|
Post by fred on Feb 24, 2012 17:39:21 GMT -6
Herosrest,
You gotta be kiddin' me! Do you actually expect me to read all that stuff? Do you expect anyone to read it?
I have absorbed all the senseless tripe I can and I dare say I have far exceeded limits others have not been able to go beyond, whether they be Grinnell, Kuhlman, Dustin, Sandoz, Stewart, Miller, Marquis, Graham, Campbell, et al. I have spent months-- years!-- collating, copying, sorting, arranging, organizing... data, times, distances, specifics, relatives, accounts, testimonies.... I can give you more than 2,000 pages (MS Word for Mac); more than 40,000 separate Excel modules of... "stuff." And I have reached my conclusions.
Nothing you post will change my opinions. Nothing. Unless, of course, you find some long-lost affidavit from one of the participants that changes everything. Then you win all the marbles. Until that time, you are wrong! Period! Case closed! Wrong!
I am reading presently Charles Kuhlman's book, Legend into History. He makes some very keen observations. At the same time, he draws very erroneous conclusions, misinterprets any number of different things, i. e., Reno's formation as he moves down the valley; yet it is a very good book. Yet Kuhlman wasn't a soldier; I was. His feel for things is different than mine. And it goes on; it translates to any number of other authors, all of whom-- or most of whom-- distort any number of "facts."
So give it up, my friend. My opinion is this, pure and simple: if you disagree with me, you better be able to prove it with facts!!!, or else you are wrong!
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by brenda56 on Feb 24, 2012 18:58:05 GMT -6
Well I have to put my hand up here. I did read quite a bit as I thought ‘here’s another view so…………….
But after a while I got a bit annoyed. I’m on an iPad and it’s not that easy to magnify, move your finger back and fore and remember which line you are reading ! It was at this stage I lost interest and had visions of ‘aliens’ hovering over the battlefield. Nuts came to mind so I trusted my instincts and moved on to something else to occupy my thoughts.
However there’s another thing which surprises me too. I’m no soldier although I have one or two in the family who have done their bit. One side indeed had connections to the Ia Drang episode which, as you all know, is associated with the subject under discussion. But here’s my point. The majority of Custer writings are disjointed and based on to an extent circumstantial evidence and personal interpretation. Not a lot wrong with that but it does give rise to ‘he said that but don’t trust him, he wasn’t there, covering for and so on. A bit jumbled up you might say. It results in fascinating reading I must admit. A bit like a chess game without an end. Nevertheless I always thought that military planning minds usually contained the phrase ‘zero hour’ somewhere. D Day is a classic example as is any WW1 battle. I mean that from the perspective of reading battlefield diaries.
So to my non military mind in order to analyse the LBH I was hoping to come across a bit of reverse engineering. I suppose you could work backwards from LSH, that would be zero hour - (minus) whatever or if you’re of the positive type you could go the zero hour + (plus) from a known point back on the trail. The salient points could be either facts, circumstantial or witnessed by and so on. Looking for flow and common sense.
Fred is completely correct in stating timing, by that I mean activity based timing, is essential in piecing the pieces of the many pieces of this battle. A previous post referred to intersection. That was a consequence of timing and I must admit it justifiably opened up another avenue for my thoughts.
By analysis of timing and fact(ish) stuff it may be that a consequential most likely set of events could indeed be as near to the truth as is likely to be revealed. It’s just a thought after reading a fair part of the post in question, I thought it a logical thought so I did. Bottomline I agree with Fred’s comments. Just another red herring to continue the chess game.
Ps what’s the difference between Chicago time and St. Paul time ?
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 24, 2012 19:21:20 GMT -6
I’m no soldier although I have one or two in the family who have done their bit. One side indeed had connections to the Ia Drang episode... Rick Rescorla? Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Feb 24, 2012 19:38:05 GMT -6
Ps what’s the difference between Chicago time and St. Paul time ? Nowadays, none... same time zone. Back then, 26 minutes, sunrise versus sunrise, sunset versus sunset. That would make it one hour, twenty-three minutes from LBH local sun time; too long to accommodate too many of the accounts. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Apr 13, 2012 15:05:32 GMT -6
After three days being fêted and honoured in friendship before the combined Crow nation in June 1878, Nelson A. Miles took a leisurely vist to the battleground and measured time taken to travel from Reno Hill To Custers northern most position. Taking 53 minutes at the walk, the distance measured as 4 Miles 160 yards by practicable route, could be covered rapidly in 15 minutes. This next Saturday, April 14th, runs the English Grand National at Aintree, over 4 miles 4 furlongs. Fastest winning time was 8 minutes and 47.8 seconds by Mr Frisk in 1990. style.uk.msn.com/fashion/women-flock-to-aintree-ladies-dayThose able to watch the spectacle will witness the abilties and endurance of horse flesh at speed over distances comparable to rides undertaken in the the valley of the Little Big Horn on 25th June, 1876. Record from those who rode into Medicine Tail creek with George A. Custer, indicates rapid advance over the ridge of Weir's Peak to arrive a half mile east of the camps. Sgt. Daniel Kanipe rode from Reno Hill with a message for the pack train, stating in letter of July 29 1908, to Walter M. Camp that private Nathan Short was with Company C when he left it on Reno's hill. According to Benteen, he was three to four miles from Ford A when Trumpeter Martin delivered orders from Custer; and advancing towards the fighting saw an immense number of mounted Indians on the plain, charging dismounted men of Reno's command. The balance of Reno's command were mounted and flying for dear life to the bluffs on the same side of river that he was. Edgerley stated on 18 August 1881, "We hurried forward in the direction of the ford where Reno had crossed, with intent to hurry to his support; but as we approached the ford a Crow scout, Half Yellow Face, came out upon our right and beckoned us to come up on the hill. We immediately turned to the right and went up the hill." This was after Custer's last orders were delivered to Benteen by Trumpeter Martin, and after Benteen had shown the note to Weir. Benteen saw Reno's command retreating from the valley. As the pack train approached the two volleys were heard, fifteen minutes before Mathey reported to Reno. That is the Custer fight's time frame. The heroic scenario developed by Whittaker in 1879 was the product of misunderstanding accounts by Curley and Kill Eagle as the close of fighting that day, coinciding with Custer's fall. That error, in various forms, endures today. What happened to Reno's command also befell Custer's but there was no timber to fall back on, no escape at all, in fact. The fighting concluded as Mathey arrived on Reno Hill and Herendeen led survivors out of the timber. Significant clues to the tactical fight lie in the account by Runs the Enemy, which corroborates Sitting Bulls horse-shoe account of the short fight once the warriors seen by Benteen as he closed on Reno Hill, transferred down river to Custer's field. The Lakota history hi-jacked early fighting by the Cheyennes as told in John D. Miles's early account of events, Custer's Last Trail'.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Apr 13, 2012 17:20:01 GMT -6
I cannot stand it.
If you look at a map of the battlefield, which previous posts of yours suggest you've done, and understood how to read it, which those same posts prove you cannot, you'd see that today the distance as the anal compulsive bird flies is a tad over 4 miles, and perhaps 160 yards depending upon where on Reno Hill and where on LSH you set the stakes. Following the ground underneath the wheezing bird would constitute considerably more distance, being hills and gullies and all that nonsense, which some are so demented as to think would affect distance and energy required. Go figure.
Whatever route the husband of Sherman's niece took, it was not that straight line, and the 'walk' references the walk of an officer's Thoroughbred, not a man actually walking unless his mother was a long lost Ent wife. Whatever Miles pretended was a "practicable route" was not that, as any idiot looking at the map, photo, or in person vision could tell you.
Now! Fun with Words for Grownups!
What is the speed of "rapidly"? Well, by the utterly relevant and handy information provided - a flat race at sea level by highly trained horses specifically bred for it few of whom are on cocaine or in any way artificially inspired - we know that the horses of the 7th were in the exact same shape and condition and with the same quality of riders on June 25th, 1876. This despite no water, bad grass, hundreds of miles of journey immediate previously, and little rest and near separate species (near all quarterhorse variants) as opposed to the gigantic muscle bound equines about to race in Europe (another unifying factor to the LBH).
We know this because Herosrest posted that we can watch "... the abilties and endurance of horse flesh at speed over distances comparable to rides undertaken in the the valley of the Little Big Horn on 25th June, 1876." You bet. Nothing could be clearer. And we all have our favorite European photo comparison between Europe and high desert eastern Montana. Horse flesh is horse flesh, rapid is rapid, Hardin is just like Wales or County Cork.
HR further illuminates the "Record from those who rode into Medicine Tail creek with George A. Custer, indicates rapid advance over the ridge of Weir's Peak to arrive a half mile east of the camps." See? That word "rapid" again. Clues wherever you look once you're skilled like Herosrest.
And, since this is to imply that Custer could have been rescued, perhaps you could trace on one of your maps the route that Benteen could have taken WITH THE TRAIN, as it was his responsibility, that provided cover so that meaningful numbers could have arrived to some purpose or other with Custer. And at what speed? "Sgt. Daniel Kanipe rode from Reno Hill with a message for the pack train, stating in letter of July 29 1908, to Walter M. Camp that private Nathan Short was with Company C when he left it on Reno's hill." Great. Cannot do better than those Titans of Truth and Accuracy, Short and Kanipe. The 32 years of contemplation no doubt aided accuracy.
"According to Benteen, he was three to four miles from Ford A when Trumpeter Martin delivered orders from Custer; and advancing towards the fighting saw an immense number of mounted Indians on the plain, charging dismounted men of Reno's command." When he saw soldiers under attack, he couldn't know if they were Reno's, could he? No. So, what is the point here?
"As the pack train approached the two volleys were heard, fifteen minutes before Mathey reported to Reno." Shots were heard, whether volley or not disputed by officers. "The heroic scenario developed by Whittaker in 1879 was the product of misunderstanding accounts by Curley and Kill Eagle as the close of fighting that day, coinciding with Custer's fall." Proof? Remote evidence? Plausibility given his cash cow, La Custer?
"What happened to Reno's command also befell Custer's but there was no timber to fall back on, no escape at all, in fact." What happened to Reno's command was survival and not what happened to Custer's. Custer could have selected from several preferable options after Weir Point, but either he chose none or he was incapacitated and the command went into auto pilot: high ground, away from enemy, you know the drill.
"Significant clues to the tactical fight lie in the account by Runs the Enemy <noted tactical authority on Cavalry command and graduate of Sioux Command School>, which corroborates Sitting Bulls horse-shoe account <did he ever leave the village?> of the short fight once the warriors seen by Benteen <don't keep us on the brink: once the warriors seen by Benteen did ...what?> as he closed on Reno Hill, transferred down river to Custer's field. <oh...>"
You're like a young child with a GI Joe and a plastic knight on a horse and toy space ship. You try to construct a universe where all could perform as intended and with no conflicts of logic. You cannot take accounts from decades after and equate them with testimony or accounts closer to the event.
Dates for these accounts that you imply arose individually and are mutually supportive?
|
|
|
Post by fred on Apr 13, 2012 20:21:36 GMT -6
I thought I would pop my cork!
It's like the ring master chasing the clown out of the tent.
Herosrest, why don't you give it up? You have no clue-- to begin with-- then you simply make a bigger fool out of yourself with every word you write. To make it worse, you take on The Master; you would have better luck peeing up a rope. Do you want the "url" for our neighbors? You would do well over there: delusion vs. delusion. Try it; it's soothing.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Apr 26, 2012 14:47:46 GMT -6
Benteen, with his battalion, the rear guard company, and reserve constituted by the pack train, could have materially affected the outcome of events at LBH by doing as ordered by Custer, promptly and with a commitment to the task. Very much is thought of Benteen, was he Custer's equal or better? Did that matter? Who was in command? What orders that we know of, did he issue to his subordinates? --- --- Ckick images.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on May 3, 2012 20:30:11 GMT -6
. . . It's like the ring master chasing the clown out of the tent. . . . you would have better luck peeing up a rope. Chuck just asked me why I was laughing. Oh, I wish I'd seen this the day it was written; it would have been a fabulous birthday present. This is almost as good as the photo of you at LBH pointing to "Rainbird." I love you, Fred!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Aug 4, 2012 16:58:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 5, 2012 8:50:21 GMT -6
Sorry, the page you've requested doesn't exist!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Aug 5, 2012 12:57:27 GMT -6
It does. That may or may not be a matter of opinion though.
It's about piano keys and flat c#'s, l think, maybe, possibly, ahem...... definately.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 5, 2012 13:58:42 GMT -6
Page not found
Sorry, the page you've requested doesn't exist!
404 - Page not found: /C?tag=533643275-20
You've followed a broken link from another website. We'd really appreciate if you could contact the administrator of that website to let them know!
Other things to try: •Search askville.amazon.com:
Continue browsing on the Askville homepage.
Terms of service · Privacy policy Copyright © 2006-2012 Askville. An company.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Aug 11, 2012 16:46:02 GMT -6
Hi Steve, i'm awaiting a reply frm them.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Oct 22, 2013 13:28:30 GMT -6
Yan Taylor, At the risk of adding to this over-used thread, "Gobbledigook" seems the best place for this post. Being bored this morning and taking a rest from work before I head off to the doctor's office, I switched on the LBHA boards and noticed your post responding to "keogh's" post about "Custer sending troops to Greasy Grass Ridge." That theory is utter nonsense and ranks right up there with the "platoon theory of Company C," as well as Custer being atop the "old" Luce Ridge, a misnomer for what is commonly referred to today as East Ridge. If you accepted all "keogh's" silly permutations of what went on once Custer reached MTC, it would have taken so much time that in all likelihood the man would have died from old age rather than a bullet. You have people who supposedly "study" this event who try to fit every theory, every wild-eyed speculation, every shred of idiotic narrative (think: Peter Thompson... then add in Theodore Goldin... complete the meal with Gustoav Korn... and you have LBH succotash) into a single mixture, giving them a gang of guys in blue scurrying like a bunch of lemmings and pitching themselves into a semi-arid sandpile. No one occupied Greasy Grass Ridge except Indians. Anything else is malarky. Such nonsense defies any semblance of timing. In other words... it's BS. Best wishes, Fred.
Regards Fred, keep up the good work. I don't agree some of your conclusions or reasoning but you provide excellent and unbiased data and provocative conclusions.
The Greasy Grass Ridge and what is currently being named Greasy Grass Hill are perfectly valid as what are termed Soldier locations. Those who developed archaelogy of the ridge used probability to assign those locations to EITHER of the combatants in entirety. That is, the preponderance of warrior artifacts at a given location, is taken to indicate an EXCLUSIVELY warrior presence. That is the level of competance applied to analysis.
Curley, your bain perhaps, told Camp 'yes' there were soldier's there whom Camp thought might have been flankers. So there is some observation to be considered and Server also vaguely agrees a presence. Further, E.S. Curtis categorcally places Custer's troops and scouts in that locale, as do the H.L. Scott interviews of WMRH and Curley. That troops and scouts would not be on that terrain, bearing in mind that there was timber along both sides of the river then, beggars belief. You know exactly where you would head, being in that place, at that time, needing to see what was going on in the valley.
That troops and Custer were not up there would be amazing.
|
|