|
Post by mcaryf on Aug 1, 2006 10:14:05 GMT -6
Hi DOH
Whilst I do not have John Gray's book I have seen detailed analyses of the timings of all the various groups based on his work in another forum.
Perhaps as you do have the book you will look at the comparison I suggested of the Custer Battalion and Benteen from either their seperation or more usefully in my view from the Morass. Then you can tell us whether it is self-evident that Benteen was dawdling.
Whilst confessing that I have not read the book, I have to say that the wild variations in reported times evidenced at the RCOI must make quite a lot of it very speculative. We also do not know how the terrain/vegetation has changed over the years so probably most of the analyses may only be useful in considering relative times taken by different parties over the same terrain. Then again it is probably difficult to compare sensible travel speeds given the military situation. Reno and Custer were first over the route so you might think they would have to travel more cautiously but then again they had loads of scouts on the bluffs and generally checking the route ahead. Benteen is coming down a path already trodden by Custer but without scouts and for all he knew the Indians might have been alerted by Custer's passing and now laying in wait for him.
I guess you can argue lots of different variants but if you can give me a fair comparison that clearly demonstrates Benteen being unreasonably slow then I am happy to take it on board.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by analyst on Aug 1, 2006 10:41:59 GMT -6
I find it incomprehensible someone has not read Gray would try to argue about his positions on a public messageboard. That is of course, ridiculous in itself. Far worse though is the person who has not the slightest idea of what a Time Motion Study is trying to say it's wrong and the author does not know what he is talking about! Sigh! Well, I have learned this the kind of absurdities that occur on most of these boards. Gray has more time researching the movements of this battle than DC has spent trying to convince people he is educated! First, Gay shows Benteen left the Divide halt at 12:12, the same time Custer and Reno left. This is well substantiated by the numerous officer and after action reports as at the Reno hearings. The packtrain left 20 minutes later at 12:32. They took the Reno trail. As Gray admits and anyone who has read Gray should know the book on P. 258 clearly states " Benteen's off-trail scout tresents some problems, for his officer's accounts are vague and faulty, and Benteen himself resorted to flagarant falsehoods. Under cross-examination at the Reno inquiry, he turned utterly irrational regarding the orders Custer had given him. He branded them senseless and mere valley hunting ad infinitum, and claimed he was to "pitch into anything I came across. He even bragged that his return to Custer's trail was in violation of orders that would have taken him to Ft. Benton. In short, he charged Custer with sending him on a stupid and endless combat mission." Benteen claimed he traveled to bluffs about 5 miles away. Gray shows these bluffs were about 1 mile away. During this time several couier carried messages were sent back and forth fixing both time and messages. After this, the last transmission from Custer ordering Benteen on to a second ridge, communication ceased. In actuality Benteen was left behind and only turned toward Custer's trail when the terrain became too rough. The measurements Gray used in following Benteen"s trail are most precise. He shows Benteen's claimed traverse claimed ten milesd was indeed only 3 and three quarters miles and he proves it by map and time and collaborating reports. "The packtrain at it,s uniform speed of 3 mph covered it's 6 miles in 2 hours and was sighted (by Benteen) at 2:32 and that was the moment Benteen picked up Custer's trail" P.263. Did Gray know what he was talking about? Of course he did! With the precision of a scientist. A very educated and precise man. He has created possibly the finest time motion study possible for this battle. Both of which shows at least one here, would be out of their depth in a parking lot puddle!
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 10:54:38 GMT -6
Mike, the argument is not with me, it is with John Gray. Unless his analysis can be refuted based upon best available evidence then as far as I am concerned it must stand. In some respect I am playing devil's advocate on this thread. My own views are held close to the vest. It seemed to me this thread, as happens with so many others, was turning into a chain letter/ monologue, with the exception of a rant or two
I have given you what I feel are good sources to evaluate, namely the COI testimony of Godfrey, Edgerly, and Benteen, as measured against topographical maps of the region. You might also consult Benteen's Official Report, and the intereview he had with J. J. O'Kelley on Aug. 1, or 2, 1876, and which was printed in the NY Herald on Aug. 8, and is reprinted in the Custer Myth. You seem to have an opinion on the matter for which I see scant support, and regardless of the evidence that may be presented to refute your position you are unlikely to alter it. If you discover the evidence on your own you are more likely to change your beliefs than if I supplied a dozen quotes. I have told you where the evidence may be found, whether you choose to look, or not, is up to you.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Aug 1, 2006 10:56:17 GMT -6
Who is dissing Gray? . . . not me. I just find "lab" studies completely different than actual field work. Try hiking a rugged trail in the dead of summer . . . when it's hot, humid, your tired, hungry, thirsty, sore, and then have someone looking at topo maps in the comfort of a air-conditioned room figure out how long it should take. There are too many intangibles to think about.
I enjoy Gray's books and they are a must-have for the LBH library . . . but timing to the minute cause me problems.
PS: No where did I insult Gray or his intelligence
PS: Were all the soldiers watches synchronized . . . and what time zone were they using?
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 11:01:12 GMT -6
Analyst---just read yours after I posted. I agree Gray is the standard. He placed the onus squarely on those who feel Benteen operated without flaw, that his every move was above reproach. With Gray in hand the burden of proof rests with the Benteenites.
This is not to say Benteen cannot be justified in his conduct, only that to do so requires that Gray be refuted. So far, I have seen none of this.
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 11:03:47 GMT -6
crzhrs---maybe you would do well to study the sources provided Mike. You also have opinions. Can you back them up with evidence that refutes Gray. You absolutely must do so if you wish to defend Benteen.
I'm not trying to start quarrels here, only to have a thorough dialogue that recognizes there is more than one viewpoint. As yet, I have seen nothing that comes close to challenging Gray's findings.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 1, 2006 11:17:35 GMT -6
Both in logic and law your claim falters, Harris. Gray does not know, and cannot know, the various journeys of Benteen's three units. Where on a map exists any but speculation? And Gray doesn't even offer a map (no fool) of Benteen's scout. Gibson and Benteen both say he was to go to a line of bluffs five miles to the south, but Gray chooses to think it much closer. Could be, but there's no proof, only guess work.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Aug 1, 2006 11:27:36 GMT -6
While I am not in the same league as Gray and his research . . . I think common sense sometimes works.
Timing to the minute is good on paper . . . like an architect's drawings. Any carpenter will tell you it's easier to "build" something on paper than it is in actuality. Most architects are not carpenters and I do not believe Gray was in the military.
I am not now or ever going to refute most of Gray's work . . . but common sense tells me timing an event on paper is not the same as timing something as it's actually happening.
As for "facts" brought out at the RCOI . . . let's say many of the witnesses were not fully forthcoming and I'm sure West and CSS will expound on that if they ever show up again!
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 12:22:25 GMT -6
You are dead wrong, Dc. There may be no map provided in CLC, but there are maps available, and the second line of bluffs are 3 3/4 from the divide. And, if you bothered reading the COI, to say nothing of Benteen's OR, you would know the battalion did not--repeat, did not- go beyond the second line of bluffs. Once again you indulge your fantasy opinions, and refuse to put up. Self-absorbtion is hardly reasonable argument.
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 12:24:53 GMT -6
crzhrs---what your statement comes down to is this: The evidence contradicts your opinion, therefore you choose to ignore the evidence. For real.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 1, 2006 12:30:41 GMT -6
Analyst -- Gibson was part of Benteen's Battalion therefore you must include the distance he traveled. Gray states Gibson went 4.5 miles. (That is close to 5 miles.)
Gray states the first line of bluffs was 1 mile away. Benteen states he was sent to bluffs 5 miles away. Was he talking about the first line or where Gibson traveled to before they all turned back. Maybe I missed it but I haven't seen the quote where Benteen states the first line of bluffs was 5 miles.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 1, 2006 12:32:37 GMT -6
On which map are formations labled "first line" and "second line" and, further, how do we know these are the same ones Benteen refers to? Where, precisely, on these bluffs did Benteen arrive? Which map? Again, there is nothing but surmise what Benteen's three separate groups travelled. And if indeed it's 3.75 miles in a linear measure, point to point, what is it in ground actually travelled? How could you know? How could Gray?
I don't have to prove a route. Only prove, as I have, that neither you nor Gray knows the route.
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 1, 2006 12:39:45 GMT -6
DC---if you have a better analysis than Gray put it on the table. Put up or shut up. Your words, DC. Are you not willing to live by them? Refute Gray, or accept that Benteen was a laggard. It is that simple.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 1, 2006 12:46:07 GMT -6
DO Harris I believe that Gibson traveled 4.5 to the next ridge according to Gray. Benteen remained in the valley 3.75 miles.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 1, 2006 12:52:33 GMT -6
Using Gray there is a marked difference in the rate of travel once the scouting ends with Gibson's report to Benteen all the way to Reno.
If you are scouting then you should spend some time looking around which explains the 3 mph rate.
|
|