|
Post by blaque on Nov 3, 2006 5:34:33 GMT -6
I'm not following you on this, blaque. Are you saying that Custer headed for Varnum's Lookout (why?) Because he was being led by Red Star, and RS was retracing his tracks to the lookout on the divide (Varnum’s).
but was diverted to CN Hill by the Crows by their calling him? Yes, this little meditated hypothesis has Custer seeing that high mountain to the left with some scouts (other than Varnum) on top. He then turns towards it, because it was close and promised to be a good viewing point. It must be assumed that the scouts there had left Varnum’s lookout sometime earlier –an assumption which would rest on the known fact that the scouts did not stand still, but for different reasons kept moving all the morning.
We know that Varnum rode down to meet Custer, but Red Star says the opposite, that Custer climbed the hill and came up to the scouts. As WMRH says he just descended the hill to lead Custer on foot up the slope, this may correspond to RS’s recollection, meaning that Custer went first to the CN and later to the divide, where Varnum met him and both rode together to the lookout.
Anyway, reading again the Arikara Narrative, I find that their description of the lookout resembles more the CN than Varnum’s lookout. What do you think? May be we have a reliable witness (the Lt.) supporting your lookout, and some Arikara & Crow scouts supporting the CN. Not all, however, as Hairy Moccasin told (well, his interpreter told) that “I went to a butte at the head of Reno Creek, from where I could see the village. I reported the camp to Custer” (TCM. p. 24). HM might be referring to your lookout, but not to the CN.
The easiest answer would be that everybody was more or less right, because the observations were made from two different lookouts. And here is a weak clue in support. It would be great if we could find more.
This could have happened about 10 a.m.: Young Hawk and the scouts left behind by Varnum were at Halt 2 with the column, when “on the little knoll at the foot of the hill, they were met by Custer’s party from the high butte [Red Star’s & Hairy Moccasin’s Butte, the point on the divide reached by Varnum]. Considerable excitement among the scouts [YH’s scouts] was to be seen. They wondered what Custer would say when he heard that the Dakotas knew of his approach. The scouts from the hill [CN] had told them [YH’s scouts] of the six Dakotas. When the scouts saw Custer coming down [from the divide] they began to group themselves…” This might mean that YH knew of those Dakotas thanks to the scouts in the CN, and that Custer, coming back from his trip to the “high butte”, knew nothing yet (Arikara Narrative. p. 93). Terribly ambiguous, of course. Furthermore, the “high mountain” of the Crows is always mentioned in the rest of the Narrative as the one and only lookout, be it the CN or your VL. But may be that Libby’s translation amalgamated every reference to two possible lookouts?
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 3, 2006 9:53:31 GMT -6
Hi Vern
I have no idea where you’re coming from on this, Mike. Here is what Varnum stated: “They . . . were perhaps a mile off toward the Little Big Horn and riding parallel to the ridge we were on.” (Custer in ‘76, page 60).
The geometry is quite clear. There are two parallel lines separated by one mile. The Sioux were on one of those lines and Varnum was on the other.
Try thinking of this as a parallelogram rather than a rectangle - the distance vertically between the sides is not as great as the length of the side of the parallelogram.
Varnum never said the Indians were already opposite them and if in fact they were, it would be already too late to move to intercept them. The implication is that the Indians are riding on a parallel line but are not yet opposite but moving towards being so. I should also note that the expression towards the LBH valley could actually apply to any direction between NW and SW from where Varnum was be it the CN Hill or your location.
I am glad you accept that the Indians did cross the Divide. I think this gives you a problem in explaining why scouts in your location could not intercept them as they naturally pass close by whereas on CN Hill the scouts can still be at some distance.
I do not accept that you have to be lower to see someone outlined against the sky and I think your photo showed a very good ecample of how that would happen. If you had taken your photo from a slightly lower position on the CN but still above the ridge line opposite then the distant mountains disappear and just leave sky.
I think Varnum's perception of the alignment of CN Hill would depend how he ascended it. If he did so from the Northern end and then proceeded along to higher portions to the South then he could well have thought of it as a ridge - it certainly does not rise to a single point but offers a line of higher ground.
I am still concerned that if your location is true we have to have both WMRH and HM lying and Varnum twice saying things he cannot have meant.
I am more and more convinced of the probability that Custer went to observe twice and from different positions although I have no specific evidence of it being two different places other than my preferring the evidence for CN Hill first and your good evidence for somewhere to the North second.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 3, 2006 16:23:41 GMT -6
blaque sez: Yes, this little meditated hypothesis has Custer seeing that high mountain to the left with some scouts (other than Varnum) on top. He then turns towards it, because it was close and promised to be a good viewing point. It must be assumed that the scouts there had left Varnum’s lookout sometime earlier –an assumption which would rest on the known fact that the scouts did not stand still, but for different reasons kept moving all the morning.
Yes, but Varnum said he rode down to greet Custer and rode back to the lookout with him, right? (Custer in '76, page 61). You're saying that Varnum didn't lead him back to the lookout, but took him over to CN Hill? If Varnum hadn't told that he took Custer back to his lookout, I'd possibly agree with you.
Mike sez: Try thinking of this as a parallelogram rather than a rectangle - the distance vertically between the sides is not as great as the length of the side of the parallelogram.
Mike, I have trouble getting by Varnum saying "They," meaning the two Indians, were about a mile off. That means if Varnum could spit that far, he'd have to spit a mile to hit them, doesn't it? BTW, the right image of the double photo back on page 1 shows two dots on a parallel ridge about a mile off. Don't know if you can see it very well.
Mike sez: I am glad you accept that the Indians did cross the Divide. I think this gives you a problem in explaining why scouts in your location could not intercept them as they naturally pass close by whereas on CN Hill the scouts can still be at some distance.
Could not intercept "them"? Wasn't it only one Indian? But I remember somewhere that one of the scouts asked if Custer would have been mad if they had killed him. Almost sounds as though Varnum wouldn't let them kill the one Indian, doesn't it? This is a puzzler, I'll admit, but you have to make a bunch of assumptions to conclude where Varnum was at. This is a soft, mushy clue at best.
Mike sez: I am still concerned that if your location is true we have to have both WMRH and HM lying and Varnum twice saying things he cannot have meant.
I know WMRH was lying, but what are you referring to about HM lying? I agree that Varnum said that his lookout was "higher" when he meant "lower" and "reflected against the sky" (which has no meaning at all) when he meant "outlined against the sky."Is that what you meant? Since he spoke of a nonsensical thing as "reflected against the sky," could we take that as evidence he was hitting the sauce that night? (Smiles).
BTW, there is a whole lot of evidence that WMRH was a liar, just not as bad as Curley. Both sides of my family had ties to Curley, and he was known as Curley the Liar. But WMRH should be suspect anyway, and everything he says should be backed up with what others have said.
Cheers!
Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 4, 2006 1:00:07 GMT -6
Hi Vern
I was thinking of HM saying he had been to the "summit of the Crow's Nest". This form of words can really only apply to the hill and not the pocket, thus HM was representing in Dixon's book that it was the traditional Crow's Nest.
Varnum also said he could see Custer's camp smoke "in" rather than above the ravine at Halt 1. There is no chance that this form of words can apply from your location as he can see no land around Halt 1 from there but it could be possible from the higher points on CN hill.
I will try to create a diagram showing my thoughts of the parallelogram
X Indians travelling ->
Ridge 1---X--------------------------------------------------
Ridge 2 ------------------- V Varnum location------------------
X and V are a mile apart the two parallel lines are .6 mile apart
The "them" referred to the two Indians a man and a boy (Deeds).
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Nov 4, 2006 4:25:07 GMT -6
Great discussion, guys, and forgive me for interposing, but just a wild thought: could "reflected against the sky" be an optical illusion -- similar to the one Libbie saw as the trooops marched off? We could have vaguely similar conditions, e.g. early-morning fog burning off ...
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 4, 2006 10:55:28 GMT -6
Thank you for joining us, Elisabeth. I've spent a lot of my lifetime out-of-doors, and if riders could be reflected against the sky, so could trees and mountains. If it was an optical illusion, I've never seen it. That doesn't mean it couldn't happen. I just haven't seen it, so I'd have to interpret Varnum's phrase as a result of brandy, rum or whiskey. (Did they have gin and vodka in those days?) I note that he also wrote that his lookout was "higher" than the hill to the north, and if you study his 1909 letter, its composition is rather scrambled. For example, he wrote that he found himself in a hollow near the summit, and describes seeing streams east and west, THEN he crawled up the hill and watched the sun rose. He doesn't make any of these strange statements in his 1930s reminiscences.
Mike -- I now understand your point about parallelograms. Thanks for putting in the diagram. As they say, one picture is worth a thousand words. So are you saying the two Indians could have been on the divide which was 1/2 mile away, but been another 3/4 mile or so further north of Varnum?
A key clue is that they spent "a half mile of hard work over very broken country." How do you explain that one? Diane posted one of my photos back on Page 1 (Reply #4) showing what it looks like to the west of CN Hill (left photo). As you can see, there is no very broken country to the west. HOWEVER, if you go to Varnum's Lookout (right photo), we see very broken country.
Cheers!
Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 4, 2006 11:14:54 GMT -6
Hi Vern
If I had to guess I would say the Indians are South of Varnum rather than North so they will pass in front of the CN Hill on their way to the trail leading up from the Divide which Varnum describes as being on his right.
Thus Varnum et al are trying to scramble down the CN Hill to get into reasonable range to intercept them when they pass. I am not sure what their attitude to using gunfire would be. I guess an odd shot might be someone hunting but a fusilade might need to be avoided. If they just wait the two Indians will pass about 1000 yards away which is a long shot, thus it would make sense to scramble down the hill from wherever they are to get a better one. It then makes sense of Varnum's story that he hears a call from a Crow on the hill (the CN Hill) indicating that the Indian and the boy have changed course. However when he goes back up the hill he finds they changed course again and went over the Divide.
I think this particular story very much favours the Crow's Nest Hill as you can understand all the problems if people are scrambling about on timber clad slopes. I think it is less obvious what might be happening in your location.
Hi Elisabeth
I do personally think the lowness of the early morning sun would play a part. It would make very big long shadows and as you say the shadows could even play on patches of mist. For that effect a level or slightly higher position would probably give the greatest impact.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 4, 2006 16:09:25 GMT -6
Ok, but you still haven't addressed the half mile of hard work through very broken country.
Cheers!
Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 4, 2006 17:44:21 GMT -6
Hi Vern
There are plenty of places the scouts could be on CN Hill descending from which would be a fairly arduous task. Just as an example if they were at the Southern higher end and attempted to come down from there it does not look too inviting either coming down or once they reach more level ground as it is cut by watercourses.
However, I am still waiting to hear you explain how the scouts might try and fail to intercept the two Indians going down the trail if they were in your location.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 4, 2006 19:24:51 GMT -6
Sorry, but there aren't "plenty of places" where it's very rough country to the west of CN Hill, Mike. There aren't any. I took a photo and posted it on the first page, and as far as I'm concerned, the photo says it all. When I said "ok" a couple of posts ago, I didn't mean that I agreed with you. I meant I understood you. No, those two Indians could not have been south of Varnum when he saw them, as you've stated. Here is what Varnum said: "They . . . were perhaps a mile off toward the Little Big Horn and riding parallel to the ridge we were on." (Custer in '76, page 60). If you are on CN Hill, looking toward the LBH, you would be looking west, not south. Bottom line is that your parallelogram hypothesis just doesn't work, especially for CN Hill. As I explained earlier, Varnum did try to approach the two Indians who were a mile off. Why they didn't try to kill them when they were closer, I do not know. But I do recall the scouts (I think it was the scouts) asking Custer if he minded them killing the Sioux, and he said he didn't. Sounds to me like Varnum wouldn't let them make a second attempt, and the scouts went to Daddy to see if he would over rule what Mommy told them they couldn't do. Maybe? Cheers! Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 5, 2006 2:16:59 GMT -6
Hi Vern
Actually the LBH River is to be found in an arc from SW to NW from the Crow's Nest and a description of "towards the LBH" would fit anywhere within that arc. Due West it is 12.4 miles, West SW it is 12.3 miles and at its junction with Reno Creek (NW) it is about 12.2 miles. As I have pointed out in another thread it would certainly appear from the Crow's Nest that the river should be closest to the SW because that is its apparent line of flow from SE to NW. However, I am prepared for the sake of this discussion to consider that the two Indians might have been anywhere on an arc from SW to NW.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 5, 2006 9:28:21 GMT -6
When Custer and Varnumwere looking for horses on the flat west of the river, they were looking west. How would they have known where the river went upstream or downstream from there? They didn't have maps where they could measure to within a tenth of a mile, right?
Regarding the very broken country, the terrain to the west of CN Hill is very much like the terrain seen in the Custer Myth photo, page 112. Maybe Diane will be able to post a photo of it so you can see it better. There is no very broken country for a half mile west of CN Hill, but there is to the west of the divide at Varnum's Lookout.
The other issue that hasn't been rebutted is that both Godfrey and Goldin said that the lookout was to the north of where they crossed the divide. Not a single person except White Man Runs Him claimed they went to CN Hill.
Before I depart this thread, I want to thank everyone for challenging my statements. It has been VERY worthwhile and I sincerely mean that. I've gone back and revised my arguments several times.
Cheers!
Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 5, 2006 13:26:43 GMT -6
Hi Vern
I think you are confusing West of the River and West of the observation point. The Indian Village was NW of both the possible observation points this is the only direction in which they can actually see the river and its environs.
Thus please accept my point that a description of towards the LBH river would apply to any point in an arc from SW to NW. Then look at the terrain to the SW of CN Hill and note that it is broken.
Absolutely no problem with the idea of Custer going to the North of the crossing on his second trip you have convincing evidence for that.
Unfortunately with respect to the first trip, I just cannot rate two of the main witnesses as pure liars and the other as twice saying things he cannot mean. An Indian witness having to have spotted another wholely unrelated group of people on or near the CN Hill at this time, and the two Indians to have ridden straight past your observation point without either being killed or spotting the scouts themselves.
The fact that your location has a dip that might be similar to the West Point Cow's Nest is in my view offset by the gap in the range being to the right of CN Hill whereas it is not with your's and your's has no views to Tullock's Creek and yet witnesses said there were.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 5, 2006 15:00:25 GMT -6
Sorry, Mike. I continue to disagree. I've covered all the points that you repeat, and I want to go on with other subjects. From what I gather, you are 1,000,000% convinced that Custer must have gone to CN Hill, and in order for that to have happened, you think there must be very broken country to the SW. I suggest that you make a trip out here and see for yourself, because your imagination is misleading you. There is no such country to the SW no matter how much you think there is.
When Diane posts my last photo, you will see that there is a creek in a valley due east (the direction of the camera). The creek flows into Davis Creek, and to my knowledge, it has no name. However, the bluffs further east of the creek, the valley of the creek, and the creek itself are nearly an exact copy of what it looks like to the SW, west and NW of CN Hill. There is no "half mile of broken country" anywhere around CN Hill. Period.
I don't hesitate calling WMRH a liar because he was a liar, and I've documented many examples of his lies. HM also occasionally lied. I suppose that if he was interviewed as much as WMRH, we would find about the same number of lies. BUT I have not found where Varnum has lied, and everything he said or wrote can be verified. If you wish to disbelieve Varnum and instead believe WMRH and HM, that's your choice, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Regarding the view of Tullock Creek, you have that turned around. You can't see Tullock except from the extreme northern end of CN Hill, beyond the timber. I posted a photo earlier of the headwaters of Tullock as seen from Varnum's Lookout. Sorry, Mike.
Custer made two trips to Varnum's Lookout and none to CH Hill. Varnum's only trip was to Varnum's Lookout, exactly on the divide, not to CN Hill.
Cheers!
Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Nov 5, 2006 18:04:48 GMT -6
Here is the photo Vern mentioned above.
|
|