|
Post by fred on Feb 22, 2008 17:56:14 GMT -6
Incidentally, I think Elisabeth's analysis is very, very good. She is probably correct here.
These Indian accounts are hairy, at best, and I think Feather Earring's is included in that statement. It wouldn't surprise me if the "W" on Luce was firing at Indians trying to get up MTC in an attempt to come in from behind the Luce/Nye-Carwright complex.
That would mean Custer had already left the Ford B environs.
I have posted this before, but this is the perfect spot to do it again.
Indians Known to Have Been at Ford B:
√ Cheyenne (probably as many as 7 to 10): • Bob-tail Horse • Roan Bear • Buffalo Calf • Big Nose • Mad Wolf (he was an old man) • White Shield (not there initially, but joined them a few minutes later) • Rising Sun [Michno] • Hanging Wolf [LBHA] • Young Little Wolf (he first saw Custer in MTC, which should put him near the ford) • American Horse (the Cheyenne chief, returning from the Reno fight where he was not one of those crossing the LBH) • Possibly Pawnee, Wooden Thigh, Yellow Horse, and Horse Road, who were camp guards.
√ Sioux (thought to be around 4 or 5 in number): • White Cow Bull (Oglala) • Shave Elk (Oglala): Possibly at Ford B. A member of Big Road’s Northern band of Oglala Sioux, Shave Elk and 4 others were riding up MTC when they saw Custer’s column coming at them. They rode back down, crossed at Ford B, and it is not unreasonable—though not certain—that 1 or more of them stayed to help defend the ford. If they all stayed—and I think that is equally unlikely— then it would explain the various commentaries about 4 or 5 Sioux being at the ford. Yellow Nose, a Ute/Cheyenne, may have been another.
This would total 20, maximum, though I think it is certainly possible-- even likely-- that there were several more in the form of Cheyenne camp guards.
Also, this is very interesting:
1. Custer appeared on the slope of a ridge near a crossing, but the Indians knew he couldn’t cross there. [96] [Is this at Ford B? It sounds like it. Why couldn’t he cross? Too boggy?] 2. As Crazy Horse headed down toward a ford, “Custer appeared upon the river bank.” [96] Custer, realizing he couldn’t ford the river there, “began to fire into the camp, while some of his men dismounted and were apparently examining the banks.” [96] [This clearly sounds like Ford B.]
This was from an article written by Charles Eastman in 1900 and the page numbers refer to the Graham book. The italicized portions are my own notes and the purple is direct quotes from the book.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Jas. Watson on Feb 23, 2008 17:58:19 GMT -6
Uh oh...I see it time to rethink (again) my Luce ridge theory......
Jas~
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 23, 2008 18:35:12 GMT -6
It might show just how little the three company skirmish line would cover of the valley and how easily they were flanked--and also the forlorn hope they had of actually effectively defending the timber with those few men Ah reason at last.Forlorn hope I like it Jas.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Feb 24, 2008 3:10:11 GMT -6
Fred, the Eastman piece says Custer was going to have to go a further half-mile downstream before he'd be able to cross. Do we know where that would be? It looks like solid bluffs for the first 1/4 mile downstream from MTF, then only very narrow coulees down to the river.The first semi-feasible access seems to be directly level with the "R" of Greasy Grass Ridge on the Bonafede map, but still far from ideal. Yet Deep Ravine, the next likely option, is more like a mile downstream. (Thanks for pointing out the scale, Jas. -- I'd never have spotted that!) Obviously the river will have changed course quite a bit over the years, so there might have been more flatland between bluffs and river on the east bank then; from the Maguire map it looks as if there was.
Just wondering ... The mouth of MTC is very wide. And the Bonafede map shows soldier casings about 1/4 mile to the south of where MTF is marked. Could Custer have first hit the river a little further south than we think, i.e. at the first point the bluffs allow, and then had to explore along the bank a bit further north before finding the ford? I don't like it much, as he'd surely get a clue as to the crossing place from seeing Indians use it. (The ones they supposedly chased down MTC, if no-one else.) But it might make sense both of Eastman's story, and of the screeching-to-a-halt rather than plunging straight across?
As for why he couldn't cross at the first point he went for: not sure how far to trust Thompson, of course, but he may offer some help here. He says that where he was, "the water was rushing very rapidly. Both banks were wet with the splashing made by the animals going to and from the village" -- which might have made for a poor crossing. (The legendary beaver dam can't have been a factor here, I think, as people were happily crossing at MTF throughout the rest of the day, and on the 27th/28th once the Terry/Gibbon relief party arrived.)
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 24, 2008 7:37:23 GMT -6
Elisabeth--
I don't know what to say here, other than I cannot trust Indian numbers, distances, directions, and times (other than time taken off the overhead sun, and even that swings an hour either way). Two Moon, for example, said they cut willow sticks and placed them on the soldiers' bodies to see how many there were. They counted 388 (obviously using a different decimal system!). I have even given up recording the "length of village" testimonies.
I don't know how the professional historians would treat this-- it's probably more of an issue for Gordon Harper or "erkki"-- but I now pick-n-choose what seems to fit. Maybe that's terrible, but again, I just try applying common sense, logic, and then see if there is anything close to corroborating evidence or testimony from some other source. The more I read, the more I seem to have that "rolling eye syndrome."
Very best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by markland on Feb 24, 2008 10:28:50 GMT -6
Elisabeth-- I don't know what to say here, other than I cannot trust Indian numbers, distances, directions, and times (other than time taken off the overhead sun, and even that swings an hour either way). Two Moon, for example, said they cut willow sticks and placed them on the soldiers' bodies to see how many there were. They counted 388 (obviously using a different decimal system!). I have even given up recording the "length of village" testimonies. I don't know how the professional historians would treat this-- it's probably more of an issue for Gordon Harper or "erkki"-- but I now pick-n-choose what seems to fit. Maybe that's terrible, but again, I just try applying common sense, logic, and then see if there is anything close to corroborating evidence or testimony from some other source. The more I read, the more I seem to have that "rolling eye syndrome." Very best wishes, Fred. Not to take this off on a tangent but one possible-and I emphasize possible-explanation of the count being so far off is that he was also counting body parts as depicted in the Red Horse? ledger art. Billy
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Feb 24, 2008 10:35:49 GMT -6
Billy, I wondered about that too. Count one head, count one torso?
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 24, 2008 11:51:30 GMT -6
Not to take this off on a tangent but one possible-and I emphasize possible-explanation of the count being so far off is that he was also counting body parts... Why?
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 25, 2008 10:29:59 GMT -6
Clair-- Your "Butler found" spot is wrong. I think they place him somewhere down that path extending from Luce Ridge to the "intersection." Maybe mid-way down that path. A beautiful job! Best wishes, Fred. Yeah...that's a real bone of contention. So far I've found three locations for poor SGT Butler...where I showed it, where the marker is, and a spot closer to the CPL's position. Take your pick. <g> Clair
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 25, 2008 10:32:44 GMT -6
Incidentally, I think Elisabeth's analysis is very, very good. She is probably correct here. These Indian accounts are hairy, at best, and I think Feather Earring's is included in that statement. It wouldn't surprise me if the "W" on Luce was firing at Indians trying to get up MTC in an attempt to come in from behind the Luce/Nye-Carwright complex. It's also possible that the Luce position was firing at the Natives coming from the Reno fight over Weir point. Now that would mean that it was done a bit later...time enough for the Natives to pull off Reno, head north in masses enough to warrant "volley fire" against them from Cavalry still on Luce Ridge. In effect, it would be covering the "backside" of any force struggling from Ford B, up Calhoun Ridge towards Calhoun Hill, from a native force coming up behind them down Boyer's ridge and your "west coulee" and "middle coulee" off Weir Point. Clair
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 25, 2008 12:47:03 GMT -6
It's also possible that the Luce position was firing at the Natives coming from the Reno fight over Weir point. Now that would mean that it was done a bit later...time enough for the Natives to pull off Reno, head north in masses enough to warrant "volley fire" against them from Cavalry still on Luce Ridge. Clair-- This is very funny! I just came on here to post this because I just read the Wooden Leg account in Graham's The Custer Myth. The timing is absolutely perfect. Indians-- Gall and Iron Cedar, certainly-- saw the Custer column moving north. There were probably some Indians already moving in that direction after the sighting. The volley firing was heard as Reno's men were arriving on the hilltop-- Benteen's as well-- and when the Indians came within range, the troopers on Luce Ridge kept them back with that firing. Very interesting timing. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 25, 2008 15:54:44 GMT -6
Such a quick movement by a mass of Indians would also well explain why any Cavalry companies down at the Ford B would head up Calhoun Ridge, rather than back up MTC the way that they came.
This would allow for Custer to be hit at Ford B for those who wish to model that, but I don't think this model would fit well for Custer being found at LSH. Rather, he with the HQ party would be on Calhoun Hill, I would think.
Anyway, the natives from the Reno fight went to Custer two main ways: - down the east bank of the LBH (over Wier Point), and - down the west bank of the LBH (through the village or along its eastern side to Ford B)
I suspect that a few of the group in the valley would get to Ford B first (Two Moons, Crazy Horse), while shortly thereafter groups along the bluff would start showing up.
And it was when Keogh saw Natives coming at him up their old trail that he knew he was in trouble...
But if there were enough natives to fire at coming up the cavalry trail, and if Yates was still coming up from the ford, would Custer have ever gone to find Ford D? I'd say no way...
So in my model, no Natives were coming over Weir Point by the time Custer was taking Yates over Last Stand Hill and north...but they could have showed up just after...
But by this time I think Keogh was "safely" ensconced on Calhoun Hill, and nobody was left on Luce or N-C ridges.
So I think the firing off Luce Ridge and N-C ridge was toward the ford crossing to slow the natives down, and to prevent them from flanking Yates' squadron slowly moving up Calhoun Ridge (probably a dismounted, firing withdrawal towards Calhoun Hill).
I don't think the Natives pressed Yates' very closely, and just as much due to Keogh's fire as Yates'. When Yates got to Calhoun Hill, Keogh's squadron joined him and took over that position while Custer pulled Yates off to the north. Couldn't have been that much pressure at this point, and it begs the question as to why all that ammo was discharged off Luce/N-C ridges.
So the model's dilemma is: > If the pressure was so great while cavalry was still on Luce/N-C, why was any element found to the north (LSH?) too far for a good defensive position? > If the pressure was light enough to admit of a recon to the north with a squadron and the headquarters, why was all that ammo expended on Luce/N-C?
One possible solution is that when the natives at Ford B were building up force, they saw the cavalry going up Calhoun ridge, so they automatically began flanking moves left (Crazy Horse/Lame White Man) and right (Gall/Two Moons). Keogh fired to block the moves on Yates' right flank from Luce and N-C. But the pressure was light on Yates' withdrawal since the bulk of Warriors went to the left behind Greasy Grass Ridge and up to Deep Ravine to "surround" Custer.
IOW, it WAS heave for a while at the ford when the cavalry was firing from Luce, but it lightened up as Yates' withdrew and the natives switched to flanking moves rather than massed assaults for a while.
Clair
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Feb 28, 2008 9:37:58 GMT -6
I have been reading Willert and in that I came across a quote from the RCOI Abstract that has Benteen saying that there were 900 warriors in the valley and another 4 or 5 hundred on the highest point about a mile away. I presume this last is Weir Peaks.
I was not familiar with this remark by Benteen so I checked the Internet version of RCOI and there on page 358 I found Benteen testifying that there were 4 or 5 Indians on the highest point.
Elisabeth kindly consulted her copies of the Abstract and Nichol's RCOI for me and found the 4 or 500 hundred in the Abstract on page 138 but the Nichol's RCOI has the 4 or 5 (on page 406).
If indeed there were several hundred warriors over by Weir Peaks then that would be a significant factor in Custer's moves.
It seems a bit strange that Benteen would bother to mention 4 or 5 Indians a mile away before he mentions the 900 somewhat closer. However, if they had been there, others might also have commented on this potentially threatening force up on the bluffs.
Is there any way to go back to the original documents or newspaper articles to check whether the Abstract is correct or the Nicols/Internet version.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 28, 2008 9:50:48 GMT -6
Clair--
I don't believe there were masses of Indians coming over Weir Peaks at any point in the battle. I think it was probably only a few and they were on foot. Gall, Iron Cedar, maybe others, but they posed little threat to any troops in the Ford B area or on Luce/Nye-Cartwright. Quite possibly some Indians were chasing after Boyer or following Custer's column from the ridges. Once troops got on Luce, they directed fire at whatever Indians they saw on the east side of the river. Minor stuff; no real import, although the Bonafede map threw me for a while. I think it is more an indication that there were merely some Indians there than any large-scale confrontation.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 28, 2008 10:06:06 GMT -6
Mike--
In the Nichols version, the number is 4 or 5, not 400 or 500. First of all, you could never get that many people on either of the Weir Peaks and it would even be a lot for the Weir loaf. It wouldn't make sense. The following is from my notes of the RCOI book by Nichols:
In response to a question about whether or not Reno’s command was engaged at this time [as Benteen reached Reno on the hill], Benteen replied, “I think the Indians saw me about the time I saw them [in the valley], and that checked their pursuit [of Reno]. They came around, probably 4 or 5 or more, to the highest point of land there. Maybe they had been there all the time, I don’t know about that.” [406]
If you saw "4- or 500" in Willert, I think it was a misprint, a typo, nothing more. There is no way I can believe that to be the case. No testimony I have read-- anywhere-- even hints at an Indian force of that size on the east bank of the river at that time.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|