Custer Custer the American Hero?

I have read Fred Wagner's book, and I can understand why it sold poorly......you have to really have patience and an overall understanding of the battle to read it. I enjoyed it, but it did take time.

I still see both sides of the argument and don't think it will ever be settled.

Well, it might never be settled to the satisfaction of every single Custer student, but the vast majority of Custer scholars now agree that Custer acted perfectly rationally and soundly given what he knew and when he knew it, that Benteen clearly disobeyed Custer's repeated orders to come to him, and that Reno lied about not hearing substantial gunfire, not knowing that Custer was in a pitched battle, and believing that Custer was going to support him from the rear.
 
Well, it might never be settled to the satisfaction of every single Custer student, but the vast majority of Custer scholars now agree that Custer acted perfectly rationally and soundly given what he knew and when he knew it, that Benteen clearly disobeyed Custer's repeated orders to come to him, and that Reno lied about not hearing substantial gunfire, not knowing that Custer was in a pitched battle, and believing that Custer was going to support him from the rear.

You may well be right, but we'll never know for sure......and that mystery is all part of the fun of studying the LBH.
 
Custer performed well during the Civil War with a few exceptions, such as getting himself into trouble at Trevalian Station. He maintained high morale in his units and led with great elan and panache.

After the war, though, things were different. His leadership style led to a division of the 7th Cavalry into cliques. He was ineffective as a leader of postwar troopers. While his strategy at Little Big Horn was mainstream at the time, it depended on Reno to not break and run. Reno broke and ran, freeing warriors to go after Custer. Had Reno held firm, it's possible Custer could have reached the rear of the village and captured the noncombatants hiding there, which would force the warriors to surrender.
I have heard that the Army in the west at this time was undisciplined, bored, and drank a lot with VD issues, If true this would have been a long way from an active Union Army in pursuit of the CSA when Custer flurished more. Any trueth to this??
 
I have heard that the Army in the west at this time was undisciplined, bored, and drank a lot with VD issues, If true this would have been a long way from an active Union Army in pursuit of the CSA when Custer flurished more. Any trueth to this??

The postwar Army was no picnic, but other leaders were able to function without playing favorites and dividing their commands.
 
You got there first! He must have been a pip. I'm sorry, who dresses that way and trails around a bazillion dogs? And bluffs a column of cavalry that should have eaten yours for breakfast, head-on, and wins? There was a thread not long ago on Libby being determined to keep his memory alive- or perhaps did she over-do how big was his personality? Bet she did not. On the other hand try living with a man who insisted on keeping 20 plus dogs and refused to wear a thing which matched. Maybe Libby just, plain liked a man who was a little bit of a handful.

Hero? In context here and there maybe? Custer wasn't a huge name during the war which was one of those things it took some un-learning about ( thank you Eric ), since my generation had a slightly garbled presentation on the man. The Civil War and Indian War became a little blurred all together- pretty funny. Well, so was being taught Custer was in some way minding his own business when those pesky Injuns came along and cheated.

Agree perhaps dying was what rocketed the guy to fame and kept him there- still, those boy generals were something special if not exactly Buford or Hampton. Also worth 45 Kilpatricks.
Custer has to be given full credit for some of the best self promotion around, he understood how to play the newspapers, he cultivated an image that made him stand out. If you look at any group photo of Custer, he manages to stand out, that whole cavalier image he cultivated was a stroke of genius. I see the man as a true romantic, a lover and a fighter, a real life Errol Flynn.
 
IMO, those Lakota/Cheyenne/Arapaho fighters were the best irregular light cavalry the world has ever seen. Picture a mounted soldier, guiding a horse with his knees, while working his repeating rifle, and possibly using the horse’s neck as a shield. That’s some cavalryman.

I think Poles and many Steppe peoples were better. The Cossacks gave the Poles fits during the Deluge and the Poles could give Turks and Tatars fits. Steppe peoples humbled kings and brought down empires.
 
Last edited:
Well I am sure some people see Custer as a martyr. I am not sure what Michigan Indians though of Custer being killed. The Indians Custer die fighting were no friends of most Michigan Indians. I know when the French in Michigan tried to end the war between the Chippewa and Sioux , one Chippewa leader stated that all the Sioux were good for was to eat and if the war between the Chippewa and Sioux ended his people would surely starve.

The Chippewa were possibly the most formidable of the Indians having defeated the mighty Iroquois in the Beaver Wars, having driven the Sioux out of northern Wisconsin and Minnesota and having played a large part in the greatest defeat the United States suffered from Indians, the Battle of the Wabash. And they defeated the Regular Army in it's last fight with Indians, the battle of Sugar Point at Leech Lake Minnesota in 1898.
 
Custer has to be given full credit for some of the best self promotion around, he understood how to play the newspapers, he cultivated an image that made him stand out. If you look at any group photo of Custer, he manages to stand out, that whole cavalier image he cultivated was a stroke of genius. I see the man as a true romantic, a lover and a fighter, a real life Errol Flynn.
I believe his wife should be given credit for turning him into a national hero after his death. She made a very nice living selling Custer.
 
That just confirms the internal divisions within the 7th Cav. Custer lost the dressing room, apart from his favourites. The 7th was malfunctioning from the top down.

Or it means that his two top subordinates displayed insubordination and/or cowardice. When General Terry arrived, the surviving soldiers were harshly critical of Major Reno. There is ample evidence that most of the soldiers on Reno Hill wanted to go help Custer. By most accounts, Custer was popular with his men.

What part of "come on . . . be quick" did Benteen not understand, especially when that same message was conveyed to him twice verbally (by Martin and Kanipe), in addition to being written down?
 
Custer believed he'd been discovered and so attacked without scoping things out. I think Custer's defeat was obviously a result of biting off more than he could chew as a result of that. But the defeat was also due to Benteen's slowness and Reno's funking out.

And perhaps Reno's reaction was largely because of the general habit of American cavalry to dismount and shoot guns rather than use steel and shock tactics. Custer's troops didn't even have sabers. I often think that a squadron of British or Polish cavalry armed with lance or sword would've plunged right through the town on the Little Big Horn and spread confusion and panic among the Indians.

I often wonder too how MacKenzie and the 4th would've handled the situation. And what alternatives did Custer have? Should he have shadowed the Indians until Gibbon came up? This would run the risk of the Indians breaking up into small bands impossible to shadow. I don't know. I tend to think he was right to fight the Indians that day but obviously he should've fought them better. But every battle has a loser.
 
Or it means that his two top subordinates displayed insubordination and/or cowardice. When General Terry arrived, the surviving soldiers were harshly critical of Major Reno. There is ample evidence that most of the soldiers on Reno Hill wanted to go help Custer. By most accounts, Custer was popular with his men.

What part of "come on . . . be quick" did Benteen not understand, especially when that same message was conveyed to him twice verbally (by Martin and Kanipe), in addition to being written down?
Or it means that his two top subordinates displayed insubordination and/or cowardice. When General Terry arrived, the surviving soldiers were harshly critical of Major Reno. There is ample evidence that most of the soldiers on Reno Hill wanted to go help Custer. By most accounts, Custer was popular with his men.

What part of "come on . . . be quick" did Benteen not understand, especially when that same message was conveyed to him twice verbally (by Martin and Kanipe), in addition to being written down?
You're right there was cowardice. Reno was most probably drunk. There was a deeply fractured officer cadre in the 7th. It was not half the calibre of later Civil War Cavalry Regiments. It was the perfect storm.
 
Do I remember correctly, .... didn't Custer execute/hang a couple of Mosby's men?

Mosby's Rangers (Collector's Library of the Civil War)
By James Joseph Williamson (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/Mosbys-Rangers-Collectors-Library-Civil/dp/0809442256/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1483218482&sr=8-3&keywords=mosby's+rangers

Grant gave the order but Mosby held Custer accountable for the seven executions, to be fair, Custer was taking Grant's orders to the extreme. Mosby called Custer 'Attila the Hun'.
 
Custer believed he'd been discovered and so attacked without scoping things out. I think Custer's defeat was obviously a result of biting off more than he could chew as a result of that. But the defeat was also due to Benteen's slowness and Reno's funking out.

And perhaps Reno's reaction was largely because of the general habit of American cavalry to dismount and shoot guns rather than use steel and shock tactics. Custer's troops didn't even have sabers. I often think that a squadron of British or Polish cavalry armed with lance or sword would've plunged right through the town on the Little Big Horn and spread confusion and panic among the Indians.

I often wonder too how MacKenzie and the 4th would've handled the situation. And what alternatives did Custer have? Should he have shadowed the Indians until Gibbon came up? This would run the risk of the Indians breaking up into small bands impossible to shadow. I don't know. I tend to think he was right to fight the Indians that day but obviously he should've fought them better. But every battle has a loser.

In point of fact, Custer fought expertly that day, but he of course did not know that Benteen would disobey a direct order given to him three times. Nor did he know that Reno would panic so early and would foolishly leave an excellent position like the timber and get one-fourth of his command killed in the process (even the Indians later expressed amazement that Reno had left the timber). Nor did he know that Reno would display abject cowardice on Reno Hill and refuse to come to his aid for nearly an hour, even after Benteen showed him Custer's written order to come to him quickly.

To understand Custer and his last battle, one must understand that politics played a decisive role in the early reporting and writing on the battle and on Custer in general. Custer was not only a Democrat, he was an ardent "McClellan man." The Radicals hated him with a passion, and much of the Republican press smeared him with every rhetorical weapon at their disposal.

General Terry was a Republican. Terry said nothing about Custer allegedly disobeying orders in his first report on the incident. But then, a short time later, Terry decided that not only had Custer disobeyed his orders but that Custer had thrown his entire plan out of whack by his actions (a claim that many scholars now view as doubtful). Grant, whose corrupt administration Custer had helped expose, sank into the gutter and publicly placed all the blame on Custer just days after the battle, before there had been any kind of investigation.

It is rather remarkable that nearly all Custer scholars now reject the 19-century Republican portrayal of Custer, given that on so many other issues the Republican version of the middle and late 1800s is still the dominant view among historians. Perhaps part of the reason for the fairness and objectivity now shown toward Custer is that he was a diehard Union man who played a critical role in the Union war effort--indeed, one could argue that Custer played a decisive role in helping Meade win the Battle of Gettysburg.
 
Back
Top