Posted on 01/16/2008 8:43:47 AM PST by drzz
LIES ON GENERAL CUSTER AND THE LITTLE BIGHORN
http://www.custerwest.org
1) Custer never massacred Indians. (see the Battle of the Washita)
2) Custer was one of the most brilliant cavalry generals of his times (see Custer in the Civil War)
3) Custer understood how to fight Indians (see the Battle of the Washita, the Battle of the Little bighorn -LBH)
4) Custer never underestimated his enemy at Little Bighorn (see before the battle).
5) The Indians at LBH were 1'500, exactly the number of warriors Custer expected to surprise with his 647 soldiers (an usual tactic in Indian warfare). There has never been "thousands of Indians" in Sitting Bull's village or "an impossible victory" as some still say without knowing what the evidence say. (see "LBH: before the battle, Custer's plan).
6) The Indians never ambushed Custer, never flanked him. They were surprised by the attack and most of their actions were late and disorganized. (see Accounts by hostiles, Last Stand)
7) The entire 7th cavalry wasn't massacred at Little Bighorn. 2/3 of Custer's troops, who had to lead front and flank attacks, were out of the battle after 30 minutes and never reached Custer. This military betrayal by Major Reno and Captain Benteen can be proven with strong evidence shown on this website. It also explains why the army never did any inquiry on the battle (see Little Bighorn cover-up, Benteen's scout, Reno Hill, Captain Weir), and let the American public dream about the "reckless Custer".
8) Custer's attack at Little Bighorn has been supported by such figures as US general in chief Nelson Appelton Miles, the most successful Indian fighter in US history (see Little Bighorn cover-up), and many historians and others.
Custer didn’t scout Tullocks Creek with his entire regiment, but his scouts did enough to inform him that no one was in this valley.
He then knew that he had to go in the Little Bighorn area. He also wanted to scout the LBH area on June 25 to look for any other tracks around the main Indian village, but it didn’t go that way because some Indians surprised his soldiers and he had to attack at once.
Benteen was sent to the South to do the same job the scout had previously done in Tullocks Creek : look out for tracks.
Sorry, it’s not Lieutenant Edgerly, it’s Lieutenant GODFREY in his CENTURY article.
Godfrey said that the regiment was doing a lot of halts and was moving slowly because the scouts were looking for tracks in the Tullocks Creek valley.
They reported to Custer that they hadn’t find any
Custer’s aspirations for Presidency should have been noted somewhere, especially in the St Louis Democrat Convention. But Dr Lawrence A. Frost never found anybody or any record which said that Custer had even begun a want-to-be-president campaign
I should have added, “and the weakness of his command”. Thank you for the post. The amount of time and energy to researching battles in the West is unlimited. The testimony of Lt. Godfrey is pretty damaging. Forces on Reno Hill definitely did not help Custer. I remember when we walked from the cemetery over to Reno Hill and saw the locations of the riflemen and bunkers on the hill suggested exactly what you’re saying, that they were in a defensive position, but thinking back it is hard to believe that no one was able to get a messenger through considering how close they were to each other. I can’t imagine Custer not being able to order Reno or Benteen to attack the forces either to his flank or between the 2 in a cross fire.
I’ve been there twice, and probably will go again, as I like to vacation just South of Livingston and pass the battlefield either on the way or the way back to Colorado. Montana is the last great frontier of open country and “Big Skies”. The valley of the Little Bighorn River is awesome. Heading South into Bighorn Canyon and traveling along the Bighorn River West from Buffalo, WY is the greatest fishing anywhere.
What testimony was this? In what court? It wasn't the Reno Court of Inquiry. Please provide details as this is interesting stuff.
Just to let you know further what I have, In W. A. Graham's "The Custer Myth", page #336, there is a document titled "EDGERLY'S STATEMENT TO HEIN". It reads "(From "Memories of Long Ago," by Lieut.-Col. O. L. Hein, (1925), pp. 143-45)
"On June 25th (1886) the tenth anniversary of Custer's last fight was celebrated at the Post (Fort Custer), by a reunion of the surviving officers of the Little Big Horn campaign, including my old friend and classmate, Captain W. S. Edgerly, at the conclusion of which a number of the officers and ladies of the garrison made a visi to the battlefields.
"Interesting information with reference to Custer's campaign was imparted to me by Edgerly in the following account that he indited for me: Extract from General Terry's Order to Custer.
"'The Department Commander desires that on the way up the Rosebud you should thoroughly examine the upper part of Tulloch's Creek.'
"When we arrived in the neighborhood of Tullock's Creek we ran on a hot trail that led straight to the Indian village. It would have been useless to scout this creek, for we knew the Indians were in front of us."
While this is second-hand, it shows Edgerly giving a different account of any scout of Tullock's Creek. What Edgerly is stating here is that "in the neighborhood of Tullock's Creek" obviously means at the Busby camp (or at the stop just below the Crow's Nest), and the trail described was the one up Davis Creek and over the divide "that led straight to the Indian village".
In addition, in the same volume, beginning at page #261, there is the written letter by George Herendeen, scout, to the Bozeman Herald published January 22, 1878. In it he confirmed my story in an earlier post that he was to report back to the Terry command, that Custer did ask him earlier on the 24th to scout Tullock's Fork and was told they would be in a better location later to do so. He states he told Custer that they were going in the right direction and "I could only follow his trail" meaning he wouldn't go any other way than they were already headed. There is nothing further in his letter about any subsequent scout of Tullock's Creek.
I'd appreciate any specific details on the evidence you have. AS you can see, it throws a different light on events the day before the battle. And myself and others would appreciate having any and all concrete source evidence there is.
Ah, but what exactly is meant by "...his scouts did enough"? This is the crux of the issue. If you read my post #33, the scouts returned to Custer at the Busby Bend and reported the trail led up Davis Creek with no evidence of it diverting elsewhere (i.e. Tullock's Creek). This does not mean that they had to scout Tullock's Creek to ascertain this. It means there was no physical evidence of any divergence from the trail to the divide. You see? Now go to my post #46 where there's a statement by Edgerly that contradicts any idea of a scout of Tullock's Creek being made at that time. Frankly, I find this highly questionable.
Ah hah! Now we're getting somewhere. W. A. Graham's "The Custer Myth" (which I've referenced in posts above) contains a large portion of Godfrey's Century article. What Godfrey actually wrote was: "The march during the day was tedious. We made many long halts, so as not to get ahead of the scouts, who seemed to be doing their work thoroughly, giving special attention to the right, toward Tulloch's Creek, the valley of which was in general view from the divide [This cold not be a reference of Tullock's Creek from the valley of the Rosebud but, more likely, from the divide between the Rosebud and the Little Big Horn, i.e. from the Crow's Nest where it is indeed visible]. Once or twice signal smokes were reported in that direction, but investigation did not confirm the reports. The weather was dry and had been for some time, consequently the trail was very dusty..."
Please not how he words this. He uses "toward Tulloch's Creek" and "the valley of which was in general view from the divide". Also "smokes wre reported in that direction". The sure implication is that scouts were out in force in the general direction of Tullock's Creek. But none of this confirms they ever scouted the valley itself. Compare this to Herendeen's earlier mention of Custer wanting to scout the area but both Herendeen and Boyer tell him to wait; which he agrees to. Then consider the Edgerly statement noted in above post #46 that "When we arrived in the neighborhood of Tullock's Creek we ran on a hot trail that led straight to the Indian village. It would have been useless to scout this creek, for we knew the Indians were in front of us."
I submit to you that while Godfrey's statements in his Century article may imply that a scout was made, this is only an implication, they are rather ambiguous, and there is no other written or oral evidence to sustain it. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary.
I'm not trying to pick an argument. I'm trying to get at the facts. If there's anything that sustains Godfrey's inference that a scout of Tullock's Creek was indeed made, then it should be made evident. I'd like to know one way or t'other. While not important to the outcome of the event itself, it would shed more light on the overall story.
I'm with you on this. As I noted above, it's conjecture. And that's something I dismiss.
Have you ever made the stop at Ft. Phil Kearney to visit the site and the battlefields of the Fetterman and Wagonbox fights? That’s another interesting part of the Plains Indian Wars that’ right in that particular backyard. It’s just off the Interstate near Story, WY. In fact, the Fetterman fight occurred right on the Bozeman Trail, within sight of the Interstate.
We have been in that area, but didn’t go to Wagonbox, but saw the Fort Kearney site and Fetterman’s plight. Fetterman was a little over anxious fell for the same tactic as Forsythe at Beecher’s Island. Indians would leave an escape route open for the Army, when in reality they were baiting them to go that way and run into hidden forces. That’s how Forsythe ended up in the middle of the Arickeree River. I like the idea of calling these “fights” rather than battles. Beecher was about 300 against 50, while Fetterman had 80 men against 2000. The repeating rifles were the Indians big problem at Wagon box, new weapons that Red Cloud was not expecting. The technology was too much for them. Wagon box was portrayed many times in the movies, John Wayne etc...”circle the wagons”, when it really was the weapons not the circle the wagons strategy!
Notice on your map that Ft. Kearny, WY has no “e”, while Kearney, Nebraska does. Named for the same guy!
“That’s a myth without any historical evidence”
of course there’s no “evidence” as in documents. but read about the nature and character of the man. Custer deployed his forces at LBH with the intent to prevent the indians from escaping and thus depriving him of his great victory
He didn’t want them to escape because it was his orders to capture the renegades and return them to the reservation.
That's one of those "Huh?" moments in history. No, they're named for two different people; Gen. Stephen W. Kearny (Ft. Kearney, NB) and Gen. Philip Kearny (Ft. Phil Kearny, WY).
Yes, the name was misspelled on the Nebraska post. Apparently the misspelling continued to be used officially, and it finally became recognized as the standard spelling. Go figure.
I've visited Ft. Phil Kearny and the Fetterman site but never got over to the Wagon Box site myself. At the time, the post had been surveyed, but that's all. I understand they've made it more interesting. At the time, there was little there except a welcome center/bookstore.
The one thing I've never got beyond, is how 2000 Indians could conceal themselves to ambush Fetterman on that narrow ridge. We were there in late May and the grasses had to be grown to a further extent than in December. I just couldn't understand how so many Indians could be so well concealed. Even the gullies didn't seem to provide adequate concealment. Oh, well.
“Thank you for the post. The amount of time and energy to researching battles in the West is unlimited. The testimony of Lt. Godfrey is pretty damaging. Forces on Reno Hill definitely did not help Custer. I remember when we walked from the cemetery over to Reno Hill and saw the locations of the riflemen and bunkers on the hill suggested exactly what you’re saying, that they were in a defensive position, but thinking back it is hard to believe that no one was able to get a messenger through considering how close they were to each other. I can’t imagine Custer not being able to order Reno or Benteen to attack the forces either to his flank or between the 2 in a cross fire.”
Thank you for your message. What’s amazing is that Reno and Benteen stayed on their hill ONE HOUR AND A HALF while there wasn’t any Indian around them (They were all against Custer)!
Custer took special attention to the Tullocks Creek area and moved on only when he was sure that nothing was there. He didn’t SCOUT the entire area, but made halts to give time to his scouts to do so.
http://www.custerwest.org
______________________________________
“The march during the day was tedious. We made many long halts, so as not to get ahead of the scouts, who seemed to be doing their work thoroughly, giving special attention to the right, toward Tulloch’s Creek, the valley of which was in general view from the divide. Once or twice signal smokes were reported in that direction, but investigation did not confirm the reports.”
Lieutenant Godfrey
Century Magazine, in Graham, The Custer Myth, pages 124 to 150)
Gosh I hadn’t see that you had already picked up the story. You made me waste my time searching in my book :-)
I think Gofrey made clear that Custer DID something regarding to Tullocks Creek. The halts mean that the scouts were doing their job.
Therefore, accusing Custer of neglecting Tullocks Creek is irrelevant.
Custer simply want to defeat the Indiasn. How many officers want to loose?
The Godfrey article is in my copy of "The Custer Myth". I was aware of it, but you had indicated information regarding a scout coming from Edgerly. That's what I questioned and only acknowledged the Godfrey data once you'd changed your focus. No intent on my part of having you waste your time.
I think Gofrey made clear that Custer DID something regarding to Tullocks Creek. The halts mean that the scouts were doing their job.
Godfrey made it clear the scouts were scouting the area 'toward' Tullock's Creek during the day. If this can be inferred as Custer 'doing something', well, OK. I, however, find Edgerly's remarks about the halt and there being no need to scout the Tullock's Creek area because of what the scouts discovered more telling. As to the halt meaning the scouts were doing their job, of course it means that. But it does not mean they actually scouted the Tullock's Creek area.
Therefore, accusing Custer of neglecting Tullocks Creek is irrelevant.
Actually, this entire subtopic is irrelevant to the whole picture. It's just one of those side issues LBH nuts like ourselves enjoy discussing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.