The Tom Custer mystery

[mac]

Why is T Custer found on LSH with GAC?
We know from Godfrey and Kanipe that the evidence is he was initially with Company C. Why would he be found on LSH? The conventional view is that he was with the HQ but this seems just based on body position.
Obviously there are many reasons why he could be found there but what are the probabilities.
I think he was there for a specific purpose.
Must go more later....feel free to comment on your thoughts on his position.
Cheers

[mac]

If GAC is, as suggested in the 5 Companies to Ford D theory, trying to break contact and move back towards the south; then he needs a detachment left in contact (DLIC) to be the final piece of the movement away. I think it probable that he would want his brother Tom to lead that unit.
On LSH there are interestingly these men identified

Edward C. Driscoll (I)
Archibald McIlhargey (I)
John E. Mitchell (I)
John Parker (I)
Francis T. Hughes (L)
Charles McCarthy (L)
Oscar F. Pardee (L)
Thomas S. Tweed (L)
Ygnatz Stungewitz (C)
Willis B. Wright (C)
Tom Custer (C )
I find it an odd coincidence that there are 4 from Companies I and L and 3 from Company C...it is plausible that there could be one more unidentified from C...we will never know!
My thought is that 4 from each company might be the basis for constructing a DLIC to be commanded by Tom Custer hence Tom is not down at Calhoun Hill with his company.
Is this the right sort of size for a DLIC in this context?
Would LSH be the last point for a DLIC to occupy?
Cheers

[quincannon]

Doctrine today for a Detachment Left In Contact (DLIC) is 1/3rd from each platoon on the Forward Line of Troops (FLOT). Doctrine goes on to say that the 1/3rd, a squad if you will, spreads out to cover the entire platoon front. You also leave 1/2 of your crew served weapons as well. It gets a little more complicated when we go from platoon to company to battalion, but let's leave it at platoon level, for these companies were approximately the size of a modern platoon.

So that is what we have of doctrine as a start point to examine the probability of a DLIC. What we do know is that the DLIC concept was not unknown at the time. They may have called it something different, or they may not have called it anything more that you, you, and you cover the unit while they mount. Regardless it is extremely bad form to run for your horses, turning your back on the enemy while you mount, without something left behind to keep the enemy's head down.

DLIC's is but one method of doing this. For units in an immediate firefight to the front, they may choose to withdraw by bounds or by a thinning of lines. Each of these has a high probability that some will be left behind, holding the bag.

There is a high probability all three of these methods were used by someone in the northern sector depending upon what they had to their front as they withdrew.

The fact that there were four, four, and three identified from companies other than E and F, looks to be for some intended purpose, rather than Georgie needing eleven or twelve horse holders. I feel there is a high probability these eleven or more were there because of utilization of some method of withdrawal.

I do not think LSH would necessarily be the last point held by a DLIC or any other method employed. If there were three company breakouts, there would be three different DLIC locations.

I do not think T. Custer was there to command a DLIC. The area being withdrawn from is too large and the companies would have been too spread out for one man to control. More than likely he was there on LSH for the same reason Smith was, having been either wounded or killed in the early part of the fight.

I do believe T. Custer was in command of Company C. Can you see a man so combative by nature being content with wiping his brother's ass while "his" company was in action. Company commanders by nature are protective of their units. In their minds no one can command "their" company better than they can. The only proof that I need personally for Company C being in the north was the presence of Tom Custer. All this is especially true in the Victorian era where leading one's unit in battle was a matter of personal honor, and being denied was something thought to be a stain on that honor, no matter the reason.

There could also be other reason for these eleven or more men from C-I-L to be there. The most probable of those is KIA or WIA while up north, and the four, four, and three coincidental.

I do not think we can get wrapped around the axle about any markers up that way being where these guys ended up. A hundred forty years is a long time and a lot has happened to that place, for both good and bad. We are working with eleven supposedly identified. Truth is with the condition of those bodies in a state that their mothers could not identify them, we really don't know how many of those bodies were from where. I am amused when Wagner claims he knows more one hundred forty years later about their identities than those that first came upon them two days after the battle. I think he may be either in possession of mystic powers, or trying to pull a teensy weensy little fib on us rubes.

[yanmacca]

Doug Scott stated that out of the 45 or so that were found dead on LSH, 28 were apparently named.

Another twelve were identified in or around deep ravine, eight were company E men.

Another L Company private was supposedly found dead between LSH and deep ravine [Pvt W. Harrington]

Mac, you know from my comments last year, that I am not convinced of a need for any DCLI.

If these three companies [C, L & I] where taking off from BRE and riding behind E and F, then why leave anyone to cover them. Any warriors would have to strike past E and F to catch them and any that tried to use the same route, would be shot at by soldiers on cemetery ridge.

I don't think that C, L and I left with warriors snapping at their heels, because if things were that hot, they would have not even halted in the first place, but E defiantly did and if they took up positions then that would mean that they were already flanked, which would make their skirmish line null and void.

They did lose their horses to attacks from that direction, but I would have thought that any Indian thrust would be against the soldiers on the hill and not the ones which had already vacated the area.

[dave]

Familial connections had reigned in the 7th from the day Custer was the nominal commander. Tom and George never hesitated to make up their rules so why would their last actions be any different. Tom was going with George just as Boston raced to join his brothers. I know y'all are ex military and are able to see this action on different levels from me but I do know people and there were no rules for the Custers!
Regards
Dave

[quincannon]

OK let's take this a step at a time.

How does Doug Scott know? Was he there? I suspect not. What constitutes Last Stand Hill? Does he mean on the now non-existent hill top? Is he talking in generalities? Ian, there is no one living that can make that statement with one hundred percent certitude. In fact the only positive statement concerning the Custer portion of LBH that is irrefutable is that they all died, and some even question that.

Who said these three companies rode behind anyone? At one point they were all on the firing line somewhere in that area, and they would have had their horses held some distance behind them. There is that thirty seconds to a minute of time that anyone retreating toward their horses must be covered and you cannot do that by counting on a neighboring company that may be a hundred or two hundred meters away. You must do that within your own resources, which means you are doing one of three things in your company sector, --- using a DLIC, using bounds, or thinning lines. Each of these three methods is costly.

Don't know if you drew that line I suggested yesterday, but it was an attempt to show you one of two or three possible variations of a FLOT. My intention was to show how easy it would have been to explain why Company E was found down by the river, while the others were pushed back in a different direction. Assuming Company E was on the left flank of the FLOT, having the Indians drive a wedge between E and their neighbors on the right while positioned on Cemetery Ridge would cause them to seek the next available defensive position to their south, which is just about where your circle was, and where the markers are today.

Dave: I fear you are buying into Custer family myth. Perhaps there were no rules for the Custer's out of battle, but there is no indication that while in battle they would play by anything but the rules. Enlighten me. `

[dave]

QC
From what I have read and studied as to the inter-behavior of the brothers leads me to believe they followed their own ways. George leaving everyone to go check on Libbie and Tom jumping in prior to the battle when George jumped him. Seems logical to me that prior behavior would be an indication for future behavior.

As we all know I am winging it when it comes to military behavior as I have not served. Nepotism is a process that spreads very quickly with poor results in the civilian sector where I worked and have to believe it would be the same in the military. Maybe not?
Regards
Dave

[quincannon]

Dave: I just cannot bring myself to believe that G. Custer would deprive his brother command of his unit, for some undefined purpose. That would be a slap in his brothers face, a mark on his brother's honor, and something, had they survived, that would be unforgivable in any time period and especially so in the Victorian era, where such actions could, and often did, led to deciding the issue at twenty paces with a pistol, unlawful or not. For a soldier in command, being deprived of that command, is the greatest insult imaginable. We only have G. Custer's own pleas to his superiors to restore him to command prior to LBH to find an example of the truth of what I am saying.

The younger brother and the nephew are examples of nepotism. They should have never been allowed on that expedition. But there is a difference. Those two were not responsible to anyone for anything. They were subject to the Articles of War as far as their conduct goes, but they had no official status, so in theory they could be anywhere they so desired.

The whole Custer clan, both blood and extended relatives, played it fast and loose just about anytime they were not in the field, but there is absolutely no evidence I am aware of that points to misconduct while in the field concerning group conduct. George leaving everyone to visit his wife was a grave error of judgment. Not sure what you are talking about concerning Tom jumping in.

If prior behavior is an indication of future behavior then I am assuming you have no confidence in redemption.

The bottom line Dave is that Godfrey says, and Kanipe by deductive reasoning also says that on the afternoon of 25 June 1876 that Tom Custer was in command of Company C, 7th Cavalry, and everyone that says he was not, is just plain blowing smoke up your ass, for they can offer no contemporary proof of what they are saying, only supposition, speculation, and bull shit slinging.

[yanmacca]

I think we need a time line to assess the time frame between leaving ford D to L Company reaching Calhoun hill.

It hard trying to fathom this out because the two time frames I have got [Fred's and Grey's] do not take into account all five going to ford D and any delaying action on BRE/CR and three moving back.

Chuck, Doug Scott was probably working on information supplied to the media by soldiers who arrived after it was safe to search the field. Many of these identifications and body counts came from 7th cavalry men who covered the ground, so if I post up any data concerning soldiers who were identified, then it came from authors who have the information via interviews with ex-7th-cavalry men.

I have knocked up a quick map of what I think may occurred in the fall back from the flats/ford D, with the Indian advances in brown, the companies in yellow and the beaten zones for any covering fire in red.



Now I am not saying that this would happened, but to me it looks like a likely scenario, especially as we are  working on the theory of all five forward and three back with two in cover mode.

Mac/Dave, the big deal about Gen. Custer and Lt. Smith being on LSH, is that they may have been hit on another part of the field and brought along as wounded under the supervision of the regimental surgeon, who was riding with the HQ.
So who can say that Tom Custer was not hit and he was being treated for wounds. This would be as good a reason for say Lt. Smith being there, so why not Capt. Custer.

[dave]

QC
I will accept your point that his military mind would compel Tom to stay with his command instead of going to George at the death.
Regards
Dave

[quincannon]

OK that map gives one a general idea, but I think you have them clustered too far north.

The bottom most yellow square should be on Cemetery Ridge, positioned between the two trails you see on the map. The next should be where the first one was before moving it. Then straighten out the other three forming a north south line.

Now instead of envisioning a route like you have, envision that line on the ridge tops facing west,turning nearly 90 degrees to where it is facing north west.

Then they withdrew after Company E's horses were scattered and E withdrew to the Cemetery Ridge Basin, and for some reason, probably loss of mobility Company F stayed.

[quincannon]

How do you know it was not the other way around Dave, George staying with Tom?

We must all try to recognize romantic notions and fairy tales of gallantry for what they are, and it's damned hard because we all want to believe them including me.

Company E attacking off of LSH is one such. It is a last gasp of gallantry fairy tale. It falls apart when you look at it tactically and in light of what a reasonable man would do. Instead of Indians always run not we are now slathered with the bull shit that Indians always split and fall apart when faced with an offensive move. It's all whites are always superior bull shit, peddled by bull shitters.

How many times were their incidents in both armies during the ACW when commanders in field arrest broke that arrest and took back command of their units then going into battle. Several I can think of including A P Hill twice. Benedict Arnold did the same thing at Saratoga. Being denied the honor of leading your own troops in battle is intolerable to any decent soldier.

[quincannon]

Now Ian, if you are willing, use that same map you have posted just above, for it shows the entire area in question, and let's place only two markers in the places Wagner says they were on the other board, and we can see what happens.

Place the first yellow marker in the Cemetery Ravine basin down by the river, and mark it F.

Then place the second yellow marker on Cemetery Ridge, and mark it E.

Show the beaten zones of fire for both firing westward from these positions. Try to keep in as much scale as you can.

Then draw: 

1) One red directional arrow starting at the the Ford D crossing and continuing across the flats to Highway 212 then up the draw that the present park entrance road is on which will lead you by the present Cemetery gate and visitors center to LSH.

2) Draw the second red directional arrow  from the same starting point to Highway 212, then over BRE turning right which will bring you out at the Indian memorial then on to LSH.

3) Then next draw a red directional arrow from the river into  the face of each of these two companies facing the river, representing the Indian hold by the nose force. Those lines will be within the beaten zone of both Companies E and F.

When you do all this place the E marker on the western slope of Cemetery Ridge, then place a green H on top of the visitors center representing the Company E horses and the location of the six removed by construction markers which we presume to be Company E horse holders.

Having done all this I believe anyone can readily see why those two companies being so close to the river could have never made it back in time to LSH.

What we have then is Company E's horses being driven off, which Wagner does not dispute, and they were driven off by someone who was behind both E and F in the Wagner scenario. So that would mean that Company E is about 600 or more meters from LSH on foot and would have to fight their way through whatever force is in their rear to reach LSH. Then there is the fairy tale of them fighting their way through again on foot down to where their markers now are.

Company F assuming they are still mounted or have access to their horses down in that basin might have made it back, but only if they detected the threat coming from D across BRE and into their rear. The problem with that is Company F in the basin had that flanking movement masked from their view. You cannot react to that which you cannot see.

[yanmacca]

I have had a go Chuck, if I have done it all wrong then I will amend it tomorrow morning in my break.



Oh one last thing, did you ever warn me to stay clear of the George Forty "US Army Hand Book 1939-45"?
I just got hold of a hard backed copy for a £1.

[quincannon]

Did you post it so I can take a look?

If you paid more than what you did for Forty, about a buck and a half US, you got robbed.