|
Post by yanmacca on May 10, 2018 11:28:41 GMT
Beth, one of the things that does spring to mind is that when the Custer and Reno and Battalions advance up Reno Creek, they had around 350 fighting men, which is nothing really, when you compare it too what they where marching into. Custer must have ignored everything his was told about the size of this village as he didn't think he would need Benteen until he saw it for himself, which was way too late. Up to that point I think he thought that his 350 was sufficient.
BTW; When I came up with that total, I have omitted Indian scouts, civilians and other none army personnel. I could go even further with this total and take out the soldiers in the HQs, that would leave Custer and Reno 324 in eight companies.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 11, 2018 18:26:07 GMT
I don't think you can draw any conclusions Beth about the whole Army or the times in general from the display of arrogance by Custer in relation to Indian fighting abilities. In fact I think there is all too much information about others who fought Indians, and deeply respected their abilities in combat.
Indians, like all irregulars throughout history always fought on their own terms. It does not matter if you term it bad medicine, or smart tactics, the irregular will always avoid combat unless he has the clear idea that he will be successful. Indians always run away is not a bad theory, but only if your friendly force has the tactical jump on them. If you surprise them they will more often than not break or attempt to break contact.
When the irregular stands and fights it is only because you either have him fixed, or he wants to. If the later, you can rest assured that you have walked into something that he thinks you can't handle. Such was the case with Custer. He walked into something that the Indians knew he could not handle.
The only way you can beat an irregular at this game is with complete surprise. Surprise is a function of reconnaissance. Surprise generally makes up, at least in part, for deficiency in the number of friendlies you have available. In Ian's example of three hundred fifty, complete surprise may have made a difference, but there was no surprise, so you must evaluate that grasp at the brass ring of surprise the actions of an idiot. Gideon's two hundred achieved surprise and defeated many many times their number by virtue of it. Gideon was grateful to God for his victory. His two hundred were grateful to Gideon. Don't think God takes sides in battle. God or not, Gideon was responsible for success or failure.
Anyone in 1876 who looked at the long sweep of history from 1607 onward, a period of continuing conflict with irregular forces, and did not have a healthy respect for the Indian as an individual, or Indians in general, as formidable fighting men was an idiot, and idiocy trumps arrogance every time.
The proof of that last statement is in the fact that throughout history there have been untold numbers of successful arrogant commanders. It is OK for a commander then to be arrogant, although his subordinates usually would disagree with OK. What is not OK is for the commander to be an incompetent idiot, either as a stand alone defining feature, or in conjunction with arrogance. When they are both your force is in really deep doo doo. John "Headquarters in the saddle - only have seen the backs of my enemies" Pope is a prime example of both. He oversaw the destruction of a fine Army in the Second Manassas Campaign, with the majority of his subordinates saying, because his brain was just where he said it was - in the saddle. Arrogance, in a commander, is a personality failure. Idiocy and incompetence, in a commander, is an unforgivable personal failure
|
|
|
Post by Beth on May 11, 2018 23:26:45 GMT
Is the adage that NA always run unique to Custer or was in the attitude pre June 1876 when dealing with Plains Indians?
Also don't you think that perhaps a little bit of what could be seen as arrogance goes with the job of being in command and not jut in the military? You have to believe in your decision making skills when you are in command of the lives of others. It's just that Custer had more arrogancy then skill, or as the saying goes-his mouth wrote a check his a** couldn't pay
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 12, 2018 4:15:05 GMT
I would think that the answer lies in those that had never fought the Indians probably thought of them as easy pickings, the White man's burden and all that, while those who had been engaged in nearly constant combat in the Southwest from West Texas to the California border, had a healthy respect for them. You know the ones I am talking about, those who spent their whole lives following their trails and rooting them out of the hides and holes. Compare this with the summer sunshine soldiers who took the field once every four years, and glorified their exploits for the next three.
Indian warfare in the southwest was as different from the northern plains as night is to day.
I think arrogance is a human failing. You must ask yourself though, were your life on the line to whom would you rather work for? Would it be for some arrogant prima donna who knows the business cold, or would it be some incompetent boob, who would be a splendid fit in Mister Roger's Neighborhood?
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on May 12, 2018 13:51:39 GMT
Is the adage that NA always run unique to Custer or was in the attitude pre June 1876 when dealing with Plains Indians? Also don't you think that perhaps a little bit of what could be seen as arrogance goes with the job of being in command and not jut in the military? You have to believe in your decision making skills when you are in command of the lives of others. It's just that Custer had more arrogancy then skill, or as the saying goes-his mouth wrote a check his a** couldn't pay Beth, much of this, they always run, came from the Hancock campaign, which took place across the central plains, circa 1866-67. Custer was involved. They could not bring the Indians to battle. The Indians, however conducted a very successful guerrilla war, causing loss of life, destruction of infrastructure, and fear. These hit and run tactics were used by many NA tribes.
As to they always run, did any of the people involved learn from the Red Cloud War, and the tactics employed. Certainly, CH did, they rarely ran in that war!
Regards, Tom
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on May 12, 2018 15:22:30 GMT
My opinion is Reno never should have dismounted. Then when he dismounted he should have never moved the horses to the timber. Putting soldiers out of sight from their horses in the presence of lots of Indians who love to steal horse does not seem prudent to me. So Reno has to reduce his force to guard the horses. I am reasonably sure where is my horse was in the minds of those troopers on the skirmish line.
I would prefer that Reno stayed mounted and fired very little with only those that could shoot firing. Then as Indians came out keep ahead of them while retrograding in the valley drawing the Indians willing to fight further from the village. Even if dismounted they could mount quickly and move back drawing the fighters away from the Big Village.
One of the things I teach is a toolbox full of tactics. We also use a Use of Force Continuum along with the application of the appropriate skillset. You know your skillsets and appropriate use of force but must chose the appropriate tactic depending on the circumstance. When something occurs immediately it may be an emergency and there is no time to decide on the best tactic. Emergency eliminates choice.
Where I heading to is that Reno had made statements about dying at the hands of Indians is a waste of life. I suspect that seeing the extent of the Big Village eliminated a charge and left him with a subset of tactics he would consider using. He formed the skirmish line which would be an attempt to draw attention to his location. That would allow the potential for Custer to attack these same Indians. I don't think that Reno ever considered that he would allow the Indians to fix him in the timber so that Custer might do something. I think he determined the timber not defensible and that the move there was to only to go to the horses. I believe French went straight to his horses and mounted. About the same time CH and even more Indians showed up.
The breakout worked and the Indians gave way. The separation from the Indians while moving at speed failed. If even a part of the command could shoot like French and ride with an independent seat the Indians could not close to CQB. At the river Sgt Ryan states they gave a good fight. The soldiers were no longer having to hold on with both hands occupied and could better fight. I would guess there was not one soldier there thinking it was a good idea not have their saber after their carbine and revolver were unloaded.
My bottom line is that I believe after seeing the Big Village the charging tactic was no longer available in Reno's toolbox.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Beth on May 12, 2018 15:46:34 GMT
I would think that the answer lies in those that had never fought the Indians probably thought of them as easy pickings, the White man's burden and all that, while those who had been engaged in nearly constant combat in the Southwest from West Texas to the California border, had a healthy respect for them. You know the ones I am talking about, those who spent their whole lives following their trails and rooting them out of the hides and holes. Compare this with the summer sunshine soldiers who took the field once every four years, and glorified their exploits for the next three. Indian warfare in the southwest was as different from the northern plains as night is to day. I think arrogance is a human failing. You must ask yourself though, were your life on the line to whom would you rather work for? Would it be for some arrogant prima donna who knows the business cold, or would it be some incompetent boob, who would be a splendid fit in Mister Roger's Neighborhood? I think there is a fine line between confidence and arrogance and often one person can be viewed as confident by some while arrogant by others. However I do not believe that being polite and caring as well as confident are mutually exclusive and perhaps that is were the difference lies. And yes, I have had my life on the line-not in battle but with medical issues and have dealt with doctors who were arrogant and wouldn't recognize me except perhaps by my scars and others whom treated me like I was a person. Perhaps that for me is the difference between confidence and arrogance.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 12, 2018 17:24:08 GMT
Confidence has a way of transmitting itself downward and upward from the commander, without the need for arrogance. The best form of it, as you state, is being polite to and caring about those in his charge. Confidence to me means knowing yourself and your profession, to the point where you always question your own judgment, and never moving forward until you know the answer. Leaders with that trait never fear that others will follow them, trust them, for everyone is aware that all the lives involved are tied to the judgment of one man.
This last may seem on the surface contradictory. How can you be confident and at the same time question yourself? Well in fact it is the test of your own confidence. Have I thought through all of the factors? Have I taken the appropriate risks and sought to mitigate risk enough? Have I tested my conclusions by seeking the advice of others? Have I bitten off more than my soldiers can chew? The confident commander considers all these things before he acts, rather than be saddled with the eternal regret of overreach.
You do not have that same feeling when led by the arrogant commander, no matter how competent he is. There is always that question in the back of your head. Will it ever come to a point where his arrogance will overcome his competence?
The confident commander gets down with his troops to even the lowest level, as a way of telling them WHY this trip is necessary. The arrogant commander does not. There is no lasting relationship that is built or maintained with the arrogant commander, whereas with the confident commander, that relationship is bonded for a lifetime, the thing you tell your grandchildren about. I served with so and so and he brought me back alive.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on May 12, 2018 19:45:08 GMT
Steve, I would guess that if Reno knew exactly what his mission was that he may have fought a similar battle to the one you suggest. But being kept in the dark really put him between a rock and a hard place because he and most of his officers knew that they couldn't progress any further up that valley so he did the second best thing and defended the ground he had took.
In the back of his mind he may have also thought that if he turned tail that he would be letting the rest of the regiment down because he was sent forward in the advanced guard role and he thought that soon Custer would appear either to his rear or maybe to his left.
Now if Custer would have spoken to him and gave him the full low down of what he wanted from him, then he could have kept mounted and caused mayhem, then gradually retreated back on himself.
I think that company M kept their horses to the rear of their skirmish line, G and A had theirs led away into the timber plus all their reserve ammo by their horse holders, which was some distance away.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 12, 2018 20:26:23 GMT
I disagree.
When I tell a subordinate that he and his unit will be the advanced guard, I don't believe a heck of a lot of explanation beyond that is either waranted or necessary.
WHAT I EXPECT - of him is to close with the enemy, make contact, and develop the situation. Reno did exactly that, and dismounting was part and parcel of developing the situation, where his dismounted force becomes the base of fire, for the main attack conducted by the main body. Whom has, or where stashed the horses is just a lot of blue some and mirrors, His commander expects him to get in there and mix it up. These things are already known, when that commander gives him his orders as the advanced guard. They are as natural as breathing. Nothing fancy is expected, no points of deliberation upon what I should do, just get in there and block and tackle.
WHAT HE SHOULD EXPECT - of me is that I am going to monitor his progress and strike in a timely manner.
Reno did his job with no mistakes at all when you properly define his given mission. Custer failed to do his.
Of course I am not prone to over-complicate a steel ball either. This was a steel ball mission, and it was conducted on Reno's part without error.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on May 13, 2018 10:50:00 GMT
Well of course you do, it is a military matter, in fact I was expecting it.
Now I am not disagreeing with your opening point, Reno was the advanced guard, even though we have accounts stating that this was mentioned in verbal orders delivered to him by Cooke, but as always we have other accounts saying the opposite.
I have no qualms with the way Reno conducted his march from ford A to when he dismounted, what I do disagree with is how he did things after they engaged the enemy. Steve makes a valid point about leading away the horses, if you were my company commander and you did the same thing, I would be worried that you had took away my mobility and ammo and stashed it out of sight god knows how far away.
I also disagree with you when you said that Reno did his job with no mistakes, because if you read the story of what happened, you will see that there was little or no order given to that firing line and it looked as if all three companies acted independently.
It was a good job M company kept their mounts close to hand, because they were the furthest out from the timber and the two companies which filled the void between M and the timber, simply left them hanging virtually isolated on the valley floor.
So many errors were made after they dismounted.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on May 13, 2018 12:39:13 GMT
Cavalry is nothing but short barreled carbines when dismounted. The advantage of horse mounted cavalry is mobility. I think Chuck likes to give us the officers viewpoint. I am looking at it as an NCO and horse owner how these particular troopers would react. I see separation anxiety when the horses are out of site. I see an increased chance of Indians getting to the horses and the ammunition they carried. I see the battalion reduced in numbers by horse holders and security forces.
Reno stops short of being within range of his weapon system. If the Indians are fleeing as was feared then his dismounted skirmish line serves no purpose. They could easily pack up and leave. Of the tactics used by the Indians in previous engagements the smoke screen and delay the soldiers was used often. Dismounted soldiers would be exactly what the Indians would like to see especially to far from the Big Village to make hits.
If the Indians didn't know about Custer they would have figured it out when they saw only three companies of soldiers stopping short of the Big Village. Either that or they thought Reno with his three companies was insane.
If Reno stays mounted and pulls back to high area near the 7th Ranch he would create a gap between the Big Village and those coming out to fight. By stopping short of the Big Village any attempt to flee was not interfered with by Reno and the Indians remained close to the open interior lines. If the Indians don't follow Reno then he moves closer to the Big Village and remains in contact which is something an advance guard can do against overwhelming numbers of enemy forces. It was in the manual in use at the time of this battle if I recall correctly.
I believe Reno had two options for an opinion of what Custer was doing. Either Custer was stopped in Reno Creek or he was moving to the bluffs. So either Reno had to create time for Custer or move out his immediate contact area before being fixed and destroyed.
It would be obvious to anyone on the skirmish that as soon as the Indians were observed moving around their flanks and to the rear that the Indians were not afraid of Reno moving toward or into the Big Village. It would be a safe assumption that Indians were on the attack and not just screening the Big Village.
I see a zero advantage of dismounting out of range of the Big Village at an easily flanked position. Placing the horses in the timber increases the distance between the trooper and his horse. These weren't trucks that you jump into to move. They were individually assigned horses and if you attempted to take someone's horse they may shoot you. Once you dismount just how far could the soldiers advance toward the Big Village and away from their horses in the timber.
My second option was that even if you dismount you keep the horses within easy reach. This is something cavalry trained to do and the skillset to perform it is seen in the manuals. As you move forward toward the Big Village so does the horses. French had to threaten to shoot members of his company because they wanted to run to their horses. Since they knew he was one the few good shots it probably acted as a deterrent. I see no advantage of creating a concealed separation gap between a soldier and his horse in the presence of lots of Indians.
Reno in the timber does nothing to prevent Indians from fleeing if that is their choice. If they want to fight then Reno could be distracting at best. He certainly was not going to fix the Indians as suggested on another board. If he moves further from the village he draws them away and creates a gap. By being close the Indians only need to cover a few hundred yards to respond to any new threat.
Regards
Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on May 13, 2018 14:32:46 GMT
I agree with most of what both of you said using 20/20 hindsight. Reno was acting in the present tense.
Reno went there with the expectation that he was the regiment's advanced guard. He did exactly what is expected of an advanced guard - make contact, dismount and form a base of fire and a pivot point for the main bodies maneuver, mix it up, and develop the situation.
Both of you are letting your knowledge of these events cloud you view of what I said.
I would suggest that both of you review the mission parameters of an advanced guard and then tell me why Reno did not follow them to the letter.
And no, I do not want to hear anything other than what he failed on as an advanced guard commander. No horses, no selected marksman, no planning for withdrawal before he makes contact.
Ian: If you say that you have no disagreement with what Reno did up until the time he dismounted than you have no disagreement with what I said at all. Again read what I said - Reno made no errors as an advanced guard commander - that's what I said. He made contact, he dismounted, he formed a base of fire, he developed the situation (caused the enemy to react), and mixed it up with them.
Both of you need to read the good book before you go off half cocked again. You're both talking about forests, while, I with my statement, addressed one simple tree.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on May 13, 2018 18:16:29 GMT
Chuck, I don't disagree with what Reno did after he crossed at ford A to the point he dismounted, in fact it was as you alluded to earlier a "text book" advance as an advance guard should do. Both you and Fred are in agreement on this, Reno protected his right flank by clearing through the timber for possible ambush, his left flank was guarded by a advanced scout detail of around a dozen officers and EMs plus a gang of Indian scouts or horse herders to his eastern side. He also had two companies in columns of fours moving parallel to each other and a third in reserve, now I cannot fault that. I have also stuck to my guns over the fact that he dismounted, he and a few of his experienced officers all agreed that going further would be a disaster for the battalion, one of them said that "if they would have carried on then they would be still there", which I suppose all buried in that same area of ground. I don't know why Reno didn't get word that Custer's men where spotted on the bluffs apparently moving north with the river between them, plus didn't anyone think of looking back south to see where Custer was moving? The two columns had earlier been moving almost together on both sides of Reno creek, now the Custer column vanishes after informing Reno that they will be supporting them and no one thinks anything about it. Here is a couple of maps ["yawn" not again Ian"] which I think shows how the two columns almost moved parallel together with the big horn river and bluffs between them.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on May 13, 2018 18:30:56 GMT
I understand what you are saying QC, it is so easy to see the battle as it should have been found and not how it presented itself in real time. My own impression is that Reno was not a creative person and would not have gone much beyond 'the book' especially after he was rebuked for his extended scout. We know now of course that Custer had elected not to enter the valley. If Reno had been acting as an advanced guard, what would have happened next? Would Custer have then brought his command past Reno? (sorry I don't have the right terms)
If Custer was expected to move forward of Reno would Reno's troops then have been a rear guard?
Did Reno delay too long when it came to assessing that Custer wasn't coming or did the valley battle just unfold too quickly?
|
|