Picketts wife LaSalle make you believe Abe and George were friends...

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Seth VA/NC

Retired User
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Location
Chesapeake, Virginia
Its been widely known that Lincoln's fake friendship with Pickett was a fragment of LaSalle's imagination.

Pickett went to Illinois to be commissioned to West Point there, because he knew he could not compete with Virginians going to the academy.
 

Harms88

Corporal
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Location
North of the Wall & South of the Canucks
I found the truth... Its all made up... George was in Quincy, Ill. learning law under his uncle. You will learn that his uncle Johnston and Lincoln were good friends. Read page 56....

http://books.google.com/books?id=usjy8GxjRxIC&pg=P***&dq=george pickett know General Pickett&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WXMYVPeOCJL5yQT1nYHADg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=george pickett know General Pickett&f=false
The closest thing I have ever been lead to believe is that Pickett respected Abraham Lincoln. That he always felt a sense of gratitude towards Lincoln and felt indebted to him for his higher education. And that he never allowed anyone to speak ill of him in his presence.

But yeah, I highly doubt there are many who ever believed they were friends, even though Lincoln did have a lot of friends and I don't doubt that there were Confederates could genuinely claim personal friendships with him.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
I found the truth... Its all made up... George was in Quincy, Ill. learning law under his uncle. You will learn that his uncle Johnston and Lincoln were good friends. Read page 56....

http://books.google.com/books?id=usjy8GxjRxIC&pg=P***&dq=george pickett know General Pickett&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WXMYVPeOCJL5yQT1nYHADg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=george pickett know General Pickett&f=false
I’m really intrigued by the title of the book (Last in their class) it’s as if being a maverick was somehow an endearing quality, I think I’d like to read that book because the reviews seem to point to the likes of Custer and Pickett as prime examples of leaders who exhibited a kind of devil may care attitude, if I think of Pickett at Five Forks for example, he displayed a very relaxed attitude ‘could be arrogance’ towards his direct order to hold Five Forks at all hazards. Custer, again could be said to have shown arrogance but he definitely did display a devil may care attitude on many occasions and more often than not had great success.
Maybe there’s something to be said about Mavericks, they may not always abide by the rules but when push comes to shove they always give it their best effort, yep, the world needs Mavericks.
 

rbasin

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Location
Tampa, Fl
I’m really intrigued by the title of the book (Last in their class) it’s as if being a maverick was somehow an endearing quality, I think I’d like to read that book because the reviews seem to point to the likes of Custer and Pickett as prime examples of leaders who exhibited a kind of devil may care attitude, if I think of Pickett at Five Forks for example, he displayed a very relaxed attitude ‘could be arrogance’ towards his direct order to hold Five Forks at all hazards. Custer, again could be said to have shown arrogance but he definitely did display a devil may care attitude on many occasions and more often than not had great success.
Maybe there’s something to be said about Mavericks, they may not always abide by the rules but when push comes to shove they always give it their best effort, yep, the world needs Mavericks.
Didn't Pickett fail at Five Forks? And how did Custer die? Hmmm....
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
Didn't Pickett fail at Five Forks? And how did Custer die? Hmmm....
Well that was my point really, however, both Custer and Pickett had a history of courageous acts, you have to ask yourself, who was it that picked up the regimental colours when Longstreet was shot through the thigh at the battle of Chapultepec and what about Custer’s numerous daring cavalry charges!
Both Pickett and Custer pretty much failed to abide by the rules but they were courageous, there’s certainly no doubting their tenacity or courage.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

diane

Retired User
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Location
State of Jefferson
Well that was my point really, however, both Custer and Pickett had a history of courageous acts, you have to ask yourself, who was it that picked up the regimental colours when Longstreet was shot through the thigh at the battle of Chapultepec and what about Custer’s numerous daring cavalry charges!
Both Pickett and Custer pretty much failed to abide by the rules but they were courageous, there’s certainly no doubting their tenacity or courage.
Custer was one of those generals I could never figure out - was he really, really brave or not quite smart enough to be scared! I think he was genuinely brave, like Pickett. In the Northwest, he demonstrated the same kind of courage he exhibited in Mexico. There's a problem, though - it's as if Pickett didn't really understand the big picture. Yes, I see the need to hang onto this railroad junction but...no Yankees around and it's shad fishing time! The cavalryman he was facing was Sheridan, another in the same boat with him and Custer. Need a demolition man? Call Phil! I always figured the shad bake wouldn't have happened if Hampton had been there. He was very much like Forrest - no joy in Mudville til this job is done...

As to Abe and George...dear Sally...her mission in life was to save the honor of her distinguished husband no matter what she had to make up! Gosh, Abe sure helped a LOT of future Confederates as it was. So did Sherman - lent money to Hood, Bragg and Beauregard. It was a small world in that day. People crossed each other's paths in startling ways - like Wyatt Earp having a beer with Willie Forrest in Nome, Alaska! (Maybe he was able to get some tips from Willie to John Ford for the Horse Soldiers...)
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
Custer was one of those generals I could never figure out - was he really, really brave or not quite smart enough to be scared! I think he was genuinely brave, like Pickett. In the Northwest, he demonstrated the same kind of courage he exhibited in Mexico. There's a problem, though - it's as if Pickett didn't really understand the big picture. Yes, I see the need to hang onto this railroad junction but...no Yankees around and it's shad fishing time! The cavalryman he was facing was Sheridan, another in the same boat with him and Custer. Need a demolition man? Call Phil! I always figured the shad bake wouldn't have happened if Hampton had been there. He was very much like Forrest - no joy in Mudville til this job is done...

As to Abe and George...dear Sally...her mission in life was to save the honor of her distinguished husband no matter what she had to make up! Gosh, Abe sure helped a LOT of future Confederates as it was. So did Sherman - lent money to Hood, Bragg and Beauregard. It was a small world in that day. People crossed each other's paths in startling ways - like Wyatt Earp having a beer with Willie Forrest in Nome, Alaska! (Maybe he was able to get some tips from Willie to John Ford for the Horse Soldiers...)
I think both Pickett and Custer viewed the war as an opportunity for greatness, it wasn’t so much about loyalty to a cause but more like ‘what’s in it for me’, the problem as I see it, is that Custer in particular started to believe his own hype. I’ve noticed that Pickett always managed to do reasonably well when he was given a specific offensive task even more so when the odds were stacked against him, but in a static situation like defending he kind of lost interest. Both Pickett and Custer liked a challenge especially if it raised their profile, perhaps that was reflected at the military academy, they weren’t interested in following the rules, I think it’s like the naughty kid in class, I can’t do the work so I’ll draw attention away from my lack of academic ability by messing about, at the end of the day, a pass is a pass, why work hard to achieve a 100% pass rate when you can scrape through and pass muster with less effort, I honestly believe that both Pickett and Custer were of the mindset that action speaks louder than words, problem is that can only work given the right opportunities and five forks wasn’t one of them, and had Custer been successful at LBH he’d of probably ended up in the White House.
 

diane

Retired User
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Location
State of Jefferson
I think both Pickett and Custer viewed the war as an opportunity for greatness, it wasn’t so much about loyalty to a cause but more like ‘what’s in it for me’, the problem as I see it, is that Custer in particular started to believe his own hype. I’ve noticed that Pickett always managed to do reasonably well when he was given a specific offensive task even more so when the odds were stacked against him, but in a static situation like defending he kind of lost interest. Both Pickett and Custer liked a challenge especially if it raised their profile, perhaps that was reflected at the military academy, they weren’t interested in following the rules, I think it’s like the naughty kid in class, I can’t do the work so I’ll draw attention away from my lack of academic ability by messing about, at the end of the day, a pass is a pass, why work hard to achieve a 100% pass rate when you can scrape through and pass muster with less effort, I honestly believe that both Pickett and Custer were of the mindset that action speaks louder than words, problem is that can only work given the right opportunities and five forks wasn’t one of them, and had Custer been successful at LBH he’d of probably ended up in the White House.
Oh, yes! Custer was definitely aiming for the presidency and at that time the best way to do it was winning a war. In his case, it was the US-Dakota Conflict. He seriously underestimated his opponent, however, and that kind of mussed the Custer... I don't think Pickett ever had his sights set that high but he was ambitious, too. As you say, war was still romantic and glorious to these two. Pickett loved the military because it gave him a chance to show his bravery and to wear a spiffy uniform - much enhanced his prospects for the future. He was from Virginia aristocracy and one of Robert E Lee's ten thousand cousins, but his branch wasn't as well positioned as Lee's. There was always room for advancement! He didn't seem to have that much against the Union, either, but was wise to high tail it to Canada for a while. He may well have been in Custer's boots if he hadn't been on the losing side. But the driving force wouldn't have been himself, it would have been LaSalle! She was a great example of a woman of her times living out ambitions she couldn't achieve herself through her husband.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

jackt62

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Location
New York City
No doubt about it. The ACW produced some colorful characters like Custer and Pickett. They may have been mavericks but in some ways they have not been treated kindly by history, despite the efforts of Libby Custer and LaSalle Pickett. Custer's reputation has been savaged in recent years as a result of a reassessment of LBH, but his Civil War career, which has been overshadowed by his final battle, was generally distinguished and capable. Likewise, Pickett gets unfairly saddled with the famous charge and shadbake. But he was generally a decent division commander otherwise (although his execution of captured "galvanized yankees" was a shameful episode).
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
No doubt about it. The ACW produced some colorful characters like Custer and Pickett. They may have been mavericks but in some ways they have not been treated kindly by history, despite the efforts of Libby Custer and LaSalle Pickett. Custer's reputation has been savaged in recent years as a result of a reassessment of LBH, but his Civil War career, which has been overshadowed by his final battle, was generally distinguished and capable. Likewise, Pickett gets unfairly saddled with the famous charge and shadbake. But he was generally a decent division commander otherwise (although his execution of captured "galvanized yankees" was a shameful episode).
That’s a pretty good summary of Pickett’s personality and I agree with your view about Custer and the effect that the more recent re-assessments of his leadership at LBH has undergone. I’ve seen countless documentaries and listened to a number of expert opinions on LBH and most of them paint Custer as being foolish, the thing is, a person can have a shining career but it’s that one mistake that gets remembered.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

diane

Retired User
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Location
State of Jefferson
That’s a pretty good summary of Pickett’s personality and I agree with your view about Custer and the effect that the more recent re-assessments of his leadership at LBH has undergone. I’ve seen countless documentaries and listened to a number of expert opinions on LBH and most of them paint Custer as being foolish, the thing is, a person can have a shining career but it’s that one mistake that gets remembered.
That's the old Navy saying: One oh s! wipes out a whole lot of atta boys! Both Custer and Pickett were good soldiers, nothing wrong with their courage, but sometimes the wives can do more damage to a guy's legacy than anything they ever did to mess it up. There were a number of widows of Confederate officers who did just that, and some who simply went on about their lives. Stuart had his reputation mixed up after the war but Flora just continued on without discussing it in public. She felt his reputation stood on its own and anyone who 'was there' knew the truth. And, Kitty Morgan Hill scoffed at the whole idea of being a 'widow of the Confederacy'. She didn't stay single and wear black all her life and openly scoffed at the 'Lost Cause' rhetoric. Others, like LaSalle, made it their life's work to restore their husbands to all the honor and glory they believed they should have had. I do think Pickett took it in the nose for doing what he was ordered to do - in all honesty, I don't think he quite understood the enormity of what he was tasked with as did Longstreet - but he sure did afterward! His response was to blame Lee...and he was quite right in doing that. Lee was the first one to say so as well. But, the mistake always sticks to the last one holding the hot potato.

Custer did have help in being foolish, but I have to say it doesn't speak well of a feller when he's so eager to shoot a buffalo he shoots his own horse in the head! I can just imagine invisible warriors watching that, looking at each other, shaking their heads... There was a long time ago a poster on this board who was one of the researchers of the LBH battlefield - he helped find a lot of new information that rewrote that battle. The thing at the core of making Custer an arrogant idiot was to lessen the Indian warriors he fought. It was much better to believe Custer was a fool who was massacred by savages than to admit a Civil War hero and US army general had been beaten by some pretty good generals on the other side.
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
It was much better to believe Custer was a fool who was massacred by savages than to admit a Civil War hero and US army general had been beaten by some pretty good generals on the other side.
I think your absolutely right, it was only when I started listening to the various handed down testimonies from some of the ancestors that it became evident that Custer was well and truly outsmarted, oh yeah and Crazy Horse.
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
I think your absolutely right, it was only when I started listening to the various handed down testimonies from some of the ancestors that it became evident that Custer was well and truly outsmarted, oh yeah and Crazy Horse.
I mentioned Crazy Horse because he was an impressive bloke, when everyone else was running around flapping in panic and excitement, he ‘crazy horse’ was busy discussing matters with the medicine man, after he’d finished that, he decided to take some snuff and have a smoke, meanwhile everyone else is getting in on the fight but crazy horse still didn’t make a move, nope, he had to rub some earth into his hair and then he needed to attend to his horse, his horse also needed a dusting of Earth and when all of that was done and crazy horse was satisfied that the spirits would protect him he was good to go. Crazy horse was anything but crazy, he was one cool dude and that in my humble opinion is why Custer couldn’t hope to win against warriors that were supremely confident and yet totally underestimated.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Custer did have help in being foolish, but I have to say it doesn't speak well of a feller when he's so eager to shoot a buffalo he shoots his own horse in the head

Ok, missed that story. Horse's heads are a little hard not to see. How'd he do that?

And like Waterloo said, Crazy Horse. Wanted to be 2 things ' when I grew up '. 1. Spy, unsure why, then discovered they get killed a lot and 2. Native American, then discovered Scots can't do that. Crazy Horse, Chief Joseph and Sitting Bull, didn't want to be their wives, wanted to be them. Chief Joseph had the edge because he had the best horses.
 

Waterloo50

Major
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Location
Blighty.
Ok, missed that story. Horse's heads are a little hard not to see. How'd he do that?

And like Waterloo said, Crazy Horse. Wanted to be 2 things ' when I grew up '. 1. Spy, unsure why, then discovered they get killed a lot and 2. Native American, then discovered Scots can't do that. Crazy Horse, Chief Joseph and Sitting Bull, didn't want to be their wives, wanted to be them. Chief Joseph had the edge because he had the best horses.
I have to admit that I did find diane’s Story of Custer accidentally shooting his horse in the head funny.
 

Cavalier

Sergeant
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
In defence of Custer and his horsey mishap I would like to respectfully submit some thoughts.

I know from nothin about riding horses and much less than nothin about hunting buffalo while mounted on one. The only thing I have to go on is the Remmingtonesque paintings of guys doing this or some old movies.

So it seems, if these illustrations are accurate, that the mounted hunter races after the buffalo and when horse and rider come alongside the running animal the rider discharges, or attempts to discharge his weapon at the now thoroughly annoyed critter.

Trying to hit a moving target, and a big, irritated one at that, while riding on a running horse, that is probably trying to avoid being gored, must have been quite a thrill, for horse and rider both, not to mention the buffalo.

That being the case, it would appear to this no horseback riding city kid that casualties to man and/or beast must not have been infrequent in this particular pastime.

So it seems perfectly reasonable to me, when considering what appears to be involved in hunting buffalo while mounted, that an accident like Custer's could occur.

That's just my take on the whole unfortunate, (at least for the horse), affair.

John
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

diane

Retired User
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Location
State of Jefferson
In defence of Custer and his horsey mishap I would like to respectfully submit some thoughts.

I know from nothin about riding horses and much less than nothin about hunting buffalo while mounted on one. The only thing I have to go on is the Remmingtonesque paintings of guys doing this or some old movies.

So it seems, if these illustrations are accurate, that the mounted hunter races after the buffalo and when horse and rider come alongside the running animal the rider discharges, or attempts to discharge his weapon at the now thoroughly annoyed critter.

Trying to hit a moving target, and a big, irritated one at that, while riding on a running horse, that is probably trying to avoid being gored, must have been quite a thrill, for horse and rider both, not to mention the buffalo.

That being the case, it would appear to this no horseback riding city kid that casualties to man and/or beast must not have been infrequent in this particular pastime.

So it seems perfectly reasonable to me, when considering what appears to be involved in hunting buffalo while mounted, that an accident like Custer's could occur.

That's just my take on the whole unfortunate, (at least for the horse), affair.

John
That's true enough - moving targets and moving horse. There were lots of stories of cavalrymen lopping off the ears of their horses with their sabers, too! However, even giving Custer the benefit of the doubt, I still have to question his judgement in the matter. He said he was trying to shoot the buffalo in the shoulder with his revolver. Myself...I want something a lot bigger than that! It's just as well the horse bought the ranch rather than the buffalo being well and truly irritated but hardly dying...and having his attention drawn to a handy target. Which became even handier when the horse plopped down right in front of the charging buffalo, depositing its rider right in front of the charging buffalo. I'll bet the Flash couldn't have caught Custer right about then - just a blur across them thar plains!
 

Cavalier

Sergeant
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
@diane

From the illustrations that I have seen it seems that this was the way buffalo hunting was done. I remember one that portrays an Indian trying to do it with a bow and arrow.

I wondered about the pistol too. However that leaves me with the impression that the rider, while using a rifle, would have no hands left to steer the horse. It seems that could be accomplished by using the legs, (I have no idea how that works). That leaves our daring rider now chasing the irate buffalo while steering the running horse with his legs, and trying to aim at his stampeding target. This seems even more risky than trying it with a pistol.

It leaves me with the impression that this was more of a sport than anything else. If so it must have been a pretty exciting one.

As to Custer's judgement, well that remains a matter of opinion I guess.

However I enjoyed reading your comments and appreciate your getting back to me!

John
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top