|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 4, 2008 8:10:01 GMT -5
This one sounds like a winner. I guess I'll have to add it to the ever-growing volumes in my unread pile. Are there many historical figures as controversial as Custer? americanheritage.com/AW
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Apr 4, 2008 13:46:08 GMT -5
I saw that new LBH Battle book in a store last week, and the cover or display had the usual hype about how this was "The Definitive" history, etc. That stuff always makes me suspicious, although granted there are new discoveries and reinterpretations coming to light from time to time. There's another book just out, and it's a history of the Little Bighorn battlefield since the 1876 battle: Stricken Field: The Little Bighorn since 1876.I just got a copy; it looks interesting, and the author, Jerome Green, is one of the top experts in the field: www.oupress.com/bookdetail.asp?isbn=978-0-8061-3791-9
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 4, 2008 22:23:18 GMT -5
Tom,
Looks like an interesting alternative to the crop of Custer books. Do you have a particular recommendation for a book on Little Big Horn or Custer? A lot of people choose Connell's "Son of the Morning Star," but I had problems with that book. I was never sure what Connell actually thought of Custer and there's no real analysis of the battle.
AW
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Apr 5, 2008 8:37:07 GMT -5
Allen, if you want deep analysis, you might want to look at John S. Gray's Centennial Campaign: The Sioux War of 1876 (University of Oklahoma Press, 1899), and follow it up by reading Gray's Custer's Last Campaign: Mitch Boyer and the Little Big Horn Reconstructed (University of Nebraska Press, 1991). Many consider the former the best history of Custer's last battle, but be forewarned that the book covers the entire '76 campaign in detail. Custer's Last Campaign is at heart a biography of one of Custer's scouts, Mitch Boyer, but it also involves an extended analysis of the timeline, movements, and deployments of Custer's command during the battle, based largely on recent archaeological investigations and analysis of the literature. Be warned that this is not a breezy reading experience.
Donovan's A Terrible Glory may well be worth getting, but I'm waiting to see some critical reviews before I jump on it.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 5, 2008 14:36:25 GMT -5
Tom,
I've got Gray's "Custer's Last Campaign," so if I ever get off this computer, I'll try to pick up the first book and take that on first.
I also found a book I'd forgotten I bought eons ago -- "Archaeological Insigts into the Custer Battle: An Assessment of the 1984 Field Season" By Douglas D. Scott and Richard A. Fox, Jr., with a contribution by Dick Harmon (boy, there's a mouthful!). This is, as the title says, an archeological report, with a map supplement. It was published in 1987. I realize there has been more archeological work done there since and I caught a History Channel show a year ago or so about some of that, plus an analysis of sound at the battlefield. Those experiments were said to prove that the soldiers on Reno Hill could hear the Custer battle as it was happening, but refused to go to Custer's aid. Only Weir went, or wanted to go, and got chased back as I recall.
Whatever the merits of Custer's plan, it turned into a complete mess. They were lucky to come away without the troops on Reno Hill getting wiped out too.
I like Donovan's take on Custer's fame, which reminds me a bit of Crockett. Both were nationally well-known and liked before their deaths, which immortalized them. Donovan doesn't think Custer would have been remembered much if he had lived to a ripe old age, but the shock of his death and "last stand" ensured his lasting celebrity. The same might be true of Crockett, although I think he would have continued to find his way into literature.
AW
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Apr 5, 2008 16:25:56 GMT -5
Allen, if you want deep analysis, you might want to look at John S. Gray's Centennial Campaign: The Sioux War of 1876 (University of Oklahoma Press, 1899), and follow it up by reading Gray's Custer's Last Campaign: Mitch Boyer and the Little Big Horn Reconstructed (University of Nebraska Press, 1991). Many consider the former the best history of Custer's last battle, but be forewarned that the book covers the entire '76 campaign in detail. Custer's Last Campaign is at heart a biography of one of Custer's scouts, Mitch Boyer, but it also involves an extended analysis of the time-line, movements, and deployments of Custer's command during the battle, based largely on recent archaeological investigations and analysis of the literature. Be warned that this is not a breezy reading experience. These are the two definitive books, imo. As I've mentioned elsewhere Centennial Campaign was used as a textbook on Irregular Warfare, at the Army's Command and General Staff College, when I attended. It's definitely not light reading, but it's not dry or tedious. Most of the time-lines, etc. are given in appendixes and don't take away from the narrative. If you really want a serious look at the Sioux War it's a must read. Allen, with all your government connections you might want to see if you can pick up a copy of the Command and General Staff College's Atlas of the Sioux Wars, it's not publicly published and is only sold at the College's Bookstore at FT. Leavenworth (or perhaps Ebay). It's a great companion to Grey.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Apr 5, 2008 16:28:47 GMT -5
Tom, I also found a book I'd forgotten I bought eons ago -- "Archaeological Insigts into the Custer Battle: An Assessment of the 1984 Field Season" By Douglas D. Scott and Richard A. Fox, Jr., with a contribution by Dick Harmon (boy, there's a mouthful!). This is, as the title says, an archeological report, with a map supplement. It was published in 1987. I have a real problem with some of Fox's early work. While I'll give him credit he went and studied cavalry doctrine at the time to help him analyze his archaeological findings - his interpretations were all off. One thing he constantly harped on was the doctrine for skirmish lines - iirc - it called for men to stand 5 yards apart. He claimed because the men on Calhoun Hill were in some places 4 yards apart and others 6 yards apart and that occasionally a couple of men were right next to each other, that it implied panic. Of course anybody that has every done something like this for real, knows that the doctrinal distances are only a guide, and that the terrain dictates the actual distances used. Also, if a man was shot and wounded, more than likely a sergeant or corporal (as long as the skirmish line was still effective) would go check on him - and probably enter the same Indian's sight line. He also rather ineffectively, argued that because the govt single shot Springfields were accurate to 800 yards, that they were superior to the Indians armed with Henrys and Winchesters. Most people can't identify or hit a single man must beyond 300 yards! At 150 - 200 yards and closer (the range of most of the Indian firings at the Last Stand area) a Winchester/Henry's accuracy is just fine. Plus there is the little matter of volume of fire. To Fox's credit in some of his later work he's backed off those conclusions. While I think there was more knowledge about what was going on with Custer at Reno Hill than we've been led to believe. I'm not too sure that it's quite that definite. Remember Reno's men are already somewhat deafened from their own weapons in their own desperate fight, and that there is still firing going on even though it has let up. Plus battlefield noise is so totally dependent on atmospheric conditions and weather, that what can easily be heard one day can be totally missed at another. Union MG George Thomas, the Rock of Chickamauga, when at the Battle of Perryville, failed to hear the whole battle - with cannon fire - and two Union Corps virtually annihilated, and Thomas was closer to the battle than Reno to Custer. As far as Wier, yes he led the advance off Reno Hill (and indeed without permission), but the whole command followed - all 7 companies. Companies A and G(?) the worse mangled in the valley fight had barely left the hill, when the advance halted at Wier Point and began to withdrawal back to Reno Hill. In fact iirc, it was Godfrey's Company (of Benteen's Battalion) that became the rearguard (not Wier) and protected the combined Battalions as they returned to Reno Hill. Sometimes people forget that the enemy has a say in the outcome of the battle!
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 5, 2008 17:01:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Apr 5, 2008 17:12:46 GMT -5
Well, I highly recommend it, but not for $50.00!!!Maybe $15, or $20 tops. My volume was compiled by Dr William Robertson, Dr Jerold E. Brown, Maj William M. Campsey and Maj Scott R. McMeen I don't have a year of publication, though I bought mine in 1995. It might be possible to order it through the Combat Studies Institute at Leavenworth.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Apr 5, 2008 17:22:38 GMT -5
I like Donovan's take on Custer's fame, which reminds me a bit of Crockett. Both were nationally well-known and liked before their deaths, which immortalized them. Donovan doesn't think Custer would have been remembered much if he had lived to a ripe old age, but the shock of his death and "last stand" ensured his lasting celebrity. The same might be true of Crockett, although I think he would have continued to find his way into literature. AW MacKenzie, Miles, & Custer were all very popular at the time with the public and and one of the three was expected to eventually be the Army Chief of Staff. Custer of course died, MacKenzie went insane and Miles eventually became Chief of Staff. But, other than people interested in history (and a few 50/60 year old boomers who can remember Richard Carlson in Mackenzie's Raiders), only Custer is remembered today, even though the other two were far more experienced and sucessful Indian fighters.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 5, 2008 17:24:47 GMT -5
While I think there was more knowledge about what was going on with Custer at Reno Hill than we've been led to believe. I'm not too sure that it's quite that definite. Remember Reno's men are already somewhat deafened from their own weapons in their own desperate fight, and that there is still firing going on even though it has let up. Plus battlefield noise is so totally dependent on atmospheric conditions and weather, that what can easily be heard one day can be totally missed at another. As far as Wier, yes he led the advance off Reno Hill (and indeed without permission), but the whole command followed - all 7 companies. Companies A and G(?) the worse mangled in the valley fight had barely left the hill, when the advance halted at Wier Point and began to withdrawal back to Reno Hill. In fact iirc, it was Godfrey's Company (of Benteen's Battalion) that became the rearguard (not Wier) and protected the combined Battalions as they returned to Reno Hill. Sometimes people forget that the enemy has a say in the outcome of the battle! Thanks Herb - good info and analysis. I need to go back and read up on the Weir event; I'd completely forgotten that. Your last comment is quite on the money and I think many generations chose to ignore that because they just found it inconceivable that the U.S. Army could be beaten so decisively by a bunch of "savages." Also, Custer's public image at the time added to that attitude. I'd like to see what the new book has to say, but it seems to me that a lot went wrong for Custer and his plan came unhinged pretty quickly. But the key issue (IMO) was that he badly misjudged the Sioux & Cheyenne that day. He actually had little experience in fighting Indians and his experience had been that Indians run and scatter. The objective was to keep them from doing so, as he believed he'd done at the Washita. But the Indians hadn't run and scattered in their recent fight with Crook, which was either a Sioux victory or a standoff, depending who you read). Also this village was much bigger than Custer had anticipated (although that didn't seem to alter his strategy to avoid the Indians scattering). The Indians weren't going to scatter that day; they were both scared and mad as hell when the attack came. They thought it was Crook coming back for more when Custer attacked. Custer didn't anticipate Reno's attack breaking down and his troops being the ones who scattered, but as I understand it now, Custer knew that had happened, but went ahead with his own attack anyway. (Maybe he should be criticized for failing to come to Reno's aid!!??). I also think Custer thought Benteen would appear momentarily and with that help he'd prevail. Once Reno retreated, the warriors were free to turn their full attack on Custer; Benteen never showed up and Custer was simply outmanned and outgunned. I know Connell suggests that the defeat should be blamed more on Benteen than Custer and even suggests that Benteen may have been happy to let Custer go down since the two hated each other. I agree with your assessment of the firing capability, plus the Indians had a number of repeating rifles, while the troopers had single-shot Henrys and sidearms; their sabres had been left home with the gattling guns. And, again, they were way outnumbered when the crunch came. I like the fact that these events keep getting studied and new evidence is examined; no event is as simple to explain as some "institutionalized" histories would have it. The Alamo accounts are testimony to that. AW
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Apr 5, 2008 17:37:27 GMT -5
You might want to look at this months issue of Wild West magazine - I know it's pop culture history, but there's a interesting article on 10 myths of the Little Bighorn. Plus the article does refer to a good friend of mine, DK Clark, who is incredibly smart about this battle.
I think one of the things this article identifies, (though I'm not sure the locations are right) is in fact that the village did try to scramble, and it was Custer's threat to the women and children that caused the Indian fanaticism - if you will.
DK Clark, changed a lot of my thinking about Reno. Clark is another retired armor/cavalry officer. One of the things he discussed in detail with me was his findings about the fight in the valley. One of the insignificant things - that is in reality very significant, that he brought up was what Reno could see when he was mounted vs dismounted. While most attribute Reno, losing his nerve when Bloody Knife's brains were splattered on Reno's face - Clark convinced me that no such thing happened, and that Reno's orders in the valley were perfectly logical - and may have been the only "correct" ones, given the situation.
The one thing, I am convinced of is that Benteen is largely responsible. I think the time-lines in Grey bare this out. It wasn't that Benteen disobeyed orders, etc. Just the opposite Benteen made a point of literally carrying out his orders to the nth degree - even when they were now nonsensical. The time-lines imply that Benteen dawdled after knowing the rest of the Regiment was in a fight (forget Martini and his limited English) Sgt Kanape (?) from C Company alerted Benteen long before Martini brought Cooke's " Big Village Bring paks" message.
In Benteen's defense, poor though it may be, nobody could envision that 5 companies of US Cavalry could be in serious trouble. But, that excuse doesn't fly. It was his responsibility to move his battalion as rapidly as possible and still maintain them in fighting order to the sound of the guns (or in this case in response to at least two messengers).
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 5, 2008 17:54:26 GMT -5
That is interesting. I guess the Indians were surprised by Reno's initial attack and mistook it for Crook's force returning. I'm fuzzy on this now, but I do recall stories of Sitting Bull being put in charge of the women and children, who were sort of herded into a central location, while the warriors went out to meet Reno. I'm trying to remember if any Indian accounts mention a move to scatter, at least for the women and children. I have always heard that the main source of Indian anger and aggressiveness was due to fear for the non-combatants in the village.
I have a 25%-off coupon at Borders and plan to head there tomorrow to look for some of this stuff. I haven't seen Wild West in some time, but last time I glanced it was a cut above True West, which was delving into movies as much as history, but entertaining for what it sets out to be. I'll probably come home with another armful of books for the "to be read in this lifetime" pile!
Thanks for the lead.
AW
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Apr 6, 2008 8:41:41 GMT -5
Here's another book I recommend: Where Custer Fell: Photographs of the Little Bighorn Battlefield Then and Now, by James S. Brust, Brian C. Pohanka, and Sandy Barnard (University of Oklahoma Press, 2005). It presents historical photographs from 1877 to the early 20th century, and, wherever possible, shows the exact scene today. It's not just a then-and-now picture book; there's commentary on the photographs and photographers, and detailed analysis of the terrain as it pertained to the battle. This is a great book to refer to while reading other books on the LBH battle; it really helps you visualize the ground.
Permit me a personal story about Brian Pohanka, one of the co-authors. He was an amazingly gifted and versatile historian with a steel-trap memory. About fifteen years ago I was quizzing him about an early California artist who later in the Civil War was a member of Duryée's Zouaves, one of Brian's main areas of expertise. During the conversation, something sparked his memory, and he said, "Before I forget, were you aware that Tom McDougall lived out the last years of his life in your town?" Brian even named the street he lived on. McDougall was one of Custer's company commanders at LBH who survived the massacre; he was in command of the pack train. Subsequently I did some local research, and sure enough, after the battle, McDougall retired here and was still a resident at the time of his death. He and his wife settled here because she had a local connection. The house they lived in is still there, and I frequently walk past it.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Apr 6, 2008 10:37:35 GMT -5
Here's another book I recommend: Where Custer Fell: Photographs of the Little Bighorn Battlefield Then and Now, by James S. Brust, Brian C. Pohanka, and Sandy Barnard (University of Oklahoma Press, 2005). It presents historical photographs from 1877 to the early 20th century, and, wherever possible, shows the exact scene today. It's not just a then-and-now picture book; there's commentary on the photographs and photographers, and detailed analysis of the terrain as it pertained to the battle. This is a great book to refer to while reading other books on the LBH battle; it really helps you visualize the ground. Permit me a personal story about Brian Pohanka, one of the co-authors. He was an amazingly gifted and versatile historian with a steel-trap memory. About fifteen years ago I was quizzing him about an early California artist who later in the Civil War was a member of Duryée's Zouaves, one of Brian's main areas of expertise. During the conversation, something sparked his memory, and he said, "Before I forget, were you aware that Tom McDougall lived out the last years of his life in your town?" Brian even named the street he lived on. McDougall was one of Custer's company commanders at LBH who survived the massacre; he was in command of the pack train. Subsequently I did some local research, and sure enough, after the battle, McDougall retired here and was still a resident at the time of his death. He and his wife settled here because she had a local connection. The house they lived in is still there, and I frequently walk past it. McDougall's fate at the LBH was apparentally decided by the "Fates" according to some sources his company was given the mission to escort the pack train because they were the last company to be ready for the march when Custer left the Crow's Nest. McDougall would normally have been part of Yate's Battalion, most of whom died at Last Stand Hill. The Pack Train was a pretty strong force, in its own right, on the battlefield that day. In addition to the civilian packers, Boston Custer was one, and McDougall's company, each company in the regiment had provided an NCO and, iirc, seven men to handle each company's packs.
|
|