Opinions on the life of General Custer?

Great operational and tactical calvaryman in the Civil War...engagements with Indians not so much, primarily because it was not a war in the conventional sense of the times, and also because in most cases their capabilities were held in contempt or underestimated...

Then again his only military failure was the one that really mattered ;)

I have a T-shirt with a picture of Custer and the words "Gotta like these odds!"

I'm not too sure how good he was tactically. At Gettysburg he beat Stuart by throwing unit after unit at him until he went away. Of course that was also how Grant ultimately beat Lee. Extremely costly in lives, but they saw winning as everything, so who am I to criticize?

The OP probably knows more than I ever will.

But I've read probably three books about the 1876 Campaign, and a fair amount about Custer.

First, a movement of less than 1,000 armed against a nation community of 2-3,000 fighters, on their own lands, is the crack of doom.

Second, a supply train of 150 or so wagons to support that force, following over 275 miles of rough terrain, cannot work.

Like Revenant says, very loosely conceived.

What would be a comparison?

Many of the battles Britain fought in south African tribal lands against the Zulu, and later the Boers.

Needless to say that the campaign was shotty at best. They were relying on Intel that was woefully in accurate due to the fact that the BIA ( bureau of Indian affairs) and reservation higher ups lied on the estimates of Indians that left the reservation due to the fact that they were paid in accordance of population. So the army was expecting around 1000 Indians with maybe 600 warriors. Also they were expecting to be relieved either by crook ( who lost and was in retreat at the battle of the rosebud creek) or Gibbon ( who was 30-40 miles out). Following Reno's failure at the southern end of the village and his complete rowt and benteen's lack of speed in getting into the fight, Custer just so happened to attract half the village in his attempt to ford the river. Hindsight is 20 20 but the campaign if executed perfectly could have worked but the cog wheels simply wouldn't mesh.

North Dakota.

GJW this is very much appreciated, truth is that I would very much like to come see the engagement areas.

As it is, I've been to western Montana working for the Gov., but never lived or worked on the plains or the hills.

If this thread could have a life, I would be an active participant. I was very moved by the books I've read enough to think that this was the larger moment of western expansion.

In California, our natives had been defeated by Spain/ Mexico 250 years before.

Our Californios had been "accepted into" our state Constitution 150 years after that.

Fact: our State Constitution was bilingual, Spanish and English.

Read about the trancontinental railroad says that it was a defining moment in the incorporation of territory, 11 years before Custer.

Custer's published accounts of his exploits gave him a public reputation out of all proportion to his actual accomplishments. He belongs on the list of commanders whose egos led to their downfall.

I think that the portrayal of him by Richard Mulligan in Dustin Hoffman's "Little Big Man" was probably dead-on accurate, lol.

For me I would say Gary Cole's performance in Son of the Morning Star was the most accurate to date (Also the best movie about the 1876 campaign in general). In Little big man he was a little too insane to be totally accurate.

Like most legendary figures Custer probably lies somewhere between the maniac of Little Big Man and the swashbuckling cavalier of They Died With Their Boots On. I had to come back to this to finish what I wanted to post before I was interrupted and while still on topic. While Pickett launched the ill fated assault,Stuart sought to penetrate the Northern rear and link up with Pickett. All he had to do was punch through an out numbered Michigan(?) regiment. Custer galloped to the head,assumed command and shouted' come on you Wolverines'.

 An argument could be made that by repulsing Stuarts attempt, Custer saved the battle that turned the tide of the war.Sheridan awarded Libbie Custer the table used at Appomattox in recognition. Custer had 2 horses shot out from him in this engagement and it solidified his reputation as one of the better,if not best, cavalrymen in the army. At Little Big Horn he refused gattling guns, deeming them too slow,he also declined four additional cavalry companies from the Montana column, and then prematurely divided his forces.

I see Custer as the embodiment of a man promoted too far, too soon. Having reached heights not thought possible by mere mortals, Custer was convinced of his own extraordinary abilities as a leader and commander. He had a narrow view of "traditional" warfare after his "successes" during the Civil War.

He was soundly trashed by the Sioux.

No, the Army didn't do anyone any favors by putting Custer in that position. Doom was the most likely outcome.

The thing about the 1860-70s army was an army that promotion was based of results instead of what we see today with classes and school. For virtue or vice Custer showed results. People forget his only military loss was The Little Bighorn. Too bad it was the one that mattered. Also he has a credit in reinventing the role of cavalry in the US army. Due to his and others persistence, cavalry played a role separate from the infantry being an offensive force rather than a stop gap in the infantry. 

North Dakota is definately a state of natural beauty in just the simplicity of it. While it may get hot in the Summer and cold in the winter (Im talking about -20 degrees on an average night) the history of both the natives and americans here is all around you. A butte just over my home town of St. Anthony alone had a skirmish between Arikara scouts and Sioux indians in 1875 that lasted 4 days of them seeking refuge on the top of little heart butte. a great place to read about it and other occurences here would be this link down below.

http://thefirstscout.blogspot.com/2011/09/battles-skirmishes-around-fort-abraham.html

Thank you for the link. Interesting about the officers assigned.

My great grandfather George Morrison, West Point class of 1904, was assigned as medical officer of Fort Apache in the Arizona Teritory, in 1905.

Obviously some years later, but he did lead the idea of the gasoline powered military ambulance.

I have to agree with Templar1099 on his assessment of Custer's character.  He was ambitious and a bit of a glory-hound, but this was standard procedure in the period after the Civil War when the army was really only a few thousand men (around 27,000 in 1876).  In order to get a command or promotion, an officer really had to really have powerful friends, or do something spectacular.

As mentioned before, Custer refused the help of 4 companies of the Second Cavalry (roughly about 300 men considering that cavalry companies were rarely up to full complement).  This would have left Terry's column with only 200 infantry and artillery and very understrength, so this refusal was not a military blunder.  The gatling guns were also refused, but the guns themselves were unreliable and needed teams of 4 horses to pull them, not to mention mules to carry the ammunition for them.  Leaving them behind to move fast was deemed the better call.

So what did Custer do wrong at the Little Big Horn?  Well, he was over-confident in that the 7th (around 660 men and officers) could take on a force he estimated at about 1,500.  Scouts had reported following a band of 400 or so earlier, and it was not until they came upon the camp that they realized the size of the gathering.  Custer still thought that if he struck hard and fast enough, he could rout the tribes and win a victory.  But he made the mistake of dividing his force in the face of superior numbers (estimated at about 2000 - 3000 warriors, and about 5000 women and children).  This was not a fatal mistake, except that once he divided his force the bitter rivalry between his officers and men (even hatred in some cases) came to the fore, and lack of action and indecisiveness doomed Custer's column (around 268 killed, 55 wounded out of ~660).  Custer's ambition and lack of caution cost him dearly, though these were sterling qualities in the Civil War period where he won his name.

Gary

I had just watched The American West on AMC last night and I gotta tell ya, Custer was flamboyant, an arrogant and narcissus pompous @$$ who out looking for a name for himself. Men assigned under him hated him. Heck anyone who ended up assigned under Custer is guaranteed to get in the middle of any action Custer was involved in. No wonder Grant assigned him in exile in Texas after the Civil War. Grant knew he was a great soldier during the Civil War but he was sort of a rebel. When reports of Gold being found in the Black Hills - a territory that belonged to the Lakota Sioux Grant brokered a peace treaty with. He sent Custer on a mission to confirm those rumors of gold on those mountains. Grant also specifically instructed Custer to report to him only upon confirmation.

Custer did confirmed, but he also disobeyed the order and made the report to a reporter back East as well. That story broke and Grant was not happy. Nonetheless, Custer is responsible for violating the peace treaty whom Grant was proud in upholding for 9 years and Custer resuming the Indian War again. Custer was so hell bent on being looked upon as a hero.

Custer also had brokered an alliance with the Democratic politicians to be a Presidential candidate against Grant. Imagine that! Had he waited for reinforcements, survived/succeeded the massacre at Little Bighorn, he could have been a future President George Armstrong Custer. All Custer needed was one more successful campaign to become a hero in the eyes of voters.

One controversy did get mentioned about the massacre at Little Bighorn - did George Armstrong Custer really die by the Sioux or did he commit suicide as the last man standing? 

I have read all this with my tongue between my teeth ;

  I was married for 47 years to a true blue American Native . She was very introspective when it came to even mentioning the man's name . Her fellow tribesman still dislike the name today . He was A perfect example of the Arrogance and Ego in the American Military that cost many fine troops their lives to make a name that would get him in the White House .

 He really was in some senses a good officer , But , not one that men would willingly go into the gates of Hell with like my C.O. Was . Ah well, It and He are the history we have .

 Tanker - Builder

While I can agree with some of the points made, Custer often gets the blame for many issues that he simplied was tied in with. The 9 year peace was a half peace at best. Often the "Paper chiefs" as they were called that signed these treaties held only influence over the braves of a tribe. This means any one man of a tribe could continue on a war path with a best a slap on the wrist (This led to many raidings of settlers by war partys due to the idea that lands near reservations were reservation lands). So when the BIA (Bereau of Indian Affairs), Agents (which were jobs assigned by connections rather than merit) took advantage of the reservation Indians (skimming off rations, delaying rations, etc,), the reservation indians were furious. This spiked the Great Sioux War of 1876 with many native americans striking the lodges and leaving the reservations in max exodus (understandably so). This led to General Custer testifying before Congress in 1876 against the Grant administration for many grievances (trader post scandal, treatment of reservation indians, Grant's poor choices of appointies, etc). So from the books i've studied many issues with native americans in the indian wars was poor decisions of the federal government and a misunderstanding of both sides of the arguments among both Native Americans and the US peoples.

Gjw;

     That said , I will go so far as to say there many of the tribes that wanted the peace to last . Many of the chiefs realised that there were many , many more "Light Skins " than they thought . They were puzzled by many things the Whites did such as " Possessing land " This was a concept not known to them .To them you could not own any part of mother earth .The " Great Spirit " provided food , shelter and all other sustenance .

    They could not understand the greed and selfishness as well as the wastefulness of these strangers . Plus the fact that the " white men " couldn't seem to speak the truth and stick to honorable agreements , whatever the reason .

    Most tribes considered the  "White Man " as one who spoke out the other side of their face . In many instances they were right . Having lived in this great land for many generations they knew that it would feed , clothe and shelter you .

 As in the great Plains they knew beforehand about the tenderness of the earth . Many times , cries of enough ! were left unheard by the settlers .The result . Many years later that area became a dustbowl .

      The Natives knew deep down the fragilitry of the area .That's why they never farmed much , if at all . They usually used wild corn and other grains or traded for it when not fighting one another .They were and are by no means perfect as humans .They just valued things differently   T.B.        When the "Bluecoats " came they knew some were good , but many were not . Especially when it came to women and land . This sadly could not be kept under control by the better officers .Too many " The only good Indian was a dead one "

Tanker - Builder

Gjw;

     That said , I will go so far as to say there many of the tribes that wanted the peace to last . Many of the chiefs realised that there were many , many more "Light Skins " than they thought . They were puzzled by many things the Whites did such as " Possessing land " This was a concept not known to them .To them you could not own any part of mother earth .The " Great Spirit " provided food , shelter and all other sustenance .

    They could not understand the greed and selfishness as well as the wastefulness of these strangers . Plus the fact that the " white men " couldn't seem to speak the truth and stick to honorable agreements , whatever the reason .

    Most tribes considered the  "White Man " as one who spoke out the other side of their face . In many instances they were right . Having lived in this great land for many generations they knew that it would feed , clothe and shelter you .

 As in the great Plains they knew beforehand about the tenderness of the earth . Many times , cries of enough ! were left unheard by the settlers .The result . Many years later that area became a dustbowl .

      The Natives knew deep down the fragilitry of the area .That's why they never farmed much , if at all . They usually used wild corn and other grains or traded for it when not fighting one another .They were and are by no means perfect as humans .They just valued things differently   T.B.        When the "Bluecoats " came they knew some were good , but many were not . Especially when it came to women and land . This sadly could not be kept under control by the better officers .Too many " The only good Indian was a dead one "

 

Well said, TB. I do believe the Sioux and other tribes were put in a negative way by the folks back east and the settlers westward. Most looked to them as "savages" - especially after the Battle of Little Bighorn. Funny, they never thought Custer was a murderer after he literally wiped out a Lakota settlement.

Keep in mind, they (the Sioux Lakota) were the first peoples in the Great Plains. They knew the land better than anyone. They knew farming was out of the question so they turn to buffalo as their main source of food. They used every part of them, nothing went to waste.

Now the murder of Sitting Bull was wrong. I cant believe the government actually bought into the fact the Ghost Dance can cause a riot. 

In a way, I'm glad Custer died. He deserved it considering he disobeyed an order to only inform President Grant confirming the gold in the Black Hills. And he did disobeyed an order to wait for reinforcements. Custer wanted to grab the glory all to himself for a chance to be a hero. Sorry George, you blew it.

TB - I would have love to meet you and your family. So much to hear about your wife's history.

It's just too bad they never mentioned Geronimo in the series. It would have interesting to see him mentioned as well.

You do make excellent points but as to the ownership of land, while the idea of personal ownership was foreign the ownership of a tribe was heavily enforced at the point of 0 tolerance atleast with many plains indians. Tribal borders were strictly enforced and often they altered the land as they see fit. In the Missouri rive bottoms the Lakota (among other tribes) often stripped bark off of cottonwood trees to feed horses in the winter killing large cotton woods and also lit grass fires to ensure good grass growth for spring pony forage (Some bottonists even think this led to the extinction of early flora and fauna). This happened in the turtle mountains where the ojibawe and chippewa lit forest fires for larger buffalo herds ensuring a good hunt. Now im not writing this in a judgmental tone or thinking we were or are any better with our handling of natural resources, but by this I like to explain that Native Tribes were simply people. Some native americans were capable of being mean, cruel, selfish, vindictive. At the same time many were kind, tolerant, loving, and understanding. At the end of the day though they were simply people.