|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Mar 27, 2016 2:42:52 GMT
My word! A cogent discussion dealing with the facts available and no condemnation of a man's actions 140 years ago by those not there and unable to judge the circumstances the man in question faced. This is like a Grown Up discussion. This thread could really attract new members and increase the number of visitors perusing our threads and posts. I sincerely hope that others will participate not only in this thread but as many of the others they may be interested in . Regards Dave I promise not to attack anyone with a hairbrush.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Mar 27, 2016 6:28:10 GMT
My word! A cogent discussion dealing with the facts available and no condemnation of a man's actions 140 years ago by those not there and unable to judge the circumstances the man in question faced. This is like a Grown Up discussion. This thread could really attract new members and increase the number of visitors perusing our threads and posts. I sincerely hope that others will participate not only in this thread but as many of the others they may be interested in . Regards Dave I promise not to attack anyone with a hairbrush. You are eee--vil.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Mar 27, 2016 11:48:22 GMT
I do not wish to cast aspersions either. My issues were posted elsewhere so I will post them here.
I received orders from Sr. NCO's, Lt.'s, Captains, even a Major on occasion. Generally I could tell from their demeanor if the order came from on high. Genesis, did not matter, I either performed the task or passed it on to whoever would. I have also passed an order from one officer to another. The difference between Kanipe's deliverance of an order and orders I passed on, other than the fact that MacDougall and Mathey said at the RCOI, that they did not receive it, was that I informed the receiving officer who it came from at the time I delivered it.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by BrevetorCoffin on Mar 27, 2016 13:06:34 GMT
I promise not to attack anyone with a hairbrush. You are eee--vil. Nonsense, Beth. I was born into a Christian household. Took time to develop ways about me that just aren't right. ;-)
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Mar 27, 2016 13:45:23 GMT
Those that do not understand that being piss your pants scared is OK and natural, never read Stephen Crane Those that do not understand that both courage and fear are fleeting, they come and go, never read Stephen Crane Those that do not understand that courage and uncontrolled fear are constant bedfellows, never read Stephen Crane. Those that do not understand the healing power of redemption, never read Stephen Crane. I feel sorry for them for they know not what they say. I agree. I have a John Wayne poster that was in my office. It stated:
“Courage is being scared to death, but saddling up anyway.”
It was important to me as a trainer that this was understood. I still instruct and patrol as a reserve officer with full peace officer authority. On the leadership side you need to control the being scared to death and keep it internal.
Since officers have many contacts where they are alone it is necessary for them to learn to perform under that stress.
In a few weeks the PRTP at NAU is closer to graduating and they will begin scenarios to feel the fear factor and have to react. First they work in pairs, then alone, and finally alone for evaluations.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 27, 2016 14:12:59 GMT
Training is the prime tool the military, and I presume police and first responders have to instill confidence in the individual, and mitigate the effects of fear. The more you have, the more confidence you build, and the result is controlling, not eliminating fear.
Training is the prime tool for overcoming all other types of stress as well, fatigue, chief among them.
No training, or substandard, or inappropriate training yield the results we see at LBH, and Lexington Green, Bull Run, Kasserine Pass, and Task Force Smith.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Mar 27, 2016 21:13:20 GMT
Hypothetical question. If a person feels no fear in a situation, are they really being courageous? I tend to believe that Custer's leading his men into battle wasn't so much an act of courage. I think he loved battle and was what we would call today an adrenaline junkie and that perhaps he wanted to lead the way so he was in the center of the excitement.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Mar 27, 2016 21:25:00 GMT
A question about Kanape. As they were traveling on the bluffs, would Kanape have been positioned close to T. Custer? Or would it be impossible to know. I was just wondering if there is a possibility of a scenario where Kanipe felt his horse was failing, mentioned it to someone in charge and they told him that if he can make it back to the packs pass on a message. I know there are other problems like no one remembers Kanipe relaying the message etc but I imagine that a lot of details were forgotten in the course of events.
|
|
|
Post by rollingthunder on May 13, 2021 13:59:35 GMT
Hello everybody:
I have three questions about Sergeant Kanipe that I can't find:
When does Kanipe say for the first time and to which person does he tell that he is a messenger from Custer? He says it and manifests it once Terry gets to Reno Hill, or is it after days, months, or years? Where was the information that he was a messenger from Custer for the first time published?
Best
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 13, 2021 17:10:55 GMT
That is an interesting question, and I don't know if anyone knows the FULL answer. As for "first time" who knows. He may have mentioned it several times in those first few hours to several people, and all of it unrecorded.
The thing with Kanipe that adds interest is not Kanipe himself, but the circumstance around the story he tells that in turn tell us, or at least give us fuel for speculation, about other events. For instance, he says he was sent back to the trains by Tom Custer. If Tom Custer sent him, and Tom Custer was acting as some sort of aide to his brother, then in selecting Kanipe to carry that message broke all sorts of sacred protocols. The only person that has the authority to send Kanipe anywhere is his company commander. Are you starting to get my drift here?
If Kanipe told anyone that Tom Custer sent him back to the trains, and he told the tale just that way, he would be telling it before Tom Custer's demise. Kanipe would have no way of knowing when he told that tale that Tom Custer would be dead within the hour. So if Kanipe was up to something untoward like shirking or deserting under fire, he would be taking one hell of a chance.
The MOST PROBABLE thing we can say about Kanipe is that his story is true, what he says happened, happened, and leave it at that. Those that assassinate his character are petty little people of no account.
|
|
|
Post by rollingthunder on May 13, 2021 17:33:45 GMT
I understand that there are golden rules like the chain of command that cannot be broken. All I really want to know is where the story of Kanipe, Custer's last messenger, is first mentioned. Benteen in his Official Report of July 4 says so, but I think nothing of the subject comes up again until after the Chicago Court of 1879. Was he the one who explained it or was he someone else? I can't find those sources and that's why I ask. I don't want to kill Kanipe's memory. All deserve respect and above all the presumption of innocence. He cannot be convicted without solid evidence.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 13, 2021 17:56:46 GMT
Well, I just don't know where those stories first appeared in print, and have just looked for more information, I am more confused about the stories genesis than I was ten minutes ago.
As far as being Custer's last messenger, then I think there are two problems there. Kanipe left before Martini, so he was no one's "last" messenger as far as I can tell, and he certainly was not George Custer's last messenger. He says he was told to go back by Tom Custer, and I think you can see Tom Custer doing just that - Kanipe get back to the trains and get them up here, we are going to need them - or words to that effect. Tom was not above acting on his own, without orders.
I do concur that Sergeant Kanipe does not deserve what has been handed him over the years. There have been several articles concerning him that call him everything from a blatant liar to having him being responsible for every malady occurring in the 19th Century. I don't know you, and as you are new here, I have not had that opportunity, so what follows may be new to you or just repetition of things you are already aware of. Sergeant Kanipe did not suffer from any bad reputation following the battle from anyone he closely surrounded himself with, his company, his regiment, and so forth. The Army then, and in many ways now, is a small place where everyone pretty much knows, or has heard of everyone else. A bad reputation, a stain on character, an incident of cowardliness travels faster than a prairie fire in July. Sergeant Kanipe married his First Sergeant's widow, and you can bet your last farthing that had there been any doubt about Kanipe within that small community, that would just not have happened.
The problem with Kanipe is that his story rains on the parade of too many who worship Custer.
|
|
|
Post by rollingthunder on May 13, 2021 18:49:58 GMT
It was a slip for me to say that I was the last messenger. Everyone knows that the last one was Martini (at least that he knows). Sure he was a good person and married a fellow widow. There are also scoundrels who do the same, but I don't think this man was. It is very interesting what you say about the old army: "The Army then, and in many ways now, is a small place where everyone pretty much knows, or has heard of everyone else." We will say that Kanipe is another great and unknown piece of the immense puzzle of the Little Big Horn.
Thanks for your time.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on May 13, 2021 19:00:29 GMT
Welcome RT; Walter Camp, he interviewed Kanipe, but I think that may have been in 1908. One of the main ones is the account he gave the magazine of the Historical Society of Montana in 1903, but I guess there would be earlier ones, but it is not my field. Sorry! Ian
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2021 19:03:45 GMT
If C Company was at the head of the column, with TC in front of it and near George and they were talking about the trains, then I can see Custer looking at his brother and making a "sign" to do it. Technically Custer or Cooke should have told one of the detailed orderlies to do it, but my scenario is probably fine. As a commander, I don't know if I would have sent one of my few NCOs back as a messenger.
One can have suspicions but I had it beat into my head by some of my old teachers to start from "All men are valorous and all women are virtues."
His tale seems a little suspect, but plausible.
|
|