Post by herosrest on Jan 16, 2013 0:03:38 GMT -6
There was/is a concerted and enduring effort to ensure that people realise one day that Custer and one wing of his battalons established a blocking position in the valley, three miles above the mouth of the river.
One of the problems faced with this battle is Custer being near the river and also fighting there. How near the river, is part of it and of course there were no dead horses found, well a handful it seems. No one considers that a large and over exerted village population simply dined upon dead horses at and near the river. More to the point and equally valid, the troopers dismounted to skirmish and protect their mounts from gunfire......... Some one watching what went on mentioned that Custer could not get skirmishers across the river, didn't want to charge in columns of fours (suicide) and wasn't at the ford anyway. No dead horses at or near the river simply means there was an opposed attempt at crossing. Some tribal record bears this out. To lay down cover fire the troops dismounted and horses taken to cover. This is confusing apparently because some of the time troopers were mounted and some of the time they were dismounted. The major source for contact and combat at the river crossing where officers believed Custer approached the river is the Crow scouts who no one wishes to believe and weren't there. Officers who saw the ground and sketched or mapped what they saw were obviously in error or as confused as the Crow scouts. The majority os tribal accounts including the crow scouts are given to state that the cavalry ran up the hill. That unfortunately is likely as not poor context and understanding. Army doesn't work that way and have ways of moving backwards which involve not showing your back. Custer and his officers are being shown as operating in the same fashion as the poorly led companies in the valley. That is difficult to believe about the intention to move away from the river. If the maneuver was a faint, the idea behind that is to have drawn defenders off the river and cross down stream unopposed. That is the tactic of fainting as relevant to that fight and it is a very winged hog. The cheyenne record given to G,B, Grinnell told of a delay near the river when an officer was killed. That was the delay everyone doing time lines plays with and yet it has been on file since 1908 as to where and precisely when in the scheme of things it took place. I was just reading Billy Jackson's little known account of the battle which is quite a hoot but raises an eyebrow about various stuff. There is an ill founded effort to move the events of the battle to and beyond the Big Horn river. I
One of the problems faced with this battle is Custer being near the river and also fighting there. How near the river, is part of it and of course there were no dead horses found, well a handful it seems. No one considers that a large and over exerted village population simply dined upon dead horses at and near the river. More to the point and equally valid, the troopers dismounted to skirmish and protect their mounts from gunfire......... Some one watching what went on mentioned that Custer could not get skirmishers across the river, didn't want to charge in columns of fours (suicide) and wasn't at the ford anyway. No dead horses at or near the river simply means there was an opposed attempt at crossing. Some tribal record bears this out. To lay down cover fire the troops dismounted and horses taken to cover. This is confusing apparently because some of the time troopers were mounted and some of the time they were dismounted. The major source for contact and combat at the river crossing where officers believed Custer approached the river is the Crow scouts who no one wishes to believe and weren't there. Officers who saw the ground and sketched or mapped what they saw were obviously in error or as confused as the Crow scouts. The majority os tribal accounts including the crow scouts are given to state that the cavalry ran up the hill. That unfortunately is likely as not poor context and understanding. Army doesn't work that way and have ways of moving backwards which involve not showing your back. Custer and his officers are being shown as operating in the same fashion as the poorly led companies in the valley. That is difficult to believe about the intention to move away from the river. If the maneuver was a faint, the idea behind that is to have drawn defenders off the river and cross down stream unopposed. That is the tactic of fainting as relevant to that fight and it is a very winged hog. The cheyenne record given to G,B, Grinnell told of a delay near the river when an officer was killed. That was the delay everyone doing time lines plays with and yet it has been on file since 1908 as to where and precisely when in the scheme of things it took place. I was just reading Billy Jackson's little known account of the battle which is quite a hoot but raises an eyebrow about various stuff. There is an ill founded effort to move the events of the battle to and beyond the Big Horn river. I
