|
Post by warden on Sept 6, 2013 9:45:56 GMT -6
Quincannon: Thank you for your reply and you are right. I did take a cheap shot at Little Mac and your criticism of my post is warranted. I did read Return to Bull Run some years ago and I always remembered the author's contention that if Jackson had more strongly pressed the Federals to his front the South's victory would have been greater during Longstreet's attack. fred: Thank you for taking an interest in my post. In answer to your question could Benteen have saved Custer? No. To clarify my statements on the Benteen-Goldin letters: My copy is The Benteen-Goldin Letters on Custer and his Last Battle edited by John M Carroll, 1974. On page 271-"twas a ghastly sight, but what a big winner the U.S. Govt. would have been if only Custer and his gang could have been taken." On page 272 I despised him On page 263 After that you can imagine what dealings I had with the SOB. He proved to my entire satisfaction that he was a cur of the "1st water" In Custer's Last Fight by Donald C. Evans on page 394: During his retirement (Benteen) engaged in a lengthy correspondence with Theodore Goldin. This correspondence reveals Benteen to have been an embittered man whose obsessive hatred for Custer increased with the passing years. In To Hell with Honor by Sklenar in chapter 2 titled Natural Enemies footnotes 2, 7, 9, 12, 14, 17, 22, 27, 29, 34, 36, 40, and 43 all reference the letters. In Touched by Fire by Louise Barnett page 195: whatever Monahseetah's usefulness as a go between, various sources report she shared Custer's bed... Custer's persistent enemy, Frederick Benteen, not surprisingly offers the fullest version of events in a letter to... (note 44 references the letter of Feb. 17, 1896 pg. 271) In Custer's Luck by Edgar I. Stewart on page 169: Benteen declared, however that he knew the man (Custer) too well to be friendly with him. Footnote 20 references The Custer Myth by Graham. Again the letters. I would like to end with a question maybe someone on the board can answer. In regard to the Weir Point episode did any officer (only those that were there) advocate an advance to engage the enemy at that time? Or did any officer on the 26th urge an offensive? They had approximately 7 companies, the reserve ammo, and the pack train. Or did the idea of 3 troops of cavalry pitching into and successfully defeating the hostiles die with Custer? thanks; warden
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Sept 6, 2013 10:00:40 GMT -6
Very well then, and thank you for making the correction.
John Hennessey, used to be the historian at Manassas. I consider his book the most readable book I have ever read on the Civil War. He also did an article on Chantilly, the last act of the campaign, for one of the Civil War Magazines that was brought to me in the hospital in February 2000 as I was recovering from cancer. I remember that the article verified for me something that I had written about thirteen years earlier in my monograph "Rebels on the Turnpike" which when written I did not have what I considered adequate source material. All that being the exact location of Johnson's brigade on Stringfellow Road, which as it turns out was the exact spot where my son went to junior high school.
I am not as critical as some about Jackson not moving with vigor to get at Pope in coordination with Longstreet's attack. He should have no doubt. His weight added would have clinched the deal, but Jackson was pretty well spent. He had a very difficult time in the march next day up the Gum Springs Road to the Little River Turnpike, and should have been well down near Chantilly Plantation with his infantry by nightfall. As it is he only made it as far as modern day Arcola. His men were very tired, and his resources badly strained. So yes he should have, I think a much more fair question is if he could have.
If this campaign interests you, you might also wish to read "Tempest at Ox Hill" subtitled The Battle of Chantilly by another local who lives in Centreville, David Welker, as well as seeing if you can get a copy of the "Battle of Ox Hill, by Colonel Robert Ross Smith, who was an Army historian at the Center of Military History. That was published in "trade book" format by Fairfax County as part of the 100th Anniversary of the ACW. I had the honor of accompanying Colonel Smith and LTC Joe Whitehorn on the battlefield when Whitehorn was preparing his article, "The Battle of Chantilly" for Blue and Gray Magazine. The narrative of Hazard Stevens return to the Chantilly battlefield is a must read to determine locations. Stevens was wounded during the battle, and his father the commanding general of the forces initially engaged was killed there. I think that is in the possession of the Massachusetts Historical Society. It was written by a friend also a Chantilly vet who accompanied him on the trip named Charles Walcott..
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Sept 6, 2013 10:29:50 GMT -6
Ian, you could say that Benteen did challenge Custer to a duel of sorts. When Custer called his officers together to read them the riot act after the letter critisizing his actions at Washita appeared in the newspapers, Custer threatened to horsewhip the author if he could be found. As the story goes, Benteen, with hand on revolver, said "General, if there is any whipping to be done you may commence now, as it was I who wrote the letter". Custer dropped the matter and supposedly never mentioned it again. Also, in regard to Pope, he had had some success in the western theater and came east with the attitude of "I'll show these easterners how we did it in the west" which naturally didn't endear him to most of his new subordinates and was probably a lot like how Benteen and others felt about Custer.
Fred, I'm going to take slight issue with your comment of "Does this mean you think that if Benteen had arrived with his 114 men, trumpets blaring, guidons waving, he would have saved the day... and Custer too?". You see that quite often in the "Benteen dawdled" debate, when someone throws out "it wouldn't have made any difference anyway". While probably true, I think it is irrelevant to the issue of judging Benteen's actions, unless it can be shown that he, at the time, made a conscious decison to do or not do something because he thought that it would serve no purpose and/or cause possible harm. Otherwise, I think it a hollow argument.
Warden, in regard to your question of "In regard to the Weir Point episode did any officer (only those that were there) advocate an advance to engage the enemy at that time? Or did any officer on the 26th urge an offensive.", although there is little in the record to indicate this, I suspect that a good deal of discussion occured between Reno, Benteen, and possibly others, surrounding the proper course of action on the 25th, such as should they follow Custer's trail, or re-enter the valley and renew Reno's attack, or something else. After they were pinned down on the hill late on the 25th and through the 26th, I don't think any sort of offensive action was possible or contiplated, other than local spoiling attacks as were launched on a couple of occasions.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Sept 6, 2013 10:37:05 GMT -6
Gatewood: Fully concur on your last paragraph. I particularly like your use of the term spoiling attack, which I think is accurate for what happened. A counter attack is to regain what is lost, and I don't believe Benteen's attack which is the most notable, or any other sought to regain anything rather to break up concentrations to their front before those impending assaults could be fully launched.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 6, 2013 10:38:35 GMT -6
Hi Warden Don't mention it,no problem.
As to your question there was a local offensive by Benteen when he organised a counter attack against a number of Indians who were getting a bit too close for comfort. The only victory of the operation. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 6, 2013 10:50:23 GMT -6
Gatewood While probably true, I think it is irrelevant to the issue of judging Benteen's actions, unless he, at the time, made a conscious decison to do or not do something because he thought that it would serve no purpose and cause possible harm. Otherwise, I think it hollow argument Agreed. Benteen should not be judged on hindsight.His obligation was to progress his orders as far as tactically possible and that was at least as far as Weir Point even if Custer was by that time dead. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by warden on Sept 6, 2013 12:20:35 GMT -6
wild: Thank you for the welcome. No snub intended. In reply to your posts quincannon was right and I was wrong. I could not care less what an individuals current/previous occupation is/was. Only that they make sense (to me anyway) on the current topic. I think I understand the basics so the more detail the better and if I want to learn and to contribute the same rules apply to me also. In browsing this board and occasionally the other one there are some interesting little nuggets to ponder and explore. Such as Kanipe possibly not really being a messenger, 2 morasses, more than 1 lone tepee site, 2 trips by Custer to the divide to scout, and many more hostile warriors, in other words back to the reported June 1876 numbers of the survivors. These little details can add up for me a better understanding of why we are all here on this board. warden
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Sept 6, 2013 12:28:54 GMT -6
Hi Warden and don’t worry, you will be fine. We are a nice bunch here and will help you as best we can. P.S. I forgot to say Welcome!
Hello Gatewood, that’s a great story about Benteen and Custer, I had loved to be witness to that face off.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 6, 2013 12:38:02 GMT -6
Did the Indians know that they had the Reno/Benteen command in the bag.Did they know that Reno/Benteen could not run having as they did wounded,unhorsed men and a mile long mule train If so they were in no rush to vacate the LSH area and confront Reno/Benteen. If only the Indians knew how close they came to duplicating the Zulu victory at Isandlwana.The key to a resounding victory lay in an attack on Terry and then mopping up Reno.The destruction of a mixed arm brigade?
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 6, 2013 12:49:04 GMT -6
Hi Warden That's ok . You will understand that not everyone is as thick skinned as yourself. I objected not only for you but for all newbees who should be allowed a period of settling in before having their efforts described as a bucket of spit.;But enough of this negativity.Enjoy the board ;I look forward to reading your contributions. Regards
|
|
|
Post by Gatewood on Sept 6, 2013 13:14:23 GMT -6
wild: Thank you for the welcome. No snub intended. In reply to your posts quincannon was right and I was wrong. I could not care less what an individuals current/previous occupation is/was. Only that they make sense (to me anyway) on the current topic. I think I understand the basics so the more detail the better and if I want to learn and to contribute the same rules apply to me also. In browsing this board and occasionally the other one there are some interesting little nuggets to ponder and explore. Such as Kanipe possibly not really being a messenger, 2 morasses, more than 1 lone tepee site, 2 trips by Custer to the divide to scout, and many more hostile warriors, in other words back to the reported June 1876 numbers of the survivors. These little details can add up for me a better understanding of why we are all here on this board. warden Warden, I think that you will find that most on this board place a premium on substantiated fact, as opposed to opinion passed off as fact. This applies to things that might be quoted from other sources, such as authors, as, just because someone may have said it in a book or article doesn't necessarily make it true. Opinion or belief is OK, as long as you present it as such.
|
|
|
Post by warden on Sept 6, 2013 13:29:04 GMT -6
gatewood: thank you. That was the exact point I was trying to make about the Benteen-Goldin letters. That various authors use them for their own agenda whether they are true or not. warden
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Sept 6, 2013 13:45:49 GMT -6
You will do OK here Warden.
|
|
|
Post by benteen on Sept 6, 2013 13:56:31 GMT -6
Warden, From your posts you seem like a gentleman, not upset by being corrected on an issue, not only here to learn but share your knowledge with us. Welcome aboard. P.S. I should have welcomed you last night but there was a football game on, and if it is a choice between old George A. and football its no contest Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by wild on Sept 6, 2013 14:09:22 GMT -6
Warden, I think that you will find that most on this board place a premium on substantiated fact, as opposed to opinion passed off as fact Warden you will find that substantiated fact is in short supply beyond MTC . Cheers
|
|