|
Post by fred on Dec 1, 2007 20:06:33 GMT -6
clw--
One other thing I neglected to mention above. If a "screen" or a "delaying action" was expected or de rigueur in fighting Indians, how come Gerard was so intent, so insistent upon Custer knowing? How come Cooke told Gerard he would inform Custer? This was something unusual, something not generally seen or done by Indians. What else would it have signified?
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 1, 2007 20:16:28 GMT -6
We're not far apart, but the main difference is that I think things in the valley were going just as Custer expected and hoped. And because they were, he never made a change in plan based on anything that happened there. Poor Clair. When he gets back to 'work' on Monday he won't know who to answer first. <bg> Sorry again, clw. I just noticed your post. I agree with you regarding things going in the valley just as Custer hoped. I think where we may differ is in his plans. I believe by the time he ordered Reno into action, he pretty much knew what he was going to do. I think we pay the man short shrift too often. This business about having no plan is more Benteen-driven than anything else, and while I believe Benteen to a point, I think Custer had it pretty much set when they arrived in the "flats." Gerard's initial report-- the Indians were fleeing-- only reinforced Custer's ideas. The switcheroo occurred some minutes later and that's why Custer veered to the right rather than directly follow (read, support) Reno. When Custer overlooked the valley (Reno was now in the timber), Custer was pleased. Things were going as he hoped because Indians were being drawn to and tied up by Reno. But... Custer had to hot-foot it down-valley to make sure he could get behind the scattering warriors/families/refugees/non-combatants. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by clw on Dec 1, 2007 22:09:19 GMT -6
clw-- One other thing I neglected to mention above. If a "screen" or a "delaying action" was expected or de rigueur in fighting Indians, how come Gerard was so intent, so insistent upon Custer knowing? How come Cooke told Gerard he would inform Custer? This was something unusual, something not generally seen or done by Indians. What else would it have signified? I'm getting out of my league here, military function in battle and all, but wouldn't it be as important for Custer to know things were going as planned as to know if they weren't? Get the news back to HQ that things were on track? Agreed Custer had a plan from the start -- I think it was....... head for the high ground while Reno kept them busy in the valley.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Dec 2, 2007 3:50:46 GMT -6
Fred and cwl Are you fellows saying that Custer feeds 3 troops to the Indians as a diversion? If Custer only wanted a diversion why order an attack? Why do you fellows not accept Custer's attack order.Your entire theory is based on you altering the stated intention of Custer.For your theory to hold you have to supply Custer with a bogus intention and you have not a shred of evidence to support this. Don't you think that a commander ordered to provide a diversion will do a much better job than one ordered to attack.Don't you think that a diversion would have been of much more use to Custer than a failed attack? If you want to explore this battle logically don't start by altering a known fact that an attack was ordered.
Agree with Fred. It's all how you see the timing. You're making a lot of assumpution there wild. Yes, the location of his reserve is really starting to concern him, and I think he's lightly engaged not just bebopping along, but I don't think things are as hot as you think yet. You are saying Custer does not recognise the dynamics of the situation he is in and thus he is not under pressure?
It is much too early for Custer to be concerned about Benteen. I don't believe his worries about Benteen showing up really began until he arrived back on the ridges after the Ford D foray Tel us what happened Fred after he arrived back that made him concerned about Benteen?
|
|
|
Post by clw on Dec 2, 2007 7:56:27 GMT -6
I didn't mean to imply that Reno was intended to be a diversion. It was an attack meant to engage the main body of warriors. The logical expectation was that the village would flee in the opposite direction.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 2, 2007 7:57:03 GMT -6
I'm getting out of my league here, military function in battle and all, but wouldn't it be as important for Custer to know things were going as planned as to know if they weren't? Get the news back to HQ that things were on track? Agreed Custer had a plan from the start -- I think it was....... head for the high ground while Reno kept them busy in the valley. clw-- You are far from out of your league here. I have been saying this from the first time I ever posted on these boards, so I will reiterate. Your opinion is as valid as mine. Mine has been developed using only the things I have read and listening to people I respect. You certainly fall deeply into that latter category. What I post here is my theory and like I said above, I have those things as my reasons. I discard nothing unless it is so outrageous and can be shown as such a fraud, that it becomes worthless information. Based on everything I have read-- and that includes profiles of various participants-- I believe Custer started off with no particular plan in mind. He developed something of a plan as he rode down Reno Creek. That plan was formed in his mind, in part, by unfolding events, i.e., the spotting of Indians, what those Indians were doing, the spotting of pony herds, etc. By the time Custer ordered Reno into an attack, the plan was solidified in Custer's mind. Okay so far? I believe that plan to be a first wave attack by Reno, followed by another, larger, second wave, "shock" attack (if we must!) consisting of the Keogh/Yates battalions. Benteen conveniently fell into the "reserve" category, but Benteen would know what to do.So far, all of this can be supported by eye-witness, participant testimony, whether or not we choose to believe it. And this was Custer's original plan.However... something happened that altered the plan. It had to have happened after Custer ordered Reno off, otherwise he planned on heading into the hills all along and I have found no evidence to support that claim. Quite the contrary as testimony at the RCOI shows. Now, I know of only two things that occurred after Reno and Custer separated. (1) Kanipe reported seeing 100 Indians in the hills to the right of the LBH River. Do you believe that? I don't, but I can't prove it, so it remains a viable theory, though discounted by me. (2) Gerard reported something very unusual in Indian fighting and apparently it was totally unexpected: warriors were coming out to oppose Reno instead of gathering up their families and running. Fact: Custer moved into the hills rather than follow Reno. In my opinion, this was also unexpected, at least by the men with Reno. So now the question becomes: what prompted Custer to make this move? Column A or Column B, it's your choice, and really, it becomes irrelevant in the larger scheme of things. The fact remains, Custer made the move, the first action in the sealing of his fate. Now... [ encore]... I am waiting for a better theory. Can anyone provide it? In my figuring, my work, I have used the opinions of "authors"; of historians; the RCOI testimony; the opinions of people on these boards; my own views of the terrain; the timing and distances involved; my personal experience of 10 years as an army officer and whatever strategy and tactics I have learned from that and from reading over the years; and from some logic and a bit of detective work (that's probably the same as logic). I have also incorporated my own personal principles that served me very well when I led troops in combat in Vietnam and which seem to fit very nicely in studying any battles I read about. One other thing, "clw." I am not in the business of denigrating anyone else's theory. We can argue and belabor the points, but I am really not interested in one-upsmanship or convincing you your theory is incorrect. I guess that's a little like "Harpskiddie." I fully respect what you say and what you write and what your opinion is. We don't all think alike and like I wrote above, you are far, far from out of your league. If that were the case, you would soon retreat from this thread and I and everyone else who is interested in reading this would be the losers. Very best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by clw on Dec 2, 2007 8:27:02 GMT -6
OK, Fred. Here's what I don't get. Why would Custer think the warriors would run when Reno attacked? That seems to me exactly what they wouldn't do. At least not until they'd bought some time or needed to disengage to protect an immediate threat to their famililes. I would think such a "screen" would have been expected.
I get the feeling that Custer operated on a 'need to know' basis and in this case, I think he thought Reno didn't need to know the entire plan, just his objective -- bring them to battle. How many battalions go into action knowing the entire battle plan (which usually only lasts until the first shot is fired anyway)? In order to direct his battle, Custer had to get to the high ground. It would have made no sense to follow Reno into the valley.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 2, 2007 9:10:36 GMT -6
1. Why would Custer think the warriors would run when Reno attacked? That seems to me exactly what they wouldn't do. At least not until they'd bought some time or needed to disengage to protect an immediate threat to their families. 2. I get the feeling that Custer operated on a 'need to know' basis and in this case, I think he thought Reno didn't need to know the entire plan, just his objective -- bring them to battle. 3. In order to direct his battle, Custer had to get to the high ground. It would have made no sense to follow Reno into the valley. clw-- I tinkered with your post so I could address it more easily. 1. Because that is what they always did. I think Custer knew he had lost the element of surprise. That's why he didn't sit out the 25th like he originally intended. He moved rapidly so he could close the window between him and the Indians who were doing the warning. I believe Custer fully expected to meet up with a village "on the move," a village already in the process of breaking down and beginning to move. That's why I believe Custer fully expected to have a "valley" run. Reno would hit first and that would draw Indians to him, in whatever measure or number or frame of mind he might have expected. A follow-up attack by an even larger force-- Custer's own-- would create even more havoc and be decisive. 2. I think "need to know" is more 20th-century political posturing than 19th century military strategy. Reno wasn't told because Custer didn't find it necessary to communicate a just-formulated plan. All Custer wanted was for Reno to attack, and Custer would do the rest. Reno was to hit hard and create havoc and Custer-- right there, in the valley-- would manage the mayhem. 3. Custer did not direct the battle and without proper communications he didn't need to distance himself to direct anything. The high ground did him no good, would do him no good, and he knew that-- or should have-- going in. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Dec 2, 2007 10:30:31 GMT -6
Now... [encore]... I am waiting for a better theory. Can anyone provide it? Custer did not follow Reno because he did not know what side of the river the village was on. Custer attacked blindly.He knew nothing of the layout or extent of the camp. It was a two pronged attack intended to sweep along both sides of the river.
Now, I know of only two things that occurred after Reno and Custer separated. (1) Kanipe reported seeing 100 Indians in the hills to the right of the LBH River. Do you believe that? I don't, but I can't prove it, so it remains a viable theory, though discounted by me. (2) Gerard reported something very unusual in Indian fighting and apparently it was totally unexpected: warriors were coming out to oppose Reno instead of gathering up their families and running. Lets disregard Kanipe.A small body of warriors on the right side of the river might have called for some investigation but not for a complete change of plan. Gerard's report was no reason to go off on an excurshion into the hills on the contrary it should have convinced Custer to support Reno in what Fred describes as waves of attack.
|
|
|
Post by erkki on Dec 2, 2007 10:57:10 GMT -6
And what was Custer doing between Gray's 3:18 for the formation of the skirmish line and his arrival at Ford B at 4:00 p.m.?
|
|
|
Post by clw on Dec 2, 2007 11:30:37 GMT -6
Fred ~
1. From the knoll near the lone tipi, Girard reported some Indians running, that being the point where Custer ordered Reno to attack. To me that report said a warning was eminent but not that the village was already on the move. A fine point, but the crux of our argument.
2. Semantics aside, the only thing we diagree on here is Custer-- right there, in the valley-- would manage the mayhem.
3. Not giving up the high ground theory. To contain the village, he had to see it and if he had hit it with everything from the south end, how was he going to contain a mass exodus in the other direction? He sends Reno to engage, while he heads north because he knows somewhere up there is where the trouble will be next.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Dec 2, 2007 12:04:29 GMT -6
Did Custer know what side of the river the village was on when he ordered Reno to attack?
And what was Custer doing between Gray's 3:18 for the formation of the skirmish line and his arrival at Ford B at 4:00 p.m.? Other than waiting for Benteen precious little.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Dec 2, 2007 12:31:33 GMT -6
And what was Custer doing between Gray's 3:18 for the formation of the skirmish line and his arrival at Ford B at 4:00 p.m.? erkki-- This is only valid if you believe Gray. I don't. At least not here. 1. From the knoll near the lone tipi, Girard reported some Indians running, that being the point where Custer ordered Reno to attack. To me that report said a warning was eminent but not that the village was already on the move. A fine point, but the crux of our argument. 2. Semantics aside, the only thing we disagree on here is Custer-- right there, in the valley-- would manage the mayhem. 3. ... To contain the village, he had to see it and if he had hit it with everything from the south end, how was he going to contain a mass exodus in the other direction? He sends Reno to engage, while he heads north because he knows somewhere up there is where the trouble will be next. clw-- Point 1. "Gerard reported... Indians running..." This only reinforced the soldiers' mind-set. This is what was expected. It's what I said before. There was a period of time Custer had to make up: the warning of the village and the arrival of the soldiers. The difference had to be shortened for Custer to be successful. This was the concern from the beginning of the campaign. "To me..." but we weren't there. If I believed the village is going to run and I know they have been forewarned, a report that "Indians are running" is only going to reinforce my belief, right or wrong, that's all it is going to do. If I am in time and catch the village before it is disassembled, I catch them in a complete state of confusion and I can manage the mayhem however I want to do it.Point 2. Pax.Point 3. Absolutely correct. But it is only correct once Custer turned to the right. Now committed, he must get to its southern end and hit it as hard as possible. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by clw on Dec 2, 2007 12:39:05 GMT -6
Did Custer know what side of the river the village was on when he ordered Reno to attack? Yes. Since your next question will be how, I'll answer it as best I can. The valley was a well used camp ground and the Crows knew it. There was no reason to think they'd be on the east side. The Crow's Nest got it's name because it was often used by them to see if the valley was occupied by Sioux.
|
|
|
Post by clw on Dec 2, 2007 13:02:13 GMT -6
"To me..." but we weren't there. Well no, we weren't. So either intrepretation is up for consideration. That's why I called it the crux of the argument. And we will never know which one of us is right. ;D But it's been fun!
|
|