|
Post by mikegriffith1 on Jul 25, 2024 4:08:59 GMT -6
Huh??? Reno was supposed to attack first. And Reno admitted in his battle report that he knew Custer would attack from the flank. A long list of scholars have noted that Reno halted his charge prematurely, failed to properly command the skirmish line, and then lied about the number and actions of the Indians he faced during the charge and after the skirmish line was formed.
And, again, if Reno had simply stayed in the timber, this would have forced the Indians to keep a sizable force at his position instead of being able to concentrate on Custer. I've already presented evidence from Indian sources that the Indians had no intention of launching a mass assault into the timber, that Reno's men would have been okay if they'd stayed in the timber, and that the Indians changed their minds about bugging out after they saw Reno's command frantically flee from the timber.
Here's what John Roberts, a former Vietnam War combat infantryman who writes about military subjects, says about the timber as a good defensive position in his 2016 book A Damned Big Fight: With Crazy Horse, Custer and Sitting Bull at the Little Bighorn:
During the brief time the skirmish line was in place out on the open prairie, it disintegrated little by little until everyone had found shelter in the timber. . . .
By accident, the soldiers now occupied an area of natural fortifications. It was not secure from attack in all directions, but there were obstacles that the troopers could use to fend off a mass attack. On the west side, Reno’s position was shielded by a drop-off from the level plain onto an area of sand and gravel deposited by the river. This natural wall extended south for several hundred yards and was anywhere from a foot to three feet in height. All along and behind this cut-bank, large trees and heavy underbrush furnished additional shelter that was so thick in places that it could not be entered except by following animal trails.
In the center of these barriers was a natural park covered with a growth of prairie grasses and low bushes about 150 feet wide and three hundred feet long. Major Reno assumed his position in this area and, having surrendered all initiative to the Indians, he waited to see what would happen. (pp. 101-102)
Some Vietnam War buffs might know that Roberts wrote the book Mighty Men of Valor: With Charlie Company on Hill 714-Vietnam, 1970, which was universally praised by the veterans who reviewed it.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 25, 2024 8:20:22 GMT -6
Right.
So how come Custer didn't press his attack from the flank to support Reno? Reno had charged/attacked down the valley to a halt.
Martin saw Reno engaged "in skrimish form" when he was heading back, and had seen Custer apparently falling back on the flats, and saw that Reno men were still retreating on his return with Benteen, which was some time later.
If Custer did what he was expected to do - i.e. press an attack in support (flank or otherwise), how would that have affected Reno? {wherever he was re:timing-wise - in skirmish per Martin}
Where would Benteen have gone?
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 25, 2024 12:42:15 GMT -6
If Martini did see those things, then why didnt he tell Benteen what he saw, didnt he say to the Captain that the Indians were running? Sounds to me that if Custer was falling back then things arnt too rosy and Reno was halted, so no battalion was chasing any Indians. Ian
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 25, 2024 13:52:56 GMT -6
Depends who you ask - Martin or Benteen....AND WHEN!!!
Martin, via WMC Martin says when he gave message to Benteen Benteen asked: "Where is Genl. Custer. " Martin said: "About 3 miles from here. " Benteen said is being attacked or not and Martin said: Yes, is being attacked" and said no more. Martin is positive that he did not tell Benteen and that Indians were "skiddaddling. "
Martin said Custer was 1st happy cause they caught the village sleeping...then traveled down the coulee/MTC till sent back; saw Custer falling back, why would he think or know the village was running?
Well maybe this - told to Graham years later:
I handed message to Col. Benteen, and then told him what the General said - that it was a big village and to hurry. He said "where is the General now?' and I answered that the indians we saw were running and I supposed that by this time he had charged through the village...
Martin seemed not to offer up much of anything on his own. Benteen at times didnt seem too curious in the details…
At the same time he saw Custer retreating up the open country in the direction of the battlefield. (He did not tell this at the Reno court of inquiry because he was not asked the question. He thinks that in Reno court of inquiry it was not desired that he should tell all he knew and said that afterward he never was invited by officers to discuss what he knew of the battle and never volunteered to do so.)
Benteen Q. When you met Trumpeter Martin did he report to you on which side of the river General Custer’s column was? A. Not at that time. He did after we had reached that highest point at the figure “7.” He then pointed out the place from which he had been sent back Q. Did you ask him at the time you first met him? A. No, sir.
But again, Martin to Graham: I was going to tell him about Major Reno being an action too, but he didnt give me the chance.
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 25, 2024 15:26:46 GMT -6
A very interesting discussion indeed! But trying to place blame on someone for something that occurred 148 years ago is like spinning your wheels. Reno was eventually exonerated and is interred in the Custer National Cemetery. I refer you this internet site by the National Park Service- www.nps.gov/libi/learn/historyculture/major-marcus-reno.htmIf you want to place blame for the defeat at the Little Bighorn on someone, then place the blame on the commander. That would be Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer. Hey, just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 9:29:35 GMT -6
A very interesting discussion indeed! But trying to place blame on someone for something that occurred 148 years ago is like spinning your wheels. Reno was eventually exonerated and is interred in the Custer National Cemetery. I refer you this internet site by the National Park Service- www.nps.gov/libi/learn/historyculture/major-marcus-reno.htmIf you want to place blame for the defeat at the Little Bighorn on someone, then place the blame on the commander. That would be Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer. Hey, just my opinion. Unfortunately, and by that stick, the blame for the setback in the valley, lay and remains with the good major. There's no getting around that just as Custer is responsible for his regiment then Reno holds same for his actions both in the valley and subsequently on the bluffs. One area of truth which cannot be avoided is that Terry was misled about the state of threat and events, once Reno's survivors gathered upon the bluffs. At the very best of it, Reno was sorely embarrassed with the truth. Misleading Terry when it absolutely was not necessary or required, was dangerously misleading and produced a myth which endured for decades. Namely that, Reno was besieged by hordes of sharpshooting Indians from 2:30pm of 25th June. That 'story' continued in the press into the 20th Century. Further more, it was not Terry being confused or doting on the matter, since his ADC Capt. Smith (who is worth some research btw) told the same 'story' to reporters in Bismarck, after Far West arrived on the night of 5th July, 1876. Reno's action's in the valley should not be considered in isolation but rather the known realities of countering irregular tactics employed against 7th Cavalry by the Sioux. The reports and comment on actions exist and have been published. The importance of cover (timber) is negated by Reno, where in truth it was salvation and known to be. Of course there was another logic at play ala the guy stood inches away having his head blown off. Since it was Indian practice to knock off obvious or apparent 'chiefs', I surmise that Reno believed that his probly very dusty and ruffled, sweating scalp was the target of several hundred Indian marksmen wishing to violently unwind his mortal coil. He wasn't wrong, was he? That said, he was a warrior Major of cavalry in the US Army with responsibility for the lives of near one hundred and fifty souls under his beck, call and peccadilo, and he failed them miserably. The Indians did not assault into occupied timber - they didn't do it. To make that point clear - they simply did not do that thing and the three companies were perfectly safe in the timber, under cover. Of course the good Major turned them one and all into ducks in a gallery by having them line up mounted platoon by platoon; and then leave one whole platoon and numerous stragglers behind to the fate which he fled from. I'm outta here, is not an option, for US Army battlefield commanders unless so ordered by superiors. When they do go, it is as tail-end rubber duck.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 9:31:54 GMT -6
Good point - it would have to be something like this... View Attachmentdepends what "elevation" he meant while crossing the high ground...also does place him in MTC, as noted by Martin w/WMC. And Custer close to the ford when he left. If Custer was close, an attack of his could have took great pressure off Reno. Martin I did not follow Dry Creek all way back to coulee running north and south but cut across the high ground.When I got up on the elevation I looked behind and saw Custer's command over on the flat and Indians over in the village riding toward the river andwaving buffalo hides. The battalion appeared at this time to be falling back from the river. A mere presence was suffient to divert the Indian force to Custer's battalions downriver at the mouth of Deep Coulee and Greasy Grass Ridge. It worked brilliantly and gets little credit. Kinda guys they were!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 9:33:28 GMT -6
A very interesting discussion indeed! But trying to place blame on someone for something that occurred 148 years ago is like spinning your wheels. Reno was eventually exonerated and is interred in the Custer National Cemetery. I refer you this internet site by the National Park Service- www.nps.gov/libi/learn/historyculture/major-marcus-reno.htmIf you want to place blame for the defeat at the Little Bighorn on someone, then place the blame on the commander. That would be Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer. Hey, just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 9:49:20 GMT -6
I made the point that 7th Cavalry had adapted tactics to what they met, in Montana - and completely understood the value of timber for cover. Here is a report, to this end, by Custer. There are some published articles also, with one in the Galaxy Magazine of July 1876, being postumous and which is a precient read. Talk about clairvoyant....... Nine companies of cavalry were available to support Reno's attack but he chose to cut and run after a shambolic deployment. That's what happened. He never, ever, mentioned this stuff in his CV. Sorry, water people were digging up the road earlier and have closed it for the weekend. Some drivers seem to think that the closure does not apply to them. Remarkable.... I guess that a tow truck is on its way. There is one, one only, explanation for defeat of the five companies east and downriver of Reno's action in the valley. His brief action and impromptu retreat from it. His support was at Fords A and B and he escaped by crossing the river where there wasn't one (a crossing), between the the two supporting forces. That's what he did. Benteen was at A. Custer was at B. Reno was gone.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 10:12:06 GMT -6
I was hunting up the Galaxy Magazine article and bumped THIS on Bruce Brown's site. George A. Custer's Own Account of His Campaign Against the Sioux. The 7th Cavalry en route to the Battle of the Little Bighorn, from the New York Herald, July 23, 1876. Seemingly, Reno was under a cloud and perhaps Custer expected his subordinate to redeemm himself. That occured quite spectacularly, did it not. Reno was intended for charges and Courtmartial, we know this from Cooke in letters he wrote home. Very interesting situation. Well, I have found a part of the article HERE as published in August, 1876. Enjoy, if this is your thing. The hunt goes on, for having shown how timely this publication was, penned during the expedition by GAC, it is the balance of writing and final sentence which did more than any mortal - to ensure that Reno was eternally damned for what he did. It is history and seen for what it was and matured over time to what people want it to be. A wonderful case in point is the misogynistic murders of Henry VIII's five wives where but for being any other, his fate would have equalled theirs with him ever being blasphemed as evil personified for serial victimisation of women.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 10:55:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 11:26:51 GMT -6
Ad Nauseam. Should any have trifled through SLAM Marshall's 'Crimsoned Prairie' linked previously, they will have discovered his opinion on the form of the Custer battle. An 'L' ambush which is a devil of a thing, apparently. This was precisely what Edward S. Godfrey described in his wayward account of the expedition and its climax, in his 1892 study of the battle published, if memory serves, by the Galaxy Magazine in 1892. In decyphering his wittering I found the battle images by D.F. Barry to be confusingly contrary and it took a long time to figure it out. That done (long ago now) behold where the troubles really began for 7th Cavalry's right wing. Of course Godfrey's idea of the deep route onto the field was a wayward attempt to justify Benteen and not resuming or maintaining the valley attack, as ordered by Custer in the 'last message', sent before Reno's retreat. Confirmed terrain match Showing where Gall advised D.F. Barry the soldiers fought. They had obviously been blocked in pulling off the river at Greasy Grass Hill in moving to the Calhoun terrain. Maguire's sketch map of the battle which accompanied his July 10th, 1876 report As per image text works and structures below the National Cemetery during Edward S. Luce's time as Superintendent. Aaaaah..... The hillsThis one goes where the other ones go! Good God, General! Where are they?Moaner LisaEnjoy
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 26, 2024 14:33:01 GMT -6
So herosrest in a previous post had a link that directed me to the below webpage- www.astonisher.com/archives/museum/george_custer_big_horn.html(from 100 Voices from the Little Bighorn by Bruce Brown) There are some interesting insights on that page (consisting of two articles). I list only a few of those insights below- “Because this dispatch was not published until July 23, 1876, Reno didn't learn about it until after the battle. So when Custer ordered Reno and his 112 men to charge the huge Sioux village on June 25, Reno had no idea Custer had already publically hung him out to dry in the pages of the New York Herald, designating him the scapegoat if the 1876 Sioux campaign failed.” I also believe the second article shown on that page was written by George A. Custer because of the following egocentric type wording. Remembering that I believe that it was stated on another thread that GAC force marched his men (and therefore the horses) almost to the point of exhaustion from June 21st to the 24th. (to arrive at the Little Bighorn). “The trail led up the valley of the Rosebud. Reno took up the trail and followed it about twenty miles, but faint heart never won fair lady, neither did it ever pursue and overtake an Indian village.” “A court-martial is strongly hinted at, and if one is not ordered it will not be because it is not richly deserved. The guides who were with Reno report that the trail where the latter was abandoned indicates that the Indian village of 380 lodges was moving in such deliberate manner and left so recently that Reno's command could have overtaken it in a march of one day and a half. Few officers have ever had such a fine opportunity to make a successful and telling strike and few ever failed so completely to improve their opportunities”. The entire webpage is a very interesting read! I have only included a few quotes in that article that I found of interest. Now, I believe there is a difference in that one officer (Reno) was more concerned about his men then chasing down Native Americans. Yes, Reno panicked at the Little Bighorn in the timber. But everyone is a human being first, and whatever rank they hold is second! Where GAC was obviously more interested in chasing down Native Americans (and his own glory) and wearing down his troops (and horses) almost to the point of exhaustion while doing it! Again (and I have stated this in two other threads) what kind of egocentric (or egomaniac) person would take 4 of his relatives into a possible battle scenario? Remembering that all 4 were killed (along with GAC)! Yep, I am convinced the person that wrote that article in 1876 was good old GAC! Again, just my opinion!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 15:24:19 GMT -6
Astonisher is a useful resource and Brown is a proponent of 'Tiger down early' theories with Custer shot at the ford. He has done considerable work with Peter Thompson's account of events, and of course the hundred voices are there to work through, repleat with considerable notes and source references. We could debate Reno's humanity but it adds little to understanding what took place since, from get go he was manipulating reality. This is clear from published record and particularly letters. Having penned a note carried privately to Sheridan dated July 4th, I find it difficult that one did not also wing its way to Cameron, and another to Grant, pleading his exemplary case for promotion into Custer's boots and for Terry and pretty much the entire expeditions staff to be fired. You may find that difficult to grasp but something of a whiteout has continued on his behalf, since mistakenly being aquitted from further investigation by the undertaking at Chicago, in early 1879. It was a different world, working to different data transmission lags. I can only, again, refer you to Terry's 'Painful Duty' report for consideration of the information which it offers. Reno was most certainly human, we can agree this. However, he was in a hole with Custer over the Tongue to Rosebud jawnt and there is no right or wrong when your CO brings, or threatens charges. You are diddly cucumber until that goes before CM, or is not taken further. Custer placed a noose around Reno's career and left him dangling by it. Now Marcus. Be a good chap and fill your boots, will you, Go charge that camp! He did it The egocentric and maniacal Custer ethos is a tawdry effort full of swiss cheese Reno sympathy. He led a battalion into battle and led it back out again by charging full tilt into a river - without knowing there was a way out on the opposite side. I don't believe that had ever happened before, and neither has it since. It was not innovative, effective, capable, or even intelligent, since turning your back on a mounted Indian invited precisely what took place and with the caveat that troops survived only because an attack had developed downriver which drew Reno's enemy off his back. There's little point peeling the banana further, so good luck with your ideas.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 26, 2024 15:39:54 GMT -6
|
|