|
Post by ulan on Jul 20, 2012 17:25:31 GMT -6
Ulan: The truth is we don't know what Custer said. We know only what Cooke wrote. C´mon, thats hair splitting.
|
|
|
Post by plainsman on Jul 20, 2012 18:16:47 GMT -6
"Cooke was not the commander, he was the adjutant. He had just wrote what Custer said....not more and not less."
Ulan, help us understand how you know Cooke wrote exactly what Custer said "...not more and not more less."
Just on the surface that is such a preposterous assertion. Can you save it?
This whole business of "Custer speaks, Cooke writes" is fascinating— though lost forever.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jul 20, 2012 18:16:49 GMT -6
No, it's not hair splitting at all. Assuming the note was written in the first place to make up for Martini's language (or as Dan suggests intelligence) deficiencies, then we must further assume that it was written in great haste while sitting horseback, and Cooke put in there what he thought was the gist of the order, then said "Go, give this to Benteen. We have no way of knowing if Cooke accidently (I don't think he would leave out anything on purpose) left an essential item or phrase out of the note. These things happen. They should not, but they do.
Now, reversing this whole affair, do you have any proof that I am wrong. No you do not, for what I have just outlined is every bit as possible, as what anyone else has said, and there is a possability that it may just be a little more probable. Cooke would have never wriiten such a thing had he time to reflect. He was from all reports a very good and efficient adjutant. Even the best though make mistakes and as long as that possability exists it must remain in play and considered.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 20, 2012 19:09:37 GMT -6
It's doubtful to me that Cooke was incompetent, and I think the note reflects what Custer wanted: the train to be safe and within use as soon as it could be done, which would not cause atmospheric tears given the mules. It really does strike me as an exhortation with no fear or apprehension and just a 'here we go!' to those not yet up. "Found it, big one, make sure the train makes it up, see you then.' If there was huge concern, in twelve words he could say: "Reno west bank, large village, follow east trail, bring train securely up.' Or ".....to me." Or whatever. You can say a lot in 12 words, but he gave zero specifics and yet repeated himself. That's hard to do.
The 7th strikes me as a much looser organization than others present it, because Martini ought not to be the conduit of anything other than hard copy, and I don't think he spoke English well, but he may have been one hell of a bugler, which raised him in the ranks when all functions were not up to the need. It may not have been like there was a huge selection of competent buglers with big lungs that could ride. For his deficiencies in English, the note. Eh.....
He didn't tell Benteen about Reno or the later upholstering of waving blankets and the trap because he may not actually have seen it until the '....you must have seen Reno.....' queries after the battle and had to pat all that into shape for his stage act later and for the RCOI, when he most certainly would have to rehearse some testimony. We don't know, but I don't see the crucial need for us to know.
Benteen unloaded on Martin when he realized what happened, but it was not like he hated him before or after. That's the sole source for Martin being dumb, and while Benteen was a racist he wasn't any worse than anyone else at the time, and a lot better than most. He wrote nice things whenever possible. La Custer burned that bridge.
|
|
|
Post by plainsman on Jul 20, 2012 19:24:12 GMT -6
I can almost imagine Cooke finishing up the message, perhaps standing and using his saddle as a kind of high desk. Custer, maybe still mounted, peering thru De Rudio's field glasses. "I will NEED those packs!" And Cooke adds his postscript...
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Jul 20, 2012 20:55:45 GMT -6
I was always under the impression that you thought Boston was always with Custer. When did you change your mind?
How can he inform Custer of anything about Benteen? It is impossible for Edgerly to see Boston at the morass and have Boston on the hill with Custer and Martini before Martini is sent back!
Boston is a non factor to me...... No one has ever given a good reason for Boston not to be with Custer the whole time....Every one of the Custer Clan was with Custer....Why not Boston?
Rosebud
|
|
|
Post by plainsman on Jul 20, 2012 21:48:17 GMT -6
He had gone back to the pack train for a fresh horse.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jul 20, 2012 22:36:24 GMT -6
Not quite true, rosebud.
Rather, I contend Boston and Martin did not meet because Boston had already arrived, as Martin describes Custer and his brotherS on a hill. During the RCOI, Benteen and Martin's story agree, and it's Benteen who points out the wounded mount. Later, Boston is the one that points it out and that alleged meeting, discovered decades after the battle, got enhanced through the years. It didn't happen.
Boston saw Benteen watering and they all exchanged waves, although Edgerly's flowery version again appeared decades later.
It's not a big deal absent those who attribute timing to it. If Fred is right about the closer hill, it makes it more likely Martin left after Boston arrived.
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Jul 21, 2012 0:14:43 GMT -6
McDougal is the only one who states this. I have no doubt that it is true. The question is WHERE did this take place?
The most logical place for this to occur is at the divide halt. This would also explain Edgerly and his sighting of Boston. The only thing is......Edgerly .....After over 20 years, wrongly recalls the sighting at the morass.
I will let you get back to the Reno Benteen link up. RB
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 21, 2012 0:24:36 GMT -6
It really does strike me as an exhortation If the command process had two forms of expression ie order,exhortation, it would for obvious reasons be of great importance to distinguish between the two.No such distinction exists. No one involved ever refered to the dispatch as an exhortation.In fact the dispatch in the RCOI [Martin's evidence]is refered to as an order.And most telling of all Benteen describes the dispatch as an order. DC's attempt to reduce the dispatch to the level of junkmail just does not stand up. Benteen when he arrived at Reno hill was acting under Custer's direct orders. The scenario which follows should be judged on that basis and not on spurious confusion.
|
|
|
Post by ulan on Jul 21, 2012 1:57:17 GMT -6
Ulan, help us understand how you know Cooke wrote exactly what Custer said "...not more and not more less." Just on the surface that is such a preposterous assertion. Can you save it? This whole business of "Custer speaks, Cooke writes" is fascinating— though lost forever. It was his job as the adjutant to give Custers orders to the next. They had no phone or any other system to comunicate over some miles, so a written order, or an order in words with a messenger could have be very important in a critical situation. It was allways possibly this is the last chance you can send someone. Cooke was not a newby in Custers staff and he knows him well. Therefore it was not so important that he wrote exactly what Custer said word by word, but what Custer meant. Custer and Cooke were professionels and if Custer thought he want Benteen to do some more precise action, he would have order so. I think this is again something to try take away the blame from Custer to another man. Was Cooke known as a adjutant who takes his job to easy?
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Jul 21, 2012 6:06:12 GMT -6
Ulan,
I guess I may have stirred up this can of worms, as I was one of the original posters yesterday that brought up the Cooke issue. It was never my intent to imply that Cooke was a weak or incompetent adjutant, as from all indications he was a very good one as well as being a very good soldier in general. However, in trying to understand the message, which is one of the great enigmas of the battle, I think it is appropriate to question whether Cooke could have done a better job of writing it. I think that obviously he could, or else we would not still be debating what it said, but I believe the end result was probably fairly negligible and wouldn't have really changed anything that happened, regardless of what interpretation you put on it.
|
|
|
Post by ulan on Jul 21, 2012 9:20:10 GMT -6
Yes, Cooke or Custer could have be more precise in the order for Benteen if nessesary. I understand this order to Benteen as a respectful information from Custer to Benteen. Custer had enough respect for Benteen that he just gave him small info and than Benteen would do the best with it or he know by his self what is the best to do in that situation. So the order were given not under pressure and was not a cry for help or something.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 21, 2012 9:41:03 GMT -6
Custer had enough respect for Benteen that he just gave him small info and than Benteen would do the best with it or he know by his self what is the best to do in that situation. So why was that not stated? So how do you differentiate between orders issued to respected officers and those issued to non respected officers?Did Benteen know that he was a respected officer? Is there an offical protocol covering respected officers and non or slightly respected officers? I'm generally not rude but the crap posted by newbies----
|
|
|
Post by ulan on Jul 21, 2012 9:43:10 GMT -6
Custer had enough respect for Benteen that he just gave him small info and than Benteen would do the best with it or he know by his self what is the best to do in that situation.So why was that not stated? So how do you differentiate between orders issued to respected officers and those issued to non respected officers?Did Benteen know that he was a respected officer? Is there an offical protocol covering respected officers and non or slightly respected officers? I'm generally not rude but the crap posted by newbies---- Yep, i have the same feeling to your posts....it is all crap!
|
|