|
Post by Mulligan on Aug 29, 2014 19:34:25 GMT -6
Fred,
I hope we can put the current dust-up behind us.
It's taken me a week or so on the board to discover the "search" function. On the advice of everyone, I have now started to read your earlier posts on LBH distances and measurements. I don't understand your metrology methods or purposes but I can see, immediately, that acquiring this data must've taken a great deal of time and energy.
I also understand that you and your friends have had the opportunity to cover a substantial amount of Custer's trail on horseback.
This horseback ride I think is an important accomplishment. My own thought is that answers to some of my questions about the fate of Custer's five companies can only come from such direct experience on the ground.
My interest in Henry Weibert's work is based somewhat on his insights into horsemanship and how that discipline played into events 6/25/1876.
I have explored taking a horseback tour of the battlefield myself, but for a solo rider (with guide) it is an expensive proposition. Maybe by plumbing your adventure for some details I can begin to understand how the LBH area would appear to columns of mounted cavalrymen arriving for battle.
If you don't mind my asking, how did you organize your ride from the Divide to LSH, and what did you learn from it? If you have already posted this information and don't wish to rehash it can you direct me to theses posts, please?
Mulligan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 29, 2014 20:22:15 GMT -6
I hope we can put the current dust-up behind us. Done. In nine years on these boards I used the "search" function once and it didn't work. It has, but I do not want to mislead you. I, personally, have never ridden the battlefield on horseback. Friends of mine have: Steve Andrews ("AZ Ranger") and Terry Craft ("zekesgirl"). They provided me with all the data they compiled, including GPS measurements, speeds (or speed possibilities), routes, etc. The rest of my computations come from map work: the USGS quad maps, military-type, 1:24,000. I have also compiled data from historical records, including letters of contemporaries, diaries, books, interviews, etc., and essentially discard-- or use only as a matter of interest-- hand-drawn maps. I rely very heavily on first-hand, primary accounts, with more emphasis on earlier accounts than later. Giovanni Martini is a perfect example. It is my belief you cannot understand the events of the LBH-- and that includes personalities-- unless you understand the timing and the times events occurred. Time verifies or distorts everything. Absolutely everything! Every single one of my theories, ideas, calculations, movements, etc., are based on time and military exigency. And I use three basic principles: logic, simplicity, and flow. Everything must fit within those three parameters. If they don't, they didn't happen... or they didn't happen "that" way. I prefer relative times to absolutes or specifics. With one or two exceptions, no one pulled a watch out to check the time when the bullets were flying, so all specifics and wild stabs; relatives are much more reliable, and that includes the days of lead-up to the 25th. Your interest mirrors mine with Edward S. Luce. Again, the person with the expertise here is AZ Ranger... and he does this for a living, mind you. As for the terrain, it may be hopeless. Things have changed so much over the years. I will be out there again next June and I am hoping we can coordinate with Steve. Met him there last year. Unfortunately, we can no longer replicate conditions such as they were. A perfect example is operating on the ground in those uniforms, en masse, with the commensurate fear and adrenaline. Another-- and never minimize this when discussing "views," etc., is the lack-- today-- of the dust being raised, purposely by the Indians, and otherwise by the movement of battle. People forget or minimize the effect dust and smoke had on movements and tactical events. Steve, are you listening?Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Aug 29, 2014 20:56:11 GMT -6
Fred said: "Unfortunately, we can no longer replicate conditions such as they were. A perfect example is operating on the ground in those uniforms, en masse, with the commensurate fear and adrenaline. Another-- and never minimize this when discussing "views," etc., is the lack-- today-- of the dust being raised, purposely by the Indians, and otherwise by the movement of battle. People forget or minimize the effect dust and smoke had on movements and tactical events."
I agree on people not really taking into account dust and smoke on the battle field. I'm curious was smokeless gun powder in use at that time? Not like it would have played a big factor on the battle when compared to the fires that the NA started. Gun powder smoke though has been a factor in battles for ages.
I have lately wondered if there was an inversion in place on the day of the battle. I've read references that there was no wind besides the high heat. An inversion would have held all of that smoke and dust very close to the ground. It wouldl have also caused a hazy effect in the air that would make seeing any distance very difficult, especially depending on how long the NA village was in place and building up smoke and other particulate matter in the air.
Beth
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 29, 2014 21:34:12 GMT -6
Beth: That is an outstanding question, and I can recall Fred discussing the dust and smoke effect, BUT, I also remember someone here or once here going into it in depth shortly before I joined so that would make it three or more years ago. The discussions centered around temperatures and inversions and their effects on short range visibility, prompted by the relatively long range of the cavalry carbine and the relatively low rate of Indian casualties. Many just put it down to poor marksmanship training, but I remember at the time thinking that there must have been more to it.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 30, 2014 6:42:34 GMT -6
I have lately wondered if there was an inversion in place on the day of the battle. I've read references that there was no wind besides the high heat. An inversion would have held all of that smoke and dust very close to the ground. It wouldl have also caused a hazy effect in the air that would make seeing any distance very difficult, especially depending on how long the NA village was in place and building up smoke and other particulate matter in the air. Beth, You might be interested in this... I believe it fits in perfectly with what you are saying. June 22—reported by LT Wallace: Weather clear, but not unpleasantly warm. June 23—LT Wallace: weather warm and clear” [“Report of the Chief of Engineers, Appendix PP, Report of Lieutenant George D. Wallace, Seventh Cavalry, St. Paul, MN, January 27, 1877,” Carroll, The Federal View, pp. 64 – 66]. June 24—LT Wallace: weather clear and very warm” [“Report of the Chief of Engineers, Appendix PP, Report of Lieutenant George D. Wallace, Seventh Cavalry, St. Paul, MN, January 27, 1877,” Carroll, The Federal View, pp. 64 – 66]. LT Godfrey—the weather was dry and had been for some time; consequently the trail was very dusty [Godfrey, “Custer’s Last Battle 1876,” p. 18]. June 25— The temperature on this day was estimated to be in excess of 100° and there was a slight northern breeze blowing. “The day was sultry, cloudless and windless… as both the Indians and the officers… say. What little movement of air there was, was from north to south, as Gerard remembered it from the drift of the smoke where Reno had first fought in the valley, and where the Indians had fired the grass after the retreat of the troops” [Kuhlman, Legend into History, p. 180]. After sundown—A lot of heat lightning. 8:30 PM—The “Far West” ties up on the left bank of the Big Horn River. Engineer sergeant, James Wilson recorded temperatures of a maximum of 91º, minimum temperature of 63º. Late evening and night—It rained on and off. No moon. June 26, 1876—Monday—Some scattered showers early, then plenty of sun and heat. Late afternoon—The Indians begin firing the prairie in the valley. Under the cover of this fire—set to conceal their movements (as before)—the Indians broke camp and began to move away. PVT Windolph: “ The heavy smoke seemed to lift for a few moments, and there in the valley below we caught glimpses of thousands of Indians on foot and horseback, with their pony herds and travois, dogs and pack animals, and all the trappings of a great camp, slowly moving southward. It was like some Biblical exodus; the Israelites moving into Egypt; a mighty tribe on the march” [Connell, Son of the Morning Star, pp. 76 – 77]. 9:30 PM—“Far West” moors on the west side of a large island near the right bank of the Big Horn. Maximum temperature recorded by SGT Wilson was 70º; minimum was 60º. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Aug 30, 2014 6:56:58 GMT -6
All this low lying smoke and haze would settle down in all the various folds that were a major feature of this battleground, thus giving the Indians a readymade smoke screen, which in turn would hide any movement, plus I don’t think that troops from any country were trained in area fire back then, the idea of ordering your men to fire at an area of smoke would not be in the field manual, mainly due to the single shot weapon and to being trained to fire at identified targets.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 30, 2014 11:03:15 GMT -6
As to the dust, the movie Little Big Man was filmed on land in sight of the actual battlefield. Although there were tons of horses and people running around for the filming, nowhere near the number as at the battle. And the dust is incredible. Watch the battle on YouTube, and it gives a pretty good idea of how to imagine June 25th.
|
|
|
Post by Mulligan on Aug 30, 2014 12:52:16 GMT -6
RE: Heat & Dust National Climatic Data Center reports average high temps for Bighorn area of Montana, in June and July, to be in the high 80's. This is for the current period, beginning 1981. The temperatures recorded by the Far West's engineer, Wilson, are similar to this. Estimates from battle participants of ground temperatures exceeding 100 degrees are possible but may be slightly exaggerated due to factors such as heavy clothing, fatigue, restricted hydration, etc. The word "clear" is used on multiple occasions by Lt. Wallace. Precipitation is mentioned. I was in southern Montana on numerous occasions as a child, during summer holiday, and both of my visits to the battlefield (as an adult) were in mid-June. Most recently, I was there June 12, 2014. My personal experience is that the LBH area, at that time of year, is brilliantly clear and only slightly warm. Frequent thundershowers cleanse the air and dampen the heat factor. I have not witnessed what we, in California, recognize as a noticeable inversion effect. Local residents may differ with me on this, and the observations of individual visitors may vary, of course. ~~~ Is there any scientific basis to think that the soil and other agronomic conditions have changed radically on the actual battlefield since 1876? There has been the occasional burn off, but wouldn't the same strains of grass reappear? There is irrigation in the LBH valley now, obviously, but maybe hundreds of horses at a full gallop across the ridges above the river might still kick up a good bit of dust. Has anyone attended any of the annual battle re-enactments? Is there a lot of dust present? ~~~ The huge smoke and dust clouds "of biblical proportion" we visualize as obscuring the battle zone may be exaggerated to a degree in our imagination. From Weir Point soldiers could reportedly make out figures moving across the battlefield. The photograph set above shows Lt. Col Raymond J. Castagnaro, USAF (Ret.) at Weir Point during the 2001 Custer Battle Re-Enactment. I have inserted it here with his permission. Here is a link to his LBH page: home.earthlink.net/~raycastagnaro/~~~ Little Big ManNot to burst any bubbles here, but 1970's Hollywood filmmakers might use a variety of special effects techniques to create the appearance of heavy dust if that's what the director (Arthur Penn) wished to capture in the scene. The most simple technique would be for stagehands to have thrown handfuls of dust in front of large fans just out of the frame. A smoke machine, utilizing buff-colored Glycerol, may have been used. Combine this with the right lens/filter/focus combination and you could create a virtual haboob on set. Motion Picture Smoke/Fog Generator Nowadays any dust effect could be added or enhanced digitally in post-production. Mulligan
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Aug 30, 2014 14:09:13 GMT -6
I suspect that there could be a large temp difference between the Far West sitting on a river possibly cold from spring melt and the temps in the LBH valley.
I can only refer to my experience of living in the Snake River vally for nearly 8 years. Inversions can occure anywhere weather can get 'capped.' C
like cold air or warm air can get capped or trapped under stable cold air. In those conditions the air is still and can get really dirty fast. You will have clear skies--as in no clouds but the hazy will make things that you normally see with easy on the other side of the valley disappear The longer the inversion lasts the worse it gets and after several days everything just gets grayer and grayer.
There are studies that the type of widespread irrigation that you see in the west does effect local weather by adding a lot more moisture in the air. However if you've ever spent much time in an area not irrigated or driven gravel roads you can see how easy it is for one car to stir up dust--it will give you an idea about how much dust you would get with 100s of animals and 1000s of people moving arround.
A question for someone who has been to the area lately, has the battlefield been invaded by cheatgrass yet? Nasty stuff.
Beth
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 30, 2014 14:17:50 GMT -6
No bubble to burst. If you'd actually look at the YouTube shots, you see the dust rising from the hooves of the horses. This is within sight of the actual battlefield on a comparable day. Second, the last thing a director wants on big expensive outdoor shots is tons of dust in the air to preclude audience vision of the shot's subject, so you don't use black powder in the guns, either, although that's what was there in 1876. You also don't want dust and smoke blowing in from one direction and you can't have them all over without appearing in the shots. Very little activity around Custer for his speech that might risk the shot. www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFjdz2bRHRgRegardless, both Indian and soldier accounts mention tons of dust, difficulty in seeing. The battlefield's big difference is that there are no huge herds of bison and deer chowing down and grinding up the dirt anymore. The beef herds I've seen aren't all that active or large and grass can grow undisturbed for much of the year. That's different.
|
|
|
Post by Mulligan on Aug 30, 2014 14:28:07 GMT -6
Good eyes, DC. Production designers could've dressed the appropriate areas with just the right amount of dust, I suppose, but let's not nit-pick.
Who's that quirky actor playing Custer?
Mulligan
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 30, 2014 14:37:55 GMT -6
No, production designers could not, then or now, because that's not what production designers do on an outdoor shoot like this. You're in Teamster Territory, I think. Nor could they or anyone control horses, nor the wind, nor variant temperature for lift, nor waste time waiting for it all to occur so they could shoot. Hence, when they need clear shots of Custer or Hoffman, all horses and extras fade away to preclude the dust issue.
Let's know what we're talking about before trying to pass it off as fact, shall we?
|
|
|
Post by Mulligan on Aug 30, 2014 15:23:50 GMT -6
Heck, I know even less about film production than I do about military matters or climatology. I don't think I stated anything as a fact. Might have, could have. My point was only that if something is in the movies it doesn't necessarily mean it depicts reality. But, of course, as the current Geico ad says, "Everybody knows that."
Actually, the Little Big Man battle sequence is my favorite from all the Custer-related films with which I'm familiar, and it's great you've shared it here. When I first saw the film I knew the production crew had made every effort to give the battle an authentic look. Also, I understand Scott and Fox uncovered a lot of debris from the shoot when they did some digging in the MTC area.
Btw, what do you think of Penn's MTC footage? Custer, leading the charge, comes down to the LBH river and then veers suddenly to the right, northwards. Does that fit any known theory of the battle?
Gotta love the small details, though, like Custer's NA scouts silhouetted on the hill, overlooking the village.
Mulligan
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 30, 2014 15:24:32 GMT -6
The temperatures recorded by the Far West's engineer, Wilson, are similar to this. Estimates from battle participants of ground temperatures exceeding 100 degrees are possible but may be slightly exaggerated due to factors such as heavy clothing, fatigue, restricted hydration, etc. Let us not forget temperatures in direct sun can run considerably higher than those measured in the shade, which, if I am not mistaken, we measure temperatures. I am sure SGT Wilson did not put his thermometer in the direct rays of the sun, so I suspect 100 degrees would not be unreasonable on a day when the temperature was measured at 91. Period photos show the ground considerably more chewed-up in 1877 than we see today, but I would venture to say conditions are quite similar. The archaeologists believe they are. Yep and yep. Let's not forget cordite was not yet invented, so you would be having a considerable about of smoke mixed with intentional as well unintentional dust-raising. The valley and the near-by foothills were pretty much chewed up by the massive horse herds: the Cheyenne had their horses north of the village and possibly west, as well. Then you had the issue of fleeing families adding to the confusion I doubt this very seriously. LSH is three miles from Weir Peaks and there was mayhem from F-F Ridge, all along Battle Ridge, and onto LSH. Indian accounts tell us the dust and smoke were so thick, they were killing one another by accident. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Aug 30, 2014 15:29:38 GMT -6
There are studies that the type of widespread irrigation that you see in the west does effect local weather by adding a lot more moisture in the air. However if you've ever spent much time in an area not irrigated or driven gravel roads you can see how easy it is for one car to stir up dust--it will give you an idea about how much dust you would get with 100s of animals and 1000s of people moving arround. A question for someone who has been to the area lately, has the battlefield been invaded by cheatgrass yet? Nasty stuff. Vegetation at the Little Big Horno Most precipitation occurs during May through July, only 10 to 12 inches per year. o Shortgrass prairie o Buffalo grass, spreading by aboveground roots, rooting as it spreads, with tufts of green grass. It can grow as much as an inch or two a day. o Blue grama grass, taller than buffalo grass, six to twenty inches high. o Western wheatgrass o Needle-and-thread o Locoweed o Plains wallflower o Gumweed o Prairie clover o Sunflower o Sagebrush o Some prickly pear cactus and yucca o Trees grow primarily in sheltered coulees and along riverbanks: o Mostly cottonwood o Aspen o Chokeberry o Mesquite o Juniper o Some cedar o Ash In general, the three most important grasses for sustaining horses and buffalo were: o Bluestem o Blue grama o Buffalo grass In 1876 the valley was thick with dust from a drought. In 1877, the year Sheridan and Nowlan went to the battlefield to re-bury the dead and mark the officers’ graves, “flowers were in abundance and luxurious grasses grew as high as the horses’ stirrups” [Michno, The Mystery of E Troop, p. 188]. “‘Coulees intervened, trees and shrubbery masked the Indians retreat along the river bank below; tall, heavy sagebrush, since cropped by sheep, covered the battlefield at a height that would conceal a lurking savage.’ All of which gives weight to the contention that the topography of the country in the vicinity of the hostile village had more to do with Custer’s defeat than any other factor” [Stewart, Custer’s Luck, pp. 436 – 437, citing Edna L. Waldo, Dakota, p. 197, in FN 22, and Burdick, Last Battle of the Sioux Nation, p. 40, in FN 23]. On p. 197, Michno mentions Robert G. Rosenberg, a Wyoming historical consultant with a background in forestry and western history. The trees everyone calls cedars are actually Rocky Mountain junipers, very common in this region. They grow as tall as 40' to 55', but are more commonly 10' to 25' tall. These are the trees that line Cedar Coulee. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|