|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 3, 2007 22:53:47 GMT -6
Again you change your answer as compared to the question. How was Benteen routed not made ineffective was the question. Your statement which is the first quote above may be correct but you didn't demonstrate how Benteen was routed per your second quote above.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 3, 2007 23:00:16 GMT -6
realbird - I am not sure if you were agreeing with Wild's statement about Benteen being made ineffective or you believe that Benteen was routed as described by Wild. Benteen retreating TO Weir. I agree with the former but don't see how Benteen was routed. Reno yes, Custer maybe, but don't see it with Benteen since he never engaged before meeting up with Reno or while going TO Weir.
Also you must realize that Wild claims the retreat is TO Weir not at it or from it.
This is the rout that Wild refers to in his posts.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Feb 4, 2007 9:59:51 GMT -6
I still think that Benteen coming upon a command coming apart, with indecision and insubordination bubbling away, did a remarkable job. He had to support Reno, had to round up Weir, had to bring cohesion with no argument in front of the men all on top of getting a defense organized against huge unfavorable odds. In retrospect, I think everyone sensed it was his presence of command rather more than the actuality of specifics that saved them, and while intangible in many ways, cemented him as the savior. He was a natural leader without military schooling and Reno - and frankly, everyone else - was not.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 4, 2007 10:40:03 GMT -6
I agree. Benteen might have been ineffective for Custer but who knows if anything would have been any better or fewer lives lost. I don't think there was anyway to win that day for the 7th.
He was effective in pulling together the remaining parts of Reno's battalion ands surviving to fight another day. A dead soldier is useless in the service to the cavalry.
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by PhillyBlair on Feb 4, 2007 10:43:51 GMT -6
DC, that's the best summation of Benteen that I've read. Right on target.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 4, 2007 12:53:30 GMT -6
Benteen in allowing a letter of his criticizing Custer for deserting Elliot to be published gave a hostage to fortune.He recognized Reno's position as exactly the same as Elliot's therefore how could he in all honesty desert Reno after his public attack on Custer.
I still think that Benteen coming upon a command coming apart, with indecision and insubordination bubbling away, did a remarkable job. He had to support Reno, had to round up Weir, had to bring cohesion with no argument in front of the men all on top of getting a defense organized against huge unfavorable odds On the contrary the indecision and insubordination was his.He fragmented the command,made Reno look like fool and risked the remainder of the command.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Feb 4, 2007 13:07:47 GMT -6
Benteen wrote the Elliot letter to a friend, who unbeknownst to Benteen send it to a newspaper editor.
Now, one can think that Benteen, knowing his friend would send the letter to a newspaper, had this all planned out that way, and he could plead innocence.
Still, I believe the friend did this on his own without Benteen's knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 4, 2007 14:52:57 GMT -6
Still, I believe the friend did this on his own without Benteen's knowledge. Benteen made no such excuse and took responsibility for it when challenged by Custer. None the less with or without his approval Benteen's colors were nailed to the mast and faced with a similar situation as Elliot there was only one action he could take.
|
|
|
Post by Realbird on Feb 4, 2007 19:15:52 GMT -6
How could Benteen be routed when you say he never engaged before Wier. He had not been defeated and was not going away from the battlefield?He was rendered ineffective by the sight of the numbers opposed to him and the state of Reno's command.
I agree with Wild. Benteen's reaction and decision was based upon his observation that consisted of viewing hundreds of hostile, embolden, and outraged warriors chasing and slaughtering fleeing troopers. A military man of immense experience, Benteen intuitively realized that the "rookies" and veterans in his command were, at the least, startled by what they saw. Therefore, his decision to "exit stage right" is understandable. The morality or immorality of this decision is another issue.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 4, 2007 20:47:14 GMT -6
So going to Weir is "exit stage right"?
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Feb 4, 2007 20:49:09 GMT -6
So if going to Weir is "exit stage right"?
Then is going back to Reno Hill is advancing?
|
|
|
Post by wild on Feb 5, 2007 3:50:06 GMT -6
So if going to Weir is "exit stage right"? Then is going back to Reno Hill is advancing? Retreat is not just a direction.It is a tactical stance,principly a withdrawal from action. Benteen's in abdicating de facto command of the forces on Reno Hill and fragmenting the command and heading off with no particular plan rendered the command ineffectual and routed.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Feb 5, 2007 4:36:38 GMT -6
Hi Wild and Realbird
I think you are really struggling with your arguments here. If Benteen and Reno had wished to "exit stage right" as you put it then they would have departed the scene altogether rather than stay on Reno Hill to face the inevitable return of the Indians.
In fact moving towards Reno Hill for Benteen was advancing closer to the location of the hostile village not moving further from it.
It is also semantically absurd to use the term rout in the context of the advance to Weir Point which again was somewhat closer to the enemy village than Reno Hill. The characteristic of routed troops is that they head away from known enemy locations. It is fairly clear that Reno was totally opposed to any move towards Weir hence the reason for a fairer description of a disjointed advance.
A more interesting speculation would be what should have been done if Custer had forted up on Luce or Nye-Cartwright rather than moving as far as LSH. What might have been the best tactic for the cavalry if Custer had been closer and on a better defensive position. Would Reno and Benteen stay on Weir or move back to Reno Hill? There would have been issues such as trying to pass ammunition to Custer and get access to water for both parties. Weir was actually a better defensive position than Reno Hill but with the huge disadvantage that there was no easy access to water. The same would be true for Luce or Nye-Cartwright. Was there any actual water in MTC? If Custer had been on Luce and Benteen on Weir they could have made MTC too dangerous for many Indians to be there.
Regards
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Feb 5, 2007 4:57:02 GMT -6
Weir is a terrible defensive position. You're falling for the high ground is always best mantra. That's not so. High ground with no cover means you're an elevated target to take fire from many or all sides from people lower with cover, certainly the case there. Then, hundreds of horses and mules.
It looks somewhat better now since they drilled the road through and gave another mound to one side, but even so it's bad. Reno Hill was no Masada, but it offered a better site than Weir regardless of water access.
|
|
|
Post by mcaryf on Feb 5, 2007 5:22:14 GMT -6
Hi DC
I suggest you look at Kuhlman's book "Legend into History" on page 97 where he has a map showing the troop dispositions at Weir. The position actually consisted of two parallel ridges not just one and where the Indians (despite some misleading testimony at RCOI) could not effectively occupy the area between the ridges so they were mutually supporting. I guess Kuhlman was aware of the layout before the road was built and he judges it to be the best defensive position in the battlefield area unfortunately with the critical problem that there was no easy access to water.
Regards
Mike
|
|