|
Post by Gerry on Mar 12, 2013 7:24:29 GMT -5
bc, Good to hear from you. Just the other day I wished you would chime in but heard nothing. You must have moved on a left oblique and we expected you to pitch into what ever you came across...but nothing we have not heard from you till now. Dawdling, I suppose.
Hopefully will see you at Sheridan.
Fred's "3411" is here to stay.
Gerry
|
|
Clair
Veteran
Benteen Doesn't Get Here Quick, I'll Have His Ass!
Posts: 150
|
Post by Clair on Mar 12, 2013 7:40:11 GMT -5
I look forward to Fred's article. I agree with the significance of "3411," although I don't attach it to DeRudio's sighting. While DeRudio indicates this as the spot, generally, in his RCOI testimony, it would put Custer south of Weir Hill on the bluff 5 minutes before Reno bolted from the timber. I wonder how Fred reconciles this?
I believe Custer was at 3411 when he waved to Reno as Reno moved down the valley in his initial advance. It was Custer's signal to tell Reno what the plan was.
I also think Crazy Horse saw Custer's column from 3411. So a significant place, indeed. I think DeRudio was a bit misoriented in the timber, and actually saw Custer on Bouyer's bluff around the Thompson sighting time....probably as Custer was riding back to his command...and probably just as Custer saw Crazy Horse moving away from the village toward Reno. I see a Custer moment...seeing CH's dust advancing south and saying: "Reno's s**t is about it hit the fan!"
Enjoy...
Clair
|
|
|
Post by keogh on Mar 12, 2013 17:11:58 GMT -5
I look forward to Fred's article. I agree with the significance of "3411," although I don't attach it to DeRudio's sighting. While DeRudio indicates this as the spot, generally, in his RCOI testimony, it would put Custer south of Weir Hill on the bluff 5 minutes before Reno bolted from the timber. I wonder how Fred reconciles this?
Enjoy...
Clair I asked Fred about this at one of our Roundtable Meetings, and he had a very simple and effective answer to the very valid points you bring out regarding the obvious flaws in DeRudio's alleged sighting of Custer on the bluffs. Fred simply rejects the time of the sighting that DeRudio testified to. He accepts DeRudio's supposed sighting of Custer on 3411, but simply rejects DeRudio's time reference for when he made the sighting. Now how's that for an effective method of making a square peg fit a round hole? I don't have the latest newsletter yet, but I congratulate Fred on his latest article. Although he and I do not always see eye to eye on how things played out, his articles are always an enjoyable and informative read. garryowen, keogh
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Mar 12, 2013 21:03:16 GMT -5
Just read through “3,411 Revisited”
If the article would have put forth that 3411 is the correct location of General Custer waiving his hat as seen by Reno’s men moving down the valley and dismounting, I would agree. I would also agree that Sharpshooter ridge was not where this took place. There was a lot of action that took place in and around 3411 and in my estimate it would not have been SSR.
Now the problem that I have…Fred states that Custer was all about speed. But here he puts Custer at 3411 watching the beginning of Reno’s fight and then uses DeRudio statement of seeing Custer on the bluff 5 minutes before Reno’s retreat out of the timber. So according to this article Custer stayed at 3411 for the entire Reno fight…the dismount, the forming of skirmish lines, the advance of the lines, the temporary holding of the line, the retreat back to the timber, and the Reno’s call for charge out of the timber, all with Custer on 3411. Where does the speed come into play.
The fantasy dismissal or mistaken fantasy is present in the article. The author does use the pure fantasy understanding of accounts and totally dismisses primary accounts because of his believe that some accounts are pure fantasy.
I can not believe that Custer stayed at 3411 for most of the Reno fight. If Custer was about speed, something like this would have occurred. At 3411 Custer would have seen Reno reaching the timber and dismounting. Custer moving north along the ridge along Cedar Creek, with the Crow scouts trying to catch up after leaving 3411, the 5 troops move down Cedar Creek. Custer moving around the east side of Weir Point, with the 5 troops now moving into Medicine Tail Coulee. Custer moving toward the east side of Boyer’s Bluff and dispatches Martini. Custer sends Co E to Ford B. Custer moves atop of south Boyer’s Bluff with Cooke and one other person, just as DeRudio looks up from the timber and sees the men on the bluff. Reno calls the charge from the timber.
Martini dispatched 6,431 feet from Ford B, cutting back to the east side of Weir Point 500 to 600 yards, looking back seeing troops falling back from the ford, early withdraw of E with little shooting. Martini continuing ¾ mile puts Martini right back at “3411” where Custer first saw the village. Martini looking down in the valley sees Reno is engaged. The General is atop Boyer’s, DeRudio sees this, 5 minutes later Reno calls the charge out of the timber.
Custer can not still be on 3411 when DeRudio sees someone on some bluff, 5 minutes before Reno retreats from the timber.
Gerry
|
|
Clair
Veteran
Benteen Doesn't Get Here Quick, I'll Have His Ass!
Posts: 150
|
Post by Clair on Mar 13, 2013 8:01:39 GMT -5
The hang up is where is the error in DeRudio's RCOI testimony...in the time of his Custer sighting, or in the location of that sighting? If you believe it totally, then you have Custer's column still below SSR just before Reno leaves the timber, and this has to negate Varnum's sighting of E Co moving over the saddle near 3411 as Reno is dismounting. I suppose you could say that Varnum saw Co E going over Reno hill and disappearing into the swale below SSR to halt there though. This model would have Custer waiting just below SSR until just before Reno bolted the timber. And it would mean that Custer didn't even climb the bluff until Reno was dismounting, and that Custer and Martin could never have seen a "quiet village" when they first climbed the bluff. So all kinds of problems with this model.
DeRudio thought he saw Custer to the south of Weir Hill, in his testimony. But if DeRudio was in the timber at the river, on the north side of Reno's timber position, he would have been looking north/northeast to see Custer. It would be difficult for him to even see 3411 at this angle, no matter which timber position you choose. Remember from his location he was facing tipis and hostile Warriors across the river from him. If he was looking at Bouyer's Bluff, the bluff there would look like a hill from his viewpoint, and he could easily have mistaken this for Weir hill at the time.
It seems to me that it would be easier for DeRudio to mistake Custer's location, than it would be for him to mistake the timing of his sighting, if you reread his testimony. So if you have to pick one or the other being wrong, I would choose Custer's location. That seems more likely than his getting the timing of the sighting wrong.
But who can prove such a thing? It only matters what you believe to be most probable, putting DeRudio's account into context with the rest of what you think happened there.
Clair
|
|
Clair
Veteran
Benteen Doesn't Get Here Quick, I'll Have His Ass!
Posts: 150
|
Post by Clair on Mar 13, 2013 8:11:40 GMT -5
Maybe like this...
|
|
jag
1st Sergeant (Shield Warrior)
Posts: 196
|
Post by jag on Mar 13, 2013 10:59:55 GMT -5
The hang up is where is the error in DeRudio's RCOI testimony...in the time of his Custer sighting, or in the location of that sighting? If you believe it totally, then you have Custer's column still below SSR just before Reno leaves the timber, and this has to negate Varnum's sighting of E Co moving over the saddle near 3411 as Reno is dismounting. I suppose you could say that Varnum saw Co E going over Reno hill and disappearing into the swale below SSR to halt there though. This model would have Custer waiting just below SSR until just before Reno bolted the timber. And it would mean that Custer didn't even climb the bluff until Reno was dismounting, and that Custer and Martin could never have seen a "quiet village" when they first climbed the bluff. So all kinds of problems with this model. DeRudio thought he saw Custer to the south of Weir Hill, in his testimony. But if DeRudio was in the timber at the river, on the north side of Reno's timber position, he would have been looking north/northeast to see Custer. It would be difficult for him to even see 3411 at this angle, no matter which timber position you choose. Remember from his location he was facing tipis and hostile Warriors across the river from him. If he was looking at Bouyer's Bluff, the bluff there would look like a hill from his viewpoint, and he could easily have mistaken this for Weir hill at the time. It seems to me that it would be easier for DeRudio to mistake Custer's location, than it would be for him to mistake the timing of his sighting, if you reread his testimony. So if you have to pick one or the other being wrong, I would choose Custer's location. That seems more likely than his getting the timing of the sighting wrong. But who can prove such a thing? It only matters what you believe to be most probable, putting DeRudio's account into context with the rest of what you think happened there. Clair Clair, I'd have to say that location and timing go hand in hand here. You (as in anyone) can't reject one and then just talk about the other, yet, there are those who try and look like first class idiots when they do. First off 3411 wasn't and still isn't anywhere important. Not to Girards sighting, not to Varnums sighting and most certainly not to DeRudio's. And I'll repeat this again, get the place wrong and you'll join the ranks of those whose claim to fame is geomorphologically moving the place to where it suits the driven minds in their attempts to incorrectly assign place to their times. It works the other way around, anyone knows that. Its people like that, that can rewrite the whole history of any battle and make anyone believe the Battle of Iwo Jima was fought 3 Islands down and 4 to the left from the actual historical Island because the volcanic mountain fits better, looks better and besides the flag they put up there with the rocks aligned just as they were when the photo was snapped are all there, see here's the photo to prove it. And then they collect a bunch of Yes men in their earth shaking discovery, couch potatoes who'd rather let someone else do their thinking for them rather than get off their duffs and do the work for themselves. What I reject are people who will try to say the Matterhorn is really Pikes Peak and go to mathematical dreams to prove it, and in their madness make half the population of China believe it. Hell, it doesn't make a damn dimes worth of difference to them what evidence exists that proves them wrong or how many people who prove which mountain is where, they have to move it to make their ideas famous, their grasp of space and time utterly changed into pretenses of what they think they know based on their attempts to make mountains move. It would be interesting to see if they could ever pass a geography class. The location of DeRudio's sighting is exactly where he said it was. And yet we have people moving the geography to fit a time theory. Its that same phenomenon that possessed Girard and his times and timing of Reno's battle that we are witnessing in DeRudio's testimony. Both of these men thought the withdrawal of the company Reno took into the woods to stave off flanking Indians, this about 10 minutes after the skirmish line was established, was the beginning of the general retreat. It wasn't. When you hold DeRudio's sighting to what he thought he was witnessing to this and say he saw Custer about 5 minutes before this, it meant he saw Custer about the same time Girard did. Girard claiming his sighting about 5 minutes after the SL set up. Here DeRudio said it backwards in time, about 5 minutes before Reno took that company off line, ie. their sightings coincided with each other as the general concensus among Reno's men on the skirmish line before that company was taken off line was, 10 minutes. Now I'm not one for moving terrain to suit my theories. And there was one man who stated an exact place on Maguire's map for his sighting, and that was Lt. Varnum. And no one needs to move it anywhere, yet they do. Anyone who's ever been there knows exactly where his, and by the way, Girard's point 2, was and still is. Its the point on the present day road where the road turns 90 degrees back east towards Weir Peak after you start your ascent up from MTC. It's about a half mile or so after you leave the valley floor. That point is point two, there's no doubt about where that is. Look at Maguire's map, then look at point two and where Point "B" is and then try to tell anyone with a brain its somewhere else, this to be about a mile and a half away from there when it wasn't. Some people will try anything to make their theory fit the terrain, but there's one thing no one can do and that is move that point "2" from where it was and still to this day is, and it sure wasn't, and still isn't, 3411 no matter how many times someone dreams it.
|
|
Clair
Veteran
Benteen Doesn't Get Here Quick, I'll Have His Ass!
Posts: 150
|
Post by Clair on Mar 13, 2013 11:58:48 GMT -5
I'd have to say that location and timing go hand in hand here. You (as in anyone) can't reject one and then just talk about the other, yet, there are those who try and look like first class idiots when they do. Hmm....that doesn't make sense to me (maybe I'm an idiot )...because I think that almost all the testimony around here is accurate in some parts, and not accurate in others. No reason DeRudio's would be any different, eh? My, my...a lot of invective but no indication as to your reasons why you discard 3411! Why isn't it important, and why do you think the important location is somewhere else? I get your vote, but is there a reason we should consider behind it? What makes you believe that? Are you in the party, then, that believes Custer's column was still south of Sharpshooter Ridge just before Reno bolted from the timber, like believing DeRudio's exact testimony requires? And throw in Varnum's sighting of E Co at the time Reno was dismounting, right? I think your model is possible, but realize that it requires a VERY SHORT Reno fight, eh? The entire time from Reno dismounting to him bolting from the timber cannot possibly be longer than 15 min. in your model, you realize? You have that much confidence in the precision of the MacGuire map? I'll take a look... So you think the point where Girard saw Custer, a few minutes after Reno dismounted, is on the other side of Weir Hill from 3411, about 3/4ths of a mile farther downstream. This means you think he is far separated from his column, which you believe is down Cedar Coulee, correct? Do you think Custer went the way the Crow Scouts did, around the west side of Weir, not the east side? Do you think Martin was with him, and where do you think Martin was dispatched from? Lots of implications for putting Custer on Bouyer's Bluff there, so early in your model. But very interesting. Clair
|
|
jag
1st Sergeant (Shield Warrior)
Posts: 196
|
Post by jag on Mar 13, 2013 13:47:09 GMT -5
I'd have to say that location and timing go hand in hand here. You (as in anyone) can't reject one and then just talk about the other, yet, there are those who try and look like first class idiots when they do. Hmm....that doesn't make sense to me (maybe I'm an idiot )...because I think that almost all the testimony around here is accurate in some parts, and not accurate in others. No reason DeRudio's would be any different, eh?I didn't say that. I said you can't Pick and choose location, geographical features doesn't move from the timing and you can't talk about one without involving the other, I'll make that point very clear in a few. My, my...a lot of invective but no indication as to your reasons why you discard 3411! Why isn't it important, and why do you think the important location is somewhere else? I get your vote, but is there a reason we should consider behind it?There's no my my puffed up I'm right your wrong about it because absolutely nothing happened there. There's no proof of it anywhere in testimony or for that matter other written statements that anything did. Reno Hill is mentioned and is pointed out by Girard, and Varnum's testimony is point two which is about 3/4ths mile away from "B" as Maguire's map shows it is a lot closer to than 3411. And there isn't anywhere evidence other than 'the highest point around there' and someone's overactive imagination making 3411 more than it was. What makes you believe that? Are you in the party, then, that believes Custer's column was still south of Sharpshooter Ridge just before Reno bolted from the timber, like believing DeRudio's exact testimony requires?And I didn't say that either. I didn't say Sharpshooter, did I? I didn't say when Reno bolted from the timber, did I? DeRudio's exact testimony was what? That he believed exactly the same as Girard did; that when Reno took that company off the line and placed it in the timber to protect their flank - That he thought just like Girard did that they were on the run back to the bluffs from that moment on. And you know as well as I do that didn't happen at that time. Both Girard and DeRudio's sightings were made within seconds of the other about 5 minutes after that SL set up. And both of them thought that when that "fool move" as Girard stated was back to the bluffs, they both thought 5 minutes after their sightings that Reno and those men were on the run from that point on to the bluffs. That's what they believed, read their statements and testimony, if the shoe fits, they had to wear it, and its right up their alley. And throw in Varnum's sighting of E Co at the time Reno was dismounting, right? I think your model is possible, but realize that it requires a VERY SHORT Reno fight, eh? The entire time from Reno dismounting to him bolting from the timber cannot possibly be longer than 15 min. in your model, you realize?No you still don't get it do you? Varnum saw his sighting at point "2" as the SL set up, 5 minutes later both Girard and DeRudio make their sightings which had to be near point two to make any sense with Weir Peak being that 'highest point around there'. You're trying to fit a bunch of preconcieved square peg notions into a round hole that doesn't work and in the process trying to make me say things that I didn't say. Otherwise Custer was heading south not north to make things work the way you and about eveyone else wants it to work. And no, once again I didn't say how long that fight lasted. But if you believe like DeRudio and Girard did, you could make a short fight of it that way, but it doesn't work, your smart enough to figure that out and had to have. I'll just say this. I think Reno's time in the valley, excluding his retreat to the hills was about 1/2 hour from the time he set up his skirmish line. If you'd like to discuss timelines we can, but do to this we're going to have to discuss locations, wont we? -- I'd have to say that location and timing go hand in hand here. You (as in anyone) can't reject one and then just talk about the other, yet, there are those who try and look like first class idiots when they do. Of course we could just talk about locations and not talk about timing or vise-versa but it wont make a lick of sense, will it? You have that much confidence in the precision of the MacGuire map? I'll take a look...Do so. Look at point "B" and point "2" and then try as hard as you can to place it, point "2" at 3411. I'll wager you wont be excited over that one. Maguire's map might not have been to scale, but it sure wasn't a mile and a half off as that major blunder would have been. So you think the point where Girard saw Custer, a few minutes after Reno dismounted, is on the other side of Weir Hill from 3411, about 3/4ths of a mile farther downstream. This means you think he is far separated from his column, which you believe is down Cedar Coulee, correct? Do you think Custer went the way the Crow Scouts did, around the west side of Weir, not the east side? Do you think Martin was with him, and where do you think Martin was dispatched from?
Lots of implications for putting Custer on Bouyer's Bluff there, so early in your model. But very interesting.No I was supporting the place where point "2" was and is. You're once again trying to read things into what I didn't state. Where I described was where Varnum made his sighting, which was back of point "2" below (northerly) Weir Peak. I never said Custer wasn't where Martin and others said he was, at the head of that column. I never said he stopped and had a party trying to figure out what to do next as everyone else is preoccupied with. And this conversation had nothing to do with Martin, so where did that come from?
|
|
|
Post by bc on Sept 13, 2013 17:21:47 GMT -5
Got my September 2013 LBHA newsletter today. They have a pic of me on the cover in a yellow shirt. Inside of the back cover page is a pic of Gerry standing by Myron Steves and others. One of them is over a hundred years old, U pik which 1.
bc
|
|
|
Post by keogh on Sept 13, 2013 18:19:20 GMT -5
Got my September 2013 LBHA newsletter today. They have a pic of me on the cover in a yellow shirt. Inside of the back cover page is a pic of Gerry standing by Myron Steves and others. One of them is over a hundred years old, U pik which 1.
bc Myron Steves is quite an interesting character. He is the widower of Captain Benteen's grand-daughter. His son, Buddy Steves is the official LBHA photographer. garryowen, keogh
|
|
|
Post by bc on Sept 13, 2013 18:38:52 GMT -5
I always enjoy talking to Myron and he is a real nice guy. Same for Buddy. The granddaughter is working on her own book about Benteen. She has access to Fred's library and Fred wrote lots of notes in the margins of the books. I think she will do a good job. I think Jim Donovan is involved as an agent in getting it published. That is her on the other side of Myron who is next to Gerry. Buddy and his family are on the front page. The pic of Buddy and the one of me were taken on that hill up by the Crow's nest where our bus broke down.
I've been to a bunch of different kinds of conventions and it seems like the LBH people have the most beautiful women that attend.
bc
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Sept 14, 2013 9:11:55 GMT -5
Got my September 2013 LBHA newsletter today. They have a pic of me on the cover in a yellow shirt. Inside of the back cover page is a pic of Gerry standing by Myron Steves and others. One of them is over a hundred years old, U pik which 1. bc Ya, if the picture of me was in color, as yours is, it would not have shown me with white hair, maybe dark like yours in color. I very much enjoyed the visits with the Steves (Benteen) family. From the view of the Crows Nest on the divide, to the visits in the convention. The picture of Myron and myself (black and white) you will find his grand-daughter standing beside him. She is now Mrs. Pac. (I think that is correct spelling). In the picture she is wearing my 74 jacket. I then told her to reach into the inside pocket and she pulled out my copy of the W.W. Cooke, Benteen come quick message...PS bring PAC. That is what she is holding when the picture was taken. The great-great-grand daughter of Capt. Benteen is now a Pac. It was an enjoyable conference. Gerry
|
|
|
Post by keogh on Sept 14, 2013 10:24:41 GMT -5
I very much enjoyed the visits with the Steves (Benteen) family. From the view of the Crows Nest on the divide, to the visits in the convention.
The picture of Myron and myself (black and white) you will find his grand-daughter standing beside him. She is now Mrs. Pac. (I think that is correct spelling). In the picture she is wearing my 74 jacket. I then told her to reach into the inside pocket and she pulled out my copy of the W.W. Cooke, Benteen come quick message...PS bring PAC. That is what she is holding when the picture was taken. The great-great-grand daughter of Capt. Benteen is now a Pac.
It was an enjoyable conference.
Gerry I see you have met the very lovely and vivacious Ms. Pac. She was at the Gettysburg Conference last year and was quite the center of attention among many of the young gentlemen at the Conference. I remember her well. garryowen, keogh
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Sept 14, 2013 13:48:10 GMT -5
I see you have met the very lovely and vivacious Ms. Pac. She was at the Gettysburg Conference last year and was quite the center of attention among many of the young gentlemen at the Conference. I remember her well. garryowen, keogh Why yes Sir, I did meet the lovely and vivacious Ms. Pac...she was the belle of the ball. It must be the southern ties of the Benteen's. Gerry
|
|