Custer and Imboden at Gettysburg

[strangeagain]

elisabeth said:

Could the story come vaguely from this?

tinyurl.com/s366b

We have the retreat from Gettysburg, we have cliffs, we have wagons of wounded, we have Imboden ...

This is great stuff from Elizabeth.

Custer has a pronounced fancy for captures, it was more fruitful during the civil war when he was directly capturing ENEMY COMBATANTS rather than indian women and children which leads to death when you leave the warriors unconfronted.
Kilpatrick would have been more likely to push the wagons off a cliff as he was trying to capture anything, for he is considered incorrigible by many. Kilpatrick's known reckless nature is responsible for blurring to Custer on several occasions because they were the youngest generals and the Age Vs Youth factor had them being watched and regarded as similiar. Custer is bold and daring with a cool and calculated demeanor.

I'm betting that some one might have pushed a wagon down a hill if it was so pitch dark and you needed to kill the enemy where you found them.

[strangeagain]

To articulate, Custer himself or any one would have attacked arguably where ever they could clearly find rebels, the first ones in vision would be an obvious wagon, which is why those were seized or possibly "pushed off a cliff". Imagine that if Custer was fighting blind, Kilpatrick would have been stirring like a rabid mongoose, and Elizabeth's story seemingly states (maybe by accident of the author) that Custer "captured" while Kilpatrick "captured and destroyed" the wagons. Both would have fought a little blinded and Kilpatrick would have been especially wild given his nature.
Either way, Kilpatrick will blur anything when next to Custer. To many, their actions and tactics are regarded one and the same.

Strangeback

[strangeagain]

Manually pushing a wagon off a cliff is unlikely unless Custer was shot off his horse and needed to quickly do something on the spot, sometimes needing some quick and deep attacks on enemy.
Custer thinks on his feet, and its what pulled him out of some nasty quarrels, particularly when his horse bolted on him once and dragged him into the midst of some rebels where he had to quickly saber his way out before they could figure out that he was Union.
Quick thinkers do incredible things, I doubt any one would really see him tip a wagon if it was so dark. Even his golden locks would not illuminate him much.

[clw]

I started reading this thread at the beginning when Eric first posted. I was facinated with the exchange between he and Eric and clicked with anticipation to page two only to find................

[gocav76]

I know-I'm sorry clw-for sidetracking it about Ulrich Dahlgren.

[clw]

I meant 'the exchange between he and Larry'........... but then you know I didn't mean YOU. I missed Trish's strangealert until it was too late.

[ericwittenberg]

I just don't understand that stuff that was posted immediately after my posts.....

Eric

[markland]

strangeagain said:

To articulate, Custer himself or any one would have attacked arguably where ever they could clearly find rebels, the first ones in vision would be an obvious wagon, which is why those were seized or possibly "pushed off a cliff". Imagine that if Custer was fighting blind, Kilpatrick would have been stirring like a rabid mongoose, and Elizabeth's story seemingly states (maybe by accident of the author) that Custer "captured" while Kilpatrick "captured and destroyed" the wagons. Both would have fought a little blinded and Kilpatrick would have been especially wild given his nature.
Either way, Kilpatrick will blur anything when next to Custer. To many, their actions and tactics are regarded one and the same.

Strangeback

Strange, please read and think about Eric's post. God Love Elisabeth for I surely do; Eric has spent far more time researching the Union Cavalry's exploits during the Civil War than all of us put together (with the possible exception of RCH from whom nothing factual surprises me!)

In other words, Eric is a subject matter expert and we are extremely lucky having him participating on this board!

Billy

[strangeagain]

I was merely relating why I felt that the story of Custer pushing a wagon of wounded over a cliff was a hard sell.

I'm not taking anything away from the Eric gent. I was just saying how Custer and Hudson Kilpatrick operate and commenting on Elizabeth's link. Hudson is more likely to destroy a wagon because Custer takes a lot of thrill in capturing things. I found it very interesting that Custer is described as "capturing" the wagons, while Hudson is described as "capturing and destroying".
Quite frankly, I'm sure the wagons would be a hot target since its easier to attack a wagon than it is to look blindly around for rebels in the black of the night when you can't see much.

And, duh, you can bet money that any of the active rebels would be lingering directly around any wagon and therefore a wagon is a major target any time they are involved anywhere.

[strangeagain]

I'm definitely far off my element and didn't mean to derail anyone. Simply commenting on how any one would approach to fight when "wagons" are around. I'm not making any comment on Imboden or anything on the other side of discussing how wagons are targeted. Wagons are huge targets, and they are stormed often. Captured, destroyed, pushed off a cliff, depending on the situation and the squeeze.

I wasn't interested in the dual.

[Diane Merkel]

It looks like I'm going to have to use my "Ban Button" again. I'm sorry, Eric.

Strange, as Billy said, we are very lucky to have Eric with us. I am going to ban you again. (How many times does this make?) I suggest you go over to thelbha.proboards55.com/. Those are new boards, and you'll see that the webmaster for custerwest.org is there. I think you'll be happier there.

Best wishes,
Diane

[ericwittenberg]

Diane,

It's okay. It just kind of weirded me out.

Eric

[Diane Merkel]

You aren't the only one!

I periodically have to ban him so he won't play in the Indian threads. He has posted some really weird stuff there. I have zero tolerance with him now.

[conz]

Eric,

In any of your studies did you come across Southern "gossip" that blamed Custer for the deaths of wounded that night at Monterrey pass?

Just as Custer was blamed for atrocities against Mosby's men, and against the farmers of the Shenandoah. Sometimes the ranks get these things started, it hits the yellow journalists, and then you have "history."

Clair

[ericwittenberg]

Clair,

Not of Custer specifically, no. Of the Union troopers in general, sure. There's no question that some of the Confederate wagons rolled down the steep mountain side at Monterey Pass, and that teamsters and perhaps some wounded died as a result. The open question is whether those wagons rolled in the chaos, or whether they were helped.

Eric