|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Mar 15, 2019 10:29:13 GMT
Chuck, there is much to wonder about with regard to TC, but his impact on the overall battle is very limited. Unless, you go to minutia and the it becomes interesting. There is one school of thought that C company is one of the companies that approached the river. The configuration of the approach is done two different ways one appears on the recent postings regarding Korn. Look at the map. Then ask the question, who was the officer that was shot at the river? Then you can go to the question of where on his body was he shot/wounded. Without modern technology there is no way of knowing. His body was so mutilated nobody could tell.
In Frances Taunton's study 'Custer's Field, A Scene of Sickening Ghastly Horror', he refers to Myles Moylan's letter to Tom's sister Margaret ... "I think most of what you have heard of the mutilation of Tom's body, except perhaps cutting out his heart, was true. His body was cut up very much, so much indeed that it was almost impossible to tell whether or not he had received any shots in the body." Godfrey wrote to Paxon: "his features were so pressed out of shape as to be beyond recognition; a number of arrows had been shot in his back, several in his head, one I remember, without the shaft, the head bent so that it could hardly be withdrawn; his skull was crushed and nearly all the hair scalped, except a very little on the nape of the neck." Girard commented that apparently the Indians had smashed the back of his head with a stone or hammer. Corporal John Ryan wrote of Tom "(his body) was terribly mutilated. The head was smashed as flat as the palm of one's hand. When we found him, he was lying on his face and hands, split down through the center of his body." Elsewhere it was said: "his throat cut, his head smashed flat and he was also split through the middle of his arms and thigh." Lieutenant Richard Thomson stated Tom's abdomen had been cut and his bowels had come out. Sergeant Thomas O'Neill mentioned Tom had been disemboweled. Then there's Godfrey's statements.
Anyway you get the idea.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Mar 15, 2019 10:46:35 GMT
Oh, and by the way, if he was shot at the river it answers why he was not with his company at the end.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Mar 15, 2019 11:32:21 GMT
Morning Tom, there is every chance that TWC was the officer shot at the river, but being a company captain and the brother of the regimental commander, he would have been carried from the field of play and not suffered the fate of Vincent Charley, who was after all a basic pvt/farrier. Getting a wounded man back to LSH would be a challenge, apparently the soldiers walked back from the river to the high ground, so maybe they where taking their time because they had a wounded captain slung over a horse. But to walk away from a fire fight may suggest that at this time the situation was still at yellow alert.
People have been debating this scenario for years, and various officers have been linked to this action, the link below was first put up in 2007 and still the question is a bone of contention today in 2019.
|
|
|
Post by crowsnest on Mar 15, 2019 13:08:59 GMT
Wouldn't Tom's mutilation in it's extreme to others indicate he was not an early casualty of the battle, or that he was infirm in the final stages, when a simple coup de gras would've worked? Isn't it more plausible that the extremes of his mutilation were either 1) because he was such a hard kill, or 2) that he may have been confused for his brother?
I would agree with above posters in saying that Tom specifically didn't alter the battle's outcome in anyway. I do however, believe his movements, and thusly the movements of C Company, are crucial in confirming the approach to LSH, and the timing of events.
Correct my knowledge. Since the messengers sent back came from C, and that in Thompson's account (even if you only believe it on a macro level) don't talk of him having any other companies pass by, leads us to believe that C company was in the rear of column to at least Weir Point. Upon leaving Weir there isn't much to make us leap to the conclusion that C was brought ahead while others sat. While we must allow for a splitting of the force, any such split would've almost certainly still kep C in the rear of any new wing development. GAC wanting his brother to guard the rear is a plausible arrangement. We then know that C Company soldiers are found on LSH, and the SW edge of the part of the battlefield. Only a couple scenarios should allow for this 1) the entire company went to at least LSH or further, and lost some men, and then proceeded back SW to extend the line that L Company had begun. 2) C Company never progressed further than a position overlooking Ford B, and the men on LSH are survivors of a failed defensive position
Now if we subscribe to option 1 for a moment we have L retrograding to Calhoun (assuming they were not placed there as a defensive force), we then seem to have C following and extending the line. Both seem to have fought in that spot for at least 15-20 minutes based on cartridges spent (estimate but educated estimate). I seems to have been caught in transit, and it's possible they arrive as L and C crumble. This scenario while more than plausible, leaves Tom's actions in question. Does Tom flee the field to return to LSH, that's hard to swallow based on prior actions. So one must assume Tom never progressed to the F/F part of the battlefield, but how does a rear guard group out of a cluster of up to 5 Companies in the Flats/LSH area have their company commander shot down? We don't believe there was an assault from the south yet at that point in the battle do we? L seems to easily establish on Calhoun, and C for the most part seems to establish soundly for a time before being brought into range.
Now if we subscribe to option 2 and have L and C left in reserve while the remainder advance, we have to have Keogh and I with E, F, and HQ, which causes some problems from a leadership/hierarchy point of view. It also has Tom and some survivors retreating in the late stages, which seems unlikely, that Tom would flee likely with just the horse holders remounting.
Other scenarios really require longer battle durations, that seem outside the excepted window of time dont they?
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Mar 15, 2019 13:28:09 GMT
If TWC went down leading his company then they were in the LSH Deep Ravine area and retrograded or thrust at Deep Coulee and recoiled in disarray. Rain in the Face was considerably known amongst the Sioux tribes and his incarceration was broadly mourned in that the expectation was his hanging. TWC will have been pointed out to the women and those interested in Rain in the Face took revenge. Warriors may have vented spleen and TWC was no sheep. He went down fighting, injured and incapactated. Horrid death. Published observation from 1877, gives 18 * sets of remains gathered in heaps at Finley Finkle and post battle identifications place C company there by recognition of NCO's. 18 men is a platoon. The 1890 investigation of the battle and marker placements indicate that TWC and his company fought with Yates and Smith, below Custer's Hill. This is the determination arrived at post battle and reported by Terry, 062776. legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/topo/montana/txu-pclmaps-topo-mt-custer_battlefield-1891.jpgIn studying Marshall's map please note that an unknown marker may have been indicated immediately above the 'i' in Captain Custer. * Sources on this are Bourke USA with 17 sets of remains reburied and a visiting news reporter published in Cherokee Advocate giving 18 sets of remains in three piles.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Mar 15, 2019 14:17:56 GMT
Thanks for the above HR. you are a champ for research!
CN your thoughts for C being tail end Charlie when leaving Weir area dovetail with mine. There are several reasons and locations for C company to have moved from the rear. The most obvious is at Chuck's stretched W where there was a minor engagement. This engagement could have caused a leapfrogging movement or some sort of moving box by companies for management of movement.
Chuck, noticed this W and Steve explored it. I will let them fill this in if you need clarification.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 15, 2019 17:10:14 GMT
CN: The elongated W is only found on the Bonafides Map, which is long out of print, and no longer available. It is a pictomap, with all or most of the artifact fields clearly marked. The W is located on the west side of the L-N-C ridge complex. It was the most probable location of the cavalry portion of the firefight with Wolf Tooth's band. You cannot tell by how it is marked if they firing uphill or down hill. Some few of us have the map. Mine is in tatters from overuse.
It is quite common for a column on the march to change leads, or for that matter change rear guards. It is a function of primarily dealing with enemy activity occurring during the march. The primary reason is to engage small enemy action with some part of your force, and bypass the encounter with the remaining bulk of the force. So having advance guards become rear guards is a commonplace occurrence, and nothing special or specific can be garnered from it having taken place, other than the need was there or perceived.
The case for five companies up north has been made several times and in several places on this board. Most everyplace else the idea is scorned, as if it and us were lepers. We are no longer welcome it was once our home.
To understand the five company theory, one must go back to where Custer task organized and distributed his force. In retaining five companies when he formed his own battalion, we may conclude that Custer was reserving the role of leading the main attack for himself. He has weighted his force, stronger by two companies than the other two battalions. Custer's orders to Reno and Benteen are confusing, in that he tells them what he wants, but does not tell them why, or what part in the whole scheme of maneuver they will play. He does not emphasize anything such as saying - Reno you must hold until I get in position - or anything even remotely like that.
So based upon what appears to be true, Custer reserving the main attack for himself and weighting his force accordingly, one can further conclude that he would not dilute that force for any reason until that objective is in sight and the assault is commenced.
Rear guards, like those suggested that consist of one to three companies positioned in the Calhoun Hill area, is an idiotic idea, thought up by those with no military knowledge of what rear guards do, or how they do it. The rear guard, usually consists of no more than one fourth of the total force. It is never stationary, with one exception, and bases its movements on the direction and speed of travel of the main body, whom it is intended to guard. The one exception is that it will stop when a threat appears and is closing. Concurrent with that threat closing the rear guard will message the main body with a warning order to be prepared to render assistance. The important point to remember here though is that the unit that ends up as rear guard on the movement, usually becomes the reserve of the attack. Why is that important in this case. Well the positions we indicate on today's field for C, I, or L, are much too far back to be a reserve for any attack on Ford D.
If there was a stopping of the rear guard in play here, that unit would most likely have been Company L. The greatest mitigating factor against company L being a rear guard is the position of their first skirmish line, at the bottom of Calhoun Hill in a bowl like feature, causing that skirmish line to fire up hill. No rear guard commander would ever choose that for his initial position. Were he traveling north following the main body he would choose a position at the top of the hill to increase his field of fire. The only logical explanation for explaining what we have in the way of artifacts, is that Company L was traveling southward, and the location of the initial skirmish line was out of necessity, not desire. A similar statement could be made about Company C. It appears they rode headlong over F-F Ridge, and were stopped on the west side, something they would not have done, just to extend Company L's line. It is more than likely that the actions of C and L were intended as part of a breakout from encirclement.
Diluting the force designated to make the main attack is a big time no no. If it has to be done, chances are the main attack itself will be called off or postponed.
Ian some soldiers walking up a hill to reach the high ground does not mean all did. Think about how cavalry does their business, by employing dragoon techniques, and what those dragoon techniques entail.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Mar 15, 2019 20:43:12 GMT
CN the Tom Custer question is a good one and I would like to address it fully.
The idea of a theory is that it should predict the outcome of an action. So, let us predict what we would expect to see if Custer had taken all 5 companies to Ford D and engaged in battle there.
We would expect to see archaeology that showed a large extent of battle artefacts in the valley and on Battle Ridge Extension, Cemetery Ridge and Last Stand Hill. We see all of that with some of it being made public after we had already begun our deliberations.
We would expect to find weapon matches between this battle and the battle at Calhoun Area. We do see that.
We would expect to find warrior accounts that are consistent with the theory (multiple groups of soldiers) and the terrain. We do see that.
We would expect to see casualties of all 5 companies identified around the BRE, CR, LSH, Deep Ravine area. We do see that.
One of those casualties is Tom Custer. QC has detailed beautifully why it is very unlikely he was anything other than the commander of Company C. His presence then is just exactly what to expect if Custer took all 5 companies to Ford D. That is what Tom tells us about the battle, all companies went to Ford D.
Did Rain in the Face kill Tom? He says he did. He was just the man to do it (look at his life). He gives a credible reason to be present at the Cheyenne end of the village even though he is not Cheyenne.
So now a what if….gotta love em!
When Custer decided to break contact in the valley he ordered Calhoun to leave first. Accounts say that when Custer moved back up to the ridge (CR, BRE, LSH) one group of mounted soldiers rode straight over the ridge, this is Company L, already assigned the lead in the retrograde. Archaeology and accounts, like Gall’s and Red Hawk’s, tell us that Company L ran into warriors returning from the Reno fight. They confronted those warriors and formed at least 2 skirmish lines as they moved back up Calhoun Hill to their final skirmish line on Calhoun Hill. Then Company C arrived as the next group away from LSH. Their stay on FF was short and some were forced north along the river in front of GGR to die along the way and in Deep Ravine catchment, some up the ridge to join Conpany L.
Why the delay? Keogh was right on the heels of Company C, why were C so far behind L?
What if Company C were delayed because Tom Custer was disabled during the retreat from the valley and this delayed the departure of Company C, now under the command of Harrington? I have no idea of course but it is an interesting thought. Was Tom in the valley commanding Company C at some stage? Certainly.
How did he end up dead on LSH? I do not know, probably never will, but I just have a gut feeling Rain in the Face might know. Certainly some warrior knew. Why was he so badly mutilated? He was really, really unpopular with the Indians, ask Rain in the Face.
Cheers
|
|
benteen
First Lieutenant
"Once An Eagle
Posts: 406
|
Post by benteen on Mar 15, 2019 21:00:43 GMT
Nice job everyone very interesting discussion. I am a little confused with the Tom Custer/ Knipe action.
George Custer ordered Benteen on a left oblique with the pack trains, and ordered him to pitch into anything he came across. He sent a senior NCO with further instructions that if he didnt find anything in the first valley to go on to the next and so on.
If Tom is with his company, where does he get the authority to send a message to the pack train to come on up. Is he not in essence countermanding his commanding Officers orders.
Be Well Dan
|
|
benteen
First Lieutenant
"Once An Eagle
Posts: 406
|
Post by benteen on Mar 15, 2019 21:10:03 GMT
Tom,
I am sorry to post this here but I completely screwed up my message board. Wasnt the Sgt in Rin Tin Tin Sgt "Biff" Ohara. or was that F Troop.
Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 15, 2019 21:24:56 GMT
Dan: You are speculating that Tom Custer sent Kanipe on his own. I doubt that. Protocol would state that Tom Custer would be told by someone to send a message back. Could have been his brother or Cooke, or a messenger from either that caused Tom to select Kanipe and send him back.
For protocol to be fulfilled the order to send someone back, must go through the commander of Company C, or there is a breech in protocol. If Harrington was then in command of Company C, then it would have to go through him. Kanipe was specific that it was Tom Custer.
In all probability when Kanipe was told to go back Company C was the forward most company, or somewhere that G and T Custer may have been riding together. G turns to T, and says we should send someone back. T responds OK I will do it. KISS and Occam's Razor, simple answers, are most likely correct ones.
|
|
|
Post by crowsnest on Mar 15, 2019 22:40:35 GMT
Thanks for indulging me everyone.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Mar 17, 2019 23:38:05 GMT
No need to thank us, we thank you. We all have discussed TC and his whereabouts during the battle, and nobody can give you s fixed answer, simply judgement calls.
The world is a funny place with intersections of fate and choice playing a major part. We and other either impact history or not. George Custer served with Arthur MacArthur during the Civil war not in the same theater, but was named the boy Colonel, he also served in the Indian wars. His son was born 4 years after the LBH. He and his son were the first father and son to be awarded the MOH. Tom Custer was awarded two MOH. Custer knew Arthur and was a Boy General, before Arthur was the Boy Colonel. Arthur served with John L Mitchell in the 24th Wisconsin, his son Douglas served on the Courts Martial Board of John L,"s son Billy Mitchell in 1925.
I could go on with this, as in my grandfather served under Douglas in WWI. As did this guy, George Armstrong Custer III(I think in Korea), who fought to retain his great-grand-uncle's name on a national park in Montana on the site of Custer's Last Stand on June 25, 1876. Himself a decorated Army officer, Custer repeatedly objected to proposals to remove Custer's name from Custer Battlefield National Monument, where Sioux and Cheyenne Indians wiped out Lt. Col. George A. Custer and his 224 men. The retired colonel, who lived in Pebble Beach, complained that Indian activism had also caused his family to be ignored at centennial observances of the battle. Custer served in World War II, Korea and Vietnam, and earned eight air medals, the Silver Star and the Distinguished Flying Cross. Funny how life intersects. What if Benteen had asked for Captain Custer's company instead of Weir's, but GAC haggled over Weir. I am sure it would have never have happened. GAC was going to give up one! Young Sturgis might even have been alive, he was originally assigned to M company. Fate and location just happen, sometimes by choice.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Mar 18, 2019 0:26:31 GMT
Dan: You are speculating that Tom Custer sent Kanipe on his own. I doubt that. Protocol would state that Tom Custer would be told by someone to send a message back. Could have been his brother or Cooke, or a messenger from either that caused Tom to select Kanipe and send him back. For protocol to be fulfilled the order to send someone back, must go through the commander of Company C, or there is a breech in protocol. If Harrington was then in command of Company C, then it would have to go through him. Kanipe was specific that it was Tom Custer. In all probability when Kanipe was told to go back Company C was the forward most company, or somewhere that G and T Custer may have been riding together. G turns to T, and says we should send someone back. T responds OK I will do it. KISS and Occam's Razor, simple answers, are most likely correct ones. There is data from Camp indicating where Kanipe was sent back. This relates well to 'G' on Benteen's map. At that phase of the advance, assuming the command was marching and it must have been, the formation was companies abreast. This could suggest Company C left flank. Difficulty - this area is one considered by students as that where Varnum sighted Company E. This is an issue that expands into doubt about the use of Cedar Coulee or Godfrey's route to access Medicine Tail. Fortunately, Varnum clarified his RCoI testimony by marking to map, the precise location on the bluffs where he saw Smith's men. W.A. Graham published the map in one of his more outlandish endeavours. Remember that Varnum recon'd the bluffs on the 27th June. M.A. Reno, RCoI, W.A. Graham. (see p145) The map isn't reproduced by Haithi Trust's online book but copies are around and AZ Ranger has been up there to check it out. The book also carries Benteen's map related to his July 4th 1876 letter. (rear pages) It's the old - C *E * * puzzle.
|
|