|
Post by Diane Merkel on May 4, 2006 14:28:13 GMT -6
All -- well, almost all -- I have been considering starting a wiki about the cavalrymen and Indians who participated in LBH. In my mind, it would be a place where everyone could contribute PRIMARY SOURCE material to build biographies of the LBH participants, explain the structures of the cavalry organization and Indian tribes, etc. Everything would have to be sourced. No opinions, no arguments, just facts from original records. It would ideally be a place to post some of the great information that has been contributed to these boards in a logical, orderly manner. Before I put my time and money into this: - Wikipedia has some good information about the participants; do you think we could do better? Is anyone else interested in such a project?
- If so, would you be willing to participate in an administrative role?
- How should the men be organized, alphabetically or by company/tribe and band?
Your thoughts and opinions would be great appreciated. Diane
|
|
|
Post by George Armstrong Custer on May 4, 2006 14:44:31 GMT -6
It sounds a great idea to utilise the knowledge amongst members here to build such a resource, Diane. My only concern would be that it may take a bit of policing in order to maintain a consistently high standard of contribution, and also to ensure that that these contributions adhered to the criteria you've set out - ie primary sourced; no debates; no comments. That, I feel might need some monitoring which could be time consuming.
That caveat apart, it could become a uniquely accurate (any infelicities would be quickly pointed out by our ever alert membership!) and much accessed resource. Hope something comes of it.
Regards, GAC
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on May 4, 2006 20:24:50 GMT -6
Thanks for your opinion, GAC. I agree that it will have to be closely monitored. That is why I asked if others would be interested in some administrative role. I would certainly need to have others check the entries, preferably at least once a day, so I'm trying to figure out how to divide that duty so that it's not too labor-intensive for anyone. Believe me, I know how time consuming such projects can be! Thinking out loud some more: Perhaps recognized secondary sources, such as Hammer, would be allowed. I certainly wouldn't expect everyone to research muster rolls and census records if the reporting of information is undisputed. Every registered user could edit entries, but it would be up to the administrator of a section to be the final arbitor if there were a conflict of information. Just as the Message Boards allow you to see the last ten posts, the wikis do too, so administrators would just have to check recent posts within their category of responsibility. Anyone else interested? If you're not sure what a wiki is, look at the Wikipedia for the Battle of the Little Big Horn at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Little_Bighorn
|
|
|
Post by q on May 5, 2006 13:04:28 GMT -6
I would be interested in helping to moderate it for you. I think though we would still be running up against some grey areas. Like Monaseetah's child. I know that some family members think that Custer had this child with her and even list it in their family geneologies. And it's grey areas like this that I think would have to be pretty well defined before we would begin this project.
|
|
|
Post by michigander on May 5, 2006 13:30:56 GMT -6
It's not a grey area, it's well known, as Monasetah had the child few months after she had knew Custer. So biologically impossible...I'm sorry to tell it, but This is another topic for which we must thanks Captain Benteen...
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on May 5, 2006 22:23:38 GMT -6
I agree with Michigander that the child story is not true.
q, I would want to stay clear of such grey areas and present only substantiated facts. Otherwise, the project would lose its relevance. There are plenty of places for the grey areas. Thanks for the offer to assist. Anyone else?
|
|
|
Post by q on May 6, 2006 4:29:26 GMT -6
Ummm... well I didn't ask for anyone's opinion whether the story was true or not, did I? Nor did I offer an opinion on whether or not I believed it was true or not, did I? To be honest with you, I wasn't offering a debate. I was just pointing out the fact that a grey area like this ONE instance has to be something well thought out and not dismissed. The reason? There are family members that put this kind of stuff in their geneologies. Now as geneologies go, most people don't put it in there unless it has been confirmed. To answer your questions above Diane.... Wikipedia has some good information about the participants; do you think we could do better? Is anyone else interested in such a project? Yes I think we can do so...... much better! If so, would you be willing to participate in an administrative role? I would be delighted to serve. How should the men be organized, alphabetically or by company/tribe and band? All of the above. You got it right the first time, Diane organize them alphabetically by company/tribe/ band. And one last thought. Would it be possible to have "delayed posting" on that thread/threads? My thought would be, that if there is such a thing, it would give the administrator time to review it and make adjustments (if necessary) to it before it was even posted.
|
|
|
Post by q on May 6, 2006 6:09:22 GMT -6
Diane, one and all. Well, almost all. ;D
Diane asked if we could do better. Below here is an offering that says. I think we can.
I have noticed several biases in the wikipedia. Though some may consider this to be fact, in fact most of what follows can't be proven. Whoever wrote it didn't use objectivity and any good sense! The errors in this accout are quite simply unbelievable!!! And quite apparently written by someone who didn't know what he was talking about! And I think this is the kind of stuff we would have to be very careful not to duplicate.
wikipedia.com Custer knew he was outnumbered, though he did not know by how much (probably something on the order of 3 to 1), but despite that knowledge he recklessly split his forces in three parts: one led by Major </wiki/Major> Marcus Reno </wiki/Marcus_Reno>, one by Captain Frederick Benteen </wiki/Frederick_Benteen>, and one by himself. Reno was ordered to attack from south of the village, while Benteen was ordered to go west, scouting for any fleeing Native Americans, while Custer himself went north, in what was intended to be a classical pincer movement. But Reno failed in his action, retreating after a timid charge with the loss of a quarter of his command. Meanwhile, Custer, having located the encampment, requested Benteen to come on for the second time. He sent the message: "Benteen, come on, big village, be quick. Bring packs."
A better anti-biased rendering of this would be:
Custer was outnumbered, (the number of warriors reported was anywhere from 1500 to 10,000). Custer split his forces in three parts: one led by Major Marcus Reno, one by Captain Frederick Benteen and one by himself. Reno was ordered to attack after scouts had witnessed a Sioux war party reported to have been anywhere from 20 to 50 strong in front of their advance. Reno's orders are still controversial to this day. The Reno Court of Inquiry, a court proceeding convened to determine whether or not Reno was at fault only confused the issue more. While several participants testified that Custer ordered Reno to "charge the village". Other witnesses testified that he was ordered to "bring the indians to battle", those indians being the 20 to 50 indians in the Sioux war party previously seen by the scouts. Earlier in the day Benteen had been ordered to go to the "left", in search of some Native Americans. Benteen's actual orders are as controversial as Reno's, and to this day it isn't known what those actual orders were. According to Benteen's testimony at the Reno Court of Inquiry he was "valley hunting" and he thought the orders given to him to be "senseless". Custer and 5 companies went north, the purpose of which still isn't determined. It was thought by some that another Sioux war party had been sighted on the bluffs east of the river. Whether Custer went in pursuit of them or because he wanted a place to view the Reno battle, or for both reasons or others isn't known. Reno meanwhile had crossed the Little Big Horn and hesitated after seeing more indians than he had apparently anticipated to be in front of him. He sent back word by courier to Custer twice apparently questioning his orders of attack. Reno upon not recieving any replies from Custer proceeded to attack the village. Apparently after seeing increasing numbers of warriors, Reno halted several hundred yards in front of the huge village and dismounted into skirmish line formation, and was later forced to the hill now named in his honor, Reno Hill. Several men in Reno's command said they saw Custer and his men on the bluffs to the east before, during and after their charge towards the village. During this time Custer's adjutant sent a message to Benteen the contents of which are still preserved today. It said: "Benteen, come on, big village, be quick, bring pacs. Ps bring pacs."
|
|
|
Post by ephriam on May 6, 2006 6:49:36 GMT -6
Diane:
I agree with your comment that the membership represents collectively a great deal of knowledge that could be used to create biographical profiles of individuals involved at the LBH. But I wonder if giving it away through Wikipedia is the best approach. I think the downside of Wikipedia, with my admittedly limited understanding of how it works, is that authorship is not recognized and it can be edited or changed. May I suggest another approach?
There are a number of publishers who I think would love to do a biographical encyclopedia of the LBH. What if LBHA members volunteered to write the biographies in the form that you mentioned, with each entry going through some editorial process and fact checking, and then were compiled into a manuscript. Each author would have their name at the end of their entry. (See the online Texas Handbook as an example of how authorship was handled). The manuscript could then be submitted for publication, the proceeds of which would go into the LBHA accounts for future projects while people received recogition for their particular contributions.
We would have to establish some rules. The Master List of individuals for whom someone has volunteered to write an entry could be maintained on this website. Each author could only volunteer for say five or so entries at a time; once they submitted an entry for review, they could volunteer for another. A maximum length would have to be established. Anyone participating in the writing process could comment on submitted entries to ensure accuracy or to ensure there are several viewpoints if something is controversial. And so on.
Anyway, just an idea. I would be happy to volunteer to assist in any way that you would like. Diane, it is a great idea to capitalize on the passion and strengths of the group to produce something of lasting value on the topic!
ephriam
|
|
|
Post by Scout on May 6, 2006 6:52:51 GMT -6
Diane...sounds good on paper...there is certaintly more than enough knowledge of the subject found here, but interpretation is another matter. Are you speaking of a much enhanced version of what is already listed under the 7th bios? I have to agree with the General, it will have to have continued montioring to ensure a high standard. Someone will have to play ringmaster and really crack the whip!
No discussions? just the mention of Monaseetah by q set off a discussion. How people will abide by the rules set down? It is a great idea and could really grow into something really worthwhile. Who will 'edit entries?' I hope only a select few. And what about information put forth? I would be glad to participate in some way. I got the time if you got the patience.
I don't want to sound to negative...just trying to throw out some
|
|
|
Post by Scout on May 6, 2006 6:54:52 GMT -6
...possible problems.
|
|
|
Post by michigander on May 6, 2006 7:30:27 GMT -6
Q, I was just underlining that Monasetah was not for me what I would call "grey area" , because it's enough to look at the day in which Custer knew the girl and howmuch later she get the baby born to prove it false. but I wanted not to open a debate with you about it. This I want it to be clear. For me grey area is something that can have different solutions. Am I wrong? Or do you mean arguments in which people are not totally agreeing? I have still some difficult with english, unfortunately...sorry!
|
|
|
Post by q on May 6, 2006 7:57:20 GMT -6
Need I say more, Scout? Michigander. I do not choose to begin debate about the rights or wrongs about any LBH event here. That should have been apparent in my opening comment. I appologize for being uncomplimentary at this time, but I don't think debating was the subject, do you? And to answer your question: For me grey area is something that can have different solutions. Am I wrong? Or do you mean arguments in which people are not totally agreeing? .... Both!
|
|
|
Post by michigander on May 6, 2006 8:24:01 GMT -6
ok
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on May 6, 2006 15:49:09 GMT -6
Ephriam -- I really like your idea, especially if you would be willing to take the lead for the Indian sections. Thank you!
Scout -- There would be discussion among those who are working on the project but the biographies would not be open to public discussion because that can be accomplished here. My first inclination was to use primary source material only because I don't want the same old myths repeated. Of course, I would welcome your participation.
q -- You said, "There are family members that put this kind of stuff in their geneologies. Now as geneologies go, most people don't put it in there unless it has been confirmed." I could not disagree with you more, and there was no reason to be so condescending to Michigander.
|
|