3) Source F is by a Private of the 7th Cavalry. He says that Custer did not care about his men “Hardships to his men were worthy of but little considerations”, which is supported by Source K, “He was too hard on his men”. He was driven on by his burning desire for promotion, fame and glory, “dim visions of a ‘star’”, which is backed up by Source K, “When he got a notion we had to go”. Men who were under Custer’s command write both sources. They would know him very well as they spend the majority of their time with him. They might just bear a grudge against Custer, but all three seem to agree that Custer works his men too hard, and is therefore likely to be true.
Source G is written by Mark Kellogg, who was a newspaper journalist in New York. It is very unlikely that he knew Custer personally, seeing as he works in the East, while Custer is thousands of miles away in the Plains, although he may have had a brief interview. He says that Custer was “A man respected by his followers”. This is contradicting Source F however, which says that Custer cared little for his men. Kellogg also states that Custer’s men would “Freely follow him into the ‘jaws of hell’”. This partly agrees with Source F, which suggests they had to go. So they would follow him to the jaws of hell, but freely? The fact that he uses that word ‘had’ seems to suggest that they had little option – maybe because they feared him. So why does he keep contradicting the soldiers? I think it is because he is a journalist – thousands will read what he has written. He isn’t going to degrade the army, he will praise them, saying how strong and powerful they are. He is telling the country what they want to hear – propaganda.
Source H was again written by a man under Custer’s command, a sergeant. He says that Custer was “aloof and removed”, and so did not speak to his men, which backs up Source F, as both seem to suggest he only thinks of himself – “Worthy of little consideration”.
4) Source G is useful because it tells you the public’s opinion of Custer, because the public often gets their opinions of what is written in the press. They think that he is a brave soldier, for whom his men have the utmost respect his skill and ability, and is a man who would give his life for the sake of his country. It is not useful however, for the truth. We know not all of his men loved and admired him, “He was too hard on his men and horses” (Source K), “Aloof and removed” (Source H), “Possible loss of life were worthy of but little considerations” (Source F).
Source J is useful because it gives you the point of view of the Indians, of the enemy. It tells us that the Indians had a lot of respect for Custer, “He was a brave warrior”, but the Source is not actually that useful. It does not give us much information, as we already knew he was a brave warrior.
I think that Source K is the most useful source by far. This is because it tells us a lot of information about him, and is backed up by other Sources. It tells us that he did not care about his men, “He was too hard on his men”. At the Battle of Little Big Horn, Custer attacked the Indians even though his men were exhausted. “He was always right”, this maybe shows he was arrogant and big headed, thinking that he could win every battle, and is backed up other Sources. “He never conferred” for example with Reno and Bentine prior to the Battle of Little Big Horn. Custer thought that he was above his men, he was superior. They were not worth talking to, as he already knew everything. “When he got a notion, we had to go”. This shows his selfishness, greed, hunger for success, as in Source F. It doesn’t matter if he was going to lose a few men, as long as he got his promotion and fame. They were merely pawns in his giant game of chess with the Indians.
5) I agree that Custer was egocentric. He only thought of himself and promotion, “Dim visions of a ‘star’”, he had his own personally designed uniform, and had long hair unlike everyone else. He “never conferred enough with officers”, and loved publicity, “His name in all the newspapers, his picture on the front of magazines”, he was bigheaded, above the others and self-centered. He refused the 2nd Cavalry shortly before the Battle of Little Big Horn, saying that he could defeat the Indians without them, and often disobeyed orders. I disagree however, that Custer was a psychopath. He was a great tactician and very intelligent. Could an American General be mad? Possibly, but maybe Custer was so egocentric that he seemed to be a psycho. Although there is evidence that he was hard on his men in Sources F and K, “He was too hard on his men and horses”. Before the Battle of Little Big Horn, his men had rode for forty miles in one day, and were exhausted, but Custer still attacked. I also think that he did not hate all Indians. He has an Indian scout, Bloody Knife, who was also one of his closest friends. It was also reported that he has an Indian wife, and if so shows that that is definitely not true. He did massacre thousands of Indians though, but I do not think that it was out of hate. It was his job - he had to kill them. It also got him fame and publicity, to maybe that was another motive. It is quite possible that he was bloodthirsty. He says in his autobiography that he respects the Indian’s way of life, and that they were not savages. So I do agree that he was egocentric and hard on his men, but not that he was a psychopath who entertained no humanitarian feelings for the Indians.
6) Custer lost at the Battle of the Little Big Horn because of a number of reasons, some his fault, some not. He was foolish because he disobeyed Terry’s orders to scout ahead, not attack. He was sent to find out what was ahead, so that the army that was coming in a few days knew what to expect. He also refused the 2nd Cavalry (another 500 to 600 men), which would have doubled his army, and maybe would have been able to hold on longer. His Indian scouts warned him of the number of Indians, but he ignored them and decided to attack anyway, knowing that he was heavily outnumbered. His men were exhausted (they had traveled 46 kilometers in that one day alone) and their morale was very low, and so they were not mentally prepared for battle. They were not fit to fight. And already outnumbered, Custer split his troops into three, meaning that his forces were very easy to defeat. If he had kept his 650 men in one group, they might have been able to hang on, and avoid total annihilation. He then promised to back up Reno, but decided to attack from the North instead, leaving Reno and his men confused and not knowing what to do. By that time (mid afternoon, extremely hot and dusty) Custer had lost the element of surprise, and so the Indians were prepared for his attack. Custer also expected the Indians to scatter as they had always had done in the past, but they attacked back. But Custer’s downfall was not brought upon him solely by himself, as there were other aspects beyond his knowledge or control. His men were armed with Springfield rifles, where as the Indians had superior Winchesters, which could fire far more quickly. Sitting Bull had a vision that Custer would be defeated. This was a huge moral boost for the Indians, who believed they would win. They were fired up for the battle, and many Indians were out for revenge. Some of Custer’s less experienced men ran, “their knees hit their chins”, some committed suicide, and others surrendered, further weakening his attack. Custer retreated to high ground, only to be outsmarted and outflanked by Crazy Horse, who had come round the back of Custer. Custer was surrounded and crushed, “Our horses hooves would have been enough”.
It was Custer’s last chance for the fame and glory he craved. He ignored all the warnings in his singled minded attempts to wipe out the Indians. The Indians used superior tactics, and outflanked him. He was pumped up, and over-confident. Rather than call him foolish, I would say he was arrogant.
Custer Being Shot
By Th☺mas Parr 1☺E
