|
Post by George Mabry on Aug 16, 2006 22:01:41 GMT -6
Harpskiddie, I've never traveled the land along Reno Creek but according to my topo map I don't see any elevation high enough around the LT site that would allow someone to see the village. The highest bluff I can find near LT is a little over 3500 feet. That is about the same elevation as Sharpshooter Ridge. The bluffs at the edge of the river are about 3400 feet. Considering those elevations and the distances involved, I don't see how it would be possible to see that village.
Didn't this topic come up a few weeks ago at which time someone made a pretty good case in thinking that Gerard was actually closer to the river than Lone Tepee when he went to a high point and saw the village?
George
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 17, 2006 0:47:54 GMT -6
Re absence of any doctor with Benteen's battalion: it may be an important pointer -- but isn't it the case that Custer's own battalion very nearly went in without one? Men With Custer, p. 198: "On June 25, when Custer divided his column prior to the attack, Dr. Lord was suffering from an indisposition and Custer suggested he remain with the force in the rear. Dr. Lord insisted on going with the regimental staff." (There's a primary source for that story somewhere, but I can't for the moment remember where; forgive me.) So assignment of doctors might have been a more casual and ad hoc affair than we think ...
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Aug 17, 2006 3:58:13 GMT -6
Hi Harpskiddie
I guess in your Benteen distances 10 miles versus 5 etc for the subordinates you are talking about the distance on the out leg of Benteen's movement. It seems that if you consider his actual journey he goes round 3 sides of a quadrilateral with Reno Creek forming the fourth side.
Both of his juniors - Godfrey and Edgerley estimate the total traverse as being in the range 12-15 miles so perhaps there is a confusion with Benteen thinking of the distance travelled before he was definitely heading back to the main trail. I understand (my ordered copy of Gray has not arrived yet) that modern thinking considers that Benteen's force did not travel as far as that but even if that is true he was not alone in his estimate.
I really have a problem with the thought that Gibson could have looked into the LBH valley (I meant the LBH valley not the LBH river in my previous post) without seeing anything. There were after all 20,000 ponies occupying large areas of it and smoke from the village should have been visible even if the tepis were obscured.
I wonder if Georgemabry could look at his topgraphical map and judge where and what might have been seen by Gibson given that he never crossed the valley of the south fork of Reno Creek.
Re-reading some of Godfrey's comments I see that his understanding was that Custer might be concerned with additional villages further up the LBH valley i.e. to the South of Reno's crossing point. He also thought that Benteen was to be a blocking force to prevent the Indians escaping in that direction. If Godfrey is correct with his last point it still means that Benteen was expected to enter the LBH valley via the route he was sent to follow and reinforces one of my original comments that it was an error by Custer to imagine that Benteen could get to the LBH Valley via that particular route in time to be useful.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by George Mabry on Aug 17, 2006 8:33:58 GMT -6
Mike, I have no idea of where Gibson was when he reported his sighting. The divide on each side of South Fork is a little over 3500 feet. Choosing a spot about 2 miles down South Fork and on the eastside, it is about 8-9 miles on a straight line to the Garry Owen Loop. The valley floor where the village was located is about 3200 feet. I don't see any elevations in between that would obstruct his view. With fieldglasses, I'd say it was possible that he could see the village. There is no way of determining how much if any effect the timber along the Garry Owen Loop would have as far a screening the village from Gibson's view.
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 17, 2006 10:25:40 GMT -6
George: I don't know what transpired a couple of weeks ago. I have trouble finding where I was yesterday so I can check out responses. In any event, it's entirely possible that Gerard was not at the Lone Tepee site when he made his observation, but closer to the river. The main point I was attempting to make was that Reno's pursue etc. order was not based on a fleeing village rearguard.
mccaryf: I see George has already answered your question as to what Gibson could have seen. I probably should have mentioned that in one of my previous posts, since I was there [not on the exact spot, obviously]. As to the length of Benteen's march - as I said the important factor is the known timing. He could not possibly have marched on his circuit, which was more like two sides of a right triangle [except none of the angles were exact] in less than two hours, had he gone 10 or 12 or 15 miles. He might have gone 7 or 8, maybe pushing it, but I don't think he pushed it and I think the 5 or 6 is pretty accurate. It depends on what his initial angle of march was, and which little valley he followed back to the main trail. But the timing is the critical factor.
As to what he did or did not see: the pony herd was not yet being driven in, so there was not a lot of dust to see. Where the horses actually were in the valley is a matter of some debate. Some of the Indian testimony seems to suggest that they were more toward the northern end of the village, which would make them hidden from view where Gibson was. There would have been no appreciable amount of smoke from the village at that time of day, and campfire smoke is not highly visible at midday [about H 1330] anyway. He says the trees screened his view farther down the valley, and I can't take exception to his statement. By the times I was there, the trees had been thinned out and cut back more than considerably, so what I could see was not at all what Gibson could see.
Elisabeth: nice point about Dr. Lord not feeling well. I seem to recall something in that vein, but don't remember where I saw it. The way I made notes to myself when I first started delving into the battle almost 50 years ago, I probably couldn't tell you where I got it even if I had it in front of me.
If Lord had insisted in staying with the packs, Custer would probably just have grabbed Porter or DeWolf.
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 17, 2006 19:44:28 GMT -6
mccaryf: I've checked my sources for Edgerly's distances, just to be sure. In 1881 he said: "...and about five or six miles from the starting point, we came upon Reno's trail...." In his 4 July 1876 letter to his wife, he wrote: "...After we went about two or three miles we found it impracticable to keep to the left and came down into the valley..." Camp repeats the 5 or 6 miles, but I think he is simply rehashing the 1881 interview with the Leavenworth Times.
Godfrey is not explicit about the distance in his famous 1892 monograph, but does say that they were ordered "to a line of bluffs about 3 or 4 miles distant" that they crossed several dry streambeds and ridges, and that the "obstacles threw the battalion by degrees to the right until we came in sight of and not more than a mile from the trail." Allowing that they went 4 or 5 miles ahead, instead of 2 or 3, and then a mile to the trail, gives a distance travelled of 5 or 6 miles.
I also note that in Camp's interview with Gibson, wherein he says that Gibson now thought he only went far enough to look down of the valley of the south fork: "Gibson might not have expected to find water as there was none in sight in Rosebud at a distance." If one wants to question that Gibson saw the valley of the Little Horn based on this supposed interview, one must wonder what Camp was talking about in respect of the Rosebud. Gibson most certainly did not see the Rosebud, even with the most powerful glasses ever invented.
Edgerly's testimony at the Reno Inquiry is rather disjointed when it comes to the distance traversed. At one point he says they marched about 7 or 8 miles then cut back to the trail and came out about 7 miles from where they started. He also said that he didn't think they were ever more than 2 1/2 miles from the trail. Regardless of whether they were 1 mile or 2 1/2 miles from the trail, they could not have marched 7 or 8 miles on the hypotenuse of a right triangle if the opposite side was 7 miles. Later he estimates the circuit they made at 14 miles, which is absurd. And still later he recants on the 2 1/2 miles. One wonders who he was talking to in the nonce.
Godfrey's testimony was at odds with what he later wrote, and he does estimate the total distance at 12 to 15 miles and the furthest distance from the trail at 5 miles. He also stated that they arrived at the morass to water the horses at about H1400, which means he claimed that they went 12 to 15 miles over rough country on jaded horses, got back to the trail just ahead of the head of the packtrain, then trotted down to the morass 1/2 mile - all of this in an hour and forty-five minutes, more or less.
As I said, it is the timing that is important. I simply cannot buy the 10-12-14-15 distances. I even think Godfrey is too early as to arrival at the morass, which would make the rate of march even more unbelievable. That may be why he changed his mind before writing the 1892 Century article.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 17, 2006 20:26:40 GMT -6
Edgerly saying they merged with Reno's trail five or six miles from the starting point isn't a reference to the distance of his journey between the starting point and that junction, but the straight line distance from Point A to Point C down Reno Creek. It A-C is the bottom of a pyramid, it provides no clue how steep an angle the other two sides make. Or where Pt. B would be.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 17, 2006 21:08:37 GMT -6
Did Camp's Rosebud reference perhaps mean: because you couldn't see the water of the Rosebud at a distance, Gibson wouldn't expect to see the water of the LBH at a distance either?
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Aug 18, 2006 3:03:14 GMT -6
Hi Harpskiddie
My purpose in mentioning Edgerley and Godfrey's testimony re the distance Benteen moved was really to show that if Benteen was wrong in his estimate then he was not alone in that. I think the timings of all the various moves during that day were very confused due to different watch settings etc thus it is possible that the absurdity of some of the time distance calculations might not have been so obvious to them.
The thing I still find strange about Benteen's mission is why he should claim that he chose to abort it when according to your theory he actually completed it and so had no reason to admit to any sort of failure with respect to his command.
Perhaps there had been a stronger emphasis from Custer that Benteen should get into the LBH valley but he felt that the intervening terrain was too difficult. After all, there was some doubt that there were Indians in the valley - Custer had not been able to see them from the Crow's Nest. So if Benteen actually thought he was supposed to get into the valley from that route but chose not to because he thinks there are no Indians then that is the order he failed to follow. This starts to seem more of a heinous failure in retrospect so he starts to muddy the water as to what he was supposed to do. In practice if he had tried to get to the LBH Valley from there he would have probably taken longer than by returning to the trail so his disobedience probably was to the good although it still might look bad.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Aug 18, 2006 5:18:18 GMT -6
Mike,
One of the few things Benteen's completely consistent about is that he believed there were Indians, even if Custer didn't -- but that they could best be found by following the main trail.
Could it all revolve around Custer's command style? There seems to be plenty of evidence that Custer didn't go in for explaining his intentions. (For instance, Culbertson at the RCOI tells of hearing Weir ask Moylan whether, when Moylan was adjutant, Custer ever told him anything; Moylan says no, he was told just to order people to go there, do this, without any notion of what was behind it.) So Benteen is simply pointed in a direction and follows it. He thinks at the time that he's been sent to round up any satellites or strays, which he concludes is pointless because there are more than enough Indians up ahead on Custer's trail. Hence he goes through the motions, satisfies himself there are no Indians to the south, and turns back, thinking he's doing the right thing. Custer himself, however -- if the "pitching in" stuff is real -- could have seen it differently. He assumes that if Benteen follows the direction he's been pointed in, sooner or later he'll be able to see both ways, north and south. Once Custer locates the main village, he therefore takes it for granted that Benteen will have seen it too, and depends on him to act accordingly, i.e. attack. It's only when he realises that nothing of the kind is happening that he concludes Benteen must have followed his secondary orders and returned to the trail, whereupon he sends Martini.
If that's how it was (and it's only supposition, of course) Benteen might well feel afterwards that if he hadn't been so quick to second-guess Custer, he might indeed have carried on and got into the valley just as you suggest. The lies do remain puzzling, though; he could simply have stoutly maintained that he carried out his orders to the letter. Perhaps his conscience wouldn't let him go quite that far -- so instead of an act of disobedience that proved to keep him away from a battle, he instead confesses to disobedience that takes him towards one? Pleading guilty, but to a lesser charge, as it were?
I wonder if one thing that influenced Benteen's thinking was his last sight of Custer's command: the Gray Horse Troop at the gallop. Afterwards, he rationalises it as that perhaps they'd fallen behind and had to catch up. But at the time, he must have seen it as a sign that Custer had spotted the enemy and was about to engage -- without him. By the time he completed his mission, it would be all over bar the shouting. (Just as Kanipe's and Martini's reports later suggested it was.) Under those circumstances, he'd be less inclined to go further and further away from where he thought the action was, and all the more ready to accept Gibson's first halfway reasonable report and turn back.
On the other hand, Lee's questions to him at the start of his second day of RCOI testimony seem to suggest a niggling suspicion on Lee's part that Benteen had orders beyond those he admits to; perhaps you're right, and he did ...
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 18, 2006 10:13:09 GMT -6
My take on Benteen's "Custer never believed there were any Indians" is that he projected his own feelings onto Custer. If one reads everything that is available from Benteen, it is not a stretch to think in those terms.
If he had been ordered to actually go into the valley, and did not do so, he would have had a lot of explaining to do when he rejoined the command. Remember, he had no way of knowing that there was going to be a fight and that Custer was going to be killed - despite what he said on both topics. Benteen was not, as Graham thought, one of the finest officers in the history of American arms, but he most certainly was one of the biggest liars present at the Little Horn.
I come back to the basic point. It doesn't matter whether Benteen's march formed two sides of a right angled triangle, two sides of a pyramid, three sides of a rectangle or quadrilateral, or a coplete circle done over two or three times, or what the various watches were set to. His march took approximately one hour and forty-five minutes, based on internal timing, from when he set out to when he hit the main trail again.
If anyone want to suggest that he covered 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 10 or 12 or 15 miles, or even more during that time period, he is free to do so with no argument from me. I choose top use 5 or 6 miles because it is consistent with the timing and the terrain and some of the evidence. Maybe I'll change my Benteen's March chapter so that the distance is "undetermined." That way I wont have to quote all the primary sources for distances.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 18, 2006 14:02:49 GMT -6
I don't buy the Benteen as biggest or even much of a liar. He had no reason to lie.
You're reading things wrong, and the sides of an offered geometric form can be important; although it would be hyperbole, it isn't deceptive. I'll take one example.
To implicate Edgerly, you say "At one point he says they marched about 7 or 8 miles then cut back to the trail and came out about 7 miles from where they started." And? If they march in a straight line for seven or eight miles and THEN cut back to the main trail and at joining it discover they're seven miles from where they left the same trail........what? The correct distance is six miles of Reno Creek, not seven, but that's not a horror.
Gray credits them with about 2 hours and 20 minutes from leaving Reno Creek to rejoining it. (Where is your timing achieved, again?) I see no conflict. Where do you? It probably seemed longer than it was, and depending on whether you trace Gibson or Benteen himself or the others (routes unknown, by the way), there is certainly great plausibility in the offered times, and nothing odious or suspicious.
Of course, they keep saying they were nudged to the right, but factored with an initial journey of seven or eight, the distance - and a view blocked by a rise after a while, Godfrey says - to the main trail isn't damning, and Godfrey was with the main, slowest, and least travelled unit of the three. Altogether reasonable, and the variable times are typical of memory and these sorts of things, are they not?
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Aug 18, 2006 18:47:49 GMT -6
Dark Cloud: As I said earlier, the quotes from the officers were not meant to arrive at a concrete mileage. The timing is more important. Which Gray do you want to use? The one where he says that they went 5.5 miles and arrived back at the trail at H1348, or the one where he says they went 7.75 miles and arrived there at H1432?
My conclusions are based on the evidence and my own experience over the country. You disagree with me, and that's certainly your prerogative, just as it is mine to disagree with Dr. Gray. I've already said that the exact route is unknown, despite what Darling and Gray claim, and that I don't claim to be 100% accurate.
That being said, I'll stick with what I've concluded on this point, and you can stick with what you have concluded.
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 18, 2006 19:38:09 GMT -6
Where is Gray's 5.5 claim?
|
|
|
Post by d o harris on Aug 19, 2006 9:55:19 GMT -6
"Centennial Campaign" by John Gray, published in 1976, gives 5.5 miles for Benteen's march from the divide to the morass. In "CLC" Gray changed the distance to 8 miles, and re-located the morass farther downstream. He was probably influenced by Roger Darling's book, "Benteen's Scout," although he does not admit to this. Gray refers to Darling's work as independent confirmation of his own revision. Gray received a mss copy of "Benteen's Scout" from the publisher to review during the time he was working on "CLC", which was published in 1991. Darling's work was first published in 1987.
|
|