Talk:Frederick Benteen

Benteen's role in Custer's defeat

F. Benteen's role in the defeat of Custer's 7th Cavalry by the Sioux has been a subject of controversy almost since the fighting ceased. Custerphiles blame Custer's defeat on Benteen's "daliance" while on the oblique scout trail, his waiting for the packtrain and his stopping to assist Reno's badly beaten battalion, since he didn't ride to Custer's defense. However, an objective examination of all the facts don't necessitate such a view. I have attempted to add more complete information (such as the complete text of Custer's note to Benteen, which specifically instructed him to bring the packs) so as to provide a more neutral point of view regarding the controversy. I have also added a "References" section before the "Further Reading" section with listings that support this additional information. Akradecki 22:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

There was plenty of blame to go around—Benteen's alleged slowness to react, Reno's hestitancy in pushing through the village, Custer's supposed recklessness and disregardance of available Gatling guns, Crook's previous defeat at the Rosebud, mass cowardice on the part of the exhausted troopers, etc. However, recent scholarship by Scott, Fox, Barnard, etc. has painted a different view, one that suggests that much of the army's movements were generally tactically sound based upon previous experience in Indian fighting. However, this time, they were up against far more warriors than previous, and under much better leadership and with superior firepower. Scott Mingus 05:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree completely...in fact, there's a lot of documentation that even on the Crow's Nest when Custer and the scouts were surveying the valley ahead (before they rode down Reno Ck), Custer consistently refused to believe that there was a large encampment in the LBH valley. And then, when they rode down the creek, it was at full gallup with a LOT of noise and whooping...not exactly the recipe for a surprise attack on a numerically superior enemy!Akradecki 20:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It would appear this article is slanted to find excuses for his actions. Right or not, this gives the article quite a POV impression, IMHO. I have removed one of those additions, as the text is not encyclopedic, cites no sources and is not even copied complete from its source, it ends in mid-sentence. Removed text: "however an unbiased look at the circumstances, including the fact that Reno's command was in shambles, with their ammunition supply exhausted, and that Reno was Benteen's immediate superior officer shows that an immediate move to support Custer, ." --Lomedae 08:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

NPOV is a difficult like to walk, sometimes, especially in a subject where the critics over the years have been so vocal as to make it seem that their view is actual history...thus any attempt to provide explanation is viewed as an attempt to provide excuse. Don't know why that sentence was left incomplete, though. The point I was trying to make was that when you remove the POV noise and look at the condition of the command and the fact that Reno ordered him to stay and help (and Army regs at the time stated that the most recent order from a superior is the one to be obeyed), leaving to go find Custer simply was not an option. No excuses for his behavior needed...he was rightly doing what he was told. Akradecki 15:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

You make valid points of course. Though the same message can perhaps be brought towards better in a slighly different way. This article needs toshow all sides of the medal. You could e.g. also make the point that he was not obliged to listen to Reno as he was perhaps drunk. There have not been officer's statement to collaborate this, but enough enlisted men have spoken out along those lines. In those days though that did not count enough. I don't think saying an unbiased look"m would be a good idea,as that is POV, but there are other ways to word that and get the same message accross.

--Lomedae 19:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

You bring up an interesting point, but I'm not sure I'm clear...do you mean Reno was drunk or that Benteen was drunk? I'd be interested to hear what sources, if any, say that he was drunk at the time. Given the route that he just rode, and how difficult of terrain it was, it seems a bit improbable, but if it has been alledged by some of the enlisted, I'd be very interested in seeing where. Even so, he was obliged, no matter how you look at it, by Army regulations, to obey the most recent superior's command. So, when Reno said to stop and help, that was the most recent order, and by regulation superseded the note from Custer. If it was improper to supersede Custer's order, then that was a liability for Reno to answer for (and, granted, Reno indeed had a lot to answer for).

I agree totally, though, that the message could be better stated. I'll endeavor to do that, and to dig out the specific references that support the facts. Akradecki 20:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Reno. I have encountered this in several instances, all of them webbased though. In the wikipedida article about the battle, under "Inquiries into the causes for the defeat" e.g. it descibes the investigation into the officer's conduct. This has piqued my interest and I'll see what I can dig up futher on this. If I find anything I'll pass it on. --Lomedae 22:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Great! Also, a friend of mine has, I believe, a complete transcription of the Reno court martial, which should have at least mentioned it, if it was an allegation. I'll check with him. Akradecki 22:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I have seen the transcript, it is avaliable online, link is in the main article. That will take some time to wade trough :P An historian, Mary Trotter Kion, is having a course on Western American History online where she states that Reno later in life has admitted to being drunk at the day of the battle. I am writing her an email to see if she's willing to shed some light on this. --Lomedae 23:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Reno as drunk

I received a reply with sources:

Utley, Robert M. Custer and the Great Controversy: The Origin and Development of a Legend. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln and London, 1998.

Page 60: At the inquest "Interest revived when B. F. Churchill, a civilian packer, testified that Reno had been drunk on the night of June 25."

Footnote 10: "According to an article in the Northwestern Christian Advocate, Sept. 7, 1904, Reno admitted to the Advocate’s editor Rev. Arthur Edwards, that his behavior in the engagement had been influenced by alcohol. Most historians, however, balance this against the substantial testimony to the contrary developed by the Inquiry and acquit Reno of the charge."

I am amazed by that last statement, as the Inquiry only had Offier's testimory, and they could very well have been protecting one of their own, not uncommon in any army in the world. Moreover, Reno was dismissed in 1880 after striking a fellow officer whilst drunk...

Mary Trotter Kion had the following to add: "At a crucial point in Reno’s portion of the Battle Reno stood, or rode, face to face with his Indian Scout when said scout was shot in the head. Reportedly, the scout’s brains landed in Reno’s face. That alone is bound to give a man, at least temporarily, the distraught and confused appearance of drunkenness, especially with an uncountable number of hostiles after him and knowing now that his commanding officer had lied to him concerning assistance." Lomedae ^talk

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 11:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced article tag

Suggest someone with a couple of books on the Little Bighorn Battle take a swing at adding references to this article, since it has no in-line citations. Or perhaps I'll try if I can. Jusdafax (talk) 04:47, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Capt. Thomas Weir needs a cross-reference here

I've just inaugurated a Wikipedia article on Capt. Thomas Weir. I notice he is mentioned, and rightly so, in the Battle of the Little Bighorn and Marcus Reno Wikipedia articles, but there is nothing at all here about him, and no notice of the fact (according to Evan S. Connell's book Son of the Morning Star) that Benteen DID try to get to Custer's position after the volley's were heard, though only after Capt. Weir started north first, against or without orders to do so. That should be fixed, of course, but I'll wait a bit to see if someone else wants get into it. Jusdafax (talk) 01:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Started work, added a few references, still more to do but the article is improving in my view. Jusdafax (talk) 20:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Benteen Park neighborhood

The page previously stated that the Benteen Elementary School and Benteen Park neighborhood in Atlanta were named for Frederick William Benteen. This is clearly wrong for the school since the school web site states the name of the school is Frederick Wilson Benteen Elementary School. That is his son. I have changed the page. The neighborhood is apparently on land originally bought by Frederick Benteen and inherited by his son. I could find no source that definitely states who it is named for. I originally edited this sentence but I now think that since it could be either, it should be left out. It really isn't a memorial anyway, just the name of a previous owner of property.

This is what I put on the page originally, but I have moved it here because it is not definitive. It merely casts doubt on the previous statement that the neighborhood is named for Frederick Benteen, under a topic heading of Memorials and monuments. As noted, I don't think it would be a "memorial" even if it were named for Frederick William Benteen.

"The Benteen Park neighborhood in Atlanta Georgia could be named for father or son, as it is located on or near the property originally purchased by the elder Benteen, although inherited by the son."

If anyone can find a source for a definitive statement about the neighborhood, that editor can add something back, although I still would suggest it would not be a memorial unless that is also definitely stated in a reliable source.

I am not the editor who earlier commented on the main page but saw that comment and reversion and decided to see if I could find something definitive. Donner60 (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

References

What was "the peace sign" Benteen made ?

A sentence "Benteen made the peace sign" is seen in the section "7th Cavalry service under Custer". According to the article of Peace symbols and V sign, neither ☮ nor ✌ should have existed in his time.

What should have been "the peace sign" he made ? And, is it proper to refer to that sign as "the peace sign", taking the risk of confusion with modern equivalents ?--山田晴通 (talk) 23:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)