|
Post by bc on Feb 28, 2008 14:48:29 GMT -6
I understand Wild, just had to vent. Same for Fred. Age old problem is how to discuss tangental issues without going off on another tangent. Too many interrelationships. I originally was a proponed of the Custer fell first theory but the more I read here it doesn't add up. I haven't rulled it out either. Posting theories are only good if they are complete. I have read Clair's theory and have looked at his excellent maps. I am going to try to print them out when I get to a computer hooked to a printer. However, for the maps and theories to work for me, I need timelines as a basis of comparison to other theories and they have to be on the same document. I hope Clair can add some times to his maps including times of Reno's actions. Then we need a teaching session so everyone can build these google earth maps.
But, even posting theories and maps goes by the wayside when they disappear 2 or 3 pages back by subsequent posts. It is even harder for me to follow when I follow the practice of looking back at the last 25 posts all the time and even then I read them from the top down in reverse chronological order which is illogical in itself. If I miss a day or two or more or on some days just a few hours, then there are a number of posts I miss. We almost need the last 50 posts to look at because of prolific posters we have here. I think there are many of us who start by looking at the last 25 posts. Then we develop hot topics that everybody jumps on until it has been exhausted. I'm surprised this thread is still going.
Fred, I still like the former Fred's battle theory and chronology project. Keep it going. You should meet him some time. I really like him. Maybe you two could get together for coffee or a beer and discuss old times. He'd probably tell you that trying to moderate these threads trying to keep them on point will wear the moderator to a frazzle. I remember the former Fred was a proponent of the Ford D movement but it appears that you aren't ready to go there just yet. Maybe you two can reconcile that issue whenever you meet but there is probably a better thread to do that on than this one.
Now on topic, my Custer fell first at ford B theory fails unless subsequent movements are deemed to have been a retreat and not a village attack agressive type movement. I would also like to see the time frames for Clair's and anyone elses' movements from Luce or MTC forward unless they are here somewhere and I have missed them. I need to relate them to Varnum's(?) times regarding Reno's and Benteen's movements. I look at Clair's maps and I can't visualize the timing. Maybe the time frames could be placed inside the arrows.
|
|
|
Post by Montana Bab on Feb 28, 2008 15:26:53 GMT -6
Fred, I still like the former Fred's battle theory and chronology project. Keep it going. You should meet him some time. I really like him. Maybe you two could get together for coffee or a beer and discuss old times. He'd probably tell you that trying to moderate these threads trying to keep them on point will wear the moderator to a frazzle. I remember the former Fred was a proponent of the Ford D movement but it appears that you aren't ready to go there just yet. Maybe you two can reconcile that issue whenever you meet but there is probably a better thread to do that on than this one. . I totally agree with BC about the other "project" you had Fred. I learned so much, but unfortunately only ended up with pages and pages of information that was bits and peices (as Elisabeth alluded to) and when the posts got to the 25th it just split off in debates that went every which way. I believe that the LBH Battle is identical to the assassination of JFK. Tons of theories and no total conclusions except for the fact that a man died, and in Custer's case, he and his troops died! I hope that this "project" takes place, and I'll be happy to stay away and fill my printer with more stuff to print, if only to have the opportunity to have access to some serious discussions and debates. No personalities, just intellectual adults who can agree to disagree and give their own view! I say go for it! (And I won't muddy the waters with my own opinions or "chaff") If I have any questions, I'll just trouble poor Fred ! We are fortunate on these boards to have people who have devoted years of study to this subject, and I am one who wants and needs to take advantage of that. Montana
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 28, 2008 16:34:41 GMT -6
I still like the former Fred's battle theory and chronology project. Keep it going. You should meet him some time. I really like him. Maybe you two could get together for coffee or a beer and discuss old times. He'd probably tell you that trying to moderate these threads trying to keep them on point will wear the moderator to a frazzle. I remember the former Fred was a proponent of the Ford D movement but it appears that you aren't ready to go there just yet. Maybe you two can reconcile that issue whenever you meet but there is probably a better thread to do that on than this one. Now on topic, my Custer fell first at ford B theory fails unless subsequent movements are deemed to have been a retreat and not a village attack agressive type movement. I would also like to see the time frames for Clair's and anyone elses' movements from Luce or MTC forward unless they are here somewhere and I have missed them. I need to relate them to Varnum's(?) times regarding Reno's and Benteen's movements. I look at Clair's maps and I can't visualize the timing. Maybe the time frames could be placed inside the arrows. BC-- The new Fred still believes as the old Fred did, about the Ford D trek. It's just that it is off in the distance somewhere and in order to put it into proper perspective, I need to work on the timing issues. In order for me to do that, I need to do more research. I will let the cat's tail out of the bag and at the risk of being a priapic boor I am trying to write a book on the strategy and tactics of the entire campaign, obviously including the battle. The thing that is unique about what I am trying to do is the formatting, the enclosures and addenda, and the approach to the battle. This past summer, I wrote some 30,000+ words, but then had to reconsider some of my timing scenarios. In the meantime, I am also working on more "source" material that will hopefully "confirm" some of my "theories." I have tested a few on these boards and so far, they seem to have held up. Right now, my own advance work-- not the writing part-- goes as far as Luce Ridge and maybe even Nye-Cartwright. And, like I said, things seem to hold up. There is contradictory evidence, but it can be easily-- again, so far-- explained. (For example, testimony from a Sioux warrior who says Custer never got closer to the river than where he died, turns out to be hearsay because that warrior wasn't anywhere near Ford B when Custer arrived there and he wasn't speaking about Ford B anyway. Things like that.) My general scenario has not changed (and I know "Harps" will be rolling his eyes at this), but it is still very, very similar to Richard Fox'. That also shows up in Clair's maps. Now the deal is in trying to see if it fits the "times" and the "timing." I am just not ready for that yet. The lure of "wild"'s idea is in seeing what others have to say and seeing if those ideas fit this "timing" I am working on. The timing is probably the most difficult thing for the whole battle, because so much of it is guessing and comparing the time zones. The person who has done the most work and the best job in this area and who has helped me immeasurably, is Mike Fox, or, as we might better know him here, "mcaryf." His work on this stuff is brilliant and exhaustive and nothing I do will be done without his O.K., unless we disagree. So, anyway, "BC," that's where the old and the new Freds are hanging out. Much of that 30,000-word hunk I worked on this summer needs to be revised because of Mike and some other things I have encountered, but it is more "addition-to" than change. As for your scenario, I literally cannot help you past Luce-- right now-- but I can give you precise times up to Luce. Also, if you are basing your Custer-shot-at-B scenario on a "retreat," you can forget it. There is not a chance those guys retreated forward. It's just not done. There is also enough evidence out there that the way back was not blocked, despite the artifact field on Luce. If Custer was mortally wounded there and if the command and control disintegrated because of it-- and that is so highly doubtful as to be fantasy-- the command could have easily made its way back. Montana-- Unfortunately, I think some personalities got in the way of those other things and they went by the wayside. It is something of a shame because I had a couple of ideas on how to rejuvenate them and add new stuff, hopefully from a lot of people. Well, we just move on. Gotta walk the dog! Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 29, 2008 8:41:57 GMT -6
On timing...I think the only timing you need to worry about is "by event."
All that matters for investigation is whether different events/sitings match up like a puzzle. What the exact times are is irrelevant.
Sometimes trying assign time ala a watch can actually hinder understanding rather than help by complicating the timing machinations too much to get your head around. They also tend to "solidify" a model that needs to be elastic, not fixed and difficult to manipulate.
Now just for entertainment you might assign times to each little event, and simply adjust them all as you try to fit in new testimony/interpretations about when something happened. But I'd just like to warn the readers that this can make investigation of the timing of events more difficult, not easier.
A better "timing" method of investigation is to put events in order, along with clauses as to how much time must elapse (min/max) between evidence points for the model to work, without assigning any fixed time.
Clair
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 29, 2008 8:53:06 GMT -6
I'm not sure I agree with you here, Clair. I understand the difficulty, but events transpire simultaneously, regardless, and each one is within the parameters of a specific finite time. I am not advocating trying to pinpoint these times within the precise minute, but they bear relevance to other events and are, therefore, important in themselves. The volley firing for example is important, because it may tell us-- given time, distance, and speed restrictions-- where certain people or units were and those then may point up their relevance to Benteen and Reno, etc.
Having disagreed with you, I also agree with you, but not fully.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 29, 2008 9:24:42 GMT -6
I agree...what is important is that you take an event in its order, and reason how much time must happen between events for it all to fit.
It is hard to assign a "watch time" to each of these events, but perhaps it is a necessary evil just to label its position. But if there was another way I would do that, even if just to say "H+65 min..." rather than "3:05pm."
Clair
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 29, 2008 12:05:56 GMT -6
Just an observation.I'v no idea on which thread I should post it.
It will take a least 40 minutes for Custer to cover the 4 miles from Weir Point to LSH,arriving 4.14.Indians depart Reno 4.20 arrive LSH 4.50.Give Custer 30 minutes dying time and that takes us up to 4.44.In other words it is possible that Custer was defeated by no more than 1/2 the Indian force.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 29, 2008 13:57:33 GMT -6
Taking wild's lead, by way of the very minimum time things could have happened...
Take 4:00pm as the base time for the first natives facing Reno being alerted to Custer's presence. Reno's force is mostly atop the bluff, some Warriors are making Weir point, most are finishing off Soldiers in the valley and on the slope at the ford, and some are in the village still.
Custer is somewhere in the MTC, could be closer to Luce Ridge or Ford B, or both simultaneously.
But, Custer "waved" to Reno in the valley when by the 4:00 base event time? 3:45? And was his command on the south end of SSR at this time peg? If so, the distance from there to LSH is indeed 4 miles as the crow flies on the proposed Custer route through Luce ridge (not exactly straight line). At an average 6mph that would be about 40 min. column marching...not an unreasonable figure.
So that could put Custer's column at LSH at 4:25 very earliest.
Now if the Natives were alerted about 4pm, when testimony says they all but disappeared, from the valley position it is still 4 miles to LSH, and they could sprint there in about 40 minutes, getting the last bulk of the forces there about 4:40pm, or 15 min. after Custer had been there.
I'm not sure such a study is very useful, since the Natives didn't travel as a group here, the battle could have been over by the time the Natives fighting Reno got there, etc...way too many variables. But it is an interesting study in military physics.
Clair
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 29, 2008 14:37:02 GMT -6
Here is where I am on this thing.
I don't agree with your "watch" times, wild, but I totally agree with your conclusion.
A number of months ago, I was a staunch believer that the Custer fight ended after 6 p.m. I was as sure of that as I was of almost anything. Then I read the RCOI and some other stuff and I started putting pen to paper. When you factor in all the variables-- HQ time vs. local sun time-- then you begin adding time for certain events, I am now convinced the Custer fight ended considerably earlier. It may have been over before the packs arrived on Reno Hill. I am not prepared to back up that statement, but research and mathematics are beginning to tell me a lot earlier than we generally think.
Of course, the caveat here is the scenario you believe in. If you believe in the apocalyptic version that Custer was routed out of Ford B, then you may almost be forced to believe he was dead by 3:30 p.m., HQ time; 2:05 p.m., local sun. How's that to start a fight?
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 29, 2008 15:09:53 GMT -6
Fred Conz What was really in my mind was that if you allow Custer time you must suggest some activity to occupy that time.Allow him no more time than it takes to travell to LSH and you simplify the mystery and all you are left with is an uncomplicated route to battle ridge. Am I mistaken in believing that the only time anchor after Weir point is based on Curleys description? Are we trying to provide a scenario to fit curley's time line? I don't believe Custer was routed at MTC Ford I prefer rather that he withdrew from it in some haste and collided with a serious force of Indians while he was strung out along Battle Ridge.
Just to add further chaff----- 4 Miles, the distance from Weir point to LSH is an enormous distance .To put that distance between you and 7 companys and reserve ammo is just mind boggling.Why would he put that distance between his units voluntary?I could understand him going far enough North to get clear of the bluffs and Ford B is his first opportunity only a man who could not retreat would go further North
|
|
|
Post by bc on Feb 29, 2008 15:31:08 GMT -6
Can anyone tell me what the basic time frame we are dealing with from the time of the DeRudio siting of Custer to the time of Weir/Benteen siting of what appears to be the end of the battle? Seems to me that is how I can then assimilate and cross reference Custer's movements to put them in perspective. I want to see if there was time to go towards ford D in all this.
I'm following this thread and the theories with interest. I'm still a virgin here who doesn't have the "benefit" of or the "taint" of having read someone's book, theory, and timeline from start to finish, i.e. Gray, Fox, Liddic, the RCOI, and others. Possibly read one or two when I was a kid and remember seeing the NPS version but that was all long ago. Been a long time since I claimed to be a virgin also.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Feb 29, 2008 16:03:42 GMT -6
Hi Fred
Thank you for those kind remarks. I have not posted any more on my time thread recently as you guys are having enough fun anyway and I am busy defending my theories on another BB.
I will, however, give you a further thought to play with. The last moment we have a relative time position for Custer is when he sent Martini back to meet Benteen and we can couple that with the last definite sighting of Custer's column which was by Varnum.
I prefer to work in local time as that is one way to match the substantial body of warrior testimony. If you want to convert it back to Wallace's St Paul time then please add 1 hour 20 minutes. Varnum saw the Grey Horse Troop at about 1.30pm (2.50pm Wallace but you are on your own from now). Martini met Benteen at about 2.20pm near North Fork which is about 1.5 miles from where Varnum saw the GH Troop.
If we assume Custer paused somewhere for 10 minutes and Cooke took a couple of minutes to write Martini's note, then Martini was travelling for 38 minutes. His 1.5 mile trip to Benteen at 6mph would take 15 minutes. Thus he had 23 minutes left to go forward with Custer and then return alone. This means Martini carried on with Custer for about 1.3 miles beyond Reno Hill and he left Custer there just before 2pm.
If Custer continued at the same speed part of his column could have been in the vicinity of the mouth of MTC just about when Reno was vacating the timber.
Interestingly in Curley's account given to Lt Roe he says that Custer was turned back from MTC at the same time as Reno left the timber.
I guess Curley's evidence is problematic but the time analysis would fit the potential start of Custer's fight being about when Reno left the timber. Plainly the various potential witnesses from Reno's original force would not have been likely to hear any Custer firing whilst Reno's charge was in progress. Thus Custer's fight could have started as early as a bit before 2.10pm and Martini could just about be right in saying he saw it.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 29, 2008 16:17:28 GMT -6
If Custer comes under attack in and around MTC Ford then his behavior is reactionary and the initive has passed to the Indians and it is easy to see him being driven or choosing to head for Battle Ridge.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 29, 2008 16:55:52 GMT -6
(1) Am I mistaken in believing that the only time anchor after Weir point is based on Curleys description? (2) Are we trying to provide a scenario to fit curley's time line? (3) I don't believe Custer was routed at MTC Ford I prefer rather that he withdrew from it in some haste and collided with a serious force of Indians while he was strung out along Battle Ridge. (4) To put [4 miles] between you and 7 companys and reserve ammo is just mind boggling. Wild-- Pardon my tinkering with your post, but it is easier to answer this way. (1) I base none of my arguments or time considerations on any of Curley's comments. I think he is completely unreliable and I believe he left the command at or shortly after he and Boyer passed Weir Peaks; maybe even before. Anything Curley says about Custer after the latter viewed the valley, is merely hearsay as far as I am concerned. (2) No; I'm certainly not. (3) Yes and no; I think he was under no pressure when he left Ford B and the battle eventually developed along Battle Ridge. It is that timing I cannot provide at this time. (4) Yes, I agree, unless Custer was under no pressure and made this move voluntarily, still on the offensive with no fear of being overwhelmed. That is the basis of my entire thesis: Custer was never under pressure until it was too late to do anything about it.Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 29, 2008 17:38:08 GMT -6
I believe Custer probably still had the element of surprise as he debouched out of MTC. There just could not have been sufficent warriors concentrated there to unduly worry him.But there was sufficent warriors present to act as a potent skirmishing screen. Imean the whole purpose of skirmishers is to harrass units particularly when crossing a river or changing from one formation into another and that is what faced Custer if he was going to attack the village.He turns away but why North? Surprise is now gone.Going North compells him to fight the entire village without any chance of support.
|
|