|
Post by shatonska on Jan 28, 2013 13:14:05 GMT -6
The difference here is not what Custer expected. We have all sorts of opinion expressed about he was doing what the great cavaliers on the other board expected him to do, cavalry minded and all that. There came a point however when the hostiles did not do what was expected, and Custer by virtue of his deployments had already crossed the tactical Rubicon, from which there was no recovery. So the bottom line is that deploying over a large amount of territory would be just fine if the hostiles called a cab, it was not fine if they decided to stand their ground and defend the cab stand. Custer had crossed the tactical Rubicon only if already badly wounded , the waiting on cemetery flats is the key , nothing (nor the relatively few warriors around there , almost all the lakotas were around Calhoun area at that time) could prevent Custer's two companies to rejoin Keogh , the waiting has only a possible answer , Custer dying Custer left Keogh still able to move and if he was still "alive" on cemetery flats i don't see how a man like Custer could choose to stand on foot instead of charging back south, i don't like him but he was not stupid , leaving the horses was certain death and he knew it ,do you see Custer dismount and hide after dead horses instead of using TWO companies to do the cavalry work ? i don't Custer dying is the answer
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 28, 2013 13:15:31 GMT -6
Gatewood: I would be grateful. The model of Hornet I purchased this morning is in Doolittle Raid flight deck markings. As I am going to have to restore her anyway, I thought I would do her at Midway. Other than the John Ford film, which shows nothing of value, I don't have a clue. In all probability two parallel rows of dashed line in a blue gray, but I really want something more solid to go on if it is available
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 28, 2013 13:25:05 GMT -6
Shat: We disagree. I believe it was crossed when he spread himself out to far and to thin. Therefore I think it was the macro, not the micro.
The difference between the two of us is not the decisions that led to death, but the decisions that led to losing the battle. They are not necessarily one in the same. Custer dying in the DC like scenario is the most damning indictment of 7th Cavalry leadership there is. A regiment falling apart because of a commander getting killed or wounded is unacceptable, and is a prime indicator of a lack of training.
How he died, where he died, are about as important to me personally as the seem to be the author of the piece AK posted. For what we call the rivet and paint police in my other hobby, it is important, and that is certainly OK, but like the flight deck markings of Hornet at Midway, it may very well be unknowable.
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Jan 28, 2013 13:42:04 GMT -6
Custer dying in the DC like scenario is the most damning indictment of 7th Cavalry leadership there is. A regiment falling apart because of a commander getting killed or wounded is unacceptable, and is a prime indicator of a lack of training. It depends where he was hit i agree with you if it happened at ford B , but if it was at ford D we don't have the regiment falling apart situation
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Jan 28, 2013 14:06:55 GMT -6
Command and Control.
The Division of the Missouri was led by LTG Sheridan, and headquarters was in Chicago. Any coordination between the Department of the Platte (Crook) and the Department of Dakota (Terry) goes through Chicago.
In normal procedure, with two departments working in the same campaign, the Division HQ had the option of forward deploying a jump HQ to command and control. The reason this didn't happen in 1876 was the heavy Army involvement in the Centennial celebration in Philadelphia. (Little Phil wanted a cheese steak).
Communication between the two departments just wasn't possible with the technology of that day. The Departments were conducting independent operations.
Note that the Department of the Dakota used multiple columns. Gibbon, Custer, the detachments running the supply depots, the steamers,etc meant multiple moving parts. Terry appropriately was in the field to manage his assets. Note that if Terry did not take the field, the field commander would have been COL Gibbon, not LTC Custer.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jan 28, 2013 14:11:18 GMT -6
My theory (shared with many through the years and not original to me) is that, as Curly says, the five companies stopped in Cedar coulee or MTC to tighten saddles, then mounted and followed the coulee towards LBH. Custer was shock and awe cavalry, not a pause and consider French impressionistic movie director. He'd wait for nobody.
They never got there, although the odd rider may have by mistake. Somewhere about a mile from the river Custer or a Custer was wounded. If THE Custer, he did not cede command and, under fire, the auto response was to get him to safety. The front two companies diverted north under fire for no specific goal but following easiest terrain for shelter to get organized. Keogh took his guys out of the coulee because the column had stopped, he could hear fire, no clue so he ran parallel to the others.
If C was middle company or the third and split between, it's disposition would be explained, more or less.
I don't believe there was a Ford D, or that they could have reached it. All sightings and artifacts of soldiers up north are explained by something we actually know happened: the Indians dressed as soldiers riding soldier mounts. Good enough to scare the Cheyenne camp and fool Weir and Terry's guys.
You have to eliminate that explanation by more than wishing hard and clicking the heels before you insert a new one.
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Jan 28, 2013 14:11:22 GMT -6
Shat: We disagree. I believe it was crossed when he spread himself out to far and to thin. Therefore I think it was the macro, not the micro.quote] To paraphrase Bismark when speaking of the Italians - Custer had a large appetite but poor teeth, or, in simple terms, he bit off more than he could chew. In my previous post I said that it was appropriate to base tactics on what the enemy could be expected to do in a "given situation", but I tend to think that Custer's biggest error was in not recognizing that this was not a "given situation" but was different, and therefore might warrant different tactics. What was "different" about it was primarily the size of the Indian village and the fact that many warriors, largely without family encumbrances, had left the agencies to join the gathering. It should therefore arguably have been presumed that the only reason that they had gathered in such a manner and numbers was if they intended to make a fight of it. However, Custer appears to have not thought in those terms and to have misinterpreted the size of the village. Beginning at the "Sun Dance" site, the village was already of significant size, but Custer (and everyone else for that matter) seem to have interpreted the various camp circles as being due to one or two much smaller villages that had moved around several times, rather than one larger gathering consisting of several sub villages. Then, as they followed the trail and found other trails converging with the main one, they largely misinterpreted that as trails "leaving" rather than "joining". Perhaps AZ can weigh in on this, but I find it hard to believe that experienced scouts, guides and frontier soldiers could not tell the difference between a trail that was coming and one that was going, but they seem to have had exactly that problem. Finally, in the immediate prelude to the battle, Custer was told several times, by several sources, that the village was much larger than he had ever anticipated, and he had reason to believe that he had been discovered and the village alerted. It seems to me that all of this should have given him pause to think (and maybe it did), that this was not the typical situation of surprising a small village at dawn, and it might therefore react in a totally different manner from what experience may have indicated was the norm.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jan 28, 2013 14:20:59 GMT -6
It strikes me as consistent with Custer for him to think he'd support Reno and create village chaos for Benteen to take advantage of on arrival by hitting them soon to take advantage of minimal surprise they'd have and whatever shock they could deliver. Going further north in view deprived them of everything in the way of possible advantage, and in any case he had no idea if there was a crossing anywhere near as good as this one.
Whether he wanted to engage from one side of the river or cross and attack, he'd be fullfilling his promise PLUS allowing Benteen's guys to append where needed. Who knows, but I have difficulty with Custer suddenly becoming so complex and given to divide while in contact. That doesn't seem like his or any officer's choice.
There's the village. They've seen us. Let's divide so they can hit us piecemeal as infantry.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 28, 2013 15:29:37 GMT -6
Montrose: Pat's or Gino's??
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jan 28, 2013 15:51:38 GMT -6
DC: I wish there was some way to depict your (or whomevers) scenario out graphicly.
If I follow you correctly, and I am trying, it would seem to me they went a very long way to get shelter and reorganize. If there was someone in hot pursuit it would be understandable. Absent that, I don't believe it would be.
If there were hostiles in hot pursuit they would be on battle ridge between Custer and Keogh. Don't think Keogh would follow directly or follow parallel under those circumstances.
If you have the time and facilities to do so is there some way you could post a sketch map of this theory?
Shat: I don't think the regiment fell apart at all. I believe they did their very best until nearly the end, when the human instincts of survival took over. I don't believe there was widespread panic as does Fox apparently. I believe they were under positive command and control. It is the quality of the thinking of that command and control that is questioned by me, not that it existed.
My statement was meant to counter DC theory that the whole shooting match would fall apart because Custer was killed or wounded.
To have such a thing happen it would be like the Church Of The Old Time Religion. If the preacher of that church gets caught with his hand in the till and the congregation disintegrates, then we can conclude that it was not a church at all, but rather a cult of personality. If on the other hand someone steps forward and says it is not the preacher but the Word, then we have a church that can carry on without their former leader.
Now there may have been something of a cult of personality in the 7th. But there were also seasoned pros who could do their jobs in conditions of adversity.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Jan 28, 2013 16:00:53 GMT -6
quote] Custer dying is the answer Darl Cloud/Shatonska In a previous post I stated that I didnt agree with the theory of Custer being hit early in the fight, but it would certainly fill in a lot of blanks. One question. IF Custer(George) was mortally wounded at Ford B, why would Tom/Yates race North, away from Reno/Benteen and even Keogh. Why wouldny they just go back to Keoghs position, have the entire battalion together, and figure out their next move. Having the Battalion united would present a much more difficult obstacle for the warriors, they would be less willing to charge them and it would have given them more time to address the situation. Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by alfakilo on Jan 28, 2013 16:07:43 GMT -6
I could not have hoped for better responses! My concern in posting this link was that I may have committed the FNG mistake of thinking I found something new. New or not, many thanks to all for your insights!
AK
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Jan 28, 2013 16:16:35 GMT -6
Gatewood: I would be grateful. The model of Hornet I purchased this morning is in Doolittle Raid flight deck markings. As I am going to have to restore her anyway, I thought I would do her at Midway. Other than the John Ford film, which shows nothing of value, I don't have a clue. In all probability two parallel rows of dashed line in a blue gray, but I really want something more solid to go on if it is available QC - these are a few photos of Hornet's flight deck that are ostensibly from Midway. Stern: www.navsource.org/archives/02/020854.jpgwww.navsource.org/archives/02/020858.jpgBow: www.navsource.org/archives/02/020852a.jpgThe markings at the stern seem to be as you suggest but appear to stop at the last arrestor cable. If there are any toward the bow, they are obscured by the tire marks. I found a forum for model builders where someone asked the identical question to yours and received the reply that the deck was devoid of markings at the time of Midway, but, as indicated above there are at least a few at the very stern. Your blue-gray suggestion also appears to be correct, as they are barely discernable agains the deck. In this contemporary photo of Enterprise, her markings are much more visible, and I would guess to be in white. They also traverse the entire length of the flight deck. www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g00001/g07746.jpgI sent an inquiry to the Hornet museum to see if they could shed any additional light and will let you know if/when they reply.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Jan 28, 2013 16:25:45 GMT -6
Benteen,
They're in column, four across probably, they come under fire from the south side of the coulee above them, Custer hit. You do not stop in a coulee, you keep moving and follow the land's lay away from the fire to render help to the wounded, everyone follows except Keogh's men who stop or retreat till he he leads them out. Confusion, but get out from the coulee. The don't know how many men are attacking them and, if Henry's, a few could seem a lot. This works with what Indian accounts say of a small group already on the East.
As they head north, more and more engage them. They can never stop and figure things out while under fire. The issue was all that gatewood and montrose and qc discuss, absent that Custer always led from the front and therefore could not keep control of his units and got hit. Keogh may never have known what the hell was going on.
Also, I do think there is an actual chain of command through TWC and an official one and this was understood and not a big deal back then. TWC was a good officer and did indeed know his bro well enough to anticipate correctly. Again, who brought the regiment forward that AM?
|
|
|
Post by shatonska on Jan 28, 2013 16:28:41 GMT -6
quote] Custer dying is the answer Darl Cloud/Shatonska In a previous post I stated that I didnt agree with the theory of Custer being hit early in the fight, but it would certainly fill in a lot of blanks. One question. IF Custer(George) was mortally wounded at Ford B, why would Tom/Yates race North, away from Reno/Benteen and even Keogh. Why wouldny they just go back to Keoghs position, have the entire battalion together, and figure out their next move. Having the Battalion united would present a much more difficult obstacle for the warriors, they would be less willing to charge them and it would have given them more time to address the situation. Be Well Dan that's why i point to Custer wounded during the ford D trip , it explains the delay on cemetery flats and why he didn't rejoin Keogh , impossible to explain both with Custer and two companies in good shape lat's say no ford D trip , Custer was alive but crazy dismounting and positioning 5 companies on that terrain ? mmmm ford D and Custer wounded is the most logical scene (Fred if your timeline shows no delay on the flats i can reconsider the wounding ) but logic is not the truth lbh is a nightmare.....
|
|