|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 9, 2023 16:40:46 GMT -6
From what I can read, it says "Co E" Horizontally above the 90deg jut to the right, and "Co C" vertically above the big "E". The faint writing in the lower middle says 'Traced in the Office Of the Chief Engineer, Sept 19, 1876' and 'Geo L Gillespie' Major of Engineer Brevet Lieut Col CSA, Chief Engr Mil Div Mo...' Check this out: www.oldworldauctions.com/catalog/lot/177/223Herorest had posted this way back, because it supposedly shows crosses in Deep Ravine...VERY likely not Maguire's work. It was HR crop/closeup in the corner of the map...I think he he thought the author had said the crosses were in red ink, from a book, I believe. There are numerous versions of "Maguire's" maps; the Gillespie (posted earlier) is included in Camp's Transcripts by Hammer (seems like just dashes in the ravine). Another Gillespie...(based on Maguire official Report sketch) Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 4:11:42 GMT -6
You have the essence of it. There were many maps by many agents with God only knows whom making decisions as to what was what and wasn't. The first serious critique of mapping was 'Massacre' by W. Kent King published posthumously by Dick Upton who wrote the closing chapter. King is considerably obscured by his style of writing, almost sainted respects for Custer, and tediously correct expose of Patterson Hughes. However, he was one of the best ever battle researchers and his book is priceless if you switch off the bias. Highly recommended for his insights with the mapping. I would suggest that he impressed Donahue sufficiently to spark his latter Battlelines works.
Bob Doran's book is comparable.
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 10, 2023 4:49:19 GMT -6
Hm, I read Michno's book on E Company, for anyone really into this part of the battle, it is worth a read as it si fulll of details etc. But I also think he back-tracked a little on a point or two he made in the book. But hey; we all should think for ourselves, so it doesn't matter hwat conclusions he came to at that time Noggy
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 4:52:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 10, 2023 7:55:41 GMT -6
So, thank you herosrest for the link to Michno’s book review.
It looks to me like he states that if there are bodies to be found, that they are buried in the Cemetery Ridge ravine.
Close, but no cigar!
I am convinced (yes, I convinced myself!) that if there are bodies to be found that they are located in the “filled in” ravine or coulee that was located at about a 90-degree angle to the Cemetery Ridge ravine. I described where I thought that particular ravine was located in my post of July 9th, 2023.
So, if I had a fortune of money, how would I proceed to verify my conclusion?
I would hire a professional geologist and tell him of my thoughts, and conclusions, about where I believe the bodies are buried. I would ask him if he thinks it is a possibility (taking into account the natural erosion characteristics of that particular area) that the ravine (or coulee) in question could have reached its present appearance over a 50-to-60-year period of time (1876 to 1926 or 1936) because of the bodies placed in it and the sides of the coulee partially removed to use as dirt to cover the bodies.
If his answer is “no it would take at least 150 years or longer, even with bodies in it, to appear as it does today” (or as it did in 1926 or 1936?). Well, that would end that!
But if his answer is “yes, the placing of bodies and covering them with dirt from the sides of that ravine would hasten the filling of that ravine into how it appears today”. Well, then further investigation (and possibly hiring an archaeological team) is required!
Now that scenario would require approval from the National Park Service to allow another “dig” (or ground penetrating radar) in the area I described.
But who knows what the future may hold!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 9:11:16 GMT -6
It is an area of immense interest and considerable research over nearly a century and a half now and a part of the battle bug with numerous strands of reasoning, emotion, and endevour. It is central to the 'bringing them home' philosophy which culminated at Arlington in 1921, under Godfrey's guiding hand and implicit to our military ways these days. The dead lay where they fell in battle for millenia and that was simply the way of it. The Duck - Arligton 1921 Unknown SoldierPeter Thompson attended )invited) the 1921 ceremonies at Virginia, and the dinner for 7th Cav vets and had a stand up row, with Godfrey, who called him a liar. Go figure. It's amazing history from true heroes to some of the worst bath tub film that ever walked on two legs and wrapped up in what I call 'militaryness'. It's there to be enjoyed and some people crusade it for obscure reasons. In a broader sense it was a clash of freedoms disastrous to those pursuing nomadic life supported by buffalo. Here's Texas's most famous living artist on Deep Ravine. I just know that he has a dream.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 9:26:12 GMT -6
Deep ravine's dead. It's a very simple problem testing hearts but it should not fool minds. The remains were moved. The army spent decades sweeping the field and removing the remains. The torrents of flood water which deluge the hills did the rest. If'n you want a real mystery, then unravel this Battle MAPLaying around Tennessee since.......... Ft. Custer was built and Buell was promoted out of his command there.
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 10, 2023 13:59:30 GMT -6
Interesting! On the below weblink is a picture of the area I have been referring to in my previous posts. It is a 1930’s (wow!) aerial photograph of a part of the battlefield (it would be the 5th picture shown on that site). www.friendslittlebighorn.com/strickenfield.htmIf you draw a straight line from the fence located on the left-hand side of the house in about the middle part of the photo, (if you zoom in on the picture) it will drop you directly into the ravine or coulee I have been talking about on this thread (the ravine or coulee located at about a 90-degree angle from the cemetery ridge ravine or coulee). The smaller fenced in area to the right of the photograph is the "custer monument and burial area" for further reference. Also notice that it appears that the upper part of the coulee (located furthest away from cemetery ridge) has not been filled in and is still a good-sized depression in the landscape. Also notice in that area there appears to be a "ravine" (closest to the coulees that flow into what is known today as the "deep ravine) which looks fairly deep and could very well be a "ravine" feature. Maybe that area is actually the "deep ravine" which is referred to in accounts of the battle? However, notice that the area closest to the cemetery ridge coulee appears flatter. Maybe both ends of that ravine or coulee had "ravine" type features (where the middle was more of a rounded depression due to erosion and more runoff coming down the center of the hill?). I think that if the soldiers were buried in the area closer to the cemetery ridge ravine (or coulee) that is why that particular area is flat. That is where I think the bodies of soldiers may still be. Now the question is “how did the rest of that ravine (coulee) get filled in (was it a “dump” for dirt from construction in other areas)? Because in the google maps view, that area now looks fairly flat, and the “deep ravine” trail goes right over it! I realize I could be entirely incorrect about the remains of soldiers still buried out there in that specific area. But the research is interesting, and I have learned (and am still learning) many interesting points about the battle! And I think that the (about) 90-year-old aerial photograph of that area is really cool and gives some good insights into the older “lay of the land”!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 16:20:54 GMT -6
I have seen the images before and discussed them variously and in regards dating as well. There were flights over the terrain in 1926, shown in an image published by Upton but of course with a huge crowd in attendance. I believe the first blacktop road went in during the 1930"s shortly after the Reno Monument was erected in 1929, and after acces rights were formalised although whether the road stretched to RBDs, I haven't been able to dig up.
Taking on the missingbodies issue, I can only really take the stuff available from the early years and completely avoid the tun of flapping kippers it became. What do we really know from the early evidence?
The idea that a group of 28 bodies lay in one putrifying pile heaped upon one another is completely flawed and false. Further, the deaths may have been small groups overcome in succesions. Kuhlman really reached out for the stars with his SSL idea and as indicated by Taunton, the theory is as whackey as a brained sardine. I would put men in that ravine if they were low on ammo and had seen their horses and saddle rounds stampede down it. That ravine from top to bottom jas no military value and not even as a trench. You are in entire crossfire and nowhere to go but down it. You get to the river or you die.
The overall opinion is those men were in skirmish formation and shot in the back and side. That means individual bodies or clusters of threes. The bodies then lay over some 150 yards given a skirmish formation.
It does not add up even in wishful thinking. The premise of a mound is flawed.
Anecdote. Cedar Coulee was an easy route of access for visitors and is the reason itbecame implated in battle lore. Take visiting parties over the ridge as it was or use easier trails along MTC and up Cedar.
No one visiting was interested in the RBDS and next to no-one knew anything of it before 1929 and even fewer afterwards but there it sat right through WWII until Luce could get funds to open up access.
When the road was built it was easier and cheaper togo over Weir Ridge than along the bottom of the Cedar washout. Roads are elevated above runoffs. That is, you don't build roads in streams.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 10, 2023 17:52:58 GMT -6
LOL! Yeah that’s it.
Well, either that - or the 10 or so soldiers and scouts - AKA primary witnesses & participants who claim and show numerous times that Custer & his command went down it.
Compared to - what 1? 1 Who may have insinuated, amongst other tellings he gave which were quite the contrary, they went over Weir Peak?
Huh...tough choice, that.
Oh forgot Gall, and later Godfrey and Benteen - which were another ridge over, despite witnesses who show/testify otherwise. Yep - maybe THATs the way they went after all.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 18:31:11 GMT -6
LOL! Yeah that’s it. Well, either that - or 10 or so soldiers and scouts - AKA primary witnesses & participants - state numerous times that Custer & his command went down it. Compared to - what 1? 1 Who says, amongst other tellings he gave which were quite the contrary, they went over Weir Peak? Huh...tough choice, that. Oh forgot Gall, and Godfrey and Benteen - which were another ridge over, despite witnesses who show/testify otherwise. Yep - maybe THATs the way they went after all. you'll have difficulty showing that Gall saw anything of a move down Cedar Coulee which was out of his view. Benteen wasn't there nor anyone of his battalion including Godfrey. Edgerley was entirely woolen about the trail taken by the companies advancing into MTC. If you wish to read the hostile Indian's accounts as routing the cavalry into Cedar Coulee then you obviouly feel they were equipped with Kryptonite - see Gall. Numbers of Sioux did use Cedar Coulee to close on the companies which saw them and moved north by west in knowing they were cut off from the bactrail and packtrain. Of course they had no idea Reno and then Benteen were on Reno Hill because that is not where Custer ordered them to go. Even from Greasy Grass Hill, Custer could not see Reno and Benteen hidden from view behind Weir Ridge. It might have been possible to sight Benteen from Luce NC ridges if he routed over SSR but there were hostiles between the two cavalry forces. The Crow scouts told as they did. Godfrey concluded as he did based on a faint trail seen on Luce NC and remembered 10 years later when playing cowboys and Indians with Gall. Godfrey adopted Benteen's idea that Custer never went to Ford B although his battle map of July 4, 1876, shows exactly that and the change of mind came weeks before the Chicago Inquiry and just after he got out of the brig after being arrested for fighting with Capt. French during a disagreement about something or other. The companies went over the ridge and down the west side of it from Weir to a short mile from the river. There was contact and a detachment sent onto Luce Ridge. Then the fun and games trying to get across the B fords started up, Reno pulled out of the valley and the hostiles swarmed down the right bank from Weir Peak and forced the companies north to consolidate on high ground and figure out wtf. It was all over very quickly.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 10, 2023 18:33:43 GMT -6
Gall Godfrey and benteen had them another ridge over. Not in cedar.
Now Martin, kanipe, Curley, WMRH, HM, Goes Ahead, edgerly, Varnum, Hernedeen, etc… yeah - it was just easy access.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 10, 2023 18:36:02 GMT -6
Sinceno one at the time knew Cedar Coulee as that name, do let me know who your ten likely suspects are for Custer using it. I really would appreciate the help.
Iron Cedar wasn't at the battle by the way, he had left with Julia Clown and the contingent which headed for Powder River before the attack. There were ash trees in Cedar Coulee I believe.
Regards.
Walter Camp decided that CC was the route. He was wrong. As wrong as Godfrey.
Godfrey's route was further north than CC and along the higher ground. Camp's work is mostly notes and brief outlines. His work evoled. His notes are scatterbrain. He did not publish and God alone knows what happened to his..... Manuscript.
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 10, 2023 18:40:18 GMT -6
Lol! You are funny! Cedar, south coulee, South Coulee, South Branch coulee, the coulee running north-south..., the valley of a tributary of Reno Creek just behind this ridge and the peaks going in a direction directly north, the coulee Custer followed down in a northerly direction - all same same. All referred to re: numerous witnesses. How about this? I’ve been posting for weeks about witnesses - soldiers and scouts - re:cedar and Weir Hill. I’ve been asking you about posting someone who says otherwise…why not quote a few who say something else? Someone? Anyone? Please post a quote or two - it would be very helpful YOU keep saying it is wrong but have shown nothing, other then referring to Curtis (thanks for that) Now, Martin wouldn't know FOR SURE Custer used Cedar all the way - unless he went into MTC, so, there's that. "Inq. John Martin. Did Custer follow the bottom South Coulee all the way and make turn into Medicine Tail or cut across the hill and save some of the distance. He Dog seemed to think Custer cut across the hill. No - Custer followed coulee all the way" Yep... Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 11, 2023 3:05:45 GMT -6
But you may be partly right - like Herendeen said - nice traveling (more “lore” lol!). I thought from modern descriptions it was not so…wonder if something changed in 150 years?
Herendeen
“A) I know that country and from the point we called Weir’s Hill, there is a sort of swale runs down and it is nice traveling to the creek that runs in there. “ I was not over General Custer’s trail that season, but I was the next, but it was so obliterated that I don’t know exactly where it was.”
|
|