mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 29, 2015 8:49:25 GMT
Crazy Horse did take his time, much to the chagrin of some of his followers, presumably because he needed to do the magic and felt the time was available. Mind you to be him you must have a reasonable ego. Lame White Man went straight to battle with no preparation so when he was killed someone scalped the body thinking he was an army scout. Ian raises a good question. If Keogh knew what Company C was doing why would he not be positioned somehow in relation to that move? Seems like it could be more lack of communication. I still feel mounted men don't die in two big bunches; so Company I were not mounted. If they knew C was moving surely they would at least be mounted? Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 29, 2015 12:57:26 GMT
If Keogh knew what Company C was doing why would he not be positioned somehow in relation to that move? Seems like it could be more lack of communication. That’s why I think that Keogh left these two companies to hold their own with him seeing to his own business over the ridge, he probably never placed anyone in any overall control, I think that Calhoun was the senior officer out of the three but I have a feeling that there was little or no communication between these two companies and that Harrington acted alone thinking that he was doing Calhoun a favour by sweeping the threat away. I still have mixed thoughts though on Keogh’s ability to control a battalion, had he ever held the rank of battalion commander for any great length of time previous to this battle? Captains are normally company commanders. But like most of the actions on that day it looks like a lot of the officers were looking after just their own companies rather than the big picture, which is ok if you are a company commander, but Benteen, Reno, Keogh and Yates were all in charge of battalions which consisted between 2 to 3 companies. Side bar; would you class Benteen’s group move to Weir Point a three or four company battalion effort? D company were well ahead but were supposed to be under Benteen, Benteen himself took forward companies K, H & M plus a few odds and ends. Yan.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 29, 2015 13:02:22 GMT
I have always thought that fact so many warriors were able to spend the time getting ready for battle shows they had the luxury of time. Similar to my better half getting ready for a night out, but she always looks lovely even though she takes an age getting it together. Yan.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 29, 2015 20:08:36 GMT
I'm curious. The subject that Reno was drinking is often discussed but what do you think the chances are Keogh might have had a something other than water in his canteen that day?
Yan the war paint/makeup analogy is very close to the truth. There was a time that my elder daughter claimed that she couldn't take out the trash if she didn't have makeup on (she was quickly disabused of that notion). Funny thing is that she told me on her last phone call home that now she is at college she has really cut down on her makeup.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 30, 2015 13:55:55 GMT
I reckon if any officers did have a swig or two of the hard stuff that it wouldn’t make much difference, imagine being in Reno’s of Keogh’s shoes and facing imminent death, surly this would sober anyone up rather quickly, if Reno was sloshed then riding his horse pell-mell up that valley would be a feat in itself, how did he stay in the saddle for god’s sake. Any prospect of Keogh being fortified by the old fire water would surly wear off with a bullet through his leg.
Beth when I work an evening shift at a doctors surgery I am accompanied by two young women cleaners (mid-twenties) and one of them is so dolled up you would think that she is going out for a night on the tiles, not cleaning toilets.
Yan.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 30, 2015 18:49:36 GMT
Beth The functioning alcoholic is in all aspects of life as we all know. The fact that these soldiers drank hard liquor before during and after battle is not surprising. I have not been in combat but I bet it will scare one sober pretty quick. The morning of the 1st day of the battle of Shiloh, a soldier from the 15th Iowa, which arrived at Pittsburg Landing at the same time as the 16th Iowa, observed his LTC drinking from a liquor bottle at about 9 am. Pretty hard core drinker there. Keogh, Reno, Weir and maybe Benteen all imbibed heavily and were functioning alcoholics. Regards Dave
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 30, 2015 21:17:07 GMT
I think the drinking thing is another red herring used to blame, in particular Reno, and it does not stand up to any serious analysis. We could easily say Custer was drunk and that explains the whole thing.....hey I may be onto something....pour me a drink and let's talk.....or not. Cheers (as salutation only).
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 30, 2015 22:07:03 GMT
I reckon if any officers did have a swig or two of the hard stuff that it wouldn’t make much difference, imagine being in Reno’s of Keogh’s shoes and facing imminent death, surly this would sober anyone up rather quickly, if Reno was sloshed then riding his horse pell-mell up that valley would be a feat in itself, how did he stay in the saddle for god’s sake. Any prospect of Keogh being fortified by the old fire water would surly wear off with a bullet through his leg. Beth when I work an evening shift at a doctors surgery I am accompanied by two young women cleaners (mid-twenties) and one of them is so dolled up you would think that she is going out for a night on the tiles, not cleaning toilets. Yan. The funny thing about makeup is that I suspect more women put on makeup for other women than for men. Men don't come up to you and say you look like you live under a rock, you need to use some blush-women will. Other women just feel exposed without makeup. Actually I suspect that if Keogh's injury wasn't just before his death, he probably was numbing the pain with a lot of hooch. Personally I have always felt that any focus on drinking at LBH is just red herring. But it bemuses me how it is so often the focus of one certain argument, even though there were probably a lot of canteens filled with whatever they bought at Powder River. You knew it was drinkable--the was no promise that any water you encountered elsewhere wouldn't give you all sorts of very unpleasant side effects.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 30, 2015 22:18:06 GMT
Beth The functioning alcoholic is in all aspects of life as we all know. The fact that these soldiers drank hard liquor before during and after battle is not surprising. I have not been in combat but I bet it will scare one sober pretty quick. The morning of the 1st day of the battle of Shiloh, a soldier from the 15th Iowa, which arrived at Pittsburg Landing at the same time as the 16th Iowa, observed his LTC drinking from a liquor bottle at about 9 am. Pretty hard core drinker there. Keogh, Reno, Weir and maybe Benteen all imbibed heavily and were functioning alcoholics. Regards Dave It really wasn't until the temperance movement in the middle part of the 19th Century that anyone would have even questioned men drinking before, during or after a battle. Often times alcohol had been considered as much of a daily ration as bread and beans. I have always considered it no accident that Libbie Custer and her allies focused on Reno's drinking. In the 1870's the Temperance Movement was becoming a very strong force in the US. Temperance movement
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 30, 2015 22:21:02 GMT
I think the drinking thing is another red herring used to blame, in particular Reno, and it does not stand up to any serious analysis. We could easily say Custer was drunk and that explains the whole thing.....hey I may be onto something....pour me a drink and let's talk.....or not. Cheers (as salutation only). Custer might have commanded better if he had had a little nip or two. It's hard to believe that he could have done worse--but I suppose it is possible. Personally I think Custer was an adrenaline junkie.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 1, 2015 4:44:26 GMT
No one can judge any testimony unless you fully understand the atmosphere in which that testimony is rendered.
Beth is absolutely correct. Had LBH been fought in 1836 rather than 1876, there would not have been any mention of anyone drinking. It was what was expected.
Mac is also correct that the who issue of Reno drinking is a red herring brought to the fore, by anyone who wanted to absolve Goldilocks from the responsibility of command and the fact that he wasted 209 lives needlessly, and in all probability for the purpose of satiating his own vanity.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Dec 1, 2015 8:49:34 GMT
I am still perturbed about how many Company I markers are grouped in the swale. The implication is that they were just "chillin" down there when one would expect at least some of them to be up on the ridge or guarding the gap or something. In the thesis on the Powder River battle there is the suggestion that at this time companies were not used to operating as battalions and the tendency was for them to "do there own thing". I wonder if these three companies, although together as a battalion were really just operating as three companies. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 1, 2015 11:30:09 GMT
Mac you have echoed what I wrote the other day my friend, due to the lack of Majors these so called battalions were commanded by company commanders, some of the companies themselves were commanded by lieutenants who were normally 2/inCs on any other day.
Has anybody read that Keogh was named as a battalion commander before the 25th or even as officer’s call on the morning of the 25th? The four senior captains were Benteen, Keogh, Yates and Weir, but for all we know that out of the four only Benteen was given the job as a designated battalion commander, the other captain who commanded a battalion/pack train of course was McDougall and he was the junior captain in the whole regiment, as far as we know Yates and Keogh both had battalions and they may have verbally got the jobs on the hoof after the divide, but I would expect that in Custer’s mind he commanded one group and Reno another and that was it.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 1, 2015 13:20:06 GMT
Many a battalion in WWI and WWII were commanded by Captains on a temporary basis. That is not all that unusual when you consider that units in combat can only use what they have available. That was the case with Custer. It should also be noted that the armored rifle company that captured the Remagen Bridge was commanded by a very junior second lieutenant, and for the same reason.
You do bring up an interesting point though Ian. Most authors consider Custer's immediate command as being one battalion. I think the separation into two is fairly recent vintage. I remember some talk several years ago on these boards about a formal/informal division into two battalions. I cannot recall exactly when it was supposed to have taken place, but if memory serves it was on the 25th. Regardless, Custer was the type to retain close control, so division or not I don't see where it would make much difference to Custer, in Custer's mind. Close control does not breed independence of thought in a subordinates mind, in fact just the opposite, a state of mental freeze when confronted with the unexpected.
The way you cultivate responsibility in subordinates is give it to them, first in small doses, and as they prove themselves in larger and larger. Custer's record is one of complete failure in developing his subordinates, for to do so would remove power from his hands. In that atmosphere you get just what you got at LBH.
Don't know if it is still true, suspect it is, Captains in Will's line of work were expected to be so well developed and trained that they could command a regiment of irregulars during combat operations, with sergeants taking command of battalions. It is the fact that SF are such force multipliers that make them a superb force structure investment
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 1, 2015 22:13:51 GMT
You do bring up an interesting point though Ian. Most authors consider Custer's immediate command as being one battalion. I think the separation into two is fairly recent vintage. I remember some talk several years ago on these boards about a formal/informal division into two battalions. I cannot recall exactly when it was supposed to have taken place, but if memory serves it was on the 25th. Regardless, Custer was the type to retain close control, so division or not I don't see where it would make much difference to Custer, in Custer's mind. Close control does not breed independence of thought in a subordinates mind, in fact just the opposite, a state of mental freeze when confronted with the unexpected. I suspect you have a very valid point QC. If Custer was a control freak, then the chances are those under him and especially those he has kept closest to him for the longest period of time, don't have the skill sets or perhaps even the confidence to act independently. They might have been more in the 'what is Custer going to do next' mindset instead of 'what should I do now.' Kind of like when a kid raised by controlling parents leaves the nest to go to college--
|
|