ammunition question

[zak]

Another dumb question. Cavalry was reliant on ammo off of horses. Reno's men were going for ammo at the skirmish line outside the village, that's under twenty minutes before needing to reload. With warriors riding away with 7th horses, carrying needed ammo, is it possible that the break down of at and around Calhoun hill had as much to do with loss of and need for ammo as it did being pushed off by force?

[Dark Cloud]

Sure, but don't be misled by the supposed piles of used cartridges at Calhoun Hill. That came from Calhoun's brother in law, Moylan, and may/may not be true. He was going to be dealing with the widow, who'd lost husband and three brothers and a nephew of her husband and their friends. It's somewhat comforting that he'd have put up a big fight, true or not. There wasn't much indication at the time or later that the 7th ran low on ammo on Custer Ridge and environs, or that the battle lasted long.

[pohanka]

Moylan wrote Lt. Calhoun's brother and said, "as high as 40 cartridges shells were found around some of [Lt. Calhoun's] men. Almost three years later he testified that he saw "28" shells around one man with scattered shells between the bodies.

Lt. Edward McGuire, several days after the battle, noted that men and their "empty cartridge shells" were formed in a semi-circle around the crest. Archaeological investigations indicate the "L" company formed an initial line south to meet the Gall contingency, subsequently altered the line to face west to meet the Lame White Man contingency, and, possibly, attempted a third re-adjustment to counter Gall's warriors who were taking advantage of the earlier shift of the line but, were suddenly overwhelmed in the process.

Lt. Wallace saw piles of 25 to 30 cartridges at "one or two places" on Calhoun Hill.

Captain Benteen noticed a "good many". spent castings lying about.

Indian Testimony (Hollow Horn Bear) said, "the fighting was hardest here."

While no one can say what the exact count of cartridges were, it is obvious that there were many more at Calhoun Hill than any other part of the battle field. The "supposed" reports of many expended cartridges came from sources other than Moylan. It is pure speculation to base Moylans' report on any fancied need to comfort a "widow."

[Dark Cloud]

When you decide what person you want to be, Wiggs/realbird/pohanka, you can move on to the misuse of quotes around words. Still, constructing an entire personality out of the wrecks you've left, cannot be easy - or worthwhile - so take your time. Remember: nothing can erase what you've put up.

There is no Indian testimony, in any case. And, unless HHB fought everywhere on the field, he wouldn't know.

There is absolutely nothing beyond speculation after Custer crossed MTC anyway, and all archaeology can prove is that an item, manufactured at a certain date, was found in a location at a certain date. Who fired at who and when remains a guess, and since we have eye witness that Indians were seen firing on the field from Weir Point that has to be factored in before claiming soldiers only fired soldier weapons.

As the collapsed story about the condition of Custer's body, its wounds, its burial location, and its exhumation more or less proves, there were several attempted stories that lacked total agreement, and the fight at Calhoun might be one, as I suggested. Also, as I also allowed, it might be true.

[Diane Merkel]

Whoever you are, I must say I find the use of the name "pohanka" a bit unsettling and distasteful. If you are trying to project yourself as a friend of Brian's, there are better ways to do that.

[AZ Ranger]

I would doubt that single shot rifles would leave piles of brass anywhere. You would have to exactly the same extraction trajectory to have them even close together. That would mean firing in the same position and direction for 30 to 40 shots? You see piles of brass on firing lines from semi autos but it is a fixed distance single target that would create that pattern.

I believe the person making that statement was trying to indicate standing ( last stand) for a length of time indicating bravery. Just as likely rapid shots not hitting anything from the same pattern on the ground.

Brass scattered about a point within a mean extraction distance for standing and kneeling extraction distances would be more likely the pattern of hard fighting. I doubt each trooper only had one Indian to shoot at for 30 to 40 rounds at a fixed distance.

AZ Ranger

[pohanka]

Jun 22, 2008 12:20:59 GMT -6 Diane Merkel said:

Whoever you are, I must say I find the use of the name "pohanka" a bit unsettling and distasteful. If you are trying to project yourself as a friend of Brian's, there are better ways to do that.

I picked a name for no ulterior purpose. I do not know "Brian" and I am sadden that you find the usage of a "name" as distasteful. I was under the impression that any name not inherently distasteful or knowingly hurtful to others was acceptable. I can not help but wonder that if I chose the name Custer would you think I was trying to "project" myself as his friend?

Dark Cloud, as per usual, your regular dispensation of nonsensical allegations grow increasingly boring. It would serve your credibility best if you stuck to relevant issues. In my last post, I presented a counter perspective to your unsubstantiated allegation that Moylan's reference to a "pile" of cartridges being based upon the need to soften a blow for Calhoun's widow. An incredibly speculative assertion.

Instead of addressing that point, you responded by embarking upon a tangent of allegations concerning MTC and Weir Point, none of these points were addressed by me. Have you confused me with someone else? The exception being the testimony of Hollow Horn Bear. Obviously you are not an authority on Indian testimony else wise you would have not made such a ludicrous statement.

Regarding your insistence to associate me with another poster, I have refused to play your game and will continue to do so.

[pohanka]

Jun 22, 2008 14:06:50 GMT -6 AZ Ranger said:

I
I believe the person making that statement was trying to indicate standing ( last stand) for a length of time indicating bravery. Just as likely rapid shots not hitting anything from the same pattern on the ground.

AZ Ranger

No AZ, I was not. I made no reference to "time" at all. The point I was attempting to make was this. At no other battle location did witnesses make reference to an amount of spent cartridges comparable to Calhoun Hill.

This, of course, does not indicate "bravery", it merely indicates that soldiers appeared to utilize their weapons on a grander scale than elsewhere.

[Dark Cloud]

A good point, and pretty much precludes any possibility of there being piles of copper cartridges, which suggests it was a story or piles made by Indians gathering stuff afterward and left for whatever reason.

Also, that video makes the whole issue of cartridges being found precise distances apart pretty iffy, given the nature of the extraction. Look at the - lord - Living Historians fire and note the extractions and imagine claiming they were found at military intervals. Dubious.

[bc]

I don't care what name anyone uses or if there is any motive or not but since Brian Pohanka died of cancer 3 years ago on the 15th of this month I can see why someone would be offended by the use of the name unless the poster is related and/or has that name. Someone not knowing of his death may tend to think this is the real Brian Pohanka making these statements and possibly give them more credence than they may deserve coming from someone else. It would be similar to somone using the name Utley, Barnard, or some other well known historian to give his statements some false credibility and attribution. Something with the qualification such as in tribute to or in memory of would be more tasteful in reference to Brian. I wouldn't care if someone used the name Custer or Martini for that matter. Some people think that he still stands.

[clw]

I've never understood the 'crime' of using one screen name or another or more than one or whatever. So what? Read their views and agree, disagree or do neither. What's the big deal?

As to using the name of someone who has passed on, I wouldn't. But that's just me. There are plenty here who use such names - even toy with them. It seems peculiar to select which of these names are acceptable and which aren't.

[crzhrs]

I use the name crzhrs in honor of him.

I have no problem with someone using the name of another person. Pohanka has a right to select a name of his choosing.

[Dark Cloud]

How in the world is Crazy Horse honored by you, or anyone, using his name, (sorta)? Who is capable of honoring him by association with themselves? You're throwing a saddle over his name to, in effect, honor yourself, actually. Just like those who call themselves Custer or whatever, it's pretty delusional to think people will think more of him - in quantity or quality - because they see crzhrs on a forum, for heavens sake.

That said, alternate User ID's don't bother me except when used to shill their own postings or try to escape their past postings' idiocies, lies, slanders and start again with new name to the same end result. Or to deceive in general.

Wiggs, on the AAO's forum, used to pretend to dreams and entered the minds of Sitting Bull and others and stated these revelations as fact. That's in the From the Indian Perspective (or very like title) over there. Larsen, whose input is missed, went ballistic over that.

Wiggs previously has lied about his background, which misled and infuriated. He lied about what he himself had irrefutably posted, didn't understand what he himself had posted (sometimes saying the opposite of what he meant when he uses big words). He lied about lots, including cut and pasting huge swaths of others' work which he tried to pass off as his own. It's all still up, and this was why he needed to have a new User ID over here. Apparently with the connivance of others, he became Realbird, then was outed.

Wiggs has now adapted the name of a late Custer field historian. If you see any of that ending well, or think with Wiggs' past of falsehoods that Brian Pohanka is honored, I don't.

[crzhrs]

Got up on the wrong side of bed once again?

And who the heck is Wiggs? and what does that have to do with anything?

Try de-caf . . . it may help.

[bc]

I hope I didn't help Diane start a tempest over this deal. I normally try to avoid these kind of issues. This is nothing personal with the Pohanka poster either as I don't know anything about him. When I first saw Pohanka post I had forgotten it was Brian that died and thought it was a different one that died. So for a while I thought this Pohanka poster was the real Brian until I read Diane's post and checked. It just struck me as a little misleading. Even if someone posted under the name of George Bush we would know that it isn't the real one.

On the other hand, adopting a handle of someone from the LBH battle is not misleading at all. I thought about adoping a persona but can't think of anyone I admire or would match up to that isn't already taken. There is no mistaking those personas as being from the real person. It actually helps in giving some insight into their posts as to who they identify with. Everyone I've read on these boards who use such names have the knowledge and dignity to honor said name.

By the way, I don't know who Wiggs is either. I frequent this board and just started to check the other LBH board after it began establishing itself with some real historians. I frequent one other board totally unrelated to Custer/LBH/history as a learning tool and definitely don't have time for any other boards nor any desire to get involved in the AAO board where ever it is. I'm just a new LBHA member trying to learn a little is all, not taking any sides, or wanting to get involved in any political situations. Everytime I do, I regret it.