Custer Moves to Ford D with Five Companies Part A

[azranger]

Jul 18, 2016 14:47:29 GMT yanmacca said:

Steve, just what are you eluding to?

I used various interview techniques to get the limited information I have.

It sounds like the old phrase “ve haf vays of making you talk”

Nothing that obvious.

Interviewing is multifaceted in ways to find out information.

Regards

Steve 

[quincannon]

Oh yes. We are talking a totally different scenario, Ian.

The waiting for Benteen crapola is only valid if you stay in the House that Wagner (and others) built. It is the only logical thing they could come up with for him being where he was and not be a complete Tom Fool Idiot. When that bucket started to spring a leak, he was suddenly the plug for the Gap.

For the three companies to be left behind by Custer, you must find logical reasons for each of them to be where they were, or your audience, the people who read your stuff start to say poop.

Now for the gap to have the importance some place upon it you MUST make the assumption that absent that gap in the ridge, the Indians would find it impossible to transit from the west side to the east side of the ridge. Is anyone here suggesting that these Indians having climbed that ravine from all the way near the river, were not capable of going the next dozen or so meters to the top of the ridge and over it, mounted or dismounted?

The gap would be a very important place to watch, and station cover there IF there was a sufficiency of troops to do so.

The swale would be the ideal place to watch for the arrival of Benteen having a direct line of sight to the L-N-C ridge complex, the place he was expect to appear.

Not going to Ford B though (and Wagner and others hang their hat on Custer doing just that) takes away the need for a stationary rear guard of any size. It also takes away any excuse for not going to the Ford D area with all the combat power you possess.

All of us are critical of Custer for splitting from Reno and the rest of the regiment. We are even more critical for him splitting again (in the conventional scenario) in the vicinity of Calhoun Hill and going on to Ford D with only two companies. None of us think that either was smart, but the latter the worst of the two decisions. The logical person, as well as the Custer fan boy, can both agree on one thing, Custer looks a hell of a lot better if he did not do the latter.

I have been told by several people in the last few days that Wagner has provided a valuable service in providing a tight time line for this battle. Indeed he has, and should be applauded for that. A lot of sweat equity went into the project. He has also built a timeline for the scenario that he believes, and in so doing has done two things 1) made that time line so tight it is like having a size forty two waist, and trying to fit your obese backside into the same pair of jeans you wore when you were fourteen, and 2) boxed everyone's thinking into his scholarship, not your common sense. I am not one for accepting anything from anyone until I have had a chance to apply my own mind, training, experience, and common sense to the issue. In the end, if we fully agree, so be it.

[deadwoodgultch]

While Fred's timeline is tight it does allow plenty of time for the scenario we are discussing. If you take out the trek to Ford B you have more than enough, in fact you even have time for a rather good look see at B while moving forward. A move not unheard of, who knows, maybe Thompson witnessed that side scout. I dropped Thompson in there in case Gerry ever drops by and it would fit.

Regards,
Tom

[quincannon]

Tom: You are absolutely correct.

The great service Wagner has performed is tightening the time line. I have no quarrel with that at all. Where I have a problem is that within that timeline, event A happened at 3:15. That does two things. It locks the time space continuum at a specific arbitrary point, and it locks an event that we don't know that happened or not in semi-solid concrete.

Just this morning Ian said that he guessed that Keogh watching for Benteen was out the window. We do not have the slightest idea that Keogh was watching for Benteen. Wagner says he was so that puts it in everyone's mind that Keogh was watching for Benteen. Wagner says that two companies went to Ford B to reconnoiter. We do not have the slightest idea that such an event happened, but Wagner says so, gives times for it, so in everyone's mind it must be so.

Now to Thompson. I think it quite logical for someone, perhaps three or four someone's to go to Ford B while the column was in motion elsewhere, if for nothing else to get a feel what was happening. I could even buy Thompson mistaking someone else for Custer. I could even buy a Boyer type scolding a Crow for trying to put the snatch on some woman. I could even buy someone motioning to Thompson to follow him away from the river. I just don't buy the fact that this person was Custer. If it was Custer was a fool and had no business there, especially when we add in the consideration that it was at that time they were sparing with Wolf Tooth.

As you say there was plenty of time, but not plenty of time if these events happened in sequence, and you factor in all of the other things that were also happening.

My personal timeline (unpublished and subject to change the next minute if I find something logical to cause that change is that from 3411 (the point, not the event) the time line in total was about two hours and fifteen minutes to the finish line. I do not believe that is all that far off from Wagner's. What you will not see me do however is assigning times within those parameters to events I cannot possibly know if they happened or not.

Had Wagner said regarding a timeline that the five companies approached Calhoun Hill at X:XX hours, and the battle was over by X:XX plus 50 minutes, and those were his conclusions, that would be all that would be necessary for any discussion of this matter, as long as he could back it up of course.

[deadwoodgultch]

"a timeline that the five companies approached Calhoun Hill at X:XX hours, and the battle was over by X:XX plus 50 minutes, and those were his conclusions, that would be all that would be necessary for any discussion of this matter, as long as he could back it up of course."

Works for me, even X:XX plus 70 mins.

[quincannon]

I will see your 70 and raise you 15 more. The point has been made.


You cannot constrain the bucking bronco that is the Custer portion of the LBH. Well you can, but in the end you will eventually look like a fool doing it. Far to much is unknown, Far to many guesses have been made that turned first into lore, then into legend. I am in neither the lore or legend business. When I say prove it happened, I expect proof, not someone's wet dream complete with a time of climax attached.

[mac]

The only thing that may help resolve matters is more northern archaeology although the changes over the years may always result in doubts. I quite like Fred's approach of assigning probabilities rather than declaring facts without evidence.
To return to the discussion.
It seems more like Custer to me that he would go quickly beyond the village with his whole force and actually engage or attempt to engage the enemy. The positioning of the markersin the south representing a retrograde would then make sense. 
I have no problem discounting the gap other than the account by Red Feather that Crazy Horse rode through the small gap in the ridge.
Chuck you may remember we discussed those Company C markers on the step in the FF ridge and you pointed out that they could be part of an orientation to the south. How would this fit into our current discussion?
Cheers

[quincannon]

Mac: I like the probabilities approach as well. What I do not like, what I vigorously object to, is assigning times to those events, for no matter how much you try to guard against it assigning times skews the rest of the narrative, with either a plus or a minus.

Wagner tries to assign railroad timetable rules to the Chinese Fire Drill of combat.

We have a game show here in the States called Let's Make A Deal. Don't know if you have it in Oz. In the game one of the events is to show the contestant three doors. The prize is only behind one. Look at Calhoun and Harrington as contestants. Calhoun chooses door Number I hopefully leading to the south and safety BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ no prize. Harrington a little later selects door Number 2 BZZZZZZZZZZZZ no prize. Contestant number three Keogh is in the crapper and does not get on stage in time to select, before the show ends.

Can't say I would hang my hat on the location of any one marker or even several. What I generally look for is the location of a field of markers portraying a significant event on or near that location. Anything off of that obvious Company C skirmish line on F-F Ridge I consider outliers, including those down in front of GG Ridge. To me they have no battle understanding meaning, and there may be a bazillion reasons how they got there, non of which I will ever know.

If you accept JSIT, then you also must accept no Ford B, you must accept a five company movement north to attack, you must accept a repulse short of Ford D, you must accept a retrograde on the part of three companies to the south, you must accept a much wider battle area (meaning BRE and probably some of that flat land west of it), you must accept two companies were cut off in the north and that at the time of being cut off were planning to move south. you must accept that they became overcome by feathered events.

Now I put it to you Mac and anyone else. Would you stop and try to defend that gap with a bazillion Indians to your rear, the high probability judging from gunfire in that direction that another bazillion were waiting over the next rise, and a third bazillion bearing down on your right flank from that very gap area. Not me brother, not me. If at that point I could find any way to extract what I had, my young ass and all that followed me would be heading to the tall and uncut. After it's over they can have my sword, my side arms, my horse, my pension, call me a coward, and throw me in Leavenworth for life, but I would die happy in the knowledge that I saved forty lives.
In

[BrevetorCoffin]

Jul 19, 2016 0:48:02 GMT quincannon said:

Mac: I like the probabilities approach as well. What I do not like, what I vigorously object to, is assigning times to those events, for no matter how much you try to guard against it assigning times skews the rest of the narrative, with either a plus or a minus.

Wagner tries to assign railroad timetable rules to the Chinese Fire Drill of combat.

We have a game show here in the States called Let's Make A Deal. Don't know if you have it in Oz. In the game one of the events is to show the contestant three doors. The prize is only behind one. Look at Calhoun and Harrington as contestants. Calhoun chooses door Number I hopefully leading to the south and safety BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ no prize. Harrington a little later selects door Number 2 BZZZZZZZZZZZZ no prize. Contestant number three Keogh is in the crapper and does not get on stage in time to select, before the show ends.

Can't say I would hang my hat on the location of any one marker or even several. What I generally look for is the location of a field of markers portraying a significant event on or near that location. Anything off of that obvious Company C skirmish line on F-F Ridge I consider outliers, including those down in front of GG Ridge. To me they have no battle understanding meaning, and there may be a bazillion reasons how they got there, non of which I will ever know.

If you accept JSIT, then you also must accept no Ford B, you must accept a five company movement north to attack, you must accept a repulse short of Ford D, you must accept a retrograde on the part of three companies to the south, you must accept a much wider battle area (meaning BRE and probably some of that flat land west of it), you must accept two companies were cut off in the north and that at the time of being cut off were planning to move south. you must accept that they became overcome by feathered events.

Now I put it to you Mac and anyone else. Would you stop and try to defend that gap with a bazillion Indians to your rear, the high probability judging from gunfire in that direction that another bazillion were waiting over the next rise, and a third bazillion bearing down on your right flank from that very gap area. Not me brother, not me. If at that point I could find any way to extract what I had, my young ass and all that followed me would be heading to the tall and uncut. After it's over they can have my sword, my side arms, my horse, my pension, call me a coward, and throw me in Leavenworth for life, but I would die happy in the knowledge that I saved forty lives.
In

Kinda like Reno ;-)

[quincannon]

Yes, I suppose so.

There are those unfortunate times when a decision must be made to fold the cards, for a greater good. The maxim is never reinforce defeat. There is no glory or honor in it. It only means that some woman will see her husband again, some mother will live to see her son grow mature, some child will play again with their father, and a family endures.

You do what you can, you do all you can, but there comes a point where you can do no more, without needless sacrifice.

There is always another day for battle.

The commander's job is the preservation of combat power. The coin of combat power is the individual soldier. He must in the nature of his job risk his life. It must never be risked needlessly, or capriciously. The risk must be justified by potential reward. I would prefer charges against a man who risked his life to recover a dead man. He has no right to risk my combat power on something so foolish. That on the face of it goes against every military "value" I know of. I don't care. Let that man risk his life to defeat the enemy, then with victory he can police up all our dead and treat them with the honor they deserve. That is not his decision though, or prerogative, as the commander it is mine.

[mac]

The interesting thing is I was (and am) skeptical about this theory. I am still thinking through it but one thing that has always bothered me about Harrington charging down close to GG and dismounting is that if he has been under fire from the GG area why would he go close and dismount? Crazy!
However maybe there is some scope for interpreting the move as a right side reinforcement of Calhoun's skirmish line if Harrington was not aware of the size of the force behind/around GG. If he was arriving from the north trailing Company L that may be possible (?).
However if Company C is heading south to break through MTC would we expect Tom Custer to be with them?
Cheers

[deadwoodgultch]

Mac,
If that charge was to clear that area of a threat, I understand it. If that area was not cleared, I don't understand attempting to establish an extended perimeter or putting down a skirmish line. Unless, he is trying to open a travel corridor for those following him to traverse or maybe to buy time.

Regards,
Tom

[yanmacca]

Some Indian accounts say about the Company charging off the hill (C Company charge), they say that they came down from a low ridge north of the deep gulch, which sounds similar to the south skirmish line and deep ravine. But Fox says that the Indians have their own way of reckoning directional points and using battle ridge as a guide makes this really east of the deep gulch, which turns it into Calhoun coulee.
Confusing isn’t it.

[yanmacca]

A guy called C. G. Du Bois said that Custer divided into two wings with I and L in one and E and F in another, C Company was split into two platoons with one attached to each wing, this would give them equal strength and more balanced formations.

Hmmm..he sounds like Keogh!

[quincannon]

And there was a guy called Donald Duck who sported Daisy, had Huey, Dewey, and Louie as nephews, and was constantly at odds with Scrooge McDuck and offered his usually uninformed opinions on a variety of issues as well.

Opinions are one thing, but common sense, TTP, and the best practices thereof are quite another.

That is why I constantly caution not to accept anything in print at face value, be it Wagner, Stewart, Philbrick, Donovan, or any other, until it can be completely dissected and subject to rigorous review. Do the same with any testimony given. If something gross stands out at you at first glance, throw the whole damned thing out, it is worthless, for those making the obvious gross mistake will make others that may not be so apparent.

In all the years here, involved in this stuff, I can draw at this juncture only two real conclusions:

1) The JSIT narrative is the ONLY ONE that withstands the rigors of the smell test. The others, ALL THE OTHERS, have flaws of logic and rational reasoning.

2) There is not an earthly soul here today, contemporary to the event, or that has existed from time of event to the present, that knows the internals of the Custer portion of the LBH fight, and there never will be.