|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 28, 2018 9:31:51 GMT
Had a quick look for you Mac;
Gall: the warriors directed a special fire against the troopers who held the horses, while the others fought. As soon as a holder was killed, by moving blankets and great shouting the horses were stampeded, which made it impossible for the soldiers to escape. As fast as the men fell the horses were herded and driven toward the squaws and old men, who gathered them up.
Little Hawk: The soldiers on the knoll let go their horses and the horses ran toward the river. Little Hawk claimed there were 23 dead Indians. One company of soldiers ran toward the river and all but one man dismounted.
Little Soldier: First the Indians rode to the soldiers holding horses and drove them away to cover. Then the warriors attacked the soldiers on foot. These soldiers lay down, and others got on their knees and others stood. Warriors rode into them. Custer’s men dismounted. Their horses got away and ran for the river. Custer’s men were all scattered out.
Moving Robe Woman: The troops horses got loose and ran to the river.
Soldier Wolf: Quite a number of horses were killed there “and two soldiers were killed and left there. The soldier’s horses were run down to the creek, eighty or ninety head.
Thunder Bear: The soldier horses that were not killed stampeded down the hills and were captured by Indian women.
I know the gap was there Mac and it could have played its part, but going on what the warriors who fought with Crazy Horse said, he was no where near deep ravine.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 28, 2018 23:32:01 GMT
Thanks Ian!
I have checked them, especially to try to identify the location as being BRE. What I was hoping for was an identification of the horse colour but no luck. However here is detail of one of your finds.
Thunder Bear (Yanktonai) in 1907
(Custer's men) ran to the top of a knoll and dismounted, one man holding four horses. We dismounted, too, and filled the gullies that the running water had made in the side of the hill. From there we could shoot straight up at the soldiers. Many of them fell, but the others kept shooting and killing some of us. The fighting continued, and what horses had not been killed, stampeded and rushed down the hill across the river, where the women and children were. The women captured them.
All the time we kept closing in on them. One crowd of the soldiers left the hill and ran down into a deep ravine, but we gathered on the edge and shot them.
Pahinhanska (General Custer, "Long Hair" in Sioux) was killed in the middle of his men. We all knew him. His long hair had been cut off. We did not cut him up, or even scalp him.
Not quite compelling enough but still supports my theory that loss of mobility, during the attempt to break contact, was a key in the collapse at the BRE/ LSH end of Battle Ridge. Cheers
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 28, 2018 23:47:10 GMT
Another thought
If at this point Officers G Custer, T Custer, Smith, are dead on LSH.
The five companies that entered the Custer battle were C, E, F, I, and L. Their respective commanders, with dates of rank and seniority, were Capt. Thomas Custer (December 2, 1875, third in rank), 1 st Lt. Algernon Smith (December 5, 1868, fourth in rank), Capt. George Yates (August 19, 1867, second in rank), Capt. Myles Keogh (July 28, 1866, first in rank) and 1st Lt. James Calhoun (January 9, 1871, fifth or last in rank).
Keogh is in command. Does this help explain Keogh's position in the order of movement?
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Nov 29, 2018 3:29:55 GMT
Would not explain it unless Keogh wants to face a courts martial for cowardly conduct in the face of the enemy, a fairly serious charge.
Company I without Keogh is another matter.
Any commander in that situation worth the name would stay to make sure all of his people get out. That's why commanders make the big bucks.
Perhaps I should explain a little further. Should Keogh assume command due to the death or incapacity of the person previously holding that post, he assumes responsibility for the whole. What he commanded previously does not enter into the matter. He has turned over his previous responsibility to another.
Keogh can't get a break no matter which way you fiddle around with this.
The conventional theorist damn him inadvertently, by where he was found in relation to Companies C and L, and by insisting on the existence of a Keogh battalion. Where he was indicates gross incompetence in not exercising command. In short you don't put two companies out on the firing line without you, the overall commander, being there too.
Then poor old Mac comes alone proposing that Keogh, by seniority assumes command up north, then is still found in the same place, suggesting not only incompetence, but incompetence salted with a dash of yellow.
Poor bastard cannot get a break.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 29, 2018 5:09:08 GMT
I only bring this up as in the past I have been "taken to task" by some experienced people as to why Custer was still on LSH. Story of my life, flogged from both sides! Cheers
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 29, 2018 11:06:28 GMT
Funny story.
When I was about 18 or 19 I had a night job running an elevator in a large city building that had a high end restaurant on the top floor. After the rush to take people up to the top early in the night, there was a long lull before I brought drunks back down. During this lull I used to talk to the security guard, they all seemed very old to me . One night I was talking to a guard about Papua New Guinea, and he told me he had fought there in WW2. This was his story.
He was a 21 year old Lieutenant and he was called to an officer's briefing in a hangar at Port Moresby airport. They were addressed by a General.
This is what the guard told me "The General told us that the Japanese were 40 miles outside the city and that they must be stopped. Our orders were to hold the line until the last man and the last bullet." He paused and reflected and the said "Then the bastard walked out onto the tarmac and got on a plane and flew back to Brisbane." We laughed. We could then.
To save anyone having to look it up the Japanese were forced back but mainly because their logistics were so stretched that they could not go on. We only worked together that one night but I always think fondly of him and consider him a hero. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 29, 2018 11:41:14 GMT
Typical Mac, just like Blackadder when General Melchett said to Captain Blackadder, your men will go over the top at dawn and we will be right behind you, in which Blackadder replies ''yes general, about eight miles behind us'' Which leads me on to a post I wanted to put up last week and it is a line from the RCOI; Capt. Moylan was explaining to the court that if the command had stayed in the timber it would have been annihilated. One of the recorders a certain Lt. Lee said to Capt. Moylan; If General Custer in passing there and seeing such deployment, would he expect that command would retreat in 30 to 40 minutes? Which Moylan replied; No sir he would expect it would hold its position. Side bar; Martini said that on his way back he saw Reno's battalion still engaged in the valley, which I would assume meant that his command were still in skirmish line, now by this time Custer would be well down MTC and maybe even on Luce etc. So where would Custer be at this point and where would Boston be? Because it seems to me that Custer had no idea that Reno had left his position. Martini mentioned nothing about seeing Reno in skirmish when he first saw the village along with Custer, with the dogs and kids playing around. So this to me sounds like Reno had not yet engaged the village and the first time he see's Reno in battle is on his way back, which by that time Custer would be well ahead in his journey across deep coulee.
BTW; IF you want me to move the Martini section from this post and put it up somewhere else, just say. Sorry if it detracts from the original thread but I had so little time to post and couldn't think of another place to put it.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Nov 29, 2018 20:58:12 GMT
No worries Ian!
I was just thinking that we have to address the tactical breakdown in the valley as well as at my preferred area of the Custer end.
Your post brings up some interesting timing issues.
With respect to the previous few posts we can say perhaps that Custer was still alive and in control when Company I left LSH.
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Nov 30, 2018 16:01:46 GMT
I think so too Mac, but I also think that it was too late to extract 'E' and maybe 'F', otherwise if 'F' saw 'E' Company getting overrun, then they would do only two things and that would be to mount up and try to help E or get the hell out of there along with 'I', the fact that they never tried to help 'E' or join 'I' in withdrawing was down to themselves being corralled and forced onto LSH.
BTW; have you ever come across any Indian accounts stating that the soldiers where driven over the ridge line near where the monuments is [or LSH] and all where killed on the western slope of battle ridge? I am sure that I have seen accounts like this that say that no soldiers died on top of the ridge.
I also think that the Reno retreat had nothing to do with Custer failing to cross the river at ford D. The Custer battalion and its subsequent pull back to BRE and Cemetery ridge was more to do with the amount of Cheyennes still in situ in the northern end of the village. Custer and his men could have been out numbered by three to one at the point they reached ford D.
|
|
tja
Civilian
Posts: 13
|
Post by tja on Dec 1, 2018 3:08:46 GMT
I have been on this board for several months now but am not really a “poster” as I am in way over my head. I have been interested in the LBH for a number of years but have no military experience and am not a student of the LBH as are most who post here. I would be interested to hear what the thoughts are on some questions I have: - was there ever a time when all five companies were still together that they realized, or should have realized they were in real trouble? Should they have made a Reno type decision to “charge” and get out in force? Had they done so was their best route south toward Reno or west away from the river to distance themselves from the village and where Indian presence may have been less? - could some or many of them gotten away in a timely full scale, non stop, all at once retreat? Terry
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 1, 2018 5:29:51 GMT
WOW
Only my opinion, but
I think most of the leadership realized they were in trouble, when Wolf Tooth and the boys came up on their flank fairly early on. The real question though is did "the" leader know, and what would he do about it if he did. Given the historical narrative, it betrays a complete lack of situational awareness on the part of the only person that counts.
Could they have done the same thing Reno did in breaking out from encirclement? Yes, but only if it was done before any or all of them reached the Ford D area. After that they were unable to break out as a complete body. Some had to remain to cover or there would have been a complete collapse and none would have made it. Custer's situation differed from Reno in that Reno could assemble using the timber to mask his intention. Everything Custer did was in full view of the enemy.
Had Custer gotten to the Cemetery Ridge area before going to Ford D, accessed the situation as being too big a bite to chew, he could have ridden off due east and it is doubtful there would be a vigorous pursuit by the Indians. They would have been satisfied with driving the Custer battalion away. Custer going east though would mean that the Indians could renew their attention on Reno and then Benteen who was at that time coming up. The result of that is that the 7th Cavalry Memorial would be a couple of miles south of where it is now, no one would pay any attention to Reno's Last Stand, and George Custer would have received the courts martial he so richly deserved.
In any attack where there are multiple parts appertaining to that attack, there must be provisions made for mutual support, the multiple attacking forces must compliment each other in attaining an overall unity of purpose.
Over your head my ass. The questions you asked are direct and to the point, focusing on the heart of the matter.
Don't ever forget as you ponder these things that had anyone else but George Custer been in command of this debacle, this battle would not make a footnote in the history of westward expansion. Of course if anyone else was in command the debacle would not have occurred in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Dec 1, 2018 11:48:18 GMT
First of all tja(Terry) welcome, to the board, you have lurked for a good while. You don't need to have military experience or background to be a knowledgeable or astute poster. QC gave you a fairly complete answers to your questions, but, there was much that lead up to your questions.
Custer was a lightning rod, a Shakespearian character(tragically flawed). He also had a great publicity machine working for him, pre and post battle. Muhammad Ali was a lightning rod, would he have been as big without Howard Cosell? Would Howard Cosell have been as big without Ali?. The publicity machine made roll players bigger than life, in both cases. Sheridan and Terry are mentioned more in conjunction with this battle than they were in their own battles. Reno and Benteen, who? Just like Muhammad Ali's opponents, sparring partners, entourage, and the "Black" Muslim faith.
The pre battle campaign was flawed, not only by GAC, but others as well. GAC caused most of the flaws that brought about the disaster that befell the 7th on the 26th.
And, you can be sure, had GAC by some miracle survived with casualties even close to this, he would have been courts martialed.
Again, welcome.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 1, 2018 15:17:08 GMT
Hi Terry, to see why Custer moved so far past deep coulee, we can take note of what Capt. Moylan said in the piece I posted the other day from the RCOI. Moylan stated that he thought that Custer would have expected Reno to hold his position in the valley. Now Moylan knew Custer personally, which is something that many writers and authors forget when they write their thoughts on Custer.
To me it shows that Custer didn’t have much regard for the Indians and fully expected them to either keep their distance or even run from any strong force of cavalry. He thought that his bravado would make them think again on challenging him in the field.
We can also see similar bravado at the Washita when Custer knew that the Indians where gathering strength and hoping to cut him off, what did he do, he made them think that he was still on the offensive which made them change their tactics from offensive to defensive and move back to their circles and stop the soldiers from attacking their camps. Custer quickly changed his stance and withdrew which caught the Indians on the back foot.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 1, 2018 15:59:04 GMT
Fairly complete is not complete, and I apologize for omitting - could anyone get away.
I think the answer is that it is possible a few did, and I speculate that a few might have, very few, numbers you could count on one hand. Unlike today, I do not believe a full accounting was made, and based upon what was available to do the accounting, that is no surprise. Anyone who did somehow slip away, possibly to the east, would still be in very hostile terrain, where their continued survival depended upon having some live off the land skills. Montana in 1876 was a very harsh place, where you could not find a 7-11 or even shelter to sustain yourself. You would probably not be anxious to rejoin the regiment in fear of courts martial for desertion. So in that light any who did get away, probably could not survive for long.
Oddly enough LBH in this respect is similar to the Alamo. Bexar, the town near the Alamo, was the 1836 version of Bumscrew Egypt. The closest town in the Colonies was Gonzalez 90 miles away, and nothing but prairie in between, no food, little water, and even fewer prospects for survival. The defenders broke out of the "fortress" to the east, in the pre-dawn hours of 6 March. They were met by Mexican cavalry, positioned in the Alameda for the very purpose of stopping such a break out. The heaviest part of the fighting actually took place outside the walls in the area which is now park and the surrounding four or five city blocks. No one really knows the actual strength of the Alamo garrison, only the numbers of bodies that were recovered and later burned. So, not knowing the actual strength and taking in consideration the darkness, I think it is very possible that some few did make it out, only to face the hardships of being stuck in an unforgiving landscape. There have been stories about these people around for almost two centuries, and I think one or two have credence.
So "get away" Could it have happened? I think the answer must be yes in both cases, but survival after getting away is most assuredly no
|
|
tja
Civilian
Posts: 13
|
Post by tja on Dec 1, 2018 17:19:23 GMT
Thanks for the quick thoughts on my questions. QC, you raised another question for me. In theory, if 5-6 soldiers make an escape attempt when all is already lost (everyone around them is dead) and let’s say 3 of them actually get away to the east (or wherever) and two days later they return to the regiment. Are these soldiers likely to be courts martialed? Is this desertion in the face of the enemy? Regards, Terry
|
|