|
Post by Beth on Sept 30, 2015 13:30:26 GMT -6
I have always wondered if the fact that Kellogg was traveling right up front with Custer meant that Custer wasn't expecting to go into battle immediately. Kellogg was on a mule after all which would have made him slower compared to everyone else.
It is perhaps my own pet theory but Kellogg was not a soldier so it seems to me the last place he would want to be was in the center of the battle--especially if he wanted to live to report about it. I would expect that just before Custer was ready to fight, Kellogg would take a position close by so he could see the action but safe enough he wouldn't be drawn in. If after Custer viewed Ford D and claimed this is the spot, Kellogg might then have set off on a different path than the rest and picked off without Custer even missing him.
Of course there is always the possibility that Kellogg had been drawn into the excitement of the events and just didn't think he was in danger.
In the end it probably doesn't make a difference of course.
|
|
|
Post by dave on Sept 30, 2015 13:55:54 GMT -6
Beth I wonder if Kellogg was just not on Custer's horizon, with the searching for the end or flank of the village, movement of the Indians, dust trails, not sure where Reno and Benteen were. I can see Kellogg with no military experience being as lost as a goose as to what was happening and where to go and the soldiers too busy to answer his pleas. He must have been terrified and just in the way. Poor man. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Sept 30, 2015 15:07:12 GMT -6
Beth I wonder if Kellogg was just not on Custer's horizon, with the searching for the end or flank of the village, movement of the Indians, dust trails, not sure where Reno and Benteen were. I can see Kellogg with no military experience being as lost as a goose as to what was happening and where to go and the soldiers too busy to answer his pleas. He must have been terrified and just in the way. Poor man. Regards Dave Perhaps. On the other hand Custer was a PR pro and he wanted the story of this battle told to the world--why else invite a reporter after being told not to. Perhaps Custer wanted to use the victory on this campaign as a springboard to his civilian career. It's hard to say though were Kellogg would be on Custer's radar that day though.
|
|
|
Post by mchlwilson on Sept 30, 2015 18:54:48 GMT -6
Beth I wonder if Kellogg was just not on Custer's horizon, with the searching for the end or flank of the village, movement of the Indians, dust trails, not sure where Reno and Benteen were. I can see Kellogg with no military experience being as lost as a goose as to what was happening and where to go and the soldiers too busy to answer his pleas. He must have been terrified and just in the way. Poor man. Regards Dave Perhaps. On the other hand Custer was a PR pro and he wanted the story of this battle told to the world--why else invite a reporter after being told not to. Perhaps Custer wanted to use the victory on this campaign as a springboard to his civilian career. It's hard to say though were Kellogg would be on Custer's radar that day though. It seems to me that once Kellogg made the decision to travel with a maneuver element instead of the pack train, he was committed to that decision once contact was made with the NAs. For safety's sake he had to keep up with the soldiers. If he were to peel off from them and hang back to watch, a NA might see him and go after him. Seems very risky. He probably sought the safety of the herd.
|
|
|
Post by edavids on Sept 30, 2015 20:32:32 GMT -6
Let's also keep in mind that Custer had no issues allowing his civilian brother and 18 year old nephew to ride with his immediate command. Broke poor Burkman's heart in the process.
Either Custer had no human feelings or he really was that confident that the warriors were a minimal threat and wanted his relatives in on "the fun". My guess is the latter.
Best,
David
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Oct 1, 2015 2:43:37 GMT -6
I think Custer was just that confident-or at least giving off that air of confidence. He seems to have made the campaign inpart the Custer summer vacation of 1876 or perhaps the put a Custer to work project.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 1, 2015 6:06:27 GMT -6
I just realized the significance of this thread's title, so let me puff up a little.
In 2007 I wrote an article for the Research Review that questioned the traditional location of the lone tepee. I showed it could not have been located 4 1/2 to 5 miles east of the river and I used first-hand, primary accounts to prove my case. Shortly after the article appeared I was contacted by a "senior" member of the LBHA who had also found evidence of the real location of the tepee and had written an article, prior to mine. Between the two of us, we have pretty much driven a stake into the heart of the old theory. Now mind you, between the two of us, that has all happened within the last 15 years, chasing more than 125 years of fallacious theory.
In 2008 I wrote another article discussing the elevation point of 3,411 and proposing the theory that it was from that point-- not Weir Peaks or Sharpshooters' Ridge-- where Custer observed the valley fighting. It appears to me, that has been pretty much accepted as the truth, especially since I supported my argument with more primary evidence along with reasoning. The Weir Peaks-Sharpshooters' Ridge crowd has been set back on their haunches.
In 2014 I wrote another article about Curley being the one who greeted Benteen, not the "other" Crow scouts. That article also won an award, so it is being seriously debated or considered.
In the Strategy book, I discussed the business about a gap leading into Keogh's position on Battle Ridge. That is brand-new stuff, never before discussed or understood or even known. It changes the entire perception of what went on in the Keogh Sector.
There is more, but that should answer the question: Yes, there will probably be more "Big Discoveries." It is simply a matter of discussing things, debating things, and reasoning things. Dig deeper, all of you.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by callmeconrad on Oct 1, 2015 8:17:05 GMT -6
Does anyone here believe that there is any meaningful physical evidence remaining to be discovered that would shed new light on the events of June 25th? Examples: - A large number of soldier cartridge cases in a new location; - Written statement from a 7th survivor revealing previously suppressed information; - A grisly find, like a Caucasian skull in an unexpected location. What do you think? Is there anything left? I harbor suspicions that Godfrey bungled the job when he searched the Luce-Nye-Cartwright area while the burials were underway. He couldn't have been looking very closely. He even saw a trail but fail to recognize it as Custer's. No telling what clues may have been found if he had been open to seeing them. Michael Hi Michael, All the bodies in Deep Ravine of course. It may not tell much more about the flow of the battle but once they find the location and work from there towards the river it might yield a ton of artifacts, and sometimes archeology throws up some wonderful surprises. Cheers, conrad
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Oct 1, 2015 11:40:29 GMT -6
Kellogg, like all reporters then as well as now wanted the "Big Story" and what bigger story would there be than to cover General Custer's victory over the last remaining free Indians on the North American Continent?
Kellogg was not originally given the assignment but got it when the publisher of the Tribune wife got sick and couldn't go. What Luck!
Kellogg was not a full-time professional, but was a former telegraph worker in a Bismarck law office and wrote under the psudeonim of Frontier for the St. Paul Daily Pioneer-Press. He wrote about a homesteader killed by Indians; "Bah! . . . I say turn the dogs of war loose, and drive them off the face of the earth, if they do not behave themselves."
His final communication with the Tribune was "We leave the Rosebud . . . we will have met and fought the red devils, with what results remains to be seen. I go with Custer . . ."
His decomposing body was discovered in high grass near Deep Revine.
Reporters go on assignments like this thinking they are detached from what is happening . . . almost like looking through a camera and not being part of what is taking place. What Kellogg was thinking as Indians closed in on him would have made a good story!
|
|
|
Post by mchlwilson on Oct 2, 2015 6:51:02 GMT -6
Does anyone here believe that there is any meaningful physical evidence remaining to be discovered that would shed new light on the events of June 25th? Examples: - A large number of soldier cartridge cases in a new location; - Written statement from a 7th survivor revealing previously suppressed information; - A grisly find, like a Caucasian skull in an unexpected location. What do you think? Is there anything left? I harbor suspicions that Godfrey bungled the job when he searched the Luce-Nye-Cartwright area while the burials were underway. He couldn't have been looking very closely. He even saw a trail but fail to recognize it as Custer's. No telling what clues may have been found if he had been open to seeing them. Michael Hi Michael, All the bodies in Deep Ravine of course. It may not tell much more about the flow of the battle but once they find the location and work from there towards the river it might yield a ton of artifacts, and sometimes archeology throws up some wonderful surprises. Cheers, conrad Excellent reminder, Conrad! I hope the NPS can get such a project going some day!
|
|
|
Post by mchlwilson on Oct 2, 2015 7:04:54 GMT -6
I just realized the significance of this thread's title, so let me puff up a little. In 2007 I wrote an article for the Research Review that questioned the traditional location of the lone tepee. I showed it could not have been located 4 1/2 to 5 miles east of the river and I used first-hand, primary accounts to prove my case. Shortly after the article appeared I was contacted by a "senior" member of the LBHA who had also found evidence of the real location of the tepee and had written an article, prior to mine. Between the two of us, we have pretty much driven a stake into the heart of the old theory. Now mind you, between the two of us, that has all happened within the last 15 years, chasing more than 125 years of fallacious theory. In 2008 I wrote another article discussing the elevation point of 3,411 and proposing the theory that it was from that point-- not Weir Peaks or Sharpshooters' Ridge-- where Custer observed the valley fighting. It appears to me, that has been pretty much accepted as the truth, especially since I supported my argument with more primary evidence along with reasoning. The Weir Peaks-Sharpshooters' Ridge crowd has been set back on their haunches. In 2014 I wrote another article about Curley being the one who greeted Benteen, not the "other" Crow scouts. That article also won an award, so it is being seriously debated or considered. In the Strategy book, I discussed the business about a gap leading into Keogh's position on Battle Ridge. That is brand-new stuff, never before discussed or understood or even known. It changes the entire perception of what went on in the Keogh Sector. There is more, but that should answer the question: Yes, there will probably be more "Big Discoveries." It is simply a matter of discussing things, debating things, and reasoning things. Dig deeper, all of you. Best wishes, Fred. Hi Fred, When I posed the question I was thinking of physical evidence, but your response is a reminder that many assumptions of prior generations of researchers cannot withstand close scrutiny. Great post! Michael
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 2, 2015 8:02:48 GMT -6
When I posed the question I was thinking of physical evidence, but your response is a reminder that many assumptions of prior generations of researchers cannot withstand close scrutiny. Great post! Thank you, Michael. To better answer your question, I would think the only thing remaining to be found is as someone else just mentioned, remains or artifacts in Deep Ravine. When they searched the ravine back in 1984-1985, they searched the upper part and since then they have realized that part did not exist in 1876. So if there were any artifacts, they would be farther down the ravine. The problem here is Deep Ravine is the major water run-off area for that part of the battlefield. If you have read any of my work, you will understand there used to be a gap in battle ridge formed by rain and snow. That gap was filled in in 1934 when they built the access road, but prior to that you had 58 years-worth of run-off into the ravine. All of that has caused considerable geologic change in the area. So you have two issues: (1) they were searching in the wrong area, and (2) you have had 139 years-worth of severe run-off, driving anything there closer to or in the river. One other thing... while 28 bodies were counted by several people when the debacle was discovered, an unknown number of those bodies were pulled out and buried shallowly on the SSL, before they put a stop to it because of the body decomposition. When you look down that SSL, almost all those stones do not belong there: there should probably be only nine, the rest belonging in Deep Ravine. Remember too, there are 252 markers on that battlefield, but only 209 men died with Custer. And five of those died off the reservation. That makes things ever whackier. Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by Jas. Watson on Oct 12, 2015 19:43:05 GMT -6
Do you think if there could have been artifacts discovered where the cemetery is now that they could have shed some light on the ford D advance? Would there be a significant batch of them there? Or could/would they possibly indicate a different scenerio? Of course this is really a moot speculative question because we will never know for sure...but an interesting thought nevertheless.
SW~
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Oct 12, 2015 21:43:43 GMT -6
Does anyone here believe that there is any meaningful physical evidence remaining to be discovered that would shed new light on the events of June 25th? Examples: - A large number of soldier cartridge cases in a new location; - Written statement from a 7th survivor revealing previously suppressed information; - A grisly find, like a Caucasian skull in an unexpected location. What do you think? Is there anything left? I harbor suspicions that Godfrey bungled the job when he searched the Luce-Nye-Cartwright area while the burials were underway. He couldn't have been looking very closely. He even saw a trail but fail to recognize it as Custer's. No telling what clues may have been found if he had been open to seeing them. Michael What about the area where the NA casualties were buried, possibly with their war trophies? Of course it would open one absolutely huge can of worms, probably akin to if someone proposed excavating the area under the monument---
|
|
|
Post by wild on Oct 13, 2015 4:28:07 GMT -6
I fear the worms would have long departed Beth.
|
|