|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Oct 30, 2016 11:12:00 GMT
I love that song!
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Oct 30, 2016 11:35:42 GMT
That song reminds me of an era of disco and punk, that was what dominated the charts around 1977-78, along with Grease of course, I never used to listen to the charts, as prog rock and heavy rock was my music of choice.
I was around 19 then and had been in a few bands, and the punk bands I saw were crap, none of them could play or even sing, but they got all the gigs and record contracts because punk was in vogue.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Oct 1, 2017 20:33:10 GMT
Back to Godfrey in the Galaxy article and away from the music above.
"Custer had then crossed the valley of the dry creek(MTC), and was marching along and well up the slope of the bluff forming the second ridge back from the river, and nearly parallel to it. The command was marching rapidly in column of fours, and there was some confusion in the ranks, due probably to the unmanageableness of some excited horses. The accepted theory for many years after the battle, and still persisted in by some writers, was that Custer’s column had turned the high bluffs near the river, moved down the dry (Reno’s) creek(MTC), and attempted to ford the river near the lowest point of these bluffs; that he was there met by an overpowering force and driven back; that he then divided his battalion, moved down the river with the view of attacking the village, but met with such resistance from the enemy posted along the river bank and ravines that he was compelled to fall back, fighting, to the position on the ridge. The numerous bodies found scattered between the river and ridge were supposed to be the first victims of the fight. I am now satisfied that these were men who either survived those on"
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 1, 2017 22:12:10 GMT
Yes, that is just the thing I'd do after getting repelled by an overpowering force and driven back, DIVIDE, then move to another place with the purpose of launching an attack with less than half of what I had when I was repelled.
That makes so much sense if Custer was a complete moron.
Godfrey, to my mind, and in that particular article, makes more sense than anything I have seen written about this battle.
If you read the entire article, start to finish, you cannot help but notice that the contents relate only what Godfrey saw or experienced. He does not get into opinion until you come to the place that Tom has quoted. Then it is the opinion of someone who was there, and the opinion was based upon what he as a trained observer saw, including the other opinions given earlier, and making them a counterpoint. I believe this is why Chandler included in "Garryowen" only Godfrey's narrative and not all the other works that had been published between the time of the battle and the late 1950's when he did Garryowen. Chandler wanted his book to be as complete as possible history of the 7th Cavalry, and I believe he chose Godfrey as the best means to accomplish that portion. I form that opinion because of the meticulous manner in which he sourced the 7th Cavalry narrative in WWII and Korea.
|
|