When I started the thread I thought a discussion of the Indian Wars particularly Little Bighorn would lead nowhere as too little is known about what actually occurred. This is not to say there have not been persuasive reconstructions but it is the smallest unknown detail that sometimes can change the case. In any event I limited this thread to the Civil War because that was the venue in which he earned his reputation. I feel his reputation has been unfairly taken from him. Rather than credit the Indians for the victory, Custer had to be denigrated to account for the loss. It is my understanding that Indians rarely fought when their village was attacked by the army, and that it was Custer’s plan not to have a pitched battle with them but to isolate the woman and children and thereby force the men to surrender. This worked for him at Washita but did not at Little Bighorn. Later his reputation was further sullied and he has been turned into a sort of cartoon character as the sacrificial lamb to cleanse our conscience of ills we inflicted on the Indian. For reason I discussed previously I believe Murat is an apt comparison. As you are aware to regain the throne of Naples, Murat met his own Little Bighorn when he tried to mimic Napoleon’s return from Elba. He took a gamble beyond what any reasonable general would do and ended up in front of a firing squad. Do we judge Murat as a Marshall of France by his failure as King of Naples? To judge civil war generals by their performance against the Indians just does not make sense to me. As you yourself have pointed out is was a much different war. I don’t know how easy it would be for any of the civil war leaders to have adjusted to this type of battle. I know Stuart as a young man did not meet with success against them, so it was a task that could elude otherwise brilliant commanders. One quibble I have with you is that you are not consistent in your arguments. You praise Wilson for defeating a defenseless foe at the end of the war but then attempt to belittle Custer’s accomplishments with arguments that the Confederates were by then only a shadow of their former selves. Which is it? One final question. You previously asked what battles Custer single handedly won. If that is the standard what battles did Upton, Wilson and Minty win single handedly? I still see you have no retort to the observation that Wilson tried to take credit for Yellow Tavern when it was Custer who made the tactical decision of how and where to attack.