|
Post by WY Man on Apr 8, 2010 13:40:03 GMT -6
I have been reading about the Battle of Little Bighorn for about 10 years now, and I am of the opinion that Captain Frederick Benteen was the hero there, if anyone could be called a hero. Certainly many other men fought heroically there, including the Indian scouts, but it was really Benteen who took charge of the situation, and it was his strategy that saved that portion of the command from certain slaughter. There has been a tendency to blame Reno and Benteen for not coming to Custer's aid. First, Benteen and Reno's men on the hilltop did not know where Custer was, and they had no earthly idea that Custer and his five companies of men were all dead. Some firing from the direction Custer had gone earlier in the day had been heard by some of Reno's men when they were fighting in the valley. But, on the hilltop there was no visual or audible sign of Custer's regiment. And, they did make an effort to find Custer. Captain Weir and a company of men took off in the direction it was supposed Custer had headed, against orders from Reno. Custer's trail had been found, leading down Cedar Coulee, and as soon as Weir got into the valley, a huge surge of Indians routed him and his men back to the command. While Benteen and others had been atop Wier's Peak, the highest elevation in the battlefield, nothing could be seen of Custer. So, it was assumed that Custer's troops had retreated, probably to find Terry, who was known to be closing in from the north. They would just have to hold their ground until help came. One thing in the back of Benteen's mind, and other veteran officers' minds during the hilltop entrenchment was how Custer had left the Washita battlefield "victorious," without even trying to find out what had become of Major Joel Elliott's company of men. Of course, they had all been massacred, and it was assumed that Custer was deserting them the same way that he had deserted Elliott's company at the Washita. I have been lately reading, "The Benteen-Goldin Letters On Custer and His Last Battle," edited by John M. Carroll. Benteen has been roundly criticized for his vociferous critical statements regarding Custer, but it should be remembered that these statements were confided privately to Theodore Goldin, another veteran of LBH, and it was much later after Benteen's death that the letters became public, after being sold. Benteen, it appears, knew a lot of very bad things about Custer that would be gone when he died, and he knew he was in bad health when he was writing to Goldin. So he told Goldin what he knew, in very colorful description, no holds barred. I don't think Benteen made up any of it, though he was incredibly blunt in his telling of it. Benteen has been criticized for speaking of people after they were dead, and he certainly did that, but he also spoke of many people who were still living. Goldin could easily have asked around if he doubted Benteen. I would recommend "The Benteen-Goldin Letters" to anybody researching Custer or the Little Bighorn. photo courtesy National Archives/Siris
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Apr 8, 2010 15:24:45 GMT -6
Damn right. I'm not, myself, inclined to think of him as a hero but as an awfully good soldier, although I have no first hand experience of what that might be. I don't think he thought of himself as a hero.
I don't think anyone comes off all that great at LBH, but I agree he did the best of all under terrible circumstances, although that implies good circumstances could exist and I'm not sure that's true. The unremarked issue I value most is that he kept the command together, did not engage in argument or internal conflict, brought Weir, Reno, and everyone on to the same page and calmed the men by consistency, innate authority, and competence. That's more important than melodramatic displays of heroism which is surprisingly valued, most often by those who, like myself, never served in combat, or at all. I don't know where they see the way clear to criticize Benteen's actions in terms of personal deficiency. Or, for the most part, Reno's either.
I also suspect that the 'coward' who whimpered and didn't charge at command with the rest and was the only one killed after the group returned by a suddenly accurate Indian shot between the eyes may have been actually killed by Benteen. No proof, but would not be beyond the pale.
It's also good to recall that there are no Golden letters to Benteen.
Benteen probably could have made a killing as a speaker and lecturer about the battle, although he showed zero interest and could have used the cash. It's what Benteen did NOT do, did not succumb to, that I think speaks so well of him. I do think he felt guilt - I suspect near every participant in battle does, especially with high loss - but I think some of it was for what happened to Reno, whom he did not like, but there but for fortune.
Benteen understood the nature and fallout from 50-50 combat calls - especially as interpreted by La Custer and the ignorant and genuine idiots - and must have been aware that Reno's actions were not anywhere near as awful as some claimed, but that once the scapegoat was selected anything that could be lain at his feet would be. That's a long way from him thinking Reno did good, but Benteen was smart and despite his class consciousness and racism (actually enlightened for the time and place), was in reality quite a compassionate and honorable man.
Had La Custer not besmirched others, Benteen might have ended up saying nice things about Custer as time passed. He understood the social lubricants of his time.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Apr 9, 2010 21:56:51 GMT -6
I don't think anyone comes off all that great at LBH... I must agree with that. The buck really stops with Custer, as commander, for getting them all into that situation in the first place, and not doing proper recon. Reno's "charge to the rear" was a costly disgrace. Benteen probably could have hurried faster, but then he had no reason to believe Custer was in trouble, rather the opposite, and I don't think he hung back, just didn't hustle faster until he came up on Reno. There certainly wasn't any conspiracy or anything of that sort, and frankly, I don't think all the timeline business and whose watch was set on what time is all that significant.
|
|
Reddirt
Full Member
Life is But a Dream...
Posts: 208
|
Post by Reddirt on Apr 10, 2010 19:08:23 GMT -6
There is no doubt that Benteen saved the day, the men were were completely demoralized and without leadership. His courage in the face great danger revitalized the men and gave them the strength to go on.
As the leader of the band, Custer can be held responsible for the tactics he used or did not use. His being there was the total responsibility of his superiors who sent him there in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Apr 11, 2010 16:27:46 GMT -6
to enlighten my view on this man what other significant action do we have of benteen in command against indian warriors after the LBH. except for intercepting some nez perce horses
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Apr 11, 2010 22:36:40 GMT -6
He had a perfectly good Civil War record--as did Reno. Indian fighting was way different. Whatever else you may say about Benteen, he certainly wasn't a coward.
For a bio of Benteen, try Custer's Thorn,, by J. Ladenheim.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Apr 12, 2010 11:23:37 GMT -6
Look it up, Wolfgang.
He played a large role in the Nez Perce war. His later elevation in rank was partly for that and partly for LBH. And partly, I'd hope, for some guilt upstairs for how he and others had been slandered. He wasn't impressed, though, as he indicated to Goldin.
|
|
|
Post by Gen. Kuster on Apr 17, 2010 1:10:58 GMT -6
Well, here’s Long Hair’s take on Colonel Benteen and Major Reno.
As any member of the military knows full well, you must place the mission above all else including your own personal agenda and any demons you may have. That’s partly why boot camp exists - to teach “individualists” that they cannot act alone. There must be a team effort, and an effort focused on the mission above all else.
Our goal that day in June 1876, our mission, was to do whatever was needed to make those Indians surrender to us. That meant we had to sacrifice the lives of our men and ourselves if necessary. Nothing, and I mean nothing is more important than the mission. If you are ordered to take a hill, even when facing overwhelming odds, you charge that hill with all you have (and rest assured I will be charging with you) and never ever allow your fear to take over. You be fearless, and if you die in carrying out your orders, you can die with pride knowing that you fulfilled the responsibility and duty you signed up for. Your parents can be proud too. That is the highest honor. But if you let fear take over when there is still a chance, however slight, that you can achieve your mission, well then I have no respect for you. You did not do what you said you would do by agreeing to be a member of the military, and you let your comrades down. Courage and a sense of duty is what separates the men who are truly committed from the boys and leaches who use the military just for the benefits.
As far as I am concerned, those two weasels can rot in Gehenna. That’s how I feel about that. Maybe some of you civilians cannot understand this position, this conviction I have, but spend some time in the military and you might understand. Remember that those two weasels were senior officers not civilians on a camping trip. They had a duty and an obligation to lead those men in fulfillment of a mission first and foremost. Instead, they let their own personal issues cloud their judgment.
The bottom line is that on that day in June 1876, only one senior officer was willing to die to achieve the mission while the other two were more concerned with saving their own hides. How anyone can say Colonel Benteen was a hero on that day is a travesty. He was fighting to save his own hide plain and simple, and he knew he needed to rally the men in order to have enough guns to defend the position and save his own skin. Get a clue!
|
|
|
Post by WY Man on Apr 17, 2010 10:24:45 GMT -6
Custer had but one motive. He had ONE LAST CHANCE to prove himself to Grant. Custer needed a huge victory of the 7th cavalry, and the 7th cavalry only, without any outside help from Terry or Gibbon's 2nd cavalry. Without any howitzers. Custer had to get to Little Bighorn ahead of schedule, which was June 26, when Terry and Gibbon were scheduled to arrive. Custer was told to wait for them, and he was warned not to be greedy.
It was Custer's commander, General Terry, who appealed Custer's case to President Grant, Commander In Chief. Grant told Terry that if Terry wanted Custer he may have him, only because Terry requested him. Grant would give NO MORE CHANCES to Custer.
SO, in short, Custer was willing to sacrifice everything, the lives of his men, and himself, if necessary, to win a political victory. For Custer, it had nothing to do with the mission, otherwise he would have cooperated with his superiors. Custer's mission unfortunately, was his own personal gain.
If the mission on that day in 1876 was to make those Indians surrender to you, Mr. kuster, then you failed miserably. And by the way, maybe 134 years has fogged your memory a bit, but your name is spelled "Custer."
|
|
|
Post by Gen. Kuster on Apr 17, 2010 12:57:39 GMT -6
All that you say occurred prior to the battle is wild speculation, has no place on the battlefield, and digresses away from the key issue which is whether Colonel Benteen behaved honorably AT THE BATTLE.
To put it simply, Colonel Benteen realized we had a big fight on our hands, and instead of obeying direct orders from his commanding officer in support of the mission, he chose to cut bait just like Reno did. They gave up because they both used incomplete information to decide on their own the situation was hopeless. Well, how many victories in America’s great military history have been snared from the clutches of defeat? You must never give up like they did!
Colonel Benteen’s actions while he was with Reno were not done at the risk of his personal safety so that other men could live. That was the result, but let’s not fool ourselves. His motive was his own safety and nothing else.
And I know better the spelling of my name than you do. My ancestors spelled it with a K. That is my real name.
|
|
|
Post by Gen. Kuster on Apr 17, 2010 14:37:00 GMT -6
Saying that Colonel Benteen is a hero is reckless. First, we don’t know how much of his actions was due to a genuine concern for the men and how much was due to his own need for self preservation. That the men benefited is without question, but it does not help prove he was a hero because we do not know his real motive.
More importantly, he disobeyed direct orders from his CO, and took matters into his own hands. I sent him two messengers for crying out loud (as well as those volleys), while he failed to communicate at all (that's insubordination all by itself). He should have known based on those messages alone that I needed him, but instead he said I could take care of myself. Is that Logical? No, it's a flat out lie!!!
The proof as to his dishonor that day is that he was slow to advance, did not bother to communicate, disobeyed orders, lied about why he did things, and when he came upon Reno, he did not even care enough to inquire as to my status by at least scouting the area (Weir had to do that). If he hated me so much and was so concerned about my politics and my motives for the battle, he could have at least communicated with me to let me know he could not support me - then at least I could have made adjustments. Instead, his lack of action was a critical element in our slaughter. In my book, all that makes him a weasel (to put it mildly). Thus, I am convinced he wanted me to die. In that case, do it honorably. He should have challenged me to a duel if he felt that strongly. Otherwise, shut up and do your duty. The time for worrying about politics and other such matters that you bring up should have ended the day we left for the Rosebud. Apparently, it did not.
According to Paul Hutton, editor of The Custer Reader: "I have always viewed Benteen as the real villain of the piece, because he was such a good soldier (unlike Reno, who was in over his head). I think Benteen's visceral hatred of Custer clouded his judgment and delayed his movements. He had a direct written order to join Custer, which he willfully disobeyed (simply saying later that the incompetent Reno was in command, and he had to defer to him)."
|
|
Reddirt
Full Member
Life is But a Dream...
Posts: 208
|
Post by Reddirt on Apr 17, 2010 18:19:59 GMT -6
The two messengers sent by Custer to Benteen and the packs seemed to be saying the same thing; Custer and the troops were beating the "heck" out of the Indians and they were running Helter Skelter trying to get away.
Maybe, at that point, Benteen truly believed that he had been duped out of his share of achieving glory. If so, he was none to happy and probably "sulked" as a result.
Regardless, Benteen's bravery has never been questioned by history. Once He realized that Reno was ineffective, he took command and saved the survivors.
|
|
|
Post by Gen. Kuster on Apr 17, 2010 19:09:54 GMT -6
WY Man, A few words about that Belknap issue you brought up. I am not so thin skinned as to believe the President truly harbored ill will towards me. It was a misunderstanding pure and simple, and although I felt bad about it because I am perpetually at the service of my superiors and did not ever want them to think I had done them a disservice ever, I was resolute because I knew I had done nothing wrong. Being that the President had no earthly reasons I could think of to detain me, I was at a loss to understand his indignation of me.
I now realize the affair was blown out of proportion. I had done nothing wrong and had nothing to prove. There was no threat hanging over my head either. So now please don’t think that caused me to take unnecessary risks in order to prove myself. In reality, I had always been one to push the envelope because in order to achieve incredible things, you must be willing to take incredible risks. Anyone who lived during those tumultuous times knew that.
Finally, all senior military officers know full well that there may be times when politics will intervene upon their career and deal them a blow to the gut. It goes with the territory. Now I think that’s all that needs to be said about that.
|
|
|
Post by Gen. Kuster on Apr 17, 2010 19:42:32 GMT -6
The two messengers sent by Custer to Benteen and the packs seemed to be saying the same thing; Custer and the troops were beating the "heck" out of the Indians and they were running Helter Skelter trying to get away. It is immaterial what appeared to be the case or what seemed to be the case. The only thing that mattered is what the actual order was. Junior officers spend years understanding lessons like this and getting beat up in the process. But Colonel Benteen was not a Junior officer. Maybe, at that point, Benteen truly believed that he had been duped out of his share of achieving glory. If so, he was none to happy and probably "sulked" as a result.. I tend to agree with you, but personal agendas and feelings have no business in the military. He had a duty to complete those orders and nothing else. We had a chance if he had fulfilled his orders. Regardless, Benteen's bravery has never been questioned by history. Once He realized that Reno was ineffective, he took command and saved the survivors. Agreed, however, I would not call him a hero for reasons I stated above. He was a brilliant man in many ways. Courageous, and smart too. But damn stubborn. I never could get through to him. We were from different worlds.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Apr 19, 2010 9:09:42 GMT -6
Nowhere in any account does Kanipe or Martini state any type of "beating the heck out of the Indians" to Benteen. They may have mentioned that to enlisted men but if they were going to make that type of statement they should have told Benteen.
<Saying that Colonel Benteen is a hero is reckless. First, we don’t know how much of his actions was due to a genuine concern for the men and how much was due to his own need for self preservation. That the men benefited is without question, but it does not help prove he was a hero because we do not know his real motive>
Couldn't the same be said of Custer?
|
|