|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 5, 2006 20:36:52 GMT -6
Gee, what a beautiful photo! (Ahem!). (I use it for my computer wallpaper). For those familiar with the Crow's Nest as it currently exists, you will probably be wondering what happed to the roads. I digitally removed them. Makes it look a lot more like the way it was when the Crows visited the area. Of course, trees are taller now, BUT there is no evidence of a forest fire anywhere. The medium-big trees you see here were probably little-medium trees in 1876.
Rest assured, neither Varnum nor Custer ever saw this sight!
Bye-bye.
Vern Smalley (P.S. Thank you, Diane!)
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Nov 5, 2006 22:40:23 GMT -6
You are welcome, Vern. Don't be a stranger!
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 6, 2006 2:42:22 GMT -6
I am not sure if Vern is still reading this thread but if he is not perhaps someone else can help me.
I re-read the original thread when Vern was debating the location with GAC. A big point was that Vern claimed WMRH said Custer approached the CN from the West and referred to page 14 of The Custer Myth. I am possibly being stupid but I cannot find a reference to this on that page. What I did find later is that WMRH is reported as saying that they saw two Sioux about one mile and a half west moving down Davis Creek towards the soldiers camp. Now this is obviously wrong as Davis Creek is to the East of the Divide not the West. Is this a misprint in my version of TCM, did the translator confuse what WMRH was saying or did WMRH not know East from West?
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Nov 6, 2006 10:30:34 GMT -6
You are not stupid, Mike. You are a very bright guy. And If I suggested that you are stupid, I apologize.
Go to page 14 of Custer Myth. You will see that the interview is being conducted "AT THE POCKET BELOW CUSTER LOOKOUT." (Their caps). Here was where Varnum and the scouts kept their horses. In the paragraph right below, WMRH said. "Custer came up the valley from the other side but did not come in with the horses." That is, WMRH was standing on the east side of the hill, and Custer came to the west side. If you take a look at the last photo posted, you will see that it makes no sense that if Custer came to the east side, he would not have "come in with the horses". However, if he approached from the west side, he could not have come in (to the pocket). Also on page 15, WMRH said "He came up Davis Creek and stopped opposite the point." This supports the understanding that he was on the west side of the hill.
Adios,
Vern Smalley
|
|
|
Post by blaque on Nov 6, 2006 12:05:03 GMT -6
Vern,
I've found an statement by Red Star which makes impossible my speculation of his leading Custer to a different lookout. In LBH Remembered, he says categorically that he (with Custer’s party) returned to the very same hill he started out from.
But I’ve also found a couple of things against your thesis. In order to discard the CN as the real lookout, you say that WMRH lied when he showed the location to General Scott in 1919. However, 12 years earlier, WMRH showed this same location to Edward S. Curtis, and on this occasion he was accompanied by Goes Ahead and Hairy Moccasin. This would increase the number of liars to three, which is a little harder to believe. Besides, we have this revealing paragraph from Camp’s correspondence with Varnum (Hardorff’s OTLBHWWC, pp. 60,61,73).
Q: I understand from your letter that the trail crossed the divide in sort of gap lying north of the high peak or so-called Crow’s Nest. In other words, as the command crossed the divide the Crow’s Nest was to the left. About how far to the left?
A: I do not to this late day remember how far it was from where we crossed the divide to the Crow Nest, but should say about a quarter to half a mile.
Apparently, Varnum is admitting implicitly that his lookout and WMRH’s were one and the same. Otherwise he would have addressed Camp’s blatant mistake of misplacing Varnum’s lookout to the left of the trail and several hundred yards from the divide. Even so, it’s still very likely that Custer made another trip to your VL later, as born out by Godfrey, Thompson and Goldin.
As to the question of which side of the hill Custer reached, here is the easiest hypothesis: Red Star led Custer back along the route to the CN. When within several hundred yards of the CN, the impatient Custer recognized the hill as his destination (it was high & with scouts on it!), spurred his horse, left behind Red Star and his pony and rode toward the mountain, meeting WMRH on the other side (N-W) of the pocket. It was about 6 a.m., Varnum was either out of sight beyond the crest of the hill or, more likely, chasing Indians half a mile away, and Custer did not climb to the top (as per WMRH). This would explain why Varnum didn’t meet Custer in this first, early trip. Varnum met him several hours later, when he rode to greet Custer and both rode back to the east side of the hill. You rightly say that in that trip to the N or W side of the hill, it would have been impossible to meet Custer on horseback; but WMRH just stated that he went down the slope to lead Custer up the hill on foot. No mention here to horses.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 7, 2006 17:53:25 GMT -6
Hi Vern
I can now understand how you interpret WMRH as saying Custer came to the West side of the hill, however, I think there are some possibilities for doubt. He says Custer came up the valley from the other side. He and General Scott have just come from the Reno Creek side of the Divide so might WMRH be referring to Custer having come up the valley from the other (Rosebud) side as opposed to where he and Gen Scott have just come up the valley i.e. from the LBH side. He then goes on to say that "The soldiers stopped this side of the creek North of the point." In fact there were no soldiers with Custer only scouts on the first occasion that Custer comes to the CN so are two occasions getting mixed together here? Certainly if the party is North of your point they are nowhere near the Creek whereas they would be near the Creek if it was CN Hill. Later in the discussion he describes Custer as stopping opposite the point which could be on the trail next to CN Hill. This might be a sensible place for Red Star to bring him as he would not know where the scouts were on CN Hill although your position is smaller so their location there would be clearer.
If we look at Varnum in "Custer in 76" we have this strange report about Custer arriving with the column including Tom and Calhoun. Gray rules all this out as an elipsis but plainly Varnum was in a position to observe Custer's approach so if he is on the CN Hill it is on the NE side and he says Custer stops by the gap . He then says he rode down towards the column which would be correct for coming down from the pocket in CN Hill and then soon met the General. Whether the General comes back from the Divide or Varnum rides up to meet him is unclear but the riding down was to the column not to the General who was leading it. This slightly counts against your position as he would ride straight to the General if he was in front not the column.
I find all this elipsis business quite difficult as both WMRH and Varnum are speaking as if Custer had soldiers with him but other evidence clearly has him coming on alone but for scouts.
When we also have to take into account that WMRH is being translated and later he is reported as saying the Indians were 1.5 miles West on Davis Creek (?!) I start to wonder about the translator!
Perhaps it is best if we ignore WMRH's evidence altogether and rely on other Crows and Varnum.
Hi Blaque
Your evidence re the other Crows and Curtis is useful to the CN Hill theory and I think your Varnum/Camp correspondence is pretty well decisive re the first viewpoint. I am, however, still happy that Vern is right about the second viewpoint. This counts a bit against your explanation which seems to have Varnum meeting Custer the second time but not the first. You seem to be suggesting there that Custer returned to the command and then rode back up the Davis Creek tributary with them. Is there other evidence for that? I thought Custer stayed on the hill until the command came to Halt 2.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by blaque on Nov 8, 2006 6:06:19 GMT -6
Your evidence re the other Crows and Curtis is useful to the CN Hill theory and I think your Varnum/Camp correspondence is pretty well decisive re the first viewpoint. I am, however, still happy that Vern is right about the second viewpoint. This counts a bit against your explanation which seems to have Varnum meeting Custer the second time but not the first. You seem to be suggesting there that Custer returned to the command and then rode back up the Davis Creek tributary with them. Is there other evidence for that? I thought Custer stayed on the hill until the command came to Halt 2. Mike, Custer summoned or talked with his officers twice before crossing the divide: sometime before 8 a.m. (at Halt 1) and again about 10 a.m. (at Halt 2). Everybody agrees that Custer descended from the CN to address his officers at the 10 a.m. call. But Benteen states that it was in the first summons that Custer “told us that he had just come down from the mountains where our Crow Indian scouts had been during the night” (Carroll’s B-G Letters, p.181). Godfrey also refers to this early address of Custer to some (not all) of his officers in his narrative: “Some time before 8 o’clock, General Custer […] gave information that scouts had discovered the locality of the Indian villages…” (TCM p.136). If the hour was 7:30 a.m., Custer would have had enough time to return from his 6:00 a.m. visit to the CN. Therefore, and bearing also in mind Hare's and DeRudio's statements, it’s not an unfounded hypothesis that Custer went twice to that place: the first as soon as he was informed by Red Star, the second four or five hours later (9-10 a.m.). This would also explain all those contradictory statements about whether Custer actually saw the village or not: He did not see any signs of the village in his first trip, but he did in his second.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 8, 2006 10:15:32 GMT -6
Hi Blaque
It is certainly an interesting theory and it could have Custer going 3 times to look for the village!
I will re-read their various accounts as it would certainly make more sense of both WMRH and Varnum talking about Custer riding up with his troops. Also when you think about it there is nobody left with the column that knows where the Crow's Nest is.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Nov 8, 2006 11:25:45 GMT -6
Maybe he was at Crow's Nest, Varnum's Lookout, Custer's Vantage Point, and Kodak Views #4. Take a topo map and label some prominence with whatever name you care to choose, just make sure that you call everyone who was on the Crow's Nest in 1876 a liar or a drunk, otherwise you can't make a case for your spot. If you do throw out the Crow's Nest, you can make a case for any number of others, and if not a good case, well, just suggest that it was on Custer's second, third or fourth or fifth trip that he went to your spot.
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 8, 2006 11:31:25 GMT -6
Hi Gordie
Well the testimony is fairly mixed up concerning this particular aspect. It is probably necessary to discard at least some of it in order to get a sensible result. The trouble is knowing for sure which bits to discard although I am fairly confident that there were no Indians 1.5 miles to the West on Davis Creek!
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Nov 8, 2006 14:01:14 GMT -6
Mike: You're right about that; but who knows whether that is what was said? I think you opined that there could have been a translation or transcription error, which is obviously possible. Also bear in mind that directions and distances were not necessarily being measured by instruments but by guesswork, in many cases.
There is too much evidence in favor of the Crow's Nest being where Varnum viewed whatever he viewed, and where Custer was taken by Red Star, and that the Crow's Nest is just where everyone has thought it was for the past 100 years or so. Your theory about Benteen's route haolds more water, although, as you know, I disagree with you on it. I don't totally agree with Darling either, but I have fewer differences with his version. Anyway, good luck on your paper - I see by another thread that you are going ahead with publication without changes. Quelle surprise, as they say!!!!!
Best regards,
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Nov 8, 2006 19:00:00 GMT -6
Hi Gordie
Actually I am going to make one or two changes because Blaque came up with some good additional evidence and I think I should add a bit about the way sound attenuates over distances as I had not touched on that point in the paper (the second more detailed one).
Quite a lot of people have disagreed with my theory and that is their prerogative as I am trying to guess what was in Custer's mind. However, I have not had anyone come up with a killer fact to prove it is untrue e.g. as I had not previously looked at the maximum theoretical distance for sound to travel that could have knocked out one of my arguments, fortunately when I did belatedly do the research I found it was feasible although by no means guarranteed that people could hear Reno's fight from the Morass. As not everybody did hear it this did in fact fit quite well.
Funnily enough, whilst we are on this thread, it might weaken my theory if Custer had only gone to Vern's viewpoint as the sightlines to the river are not so good from that lower position so the apparent line of its flow from the SE might be less clear.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Vern Smalley on Sept 3, 2007 12:06:35 GMT -6
What ever happened to Varnum’s Lookout, the site about one mile NW of the Crow’s Nest?
My answer:
I presented my research to the Montana Historical Society, a part of Montana’s government assigned to investigate and report on Montana’s history. After reviewing my data, the MHS concluded as I did, that either we have to say White-Man-Runs-Him, a frequent liar, lied about where Custer went on the morning of June 25, 1876, or that Varnum and Godfrey both lied. Neither officer is known to have lied, even at the Reno Court of Inquiry coverup.
The Montana Historical Society concluded that Varnum’s Lookout was “a major discovery and one that merits recognition.” On July 11, 2007, I accompanied Montana’s State Archaeologist to the Crow’s Nest and to Varnum’s Lookout. He concluded, as I did, that neither Custer nor Varnum ever stepped foot on the traditional Crow’s Nest Hill. Instead, both went to a lower hill, exactly on the Little Bighorn-Rosebud divide, one that I’ve called Varnum’s Lookout.
The Montana Historical Society was ready to offer a plaque naming the site Varnum’s Lookout, but that’s when politics took over.
Jim Court, a prior superintendent of the Battlefield who made “about 2,000 trips” (his estimate) to the traditional Crow’s Nest at some $400 per carload of tourists (Yes, that’s roughly $800,000), didn’t want it advertised that he took his well-heeled tourists to the wrong place. Court is on MHS’s Board of Trustees, and let it be known to the Society's employees he wanted the plaque to read that Varnum’s Lookout was one of the places Varnum and Custer might have gone to. The MHS employees were intimidated by Court, meaning he could make their lives miserable as he has done in the past, and are now forced to claim Varnum’s Lookout is only a possible site. In my letter to them, I asked to either put up a sign stating the following, or put up no sign at all.
VARNUM’S LOOKOUT 2Lt. Charles A. Varnum arrived at this site at about 3:00 in the morning of June 25, 1876. His Crow and Arikara scouts saw smoke from early morning campfires along the Little Bighorn River, and Varnum sent for the regiments commander, Lt. Col. George A. Custer. Custer spent about an hour here but saw nothing. He returned briefly with his brother, Capt. Tom Custer, and probably saw the immense pony herd west of the river. He then led his column down Reno Creek to attack the Sioux-Cheyenne-Arapaho Indian village.
Upon learning of Court’s behind-the-back politics, I publically challenged him to debate the location of Varnum’s Lookout in front of the Society’s full Board of Trustees. I’ll present my evidence and Court can present what little, if anything, he has. I’ve yet to receive any reply from either Jim Court or the Montana Historical Society. What does that tell you? Jim Court doesn’t know anything about the Crow’s Nest area. The total sum of what Jim Court knows is what he picked up listening to his Battlefield rangers tell the tourists.
As of the moment, there is no action regarding having a plaque placed at Varnum’s Lookout. But this story is far from over. I’m not willing to accept that the Custer story is based on politics of people like Jim Court and not fact.
Jim Court has joined Nichols, Wells, Liddic, Boyes and a few other cowards (in my second edition of Little Bighorn Mysteries) who think they can control others simply because they’ve been around for a long while. No one is permitted to think for themselves or these members of the old guard might be embarrassed. My opinion is that these people should be embarrassed. Historians and students of history hundreds of years from now should know the kind of people we had to deal with, and I am pleased to include their names and addresses in my books.
They shall be remembered by the facts and because of their politics.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Sept 4, 2007 7:43:41 GMT -6
Vern,
I am so sorry the MHS didn't have the courage to go forward. Shame on them.
Your last two paragraphs sum up the problem with LBHA -- and other such groups -- very well. We are left to hope the next generation will have open minds.
Best wishes always, Diane
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Sept 4, 2007 11:41:20 GMT -6
<He returned briefly with his brother, Capt. Tom Custer, and probably saw the immense pony herd west of the river. He then led his column down Reno Creek to attack the Sioux-Cheyenne-Arapaho Indian village>
If true then his decision to make an immediate attack was sound, although the planning of it was not.
There has been much to do about what, if anything Custer saw. According to statements he could not see anything, but was told to look for worms (horse herd). Again he could see nothing. He seemed convinced there was nothing there only to be told about the bread box found by Indians and the constant urging by the Crow that the command had been discovered and to attack now before the Sioux did.
What evidence is there for Custer seeing the horse herd?
|
|