The previous entries looked briefly at some of the broad circumstances – westward expansion by European Americans, broken treaties, and fractious relationships between some of the different tribes that lived on the plains – that led to the Great Sioux War of 1876-1877. As we approach the battlefield at Little Bighorn or Greasy Grass as the Lakota called it, I think it’s important to take a look at the most famous American soldier to emerge from the battle – Lieutenant Colonel George Armstrong Custer.
Custer was an oversized figure who sought celebrity and enjoyed it. He was a man of great ambition tempered by honor and chivalry. He could be a man capable of deep sympathy and great cruelty. In short, a very complex character stood at the center of “Custer’s Last Stand” at the battle of the Little Bighorn. This battle not only became one of the most storied and controversial engagements in the history of American warfare but it served as a rallying point for the U S Army to increase its prosecution of the war against the Sioux and Cheyenne bands that had won the day on the plains of Montana and bring a swift resolution to the conflict.
(Anyone needing to cite an example of winning a battle but losing a war, should unhesitatingly point to the Battle at Little Bighorn. So relentless was the American response to its Army’s defeat that this was the last battle the Native Americans would win in the Great Sioux War. Crazy Horse, one of the men who led the Sioux and Cheyenne into battle that day, would surrender barely six months later on 8 January 1877. The Agreement of 1877 – signed on 28 February – officially annexed all Sioux land and established permanent reservations. Sitting Bull, the last holdout, would lead his people on a four-year exile into Canada on 5 May of the same year before his own surrender in 1881.)
Building a reputation.
[Photo of George Armstrong Custer from owlcation].
(American history, at least as it was taught when I was in primary and secondary school, is little more than a broad survey that touches upon selected events, presented with little or no depth or context, and usually from a single – one might say propagandistic – point of view. What I was taught was that Indians had tricked Custer into an ill-conceived raid on an Indian village and ended by massacring him and his men on the battlefield. We learned none of the context I covered superficially in the previous entries nor, as we’ll see below of the flaws in the execution of General Terry’s battle plan, nor of the tension between Custer and at least one of the other officers present that day who, had he made some different decisions might have prevented the loss of all of Custer’s troops.
In my time covering Maryland athletics, I learned that in sports, one play made or missed or one infraction called or uncalled by the official, is rarely solely determinative. The same can be said of Custer’s defeat at Little Bighorn. It wasn’t a single decision or even a series of decisions Custer and others made on the day of the battle but a confluence of events both before and during the fight that likely led to his demise.)
Although he had little interest in or talent for academics – he graduated 34th in his class of 34 from the U S Military Academy in 1861 – George Armstrong Custer had an instinctive aptitude for leading men and for daring on the battlefield. (In truth, Custer’s poor academic record might be somewhat misleading. His class initially enrolled with a total of 79 men. Of that number, 23 dropped out for academic reasons while 22 of his erstwhile classmates dropped out to join the Confederacy.)
It was in the American Civil War that Custer made his reputation. He first made an indelible impression while serving as an aide to General George B McClellan during the Peninsula Campaign. McClellan was contemplating a crossing of the Chickahominy River and wondered aloud at its depth. Custer, who happened to be within earshot, promptly rode his horse into the center of the stream and shouted, “That’s how deep it is, Mister General!”
McClellan responded to the then second lieutenant’s brash action by tasking him with leading four companies in what proved to be a successful assault on the forces of Confederate General Joseph Johnson. This earned Custer a field promotion to captain.
Custer’s reputation grew after he was given a field promotion to brigadier general commanding the Michigan Cavalry Brigade a group of volunteers also known as the Wolverines. (This is known as a brevet or field promotion. It’s usually temporary and the U S military discontinued the practice in 1890.) Once in that position of command, Custer chose to wear gaudy uniforms partly because he wanted his troops to easily identify him as he led from the front and, in part, because he wanted others to know he was leading from the front.
Usually leading his troops in what became known as the “Custer Dash,” some criticized his leadership as reckless. While his strategy appeared reckless, in truth, it wasn’t. By the time he ordered his troops to charge, Custer had scouted every battlefield meticulously, gauged the enemy’s weak points and strengths and ascertained the best line of attack.
Custer fought successfully in a skirmish at Hanover, Pennsylvania on 30 June 1863 and barely escaped death a day later in a battle at Abbottstown where he was unhorsed but rescued by Private Norvell Francis Churchill of the 1st Michigan Cavalry. Safely reaching the town of Two Taverns, he reunited with the troops of Elon J Farnsworth where they received orders to protect General Meade’s flank at Gettysburg.
Seen by most as the pivotal engagement of the American Civil War, the tide of the three-day battle at Gettysburg was perhaps turned by Custer’s actions and these were certainly his finest hours during that war.