|
Post by shan on Jul 30, 2024 4:04:39 GMT -6
Herosrest,
I don't know how long you've been on these boards but I suspect its as long as me, and I joined around 2000 or even a bit before. So here's my question, after all we've read, have we any better idea of the sequence of events at the Custer end of the field?
By now we must have read millions of words ~ indeed you yourself must have written the equivelent of several books by now, and yet here we are after all this time going over the same old ground. Now I've said it before, and been ignored, but I'll say it again and be ignored. If we peer back into our own lives and go over some traumatic event which happened to us a long time ago, do we really imagine that we can time some of the things we're remembering to 5, 10 or even 15 minutes duration, or that we saw so and so over there and that other fellow over standing by tht tree? Well I'm afraid the answer is yes, we do like to think that we can remember these things with such precision, even though the realty is, we're not the same person who actually experienced the event we're considering.
Which brings me to some of the accounts, both Indian and white that we're so relient on. Now I'm sure they did their best when questioned, but in both groups their were isuus which coloured what they said. As far as the military men were concerned, many of them feared that they were being blamed for having left Custer and his men to their fates without intervening, and so some of the stories they told could be seen as efforts to cover their backs. With regards to the Indians, many of them feared that they might be hung if they gave a true account of what they did and to whom, not to mention the fact that their words were being translated by yet other men who'd been hired to do a job. And so we plough on, picking over these words as they will suddenly reveal the secret we've spent so much time searching for. For my own part, and I have no explanation for this, I find myself trusting most of the Arickaree accounts. Of course they were vilified for years for being cowards who had fled the field and left thier white employers to their fate, when in fact the opposite was true. They tried to do what they'd been employed to do, which was to run off the horses, and when it came to the fighting, they put up a better show than the soldiers killing by managing to more of the enemy.
So there we are I've had my little rant, and shall no doubt continue to sign in every day to see if anyone has come up an expanation for what happened. What a life eh? But its been fun.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by shan on Jul 30, 2024 4:09:38 GMT -6
Oh me oh my, always check what you've written for those little mistakes that make it so hard for others to follow what your getting at. Always in a hurry that's my problem.
Shan
|
|
|
Post by mikegriffith1 on Jul 30, 2024 4:29:53 GMT -6
This has already been discussed. No he didn't. You are still in error with some of your statements... "At the RCOI, he said he "I believe" - THEN - in 1879 - i.e. by 1879 he stated he now believed that Custer et. al. was already dead". {Likely not} "I planted a guidon at the highest point that looked over that country. Some of the officers say that the battlefield was in sight, but I know positively that it was not"
Q. State whether at that highest point you saw any evidence of fighting or hear the sounds of any firing. A. I saw no such evidence nor heard any firing.
Q. What was the purpose of placing the guidon, on that high point? A. To present an object to attract the attention of General Custer’s command, if it was in sight. Q. Then in your opinion his command was then alive? A. I thought so."This has already been discussed"?! Uh, yeah, it has already been discussed, by numerous scholars, but you brush aside their research and keep repeating the Reno-Benteen version of the battle. You say you've read all the books written by professional historians on the battle in the last 20 years, yet you repeatedly reject their findings and say nothing about the evidence they've presented to support those findings. Regarding Benteen's RCOI testimony, okay, let me rephrase: Benteen told the RCOI that at the time, on Weir Point, he thought Custer's command was still alive. However, when recalled to the stand, Benteen claimed that Custer's command was destroyed by the time Martin arrived with Custer's written order. You don't see a major contradiction there? Really? And what was Benteen's basis for his claim that Custer's command was destroyed by the time Martin arrived with the written order? Weir took off toward Custer without orders from Reno Hill because he and many others could hear firing and knew that Custer was in a serious fight. Benteen said he neither saw nor heard any signs of fighting while on Weir Point. Yeah, and he also claimed that he never heard any heavy firing to the north while approaching Reno Hill or while on Reno Hill. Anyone who believes Benteen's ludicrous claim that Custer's unit was destroyed by the time Martin arrived with Custer's written order has no business talking about the battle in a public forum. Here is the rest of Gordon Richard's reply to the claim that Custer had no plan and/or that Reno did not know the plan: At the inquiry, Sergeant Davern testified that Cooke said to Reno, “Girard comes back and reports the Indian village three miles ahead and moving. The General directs you to take your three companies and drive everything before you.”12 In answer to the question, “Was anything else said?” Davern replied, “Yes, sir; Colonel Benteen will be on your left and will have the same instructions.”13 Lieutenant Edgerly, in his papers, says, “Major Reno was ordered to ‘march straight to the village, attack any Indians you may meet, and you will be supported.’ Capt. Benteen was ordered to move to the left at an angle of about forty-five degrees from Reno’s direction.14 Plus we have Major Henry R. Lemly’s assertion that Lieutenant Wallace told him that when Custer separated from Reno his plan was to march to the lower end of the village, crossing at one of the lower fords, and to make his attack there. His attack was to be the signal for Reno, just as soon as the latter saw or heard him, to press forward in the reasonable expectation that the combined pressure would stampede the Indians out of their villages.15Perhaps the most significant evidence in terms of Benteen’s intended role is Lieutenant Varnum’s letter to his parents saying, “Just then Colonel Benteen and three companies came in from a trip they had endeavored to make to the rear of the village,”16 which is endorsed by part of Captain Moylan’s testimony where he is questioned regarding support for Reno:Q. But at the time you were moving down this bottom and engaged in the timber and in going back to the top of the hill, was there any belief as to where the balance of the command was? What was your opinion? A. My opinion was that it was on the rear of our trail and was coming to our assistance. Q. And Captain Benteen’s command? A. That I do not know so much about. It passed away to the left and I thought might come in through the foothills.17It is likely then that Benteen was meant to come to the village up the west bank of the river, possibly via the south fork of Reno Creek, as the entry to the Little Horn river valley course was almost certainly too far for Custer to have wanted him separated from the rest of the command.Testimony which promotes the lack of an attack strategy is therefore false, contradicted by the weight of evidence demonstrating that Custer had planned the envelopment; but were the orders given by Custer to his senior subordinates as senseless as Benteen claimed? The only order Reno received was to attack the village and his command was supposed to be Custer’s holding force, but it didn’t hold for long.Benteen’s column was ordered to the left to eventually find its way to the west of the river, probably via the south fork of Reno Creek, to block anyone from the camps fleeing that way and with the ultimate task of attacking the village from the south wherever he saw fit. By his own admission, Benteen disobeyed his orders by returning to the main trail instead of crossing one more hill into the valley of the south fork. Both officers therefore, had ample reason to avoid the truth at the court of inquiry, and we need to look at what Custer was trying to achieve with his immediate command in the light of what he expected his subordinates to be doing.In his testimony at the court of inquiry Major Reno stated, “I moved forward in accordance with the orders received from Lieutenant Cooke to the head of the column. Soon after that Lieutenant Cooke came to me and said, ‘General Custer directs you to take as rapid a gait as you think prudent, and charge the village afterwards, and you will be supported by the whole outfit.'” He also said, “From the manner I received the order I could not conceive of any other manner of being supported except from the rear”; yet in his Report of July 5, 1876, he wrote, “After traveling over his trail, it is evident to me that Custer intended to support me by moving further down the stream and attacking the village in the flank.”18The latter comment was made, of course, in all rationality, without any idea that he would later have to justify his actions at a court of inquiry. The inference he made in his testimony was that Custer expected to follow him across the Little Horn but changed his mind and turned to the north. His report however, accurately describes Custer’s adherence to the envelopment plan, a plan that would have been known to both Reno and Benteen.Custer’s turn to the north was therefore pre-determined by the tactics Reno describes in his report, and not for any other reason. . . .Some writers have suggested that Fred Gerard’s news that the Indians were coming out to meet Reno prompted Custer to change his mind and move north instead of following Reno to attack the village. That theory is based on the idea that the warriors would stall the attack until their families had safely fled to the north and then flee themselves, the very scenario that was the biggest worry of all the military commanders. It was, in fact, their standard behavior in such circumstances, as Godfrey described:If the advance to the attack be made in daylight it is next to impossible that a near approach can be made without discovery. In all our previous experiences, when the immediate presence of the troops was once known to them, the warriors swarmed to the attack, and resorted to all kinds of ruses to mislead the troops, to delay the advance toward their camp or village, while the squaws and children secured what personal effects they could, drove off the pony herd, and by flight put themselves beyond danger, and then scattering made successful pursuit next to impossible.19 Being aware of this meant that Custer was not only unsurprised by Gerard’s news, but also delighted, because at that point the Indians were behaving as he expected them to. His turn to the north was therefore in response to what he had anticipated would happen, and he wanted to get to the northern end of the village to attack and crush the warriors between his battalions and those of Reno and Benteen. Initially of course, his movement was in the form of a reconnaissance-in-force, or, probably more accurately, a movement- to-contact—much like what would nowadays be called a “search and destroy” mission. (Gordon Richard, “Death of the Valiant: Another Look at Custer’s Fight,” in Gordon Harper, The Fights on the Little Horn: 50 Years of Research into Custer's Last Stand, Casemate Publishers, 2014, pp. 259-262)
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 30, 2024 5:03:57 GMT -6
Shan,
IMO, there is nothing wrong with referring to/relying on primary accounts - including the Rees. Like most sources - it is when their statements disagree with someone's own notions that they are rediculed.
As shown in a couple threads - their actions and statements are consistent and have lots of 1st hand confirmation.
|
|
|
Post by mikegriffith1 on Jul 30, 2024 6:54:15 GMT -6
How many times will you mis-represent what was stated, and where? I COVERED THIS TWICE ALREADY. You'll have to read it again. Clue: post Benteen's statements that he was on Weir Point AND that he thought Custer was still fighting. Huh? ? You yourself just quoted from Benteen's RCOI testimony where he said that when he planted the guideon he thought Custer's command was still alive. Let's read it again: Q. What was the purpose of placing the guidon, on that high point?
A. To present an object to attract the attention of General Custer’s command, if it was in sight.
Q. Then in your opinion his command was then alive?
A. I thought so.So when Benteen placed the guideon on the high point on Weir Point--that's the "then" in question--he thought Custer's command was still alive. What don't you understand here? And you say you've read Donovan, Harper, Stiles, Philbrick, Tucker, etc.? If you agree that Benteen's claim was a lie, then how in the world can you trust his other claims regarding the battle? Why do you keep citing all of his other claims as if they are reliable? We're not talking about some little white lie or some slight bending of the truth. We're talking about an egregious lie and an utterly bogus claim. And if you agree that Benteen lied about when Custer's command was destroyed, you must also reject Reno's similarly bogus claim that Custer's unit was already destroyed by the time Reno left the timber. Yet, you keep citing Reno's claims as if they are reliable. Uh, first you said that Benteen did not actually claim that Custer's command was still alive when Benteen reached Weir Point, that he merely said that he "thought" this was the case. A fair point but a point that does not really help your argument, especially since Benteen provided no basis for his claim that Custer's men were dead when Martin arrived with Custer's order. Then, oddly, you changed gears and asked me to back up my point that Benteen said he believed Custer's command was still alive when he planted the guideon on Weir Point. This is the kind of discrediting confusion you get when someone is rabidly determined to avoid plain facts they don't like. So "now" I believe Reno? Really? Such a comment suggests you are not here for genuine, serious discussion, but to engage in polemics and evasion and to defend your position no matter what. As I've said several times, (1) Reno's battle report contains a number of lies, distortions, and omissions, and (2) when Reno wrote his battle report, he did not yet realize all the lies he needed to tell to try to conceal his cowardice and incompetence. Yes, I believe Reno's battle-report statement that he knew Custer would attack from the flank because this statement is supported by other evidence, because it reflects Custer's known preferred assault tactic, and because Reno did not yet realize that he would later need to make the absurd claims that he expected Custer to support him only from the rear and that he did not know that Custer was to his right front. "Zzzzz"?? Right. You seem to have no intention of objectively analyzing Richard's arguments and evidence. Yes, I would definitely put Gordon Richard in the ranks of genuine Custer scholars. Let's make this easy: Just name me a single professional historian or genuine Custer scholar in the last 20 years who has defended the Reno-Benteen version of the battle--specifically, who has argued, ala Fred Wagner, that Benteen did "absolutely nothing wrong," that Reno's retreat from the timber was wise and justified, that Reno's timber retreat was a well-organized military charge, that Reno and Benteen were telling the truth when they said they heard no heavy firing to the north, that Reno was telling the truth when he claimed nobody told him about hearing such heavy firing, that Reno and Benteen truly had "no idea" what had happened to Custer until two days after the battle, that Custer disobeyed Terry's "orders," etc., etc. Just name one. I won't ask you to name a historian or genuine Custer scholar who buys Reno and Benteen's ludicrous claims that Custer's command was already destroyed either by the time Martin reached Benteen with Custer's order or by the time Reno left the timber. I should ask you to name such a historian/scholar, since those bald-faced lies clearly prove that Reno and Benteen are very untrustworthy sources, but I won't. Instead, just name me a single professional historian or genuine Custer scholar in the last 20 years who has defended the arguments presented in the paragraph above.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 30, 2024 7:32:50 GMT -6
Who said Benteen planted a Guidon on Weir Point? Please post their statement.* When did Benteen say he planted a Guidon? Please post a statement. Benteen certainly did say he thought Custer was still alive - which is why he planted a Guidon- where and when he did.
*On edit: of course I mean from someone who was there. (take your time won't be easy)
Yep: J41 Q. What was the purpose of placing the guidon, on that high point? A. To present an object to attract the attention of General Custer’s command, if it was in sight. Q. Then in your opinion his command was then alive? A. I thought so.
You originally said "fighting'...
|
|
|
Post by mikegriffith1 on Jul 30, 2024 12:57:19 GMT -6
Who said Benteen planted a Guidon on Weir Point? Please post their statement.* When did Benteen say he planted a Guidon? Please post a statement. Benteen certainly did say he thought Custer was still alive - which is why he planted a Guidon- where and when he did. *On edit: of course I mean from someone who was there. Yep: J41 Q. What was the purpose of placing the guidon, on that high point? A. To present an object to attract the attention of General Custer’s command, if it was in sight.Q. Then in your opinion his command was then alive? A. I thought so.You originally said "fighting'. No, he didn't. Please post a Benteen statement saying he didn't see any fighting from Weir Point. This is getting silly. You are splitting hairs and parsing words, and appear to be forgetting things that you just posted. So you see a huge difference between saying that "Custer's command was still fighting" and "Custer's command was still alive"? Really? Do you really? You said, "Please post a Benteen statement saying he didn't see any fighting from Weir Point." Huh? What? You yourself posted a quote from Benteen's testimony in your previous reply where Benteen said exactly this. Let me repeat Benteen's statement that you yourself quoted to me: Q. State whether at that highest point you saw any evidence of fighting or hear the sounds of any firing.
A. I saw no such evidence nor heard any firing.Does this refresh your memory? Remember this? Again, you posted it. Moving on. . . . Earlier I talked about Dr. Charles Kuhlman, considered by all to be one of the all-time greats in Custer scholarship. Let us consider some of Dr. Kuhlman's conclusions found in his famous book Legend Into History: The Custer Mystery: * Reno and Benteen could have saved Custer's command if they had moved earlier and resolutely. * Benteen lied about his orders. Custer did not send Benteen on an open-ended valley hunt but only wanted him to scout the upper part of the LBH Valley and then to return to the trail. * Reno and Benteen were "self-proclaimed deaf" when it came to hearing the firing in the north. * Reno and Benteen lied about the movement from Weir Peaks (Weir Point) because they sought to cover up the fact that they were surprised when the Indians galloped toward them after finishing off Custer. * Reno lied about ordering Weir to move toward Custer, and in fact Reno and Weir had a bitter argument over the matter. * Reno actually did propose leaving the wounded behind on Reno Hill and fleeing with only the able-bodied men. Kuhlman noted that Benteen himself admitted in writing that Reno made this proposal. * Benteen's tale about the packers stealing supplies was false. Benteen slandered them in an effort to discredit their testimony about Reno's drunkenness. * Reno Hill was not a very good defensive position. * Reno's retreat from the timber was incompetently done, and Reno should have used bugle calls to ensure that all soldiers knew to leave. These and other conclusions put Kuhlman rather close to the scholarly consensus that has formed over the last 20 years. Some of Kuhlman's findings, such as his defense of leaving the timber and his minimizing of Reno's drinking during the battle, are now rejected by the professional historians and genuine Custer scholars who have written on the Last Stand over the last two decades, but many of Kuhlman's conclusions are squarely within the scholarly mainstream that has emerged.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 30, 2024 14:24:09 GMT -6
Itis NOT silly - this is vital stuff. Of course, yes! Because of what Benteen ACTUALLY said. And because I know the views are quite different from different locations.Vital : Benteen stated he 'saw no evidence of fighting from the highest point - where he placed a guidon'. Seems he wasn't lying. You CAN NOT see the battlefield from where he planted the guidon.So...let's go over it AGAIN... Herendeen, RCOI Q) What is the character of the country towards “B”? A) I claim that what is called Weir’s Hill is the highest point on the ridge in that vicinity. Q) That circular mark is to indicate the position Major Reno took. How far from there can you see the country towards “B”? A) To that highest point, Weir’s Hill, probably half a mile down.
DeRudio, RCOI 1879 A. …General Custer, Lieut. Cook and another man I could not recognize came to the highest point of the bluff and waved their hats and made motions like they were cheering Q. Where was that? A. It was on the highest point on the right bank of the creek just below where Dr. DeWolf was killed. {he marked it pt 7} Q. About how far do you think it was from the point on the bluff occupied by Maj. Reno? A. I think it could not have been more than 5 or 600 yards. Q. Was it the highest point down the stream? A. Yes sir and up stream too it was the highest point around there.I went on the top of it afterwards on the 27 with Capt. Benteen
Windolph “Some of Renos men told in excited tones how from the valley below they had seen Cpt Yates’ white horse troop…Others had said they had seen Custer and 1 or 2 men looking down from a hilltop”
Martin, various Q. That place from which you saw the village and children, dogs and ponies - was it the highest point down the river below where Major Reno made his stand? A. Yes sir, the highest hill the very highest point around there. Q. Can you point out on the map in what direction General Custer went after he got to the point 7? {7=highest point DeRudio saw GC} A. General Custer struck to the right then struck a ravine and went down to the river.
“Custer first halted on Weir‘s hill and took a look at village…"
Edgerly ...moved towards...Indians whom we had already seen from the highest point {re: pt 7} ...We moved out and went to a point which I now mark “9.” “When Edgerly turned down to right down the hollow {pt 8}, Weir standing on high point signaled that Indians were coming”
WMC, circa 1908-1910... "It is 1700ft from Reno’s retreat up to Weir's Hill” "Distance Weir Hill to 1st Edgerly Peak is 2500ft" "from Weir Hill can see the Custodians house but not the monument nor any part of Custer battlefield"
Benteen, RCOI A. I planted a guidon at the highest point that looked over that country. Some of the officers say that the battlefield was in sight, but I know positively that it was not, having gone over it two or three times sinceQ. State whether at that highest point you saw any evidence of fighting or hear the sounds of any firing.A. I saw no such evidence nor heard any firing.Q. When you met Trumpeter Martin did he report to you on which side of the river General Custer’s column was?A. Not at that time. He did after we had reached that highest point at the figure “7". {“G”, Weir's Hill} Benteen, letter July 4 '76 Weir's Company was sent out to communicate with Custer, but it was driven back.We then showed our full force on the hills with Guidons flying, that Custer might see us, but we could see nothing of him, couldn't hear much firing, but could see immense body of Indians coming to attack us from both asides of the river.Benteen, narrative, Harper “from the top of the highest point in vicinity, saw Weir’s troop returning, hordes of Indians hurrying them somewhat.”
Herendeen I claim that what is called Weir’s Hill is the highest point on the ridge in that vicinity.
Benteen, Letter to Col Goldin,1892 " While enroute to the highest point on the river bluffs in that vicinity, Major Reno kept his trumpeter pretty busily engaged in sounding the 'Halt' for the purpose of bringing my command to a stand. However, I paid no heed whatever to the signal, but went to the highest point of bluffs, the battalion being in columns of fours. ON arriving at elevation, I then had my first glimpse of the Indian village from the height. Still I saw enough to cause me to think that perhaps this time we had bitten off quite as much as we would be able to well chew.Then I got the guidon of my own trooop and jammed it down in a pile of stones which were on the high point, thinking perhaps the fluttering of same might attract attention of Custer's commands if any were in close proximity. Reno had gotten up to the point where I was. However, I ordered French to put his troop in line on a bluff near, which was at right angles with the course of the river, and then for the purpose of showing where our command was, if there were any other bodies of our troops in sight."{ Reno never went to the peaks. See Hare.} Rocks on the ridges, with Weir’ HILL behind; Weir's HILL - the highest point in that vicinity, where Custer and Benteen 1st glimpsed the village. Benteen Sketch "G" The high point from which Custer got his first view of the village" {see Martin, pt 7, Weir's Hill}RCOI Q. How far was that point to which yourself and the advance of the command arrived from Major Reno’s position, on the hill?A. About a mile. Q. How far down the river was the furthest point reached by any company under Major Reno?A. About half a mile below that highest point.Weir's HILL is about half a mile above Weir Peaks...it is where "Captain Weir" went to directing Edgerly, where Reno went to during the advance, where Hare went to converse with Reno, where Weir 1st fell back to, and where Benteen met Reno after Benteen’s VERY brief time near the Peaks when those 2 decided to retreat. It is also "G". And "pt 7". See Martin, DeRudio, Windolph, Edgerly, and pt “5” see Hare. It is 1700’ to where Godfrey set up his skirimish, to save the command. (at Reno retreat up point. See Godfrey, Hare, Benteen). Benteen planted a guidon here. There is NO view of the battlefield from there. Weir POINT is the extent of the Weir/Edgerly advance...and is about a mile below Reno Hill. It is about a half mile below Weir’s HILL. (It is also "pt 9". See Edgerly, Wylie, Harrison). There IS a view of the battlefield from there. Harrison, Wylie “Weir and D Company had stopped back at the south end of this sugarloaf, and Edgerly said he would go out to the end of the sugarloaf” “Men dismounted and put horses behind Edgerly peaks and behind hill to east and men formed line over this hill from east to west”Godfrey, WMC, RCOI “in the advance towards Custer, D co. went first then M K & H. These men were at intervals along the high ridge and two high peaks”“Benteen did not remain there long, but went back and joined Reno.”Q. At the time you moved down to Captain Weir’s position to the point known as Weir’s Hill, did you look in the direction of the place of the massacre? A. Yes, sir. Q. Could you see it? A. I could see the general lay of the ground…A. No, sir, I don’t think there was. I saw no evidences of fighting at that time.Re: the retreat "after passing the long ridge some distance, dismounted his {Godfrey} men, forming a skirmish line at right angle to the river...CO K was guarding ridge in rear of Weir Hill about 1/4-1/2 mile south of Weir Hill"... “A. Captain Weir and Captain French were the only ones who engaged the Indians till within 3 or 4 hundred yards of the final stand. Then Captain Godfrey engaged them.” “Co. K., which dismounted at the point where Reno retreated up the bluffs (500 yards north of Reno hill) and held the Indians in check.”
Hare, RCOI, WMC He {Reno} was going to that highest point when I went away. Q. Did he {Weir} come back and join Major Reno’s column on the hill marked “5”? A. Yes, sir.
“Benteen & Reno were discussing matters (they were standing about 1/2 mile in rear of D)..."Benteen This company, when we got back to the place where we were corralled, had left that point and were in the line coming back as rapidly as were any of the others. I then sent Captain Godfrey’s company back to another hill to check the Indians till we formed
Reno, report “I moved to the summit of the highest bluff, but seeing and hearing nothing sent Captain Weir with his company to open communications with him." {he actually sent Hare to Weir. see Hare, pt 5} Reno, RCOI Q. Do you remember about a guidon being placed at a point termed Captain Weir’s hill? A. It was done. Q. This guidon you speak of being planted as a rallying point for someone, where was it planted? A. On the top of the highest hill.
Weir Peaks and Weir Hill were all at 3500' elevation in 1891. (See USGeo Marshall) So - Know what the main difference is between Weir POINT and Weir HILL? About half a mile.Told you Benteen was a cunning witness. He KNEW where he planted a guidon and that it offered NO view of the battlefield. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 31, 2024 3:02:05 GMT -6
It wasn't Custer who DeRudio saw on the bluffs from cover in the timber. That is certainty and he was simply mistaken. This has become scuttlebutt amongst generations of researchers, students, and those working with blunt axes. De Rudio went to the place he saw the figures and described his route to it. Getting to the bottom, of the point being made - Did Benteen reach terrain from which he cpould see hordes of Indians begin moving towards the soldiers, from Custer's battleground? If so, then this was not from the supposed Weir's Hill. It was either from Weir Point or the hills clustered beyond it; or it was from high ground upriver which viewed over Cedat Coulee along Nye-cartwright Ridge. So, did Benteen advance to terrain at Weir Point? Did he raise his flag on Weir's Hill? Why did he unsaddle his command after arriving on Reno Hill? Why did, or did, Capt. Weir advance without orders, and where did Weir go to? Where did Weir see Edgerley go to? Who were the scouts returning along the bluffs from Weir Point that Cpl. Wylie passed whilst marching out with Edgerley, to find Custer? What had those scouts seen to the north from the highground offering a view downriver? Had those scouts tried to go north to join Custer? Why did Benteen allow Reno to back down to the river into immense danger; or had the Indians in the valley attacking Reno's command departed and ridden downriver at that time? Was it not still, terribly, terribly, dangerous for the senior Officer present to go back down to the terrain he just fled from where Officers of his command lay mutilated and hacked to bits and pieces? Did Benteen, who was recalled to examination at least three or four times, at Chicago; candidly divulge what he knew of actual events or was he prone to fisherman's waffle - since he had actually been accused of worse failings than Reno and had quite definately beyond any shadow of doubt, disobeyed the verbal and written orders given to him on 25th June 1876, by his commanding Officer. Benteen did disobey his orders, understood that he did, and admitted it to the expedition commander, on 27th June 1876. Whilst Custer's instructions from Terry form the basis of adnauseum discussion by those who don't understand what Terry did, that is not the case with Benteen who disobeyed Custer's orders and was quite openly humiliating, about it when having to discuss it. I could not obey my orders because Reno and Custer were stupid female dogs! Sir! Pass the cherry brandy and my baseball bat, will you......... Don't you love this stuff...... Custer or Cluster........
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 31, 2024 3:15:42 GMT -6
HR, we have been over this. But AGAIN He was near it. He did not go as far as say D. He went far enough to see indians. And it was not for very long. H was last in line along the bluffs. Maybe - Godfrey mentions it. " it was seen that Indians were coming over from Custer ridge to meet them". Benteen specifically saw them in the gorges, around the bluffs, in the valley…he said “it was a hell of a place to fight indians”, whhich is why he went back to Reno at 5. He also saw them pursuing Weir retreat, while he was at 5 / Weir's Hill. Benteen did not see the battleground from his advance point. Benteen told Reno, while at Weir's Hill, that they should retreat because indians could use the river flat and the coulees to get around them. On reaching the highest bluff in the vicinity, I saw what I estimated to be about 900 Indians in the valley from which Reno had just been driven. The officer who had preceded me on his “own hook” with his troop had gone down a gorge with it. Indians were riding around the bluff on either side of this troop, signaling..{Benteen seeing D in Cedar...see Edgerly; MAYBE getting to pt 6} Hare Benteen and Reno were discussing matters. They were standing about 1/2 mile in rear of Co. D, and Benteen suggested to Reno that they fall back as they were in a poor place for defense. Benteen remarked that Indians could pass around them to the east and also by river flat at the west and would soon be in their rear if did not fall back.The DeRudio sighting was confirmed…see Windolph, on first reaching Reno retreaters… Windolph “ Some of Renos men told in excited tones how from the valley below they had seen Cpt Yates’ white horse troop… Others had said they had seen Custer and 1 or 2 men looking down from a hilltop”
Nope. NO ONE in the advance went beyond Weir Point. Benteen less of all. See everyone who was there, Edgerly, Wylie, Harrison, Godfrey. D dismounted at the crescent. Period. M K along the peaks. H was strung out along the ridge behind (ie furthest back) Wylie Men dismounted and put horses behind Edgerly peaks and behind hill to east and men formed line over this hill from east to west,Godfrey, WMC, RCOI “in the advance towards Custer, D co. went first then M K & H. These men were at intervals along the high ridge and two high peaks”“Benteen did not remain there long, but went back and joined Reno.”Yes. He was there “with guidons flying”. “It was done”. he "got the guidon of my own trooop and jammed it down in a pile of stones" Because Indians were firing on Reno group and Reno command was still retreating. They set up a skirmish. As did McDougall when he came in almost an hour later. Yes. Because he heard firing down stream. Weir went to the highest point @weir's Hill/pt 7. D mounted and followed. D went to the right like Custer. Then after directing Edgerly around in the coulee to the right, Weir followed D, who had circled back to the ridge, to Weir Peaks. He dismounted at the crescent and stayed there when it was pointed out they were indians at the battleground. Weir eventually returned to Reno on Weir’s Hill / point 5 by himself. “Men dismounted and put horses behind Edgerly peaks and behind hill to east and men formed line over this hill from east to west, seeing many horsemen over on distant ridge with guidons flying Weir said "That is Custer over there and mounted up ready to go over, when Sergt. Flanagan said: "Here, Capt. you had better take a look through the glasses, I think those are Indians. " Weir did so and changed his mind about leaving the place. Accordingly the men were dismounted and the horses led behind the hill.”After being at the highest pt 7? Down the coulee to the right. And then circle back around to the bluffs ahead of him, then to Edgerly Peaks. The furthest. Edgerly "We moved out along the ridge, the highest point, that point “7,” and then we moved down the valley in the general direction of the point “8.” We moved from Major Reno’s position about a mile and a half, and then swung around on those swells and came up again and met the other companies coming up. We moved out and went to a point which I now mark “9.” “After going a few hundred yards I swung off to the right with the troop and went into a little valley which must have been the one followed by Custer and his men, or nearly parallel to it, and moved right towards the great body of the Indians, whom we had already seen from the highest point. After we had gone a short distance down the valley, Col. Weir, who had remained to our left, on the bluff, saw a large number of Indians coming toward us, and motioned with his hand for me to swing around with the troop to where he was, which I did.”
|
|
|
Post by mikegriffith1 on Jul 31, 2024 3:40:15 GMT -6
No, it's not. No I'm not. You're just not paying attention, nor providing the requested statements. Its ok..not an easy task. Of course, yes! Because of what Benteen ACTUALLY said. And because I know the views are quite different from different locations. Benteen stated he 'saw no evidence of fighting from the highest point - where he placed a guidon'. Seems maybe he wasn't lying. Of course - I posted it. I do not see any mention of "Weir Point" in there. Do you? So...let's go over it AGAIN... Herendeen, RCOI Q) What is the character of the country towards “B”? A) I claim that what is called Weir’s Hill is the highest point on the ridge in that vicinity.
[SNIP] Weir's HILL is about half a mile above Weir Peaks...it is where "Captain Weir" went to directing Edgerly, where Reno went to during the advance, where Hare went to converse with Reno, where Weir 1st fell back to, and where Benteen met Reno after Benteen’s VERY brief time near the Peaks ("2-3 minutes") when those 2 decided to retreat. It is also "G". And "pt 7". See Martin, DeRudio, Windolph, Edgerly, and pt “5” see Hare. It is 1700’ to where Godfrey set up his skirimish, to save the command. (at Reno retreat up point. See Godfrey, Hare, Benteen) There is NO view of the battlefield from there. Weir POINT is the extent of the Weir/Edgerly advance...and is about a mile below Reno Hill. It is about a half mile below Weir’s HILL. (It is also "pt 9". See Edgerly, Wylie, Harrison). There IS a view of the battlefield from there. [SNIP] Weir Peaks and Weir Hill were all at 3500' elevation in 1891. (See USGeo Marshall) So - Know what the main difference is between Weir POINT and Weir HILL? [SNIP] Oh my goodness. Sorry, but this is more silliness. Surely, surely it should have occurred to you that I am using the term "Weir Point" to refer to the area of the hills/peaks that are also called by his name, e.g., "Weir Peaks." Yes, of course, I understand there was more than one elevation named after Weir. "Weir Point" refers to the area of those elevations. Charles Kuhlman used "Weir Point" in this manner--he referred to the area of the peaks as "Weir Point." So does James Donovan.
You say you've read Harper, Philbrick, Donovan, Stiles, Tucker, Utley, etc., yet you continue to make comments that indicate otherwise, or else that indicate you've taken it upon yourself to simply dismiss their research and findings.
If you've read Gordon Harper's book, then I have to wonder why we are even having this discussion. Let's read what Harper says about Benteen's claims regarding Custer's command and what Benteen did and saw at "the Weir Point area":French, Godfrey and Benteen reached the Weir Point area. . . .In both his testimony and his later writings, Benteen claimed to have gone to the highest points and to have planted a guidon and had his company front into line, so that any troops in the vicinity might see the position. There is a smattering of truth in these often-repeated extravagant claims, but the overall picture is totally false and misleading. . . . In his first narrative, Benteen wrote only that: “from the top of the highest point in vicinity, saw Weir’s troop returning, hordes of Indians hurrying them somewhat.” He expands on this point in his second narrative:On reaching the highest bluff in the vicinity, I saw what I estimated to be about 900 Indians in the valley from which Reno had just been driven. The officer who had preceded me on his “own hook” with his troop had gone down a gorge with it. Indians were riding around the bluff on either side of this troop, signaling. I then formed a troop, dismounted, at right angles with the river, and one on the bluffs, parallel with the river, so that, if Custer’s forces were near, our position would be defined.It is in his Reno Inquiry testimony that Benteen told the story of planting the guidon:I went down the same direction that Captain Weir had gone, to the highest point of land, and had the troops by file on the river bluffs, and a company across at right angles from that line, von another ridge, with the intention of showing to General Custer, if he were down the river, our exact location as near as possible. . . .
That was my first sight of the village, after I arrived at that high point. That was the only point from which it could be seen, and I saw, as I supposed, about 1,800 tepees. There was no sign of any troops, or of any fighting going on. Nothing of the kind could be seen. The troops were by file on a line of river bluffs, and, as I have stated, another company was formed at right angles on another ridge. I planted a guidon at the highest point that looked over that country.
Some of the officers say that the battlefield was in sight; but I know positively that it was not, having gone over it two or three times since. . . . [The purpose of the guidon was] to present an object to attract the attention of General Custer’s command, if it was in sight. . . . It could not be seen as far as the horses [could be seen]. It might attract attention by its fluttering, or by the point of brass on the end, though the horses would be more noticeable objects than the guidon.When asked directly if he thought Custer was still alive at that time, Benteen replied: “I thought so.” Contrast this response with his gratuitous statement when questioned about the order received via Trumpeter Martin: “I received an order to ‘Come on, be quick, big village, bring packs, bring packs.’ He then had found [the village]. I wish to say before that order that I believe that General Custer and his whole command were dead.”Benteen’s supposed display of the guidon and having collected the troops on the highest point of land have in recent years seriously colored published histories of the campaign, with many historians using these assumed incidents to attribute motives and actions to Custer, who, they say, may have seen the men and horses. In fact, only Benteen mentioned any of this, while the bulk of the evidence is that he was never on the highest ground with or without his company and that he in truth was not at the advanced position for very long at all.His own contradictory testimony is absolutely clear on this point and is corroborated by others. Benteen himself testified: “We had not been more than 2 or 3 minutes at that high point before the gorge was filled with Indians rushing towards us. Then we fell back to where we were corralled.” Lieutenant Edgerly swore that: “After a little while Captain Benteen moved back with his company towards the corral,” and Edward Godfrey told Walter Camp that: “Benteen did not remain there long, but went back and joined Reno.”While Benteen claimed to have been unable to see Custer’s battlefield or any sign of troops or fighting, while in his advanced position, several others who were there have left accounts of what they did see. (Fights on the Little Horn, pp. 179-181)I had not even gotten around to addressing the veracity of Benteen's claims regarding his actions at Weir Point. My point has been that Benteen told the RCOI two contradictory things about when Custer's command was destroyed, and that his claim that Custer's command was already destroyed when Martin arrived with Custer's order is ludicrous.
Yet, here you are defending Benteen's veracity ("seems maybe he wasn't lying"), never mind that he told the RCOI the whopping lie that Custer's command had already perished when Martin arrived with the "come on . . . be quick" order.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 31, 2024 3:53:04 GMT -6
Thank You, Mike. If you think Benteen actually raising the Guidon at Weir's HILL, which is 1/2 mile behind Weirs Peaks - and what the means re: his testimony, is a small tree - cheers! I think its huge. Showing and knowing this happened where it actually did shows just how wrong so many "historians" have been for years...just like re: Custer's trail. I have seen a couple people get it right. LOTS of others still dont/wont get it! That's nice for them. Please note that “ Weir POINT” IN NO WAY REFERS TO WEIR'S HILL. They are about a half mile apart. Hmm…not sure you are really getting that yet. They are quite different in location and what went on at each. See above for just some of it. See Custer lookout re: Weir’s HILL. Yep. I am glad you/Harper agree. Which is why I prefer statements from people who were actually there. WE HAVE A BINGO!!!!! YES! EXACTLY!!! Benteen was NOT at the highest ground at Weir Peaks with his troop, or at the least was not near there long at all. Whoop - there it is!See my posts above, and earlier stating the same: BENTEEN did NOT plant a guidon AT WEIR POINT.
Wrong. AGAIN - Beneteen did NOT CLAIM THAT! THAT IS THE POINT!!He claimed he couldn't see evidence of/fighting " from the highest point". As shown above the highest point was NOT his most advanced position, nor was it at Weir Peaks. Benteen returned to Reno at the highest point AKA Weir's Hill VERY soon after being near the peaks. Godfrey “Benteen did not remain there long, but went back and joined Reno.”
Benteen did travel near Weir Peaks with his troop...H was last in line of the 4 most-advancing troops. Edgerly said he did see Benteen on the bluffs after his loop-around. "When I got up on the bluff I saw Col. Benteen, Captain French and Lieutenant Godfrey coming toward us with their troops."Benteen did not could not see the battleground from Weir's Hill, which was the highest point. No one could. YOU CAN SEE THE VILLAGE THOUGH (at least part of it - see Martin re: Custer at Weir's Hill/pt 7/the highest point, Benteen's 1st glimpse and "G", and WMC and others).
A. I planted a guidon at the highest point that looked over that country. Some of the officers say that the battlefield was in sight, but I know positively that it was not, having gone over it two or three times since
Benteen is proven correct. The highest point was identified AND located by A LOT of witnesses - it was Weir's Hill.You can not see the battleground from there. BENTEEN planted a guidon AT WEIR'S HILL.Q. State whether at that highest point you saw any evidence of fighting or hear the sounds of any firing. A. I saw no such evidence nor heard any firing.Yep. (well "saw" anyway)
|
|
|
Post by mikegriffith1 on Jul 31, 2024 6:52:14 GMT -6
Thank You, Mike. I will - if & when someone who was there actually shows I am wrong....shows everyone else who was there was wrong. Until then all the primary statements from those there confirm each other. As for others admitting they were wrong? We shall soon see. Hasn't happened yet. IF you think Benteen actually raising the Guidon at Weir's HILL, which is 1/2 mile behind Weirs Peaks - and what the means re: his testimony, is a small tree - cheers! LOTS of others still dont/wont get it! Yep. I am glad you agree. Which is why I prefer statements from people who were there. WE HAVE A BINGO!!!!! YES! EXACTLY!!! Benteen was NOT at the highest ground at Weir Peaks with his troop, or at the least was not there long at all. ("2-3mins") Whoop - there it is!See my posts above, and earlier stating the same: BENTEEN did NOT plant a guidon AT WEIR POINT.
Wrong. AGAIN - Beneteen did NOT CLAIM THAT! THATS THE POINT!!He claimed he couldn't see evidence of/fighting " from the highest point" - as shown above the highest point was NOT his most advanced position, nor was it at Weir Peaks. Benteen returned to Reno at the highest point AKA Weir's Hill VERY quickly after being near the peaks. Godfrey “Benteen did not remain there long, but went back and joined Reno.”
Benteen did travel near Weir Peaks with his troop...H was last in line of the 4 most-advancing troops. Edgerly said he did see Benteen on the bluffs after his loop-around. "When I got up on the bluff I saw Col. Benteen, Captain French and Lieutenant Godfrey coming toward us with their troops."Benteen did not could not see the battleground from Weir's Hill, which was the highest point. No one could. YOU CAN SEE THE VILLAGE THOUGH (at least part of it - see Martin re: Custer at Weir's Hill/pt 7/the highest point, Benteen's "G", and WMC and others).
A. I planted a guidon at the highest point that looked over that country. Some of the officers say that the battlefield was in sight, but I know positively that it was not, having gone over it two or three times since
Benteen is proven correct. The highest point was identified AND located by A LOT of witnesses - it was Weir's Hill.You can not see the battleground from there. BENTEEN planted a guidon AT WEIR'S HILL.Q. State whether at that highest point you saw any evidence of fighting or hear the sounds of any firing. A. I saw no such evidence nor heard any firing.Yep. Based on your comments, I don't think you've done half the reading you claim you've done. I’d rather not spend time dealing with your scatter-shot special pleading, nit-picking, and evasion. Instead, allow me to try to bring the discussion about Benteen’s claims regarding Weir Point and the status of Custer’s command back to a meaningful, factual basis. Benteen lied to the RCOI about his actions on Weir Point and about what he saw and heard there. It is curious that you continue to assume that Benteen did not lie on these matters. Benteen planted no guideon anywhere. He never mentioned this tale until the RCOI. He did not even imply such an action in his battle report. Yet, you say you’ve read Harper. Benteen told the RCOI that while on Weir Point, he believed Custer’s command was still alive, but then, when recalled to the stand, he turned around and claimed that Custer’s command had already perished by the time Martin arrived with Custer’s written order. He made no effort to reconcile those two contradictory statements, and he offered no substantive basis for his bogus claim that Custer’s men were already dead when Martin arrived with Custer’s order. We could go on and on about Benteen’s lies. For example, in his battle report, he claimed he did not cross the river because he had “a large element of recruits” in his battalion. That is bunk. He had only 14 recruits and not one of them was an 1876 recruit. In fact, Benteen had more Washita veterans than any other unit.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 31, 2024 6:55:02 GMT -6
Benteen was NOT on Weir Point! If he was near there it was very brief. So he didn't lie about it! Get it?!? Benteen July 4, '76Weir's Company was sent out to communicate with Custer, but it was driven back. We then showed our full force on the hills with Guidons flying, that Custer might see us, but we could see nothing of him, couldn't hear much firing, but could see immense body of Indians coming to attack us from both sides of the river.Reno, RCOI Q. Do you remember about a guidon being placed at a point termed Captain Weir’s hill? A. It was done.Harper "Benteen’s supposed display of the guidon and having collected the troops on the highest point of land have in recent years seriously colored published histories of the campaign, with many historians using these assumed incidents to attribute motives and actions to Custer...the bulk of the evidence is that he was never on the highest ground with or without his company and that he in truth was not at the advanced position for very long at all.
As confirmed numerous times. Benteen was indeed NOT on the highest ground at Weir Point planting a Guidon. Near there WAS his advanced position. He WAS at the highest point Weir's Hill "with Guidons flying"...aka "jammed it down in a pile of stones". Ah - my mistake. I thought here /\ you were actually stating - for a 3rd time - that Benteen had indeed planted a guidon - and it was at Weir Point. Sorry if that's not the case of what you were saying then. Or if you no longer think that. He did though. At Weir’s Hill. You would have been 1/2 right (just wrong in where and when). May be. Or not. Was he at Weir Point doing anything? At all? So it depends on what you are referring to and WHERE Benteen actually states it took place. I think there lies your confusion. Troops got orders near Weir Peaks - some to dismount (NOT D - they were already dismounted to the east). And around Weir's Hill. Someone gave them to them. However Benteen was soon on Weir’s Hill with troops and a jammed in guidon. Godfrey I know my company was about the third company and it was a little below on the hillside, and I went to the top to take a view of the country. While I was up there the Indians started back from some position they had away ahead, apparently about 3 or 4 miles. They started towards us and the companies were ordered to dismount. Let’s not. There is way too much of that already. Instead - how about addressing Custer failure in further supporting Reno by not pressing his flank attack? 1) What were Reno's orders? 2) HOW was Custer supposed to support Reno (if he was)? 3) Apparently Custer's flank attack failed and he retreated...WHY? 4) Custer did not press an attack at the flank. see 3. WHY? 5) After his attack failed, Custer left Reno in the lurch on his own & moved to & lingered at points north and east - WHY?
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 31, 2024 9:09:45 GMT -6
Aaaah............ it's a problem with spoons. Men of Bentten's company were able to see hordes of enemy come towards them from Custer's battlefield. So how did they do that and where was their battalion commander. The three companies at the time, and since, were and are understood to have been a battalion. Previously, that battalion would have been under the command of Benton Weir but on 25th June 1876, Custer gave the battalion to its former wing commander - Benteen. Weir obviously had little time for Benteen's way of going about things. That would make an excellent tpic for discussions, I think. So anyways, just because J.S. Gray built his entire timeline around DeRudio's supposed sighting, indicates only how flawed JSG's methods and research were. Another of his legacies has been the idea that the packtrain travelled at 3-3.5mph which is used water from perfumed sus scrofa. Gray's timeline began with the spurious DeRudio sighting and was workrd forward, and backwards, in time from that point to produce the stated bathwater. I suggested to you, I believe, to go out and identify people stood 1,000 yards away. This would prove that it is not possible with the naked eye. Fred did it, but he knew who the people he was seeing 1,500 yards away - were. Go there, and I will see if I can recognise you....... utterly..... fred. DeRudio did not sight Custer on the bluffs. You can go to your grave believing that but it won't make it true, or truth. If you are stood on Reno Hill, there are two ways to see the terrain of Custer's Battlefield. Neither of them involve the Weir's Hill incarnation despite your worshipful misunderstandings of WMC online. You could not see beyond Weir Point from Weir's Hill in 1876, 1925, 1976, and even today. Therefore, WMC or yourself, or both, are completely dumbfounded to reach such a conclusion. Green suggested that hilltops were..... removed. That's his sense of enquiry and humour. One bit of terrain, Weir Point, did not erode less than Weir Hill, during the past 148 years - did it. You can clearly discern what you have, and continue to be told, in the image here link and blown up below. There ya go. Wmc may have erred.......... he was after all, human and had intended to publish his book in 1920-1912. Perhaps he could not find a publisher but was that not incredibly fortunate in the long run. anecdote - View of Custer's Hill.
|
|