|
Post by sonofacavalryman on Jul 31, 2006 13:30:12 GMT -6
Yet more apologies for Reno and Benteen. Won't change the facts of cowardice and incompetence.
Son of a Cavalryman
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jul 31, 2006 13:37:55 GMT -6
Son of a B . . . . whoops Cavalryman:
Can you give us your reasons for your beliefs?
|
|
|
Post by sonofacavalryman on Jul 31, 2006 15:07:18 GMT -6
Smart guy like you, you already know them, they've been hashed over on this forum many times. Go ahead, apologize for them again.
Son of a Cavalryman
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Aug 1, 2006 6:53:41 GMT -6
SOCM (I get it)
I am not an apologist for Reno or Benteen . . . I just don't feel they are the main reasons for the LBH disaster.
Reno while fully responsible for his actions was not a coward (he may have ACTED cowardly during his retreat) but there were many officers during the fight in the valley and on the hill that did not act up to "snuff"
Those who have accused Reno of being drunk have questionable motives. Girard had been fired by Reno then reinstated by Custer. Frett & Churchill had a run-in with Reno regarding the pack train. Frett & Churchill may have met with Whittaker prior to the COI to "go over" their testimony which by the way contradicted one another. DeRudio's many statements leave much to be desired. And Godfrey never a Reno man always maintained that Reno was not drunk . . . in addition both Varnum and Edgerly also stated they did not see Reno drinking or drunk.
Benteen while certainly not enamored with Custer would not have abandoned other soldiers to spite Custer. His pace once returning from his scout was according to military procedures of not pushing the animals until in contact with the enemy. We can blame them after the fact . . . but while the action was taking place they believed they were doing the right thing.
Thanks for the compliment about me being a smart . . .
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 7:35:36 GMT -6
crzhrs---When and where did Edgerly state he did not see Reno drinking?
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 7:50:22 GMT -6
To put Benteen's march in perspective let's look at John Gray's time/distance analysis.
Benteen left the divide at 12:12 P. M.. He arrived on Reno Hill at 4:20, after a march of 13 3/4 miles. Allowing 20 minutes to water stock at the morass his movement calculates to 3.6 MPH.
Reno also left the divide at 12:12, marched 12 miles to the LBH, watered stock and forded the stream, dismounted his battalion to cinch saddles and make other preparations for going into battle, mounted his battalion and galloped forward two miles, fought a battle of 35 minutes in the valley, retreated 1 1/2 miles to the hilltop where he arrived 10 minutes before Benteen. Now, in order the comparison be fair we must throw out 10 minutes for crossing and reorganizing at ford A, and 35 minutes for fighting in the valley. Reno's average speed calculates at 4.8 MPH.
If Benteen had achieved Reno's average, which doesn't at all seem to be extraordinary or exhausting, he could have been at ford A at about 3:15---before Reno dismounted to form a skirmish line. Wouldn't that have made a difference?
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Aug 1, 2006 8:28:55 GMT -6
Hi DOH
I do not have the Gray or Darling books so I do not know how they computed the distance travelled by Benteen on his scout. For example do they just include the distance that Benteen himself travelled or do they add up all the hill climbing done by Gibson and if they do just count Benteen do they assume that he is continuously moving or waiting for Gibson?
You are also making an unfair comparison by using Reno's force whose horses were certainly not in any condition for a fight, as Benteen's had to be, after they had made it up to the top of Reno Hill.
A fairer comparison might be with the Custer Battalion. Benteen arrives on the Bluffs about an hour later having travelled about 3 miles further, parts of which were over pretty rough terrain. I do not see any big issue with respect to that difference. If you want to exclude the scout, since we do not really know how that proceeded, then Benteen's time from the Morass to the bluffs is identical to that taken by Custer in analyses that I have seen.
One query here - supposedly Weir took off from the Morass because he heard firing from ahead. Does anybody know what that firing might be, certainly Reno was not engaged by that time.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 1, 2006 8:35:27 GMT -6
Gray doesn't know - and nobody does know, despite dramatic announcements - exactly the route Benteen's three separate entities took. There was Gibson's group out front, there was Benteen out front in a different course, there was everyone else. Godfrey is, if anything, far more dramatic in his description of the land they were on than Benteen, and he says it was damned awful and the horses were in tough shape. Unless you question Godfrey, Benteen was probably restrained in his descriptions and certainly correct in his pacing.
If the land was as tough that day as described, the linear distance is less than the actual distance of climbing and descending. Gray's route for Benteen, as they all are, is an utter guess.
Again, this allegedly crucial 1.2 mph difference (sounds so scientific and precise) means nothing. What is being measured? The first guy of Reno's command to arrive on the hill? Benteen, well ahead of his command? Or, as with the packs, the majority over a far longer period? Pretty sure it's the first, not the meaningful majority.
Why in the world would Benteen follow Reno across the river without the packs, now in his responsibility, and remove his group as a block between the packs and the village? He'd still have received the Martin note.
Far more curious is why, after promising support, Custer did not for an hour, if at all, and perhaps that not intentionally.
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 9:00:02 GMT -6
OK, DC. Gray doesn't kinow. Would you care to substantiate your remarks with a little item by item rebuttal of John Gray based on evidence rather than your opinion. It really comes down to this: You cannot prove Benteen was right without proving Gray was wrong.
Benteen never let his "responsibility" for the packs alter his conduct in the least. But 125 troopers advancing on Reno's left could very well have altered the outcome that day.
Your Custer comment is typical. Whenever one of your favorites, or pet theories comes under attack rathe than offerr cogent rebuttal you offer your opinion which, apparently, we are to accept as the last word, and then of course, you try to redirect the thread. Defend Benteen, if you can. I don't think you can do it. Put up or shut up! Recognize the quote?
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 9:07:38 GMT -6
Mike, if you haven't come to grips with John Gray I'd recommend you call a time out until you do. Lacking that, you might want to get USGS 7.5 x 7.5 topographical maps and use them to track Benteen's march based on the COI testimony of Godfrey, Edgerly, and Benteen.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Aug 1, 2006 9:12:45 GMT -6
d o harris:
I believe seeing it in THE CUSTER MYTH along with Varnum's statement
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 1, 2006 9:20:59 GMT -6
You misstate my pont, Harris. You base your math on suppositions; you have to prove Gray correct, something he does not do, by the way. I'm not playing favorites. You say Benteen's route covered thus and so mileage. Prove it. Who and how was that authenticated? Is it Benteen's mileage, or Gibson's, or the rest of the three companies? How do you know?
My lack of enthusiasm is based upon Godfrey's and Benteen's accounts, who were there. Is anyone saying General Godfrey was Benteen's creature?
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 1, 2006 9:27:19 GMT -6
Mike -- You posed some important points that Gray does not answer. If Benteen is waiting for Gibson to go look and come back then 3 mph is a good speed. The more important speed is when Benteen receives notice to return to Custer. Those speeds range from 4.7 to 7.5 mph based upon Gray.
Custer never told Benteen he had to scout to the left at a trot. Gray does not show a 3 mph speed on Benteen's return. If you knew you were heading into action and failed to water your horses that would be negligent.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Aug 1, 2006 9:30:24 GMT -6
While Gray's analytical studies are worthy of praise . . . I think this fine-tuning to the minute is leading to many misconceptions.
Trying to "time" everything decades after the fact is just a guess . . . at best. The conditions at the time, including horses, men, worrying about Indian ambush, ambiguous messages/messengers, personalities, etc. are major factors.
"Lab" experiments are far different from conditions on the field with variables that are unknown or unexpected.
Saying that, I like Gray's books . . .
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 1, 2006 9:39:55 GMT -6
As do I. He performed the utterly boring and thankless task of these time schedules, and true or not they have to be dealt with. And, it's hard to claim he's WAY off in that the interconnections anchor much of it securely. Still the most important book on LBH.
|
|