|
Post by tubman13 on Jul 16, 2016 5:53:10 GMT -6
HR,
I want your opinion or thoughts regarding the action at Ford B, could that action have actually taken place at Ford D? Kind of an open question to anyone who wants to answer. Could the shod hove prints, at Ford B, be only those of captured horses from the battlefield as Godfrey seems to indicate in some of his writings?
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Nov 3, 2016 9:51:21 GMT -6
Ducemus
The evidences include Maguire's RCoI testimony, such as it is, link and the considerable weight of archeologic review and historical opinion. Without any doubts the tribal record indicates fighting 'near' the river and there lies the rub of the feather.
Yes there was action and it was witnessed by Peter Thompson but I believe that he painted a brave face to it in respect duration but that is a different matter.
The trail of two shod horses leading into the river at B and turning back to the bank, can obviously be anything and anyone but the belief at the time, given later at RCoI, was that was Custer's trail followed from Reno Hill on the 27th June. There was no reason to doubt that then and there remains none today. Maguire's B was not a crossing place for the cavalry it was a watering place. The ford was lower down a half mile at what is now called Realbird.
Archaeology variously gives that light action occurred near the river but the archaeology is completely unreliable in respect any assessment of tactical presence because the area has been heavily collected long time, is a flood plain, and is a part of events which is greatly confused in relation to events related to it. It being the generalised ideas and misconceptions of Maguire's B. It was not a crossing place for cavalry and there was no reason to be there once that was discovered. Hence trails of two horses into and back out of the water.
There were two routes of march from the approach to Maguire's B and record shows that gunfire did occur and that is all that we will ever know.
Could the action have occurred at the D (various) fords - NO. However, many modern enthusiasts including Fox and Donahue want to sell that dream. Suppose that it did happen at D(x) then a plain and very simple truth is the reality that Custer emulated his Washita battle plan and Benteen et al, simply covered up not following their orders to go to LBH valley as the left battalion of the regiment's left wing.
Evidences for the split wing developments at Maguire's B came from Dustin and the Curley - Russell White Bear letter and that was kinda scary to accept for a very long time, with only Maguire's map to back it up. The Freeman sketch which was published after one hundred years makes the case and helps to develop the reality of what happened.
Little Bighorn is a quagmire of deceits related to the valley fight and Benteen's march into Long Otter Ck and not worth raking over here but yes there was fighting at B and that B was the Realbird and Greasy Grass Hill area and all along the retreat route to Calhoun and Smith's Hill.
We will never have artifact evidence to confirm what took place at Fords B(1) and B(2). That anything took place on cemetery ridge or downriver really, really, must be considered to be flight of fantasy or the flight at the end of the Custer fight.
This opinion and supporting views will be modified and evolve over time as suits me when such is suitable and relevant to new evidence and some is very shortly on its way from the camp of Liberty on Cheyenne Way.Godfrey left some unfortunate herrings for students to enjoy and a very particular one relates to the Luce/Blummer and or Nye/Cartwright relic data. Why didn't Godfrey discover the cartridges during his annual visits with Walter M. Camp? The answer is interesting. Time and the missing hour come into all aspects of considering the Custer fight and we do not know enough yet to decide that it was anything other than the briefest of fights. Over by lunch time.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Nov 4, 2016 5:50:34 GMT -6
HR,
Thanks for your response.
Regards, Tom
|
|