Who was the real Custer, and to what extent was he to blame for the defeat of the 7th Cavalry at the Battle of Little BigHorn?

There have been many arguments and variations to why the 7th cavalry were beaten at little bighorn on the 25th June 1876. I am to analyse these and Custer himself to conclude whether it was Custer's fault or whether defeat was out of his control.

In 1876 the Us army dispatched three columns (1800 soldiers) to attack in a co-ordinated fashion. One of which, led by Lt. Colonel George Armstrong Custer, was the 7th cavalry. They all planned to attack Sioux and Cheyenne Indians who had gathered in Montana with the great warrior sitting bull to fight for the right of the land, not for ownership. The seventh cavalry consisted of about 225 soldiers. Due to early arrival, they attacked the camp housing 12,000 native Americans, without the help of the other 600 soldiers and many other reasons, the 7th cavalry were tragically defeated and, not a single soldier under Custer's command survived, even Custer himself did not live. So it is impossible to tell what exactly happened over that short period.

"What happened to Custer and his men is not clear as there were no survivors from his force" this was from the public statement of the president (Ulysses S. Grant) shortly after the battle in June 1876. The source is quite clearly truthful because there are facts and figures to back it's subject up, however it favours Custer's side because it has a sorrowful tone and regretful nature. But could also be said that it is neutral and that he holds respect for the Indians because he didn’t particularly favour Custer for reasons explained later.

Custer was born in New Rumley, Ohio and spent much of his childhood with a half sister in Monroe, Michigan. So from the split of his parents it can be said that Custer from then on, did not have an ordinary life as it was fairly uncommon, so may have caused him to be bullied, making him always look for chances to prove himself. Once he wrote to a former seventh cavalry private with whom he had later served with at the battle of Little Bighorn. "I've been a looser in a way, all my life by rubbing a bit against the angle-or hair-of folks, instead of going with their whims; but I couldn’t go otherwise-'twould be against the grain of myself." This quote is a negative aspect of Custer but he is trying to justify it by suggesting that he rubs against the hair but only because he can't do otherwise. So the wrong decisions in his life maybe explained by this long-term cause of not being able to find other possibilities, however the source could just show Custer searching for sympathy and good luck from this former private.

He enrolled in West Point immediately after he graduated, last in his class, showing that maybe he was not intelligent enough and didn’t work hard enough to be put in command a few years later. Also the fact that he failed in his duty as officer of the guard to stop a fight between two cadets shows this. He was court marshalled and saved from punishment only by a great need for officers with the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861-65. In the war Custer did well, although he always had enormously high casualty rates, through his "fearless aggression" recorded by a historian of that period. This is a negative aspect of his personality and the historian doesn't favour Custer greatly but recognised the fact that this earned Custer great respect from his commanding generals and also kept him in the public eye. " I know of no person more instrumental in bringing about the surrender of the Confederate Army at the end of the Civil War than your gallant husband. General Sheridan in a note to Custer's wife Elizabeth." It favours the side of Custer shown from the great amount of praise. And can act as a negative factor to why it was not Custer's fault because it suggests that he was a good fighter and if so would have known what he was doing and so put up a good fight. It explains how Custer was seen to have been doing a good job during the Civil War and that nothing frightened him. But it goes around the point of him being a good warrior, just that he is aggressive and a harsh leader. So would offer the explanation that Custer was hard on his men so would have marched them into battle after a long ride. Also it is judged on the amount Indians that he killed, not the amount of warriors.

Custer was very self confident, arrogant, big headed and disobedient enabling us to argue that many aspects of the battle were his fault. If this is a true analogy, he would have ignored orders and done anything for as much glory as possible.

But with these down sides, came incredible ambition, as he had always wanted to become a lawyer, causing him to also be bold and brave.

"Brave to the point of idiocy" stated Tim Slessor from the video documentary. It is both positive and negative, as it is a contradiction with irony, because being a historian he would be looking at the facts, but many historians study the evidence and write about their views on it. It backs up that Custer was brave, but that he often took it too far. It is a reason why he may have been defeated because it suggests that no matter the amount of Indians he would have had the bravery to fight them any way, because he knew in his mind he could beet them although he actually had no chance, and his idiocy would not have seen this. Even Low dog (a chief at the Little Bighorn) said " He was a brave warrior and died a brave man." This quote is both positive towards Custer himself and his war efforts so is an argument to back up that it was not his fault and that he was a good fighter. But the quote doesn’t suggest he was a good fighter and bravery may suggest that he was brave to fight the many warriors. It would have caused him to lose the battle so can be seen as his fault, being the one that forced his troops into battle. And it is questionable to whether it was actually said, and whether the definition of brave was overlooked. We know that it could have been called bravery but was in fact glory seeking and being blood thirsty, which can be seen as bravery but only because he was not being cowardly.

Custer made sure that he was in the public eye and so cumulated a lot of followers who admired his work. " A man respected and beloved by his followers, who would freely follow him into the 'jaws of hell'." Written by Mark Kellogg, for the 'New York Herald' correspondent. The source was used in a news paper so could have had the use of promoting places in the army for the public so would have used propaganda. He also was a white American of the period so would have supported his side in the war against the Indians. We know that he was often in the eye of the public. He was very proud of his appearance and had a personal photographer that was always by his side, explaining the fact of there being many photographs of his, capturing him as strong and powerful so can be stated that he was insecure or very shallow and vein. Evidence again of being proud of his appearance is shown in his long blonde hair that would attract attention from a great distance and also his suit, which was tailor made. Making him recognisable in a crowd. He wanted to be known as a gracious and powerful man. The source is also backed up by the point that many of the public signed up to be in his cavalry.

"The honour of his country weighed lightly in the scale against the 'glorious' name of George A Custer. The hardships and dangers to his men as well as the probable loss of life were worthy of but little consideration" this source was stated by Private Theodore Ewart, 7th Cavalry. It is negative and favours the white American side but disagrees with the attitude of his commander. It is reliable, as it is someone that worked along side him throughout his most supposed glorified moments. It backs up the possibility that Custer forced his men into battle, even though they were tired, in order to gain glory for defeating the Indians.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Custer proved to be a less able peacetime leader than wartime commander after the civil war, stationed in Hempstead, Texas. Being seemingly poorly equipped to deal with the problems of disciplining the troops who were citizen soldiers and were anxious to get home, and many of his men held him in low esteem. "A cold blooded, untruthful and unprincipled man, despised by most of his officers" stated by General David Stanly, US Army. The source is a positive factor to the act of Custer being defeated, and is negative towards Custer as a person, so can give an explanation to the fact that Custer was defeated. It suggests that he was not sensitive which may have caused the Indians to hate him even more so had more aggression. But they could have seen it as bravery. Also the factor that he was untruthful backs up the sources that suggest he was innocent such as "I am not impetuous or impulsive……..". It shows that he was probably being untruthful when he said this. However the source isn't completely reliable because although it was stated by someone in the same profession, he was not under Custer's command so didn’t see Custer in action very often and may have concluded it after seeing a small area of his work. As David Stanly was a general, he could have been in competition with Custer to get further promotion, therefore may have said these things to make himself look better.

Adding to Custer's woes was that, with the end of the civil war, the army faced a large-scale reduction in its strength. Many officers and men were forced to leave the service, while others, including Custer, had to accept considerable downgrades in rank. After being demoted to the 5th cavalry he went strait to Washington to complain but was not again promoted, so began to look for other ways in which to fulfil his aspirations. One of which was to take a congressional career in politics. On the 28th of July 1866, he accepted the lieutenant colonelcy of the seventh US cavalry. In March 1867 Custer was to take to the field on his first campaign against the Native Americans. Observers soon noted Custer's self-confidence in his new role, though in fact the regiment achieved little success, in what just became a chase of the Cheyenne and other natives. Custer became very critical of his commanders' methods and was also un-happy about being parted for so long from his wife and was again brought before a court martial for leaving his command without permission and sentenced to a year's suspension from pay and service. From this his disobedience is displayed causing us to believe that he may have performed some disallowed acts at Little bighorn but it also shows a strong form of loyalty to his wife, Libby, and his love for her so displaying his possible loyalty to others. Elizabeth Custer speaking of her husband, "He had a very keen sense of social responsibilities as post commander and believed that our house should be open at all hours to the garrison". This source again shows his loyalty and that he was not selfish even though we have repeatedly seen that he was. The source would back up the point that Custer was not hard on his men and acted to win glory for America not just him. If anyone were to know Custer well it would be Libby, but she would have never seen him at work, and as he loved her dearly she never would have seen a negative part of his personality. She may have also been defending him to make him look better as it would be more believable coming from her than it would Custer if had been accused of something.

But again the call of war relieved him of his sentence before he had been punished. Once more Sheridan had plans to send the seventh into the field against the southern Cheyenne. On the 27th November 1868, Custer and around 800 troops were sent to the freezing banks of Washita River in Oklahoma. Generals Sherman and Sheridan requested the services of Custer whom they had previously battled along side in the civil war and knew that he was 'hot-headed', self confident, brave, skilful, and would obey their orders. " Custer had a flair that caught the eyes of powerful men. Custer made the most extraordinary series of leaps in the history of the U.S Army. Between July 1862 and July 1863 he went from 1st Lieutenant to Brigadier-General. (One of the highest ranks)." D. Nevin. -The Soldiers, 1974. This source is positive towards Custer himself but negative to their defeat. Because although Custer was happy with his promotions, he had only received them from his self publicity, not his great leadership as we know that he was disobedient and often didn't know what he was doing or on the spur of the moment. He was not the best of soldiers and had graduated last in his class. So it explains the defeat in the way that Custer was not ready for such responsibility. He had not gained enough experience and skills needed, he was only given the role because he was in the media and was put across as being great to those who hadn't carefully studied his war efforts. It is a source that is fairly neutral but he focuses on the soldiers more so than the Indians so it is impossible to say what he feels for Indians. It is recognising the fact that Custer didn’t work hard to get to his position but it remarks him for doing so, so is more positive than negative.

Custer agreed to help them in what was later known as The Battle of the River Washita. However, this battle didn’t go as planned and Custer disobeyed orders by following fleeing Indians to another camp, and killing them all. 103 Indians were killed, of which only 11 were warriors and the other 92 were women, children and old men. Also, two officers and 19 men of the U.S. army were killed and three officers and 11 men were wounded. So from this it is possible to state that Custer was very disobedient and a man without honour and pride, just thirsty for blood and glory. Forming part of a long-term cause for the defeat at little BigHorn- that his track record was extremely poor. But the casualties of the army were mainly from a detachment under Major Joel Elliot who Custer had sent in separately when he split the regiment to strike the village, so causing the question of who was to blame.

"I have never met a more enterprising, gallant or dangerous enemy during those four years of terrible war, or a more genial, whole-souled, chivalrous gentleman and friend in peace." Sources given by T.L Rosser, former major General, confederate Army, speaking of Custer during the Civil War. During the Civil war Custer may have actually been a good soldier, however when he was given more power at Little bighorn, it may have gone to his head and he wanted more fame, because we know that he was egotistic and hunted for glory. But the source favours the side of Custer, and there could be many reasons for this. He might want to get back in to the army because we know he is a former major general so may have seen Custer as a way back in. Or he could be being truthful and like Custer from what he had seen of him. However we do not know how informative the source is because he may have just heard about Custer and not have seen his work. We also know that during many of his battles Custer often thought about himself and slaughtered more women and children than warriors just to boost the death count.

However, Custer was greatly praised for his fighting methods against the Natives and the use of the split attack was used by him many more times due to its success, but it was inevitable that this would back fire once the natives saw the repeated use of it. Custer's war tactics worked well for him in some ways, as he took 875 of their horses, and put them to death. Without these and the 1000 buffalo skins, hundreds of pounds of black powder, and all the weapons seized in the fight, the Cheyenne's' ability to make war was reduced considerably. Custer and the seventh cavalry were soon seen as premier Indian fighters, a title, which they held for many years leading up to the battle of Little Bighorn. This explains why many people were shocked by the defeat of the 7th in 1876.

A period of calm continued until the summer of 1874. Custer set out from fort Abraham Lincoln, Dakota territory, and headed for the black hills which were sacred lands of the Sioux people and was protected by treaty after the whites set up special reservations for the Natives, not enabling the whites to go on to it. These reservations were set up by the government to enable the whites to build up America using the best land. This whole idea caused friction between the two cultures, as did the way that they both lived and respected things. However during a geographical study of the land, gold was found. Custer's job was to prevent the rushing public from mining but they didn’t prove successful, despite their presence being illegal. Though some were intercepted by the Sioux and Cheyenne, who killed these people. The Indians refused to give up their hunting grounds, (" one does not sell the land upon which people walk" a quote from Crazy Horse as agreed by him, Red Cloud and Sitting Bull) while the whites ignored the treaty of fort Laramie in 1868 due to their lure for wealth. Conflict was inevitable, as neither culture would back down. Custer in the meantime infuriated U.S Grant with a march testimony on Indian service corruption so his request of taking the seventh cavalry into the field, was denied. Again Custer called upon powerful allies to be allowed to join the regiment. Sheridan and popular disgust of others caused Grant to reverse his decision.

Unaware about what was ahead, Custer reported back to fort Lincoln where he joined General Alfred Terry's command. Their mission was to locate the thousands of Sioux, Cheyenne, and Arapaho- those led by Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and Red Cloud.

The column rode out on 17th May 1876 but it was not until the 15th of June that Major Reno, returning from a scout informed them of their large hostile movement near the RoseBud River. The best course of action would have been to keep all the troops together and either attack in numbers or send out more scouts to find the exact number of Indians they were to face in battle. But the three troops decided that they should attack in the usual successful way so generals Terry and Custer would attack from the west, General Crook would attack from the north and General Gibbon would attack from the East. But the Sioux engaged the forces of General Crook, after a fierce battle, Crook decided to retreat. So as a short-term effect it could be a possibility that the scout was on the Native American side and could have said that there were fewer Indians than thought causing Custer to believe that he could handle them by himself. Or the scout could have told Reno that the Indians knew that they were to attack in around 11 days so to prevent them from getting away, General Custer thought he should speed up. Or the scout could have then turned around and informed the Indians of the attacking plans and when they were to do so. Terry instructed Custer to take the seventh cavalry and follow this trail until the enemy camp was located, then to wait for Gibbon and Terry before attacking the Indians. It was said that on the 24th June Custer's Indian scouts told him of the huge village and that Custer and his men didn’t have enough ammunition to fight so many. But Custer was overly confident and so rejected the new revolving riffles that the Indians actually had, instead he stuck with the single shot guns to make his "victory" look more great. Tim Slessor stated that he had "a general disregard for the Indians capabilities". The source is unlikely to be biased because it is a historian who is on neither side of the battle. But it is written in modern day after much of the information could have changed by continuous word of mouth. Aswell as believing that the 7th Cavalry and him were invincible as did the public of America, he thought that he couldn't lose the battle and had little respect for the Indians and of what they had and daily achieved. Their whole lifestyle being one of these. Their great respect and honour for the men were not at all returned. They were slated because Custer and likes of his person were poorly educated of their life style. He was certain that all he needed was he and Custer's "luck". We know that he even turned down the help of Gibbons 2nd cavalry because he knew he was to win, to back my opinion up.

While Custer pressed forward, Terry's main command was to continue on, with the intention of reuniting on the 26th June for a strike against the hostiles. President Grant had clearly given the army the task of either rounding up the Indians or wiping them out. By a series of day and night marches the command reached the divide between the Rose Bud and the Little BigHorn Rivers. Scouts reported the presence of the encampment, but more information stated that they knew of the army. Custer had 'Officer's Call' and ordered another 3 pronged attack. He divided the regiment into three squadrons, one with five troops under his own control, and two with three troops each under Reno and Benteen, around 600 men in all compared to the large amount of Indians. It was one of the most dreadful of his short term mistakes leading up to the battle to split his troops due to it being a re-occurring war tactic including those of Washita and Sand Creek where many Indians got away, including Chief Black Kettle. And any confrontation would have too little strength to battle with any success. But Bob Murray also argues that this was not decisive. And by this time a village of furried Indians had settled in the valley of the Little Bighorn, consisting of 7000 people and 2000 of these being warriors, homed in over 1000 tipis. Whereas normal Indian camps were around 500 people, so it was a factor out of Custer's control and he wasn’t to know the exact number, but then again he didn't want to know or believe it when he was told. He had forced his men and horses to travel without sleep for 24 hours over the Wolf Mountain to reached the valley of little bighorn a day ahead, instead of circling it, as he was commanded. But this was inevitable because we know that it was in his personality to disobey. And then he expected them to go straight into battle when they were not on top form to do so, whereas he should have sat in this situation until the other troops came. " He was too hard on his men and horses. He changed his mind too often. He was always right. He never conferred with his officers. When he got an idea he had to go." Jacob Horner-7th Cavalry. This is backing up the information that we have seen frequently, therefore suggesting that Custer did force his men into battle after a 24-hour ride to little BigHorn. It is stated by another of Custer's men, so would have known what Custer was like as both a leader and soldier, therefore is an accurate source. But there is a lot of information to back up that Custer was a good fighter, however, few suggest he was a good leader. Information also tells us that he did things on the spur of the moment. So the themes of the source are also backed up making it fairly accurate. But a source to neutralise this one and to give an explanation would be; -" I am not impetuous or impulsive. Everything that I have ever done has been the result of the study that I have made of imaginary military situations that might arise." This is Custer saying that he never takes military action at the last moment and that everything is planned aswell as the results being considered. But the factor that he was proven to make many mistakes and fast decisions obviously without little thought because we know that he relied on "Custer's luck". And that he was labelled untruthful and glory seeking may explain that the source is unlikely to be honest. We also know that he was very egocentric, so would hardly ever have mocked himself as he thought so highly of his person. So the fact that he suggests, is highly likely to be a lie and a cover up for his mistakes. Therefore the source is very biased to a large degree.

He believed that he was always right and his opinion was the only one worth having. He never listened to his troops or commanding officers. We know this because he didn't wait for backup from the other regiments and he purposely took the wrong route. However because we had no eye witness accounts we do not know the actual reason that Custer took the short cut and speeded up his men.

"Some officers were easy going with their troops, but Custer struck me as being aloof and removed." Stated by Sergeant Charles Windolf, 7th cavalry. From the negative aspect of his personality in this quote, it enables us to see that it is impossible to tell why and what was going through his mind on that day. However the source is unreliable even though other sources and facts back it up, because many people during that period agreed with President Grants past decision that he should not be able to go into battle so were negative towards him. Many could have also been bitter about his position and responsibilities.

It seemed to Custer that victory for both the U.S and himself were near and, despite the warnings given by his scouts; Custer ordered an immediate attack on the village. It is reported that Mitch Boyer stated "If we go in there we will never come out" which is un-reliable because there were no survivors to back it up. But Custer was said to have been so heated up in what he thought would be a triumphal moment that he ignored the plea of his tired men and ordered them forward, he also wanted to move quickly as he thought they would try to escape. What he could not have known is that they were determined to stand and fight. He could not have known the true number of warriors and could not have foreseen their fighting capability and especially their modern ammunition, which was supplied by traders. Some Indians were better armed than the cavalrymen were. After Custer had sent Reno and Benteen up to the little Bighorn valley, the Sioux had stopped Major Reno's attack and he retreated across the river, where he took up a defensive position, Benteen and his men then joined Reno. But towards the end of a hard days battle Benteen's now united force escaped when the Indians broke off the fight, they had learned of the other two columns of soldiers were coming towards them, so they fled. They received order to support Custer but were unable because they were under such heavy attack. Custer had repeatedly failed to scout ahead because either he didn’t feel he needed to as the 7th was so superior, or maybe he no longer trusted the scouts. So Custer failed to cross the river because the bluff was to steep and turned back to head for the higher ground. However, Oglala Sioux under Crazy Horse's command, had seen them and swiftly moved downstream and doubled back in a sweeping arc, enveloping Custer and his men in a pincer move. If Custer had scouted ahead he could have known about the bluffs and detoured with out the Indians Knowing. But without the support and reinforcements of Reno and Benteen they were surrounded. Custer had assumed that when the Indians saw the American soldiers coming they would flee but he was incorrect, forming a surprise and a major disadvantage to Custer and his men. The Indians usually declined from fighting and ran because of the ritual beliefs that killing man was wrong. The state of the surrounding land was unknown to the army.

One short term explanation of their loss is touched upon at this point where Custer and his men were trying to climb the mountains to get above the Indians as they were being shot at. Custer and his men also started to fire but because they were not balanced and where trying to keep themselves from falling and accidentally shot each other. It is also said that dew to the dust they also couldn’t see where they were shooting and killed each other in the attempt a shooting the Indians. This is shown from the finds that many of Custer's men were found dead with U.S bullets (their last bullet) as a cause. However this could suggest that they killed themselves because either they wanted a fast way out, or knew that the Indians wouldn't mutilate them or scalp them if they did. Indians only took the scalps of the people they had killed (those who had died bravely in war.)

Aswell as this the Indians also began pouring in gunfire and arrows. They were much better at aiming than Custer's men, because firstly, they relied on good aim in order to kill the buffalo which they needed to survive which they often did while galloping on horse back and this was at stand still. Custer's soldiers where untrained and had only had 6 bullets in total to practice with each year, many did not use all of these. Also they were not experienced Indian fighters as many had recruited through propaganda as Custer was so publicised and photographed, and also through wanting to be certain heroes. So many were not trained in combat at all, Some men even went in to battle never having fired a gun before. Even Custer and the 7th Cavalry had only encountered the Indians once in the ten-year period of 1865-late 1875 on the western plains. From the video "The Truth about Red Clouds War" I achieved the Knowledge that within Custer's army many were alcoholics so were in no fit state to fight. The seventh cavalry was not content or remotely experienced. Tim Slessor stated "to Custer summer campaigning with his favourite scouts was a game". This source is a long term cause of his defeat because it shows that when Custer was supposed to be training his troops and preparing them for battle aswell as getting more people to fight for him he was not being a mature leader. However this may have been because he knew that many people wanted to be in his regiment so he didn’t need to worry about it. Also they didn’t need training because he thought they were fully trained and that the Indians couldn’t fight anyway, also with himself as leader he believed that it was certainty that he would win the battles ahead, because we know of Custer's luck. Also after so much praise received Custer could have become very headstrong so triggered his will to do other things other than what he was supposed to be doing. However it is possible that his instinct was to rest and enable his men to rest in order to prepare for battle instead of practising.

Also the repeated factor that the Indians were armed with the repeating rifles, whereas Custer turned down the Gattling (machine) Gun and instead settled with the Springfield Carbine rifle (a single fire rifle). It is also claimed that the copper bullets in these got stuck and exploded in the men's faces and so could have killed themselves due to the pain or got shot off guard by the Indians. Or it could have killed them straight away. However, Bob Murray argues that this gun was " one of the finest military weapons of all time". This source states that the claim of the copper bullets getting stuck and exploding was impossible due to this fine piece of ammunition. Although there were no eye witness accounts other than the Indians, the guns were still retrievable from those that were left on the battle field which were studied and could still be studied to this day. So it is a likely suggestion especially as the US Army tried to blame the defeat on anything but the cavalry because they were so shocked at the defeat. There is little biased because Bob Murray is a modern day historian, so would not favour either side because the feud is all over nowadays. He would also have evaluated the evidence and drawn his own conclusions, so would have not followed the stories in the white American history books even though much of the information could be true.

Though, the Indians were not used to fighting a pitched battle so this style of fighting was completely unconventional to them, showing the great leadership qualities of Crazy Horse and the immensely difficult battle he put forward. But due to being used to using weapons, the scouts information and knowledge of tactics, many tribes pulling together, trading with white men, having modern ammunition and a strong will to fight for what the believed in, and the fact that Custer and his men had some terrible factors against them (and so many of them) the Natives had the upper hand by far. The battle only lasted around 40 minutes and all 225 of Custer's men were annihilated, and only a further 75 soldiers were killed from the rest of the whole army shortly leading up to the battle of The little BigHorn, such as in Reno and Benteen's troops.

After the battle, the Indians stripped the bodies and mutilated all the uniformed soldiers, believing that the soul of a mutilated body would be forced to walk the earth for all eternity and could not ascend to heaven. Inexplicably, they stripped Custer's body and cleaned it, but did not scalp or mutilate it. He had been wearing buckskins instead of a blue uniform, and some believe that the Indians thought he was not a soldier and so, thinking he was an innocent, left him alone. Because his hair was cut short for battle, others think that he did not have enough hair to allow for a very good scalping. Immediately after the battle, the myth emerged that they left him alone out of respect for his fighting ability, but few participating Indians knew who he was to have been so respectful. Another suggestion was that Custer killed himself like many of the men under him by saving the last bullet, which could be a possible reason because we know that Indians didn't take the scalp if the person had committed suicide. The Most likely of these explanations would be that they didn’t know he was the white leader and by chance had enough scalps so then moved on. Most Indians who told of the battle said they never saw Custer and did not know who killed him- " we did not know until the fight was over that he was the white chief." Stated by Low dog. The source is contradictory because earlier we saw the source that he thought Custer was a brave warrior and died a brave man. However, here we see that he didn’t know who Custer was so could not have known what Custer was like in battle because it is unlikely that he would have been watched by Low Dog during the fast and furious battle, if they didn't know who was the white leader. So either one or both of Low Dog's sources featured are untruthful. And we also know that the Indians hated the US Army so would not have praised their fighting skills or cared who was the leader as long as they won their rights, their land, and had enough scalps to enable the scalped Indians to get to the heavens.

To this day, no one knows the real reason, again because the only eyewitness accounts until the remaining troops arrived, were the Indians. It has been said that the killers of Custer were Rain in the Face, Flat Hip, and Brave Bear. But Red Horse said that an unidentified Santee Warrior killed Custer. It is also unclear to who killed Custer or whether he killed himself, but this may be because the individual warrior Indians wanted to have killed the white leader for rewarding purposes. There may have been a lot of respect given by the other Indians to the killer of Custer so many Indians lied in order to get the title. However, Chief Sitting Bull speaking many years later said, " They tell me I murdered Custer. It is a lie. He was a fool and rode to his death". The source either shows the guilty conscience of Sitting Bull, shown by the way that he didn’t agree with killing other men and the fact that it didn’t change their way of life was a waste of efforts and he regrets it. Or he was being truthful by admitting that he didn’t kill him, unlike some of the other Indians had said about themselves, and that he had no respect for the battle skills of Custer. But nearly all of the sources are un reliable because of translation difficulties the translators faced so may have interpret what the Indians said wrongly, and that there were few eye witnesses. The sources that originate from white American history books because the defeat didn’t look good to them so may have covered many of the US Army's errors and made it out to be the fault of the Indians. 1876 ironically also marked the one hundredth anniversary of American independence.

Many of the sources that favour and praise Custer are marginally more accurate than those which are negative towards him especially those written by the people that were on the side of the white Americans. They tried to make Custer out to be a good warrior and that it wasn’t the army's fault that they lost, as they were so shocked at the seventh cavalry's defeat.

I both agree and disagree that Custer was to blame for the defeat at little bighorn. Custer made many mistakes that could have been avoided if he had overlooked his status and took advice from others. I feel that General George Custer was a ruthless and ambitious man who risked both his men and himself in an attempt to win glory for himself, as he hungered so greatly for it. But Custer was also courageous, patriotic and had the potential for being a great military leader with his selfishness put aside. Custer's blunders cost him his life, but gained him everlasting fame, which is all he wanted. I feel that it was Custer's fault more than other factors out of his control but only because if he had had back up they still would have lost because the Indians had wanted to win more- they had had enough after trying to play fairly. The Indians had more to lose than the White men such as their religious mountains and their conventional way of living, as opposed to a bit more gold (material things) for the white Americans. So the natives had more skill and ambition, which could never have been defeated with the great number who shared this feeling.

By Samantha Fulcher 11MNJ