Custer as a commander

[dave]

Among Custer's various traits was one of indifference to others' sufferings and discomforts. Custer cared about Custer and a select circle of others. Not many leaders are successful when they are indifferent to the well being of his staff, troops, personnel or what ever group they lead. It is hard to get the very best from people when they sense a complete lack of interest in their lives and affairs. Many of the posters on the other boards can see only the faults of Reno and Benteen, which are many, but make excuses for Custer.

I have no experience as a soldier but I did head an administrative department and worked with professionals and students. In a sense my professionals would have been the regular army soldiers, both officer and enlisted, and the students to be the volunteers in the 7th. You have to be consistent and honest in how you lead and make allowances for the lack of knowledge of the students/volunteers and provide the necessary training. Montrose has pointed out repeatedly this did not occur and the 7th was the worst in the army. Once you loose the respect of your people it is extremely difficult to lead them successfully. 

GAC fought a battle against the Indians by shedding soldiers as he proceeded north towards the strength of the enemy kinda like a kid stripping on his way into the surf at the beach. Starting with 12 companies Custer ended up making the fight with one company and a few stragglers. I fail to see the wisdom of his actions and I am not alone. Custer's apologists have made the case that GAC was anticipating his subordinates to know his plans and respond accordingly and they failed him. 

Here we are almost 140 years later attempting to understand the actions and decisions of a self absorbed man who felt he was the center of the universe. He was an attention grabber at least from West Point to the end of his life.
Regards
Dave

[quincannon]

And Dave your post should be ample evidence that leadership is not the exclusive domain of the soldier or politician. It must exist in any walk of life. It must be present at IBM as well as behind the counter at Burger King. It is the means that allows human kind to progress and succeed.

The answers to what happened at LBH are not found in a book or in the classroom at some military academy or staff college. Walk into MacDonald's see if it functions well. Then walk into some hole in the wall dive.  You know the one with the cockroaches crawling out of your sandwich, the bath room that has not been cleaned since JFK was president, run by the guy who has more grease stains than white on his apron, who is currently bitching about lack of customers. Then ask yourself why Ronald MacDonald succeeds and Bozo the Clown fails.

[yanmacca]

Maybe it’s like Montrose said, that Custer had recently bought a book about Napoleon and after some careful study, decided to play the clever bugger and do some fancy manoeuvring for a change, let’s face it he probably had an idea that this campaign may be his last as a field commander and thought “what the hell” I will go out in a bang and show em all just how good I really am.
But unlucky for him Sitting Bull had a copy of Wellingtons “how to beat Napoleon” in his tepee.

Yan.

[Beth]

Custer and Napoleon share a lot of the same traits so I can see why Custer would identify with him and want to model himself that way.

Sitting Bull though probably read about Wellington when he was at West Point though. 

Funny thing about Custer and his fans--I suspect that many of them would absolutely hate him as a boss.  They are in love with the Custer myth, probably not the man.

I wonder though was Custer unique as a commander post ACW or was he fairly typical?

[mac]

I would like to see this thread filled out a bit, as QC suggested in one of the early posts, by going back to the ACW and looking at when Custer actually did take command, as opposed to follow orders.
For example his charge against Stuart at Gettysberg which I had thought was on his own initiative but I now find this
"Gregg again ordered one of Custer’s units, the 1st Michigan Cavalry, to charge, and, with Custer at their head crying, “Come on you Wolverines!” their charge split the Confederate line in two."
Clearly he was following orders.
I do not mean to diminish his achievement at all!
But ask where in the ACW did he actually exercise full command, making tactical decisions?
Cheers

[quincannon]

Mac: The histories are full of such tales of Custer getting out and front and leading. What is absent from all I have read is Custer sitting down with his staff and subordinate commanders and planning an operation. Either he did not, or no one bothered to write it down, so we can make an analysis of his true worth as a commander.

Every commander is a planner at some level, just as every commander follows orders from some level. The commander though is the one that can receive an order, extract the portion that is his responsibility, plan with his subordinates how he is going to accomplish what has become their portion, then execute it with a minimum of supervision from above.

In short any dumb ass can get on a horse, draw his sabre, get out in front of a regiment, brigade, or division, and yell charge at the top of his lungs. A commander both plans how it is done then executes it.

Don't think you will find any examples of Custer making any operational decisions, nor ever operating without very close supervision. Yelling charge is a tactical decision.

A guy who fights with a knife in an alley does not need to be very bright. Hell he does not need to even know how to get in the alley. Commanders know how to get to the alley, know how many knife fighters to send in and how to array them, then knows how to control the fight.

[deadwoodgultch]

I guess we get the "point", you sure know how to "stick it" to a guy.

[quincannon]

Here in the high desert Tom we refer to George as NDTBFer. You know my phone number if you need said reference defined. This is a family affair here.

[dave]

QC
Needle? Why you rascal you!
Regards
Dave

[deadwoodgultch]

Try it with an arachnid!

[deadwoodgultch]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I have a quote from one of Custer's orderly's. The gentleman's name is Theodore Ewert, private 7th Cavalry, he was GAC's orderly and trumpeter in 1874 during the Black Hills expedition. First a wee bit about Mr. Ewert, he was born in Prussia in 1847, migrated, with his family to Chicago in 1857. He enlisted in the Cavalry at 14 and eventually served as a 2nd Lt. of Artillery. Then he served in the 36th infantry from 1867 until he was discharged 2 years later as a corporal. He joined the 7th cavalry in 1871. The quote is from his journal, It was Ewert's opinion, that it was Custer's goal "to gain a star with fresh laurels" from this expedition. I confess here that he had a rather low opinion officers in general, the government treatment of treaties, and Indians in general. Seemed to be negative about everything, but baseball, and he seemed to like Benteen because of it. He was gone from the 7th before the LBH.

Regards,
Tom

PS and I got it for free, www.alibris.com/Private-Theodore-Ewerts-diary-of-the-Black-Hills-expedition-of-1874-Theodore-Ewert/book/5349796

[deadwoodgultch]

A tad more about Ted. www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GSln=Ewert&GSfn=Theodore&GSby=1847&GSbyrel=in&GSdyrel=all&GSob=n&GRid=90685301&df=all&

[dave]

It has become apparent to me that George Custer is one of the most divisive figures in American history. His admirers were generally those members of his "inner circle" and enlisted men who had ridden with him during the War from 1861-1865. His family, primarily his wife Libbie, were the prime defenders of his career and accomplishments. She spent 50 plus years attempting to silence and curtail any and all efforts, in her opinion, to besmirch and or detract from the mythical figure she had created. Only after her death in 1933 did the real George become clearer.

Custer to this day is still is a source of discussion, praise, worship, denigration, love and admiration almost 140 years after his death. This to me begs the question, if Custer had not died on a Montana hillside with his entire command of 5 companies, would we be discussing his career and actions today? I suspect not.
Regards
Dave

[yanmacca]

He was well known in the USA and even started to write articles (under the name nomad I think), I suppose at the time his civil war record gave him a high status, but out side the states were his war record is not so well recorded, he is best known for the massacre that occurred in 1876.

That record was highlighted in such films as "they died with their boots on" and "Custer of the west" and this elevated his profile even more, I must say that only for TDWTBO, I would never have heard of him, and would have stuck to reading about British generals like the excellent William Slim and his classic campaign to recapture Burma from the Japanese

Yan.

[Beth]

I agree Dave--but I am unsure if Custer's fame is actually from LBH or from the efforts of Libbie and his friends to make sure that Custer was remembered and remembered as a heroic American Icon. It would be good to look at his Civil War legacy and compare it to his time in the 7th.

This might be a question on how the command structure worked but was Custer ever in a position to be involved in planning a campaign strategy or was he always told where he needed to be and what he needed to do by commanders higher up the food chain? Was Custer ever just given free rein--like JEB Stuart had around the time of Gettysburg? And if not would the difference based on Custer's ability or because of the difference in style of command between the North and South. (I'm not sure if what I am asking makes sense)

I suspect that during the ACW Custer was able at his job and thrived in the environment--they must have been heady times for a man who professed he loved battle. His life in the post war army must have felt stifling in comparison.