Locating Varnum's Lookout

[fred]

Helford,

I have climbed up the Crow's Nest Hill. It is not that big a deal; and I was six weeks shy of 67 when I did it. I was also on the divide with Vern Smalley and the two of us checked out the spot he believes is "Varnum's Lookout." We then climbed up what he has termed Elephant's Hill and I spotted the small area he believes Varnum kept the horses and slept.

Vern is incorrect.

He makes a good argument, but it falls short. The area Varnum was supposed to have kept his horse and slept is entirely too small and too wet... it is fed off of Davis Creek. While the view from the divide is decent, no one, waking up at first light, would have ever eschewed the Crow's Nest for any spot on the divide. And if there were Indians atop Elephant's Hill or Elephant Hill, then Varnum and his party would have been readily seen; there is no cover except for a copse of trees just west and below the divide hogback. None of it works.

The Crow's Nest Hill is easily accessible from its pocket and one needs to be in only reasonable shape to keep one's heart-rate below 100 to reach any spot along its higher ridgeline to view the valleys below. Once there, you can see the huge difference between the two sites and no one would make the mistake of not going up to the Crow's Nest Hill.

Now... where I believe Smalley was on to something... and I believe this emphatically... is a second viewing by Custer-- the one referred to by Luther Hare, the one where LT Cooke borrowed DeRudio's Austrian-made field glasses, the one Varnum said was never made.... That trip was to Smalley's "Varnum's Lookout" and it was made shortly before Custer mounted the regiment and moved it across the divide. Varnum was correct: Custer never made a second trip to the Crow's Nest; but while Varnum was scavenging for something to eat, Custer went to the divide to attempt to see the village again. This was probably done at Mitch Boyer's urging.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Margaret]

ahh....thank you so much Fred, my mind is now at peace with most of this I think. I thought Mr Smalley put up such a good argument and was so forthright in his assertions that he swayed me, not having been there myself of course.

So does this also mean the hostile Indians were not on Elephant's Hill either? then which ridge were they seen on? would it be the one mcaryf was referring to in his earlier post with the photo where he drew the line? as that's what I had always thought. Vern was adamant it wasn't that one.....?

I notice some photos are no longer visible that were on this thread earlier, which is a pity, I should have liked to have seen them

[fred]

Helford,

I am not sure about which ridge the Indians crossed. Elephant Hill, however, does not seem logical to me, though I have not ruled it out entirely.

I too, have been swayed-- back and forth at times-- by various arguments. Many are put forth rather convincingly. When you dig deep enough, however, few hold up.

The things that must be remembered with this event are ofttimes those things one most easily forgets in favor of cherished theory. First and foremost, this was a military operation and the speed and exigencies of a military operation were no less applicable or important in 1876 than they are today, in 2010. In addition, one of the primary fears from the very start of the campaign, was that these Indians, if cornered or forewarned, would break up their concentration and scatter.

As the campaign wore on-- June 25 was the 40th day-- this fear increased, simply because the Sioux were not found where the military thought they would be, but had continued farther west into the extremes of their known territory. Much beyond the LBH area, it was thought the tribes would then begin to break up and go their separate ways, completely wrecking the chance to confront the entire mass. That breaking up would also defeat any immediate military plans.

There is a great propensity for people to cast blame on various characters because of personality issues... it becomes extremely difficult to set those prejudices aside because many of them stem from years and years of day-dreaming and subjective beliefs, as well as one's own ideas of likable personality. What I have found is that these personality issues played virtually no role in this affair, and of course, that upsets a vast majority of "-philes" in one camp or another. Benteen is a primary example; Reno less so; then of course, you have the Custer-haters who are equally at fault.

The more I studied this whole thing the more intent I am that it was a true military operation and was conducted as such by very professional men. The fact that mistakes were made is ancillary. The fact that some officers were less competent than others, is also ancillary. George Custer was a competent and highly skilled officer and as such, wielded his "sword"-- i. e., his command-- with aplomb. Circumstances and not a little bad judgment intruded, however, causing the debacle.

Two of the main issues I have-- and I am getting way ahead of myself here-- are the speeds George Custer moved down Reno Creek and the speed Fred Benteen did, as well. I believe I am in a very small minority-- especially if you see the posts on the "other" board-- though I also believe I am supported by two of the best and most knowledgeable people, viz, AZRanger/Benteeneast and Zekesgirl.

Your opinions, however, are for you to form and decide on once you have weighed all the data you feel you need to digest.

By the way, it is a shame about the pictures. In past years, I put up a number of pictures on this site and I noticed some time ago that they had disappeared. It may have been because of changes at Photobucket, or more likely because I had to change my hard-drive and then my iPhoto program suddenly disappeared. When I went back to Photobucket, I noticed all those pictures were gone. It is too bad. If I knew where the missing photos were located on these threads, I would replace them because fortunately, Macs store all pictures in separate files as well as iPhoto.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[fred]

Helford,

I am not sure about which ridge the Indians crossed. Elephant Hill, however, does not seem logical to me, though I have not ruled it out entirely.

I too, have been swayed-- back and forth at times-- by various arguments. Many are put forth rather convincingly. When you dig deep enough, however, few hold up.

The things that must be remembered with this event are ofttimes those things one most easily forgets in favor of cherished theory. First and foremost, this was a military operation and the speed and exigencies of a military operation were no less applicable or important in 1876 than they are today, in 2010. In addition, one of the primary fears from the very start of the campaign, was that these Indians, if cornered or forewarned, would break up their concentration and scatter.

As the campaign wore on-- June 25 was the 40th day-- this fear increased, simply because the Sioux were not found where the military thought they would be, but had continued farther west into the extremes of their known territory. Much beyond the LBH area, it was thought the tribes would then begin to break up and go their separate ways, completely wrecking the chance to confront the entire mass. That breaking up would also defeat any immediate military plans.

There is a great propensity for people to cast blame on various characters because of personality issues... it becomes extremely difficult to set those prejudices aside because many of them stem from years and years of day-dreaming and subjective beliefs, as well as one's own ideas of likable personality. What I have found is that these personality issues played virtually no role in this affair, and of course, that upsets a vast majority of "-philes" in one camp or another. Benteen is a primary example; Reno less so; then of course, you have the Custer-haters who are equally at fault.

The more I studied this whole thing the more intent I am that it was a true military operation and was conducted as such by very professional men. The fact that mistakes were made is ancillary. The fact that some officers were less competent than others, is also ancillary. George Custer was a competent and highly skilled officer and as such, wielded his "sword"-- i. e., his command-- with aplomb. Circumstances and not a little bad judgment intruded, however, causing the debacle.

Two of the main issues I have-- and I am getting way ahead of myself here-- are the speeds George Custer moved down Reno Creek and the speed Fred Benteen did, as well. I believe I am in a very small minority-- especially if you see the posts on the "other" board-- though I also believe I am supported by two of the best and most knowledgeable people, viz, AZRanger/Benteeneast and Zekesgirl.

Your opinions, however, are for you to form and decide on once you have weighed all the data you feel you need to digest.

By the way, it is a shame about the pictures. In past years, I put up a number of pictures on this site and I noticed some time ago that they had disappeared. It may have been because of changes at Photobucket, or more likely because I had to change my hard-drive and then my iPhoto program suddenly disappeared. When I went back to Photobucket, I noticed all those pictures were gone. It is too bad. If I knew where the missing photos were located on these threads, I would replace them because fortunately, Macs store all pictures in separate files as well as iPhoto.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Margaret]

hi Fred,

thanks for your reply.
I understand what you say and wouldn't disagree with you. I have mixed feelings about Custer taking his career overall, but I'm afraid I don't have a great deal of sympathy with the soldiers in this particular fight as I believe they were there for the killing, and most of them I think were looking forward to getting stuck in, in that way. They got their comeuppance although ultimately I hold Sheridan/Grant/Sherman and Crook responsible for the politics in setting the whole thing up.

I think Custer's plans at LBH, kept closely to his chest by all accounts, which cannot have been the best idea in the world, were less about indiscriminate killing and more about hostage taking, which might not have pleased his troops too much had they known, before things started to go horribly wrong for them.

I feel a little for Boyer but he chose to be there and could have got out but got swept up in it all.

My sympathies are with the Indians Fred. A lot of posts I'm reading on these boards appear to come from the military standpoint which is all too common I find. Take the battlefield itself, why put a military cemetery there, most of those buried have nothing to do with the battle and in my view, it's a complete blot on the landscape and has no place to be there.
In recent times a few measures have been put in place to recognise the Indian dead, but not much. I see it as a little triumphalist in nature, as if saying, this is our country now, this is our battle, our boys, and our cemetery, even if it is on a reservation.
In the future, I would like to see the cemetery removed completely and the dead re-buried somewhere else and the visitor centre moved to the valley area, an idea that has been proposed I see.

As far as the intricacies of the battle are concerned, I am looking for some closure which is why I am generally happy with John S. Gray's wonderful book which so many people like to pick to pieces and they have every right to do so and offer their alternatives and criticisms, but if they can produce as good a book that grabs my attention as much, then I'd be happy to buy it, otherwise I'll stick with Gray and go with what he says. He does allow us some leeway to speculate towards the end, as he would have to of course.
So as far as the trail down Reno Creek goes, I will go with Gray on that too but do allow Benteen perhaps a little more leeway, it must have been ''terribly hard on the horses'' and I think I go along with that and I don't suppose the pack train could have gone much quicker, could it?
I love 'what if's', and do wonder what might have happened if Benteen and the pack train had come up in time to support Reno in the valley before he capitulated. Custer could then have made his assault from MT ford I think - for a sizeable proportion of the women and children and perhaps caused a stalemate.

Gray doesn't mention anything about another lookout though, as Vern did, so that bothered me a little and from your post above, I'm still not quite satisfied here with the dismissal of his theory as you admit not to be sure of this ridge top the Indians were seen on either. Vern was quite clear about it, so I'm still looking for closure on that point. Vern also queried the 'broken country' I think Varnum referred to, but wasn't there at CN Hill. So, something not quite right there. From where I'm looking it all looks broken up.

I'm pleased to hear the Crow's Nest hill can be climbed quite easily - I was beginning to have visions of Custer struggling - which wouldn't do.
I tried to get there once but had to turn back at the Davis Creek turn off from the Rosebud as there wasn't a decent road to travel on, just some dirt track I think for bike riders, and something about getting permission from landowners, so had to backtrack to the 212 which is a boring route.

You are a very lucky man to have been over that ground yourself, I am terribly envious. Shame about the photos, perhaps I'll find some more during my travels on these boards.

I do hope none of the above has offended you in any way,
my view may not appeal to the most patriotic

[fred]

Helford,

You have certainly not offended me, not at all, for I too believe changes should be made to the battlefield, changes which neither of us will live to see... if they are made at all, which I doubt seriously.

Let me say this about John Gray and his last book. I consider the book one of the best ever written, but my issue is with his determination of time, times, and timing, all distinct areas. The fault that I find is that he based his work on his theories rather than the other way around. There is no way to prove that, of course, but a serious, a long, and a detailed study of every single entry will bear me out. In addition, Gray uses a time that is unsupportable and he uses convoluted logic in determining it, then claims his opinion is so correct that anyone would be a fool to oppose it.

That, of course, is all paraphrased and my use of the word "convoluted" may be too harsh, for I cannot think of exactly what his justification was. (I do not like to make those kinds of criticisms without being able to support it, but I am just writing this as I remember it when I first decided to dispute his findings some three years ago.)

My biggest complaint about him is his tendency to ignore testimony that would contradict his times and his theories. There is also an element of logic involved, but it is logic supported by testimony-- white and red-- and Gray chooses to ignore it. I find that practice disingenuous to say the least. One example: a military command led by a personality like George Custer, under the circumstances as we know them, going down Reno Creek at the speed Gray would have us believe, is patently ludicrous. It is particularly so because we have the statements of officers, enlisted personnel, red scouts, and white interpreters who said otherwise.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Margaret]

hi Fred,

I know the trip down Reno Creek bugs you considerably from Gray's accounts as I've read some of your posts on it. I believe you have Custer travelling at about 10 mph for 10 miles whereas Gray puts it about 4 mph. I have also read elsewhere by others who are familiar with horses and cavalry speeds of the time that feel much the same and of course I have to defer to their superior knowledge, but 10 mph sounds alarm bells even to me.

4mph just sounds more reasonable given the circumstances. Benteen gone off to the left, packtrain trailing behind...
Passing the lone tepee ''at a trot'' - isn't that about 6mph? probably the fastest they went.

Perhaps Mr Gray wanted to find some closure before he died and was determined to do that.
Of course anyone can pick it to pieces but I do wonder if he was still alive whether he would do another re-write for us, and perhaps amend a few things but I cannot see him doing a complete about turn.
I do get a little concerned though about his insistence on local sun time, and do question if everything happened an hour or so before he says it did.

Anyway Fred, it's been nice talking to you and thank you for your time on this subject, it's been much valued I can assure you. Obviously, I have a lot of catching up to do

[fred]

Helford,

The 4 MPH business is right smack out of the manuals. Same with 6 MPH for a trot and 8 MPH for a gallop. Those are parade-ground estimates and they no semblance to reality. Do you think for one moment that Reno's men charged out of the timber at 8 MPH? Those guys probably set the land-speed record being chased by that horde!

Four miles per hour also ignores the military necessities of getting down Reno Creek in a rush to confront the village before it was broken up. Remember, by this time Custer believed he had lost the element of surprise.

I am also not saying that he moved at a uniform pace. This is one of the problems people have in grasping what went on: everything is done-- in one's mind-- at uniform, separate actions. But it wasn't that way. I am sure Custer moved down the creek in bursts, maybe 15 MPH, then a slowdown to a trot; another burst of speed, another slowdown. The pony express average an easy 10 MPH over similar distances. Why couldn't cavalry horses in decent shape do the same? Besides, Gray's 4 MPH ignores completely the evidence left behind by men who saw Custer moving and men who participated in that move. So where does Gray get off changing all that?

Another thing to ponder: a man running a marathon runs at a speed of some 12 to 13 MPH and he does so over a distance of 26+ miles. Plus-- and I do not know if you saw this-- I posted a number of comments I got off the Internet that support these kinds of speeds for distances of that nature, in essence only some 10 miles before a general slow-down. I see no problem with speeds like this, especially considering the military necessity and the consequences of failure.

I have a similar problem with Gray's insistence about the command being on local time. Wallace clearly denied it, in what we today think is obtuse language, but which was pretty definitive at the time. Godfrey supported that, yet Gray insists the command was on local sun. That insistence ignores all the subsequent testimony from people like Herendeen, Gerard, DeRudio, Godfrey, Hare, Varnum... not to mention some 35 or 40 Indians who claimed the battle started when the sun was "overhead."

While I almost hate to say this, John Gray was something of an academic bully, flinging his MD and professorial credentials around like a baseball bat. His technical presentation was superb, but it buffaloes people who have neither the time nor the dedication to attempt refutation, plus as I have said before, he summarily dismissed all contradictory arguments before he even made a case for his own. That bothers me because it relegates immediately to the ashbin other opinions that might conflict with his own. It reduces another person's arguments to the trite even before that person is allowed to present them. I realize this was a book so you do not have the immediate give and take of a forensic debate, but Gray's technical competence and expertise, combined with his dismissive comments, certainly has its effects.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Margaret]

hi Fred,

thank you for your indepth response once again and as always it made very interesting reading. I am curious to know whether the discrepancies you have uncovered from Gray's work, and applying your own amendments, satisfy all the surround evidence available and that you are happy with the result you have obtained, so from rejecting Wallace's time at the divide, the pace to the North Fork and everything beyond, that according to cross sightings from primary accounts, everyone is where they should be and at the right time?

I do question whether anyone attempting what Gray did would not also have to shuffle the evidence to fit the result, rejecting as much as they are able to include, otherwise it'll never work.

If they do square up then you have achieved something that perhaps few others are able to.

I've noticed on this board [forgotten where], a thread was started to discuss Gray's timelines but the thread fizzled out after much argument, and no one appeared to have put forward credible alternatives of their own. It seems everyone likes to dismiss his work [and I first noticed it from Michno in 'Lakota Noon'] yet no one has come up with anything comparable. Why is that do you think? An impossible task?

[fred]

Helford,

What you should understand is that this is no easy undertaking. I began it almost three years ago and have worked on it a minimum of 90% of the days in that period of time. Some days I have worked on it for hours on end and others for only a few minutes when I wanted to check on something.

I do not reject Wallace's noon divide crossing time. I did at first, but then I determined that the rejection skewed everything and was not compatible with my aims, i. e., to use the times rather than the theories. Every time tried to inject my own personal prejudices I found I was having trouble making the thing work. The only subjective insertions were speeds and I used what I believed were reasonable for some specific entries. An example of those entries was Benteen's speed from the divide separation until I saw the first difficult terrain on the topo map. From that point on, I needed to change speeds.

The odd thing about that is when Terri and Steve made their Benteen run on horseback, their results agreed almost perfectly with my "guesstimates."

Other subjective entries would include movements by various Indians, e. g., Crazy Horse, Gall, et al. Much of that data and speculation I got from Michno and Bray. Again, the odd part is that it all fit without me having to jerry-rig anything.

The most difficult items were Sharrow's return to the command from his message to Benteen and Boston Custer's speed from the morass to his meeting of Martini. After that, it was a piece of cake, especially since I had a reasonable idea of where Boston would have to end up.

The only out of hand rejections were Wallace's 2 PM-specific time, along with a couple of subjective "around," "about"s, and stuff like that.

I rejected Wallace's 2 PM Custer/Reno separation because there was too much other evidence against it, including Wallace's own statement that the only-- and last-- time he was sure of was the divide crossing. The 2 PM time fell afoul of comments from Gerard, Ryan, Porter, Herendeen, DeRudio, Godfrey, Edgerly, Windolph, Benteen, Reno, and about 35 Indians claiming the sun was directly overhead when the battle began. That ain't some time after 2 PM! Any specific Indian claim of, let's say, "3 PM," was rejected completely.

The amazing thing is that by using reasonable speeds-- speeds you would expect a military command to assume in a given situation or speeds based on Indian testimony, i. e., "we rode into the village and put on our warpaint,"-type thing-- almost everything I plugged in worked without any subjective messing around or finagling. I will tell you, Helford, it was a stunning series of revelations to me, no hyperbole, no exaggeration. Almost every time I wanted to fit some new set of entries into the overall master document, they fit within a couple of minutes of what one might accept as reality.

The document is complete essentially, and contains 444 entries, I would guess about 90% or more, fully sourced in one form or another. If there is anything someone can suggest that is not already included, I would welcome the suggestion and I will include it. That includes individuals and events. It already includes Boston Custer, Voss, Sharrow, Martini, Kanipe, Gall (speculation and "simulation"), Crazy Horse (speculation and "simulation"), and a lot more.

I will also tell you that it includes Custer beyond Luce Ridge... maybe the most interesting part of it. You would be amazed at the conclusions. I tried plugging in the theories of Gray, Stewart, Liddic, Donovan, and I do not know how many others. Based on testimony from a number of Indian sources as well as observations from about a dozen white sources at Weir Peaks, only one scenario works fully. And to arrive at that conclusion, I simply started with two base-times: a beginning and an end, both of those being set not by me, but by participants. When you consider distances (from a topo map) and reasonable speeds-- and, to be honest, there are a couple of assumptions, again, based on Indian testimony-- the results are eminently workable.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[fred]

Helford,

What you should understand is that this is no easy undertaking. I began it almost three years ago and have worked on it a minimum of 90% of the days in that period of time. Some days I have worked on it for hours on end and others for only a few minutes when I wanted to check on something.

I do not reject Wallace's noon divide crossing time. I did at first, but then I determined that the rejection skewed everything and was not compatible with my aims, i. e., to use the times rather than the theories. Every time tried to inject my own personal prejudices I found I was having trouble making the thing work. The only subjective insertions were speeds and I used what I believed were reasonable for some specific entries. An example of those entries was Benteen's speed from the divide separation until I saw the first difficult terrain on the topo map. From that point on, I needed to change speeds.

The odd thing about that is when Terri and Steve made their Benteen run on horseback, their results agreed almost perfectly with my "guesstimates."

Other subjective entries would include movements by various Indians, e. g., Crazy Horse, Gall, et al. Much of that data and speculation I got from Michno and Bray. Again, the odd part is that it all fit without me having to jerry-rig anything.

The most difficult items were Sharrow's return to the command from his message to Benteen and Boston Custer's speed from the morass to his meeting of Martini. After that, it was a piece of cake, especially since I had a reasonable idea of where Boston would have to end up.

The only out of hand rejections were Wallace's 2 PM-specific time, along with a couple of subjective "around," "about"s, and stuff like that.

I rejected Wallace's 2 PM Custer/Reno separation because there was too much other evidence against it, including Wallace's own statement that the only-- and last-- time he was sure of was the divide crossing. The 2 PM time fell afoul of comments from Gerard, Ryan, Porter, Herendeen, DeRudio, Godfrey, Edgerly, Windolph, Benteen, Reno, and about 35 Indians claiming the sun was directly overhead when the battle began. That ain't some time after 2 PM! Any specific Indian claim of, let's say, "3 PM," was rejected completely.

The amazing thing is that by using reasonable speeds-- speeds you would expect a military command to assume in a given situation or speeds based on Indian testimony, i. e., "we rode into the village and put on our warpaint,"-type thing-- almost everything I plugged in worked without any subjective messing around or finagling. I will tell you, Helford, it was a stunning series of revelations to me, no hyperbole, no exaggeration. Almost every time I wanted to fit some new set of entries into the overall master document, they fit within a couple of minutes of what one might accept as reality.

The document is complete essentially, and contains 444 entries, I would guess about 90% or more, fully sourced in one form or another. If there is anything someone can suggest that is not already included, I would welcome the suggestion and I will include it. That includes individuals and events. It already includes Boston Custer, Voss, Sharrow, Martini, Kanipe, Gall (speculation and "simulation"), Crazy Horse (speculation and "simulation"), and a lot more.

I will also tell you that it includes Custer beyond Luce Ridge... maybe the most interesting part of it. You would be amazed at the conclusions. I tried plugging in the theories of Gray, Stewart, Liddic, Donovan, and I do not know how many others. Based on testimony from a number of Indian sources as well as observations from about a dozen white sources at Weir Peaks, only one scenario works fully. And to arrive at that conclusion, I simply started with two base-times: a beginning and an end, both of those being set not by me, but by participants. When you consider distances (from a topo map) and reasonable speeds-- and, to be honest, there are a couple of assumptions, again, based on Indian testimony-- the results are eminently workable.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Margaret]

You've clearly done well there Fred and you must be delighted with your well earned results. Such dedication !
I can see you're determined to get to the bottom of it.

However, I have a few queries from what you have told me above.

You accept Wallace's time at the divide, so with your 10 mph average down Reno, we must have them arriving at the Flat around 1.30 with Custer's charge order and separation shortly after. [You reject Wallace's 2pm for this].

Some watering at Ford A for Reno's men then a couple miles down the valley to the loop where they formed the skirmish line must put you somewhere about 2pm ?

According to Wallace it was 4pm at the retreat ford as he claimed to have looked at his watch, and according to Godfrey, Benteen arrived at Reno Hill at 4.20.

So, are you telling us that Reno's skirmish line, refuge in the timber, and the van arrival at Reno Hill took 2 hours? sounds rather a lot to me considering they were quickly routed, by all accounts.

Now to the matter of the overhead sun time:-
I would think that the village Indians would have recalled the start of the battle to be when all the commotion started occurring, which would be perhaps at most half hour [according to Utley], [when they got warning of approaching troops], before Reno's actual firing started, giving enough of them just time to get ponies, dress, get ammo. etc.... to make a bold show at the south end.

So whatever time we have for Reno's skirmish, an Indian recollection of 'sun overhead' might be as much as half hour before that time, which is reasonable I think.

Having been to S.E. Montana in June, on a very hot day, if I had no idea of the official time, I would think that the sun would be overhead anywhere between late morning and mid afternoon.

I suggest the 'commotion' started around 2.45-3pm.

[fred]

Helford,

You have bought in clearly to the classic Gray trap of selectively choosing which statement of comment one wishes to believe. Your estimates of the Custer/Reno separation are incorrect and the Godfrey business about Benteen's arrival on Reno Hill at some 4:20 PM is the perfect example of that selectivity.

Here is what I would much prefer to believe:

Benteen, F., CPT-- He was prompted, but agreed to a time of about 3 o’clock when he met Reno on the hill. RCOI, 1879.

Davern, E., PVT-- Reno's command reached the hilltop between 2 and 3 PM. RCOI, 1879.

Reno, M. A., MAJ-- Reno says he watched Benteen go off to the far left and he “did not see him again until about 2:30 PM of that same day.” Reno memoirs, 1885 or 1886.

Windolph, C. A., PVT-- Windolph said it was about 3:30 in the after noon by the time Reno’s troops reached the hilltop. Windolph's memoirs, 1946.

Gerard, F.-- Gerard felt it was about 2 PM when Benteen was reaching Reno Hill and the commands were uniting. 1912 interview.

Godfrey, E. S., LT-- “My recollection is that it was about half-past two when we joined Reno” on Reno Hill. Article in Century Magazine, 1892.

Wallace, G. D., LT-- Soon after reaching the top of the hill, it was reported Benteen was coming. Benteen arrived at Reno Hill about 10 minutes after Reno’s command. The packs arrived about an hour later. RCOI, 1879.

Godfrey, E. S., LT-- Godfrey wrote, his “recollection is that it was about half-past two when we joined Reno.” This extract also brings up Godfrey’s bafflement about his 4:20 p.m. notation in his memorandum book. Graham says in a footnote, that Godfrey, after reading Graham’s time analysis, figured the 4:20 was when Benteen’s column joined Reno. Article revision, 1921; 1920s-1930s.

Godfrey, E. S., LT-- Godfrey thought they joined up with Reno on the hill between 3 and 4 PM. RCOI, 1879.

Varnum, C. A., LT-- “Q: How long after retiring from the timber did Captain Benteen unite with [Reno]? A: I would say 20 or 25 minutes.” Memoirs, probably early 1930's.

Varnum, C. A., LT-- “My statements in regard to time are more or less a guess. In 10 or 15 minutes Colonel Benteen came up….” RCOI, 1879.

Varnum, C. A., LT-- A few moments later a column was spotted moving downriver toward them. The column arrived 10 to 15 minutes later. RCOI, 1879.

Varnum, C. A., LT-- Longer than 10 minutes—maybe 20 minutes total—on the hill when Benteen arrived. Camp interview, May1909.

Hare, L., LT-- Hare estimated they were on the hill for about 15 minutes before Benteen arrived. RCOI, 1879.

Hare, L., LT-- Benteen arrived about 10 minutes after Reno reached the top of the hill. Camp interview, 7Feb1910.

Edgerly, W. S., LT-- Benteen’s battalion joined Reno’s force 15 to 20 minutes after Reno’s retreat. Leavenworth Times, 18Aug1881.

Varnum, C. A., LT-- Q: “How long after retiring from the timber did Captain Benteen unite with him [Reno]?” A: “I would say 20 or 25 minutes.” RCOI, 1879.

Godfrey brought up the 4:20 time as an afterthought and originally alluded to seeing it noted in his memorandum book, but he couldn't remember why he made that note. When he had made the note, he was already atop Reno Hill. The only other comment about Benteen arriving as late as 4 PM was when Wallace claimed that Benteen's arrival was about two hours after the Custer/Reno separation. Since Wallace stuck to that 2 PM time, he concluded Benteen's arrival was about 4 PM. You will also notice that Godfrey's acceptance of a 4:20 arrival was done after Graham's prompting, and many, many years after Godfrey's RCOI testimony: 40 to 55 years later!

Every other specific reference to time places Benteen on the hilltop some time between 2:30 and 3 PM.

Reno spent a total of some 45 minutes in the valley-- from dismount to the beginning of the retreat. Again, a very careful reading and analysis of the testimonies is required to arrive at that conclusion, another one rejected by Gray... and actually, almost everyone else I know of. And that's fine, but it does not make them right. My only comment is that the scholarship over the years has been less than good, and I do not care whether that has been from Paul Hutton, Robert Utley, Nathaniel Philbrick, Edgar Stewart, or anyone else.

Your interpretations of time are fine, if that's what you believe... John Gray did; but again, it is selective and it rejects the preponderance of testimony in favor of that which supports personal theories and prejudices. The more one reads, the more one dissects what was said, the more one takes even Gray's selections and places them within the context of what others had to say, the more reality begins to creep through.

There is also the matter of military exigency which virtually everyone but a trained military man does not seem able to grasp. Gray clearly couldn't grasp it and chose to develop his work as an academician would rather than as a military man would.

Anyway, Helford, I have addressed this issue too frequently and these and the other boards are littered with my arguments, none of which seem to make a whit of difference to anyone. Opinions are already etched. It is rather a shame because Gray's work distorts the entire affair and causes blame to be cast about where none is deserved. I do not absolve any of the principal players of certain elements of blame, but if you are going to cast aspersions, at least do so where there is some question of culpability. Everything Reno did up to the time he chose to retreat was highly competent; after that, things become debatable and opinions-- including mine-- vary. Everything Benteen did up to and including the speed of his arrival on Reno Hill, was highly competent; after that you can debate it. Custer...? It begins when he separated from Reno. Or maybe later... or maybe before.... Or to some, never.

This thread started off about Varnum's Lookout; I think it should return there.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[Margaret]

ok Fred, thanks again for all that useful information, I've learnt a lot from it. You seem confident in your assertions and I expect you're right....

I understand your wanting to move on now as I'm aware you've been through all this already on other boards and it must be getting tiresome for you but there's always scope for some of us to learn where others have delved into it more deeply for whatever reasons.

As for Mr Gray's work, I'm less concerned about his confusing times and speeds, more in favour of his reasonings, why people did what they did and where they did it, such as events at Ford B, Weir Advance, and the counter clockwise hypothesis - I'm happy to accept those although I expect you wouldn't.

As for apportioning blame, I wonder who Custer would have blamed for his wipe out, if he could speak to us today...... Benteen perhaps?

nothing more to say on Varnum's Lookout, I feel that's been cleared up nicely.

suffice to say Happy Christmas to you and all your family, and thanks for all your help.

bi for now,