Nathaniel Philbrick : The Last Stand, Another look at Custer

[Dead I]

Both Longstreet and Pickett called Lee a fool for ordering the charge into the middle of the Union lines at Gettysburg.  Few historians call Custer a "bumbling fool", but hollywood does. He was no like the charactor depicted in "Little Big Man", but I love the movie.  Custer was both loved and hated by his men.  Reno was the bumbling fool that day IMO, and he was drunk.  Benteen's hatred of Custer was such that he would not lead his men to the "sound of the guns" as is doctrin in the Army.

After the battle a sizable number of officers believed that Custer was correct and that he was wipped out because neither Reno, nor Benteen followed orders to "come quick" and "bring pacs".  I agree with this evaluation.  Custer had a long history of military successes.  He was one of the most successful generals in the Civil War and he did have some success fighting Indians ie Washita and in the Black Hills.  However Custer was not the most successful Indian fighter.  That accolade goes to Miles, Mackenzie, Crook and of course, Kit Carson.

However, if you could select the man whose troops you were going to fight against, Custer would be one of the last you'd pick.  Custer never retreated, fought like mad and would win.  Why?  Because he always did....except for that last time that is. 

[Fox Creek Kid]

So that's why Custer was courtmartialed for abandoning his post and as well abandoning Maj. Joel Elliot to the Indians at the Washita?    He was a martinet with little or no real command decision making experience and very little Indian fighting experience.

[Dead I]

Well, Custer did get court martialed for leaving his unit and taking an ambulance to visit his wife.  He was also tried for his order to shoot deserters.  He was not tried, as I recall, for not going after Maj. Elliot. Was he?  I was in the army too, and I found many field grade officers martinets.  Many were rather full of themselves, they wanted to make Colonel and then become the godlike generals. I don't think Custer was any more of a martinet than another other field grade officer.

After the Washita battle Custer was busy killed the Indian's horse herd (about 600) and burning their tentage/food/clothing, etc.  He looked up and saw a lot of Indians, who had been camped further down stream.  He had his men saddle up and march out of there.  They left their coats on the ground where they had put them prior to the attack.  I'm sure that he thought that Elliot could take care of himself, he was a major after all.  If Custer went hunting for Elliot and his men I'm sure he would put his command at risk...even more than they already were.  Also Elliot was already dead, most likely, and searching for him wouldn't have done any good anyway.
 

[Fox Creek Kid]

...Also Elliot was already dead, most likely, and searching for him wouldn't have done any good anyway.
 

Custer was telepathic and knew this?  He ABANDONED his men on the field. Period. Benteen as well as many other junior officers never forgave him for this. I wouldn't have either.

[Dead I]

Custer was telepathic and knew this?  He ABANDONED his men on the field. Period. Benteen as well as many other junior officers never forgave him for this. I wouldn't have either.

Well, yeah, Benteen never forgave Custer for several things at the Washita.  Killing over 600 horses for one. Riding off and not searching for Elliot for another.  However consider Custer's plight.  One, he didn't really know where Elliot was.  And two, he was surrounded by an allert band of Indians who would have loved nothing more than to tear into him.  Custer must have thought that if he took his men out on a hunt for Elliot's group that he'd have put his men at greater risk. I agree.  Also since he had not heard any shots from the direction Elliot went he could either conclude that Elliot had escaped or was dead, either way searching for him wasn't worth the risk and was probably futile.

Have you been to the ground?  I have.  Elliot's men were about three miles from the battlefield (as I recall) in a little swale.  I think they were killed soon after the battle started, but certainly were dead when they were burning the Indians impedimenta..

Benteen hated Custer.  He, in my opinion, was jealous of him, after all he too had achived high brevet rank during the CW. Whether or not Benteens reasons for hating Custer are valid or not is a matter for debate.

[Fox Creek Kid]

Again, you are MISSING the point: Custer did NOT know at this time that Elliot was dead!! He ABANDONED his men. Benteen was revered by his men and everyone on Reno Hill spoke of his incredible bravery by standing upright and literally walking the "parapets". He was a far more competent officer than Custer which was known throughout the unit. Only Custer's relatives and immediate circle of lackeys & toadies liked him. Outside of that he was basically despised.

[Dead I]

Again, you are MISSING the point: Custer did NOT know at this time that Elliot was dead!! He ABANDONED his men. Benteen was revered by his men and everyone on Reno Hill spoke of his incredible bravery by standing upright and literally walking the "parapets". He was a far more competent officer than Custer which was known throughout the unit. Only Custer's relatives and immediate circle of lackeys & toadies liked him. Outside of that he was basically despised.

Not so and I am getting the point.  Custer was well liked by many senior officer, Sheridan for one and Sherman for another.  They had seen him in action during the Civil War and knew his courage and elan in battle.  When Abe Lincoln met Libby Custer he extended his hand and said, "So this is the wife of the man who goes into battle with a whoop and a shout". 

While, by all accounts, Elliot was a good officer, so was Custer.  Elliiot was sent off to the east to keep the Indians from excaping that way, just as Benteen was sent off during the battle of LBH to keep Indians from excaping to the south.  Elliot was sent off on a mission and he never returned.  He was never "left" or "abandoned".  It was his job to get back to his main force and he could not.  He was overwhelmed and killed.  His men were also tortured.  It was not a bad scene.

[Dead I]

Custer was not basically despised.  That's Hollywood talking.  While Benteen did hate Custer none of the other officers did.  I don't think that all of them "loved him", but as far as I can tell,  only Benteen really hated him.  Some admired him and were excited to be in his unit.  He was a nationally know and a revered celebrity at the time.  Custer was one of the heros of the Civil War, along with Chamberlain.  Grant thought so much of Custer that he gave him the little table that he and Lee had signed the peace treaty upon. (It burned up in when the Custer's house at Fort Lincoln burned down.)

Some of Custer's men disliked him and many deserted, but that was SOP during the Indian Wars.  It was lousy duty.  It was inspections and troop and stomp every day and the chow was pretty poor. Custer was hard on his men, but so were Jackson and Patton and they are considered heros today, so for a very long time was Custer.  

People didn't have the negative feelings of Custer in this country until the Vietnam War, when people hated all things military and despising the brass became popular.  I believe that Custer was an effective fighter, and more effective than most.  On 25 June he gave orders to his subordinate officers that they did not follow.  If they had I think Custer had a pretty good chance to win the battle.  

[Fox Creek Kid]

I give up. 

[Dead I]

I give up.  

No need to give up, Fox Creek!  I'm doing my best to report facts as I see them.  Please do the same to support your point of view.  Also you must understand that I'm cheating a little here, because for fifteen years I read nothing but Custer related stuff.  Then I went to every site that I could find.  I have heard what you have said/written, it is conventional wisdom.  I just don't think it's true, at least in a large part.  Custer was both loved and hated, and that's a fact.  I think, however; he was more loved than hated.  

I'll tell you what.  If we were to interview 500 people on Time Square we'd find about a hundred who had heard of Custer, and all of them would agree with you.  As I said, it's conventional wisdom.  It's just wrong...and I don't think there's any real evidence to support it.   

[shrapnel]

I give up. 

Good, because you distaste for Custer is evident in your opinions. Like him or not, facts are facts and Custer had tremendous leadership skills that made him a Brigadeer General during the Civil War. It is thought by some that we only have intelligent leaders in our armed forces of today, and we had to settle for what we could get in the past.

This is not so, intelligence isn't time related, technology is. The leaders that fought during the Civil War were bright individuals that did make mistakes, among them, Grant, Lee, Burnside, Stuart etc.

Custer had more to do with winning the Civil War than his detractors will admit. He was successful at almost every engagement, turning the tide of the war as he started late and finished early. I am glad we had his bravado to lead others into battle, but I would not have wanted to serve in his command. Phil Sheridan knew both and that is why he sent Custer to Montana in 1876

[Dead I]

After reading as many books on Custer that I have and having been to many of the placies that he either lived or fought I think I have a pretty good idea what kind of guy he was.  Little known things about him.  He was a neatnick.  He suffered bouts of obsessive handwashing. He had, therefore some problems with obsessive compulsive traits. He was always neat as a pin.  His wife teased him for brushing his teeth after each meal.

He had an overblown sense of humor.  If pleased he come home and throw firniture around laughing and cheering.  He found fun in most everything and he was a constant teaser.  He liked practical jokes.

He never swore and after a few embarrassing run in with some of his heavy drinking, he stopped and never touched a drop of hard liquor again.  He did not reprimand his officers in public.  He loved to gamble and he'd gamble with his fellow officers and many of them owed him money.  He enjoyed being on stage.  He even said that if he had not become a soldier that he would have become an actor.   

[Story]

In a fascinating "American Experience," "Custer's Last Stand," to be shown Tuesday on PBS, Custer emerges as a classic fame addict, tasting public adoration early because of his battlefield exploits during the Civil War but never quite being able to say, "I had a nice run; now I have my memories." Instead he kept looking for opportunities to return to the limelight and embellish his legend.

http://tv.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/arts/television/custers-path-to-the-little-bighorn-on-pbs-review.html

[Bruce W Sims]

Maybe someone mentioned it and I missed it. Did anyone catch the examination of Indian reports
by eye witnesses to the LBH event? These were discounted a number of times in deference to
the 'official" government report all the way up to WW II. I seem to remember a special being done on this for TV by National Geographic (?)
or some such.

As far as the nature of the late General Custer's personality, IMVVHO there are several "red flags" that easily
suggest a Personality Disorder or quite possibly Bi-Polar Disorder for which self-medicating behaviors such as heavy
use of alcohol is common. Were it true that Custer came to completely abstain from alcohol it would easily follow
that he might assume any number of self-regulating behaviors that others might view as, say, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

I'm not here to put my thearpist/counselor hat on, or play the Sage regarding someone who has not been among us for
several generations. Rather, I can report from personal experience that whenever the fame of a Historic personality
becomes somewhat - er - "checkered", I guarentee there is much more going on behind the scenes. There are reasons that a single individual is seen so radically different by so many people, and the biggest cause that I have found is that not everyone is seeing exactly the same person at all times and in all circumstances.   Just sayin.... No real point....

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Bruce W Sims]

Just had another thought which may or may not apply to this thread.

I'm wondering if anyone has actually studied the life and times of the typically Frontier Cavarly trooper---
say 1865 to 1895?

Examinations of the remains of US Army troopers of the period suggest endemic infections, arthritis and eye/ear/nose/throat
conditions secondary to the demands of the Service. Though it is documented, such things as starvation, floggings, and torture
were far from rare and contributed heavily to the high rate of desertions and constant undermanning of the Frontier units.

The only reason I mention this is because the media, including movies, TV and even some documentaries represent  an almost  "Boy Scout Camp" lifestyle and I don't get anything like that from my own reading. Poor hygiene, insects, poor diet, improper clothing and weather conditions give lie to the romantic view seen in "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon", "They Died With Their Boots On" and "Fort Apache". Nor were the communications, logistics, support and administration anything like the sort of conditions suggested in the media.


If it can be said that I have a point here, it is only that I hope folks would remember that we have a very comfortable perch in our recliners from which to pass judgement on how others lived a hundred years ago. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[ChuckBurrows]

and don't forget the STD's which were endemic all over the frontier - even the Lewis and Clark expedition carried "cures" for such - some often containing mercury which sure didn't help ones cognition....
Some researchers of STD's believe that some types, such as syphilis, even originated in the New World..

[Bruce W Sims]

and don't forget the STD's which were endemic all over the frontier - even the Lewis and Clark expedition carried "cures" for such - some often containing mercury which sure didn't help ones cognition....
Some researchers of STD's believe that some types, such as syphilis, even originated in the New World..

I think thats one of those things that "polite" society does not care to hear too much about. An article in the Encyclopedia of the Old West reports that an estimated 50,000 prostitutes plied their trade during the latter half of the 19th Century
between the Miss. River and the West Coast. I also learned that it was not unusual for a prostitute to be married,
and to have children. What I came away with was three things. a.) There was a very distinct hierarchy in the profession b.) Pretty much EVERYONE was in on it regardless of color, creed, or political office and c.) it was a hard, hard life for women at best, and health concerns were #29 on their list of the five most important things to worry about.


As far as STD-s go people have been trying to figure out where STD-s  started for centuries now and the result is always that everyone points their finger somewhere else.