|
Ford D
Jan 3, 2017 11:07:07 GMT -6
dave likes this
Post by fred on Jan 3, 2017 11:07:07 GMT -6
The only really fordable areas of that river are where the coulees and ravines meet the river. That is where silt has been built up to afford crossing areas. The rest of the river is either much deeper, or the banks too high, or the bluffs way too close. This is not the Thames or the Hudson or the Mississippi, but it presents-- and presented-- problems of its own.
Also, it was particularly deep that year because of the excessive winter run-off. Now, how much deeper that would have made it is a geologist's task, but it was deeper than usual.
And of course, the fords had no names back then, unless, of course, the Indians had given them one or some. They had, for example, several names for what we know today as Medicine Tail Coulee. At the RCOI, the coulee was referred to as Muddy Creek and referred to frequently as “the watering place.” The Sioux and Cheyenne had several names for it: • Muskrat Creek (referred to by Standing Bear [M]). • Dry Creek (Soldier Wolf [C]). • Water Rat Creek (Fears Nothing [O]).
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 3, 2017 12:38:25 GMT -6
Post by wild on Jan 3, 2017 12:38:25 GMT -6
Hi Guys
Reno crossed the river twice with no difficulty. Custer's orders to Reno particulary his promise of support indicate he had no worries as to crossing the river. Custer's decision to advance along the East bank also indicates that crossing was not an issue. Reno's exit from the timber was possibly because he could not prevent the Indians crossing and infiltrating his position. Indians crossed in such numbers and so rapidly so as to prevent the escape of a single man from a position of 1000 meters.
As there is no problem crossing the river unopposed Custer's Northwards march was to get clear of the village and opposition. Thus no recce was required . Which leads one to conclude that he got no further than LSH. Best Wishes Richard
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 3, 2017 14:36:41 GMT -6
fred likes this
Post by AZ Ranger on Jan 3, 2017 14:36:41 GMT -6
Richard
I would agree on the first crossing but how you think there was no difficulty on the second is beyond me. Those horses were not capable for battle after reaching the rallying point. If Custer was to cross the river toward the big village I would think he would not want to take a recovery break for the horses.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 3, 2017 18:07:28 GMT -6
Post by wild on Jan 3, 2017 18:07:28 GMT -6
Hi AZ
I would agree on the first crossing but how you think there was no difficulty on the second is beyond me Reno crossed at two different points . The problem with the second crossing was that it was attempted while under attack. If it was only possible to cross at fords, Reno would surely have retreated to where he first crossed . He did not probably because his judgement was that the river was fordable just about anywhere. My case here is that Custer was of the same opinion. He did not need a ford. What he needed was an unopposed crossing.
If a ford was not vital a recce was not required.
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jan 3, 2017 19:41:51 GMT -6
Reno attempted to return to ford A, but was blocked by the Indians. He crossed where he did as he had no other choice. That crossing was very difficult and he lost lots of men doing it It was not a matter of Reno's judgement about being able to ford anywhere. He crossed at the only place available to him at the time.
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 4, 2017 1:53:36 GMT -6
Post by wild on Jan 4, 2017 1:53:36 GMT -6
Same difference Colt . Probably the bluffs he was trying to avoid but was forced off course. But he still got across . The point is good.....Custer did not need a ford. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 4, 2017 6:20:43 GMT -6
Reno attempted to return to ford A, but was blocked by the Indians. He crossed where he did as he had no other choice. That crossing was very difficult and he lost lots of men doing it It was not a matter of Reno's judgement about being able to ford anywhere. He crossed at the only place available to him at the time. Very well stated and right on the money. A "ford," per se, was never on Custer's agenda. He was looking for the refugees. Let us not forget what his mission was... and it was mapping fords. He could not have crossed anywhere he wanted; it wasn't that kind of river. If he could, he would not have needed scouts familiar with the terrain. Notice the scouts who accompanied him: Crow and Boyer, all of whom were familiar with the country. It also did not take a genius to understand coulees and ravines led to fords... it is probably one of the reasons he traveled in the coulees, just in case. Claiming Custer got no farther than Last Stand Hill excludes too much archaeological and anecdotal evidence and is only a bullet-point for argument. We can come up with silly reasons for everything about that battle, but that is one of the enduring issues here: silliness. There is not a lot of immutable, apodictic fact connected with this fight, so we need to go with what science and lore hand us. Using reason, logic, and common sense helps join those two to give us a better picture of what happened. "Looking for a ford" as part of a mission is just silly, so "wild" is correct in that regard: find a coulee, find a ford. The goal was to find where these Indians had gone and were going to. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Jan 4, 2017 7:17:25 GMT -6
I think Reno was looking for the egress on the other side of the river when as Colt pointed out the Indians had blocked movement to Ford A.
I think you can cross that river anywhere but the ingress and egress points are more restrictive. Indians riding as individuals would not have the same concern as a cavalry battalion. If we include the ingress and egress in the features of a desirable crossing point it certainly limits cavalry under fire crossing places.
Look for places with a wide front and reasonable ingress and egress and the crossing places for Custer are limited. For me Custer created this problem by not following Reno. He could have rode to the other end of the village if he desired by moving around the left flank of Reno.
There are places that the Indians used to cross between Ford B and Ds that were easy for them to defend and force a bad situation. If you can force the enemy into a defile and then slow them to less than a walk speed in the water of the river that would not be a great place to cross under fire.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 4, 2017 9:32:57 GMT -6
Steve,
For the most part I would agree. Let us not forget, however, these men had no idea how deep that river was, plus it was swollen at that time, so they would naturally seek a natural ford... and those fords are still generally where ravines and coulees enter the river, laying partial silt on the stream bed.
Estimates of the Ford A crossing were 25 to 30 feet wide with virtually no banks and water at about two- to four-feet deep.
The retreat crossing was estimated at 40 feet wide, saddle depth, with a five-foot bank above the water level on the entry side and an eight-foot bank on the east side. That would hardly be considered a "fordable" area and it would be chosen clearly only in extreme duress. You never saw Indian trails crossing at points like that.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jan 4, 2017 10:25:22 GMT -6
Fred, I don't think GAC was not on a recce, as Wild describes it. He was on a mission to the north, he had Boyer and others that were familiar with this territory. He was headed for a northern crossing to attempt to capture/cutoff non combatants. Whether he got to the crossing or not is another story, but I am rather certain he got close. greatsiouxwar1876.proboards.com/attachment/download/325
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jan 4, 2017 11:42:29 GMT -6
I don't think GAC was not on a recce, as Wild describes it. He was on a mission to the north, he had Boyer and others that were familiar with this territory. He was headed for a northern crossing to attempt to capture/cutoff non combatants. Whether he got to the crossing or not is another story, but I am rather certain he got close. I agree with you, Tom. We become way too caught up in semantics with this thing. Like I said, the mission was not a ford, not a river crossing: the mission was to gather and/or kill as close to all the Indians he could lay his hands on. It was to break their power, their mobility, their way of life, and to herd the remnants to agencies/reservations. The mission was to put an end to a way of life. Custer had Boyer along to warn him of any untoward ground or signs. Otherwise, Custer's horse could have sniffed out a ford. As for getting close to Ford D, by denying it, one eschews what evidence we have troops were there in favor of completely unsupportable supposition and theory. I grant everyone evidence is scarce or scant, but what there is points in that direction and it is certainly more than anyone has who would deny such a move. Negative evidence is not evidence. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 4, 2017 16:23:54 GMT -6
Post by wild on Jan 4, 2017 16:23:54 GMT -6
Benteen stated in the RCOI "I could cross that river almost anywhere[/i]". And we have Reno doing just that. And AZ our resident horseman stating similar. And YOUTUBE shows horsemen having no trouble crossing.
So there is no need for Custer to look for ford D
Fred
As for getting close to Ford D, by denying it, one eschews what evidence we have troops were there in favor of completely unsupportable supposition and theory We are here to discuss and examine and question and the tactical issues such an exercise raises [ ford D]are so ludicrious that they cannot pass unchallanged. Dividing the command while in contact with the enemy to look for a crossing of critical importance is risky enough but to undertake such a search when it is unnessary is unadultrated madness. Look at what we must do to Keogh in order to get Custer to Ford D ? We must make of him an incompetant fool. And are we to believe that Custer reaching LSH would not fight his way through to Keogh?
Best Wishes Richard
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 4, 2017 17:06:26 GMT -6
Post by AZ Ranger on Jan 4, 2017 17:06:26 GMT -6
Steve, For the most part I would agree. Let us not forget, however, these men had no idea how deep that river was, plus it was swollen at that time, so they would naturally seek a natural ford... and those fords are still generally where ravines and coulees enter the river, laying partial silt on the stream bed. Estimates of the Ford A crossing were 25 to 30 feet wide with virtually no banks and water at about two- to four-feet deep. The retreat crossing was estimated at 40 feet wide, saddle depth, with a five-foot bank above the water level on the entry side and an eight-foot bank on the east side. That would hardly be considered a "fordable" area and it would be chosen clearly only in extreme duress. You never saw Indian trails crossing at points like that. Best wishes, Fred. Fred Some crossings are better than others for sure. I think Reno made the only choice he had. I believe there had been a few buffalo trails into the river 0n the other side which they used when they climbed out. The problem is that makes it a defile coming out of the water and up the bank. That leaves slow moving and stopped targets for the Indians to shoot at in the water. Most revolvers were probably empty so it was iffy to think they reloaded while waiting for the defile to clear. I agree with you on fords but that is my point. The Indians knew where those fords would be located and could defend them. As far as the depth at the Reno retreat crossing my horse went completely under water including his head. The only visible part was my saddle horn and a bit of Rios neck. I took my feet out of the stirrups at that point thinking we both may be swimming soon. Rio than raised his head out the water and within a short distance we were back into shallower water. Since it was warm out I dried quickly. So I would say it was a crossing but certainly not a selected for ford. Hope you are better. Steve
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Jan 4, 2017 17:07:34 GMT -6
Fred, ...or, two wrong fords don't make a right ford... Robb Three left turns make a right turn Steve
|
|
|
Ford D
Jan 4, 2017 17:52:01 GMT -6
Post by AZ Ranger on Jan 4, 2017 17:52:01 GMT -6
Benteen stated in the RCOI "I could cross that river almost anywhere [/i]". And we have Reno doing just that. And AZ our resident horseman stating similar. And YOUTUBE shows horsemen having no trouble crossing. So there is no need for Custer to look for ford D Fred As for getting close to Ford D, by denying it, one eschews what evidence we have troops were there in favor of completely unsupportable supposition and theory We are here to discuss and examine and question and the tactical issues such an exercise raises [ ford D]are so ludicrious that they cannot pass unchallanged. Dividing the command while in contact with the enemy to look for a crossing of critical importance is risky enough but to undertake such a search when it is unnessary is unadultrated madness. Look at what we must do to Keogh in order to get Custer to Ford D ? We must make of him an incompetant fool. And are we to believe that Custer reaching LSH would not fight his way through to Keogh? Best Wishes Richard [/quote] Richard Give me a break. When I crossed at Reno's retreat a kid with a BB gun could have taken me out. Shot out both my eyes. My focus was no longer on anything but maintaining my seat and not disturbing anything the horses was trying to do to fix the situation. At model A ford below I could cross at speed and shoot if I had to. I call it Model A because of the motorized vehicle tracks. Benteen or most any horseman could jump in the river at one point and get out at another. Neither Benteen or myself would jump off the bluffs into two feet of water nor would we attempt climb a cliff. The point he was making is that if the ingress and egress are there you can cross. Reno made a crossing at the retreat crossing location but it certainly was not something one would choose in an opposed crossing. Notice it is called a crossing and not a ford. For a ford while attempting an attack I think you want a wide front so more can cross at a given time. You would prefer a short distance in water that was not deep enough to slow the horses. I think a site selected for fording under fire is not the same as being able to cross in a narrow defile with water deep enough for the horse to swim. Regards Steve
|
|