer who, when his job with the disasterous packs was most needed, is allowed without censure or comment to ride to join the family, which is to say leave his post at will. If prearranged, what does that say; if not prearranged, what would THAT say? People note it but nobody tells him to get his ass back to this job. It seems to reflect long understood procedure to nobody's surprise or resentment.
If with Boston, imagine the latitude TWC had. I think TWC acted as his brother's number two a lot, and knowing him made correct decisions his brother would have: bringing the regiment forward, sending Kanipe in anticipation of need back, and, if George got shot, speaking for his brother if bro didn't cede command.
This is why I suspect nepotism took a big bite out of Custer, that day, if actual and official missions diverged momentarily.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Jul 19, 2006 8:33:21 GMT -6
One little problem with using Boston as an indicator: while he'd previously been employed as forage-master, on this campaign he was on the roster as (comically) a guide. Nepotism writ large, certainly, no doubt about that, as it gave him $100 a month instead of the forage-master's $75; but if he was doing anything resembling his job, up front with HQ is where he should have been. (He went back to the pack train simply to change to a fresh horse.)
Similarly, Autie Reed -- employed as a herder -- explains in a letter home that he's able to ride with HQ on the last leg of the trip because most of the cattle he was herding have now been eaten.
Which doesn't mean you're not right about TWC, of course; or about nepotism playing a part in the outcome. Imagine, for instance, the chaos if some adhered to the official chain of command and others obeyed Tom's orders. Madness.
A mini-thought has just occurred to me. If Custer had been shot and ceded command, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that it went initially to Keogh, as it should ... with TWC only taking over (if he did) after Keogh was killed. Not sure it gets us anywhere, but it's another possible way of looking at it?
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 19, 2006 8:51:01 GMT -6
Elisabeth--
Keogh in command, hmmm ... but timing might have been against it. It depends when GAC dies/gets wounded and whether Cooke could even get through to the captain at that time. Perhaps Tom was just the fall back option, with a noted craziness when it came to battle situations (I'm particularly remembering the stunts that got him nominated for the MOH). Maybe the insistence on a last stand was his idea? But the possibilities are quite intriguing!
Good points about Boston and Reed!
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 19, 2006 11:32:55 GMT -6
I didn't know that about Reed and Boston, and thought I recalled Boston being told to stay with the train till a vague 'later on.' But it helps my case. They weren't hired for the jobs for which paid. Where were they needed? The train, obviously was where they would do the most good and free up soldiers, I'd think.
When was the last cow chomped? Well before Custer went down the Rosebud. Reed had no role at all and was sucking up food to no point.
But where were they? With the family unit. Trusted.
It's not really profitable to visualize every possible manifestation. Just saying that the evidence used so assuredly for Custer on the offense, etc., can easily support many other theories as well. It's silly to pretend otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 19, 2006 11:37:29 GMT -6
Maybe it was "easier" for Tom to tell GAC about the boxes . . . Tom would be use to any temper tantrums from his brother and George could vent his anger on TC rather than jump all over anyone else and Tom would just shrug it off as usual.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 19, 2006 11:40:44 GMT -6
I don't think Boston or Autie were really "needed" any where. They were along for the adventure . . . the excitement of riding with GAC and be in on the last great Indian battle/campaign in US history.
They had little or no experience for their positions and may have had a free reign which apparently happened when Boston decided he wanted to be in on the kill with his brother . . . the "Custer Luck" and/or fame got them overconfident even though they had no experience in fighting indians.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Jul 19, 2006 11:50:22 GMT -6
Nice one, crzhrs.
Benteen talks about trying to get Cooke to tell Custer about his new improved method of guarding the packtrain, and Cooke saying (in effect) "tell him yourself" -- so it looks as if Cooke, for one, was scared of telling him anything he didn't want to hear. Maybe the same was true of Keogh and Yates? Or maybe Tom volunteered, to save either of them getting stomped on. Yates would have caught it for his troop's bad packing, Keogh for the packtrain in general, so either way it could have got nasty ...
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 19, 2006 14:46:03 GMT -6
Here's an example of myth into fact.
Cooke is "scared" to tell Custer news? Keogh and Yates as well? But Benteen has no problem? Cooke could have been exhausted and that's all he meant. It was neutral/good news, so there's no fear factor. If there was fear of that sort, the Custerphiles' myth is shot, what? That's a crappy commander.
NONE of that could be true, but it's being repeated as proto-"fact." We have no reason to think Custer didn't want to hear news, and he'd started out down the Rosebud saying let's work together to the officers and commending them.
I don't know either way, but this strikes me as an overinterpretation.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 19, 2006 15:14:28 GMT -6
The problem is, Benteen never seemed to have a problem with going to Custer, especially when it made himself look better. I think your point is stronger with Keogh and--particularly--Yates. I had always been under the impression that Yates and GAC were quite tight friends, if it were possible for GAC to truly establish meaningful, bilateral friendships, which does cause me to wonder why Fear of Autie could rule the captain ...
|
|