Michno's "Lakota Noon"

[Tricia]

Crzhrs, Markland--

Not surprisingly, my copy ends with the exact same sentence. Perhaps there is something lost in the translation? However, I found the following quote interesting:

"Custer may have done almost everything as prescribed, but it was insufficient to overcome the combination of particular circumstances, some of his own making, which confronted him that day ... (pg.296)"

Regards,
Leyton McLean

[crzhrs]

Maybe CSS is confused which book he read. Michno has several books. I've only read LAKOTA NOON, the others, especially his "new" version regarding Sand Creek and THE MYTSTERY OF TROOP E I have not.

I suppose it could be interpretation . . . but since CSS & West are big Michno supporters maybe they "forgot" the real ending and replaced it with what they "believe" the ending should be.

[Tricia]

Crzhrs--

I did find a possible statement which, with CSS' and West's imaginative interpretation processes, could be considered damning to the Anglo survivors:

"In addition, the Reno-Benteen survivors had a stake in perpetuating the idea that the Custer fight was over quickly. It was not in the interest of the army, or to a number of officers' careers, if it could be shown that they dawdled for two hours during Custer's death struggle ... (pg 297)"

The key word in this run, obviously, is if, but as this thought appears at the end of a discussion section of the narrative, it would seem to be less *fact* than Michno's musings aloud. But so far, I've found no statement where he comes out and says, "everybody lied at the RCOI ... " to paraphrase badly.

I think it should also be noted that the Army also needed to protect the Dead Custer (and Terry's orders) as well at the RCOI, where Jess Lee, with his inexperience, could not only not demand specifics from the survivors, but also did not, through vague-ish questioning and weak follow through, cause the testimony to hammer any specific actions by GAC ...

Regards,
Leyton McLean

[crzhrs]

The findings of the COI:

"The conduct of the officers throughout was excellent and while subordinates in some instances did more for the safety of the command by brilliant displays of courage than did Major Reno, there was nothing in his conduct which requires animadversion from this Court."
Jno. H. King
Colonel 9th Infantry
President


"I concur with the Court in its exoneration of Major Reno from the charges of cowardice which have been brought against him . . ."
W. M. Dunn
Judge Advocate General

A Court of Inquiry is a investigatory body whose one and only function is to inquire into and report upon aspersions or other derogatory matter respecting a person in the military service with a view to establishing facts; and if so directed, it recommends the action, if any, that should be taken in the premises.

The witnesses were sworn in under oath questioned and cross-examined. In the main they told the truth as they saw it, though a more expert interrogator than Lt. Lee could have gotten more information from them, but all in all he did a good job.

While the evidence did not always praise Reno there was no claim of cowardice by the witnesses. And by the way it was Reno who demanded the inquiry and he started his demands on June 17, 1878

The court was convened to determine Reno's conduct not to explain what happened at the LBH.

If anyone has a problem with the court's findings then they should take it up with the US government.

[custerstillstands]

"Vagabonds" is the afterwords

p.297 in Lakota Noon by Michno

and, for example
Utley, Robert, "Custer Cavalier in Buckskin", Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 2001, p.159 for Benteen

or Barnett, Louise, "Touched By Fire", New York, Henry Holt & Company, 1996, p.292

or Wert, Jeffry, "Custer, the controversial life of George Armstrong Custer", New York, Touchstone Books, 1996, p.347, still for Benteen

Thanks so much crzhrs for your invaluable add to the case. You should perhaps try to read the book now

[custerstillstands]

ricemclean said:

Crzhrs--

I did find a possible statement which, with CSS' and West's imaginative interpretation processes, could be considered damning to the Anglo survivors:

"In addition, the Reno-Benteen survivors had a stake in perpetuating the idea that the Custer fight was over quickly. It was not in the interest of the army, or to a number of officers' careers, if it could be shown that they dawdled for two hours during Custer's death struggle ... (pg 297)"

The key word in this run, obviously, is if, but as this thought appears at the end of a discussion section of the narrative, it would seem to be less *fact* than Michno's musings aloud. But so far, I've found no statement where he comes out and says, "everybody lied at the RCOI ... " to paraphrase badly.

I think it should also be noted that the Army also needed to protect the Dead Custer (and his orders) as well at the RCOI, where Jess Lee, with his inexperience, could not only not demand specifics from the survivors, but also did not, through vague-ish questioning and weak follow through, cause the testimony to hammer any specific actions by GAC ...

Regards,
Leyton McLean

Officers said that the battle ended quickly. Michno found that the battle lasted much LONGER and that was interesting to see that 2/3 of the regiment was out of the fight for SUCH A LONG TIME.

Michno said that the men were lying about that, and one can easily find that Edgerly's or Godfrey's testimonies, along with other witnesses, don't match at all Benteen's and Reno's testimonies.

[custerstillstands]

ricemclean said:

Crzhrs--

it should also be noted that the Army also needed to protect the Dead Custer (and his orders) as well at the RCOI, where Jess Lee, with his inexperience, could not only not demand specifics from the survivors, but also did not, through vague-ish questioning and weak follow through, cause the testimony to hammer any specific actions by GAC ...

Regards,
Leyton McLean

An other beautiful statement. Did the army protect Custer ? They accepted testimonies which said that Custer had no battlepan ! They concluded that he was the lone responsible of the battle according to testimonies as bad as Reno'

[Tricia]

Crzhrs--

Is it true that Whittaker haunted the halls of the RCOI and demanded he question the witnesses because he felt Lee was not doing a good enough "hatchet job" on the likes of Reno?

CSS--

I'll agree GAC did have a battleplan ... I think his problem might have been keeping it too close to his chest. What did he mean by "support?" And if Benteen was to "pitch in," what would happen if he got too far away--further exhausting his mounts--to possibly help should a situation warrant it?

The glorious Custer aside, we also have to look at the greater issues of the Summer Campaign where it seems nobody (from Sheridan down) performed in a manner worth writing home about. The army had a lot of CYA at stake and its continued need to invoke it might have contributed to the questioning methodology--or lack thereof--of the witnesses.

I admit I'm a complete neophyte when it comes to the RCOI.
Leyton McLean

[Tricia]

CSS--

I still haven't found the term "lie" in regards to the RCOI on page 297 ... I quoted (had you bothered to read it) something that you might *construe* as such from that very same page. However, this statement of Michno's follows a statement on the previous page where he admits some of Custer's problems at LBH might have been "of his own making."

It's all a matter of interpretation, je pense ...
Leyton McLean

[crzhrs]

CSS:

<Did the army protect Custer ? They accepted testimonies which said that Custer had no battlepan ! They concluded that he was the lone responsible of the battle according to testimonies as bad as Reno'>

Take it up with the US Army . . .

CSS:

You can refute other's statements which is your right but the constant personal attacks and sarcasm when someone disagrees with you is childish.

I've read ALL the books and I've formed MY opinions . . . just because they don't go along with yours does not make me wrong and you right.

Grand Expert