dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 23, 2015 16:22:16 GMT
"COLONEL JOSEPH J. REYNOLDS AND THE SAINT PATRICK’S DAY
CELEBRATION ON POWDER RIVER; BATTLE OF POWDER RIVER"
This theses was posted on another board and thought I would share with y'all. The focus of this paper is best described by the author:
"This thesis will examine how the Battle of Powder River played a role in the
operational losses in the battles of the rest of the Centennial Campaign. The Battle of
Powder River began a series of mistakes, blunders, and lost battles, all directly or
indirectly contributing to the massing of the Sioux and Cheyenne Indian tribes just prior
to Custer’s fatal last day."
This paper dates from 2001. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Nov 23, 2015 20:29:19 GMT
I have read, but you might wish to supply a link for others.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 23, 2015 21:19:55 GMT
Deadwood you are right it would be helpful to have the site listed. Regards Dave
file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/ADA396759%20(2).pdf
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 24, 2015 0:15:19 GMT
Dave, that link isn't going to work. Let me know if this is the right document link
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 24, 2015 4:37:20 GMT
Dave, that link isn't going to work. Let me know if this is the right document linkBeth it has the pdf about 1/2 down left side in blue. Clicking on the pd opens it. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 24, 2015 19:26:09 GMT
I wanted to make sure. The link you put up is actually a location on your own computer--on your C drive actually.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 24, 2015 20:24:37 GMT
I did not know I had a C drive. Glad we have got the address straight so people can read the document.
One the most startling thing I got from this paper was how Crook blamed anybody and everybody for the failures at Powder River and the Rosebud. I had always held him in high regard prior to reading this theses. Crook was as big a prima dona as Custer. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 24, 2015 20:46:36 GMT
I wonder sometimes if the prima dona comes with the job. Perhaps it is one common denominators that allows some officers rise in the ranks higher and faster than others.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 24, 2015 22:17:39 GMT
Beth I am sure the military has the same quality of folks as they did in the 19th century and 20th century. We only know about the ones from history to judge. The sad fact is you never hear about the Sam Damons but the Courtney Massengales are always heard from and about.
Occasionally we hear from vets like QC and Fred about really good leaders but alas not many of the really good leaders are well known outside the military. The Custers and Cooks promote themselves so well that they are the only ones visiable from afar. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 25, 2015 11:46:26 GMT
You guys were lucky, around the time of Custer most officers in the British army came from private school stock, who's families were loaded and powerful, a lot of these were of gentlemen stock and it didn't matter one jot about their ability in the field as they wore the old school tie, obviously there would be exceptions and many of these chaps were brave, but the chances of coming through the lower ranks and making a career as a top officer would be very hard indeed and many doors would be closed, no matter how good you were as a leader.
The same was said about sport, the chances of you playing cricket or rugby union for England would be nil, no matter how talented you were, not that you had a chance to be picked in the first place as the possibility of you being coached or even having sporting equipment would be slim, you were more likely to be working 12 hours a day when you was 13-14
Yan.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Nov 25, 2015 20:40:53 GMT
Ian As part of the immigration of the US many old countries ways were abandon. From religious freedom to access to public schooling things were different except for manufacturing. The US was greatly effected by the Industrial Revolution as was Great Britain and other nations.
Labor abuses lead to the formation of the AFL-CIO and worker rights. We had the rise of the rich tycoons such as Astor, Carnegie and Vanderbilt which held sway over the pay and rights of the work force. The Sherman Anti Trust Act of 1890 broke up the corporations but we had manny of the same ills as y'all did.
The military was operated by the graduates of West Point with the exception of the 5 years of the War 1861-1865 when civilians rose to positions of leadership. Few of the civilians were able to secure officer positions after the War. Benteen was an exception to the rule. The military is more receptive to non military graduates and in fact Admiral Boorda who rose from the ranks to be the Chief of Naval Operations. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Nov 25, 2015 21:39:20 GMT
America--especially Victorian America did have a class system, it is just more nebulous than the British system that people could move up and down by their own merit rather than by birth. There were also families that would even fit the mold of Aristocracy and even today we recognize the names and some still have that 'gild' of 'old money-Astors, Cabots, Lowells, Roosevelts, DuPonts...
You will find that quite of few US generals, especially those from New England, at the time fit the mold of gentlemen's sons. Terry is from New Haven Conn. He attended Hopkins School and then Yale which is the American equivalent of going to a school like Harrow (Phillips Exeter would be closer to Eton) and then Cambridge.
Those who went to West Point and other military academies, were taught to be "Gentlemen" because it was considered vital to being a good officer.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Dec 4, 2015 16:55:15 GMT
I noticed that Crook set off for his Powder River campaign on March 1, 1876 and within days ran into a blizzard. Leading to some questions that I have:
1) Why leave so early in the year knowing that winter might not be over? 2) Was it to beat Terry and Custer and gain early glory? 3) Was it to test the mettle and strength of the Indians prior to the summer campaign? 4) By having Reynolds in command did Crook have a patsy in place in case of disaster? 5) Was this proposed campaign well designed and planned? Or not? 6) Did Crook have better intel than Custer or about the same?
Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Dec 4, 2015 19:54:21 GMT
Dave, I think the long and short of the above was to get after the NA's while less mobile, thinner slower ponies, less in the way of scouts out, less hunting parties out, and slowed by weather. You also must remember Gibbon was out and about in the same timeframe. Custer and Terry were late. Check out the timing Sheridan actually wanted. Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 4, 2015 21:05:30 GMT
Dave if you waited until there was no chance of a blizzard in certain areas of the mountains, you would have an extremely limited window of opportunity.
|
|