|
Post by rocklord on Jun 23, 2010 7:02:43 GMT -6
Hello I am new to the forum and currently re-visiting what was a childhood obsession with the LBH battle. Also apologies if this duplicates earlier threads...
My question is this: when did GAC die / become combat ineffective and what was the impact upon the battle?
For a long time I have pondered the disparity between GAC who rode to the sound of the guns during the Civil War and the GAC cut off and wiped out at LBH. They don't seem to add up and although GAC had many years Indian Fighting experience by 1876, what happened to the man who led from the front and did he become the man who hid behind a dead horse?
I would have expected far more aggressive action even on LSH from GAC so... was he out of action by then? Why are the Indian accounts lacking in any description of a buckskin warrior? From the many books I've crash-read recently, I can only find two possible mentions:
(1) A buckskin soldier shot as the 7th tried to cross into the camp at the start of the battle. Seen to fall from his horse then remount. (2) A mounted buckskin soldier seen on LSH at the beginning of the end.
I believe that both the Custers and Cooke wore buckskin on the day. Also that GAC had two GSWs when his body was found (close range, to the temple and chest). So was he either dead or dying when the Sioux and Cheyenne stormed across LSH, finished off by a comrade? What did this mean to the battle and what would it have looked like if there had been a fully active, 1865 model GAC in command throughout?
IMO, GAC was wounded (chest) early in the battle and as the enemy closed in, either shot himself or was shot by a comrade. Apparently the chest would would have immobilised but not immediately killed him.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jun 23, 2010 11:43:41 GMT -6
There's no way of knowing when Custer became ineffective or what precise meaning it had to anyone else at the time.
There's really no disparity between the CW Custer and his demise. He might disagree that his generalship consisted of reaction to the sound of firing. He did attack as his MO, and it stood to reason his luck wouldn't last forever. He had been rescued during the CW after being cut off at least once.
He seems to have made some 50-50 calls at LBH and crossing MTC allowed his command to be subsumed by greater numbers on very bad ground for cavalry.
Several people, including TWC, wore buckskin. There is no evidence Custer's wounds were close range, and nobody mentions a powder burn. There is disagreement upon which side they were, and which was the fatal shot if either. Could have been blood loss in aggregate or a club to the head.
It's engaging in fan fiction of the sort that laces Star Trek's devoted to imagine his method of death, there being no evidence contemporary to the battle years. Some accounts appear well after the fact. Bob Palmer wrote a book - the Death of Yellowhair - insisting brother Tom killed him so he wouldn't be tortured. There's no evidence whatever one way or the other.
It's worth recalling that LSH had some company and 'headquarter' officers together at the top where the monument is, exactly where they'd be if they were shot off their mounts as they crested the ridge. They were not in the center of a defensive position. It looks like a horror and not a Last Stand. The markers only indicate where they were first buried, more or less. If that. Not where they were killed or even found despite what the stones say. 20% should be elsewhere, near Reno Hill, for example.
|
|
j52
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by j52 on Jul 19, 2010 19:14:46 GMT -6
Actually, the doctor who examined Custer's body wrote of two bullet wounds, no clubbing to the head. (He wasn't a Custer basher). The chest wound could have been fatal , as could the head shot. When he died is unknown, the where appears to be at or near the crest of the hill, where the monument now stands.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 19, 2010 21:04:30 GMT -6
"Doctor" is another term that fails us in Custerland. That we have high regard for doctors today shouldn't, necessarily, mean that doctors back then should have their accounts valued more than anyone else's. Just like MOH, you cannot really compare the term back then as equal to the term today.
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Aug 6, 2010 21:10:20 GMT -6
DC why do you always state that the 7th members were not burried where they had been killed? I would say you either burry em all neat and clean rounded up and lined up on a square place for future improvements of official grave site or you bury them where you find them. why would there be an in between : what is the proof that some were carried away and some not, what is the proof of that, makes no sense to me (I leave out those carried away by lakota women for various purposes). I am not an LBH expert as you know (more ndn wars to study!) but what tells you the markers are mostly wrong.
the fact that several ndn witnesses have a buckskin officer shot at the beginning does not confirm for certain but does indicate a chance that it could have been GAC, from where some scenario could apply. it is not complete fiction when there is no other more credible account.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 7, 2010 0:07:09 GMT -6
You're not well or sufficiently read on the battle, Wolfgang. This is well documented.
1. DC why do you always state that the 7th members were not burried where they had been killed?
Several reasons, but primarily because we can't know where they were killed, only where their bodies were accounted to have been found. Even then, they sometimes moved them to where the ground was diggable. Custer and his immediate group were all on the top where the monument is. He was buried allegedly where the marble marker is with Tom yards down the slope, but even then the body first interred and the body disinterred were not described as similar, or the latter complete. Boston and the nephew were described as hundreds of yards down the slope, well beyond fence, and some say the nephew wasn't found at all.
2. I would say you either burry em all neat and clean rounded up and lined up on a square place for future improvements of official grave site or you bury them where you find them.
You might, but they didn't bury most at all, first time.
3. why would there be an in between : what is the proof that some were carried away and some not, what is the proof of that, makes no sense to me (I leave out those carried away by lakota women for various purposes). I am not an LBH expert as you know (more ndn wars to study!) but what tells you the markers are mostly wrong.
The is only testimony and account, written military reports, newspaper first hand accounts, and descriptions in private letters. No dreams or interpretive renderings by channelling Adobe software salestaff, so I'm at a loss for evidence that you'd accept.
4. the fact that several ndn witnesses have a buckskin officer shot at the beginning does not confirm for certain but does indicate a chance that it could have been GAC, from where some scenario could apply. it is not complete fiction when there is no other more credible account.
Nobody said there was. It makes much sense that a Custer, perhaps the Custer, was shot early on and command kept trying to get organized but they were pressed too hard to the top, where they were met by more.
Look, about 20% of the marble stones belong on the Reno field or down in the valley. The accounts and the earliest photos of the wooden stakes do not support the look of LSH today.
Further, where a soldier went down, where he died, where he was first buried, where the first marker was assumed to be, or the second markers, may or may not be connected to each other or reality. Camp thought the SSL were just representing those dead in the coulee and placed to suggest a skirmish line rather than what was more likely a final delusional dash toward the village for safety. Something.
Where Custer Fell tries to meld early photos with today, but that may not be all that relevant to where the men fell, given the description of the field a year after the fact. The descriptions of the first burials not officers are described as notional handfuls of dust atop the corpse, a stick hammered in nearby, but the description next year of all the sticks knocked down by grazing animals, may arouse in you a feeling of certainty, but I'm olde and less convinced. Whoever described the field today as an artistic interpretation may have it better said.
But again: if you do a graphic of LSH by removing 20% of the number and then placing the remainder where accounts and early photos suggest they were, and get rid of the fence and monument, it looks like two thin lines in motion (one from/to Keogh area along the ridge, the other down to the river) reaching a point around the top, where its quite likely those on the better horses arrived first - explaining the officer congestion - where they were blown off their mounts.
They all fought where they were stopped and that was it.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Aug 7, 2010 12:51:25 GMT -6
Wolfgang, One thing to remember is that this battle took place only about 10 years after the CW, where battlefields had thousands sometimes tens of thousands of deaths. This was still in peoples minds with some of the soldiers actually having fought in it. A battlefield with 300 dead was a nothing to them.They didn't think in their wildest dreams that 130 years from then, that people would want to know where every tree was, every horseshoe was found etc. So if they came across some rocks or difficult terrain, they may have as DC points out simply buried the body 10 feet away or so, wherever the ground was easier to dig.To them as long as their fellow soldier had a decent burial, that's all that mattered. What was the difference if the marker wasn't exactly where he fell. Who was going to care.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 8, 2010 8:59:08 GMT -6
benteen I think that is correct. It was more important to have the total number to those that placed them rather than only placing those with accurate locations.
AZ Ranger
|
|
fz1
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by fz1 on Feb 14, 2011 20:46:35 GMT -6
Custer probably died toward the end of the battle. Custer is outnumbered 10 to 1 and understands his only option is to play defense and hope Benteen arrives. Custer can simply do nothing but play defense as the numbers against him continue to mount.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 15, 2011 6:59:49 GMT -6
I find it hard to believe that Custer would wait on anyone to save him. I would be more convinced if the 5 companies were within supporting distance of each other in a defensive posture. Seems that Custer missed the clue to regroup and dig in on defense.
Benteen with 3 companies could not move through the Indians any better than Custer could move through them with 5 companies. Too many Indians willing to fight stopped Custer from attacking the village and annihilated 5 companies.
|
|
fz1
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by fz1 on Feb 15, 2011 20:14:31 GMT -6
Custer is not waiting; Custer is trapped! Custer is then overrun before he can consolidate his 200 men.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 16, 2011 6:08:44 GMT -6
The companies were together when they started toward MTC. Why would Benteen be able to get to a trapped Custer and Custer not be able to get to Benteen?
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 16, 2011 7:08:57 GMT -6
Custer probably died toward the end of the battle. Custer is outnumbered 10 to 1 and understands his only option is to play defense and hope Benteen arrives. Custer can simply do nothing but play defense as the numbers against him continue to mount. At what point in the battle are you claiming Custer "can... do nothing but play defense"? Custer is not waiting; Custer is trapped! Custer is then overrun before he can consolidate his 200 men. Again... you say Custer is not waiting, but is trapped. Being "trapped" implies an element of immediacy. Otherwise, why wouldn't he attempt to break out? If there is immediacy then the threat is extraordinary and being out-numbered-- as you say, 10 to 1-- would certainly mean the Indians were ready to put an end to it. Indian testimony verifies that. Indian testimony also says that when he was finished essentially with Keogh, Crazy Horse put his attention to Custer. That implies Crazy Horse was in at the finish-- some how-- and that there was absolutely no way Benteen could have gotten through the cordon of warriors between the two commands. I question your comments here... "before he can consolidate his 200 men"...? Again... you are implying that Custer was "trapped" while Keogh, Calhoun, and Harrington were still able to act. While I respect your opinions, you are not making much sense. Please elucidate. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
fz1
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by fz1 on Feb 16, 2011 18:50:04 GMT -6
The companies were together when they started toward MTC. Why would Benteen be able to get to a trapped Custer and Custer not be able to get to Benteen? It is 50/50 as to whether Benteen can get thru to Custer,but Custer does not know this when he sends for Benteen. Further,Custer has indians between his position and Benteen,is increasingly being surrounded. Benteen has no Indians in his rear and has Reno to his front when he recieves Custer's order.
|
|
fz1
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by fz1 on Feb 16, 2011 19:09:42 GMT -6
Custer probably died toward the end of the battle. Custer is outnumbered 10 to 1 and understands his only option is to play defense and hope Benteen arrives. Custer can simply do nothing but play defense as the numbers against him continue to mount. At what point in the battle are you claiming Custer "can... do nothing but play defense"? Custer is not waiting; Custer is trapped! Custer is then overrun before he can consolidate his 200 men. Again... you say Custer is not waiting, but is trapped. Being "trapped" implies an element of immediacy. Otherwise, why wouldn't he attempt to break out? If there is immediacy then the threat is extraordinary and being out-numbered-- as you say, 10 to 1-- would certainly mean the Indians were ready to put an end to it. Indian testimony verifies that. Indian testimony also says that when he was finished essentially with Keogh, Crazy Horse put his attention to Custer. That implies Crazy Horse was in at the finish-- some how-- and that there was absolutely no way Benteen could have gotten through the cordon of warriors between the two commands. I question your comments here... "before he can consolidate his 200 men"...? Again... you are implying that Custer was "trapped" while Keogh, Calhoun, and Harrington were still able to act. While I respect your opinions, you are not making much sense. Please elucidate. Best wishes, Fred. Well,trapped is a relative term. Your inference is not,necessarily, my implication. Lol. You answered your own question. The other commanders are also trapped,are they not? The point is, events begin to spin out of Custer's control so quickly that Custer does not even have time to at least consolidate his 200 men. Why does not that make sense,to you?
|
|