|
Post by AZ Ranger on Apr 21, 2023 7:23:06 GMT -6
Sorry, but you are wrong. The mission was given by Terry. Custer sent Reno into the valley to initiate the mission contact. Custer told Reno he would be supported by the whole outfit. That is the mission and how Custer chose to implement it. Regards AZ Ranger Here's an interesting thing about the mission. A number of participants gave testimony at the Chicago Inquiry into Reno's conduct on 25th June, 1876. Among them was Maj. Reno's Orderley that day and his account of what was ordered was entirely at odds with other accounts of the orders. That was Pvt. Davern. Edward was from Limerick and joined the regiment in 1867, serving under Yates in Company F, at the time of the battle. HR
Terry sets the mission. Custer was to implement it. The mission never changed, but it failed.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Apr 21, 2023 11:44:31 GMT -6
For me....I am extra cautious using any information that was not documented within 10 years of the battle. Memories fade and stories grow. 2 years is even better for any white participant of the battle. The Indians side of the story has its own set of problems. Shortly after the battle they were not talking because they feared punishment. They kept their mouth shut. This is where the suicide stories evolved......If they say the soldiers shot themselves then they might not be in as much trouble. 15 to 20 years after the battle, some started giving Indians nice little gifts to get them to talk. Boy oh boy did this ever make a mess. Many wanted those gifts and got them. No wonder this battle is such a mess after all of these years. Rosebud Heck....There are some that still come to Montana thinking that the Indians will tell them the true story. For some, it is a big game to see what they can get the white man to believe. Some of my extended family are married to Indians. A couple of them taught school on the Cheyenne Reservation. My degree is in history and sources is of great interest. I can respect and appreciate oral traditions as something worth paying attention to, but not without condition and only with a highly skeptical eye. To quote He Dog around 1930: "There are a lot of old Indians hanging about the reservation who like to talk to the white people and would just as soon tell you anything, whether it is true or not." Not long ago, a couple of years at most, some Cheyenne made the news when they "revealed" who had ACTUALLY killed Custer...well good for them and anyone who believed it. I guess.
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 21, 2023 18:38:51 GMT -6
I must say, for all my posts are ‘firing into the dark’ I appreciate all who have added to this thread, most enjoyable reading, I’m sure I’ll likely in the near future ‘fire into the dark’ some more, but hopefully hitting a target of interest.
However my posts are understood by others, I must repeat they are meant as inquisitive and friendly, in no way confrontational.
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 22, 2023 5:39:13 GMT -6
Rosebud
It’s the same as a ‘shot/shots in the dark’ meaning guesses, in this case what might be good topic starters, or a way of advancing discussion.
In keeping a connection to LBH, I think that’s what had to be done by the men with Benteen and Reno, noises heard but warriors unseen, only the direction could be judged.
On another forum, they used to use terms like - ‘firing a broadside’, ‘sniping’....etc.
Personally I like thinking of the film ‘The Duellists’ when two reasonably equally matched debaters are arguing their points, like a duel but the ‘weapons’ are words.
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 22, 2023 6:17:38 GMT -6
This kinda sums up my feelings, apparently by a Private William Taylor, veteran of Little Bighorn -
‘Reno proved incompetent and Benteen showed his indifference - I will not use the uglier words that have often been in my mind. Both failed Custer and he had to fight it out alone’
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 22, 2023 7:23:15 GMT -6
You must take into considerations what the soldiers saw with their own eyes, now if I was a trooper with Reno and saw him stop the battalion, orded me to form skirmish line, then get me forced into a timber line with enemy forces surrounding me, then I would feel rather let down, so who do I blame, the officer who got me into this mess, plus after this I had to mount up and ride for my life losing friends trying to reach safety, I would be angrier still, so what ever the soldiers thought of Reno, they would compelled by their feelings when judging him, after all in their minds he was in command and only by the grace of god they got out.
On the other hand, Benteen would be a welcome sight to me on that hill, so my admiration of the man would far exceed that of Reno.
Ian
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 22, 2023 9:40:48 GMT -6
I can only use my thoughts from my other subject, which are many tend to focus on the officers, and the differences of leadership, likability, decisions, actions, etc., but unwittingly overlooked the thoughts of the men in the ranks of the part of the force not engaged with the enemy, who, knowing another part of the force was most likely fully engaged, therefore many of their friends and fellow military men in the ranks were facing a numerous enemy, but they themselves were held back, not heading out in support, leaving their friends fighting for their lives, wondering when reinforcements would appear coming to their aid.
Although the men fully engaged with the enemy were more focused on the fight, I reckon they were on the lookout for the other men under Reno and Benteen, maybe even having time to feel a sense of betrayal, not necessarily by their friends, but the officers in command of them. Thinking why would they be willingly left to their fate....without rescue attempts from those in the same unit as them, the 7th Cavalry, where was loyalty at a time they were in a dire situation likely to be wiped out.
I’m sure, as I previously mentioned, there will be other examples in military history from different eras, even more recently, where a force, known to be engaged, possibly surrounded by superior numbers, that if left without support, would definitely be killed or captured. However, in these other examples, rescue attempts were made, resulting in casualties amongst the rescuers themselves, possibly equalling those of the trapped force, maybe even higher, but there was no way they’d have held back without trying, even at great cost to themselves.
As I’ve never pursued this specific point in other battles, I can’t give examples at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 22, 2023 13:51:52 GMT -6
If we keep it to the history of the US Army, we did have isolated units being surrounded with various rescue attempts carried out. linklinkThese are both in 20th centuary, but are a good example. "thanks Jenny" I don't get many likes, so its nice to be on the receiving end Ian
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 22, 2023 13:53:20 GMT -6
If we keep it to the history of the US Army, we did have isolated units being surrounded with various rescue attempts carried out. linklinkThese are both in 20th centuary, but are a good example. "thanks Jenny" I don't get many likes, so its nice to be on the receiving end Ian
|
|
|
Post by justinterested on Apr 22, 2023 16:41:10 GMT -6
I can only use my thoughts from my other subject, which are many tend to focus on the officers, and the differences of leadership, likability, decisions, actions, etc., but unwittingly overlooked the thoughts of the men in the ranks of the part of the force not engaged with the enemy, who, knowing another part of the force was most likely fully engaged, therefore many of their friends and fellow military men in the ranks were facing a numerous enemy, but they themselves were held back, not heading out in support, leaving their friends fighting for their lives, wondering when reinforcements would appear coming to their aid. Although the men fully engaged with the enemy were more focused on the fight, I reckon they were on the lookout for the other men under Reno and Benteen, maybe even having time to feel a sense of betrayal, not necessarily by their friends, but the officers in command of them. Thinking why would they be willingly left to their fate....without rescue attempts from those in the same unit as them, the 7th Cavalry, where was loyalty at a time they were in a dire situation likely to be wiped out. I’m sure, as I previously mentioned, there will be other examples in military history from different eras, even more recently, where a force, known to be engaged, possibly surrounded by superior numbers, that if left without support, would definitely be killed or captured. However, in these other examples, rescue attempts were made, resulting in casualties amongst the rescuers themselves, possibly equalling those of the trapped force, maybe even higher, but there was no way they’d have held back without trying, even at great cost to themselves. As I’ve never pursued this specific point in other battles, I can’t give examples at the moment.
Hi, Logan.
Do you think this also applies also to the Reno and Benteen units, as they perceived Custer? "Although the men fully engaged with the enemy were more focused on the fight, I reckon they were on the lookout for the other men under Reno and Benteen, maybe even having time to feel a sense of betrayal, not necessarily by their friends, but the officers in command of them. Thinking why would they be willingly left to their fate....without rescue attempts from those in the same unit as them, the 7th Cavalry, where was loyalty at a time they were in a dire situation likely to be wiped out."
Several of them expressed pretty much that, and I think it's important to include that perspective in considering why there was not an immediate dash to Custer's aid. The assumption that they knew Custer was in deep trouble, per your penultimate para above, is just that. It's an assumption (and yes, I'm aware that some heard volleys and gunfire, but I'm equally aware that even those that heard that were unanimous that it meant Custer was in trouble).
What is not an assumption is that Reno was in deep trouble, and Benteen was helping him and potentially avoiding a full blow route in doing so.
So I understand you asking your questions on why no one rode to save Custer, but I also wonder if you've asked that same question in reverse, and applied that in your thinking on the concept.
|
|
|
Post by justinterested on Apr 22, 2023 16:46:19 GMT -6
If it's not obvious, I missed a "not" in the above. This should have read "(and yes, I'm aware that some heard volleys and gunfire, but I'm equally aware that even those that heard that were NOT unanimous that it meant Custer was in trouble)."
Apologies ...
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 22, 2023 17:13:18 GMT -6
just interested
There are several fantastic posts on this thread, but I do believe yours is my favourite, at a perfect moment in the discussion, I will reply, but it is after midnight here and I’m what is called a bit ‘under the weather’ being a Saturday night (alcohol involved) so was just checking before finishing my day.
I’ll respond later on Sunday okay, but I hope others respond meantime, as it is a very valid point.
Regards
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 22, 2023 17:23:58 GMT -6
Yan Taylor
Those links are incredibly interesting.
Thanks for adding.
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 23, 2023 7:03:30 GMT -6
just interested
The point that firing was indeed heard and seeing how large the village was, it could be imagined by even the troopers Custer was in trouble engaged likely by a large number of warriors, Reno being well aware of how many he had faced himself, would’ve likely been the same for Custer, further away and still threatening the village, warriors observing Reno/Benteen weren’t advancing to assist, but remained where they were, passive and unthreatening, warriors then able to focus more on Custer himself.
The moment Reno and Benteen convinced themselves on the narrative that it was a Custer who had abandoned them, not the other way about, it would’ve been impossible to think otherwise, as we keep getting reminded of Maj Elliott, they had a long time to mull over this mindset, likely pondering that in any court of inquiry that might be held in the aftermath, either one or both officers could hold Custer to account for the failure, and that they were the ones facing most if not the entire force of warriors from the village, determined to survive in order to give their accounts in any later investigation.
Personally, if I was there in the situation and felt I had been deserted by my commander, left to fight it out without his support, I’d have certainly been determined, if I survived, to make sure to hold him to account, that by pursuing his own ends whatever the reasoning was, used Reno/Benteen as bait as he gained the fame and glory.
Benteen needed convincing Custer was dead, not sure how he truly felt on seeing his body, whether realising he was the one who had let Custer down, or more likely in my opinion, disappointed, as he must’ve really thought he was finally going to nail Custer and finish him, both his career and the legend surrounding him.
|
|
logan
Full Member
Posts: 202
|
Post by logan on Apr 23, 2023 18:35:39 GMT -6
Hindsight ? That’s what everyone is using discussing the subject today, none of us were present on the day, but it is my belief, with enough consideration of events at the time in history, it is possible to surmise what is thought to be going on with the evidence available to the men present.
Is it not something like Occam’s Razor, that events can be interpreted In different ways ?
Regarding volley fire heard in Custer’s direction....some hear Custer was giving the warriors hell...others hear Custer must be dismounted firing volleys at an opponent that isn’t of the ACW era marching in lines, but fluid, fast, evasive, hard to predict, surfacing above terrain momentarily to shoot or fire arrows, therefore volley fire is mostly ineffective, used for effect not a guarantee of hitting targets.
Reno and Benteen, especially the former, should’ve realised, volley fire will not deter a determined irregular opponent, whose fighting methods were unpredictable, but also defending their own camp and non-combatants from attack.
|
|