|
|
Post by markland on Dec 2, 2006 4:03:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Jan 27, 2007 11:58:05 GMT -6
Chuck Collins told me that the Combat Institute takes a group of students to the battlefield each year and they "use Custer’s approach march to study how commanders processes a changing situation and update their commander’s estimate of the situation (the military decision making process)."
The Atlas to the Sioux Wars is amazing!
|
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Jan 28, 2007 3:17:04 GMT -6
The LBH maps are very good looking, it is a pity that they take the John S Gray timings for everything, which I personally think are often incorrect, but I suppose it is inevitable until a big name Custerologist takes the trouble to look at the evidence properly and without Gray's bias. Perhaps if we got our WIKI finished they might look at that!
He has rather a high number for strength of Reno's force.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Jan 28, 2007 13:16:10 GMT -6
Mike:
It depends on how you calculate Reno's strength. Ever since the battle, we have heard the number 112 given for Reno's battalion - and that is so much blather. After detachments to the packs, and including the Indian scouts, his strength was 176. One scout stayed with the packs, hence 175. I'm not sure that is how the author arrived at his number, but there you go.
Twelve of the scouts did not cross the river, leaving a strength entering the fight in the bottom of 163, including 23 scouts and the two officers commanding them - 10 of these scouts went after horses. Allowing for horseholders, Reno's strength on the skirmish line was 122, including 13 scouts and Varnum and Hare.
Anyway you slice it, the "standard" 112 was a figment of Reno's imagination.
Gordie
|
|
