The Little Bighorn (2 Viewers)

[maddadicus]

Couldn't agree with you more, Reb, let's get back to the LBH and forget all the PC crap that has taken over the basic idea. Thoughts on who was to blame, Custer? Reno? Benteen? Terry? or Grant? Was there any likelyhood that Sgt Finkel (Finkle?) was really a survivor? How much did Libby do to obfuscate the truth? I know a lot of this has been debated already but for God's sake let's get back to square one.

Have you read the book..Custer's Last Campaign by John S. Gray ? Reb gave me the heads up on this one. It is a book for those that are well read already on the subject. Would not recommend for a newbie. It is a dry read of anaylitical times and distance plots of the movements of all involved. It is based on diaries, court testimonies and custer scout interviews. The author makes a great case in proving Curley's rememberences ( claims he was the last person to be with Custer and saw part of the battle. ) The author also dismisses the idea of no real defence by Custer's men and that they were basically routed. Just looking at the bodies found in clusters on ridges in a rough square shows that there was an established perimeter. Based on this book, there was no way Custer could have been rescued. He made the mistake of attacking , without his whole command in support . His moves after seeing Reno's repulse was delaying movements, hoping that Benteen would come up. Problem was that Benteen was too far out of the mix and when Custer ordered Benteen to bring the ammo packs, that slowed Benteen's response to a crawl..Remember, Benteen did not see the total size of the village. I am sure that there was an cavalryman's arrogance that no amount of indians could stop 200 well armed troopers. Faulty intelligence as to the number of warriors and the lack of knowledge of Crooks defeat and subsequent retreat, was info that Custer could have used and maybe had given him pause to the indians' intent to fight...Michael

 

[eborris]

Have you read the book..Custer's Last Campaign by John S. Gray ? Reb gave me the heads up on this one. It is a book for those that are well read already on the subject. Would not recommend for a newbie. It is a dry read of anaylitical times and distance plots of the movements of all involved. It is based on diaries, court testimonies and custer scout interviews. The author makes a great case in proving Curley's rememberences ( claims he was the last person to be with Custer and saw part of the battle. ) The author also dismisses the idea of no real defence by Custer's men and that they were basically routed. Just looking at the bodies found in clusters on ridges in a rough square shows that there was an established perimeter. Based on this book, there was no way Custer could have been rescued. He made the mistake of attacking , without his whole command in support . His moves after seeing Reno's repulse was delaying movements, hoping that Benteen would come up. Problem was that Benteen was too far out of the mix and when Custer ordered Benteen to bring the ammo packs, that slowed Benteen's response to a crawl..Remember, Benteen did not see the total size of the village. I am sure that there was an cavalryman's arrogance that no amount of indians could stop 200 well armed troopers. Faulty intelligence as to the number of warriors and the lack of knowledge of Crooks defeat and subsequent retreat, was info that Custer could have used and maybe had given him pause to the indians' intent to fight...Michael

Sometimes no matter what you do, you just run smack dab into Murphy's Law, unfortunatley in a battle it only has to happen once.

 

[jazzeum]

I have moved several posts relating to, for lack of a better title, Genocide to a new thread so please only post here about the Little Bighorn. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[lancer]

I have moved several posts relating to, for lack of a better title, Genocide to a new thread so please only post here about the Little Bighorn. Thank you for your cooperation.

Thank you. I am enjoying the Custer stuff. Genocide, not so much. -- lancer

 

[jazzeum]

Al,

It does tend to get a bit weighty and when all is said and done, is anyone going to change their mind?

 

[Spitfrnd]

Couldn't agree with you more, Reb, let's get back to the LBH and forget all the PC crap that has taken over the basic idea. Thoughts on who was to blame, Custer? Reno? Benteen? Terry? or Grant? Was there any likelyhood that Sgt Finkel (Finkle?) was really a survivor? How much did Libby do to obfuscate the truth? I know a lot of this has been debated already but for God's sake let's get back to square one.

I am interested and pleased to see the discussion continue on the mechanics of the event. However, I fail to see how you advance that objective by labeling a legitimate examination of the purpose and appropriateness of Custer's orders, motivations and intended consequences as "PC Crap". This is especially true when you ask who was to blame. A little understanding is no less relevent now than then.

 

[Spitfrnd]

Al,

It does tend to get a bit weighty and when all is said and done, is anyone going to change their mind?

Perhaps or perhaps not......
"Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

 

[eborris]

Al,

It does tend to get a bit weighty and when all is said and done, is anyone going to change their mind?

Mind? What mind? I lost mine years ago and it hasn't come home to roost.

 

[jazzeum]

I am not in disagreement with what Paster Niemoller said or the sentiments expressed in the moved posts. However, since people wish to discuss Little Bighorn as opposed to what Little Bighorn may have signified, I broke out that part of the thread.

 

[lancer]

Al,

It does tend to get a bit weighty and when all is said and done, is anyone going to change their mind?

If I want weighty I read my history books or think about that comet in outer space that you know is headed our way. -- Al

 

[Spitfrnd]

I am not in disagreement with what Paster Niemoller said or the sentiments expressed in the moved posts. However, since people wish to discuss Little Bighorn as opposed to what Little Bighorn may have signified, I broke out that part of the thread.

I never thought otherwise. I think it was a fine choice to break the thread; I only responded here to the notions on the appropriateness of the discussion, which were posted here after the move. You can move those too if you like.

 

[jazzeum]

No, I'm in agreement with you. Guess I was being a little obtuse

 

[trooper]

I am interested and pleased to see the discussion continue on the mechanics of the event. However, I fail to see how you advance that objective by labeling a legitimate examination of the purpose and appropriateness of Custer's orders, motivations and intended consequences as "PC Crap". This is especially true when you ask who was to blame. A little understanding is no less relevent now than then.

I agree with you regarding a little understanding, however I would refer you to the original post starting this thread and suggest you re-read it. The whys and wherefores of Custer's actions have been threadjacked to a wide ranging debate comparing various nation's actions throughout history which is the "PC Crap" refered to. Custer's orders and motivations are relevant to the thread, the Zulu War, WW2 and the Iraq war are not. A little understanding also applies for the people who want to talk about Custer and his battle rather than a high flown morality tale of what is, and is not ethical.

 

[Spitfrnd]

I agree with you regarding a little understanding, however I would refer you to the original post starting this thread and suggest you re-read it. The whys and wherefores of Custer's actions have been threadjacked to a wide ranging debate comparing various nation's actions throughout history which is the "PC Crap" refered to. Custer's orders and motivations are relevant to the thread, the Zulu War, WW2 and the Iraq war are not. A little understanding also applies for the people who want to talk about Custer and his battle rather than a high flown morality tale of what is, and is not ethical.

You might be more convincing and I might be more sympathetic if you would contain your demeaning labeling my friend. Can you not just read what you like and disregard what you do not without attempting to characterize the opinions and posts of those with whom you disagree as "crap"? In fact, what you are complaining about is not even "PC". By the way, thank you for the suggestion that I re-read the opening post. Perhaps you might try reading somethings you do not agree with for a change.

FWIW, I really have no desire to offend you or anyone else but when you post something that I simply cannot agree with, it is not in my nature to just let it pass. So if you want to just discuss Custer and his tactics, let's all stick to that.

 

[UKReb]

FWIW, I really have no desire to offend you or anyone else but when you post something that I simply cannot agree with, it is not in my nature to just let it pass. So if you want to just discuss Custer and his tactics, let's all stick to that.

Guys

I have just been down to my local parish church and rattled off 10 Hail Mary's and 8 Our Fathers for Custer's sins and for mine in having the temerity for studying this fight so with a bit of luck- especially as Custer had both of his ear drums pierced with buffalo bone needles so that he could hear in the after-world- someone just may have heard me Now can we go back to the battle?

Reb

 

[UKReb]

Was there any likelyhood that Sgt Finkel (Finkle?) was really a survivor?

Survivors of Custer's Last Stand itself would seem to belong exclusively to the province of the novelists. I have read of a multitude of different survivors most having ingenious stories of how they escaped from hiding in hollow logs/trees/gullys/under a horse or even in the carcass of a buffalo. One inventive soul told a story in the early 1900's that badly wounded and deliriously deranged he was taken captive by the Cheyenne and spared because they considered him wakan-touched by the gods.

Frank Finkel had the soundest case ever advanced by a "Sole Survivor" claiming that he simply outran his pursuers to safety-thereby gaining in credibility what he lost in drama. Finkel related that he had been wounded several times that day and escaped because his horse actually bolted. Happening on a trappers cabin many miles from the LBH he was nursed back to health and eventually reported to Fort Benton where the officer in charge did not believe his story. Soon after he deserted the army and became a farmer near St Louis relating his story to anyone who would listen.

I have researched this guy who claimed that he had been a member of Tom Custer's C Troop and a simple check of the 7th Cavalry muster rolls does indeed reveal a Sergeant George August Finckle born in Berlin Germany in 1844 and had been a Captain in the German army before enlisting in the 7th- in January 1872. Sgt Finckel was presumed to have been killed in the battle but like a lot of troopers his body was never identified. Other than that information, it is virtually impossible to confirm or debunk the claim by Finkel. However, he died in 1930 from a malignancy caused by a bullet in his side he had received decades before-so who knows?

Reb

 

[eborris]

Survivors of Custer's Last Stand itself would seem to belong exclusively to the province of the novelists. I have read of a multitude of different survivors most having ingenious stories of how they escaped from hiding in hollow logs/trees/gullys/under a horse or even in the carcass of a buffalo. One inventive soul told a story in the early 1900's that badly wounded and deliriously deranged he was taken captive by the Cheyenne and spared because they considered him wakan-touched by the gods.

Frank Finkel had the soundest case ever advanced by a "Sole Survivor" claiming that he simply outran his pursuers to safety-thereby gaining in credibility what he lost in drama. Finkel related that he had been wounded several times that day and escaped because his horse actually bolted. Happening on a trappers cabin many miles from the LBH he was nursed back to health and eventually reported to Fort Benton where the officer in charge did not believe his story. Soon after he deserted the army and became a farmer near St Louis relating his story to anyone who would listen.

I have researched this guy who claimed that he had been a member of Tom Custer's C Troop and a simple check of the 7th Cavalry muster rolls does indeed reveal a Sergeant George August Finckle born in Berlin Germany in 1844 and had been a Captain in the German army before enlisting in the 7th- in January 1872. Sgt Finckel was presumed to have been killed in the battle but like a lot of troopers his body was never identified. Other than that information, it is virtually impossible to confirm or debunk the claim by Finkel. However, he died in 1930 from a malignancy caused by a bullet in his side he had received decades before-so who knows?

Reb

To make his story even more plausible, I've read some statments by Indians that were present or at least claimed to be present, that some number of the troopers horses bolted straight towards them and at least one they think made it through without being killed. Who can say for certain, it almost sounds reasonable. However, even if he did survive he never saw enough of the battle to to cler up any mysteries.

 

[Louis Badolato]

To make his story even more plausible, I've read some statments by Indians that were present or at least claimed to be present, that some number of the troopers horses bolted straight towards them and at least one they think made it through without being killed. Who can say for certain, it almost sounds reasonable. However, even if he did survive he never saw enough of the battle to to cler up any mysteries.

Did he ever say anything about Custer being wounded early while crossing the Ford? That would clear up a lot.

 

[eborris]

No, I'm sad to say he did not. The Indians did state that some officer(?) or at least some guy in buckskins was shot off of his horse, but they were not sure of who it was. I'm afraid this battle much like the Alamo will forever be clouded in mystery. If it wasn't though, this would have been a short thread.

 

[Louis Badolato]

No, I'm sad to say he did not. The Indians did state that some officer(?) or at least some guy in buckskins was shot off of his horse, but they were not sure of who it was. I'm afraid this battle much like the Alamo will forever be clouded in mystery. If it wasn't though, this would have been a short thread.

Is there any written account of what he did claim to have seen? I would be very interested, considering the fact that he did die from complications from a decades old bullet wound, and his name was on the regimental role.