|
Post by noggy on Jul 15, 2022 13:34:56 GMT -6
Also, the artifacts in the Calhoun Hill area indicate a skirmish line downslope from the top of the hill, with another line further up the hill. No one sets a skirmish line down low on a hill unless they suddenly encounter hostiles there. The second skirmish line shows L company moving back to the top of the hill. This indicates L was going south when they hit hostiles in the coulee. I don't know of a book or article espousing the north to south theory per se, but military training and experience, plus a preponderance of the evidence on the ground, along with JSIT's testimony, makes the north to south withdrawal theory a likely event to have occurred. We can't know for sure, but all of us who have military experience believe this theory to be true. Like so much of this battle, no one will ever know for sure. I'll just quote the Bold parts, as, like I've said before, I have no "issue" with any of this. 1. It's been years since I was in the infantry, but you don't always but troops on the very top of a hill no matter. The slope of a hill has a lot to say, meaning if the "curve" (my English fails me) is too steep, you can't actually hit the enemies coming from below. if they are armed with something they can "lob" against you, like arrows, you have a problem if you are armed with something which shoots a straight projectile; then you are at a disadvantage. If you look at Hump, Runs the Enemy etc who mention the first attack on Calhoun Hill, they describe how their horses where hit from the hill, and they gave up and then mostly advanced on foot. The NAs mentioned how they could hit soldiers with bows, but not vice versa. I may be wrong, but the majority killed on LSH were not clustered together on the very top either. (In modern military tactics, if I am not wrong you also avoid the very top of a hill, since it is to obvious of an target for artillery, and you become an easier target at the peak) 2. At the same time, there are those with military experience who also disagree with you on it I feel I need to make my point a little clearer, as far as my own thoughts go: Most of what I have read is the classic 2+3 companies. Do I feel that is Gospel? No, and not only because I am atheist/agnostic/whatever. Do I think there is a lot of truth to it? Yes? Do I know this for sure to be how it panned out? To quote the old uncle of a friend of mine, whenever he watched the news: "They don't f------g know that!" Do I feel that there are things within the "Retreat from LSH" point of view which makes sense? Yes, parts of it/the main idea behind it makes more sense than say I Company hanging out doing very little while getting ganged up on. Personally, that is. I think there may be parts of this which may very well be spot on, and I for one welcome any serious discussion about alternatives to either theory. I am not offended by opinions, except racist and religious (or even atheist) extremisme. That is why I would personally love to see something more than a couple of posts come out from theory, so I and others could give it a read. And yes; I understand that the theory is a broad one, and that it is not like everyone of you guys sat down and had a pow-wow, agreeing on what happened PS: On yet another personal level I would like to thank everyone who has written here over many years prior to me joining the board, be they active, alive or non of the above. As I have mentioned, history is a great passion of mine, and on my free time I write articles about military history for a magazine who posts in all of Scandinavia. German military history is my main area of focus, certian aspects of the Indian wars have always been in close second. Since I had written articles about my "favorites" the Apaches and also the Powder Rover War, I was in late 2016/early 2017 asked if I could write about LBH. I knew the basics, so sure...20 pages, they asked? Sure! You guys can imagine how that went. This Summer I said "fine, I'm done now, or never". 45 pages, without pictures or maps...it may be a pretty long thing. If it at any point is any good, it is to a large degree due to people who have and/or continue to post. I have learned so much, even from those post(ers) I disagree with. Actually, in said article, I had to several times make a point out of conflicting schools of thought regarding theories, motives etc in my article, because...well, like the old uncle said... Sorry for rambling on, but easy to get carried away when on beer number 5 and still feeling the drain of a 15km long run earlier today, which in fairness is a little too long for me these days. Much of this may not make sense, but here tou go : All the best, Geir
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jul 15, 2022 13:46:43 GMT -6
Thanks again, Colt, Shan alludes to one person, JSIT(one person), who is relating first person accounts from the battle veterans. Shan also alludes to Chess pieces, they were also meant to move, were they not?
Shan also thinks it's crazy to think Custer had time to make that jaunt, here he is absolutely correct. Hence there lie 210 dead men. You are also crazy to continue to distance yourself from the requested support.
I am currently at the LBHA Conference in VA.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jul 15, 2022 14:22:29 GMT -6
Tom, Be sure to post the things you learn at this convention. I am curious to learn what goes on there.
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jul 15, 2022 14:23:29 GMT -6
Noggy, my reference to the top of the hill was not the absolute top, but rather the military crest. I should have specified that.
|
|
|
Post by Nape Sintekiya Mani on Jul 16, 2022 12:09:43 GMT -6
Noggy:
I agree with Colt, no one puts a skirmish line in the middle of a slope when they can put it at the top. For me it´s the supreme proof that there was a retreat to the south.
From the middle of a slope you can shoot the same as from above, the definitive thing is that from above you have more shooting range. In addition, an upward attack is always slower, whether on foot or on horseback, therefore the higher you´re, the longer it will take for the enemy to reach.
If you say it because of the curved shot of the bows, you will always be better up, against more distance with less force the arrows will arrive. The only logical reason to put a skirmish line down there is if there were natural defenses behind it, rocks or ditches.
PS- Too bad I don't read Norwegian to read those articles of yours
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 16, 2022 13:00:10 GMT -6
Terry's original report indicated a circular movement around the field and the idea is supported by Benteen's little known map of the battle. That idea based upon what was seen on the ground could and can provide both SNBF and NSBF besides the clockwise and anti-clockwise issues of a circling movement.
I'll see if I can hunt up the map although I'm sure some have seen it. It suggests that Benteen had Terry's ear at some point. Of course Benteen was first to visit the ground - sent by Terry to locate the Officers.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Jul 16, 2022 13:07:31 GMT -6
I feel that a lot of strange moves took place that day, the other major one which many believe is Harrington riding into a death trap clearing out "Calhoun Coulee", a move which many an army man said would be suicide, but this ride of death is still found in many books.
Going back to Calhoun, he had his horses stashed away in the "Swale" area behind his skirmish line, so I believe he dismounted on the crest of that hill. Now did he move down slope with his line on foot, or did he ride so far down, released a few volleys from horse back, then ride back uphill and dismount.
Trooper Thompson said he saw the men in lines on the high ground, so this throws another spanner in the works, but could the word "lines" mean Calhoun and Harrington.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 16, 2022 13:47:38 GMT -6
Bing bong - Benteen's Battle map dated July 4th, 1876. Graham located it during the 1920's I believe. I have for quite a while, had difficulties with the Company L led horses being in the swale and it occurred to me me that whilst the dismounted platoons held the military crest of the hill, the horses were held at the crown. The A-B/C-D skirmish lines on the crown were discussed elsewhere relevant to re-orientation to meet changing threats but the cartridge evidence suggests only 10 men present, which could be the horse holders. There are other ideas. Also, of course according to JSiT, the battle ended on Calhoun Hill where 10-12 soldiers were killed. Here link is Hardorf's take on it BUT I have seen the original transcript of Rickey's interview and as said, according to Timber the fighting ended at Calhoun Hill. The interviews by Margot Liberty were taped and are in collection Here. I became rather bored with Timber once I realised he knew Marquis and never told him, or any of the old timers who fought the battle and spoke to Marquis, what he (Timber) told Rickey and Vaughn. Of course the prime interest in 1926 and ever after was markers for the Cheyenne dead.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 16, 2022 15:36:43 GMT -6
BENTEEN'S BATTLE MAP
The following, in Benteen's inimitable handwriting, appears on the reverse side of the battle map drawn and an notated by him in the field shortly after the battle: If you see fit, Dr. Taylor can send this to N.Y. Herald in case nothing of kind has appeared.
On the morning of the 25th of June, Custer, about 16 or 17 miles from the indian village, divided his regiment into 3 Battalions — Custer having Co's. C.E.F.I.L. , ”Reno getting Co's. A.G.M. — Benteen, Co's. D.H.K. Benteen, with his Battn. was started off at once to the left — to hunt for vallies, indians, etc. Custer with his own and Reno's Battn. — kept the main trail: on arrival near indian village - Reno with his Battn. was sent across Little Big Horn to charge down the valley — He got to the heavy grove of timber marked. There he dismounted, leaving horses in timber, throwing skirmish line across valley — He was driven back to horses, mounted and charged thro', getting to bluffs at the place marked “Ford“ =. It was at this place and time that I arrived on the field, and, seeing the cavalry retreating, reinforced them at once on bluffs. We awaited at this point until McDougal with Co B, came up with the pack train and at same point were corraled by the indians for two days. When Reno crossed river to charge indians, Custer promised to support him, — but instead, went to his own death by the line marked, as per margin. General Terry relieved us on the morning of the 27th June. It is my belief that no line was formed by Custer, but what was formed by each Co. commander on his own hook and that the indians got him running and kept him at it until they all saw they were surrounded.
At the bottom of the map itself, also in Benteen's hand writing occurs the following message: “Kittie, I have hastily sketched for you the battle field of the ‘Little Big Horn. ' From it you can probably glean some idea of our situation.”
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 16, 2022 15:47:26 GMT -6
There are fourteen markers on Calhoun Hill, though only eleven are considered accurate and unpaired. Yet, with forty-six men, Calhoun’s company was the largest in Custer’s command and if we allot a dozen troops as horse-holders, that still leaves thirty-four men (including two officers) to fight two skirmish lines.FCWIII - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:48pm
|
|
|
Post by Nape Sintekiya Mani on Jul 16, 2022 15:57:16 GMT -6
I feel that a lot of strange moves took place that day, the other major one which many believe is Harrington riding into a death trap clearing out "Calhoun Coulee", a move which many an army man said would be suicide, but this ride of death is still found in many books. Going back to Calhoun, he had his horses stashed away in the "Swale" area behind his skirmish line, so I believe he dismounted on the crest of that hill. Now did he move down slope with his line on foot, or did he ride so far down, released a few volleys from horse back, then ride back uphill and dismount. Trooper Thompson said he saw the men in lines on the high ground, so this throws another spanner in the works, but could the word "lines" mean Calhoun and Harrington. Ian My idea is that they were on horseback when they ran into the Indians. They dismounted and formed the skirmish line, and when Calhoun realized that he could not scatter the warriors he mounted his horse to the top of the hill. He formed another line up there and hid the horses in the Swale.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 17, 2022 1:46:54 GMT -6
The scenarios multiply rapidly the longer the consideration and greater the introductions of evidence from archaeology. That so much discussion can remain valid after research and opinion by archaeology speaks volumes. There was without doubt a flow of battle north and west across Medicine Tail into the ravines and hills of the battlefield cemetery. There are huge problems with intuitive interpretations of artifacts found beyond Custer's Hill towards lower fords and at the National Cemetery. All considerations of events blatantly ignore the Indian attack across Medicine Tail from Weir Point terrain after the retreat from the valley and union with Benteen on Reno Hill. Aaaaah........... the bluffsNelson A. Miles visit to Custer's Battlefield with Indian combatants (then scouting for him) to investigate the events of the fight, in June 1878 and for which the official report is entirely AWOL..................... A Visit to Custer's Last Battlefield. From 1895 to 1903, Miles served as the last Commanding General of the United States Army. Is this to say that 1903 was the last time US Army had a commanding general? The troops of Custer's command flowed north across Deep Coulee and beyond. There was a defacto south to north flow of battle. There is evidence of a skirmish line on the Luce Ridge area. It is common knowledge skirmishing occurred on Calhoun Hill but..... Which way were those troops facing. Let's introduce JSiT and Wolftooth. Timber and Kuhlman indicated skirmish in the Luce area, cavalry then moving north and the south to north battle flow. The Wolf Tooth party backed off and..... re-engaged. They were woodpeckers. Where did they go? It doesn't take rocket science or archaeology. Calhoun Hill looks DOWN on NC and Luce Ridges. Calhoun Hill is the highest terrain around including Custer's Hill.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jul 17, 2022 2:03:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 17, 2022 6:10:09 GMT -6
I feel that a lot of strange moves took place that day, Agreed! Noggy
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 17, 2022 6:19:19 GMT -6
Noggy: I agree with Colt, no one puts a skirmish line in the middle of a slope when they can put it at the top. For me it´s the supreme proof that there was a retreat to the south. In theory I agree. Just to be clear, I don't see the positioning of troops on CH as "proof" either way. Where I do disagree, is the length of how long they were there. The way I read testimonies, allude to them being there for quite som time, not being hit quickly after arriving there. Same goes with the area White Bull was in, probably I Company. I don't see it as going down rapidly. Ofc this can still fit with the idea of the companies coming back from LSH/CR, the difference here is time/length. I see some parts of the web is quite the drama! All the best, Geir
|
|