Post by strange on Feb 26, 2009 22:47:12 GMT -5
Fred, Fred...
Such is my curse for having so many quick theories to weasel myself out of actual bookwork! But very quick are some of you to challenge me, so I better get wiser to enforcing my bluff!
First of all, I'd like to patch up your reference to my "more competent officers" quote. Such was not a blow to say that some or anyone would be more qualified than Benteen, but rather to iterate that I think Custer himself and his Star Knot of close companions, with people like Calhoun, Keogh, Yates, Cooke, Tom Custer, etc.... , could've organized smart enough plans to save their buns from the burner if that had been their choice. Meaning to say, if Reno can make it out alive with so many mistakes.... then almost any one else could.
For as many mistakes that we debate between Reno and Benteen, it seems that Custer and his Knot were working a very tight and professional operation with not even the slightest idea of pulling out or falling themselves into disarray.
At the moment, I can only theorize as to what Custer was thinking but I can also mention a few details on why I think he thought he may have been winning and why retreat was never considered even when the situation was dire.
Starting with the retreating details....
-I suppose Custer killed some of his chances at a getaway when he made the decision to slaughter the horses, or at least have them lay down, for use as a worthy breastwork to fire from. I suppose at that moment, Custer was making a move to "hold the field".
Holding the field is my best theory to explain why no retreat was being considered or planned, and it places more emphasis on "bring packs" as far as my reasoning goes.
-Has Custer ever retreated? During the Civil War he was described as the First man on and the Last man off of any given battlefield. Even in the battles which officially went down as a loss for the Union (such as Gettysburg which apparently leaned in favor of the south), Custer always came out of these battles with high praises for "winning" at whatever neck of the woods he was operating in. He holds his head above the water long enough to look really good in battles where others in his own army may have failed, and he can thus claim victories from battles that Union had lost, simply by hauling his weight.
Therefore, I remain curious, has Custer ever retreated without nailing a considerable blow to the enemy and coming away with something? I definitely know that he is not stupid, and, like Wild Bill Hickock, he's credited with a cool head that eases him away from unnecessary confrontations. But when he has the scent of a win, he will pursue it. And he's often not bothered by the consequences.
-Lastly, Custer never lost control of the command that went down with him. The Stands were made from far stretching places with multiple commanders that did not budge, even to their demises, from Custer's official game plan.
Essentially, as I know it, there were 3 primary areas where the stands were made. I think its been divided into the Keogh area, the Calhoun area, and Custer's very own Last Stand Hill. For these men to operate so tightly with Custer's wishes while being so far away from him and approaching direly to their own nearing fates...... I have to believe that retreat was never considered until it was far beyond the point of being too late already.
Now onto why Custer thought he was winning....
Well its just like as I stated before and above. I simply don't think Custer was intimidated by the numbers (even if it went beyond what he was expecting.) and I believe the Indians, in these numbers, give an awkward stumbling block in trying to figure out whether you have them beaten or not.
Indians are tricky to a point where they can puff themselves up to intimidate you while they themselves are retreating, and they are clumsy enough to not keep track of their losses when they are organized in great number. The Indian's have a system of military that places a great deal of control and decision making into the roles of each individual band leader. When one band fails and drops away, there's another right around the corner that will think he's doing pretty good and he he will stay the coarse with his particular group of men.
Custer and his Knot took down about as many men as they lost and maybe a few more. That places their kills (as far as I'm concerned) at around 2, 3, maybe 4 or 5 hundred.
What does 4-5 hundred mean to 1-2500 Indians? Its a good pull to kill more than you lose, but even that number would've looked a little bit low next to how many Indians were there.
Some, like Red Horse, actually were intimidated, which means Custer was getting somewhere. And the Indians are actually notso hard to intimidate when you acknowledge that great number of them were spooked away when one of Benteen's soldiers scalped a native in front of their eyes. A great number of the Indian forces were also small children in what we consider today, so it stands to reason that the numbers become less intimidating as soon as you feel that you have called their bluff.....
..... I think Custer was trying to call their bluff. I think he knew they could only stand heavy fighting to a certain point before they'd eventually fall away and crumble.
When Custer set himself up to nest atop his hill, he was trying to get as close as he could to them before they could fall away. And would've been a hard victory, but the dominoes would've stumbled into place as soon as Benteen had made a good use of himself.
Benteen did not have to, because that was more of Reno's responsibility.... but along we go to that spinning circle of debate..... round and round.
Strange
Such is my curse for having so many quick theories to weasel myself out of actual bookwork! But very quick are some of you to challenge me, so I better get wiser to enforcing my bluff!
First of all, I'd like to patch up your reference to my "more competent officers" quote. Such was not a blow to say that some or anyone would be more qualified than Benteen, but rather to iterate that I think Custer himself and his Star Knot of close companions, with people like Calhoun, Keogh, Yates, Cooke, Tom Custer, etc.... , could've organized smart enough plans to save their buns from the burner if that had been their choice. Meaning to say, if Reno can make it out alive with so many mistakes.... then almost any one else could.
For as many mistakes that we debate between Reno and Benteen, it seems that Custer and his Knot were working a very tight and professional operation with not even the slightest idea of pulling out or falling themselves into disarray.
At the moment, I can only theorize as to what Custer was thinking but I can also mention a few details on why I think he thought he may have been winning and why retreat was never considered even when the situation was dire.
Starting with the retreating details....
-I suppose Custer killed some of his chances at a getaway when he made the decision to slaughter the horses, or at least have them lay down, for use as a worthy breastwork to fire from. I suppose at that moment, Custer was making a move to "hold the field".
Holding the field is my best theory to explain why no retreat was being considered or planned, and it places more emphasis on "bring packs" as far as my reasoning goes.
-Has Custer ever retreated? During the Civil War he was described as the First man on and the Last man off of any given battlefield. Even in the battles which officially went down as a loss for the Union (such as Gettysburg which apparently leaned in favor of the south), Custer always came out of these battles with high praises for "winning" at whatever neck of the woods he was operating in. He holds his head above the water long enough to look really good in battles where others in his own army may have failed, and he can thus claim victories from battles that Union had lost, simply by hauling his weight.
Therefore, I remain curious, has Custer ever retreated without nailing a considerable blow to the enemy and coming away with something? I definitely know that he is not stupid, and, like Wild Bill Hickock, he's credited with a cool head that eases him away from unnecessary confrontations. But when he has the scent of a win, he will pursue it. And he's often not bothered by the consequences.
-Lastly, Custer never lost control of the command that went down with him. The Stands were made from far stretching places with multiple commanders that did not budge, even to their demises, from Custer's official game plan.
Essentially, as I know it, there were 3 primary areas where the stands were made. I think its been divided into the Keogh area, the Calhoun area, and Custer's very own Last Stand Hill. For these men to operate so tightly with Custer's wishes while being so far away from him and approaching direly to their own nearing fates...... I have to believe that retreat was never considered until it was far beyond the point of being too late already.
Now onto why Custer thought he was winning....
Well its just like as I stated before and above. I simply don't think Custer was intimidated by the numbers (even if it went beyond what he was expecting.) and I believe the Indians, in these numbers, give an awkward stumbling block in trying to figure out whether you have them beaten or not.
Indians are tricky to a point where they can puff themselves up to intimidate you while they themselves are retreating, and they are clumsy enough to not keep track of their losses when they are organized in great number. The Indian's have a system of military that places a great deal of control and decision making into the roles of each individual band leader. When one band fails and drops away, there's another right around the corner that will think he's doing pretty good and he he will stay the coarse with his particular group of men.
Custer and his Knot took down about as many men as they lost and maybe a few more. That places their kills (as far as I'm concerned) at around 2, 3, maybe 4 or 5 hundred.
What does 4-5 hundred mean to 1-2500 Indians? Its a good pull to kill more than you lose, but even that number would've looked a little bit low next to how many Indians were there.
Some, like Red Horse, actually were intimidated, which means Custer was getting somewhere. And the Indians are actually notso hard to intimidate when you acknowledge that great number of them were spooked away when one of Benteen's soldiers scalped a native in front of their eyes. A great number of the Indian forces were also small children in what we consider today, so it stands to reason that the numbers become less intimidating as soon as you feel that you have called their bluff.....
..... I think Custer was trying to call their bluff. I think he knew they could only stand heavy fighting to a certain point before they'd eventually fall away and crumble.
When Custer set himself up to nest atop his hill, he was trying to get as close as he could to them before they could fall away. And would've been a hard victory, but the dominoes would've stumbled into place as soon as Benteen had made a good use of himself.
Benteen did not have to, because that was more of Reno's responsibility.... but along we go to that spinning circle of debate..... round and round.
Strange