|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 1, 2024 17:19:27 GMT -6
Ah ok - so back to version 3. Note the markers & bushes all the way to the left…they look familiar… Of course YOU are now marking your missing gulch behind & parallel w/ the ridge again (i.e. not crossing it like the horses did)...UGH!! STOP MOVING IT!!!!
But hey - that view is still there!... Same from above... Just HAVE to wonder what all those little peaks and valleys along the ridge between the ravines & along the trail look like from old aerial photos... Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 1, 2024 19:18:15 GMT -6
johnson1941,
My good friend,
I have no idea what you are saying!
Do you agree with me or not?
Am I right or wrong?
The NPS needs to take core samples!
Haven't heard anything back from them after about 3 weeks!
Do you know what KMA means?
The NPS can KMA!
Onward my friend!
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 1, 2024 20:30:04 GMT -6
Well... let’s just say i haven’t seen ANY location version that works yet. AKA - is documented. And if YOU can’t nail it down… We have seen these pictures before... 1) A modern day view from the monument area...note the DR Trail... 2) A GREAT period photo, view from the monument area..note the marker 'trail' & clusters...also note the cemetery off to the right. I see Deep Ravine. I see Cemetery Ravine. I see the ridge & high points down the slope between them. I see markers & the clusters and the trail along a bit of Cemetary Ravine and then crossing the ridge leading to the DR. I see where the horses crossed. That period pic offers a clear & perfect view of the ridge/slope between the ravines and to the right of CR - all the way to the river: I just do not see a missing gulch anywhere down that slope - not at the markers, not crossing them, not in front of them, not past them…not anywhere between the ravines - even at the lower cemetery line.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 2, 2024 6:09:11 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 2, 2024 7:04:24 GMT -6
Zoom zoom zooming the upper reaches of DR in the linked 1907 (1891) Marshall icon, shows us what he trapsed over, saw and chained, in 1891 - shortly after the gallantly erudite Owen J. Sweet erected markers for the fallen located on the field. Should we assume that, the good Robert, had a copy of Owen's report in hand, when he purposfully stalked the terrain chaining out distance and elevations. To my mind, and please excuse the English; Marshall did a fine job for the time (of the place) and obviously, provided an inventory of the reported markers relative to the difficulty Sweet resolved on the ground with those supposedly in it, but actually removed from where they fell. Quote: ' On examination of the field it was found that the resting place of only 217 officers and men had been marked, exclusive of the places where Boston Custer and Arthur (Autie) R. Reed fell,All hail Marshal, 1891Here, link is a delightful history of the theories. If time permits, i'll get into the Walter M. Camp aspects of elevations used during his period with the battles. We can see how Sweet Military Sexual Complex - Analysis found only 217 marked graves but was eventually able to erect markers for 246 officers and men on the Custer field. Two headstones, one for Lt. McIntosh and the other for Dr. DeWolf, were set elsewhere. We can learn from the May 15, 1890 handwritten report, that ' On the lines held by Troop L, Calhoun and Crittenden, 38 men fell. Whoa boy........... steady there!! Thirty eight dead of Company L....... hmmmm........... Continuing, because I really do hope that people read this stuff On the West line, marched over by Troop E, Smith and Sturgis and T. Yates and Van Reily, either in column of fours, or from the left flank of the skirmish line, from near the extreme right of Calhoun’s line, which at that time was covering Custer’s rear, to near the Bug-Deep-Cut Ravine, and near where the final left flank of Troop E rested in said Ravine, only 13 men fell. From the head of Big-Deep-Cut Ravine and the extreme left of Smith’s line, as his body was found in the Custer group, probably 200 yards from his troop, it is probable that Lieut. Sturgis was left in command and there killed on his part of the field, and his body, with others, mutilated beyond the possibility of human recognition. From the tope of the ridge, Smith’s center, to within about 200 yards of the Custer Group, the right of Smith’s line, 26 men fell, some of whom were from the left of Flank of Troop F. In the center group and at, and in the immediate, vicinity of the monument, 56 men fell, General Custer, Boston Custer and A.R.Reid, inclusive/ This number includes the balance of Yates troop and several men of Troop C, Capt. Tom Custer and Lieutenant Harrington.”There you have it. Don't you. The battle as indicated to one and all who would reconstruct based upon the marker locations. It is remarkable how few of those that do it, do it. So........ If we can see that Deep Ravine is presenting three fingers of ravine towards the upper reaches with the lower and longest being now Calhoun Coulee forming the runoff below and north of Greasy Grass Ridge, then the true upper reaches of DR point towards the hill of Last Stands. I use Last Stands because there may have been several there, and I am of the opinion at the moment that there were, and they occurred in succession (obviously). Combined with the possibility of a Last Stand at Calhoun Hill, then some of the fog of war which so plagues this fascinating and heavily studied military disaster - lifts gently in little wisps to scatter on Montana's breezes. A small hill is located where Marshall placed 'Captain Custer' with 'Yates' above; and significantly - a smaller knoll to the southwest 'on' an indicated watercourse which some take to be Cemetery Ravine, but of course not those who think it the one immediately next, further west; or yet further west even again. I understand that there were thirteen markers and that that is how many that Sweet stated that he place there. Yes, ' where the final left flank of Troop E rested in said Ravine, only 13 men fell.Does this help locate the forgotten gulley? Well probably not but the above text in one damn fine read. Whether there is a ravine filled with rubbish or debris from erosion, or the detrius of old road building projects - I hope you get your core samples and that NPS let you keep them. Wouldn't that be great. What will you do with them, Dan?
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 2, 2024 7:40:45 GMT -6
Courtesy of FotLBB, an imge looking towards Keogh and Calhoun link from the Custer Road area at the Monument showing some of the grading work done during construction of the blacktop since the 1930's. Quite huge ramparts were erected to carry the road over the gullies of numerous rise along the highest terrain - which is usually, how such roads are protected from precipitation to prevent them being flooded and washed away. The principal risk then is erosion undermining foundation and delude washing surface tarmacadam, away. As given, some of the grading for the roadway erected immense ramparts straight through numerous gullies along the route of travel. www.friendslittlebighorn.com/images/historic/Custer%20Hill.jpg
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 2, 2024 8:29:31 GMT -6
Once again good stuff, HR! But we may need to re-read this again: "from near the extreme right of Calhoun’s line, which at that time was covering Custer’s rear, to near the Bug-Deep-Cut Ravine, and near where the final left flank of Troop E rested in said Ravine, only 13 men fell."Does this help locate the gully?" I'd say no...(unless it is now that weird "Y" Camp has in the middle)
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 2, 2024 8:55:11 GMT -6
Hello again johnson1941-
So, I was looking at the blue map on your latest post and what you explained about it. Now the terms "extreme right" and "left flank" were used.
But how do we know the orientation of the person that was describing this? I assumed when looking at the map that I was facing (more or less) the battle ridge.
What if the person that was describing this was facing the river? Then wouldn't right and left be reversed?
Am I overthinking this again (probably)!
Onward!
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 2, 2024 10:12:29 GMT -6
Hey, Dan, I went with: "extreme right of Calhoun’s line, which at that time was covering Custer’s rear"For the upper anchor point. And: "to near the Bug-Deep-Cut ravine, and near where the final left flank of Troop E rested in said Ravine"For the lower. Just so happens to work out perfectly too!
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 2, 2024 10:28:55 GMT -6
Thanks for the assistance my friend!
Much appreciated!
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 2, 2024 14:47:56 GMT -6
So, my friends- Long story short. I was doing some minor edits to my book and ran across these pictures in my files. The following pictures are all the same area of (what I believe is) the Forgotten Gulch. They show how the same area can appear entirely different with photographs taken at varying camera angles and heights. The first picture is when I was there last year when I had my 7 pages of research with me (including printed pictures) to guide me to where the gulch was by the location of the soldier markers. I refer you to my post of July 14, 2023, at 7:48am (on page 7 of this thread). I related that there is a significant dip in the Deep Ravine trail where that trail crosses over the filled in gulch. I believe that dip is the result of the filled in gulch’s dirt settling in over about 90 years. The second picture is a similar view that I found on the internet (actually it is a better picture than mine!). The third picture is a close-up (sky view) of the same area. Notice you cannot discern the dip in the trail. The fourth picture is the same area (also a sky view). Again notice you can’t discern the dip in the trail. All the pictures show the same area based on the placement of the soldier markers! Interesting stuff! Onward, and the adventure continues!
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 2, 2024 16:28:52 GMT -6
So - we are back to the gulch crossing the ridge and trail - right at the marker cluster & right near where the horses did?!?
|
|
|
Post by lakotadan on Jul 2, 2024 17:36:26 GMT -6
My good friend, johnson1941- You are too funny with your white flag picture! Aren’t we the pair! You refer to the 1926 anniversary photograph as stating the Forgotten Gulch wasn’t there! I refer to the 1932 aerial photograph stating the Forgotten Gulch was there! So, referring to one of the 1926 photographs with the soldier markers circled in yellow (first picture attached here) and then comparing it to a sky view of the area with the soldier markers also circled in yellow (second picture attached here). In the 1926 photograph the horse train is way in front of the soldier markers circled in yellow, there is no way they would be anywhere close to the Forgotten Gulch (also the second picture attached here with the horse train location of the 1926 photograph shown in red). The NPS needs to take core samples otherwise this discussion can go on until “I am pushing up daisies!”. Oh well, at least this discourse is fun! Onward my friend! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 2, 2024 18:31:04 GMT -6
Wait - you are saying the horses are moving around a missing gulch which no one can find and that can't be seen?!? "Way in front" yes - because the DR branch & the slope they came down is between the horse train and the markers... AFTER THE HORSES CROSSED THE RIDGE next to/ to the right of THE MARKERS!! Horses? Check. Markers? Check. High point? Check. Ridgeline? Check. DR Branch? Check. What IS NOT THERE, is a gulch. This is a VERY good match. (If only GE would pitch a wee bit more). Can't you see? ? YOU ARE again marking your gulch crossing right at/between the markers and the horse crossing on the ridge. WE CAN CLEARLY SEE BOTH THOSE THINGS...we CAN see the horses crossing the high point and we CAN see the markers on the HIGH point IN THE SAME FRAME. They are not that far apart - only about the width of the marker cluster+ between them - but that doesn't matter...because WE CAN CLEARLY see that continuous slope & the continuous 'ridgeline' between them - all along the slope!! We can ALSO see the DR Branch running parallel between the horses - when they are in front of the markers - and the slope going up to the markers/trail/higher ridge. What we CAN NOT SEE? A GULCH! CAUSE THERE IS NOT ONE THERE. There is NO gulch at the point you have marked. It HAS to cross that ridge if it is to connect the Cemetery ravine to the DR Branch. Any gulch that crosses this ridge and the SSL will NOT be subtle..
|
|
|
Post by johnson1941 on Jul 2, 2024 19:20:30 GMT -6
And just so you know, for sure... This "gulch" \/ - is also NOT SEEN in the horse picture or any other, even though t he entire area is seen quite clearly.We CAN see the DR Branch you have it engulfing (to the left), and the marker trail and cluster you have it covering, and the higher ridge where the DR trail is, and the slope down from it you have also highlighted in bulbous blue. And we can see where the horses actually crossed the ridge (which is not where you marked but no biggie cause we can see the whole wide slope). ALL THOSE features are what we can also see in ALL the other pictures. What that shows?! THAT this 1932 thing is NOT a GULCH. Deep Ravine Branch? Partly. A branch of the branch and greenery? A bit. The slope coming down from the long high points & where the markers are? DEFINITELY!! THEY ARE ALL there and are STILL THERE. 1932 IS confusing-looking for sure. But EVERY OTHER picture & map confirms it is NOT what you think it is. There is NO gulch at the point you have marked in ANY photo or on ANY map. It HAS to cross that ridge if it is to connect the Cemetery ravine to the DR Branch. It doesn't. It didn't. Nothing did - except the horses.
|
|