Time for some answers

[wild]

A point of information ----Wallace when questioned at the COI did not know if his watch was an hour fast or slow or if it was set to local time.
Further ,witnesses give evidence of actions taking place at something o'clock yet the court never esablishes if everyone is using the same standard.

[mcaryf]

I have been looking at Little Big Horn Diary by James Willert which gives a lot of detail concerning the movements of General Terry and the Far West. So far the earliest recorded sailing time I have seen for the Far West was 2.30am and the latest mooring (noted in Terry's Field Diary) was 8.15pm. As it is most improbable that the Far West would steam in unfamiliar waters in poor light, it looks as if Terry and the Far West were operating broadly on some form of local time.


I found this as specifying the standard for watches to be used by railroad employees in the US in 1893

"...open faced, size 16 or 18, have a minimum of 17 jewels, adjusted to at least five positions, keep time accurately to within 30 seconds a week, adjusted to temps of 34 to 100 °F. have a double roller, steel escape wheel, lever set, regulator, winding stem at 12 o'clock, and have bold black Arabic numerals on a white dial, with black hands."

Watches had been around for over 300 years by the time of the LBH so I guess the officers knew how to keep them in reasonable order and, from the above, accuracy of 30 seconds a week was not unusual. The evidence we have suggested that the officers synchronised their watches at the Officers' Call on the 22nd June so perhaps we should allow for 15 seconds of inaccuracy!

Unfortunately the first luminous watches did not appear until the 20th century so the officers would have relied on moon, stars or candles for night readings.

Most of Varnum's statements about time were consistent with Wallace's as being apparently later than those of other officers. They were close comrades having previously been classmates. Who knows, perhaps they had an arrangement to keep their watches set the same in case of Wallace having a problem with his. However, I would have thought it should be no great problem for Wallace to keep a track of how much his Engineer's time would differ from other officer's local setting and get to the time needed for his report that way. Now if I had been given Wallace's job I would probably have carried two watches but there is no evidence that I know of that says he did.

Hi DC

I am glad you agree that it was not impossible for some Indians of the era to have understood about clocks and time although plainly most of the "hostiles" would not.

Regards

Mike

[AZ Ranger]

bc said:

Regarding figuring noon by the sun. I've never been able to figure out when High Noon is by looking at shadows and the sun. The sun is usually at an angle from the south and looking at my shadow or the the shadow of trees, etc. produces about about an hour variation. I can sense when the sun is overhead but there is still about an hour or so variation even when looking overhead and comparing to a shadow. I don't know how they would figure high noon with any certainity without using a sundial or similar device (a stick in the ground) and I don't know if anyone carried a sundial.

If there was a prescribed military procedure for synchronizing to local/sun time I would like to know what it was. Also was anyone carrying a sextant to verify their positions both in the Dakota column and the Custer column? I believe that when you shoot the sun, you have to have a watch set for the time you are referencing your distance to such as St. Paul or Chicago time as well as some type of table of distances. I believe the sextant allows for the sun angles and can find high noon. Maybe someone else knows more about this. If they used a sextant to find High Noon, then it was conceivable they synchronized off of that.

I don't know who the officer(s) in the column(s) were in charge of tracking position and distance traveled, but I suspect Lt. Wallace was involved in doing that which would make sense why his watch was set for St. Paul/Chicago time depending upon what his sextant tables were published from.

Just looking at sunrise and sunset tables, Billings is one hour later than St. Paul and approx 1 hour 16 minutes later than Chicago. Personally to me, it would be easier to synchronize watches based off of sunrise or sunset and then having the sunrise/sunset tables for St. Paul/Chicago and calculate your distance away but then again to be accurate, a sextant would be necessary unless you have a good map to work from which may also be a possibility since they weren't exactly working in uncharted terrain.

And do we know if most officers were using FAL time or did they synchronize along the route?

I agree with you bc. My point is that you can tell noon close without a watch. What time do you set you watch to even if you have the exact sunrise for your location?

A stick in the ground and watch the shadow if you have time to sit there that long. Boys Scouts know how to do that. Even when the sun is at angle the length of shadow can determine noon. Noon is always 1200 hrs sunrise and sunset is different each day.

AZ Ranger

[eaglewizard]

mcaryf:

I have a couple of nineteenth century pocket watches and the glass is hinged on both. It should be possible to feel the time even in the dark. This could be the reason for having a hinged glass.

-eagle

[mcaryf]

Hi Eagle

Thanks for the information, I had not thought of that being used to modern ones with sealed glass.

Regards

Mike

[Dark Cloud]

A man with a watch knows the time. A man with two watches NEVER does.

Do not fall for the assumption that 'diaries', 'journals', et al were filled out lovingly and accurately each day. Rather, they were filled in later, often enough.

Captain Grant Marsh of the Far West was entirely familiar with those waters, and probably could make progress in the dark. He set a record getting the wounded back to Fort AL.

As AZ points out, they could not have been operating in any form of ever changing local time without sextant and taking - rather pointless - readings for constant watch adjustments.

The standards for watches nearly twenty years after the fact are as compelling as past specificity enthusiasts here offered Burmese mules in a later century as criteria for judging the pack train locomotion in the 19th, specifically those under Custer. That you believe the accuracy of these watches, and discount the constant trauma upon them of riding a horse for weeks, and that you see the ability of opening the glass to be a benefit rather than entry for detritus, does not speak but to gullibility. Riding the rails was far less traumatic, and watches could be reset at each station.

Unless you can prove that references to time were recalled from those of the speaker's own watch and not from later conversations (the letter writing frenzy in early July), you aren't verifying much if anything.

Most gracious of you to acknowledge my observation "it was not impossible for some Indians of the era to have understood about clocks and time although plainly most of the "hostiles" would not" even though that was not the source of our argument. You said an Agency Indian would know how to read a watch, and this particular unnamed Indian was an Agency Indian because he was heading for an Agency, that he had obtained a watch at the Rosebud, understood its use and maintenance requirements, and kept time for only Reno's portion of the battle and nothing else, and that Respects Nothing recalled this clearly decades later for the coincidental benefit of someone - and a translator - who had an agenda. And this is proven by pointing to the sky, since everyone apportions the sky into hour components widely understood.

No need to apologize for accusing me of a racial slur by my pointing out technological ignorance of linear time measurement devices among the Sioux at that time, which was entirely accurate and not relevant to race at all.

[Jas. Watson]

As mentioned earlier in this thread, I am one of those nuts who only use antique pocket watches, I have a number of them and they are very well maintained. But I have to disagree slightly with what Mike submitted regarding Railroad watches. What he submitted was correct, but also later, and Railroad watches were a specific type watch--very expensive and not at all usual for most people to carry. The average watch was a considerably less accurate thing. Someone (CONZ I believe) asked whether there was such a thing as an 'army issue' watch then; well almost. The American Watch Company in 1862 produced their Wm. Ellery line which was billed as ''the Soldier's Watch", sort of the Timex of the Civil War. It was a heavy plain silver hunting cased watch, often with a patriotic or military scene engraved, supposedly fairly shock proof (although you couldn't tell it by mine!), no frills, and was typical of the more inexpensive but fairly good quality of the watches of the day. After the Civil War the Wm. Ellery model continued to be produced because they were by then so popular. I have no doubt that many would have been carried by officers and men in the cavalry in the 1870's.
In addition their were many other popular brands and lines, Elgin had theirs, Columbus Watch Co. was one of the first to come out with a stem winder (and it still wound with a key if one preferred), but none of these mid range watches were anywhere near as accurate as the 'official Railroad' watch--nor nearly as expensive either. Many cheaper watches toward the end of the century were touted as being RR watches--even to the point of having steam locomotives etc. engraved on them--but were in fact not...only cheap imitations.
The point of all this is that from various readings and from personal experience with a variety of original watches I can say that if a dozen or so watches were synchronized one day, a day or so later one would normally expect a good five to ten minute discrepency with at least some of them. It was said during the mid 19th century that if a watch kept within ten minutes a day it was acceptable. (this had a lot to do with the spring tensions etc.) Folks often reset their watches.
On a side note, the only really reliable watches then were Fuzees--who's movements were entirely different from the later lever watches. Normally found in the 18th century and very early 19th (I have a very late one dated 1837), their movements greatly resembled the gears of a ten speed bicycle and were in fact chain driven just like a bicycle--if you can imagine a hand made bicycle chain the thickness of a thread! And you can imagine what they cost! But they were incredibly accurate, I used one an entire year without resetting it once!
As for seeing them in the dark, not that hard if you are familiar with the watch. Some have fairly thick dark hands that show up against the white dial well. Of course gold hands on a silver dial or some such would not, but the usual watch was as the former.

Jas~

[bc]

azranger said:

I agree with you bc. My point is that you can tell noon close without a watch. What time do you set you watch to even if you have the exact sunrise for your location?

A stick in the ground and watch the shadow if you have time to sit there that long. Boys Scouts know how to do that. Even when the sun is at angle the length of shadow can determine noon. Noon is always 1200 hrs sunrise and sunset is different each day.

AZ Ranger

Hi AZ, just to clarify my discussion points(I'm not arguing with anyone just discussing), assuming you have the sunrise/sunset tables for a known location, you add the minutes for the distance you are west of the table location, and set your watch for that at sunrise where you are at, depending upon (and this would test the patience of Gordie and some) which side of the mountain you are on as to whether you have a typical sunrise or not. Anyway this is just a discussion point cause I'm still waiting to see if any of our West Pointers (if we have any) knows of the military procedure for telling time back in those days. I know with navy ships, even Sir Francis Drake had one in the 1500's, they used a chronometer set for Grenwich Mean Time and then used a sextant to determine their location.

That said, I don't know what the columns were using for time, if anything, or if they had sextants to determine location. You probably don't need tables to figure sunrise/sunset. Just take the FAL sunrise/sunset and add a minute for every 15 miles west of FAL you are along with a minute or so a day for the lengthening of the summer days. They used methods back then that we have long forgot.

You mention the boy scout method. I lost my old boy scout manual a long time ago so I'm not prepared to discuss it but I do remember the stick method for high noon. It is based on the same concept as a sundial. The boy scouts didn't invent the method but copied something that has been known for centuries. They very well could have been using a stick method in the military and LBH. Somewhere there has to be an old engineering manual of some sort that discusses that.

I also agree with those that to have an effective time schedule system sergeants as well as any others who could afford them would have watches. Also, to move at a certain time, you have to get up early to eat, care for your horses (feed, water, combing, etc.), saddling, packing, latrine duties, assembly, and other activities.

Regarding the Indians and times. About all the NAs were agency/reservation Indians who were now off the reservation which was the reason for the whole 1876 campaign. The Indians have been on reservations and receiving military trade goods since the 1850's and 1860's. The first treaty of Laramie was in 1851 and the second treaty was in 1868 for instance. For years they have been going to and hanging around military posts to receive their allotments. Those dealings will have accumtomed them to some knowledge of the time-keeping ways of the pale faces. That along with years and years of trading with pale faces. Maybe some young buck had never seen a watch, but I believe most had some awareness of longknife timekeeping.

[crzhrs]

Have to agree about the familiarity of Indians with Whites. Many of the combatants knew each other.

Dorman was familiar to the Sioux--
Girard was a trader and had a personal feud with Sitting Bull--
T Custer arrested Rain-in-the-Face--
G Custer must have been known to the Cheyenne--

And probably many others. So, yes, Indians, especially those who had spent time on reservations and even non-reservation Indians must have come in contact with many of the White Man's goods and knew about them or of them.

Whether any knew the workings of a timepiece and what it represents is a possibility.

[Dark Cloud]

Really? Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull and their guys were Agency Indians? As said, Indians - quite possibly all of them - visited agencies to get food and ammo, but hardly all of them or even a majority stayed there all the time to qualify as 'agency' types. If they spend half the time off and half on the reservation, what are they? Or 54% vs. 46%? And how would we know, given the fraudulent records kept by the agents, whose census was off by huge amounts, the battle revealed?

Knowing the Americans had noise making devices and looked at them a lot is a long ways from understanding the concept of time measurement, especially after living in cyclical terms for eons. Think of all the back info that has to be more or less understood before handling the concept of a clock, and what has to be unlearned. If it was common knowledge among Indians, they'd have long had them giving duration in minutes and hours, not sleeps and shadow movement as accounts from the battle reveal. At least, absent helpful translators screwing up what was actually said.

It's a stretch to say 'many' of the combatants knew each other. Some did. Some Indian accounts said they had no idea who Custer was till after the battle, had never heard of him. Custer was more familiar to those Cheyenne of the southern branch, and hardly all of them, than these in the battle. He'd never fought or had much if any contact with the Northern Cheyenne. White men look a lot alike, after all.

[crzhrs]

No CH & SB were not agency types, but SB did go to trading posts, whereas CH had nothing to do with any whites. That doesn't mean other Indians didn't have contact with agencies, visited relatives there and picked up some of the White Man's goods. They probably could care less about watches, but who knows, there might have been an Indian who did. Let's not discount the ability of non-western people to grasp other cultures and their technology.

"Many" is subjective. I'd say there was contact among some of the antagonists at some point and were recognized after the battle. How many is that, don't know, but enough to qualify as "many."

[mcaryf]

Hi Jas

I am not too bothered with watch times being out 20 or so minutes either way as I personally would have difficulty in judging sun times to that degree of accuracy and in most cases we do not know if a given time came from a watch or from the sun. The issue is about a potential and consistent variation by around 1hr 20 mins because Wallace might have been using a different time setting.

I do not know what procedure the army used for time keeping which is why I raised the question in my original posts.

If I was required to guess I would not imagine that they would fine tune their times by the odd minute every day. I would expect that once they were in a new vicinity, where they intended to operate for a while and which was something like an hour different from their origin, then there would be some readjustment but with all the officers and NCO's doing the same change.

In a recent post I have put forward some evidence to suggest that Terry and the Far West were operating on a version of local time so I suspect that all Terry's units would have been on a similar time setting but I do not yet know that for a fact.

I see DC claiming that Grant Marsh knew the river system exceedingly well. How then was he persuaded that the LBH was just a creek and not a river so that Edgar Stewart writes that he went 15 miles along the Big Horn beyond it before having to come back again?

If anybody can find me any evidence that the Far West did not tie up every night at this stage of the campaign, I will be very impressed. The river had rapids, islands and was in some degree of flood, I think only a fool would have tried to negotiate up river in the dark and only a fool would suggest that Grant Marsh did so.

Finally I gave DC a couple of opportunities to withdraw gracefully from his exposed position of asserting that Indians of that era were incapable of grasping the white man's concept of time or understanding what a watch was. I see he is still digging himself deeper into that mire of prejudice and I will leave him to continue to do that.

Regards

Mike

[AZ Ranger]

I suspect without the need to know what time it is there would be little desire to learn how to tell time.

AZ Ranger

[AZ Ranger]

bc Where did they get the tables from in the 1870s? I find it hard to believe they had the tables then for Custer Battlefield? Not impossible just hard to believe. Time of day was not that important to people not punching a time clock. Sunrise and Sunset also varies north and south. From Phoenix to Flagstaff just heading north it changes 4 minutes.

AZ Ranger

[elisabeth]

Just speculating: the tables for the region could have been drawn up in the days when the Bozeman Trail forts were still operating, perhaps?

In garrison, at least, the army almost was punching a time clock: an incredibly strict timetable, specific to the quarter-hour and even beyond. (See Barnitz, Life in Custer's Cavalry, p. 158.) So it would have been necessary to agree a common time and stick to it within each post, whether or not it was co-ordinated with others in the district.