# The Truth About General Custer



## fmdog44 (May 30, 2021)

No one knows but one  account from a Lakota member I watched on youtube said he had one hole in his chest and one in his forehead. He had short hair and was not wearing his buckskin coat The Lakotas took nothing from his corpse because he committed suicide making him a coward and if you took from a coward you will act as one. I am guessing the short hair an absence of his buckskin coat was his idea of making the warriors believe he was not Custer. Apparently many soldiers committed suicide when they knew they had no chance of survival.  Apparently there were about 7,000 Indians. This account also claims there were seven tribes total in the battles at the Little Big Horn area and four soldiers commanders.


----------



## jerry old (May 30, 2021)

custer was inept, but his decisions not only resulted in his death but the death of his troops-idiot


----------



## jujube (May 31, 2021)

When we went to the Little Big Horn battle site, we took the tour sponsored by the hospitality department of the local reservation's community college.  

The narration was from the Native American viewpoint. Very, very informative.


----------



## Mr. Ed (May 31, 2021)

I believe history, history is true, history never lies. trust history


----------



## Pepper (May 31, 2021)

You believe Herodotus?  Not that he lied but he must have embellished.  Is your belief satirical?


----------



## Keesha (May 31, 2021)

Mr. Ed said:


> I believe history, history is true, history never lies. trust history


It depends whose history you are hearing. 
Everyone has their own personal perspective or their own truth.


----------



## fmdog44 (May 31, 2021)

The Indians kept no written record of anything therefore word-of-mouth rules not forgetting half of what has been written about our old west history is lies.


----------



## Gaer (May 31, 2021)

Keesha said:


> It depends whose history you are hearing.
> Everyone has their own personal perspective or their own truth.


I'm not sure the Sioux descendant's stories are correct.  I have some extremely old books with accounts of the battle and they don't hold with his stories.  (I grew up in Custer County)  
I've always held the Sioux warriors in the highest esteem.  They were handsome, proud, brave and highly evolved IMO.
I wonder why he would find it necessary to demean Custer's legacy?


----------



## Murrmurr (May 31, 2021)

jerry old said:


> custer was inept, but his decisions not only resulted in his death but the death of his troops-idiot


Based on stuff I've read, Custer was an egomaniac.


----------



## fmdog44 (May 31, 2021)

Gaer said:


> I'm not sure the Sioux descendant's stories are correct.  I have some extremely old books with accounts of the battle and they don't hold with his stories.  (I grew up in Custer County)
> I've always held the Sioux warriors in the highest esteem.  They were handsome, proud, brave and highly evolved IMO.
> I wonder why he would find it necessary to demean Custer's legacy?


First there were many tribes not just the Sioux as portrayed in stupid movies that engaged the troops. Some say there were seven different tribes waging war. Maybe we demean Custer because we can and rarely has anything glorifying the man been written by anyone.


----------



## Keesha (May 31, 2021)

Gaer said:


> I'm not sure the Sioux descendant's stories are correct.  I have some extremely old books with accounts of the battle and they don't hold with his stories.  (I grew up in Custer County)
> I've always held the Sioux warriors in the highest esteem.  They were handsome, proud, brave and highly evolved IMO.
> I wonder why he would find it necessary to demean Custer's legacy?


I hold the Sioux warriors in the highest esteem also but I don’t really know the story since I wasn’t there. I also wonder about many history books and how accurate they are. Like; was Christopher Columbus the first person to discover America but what about the Vikings there first? Plus what about natives of the land they didn’t know about? Yes off topic somewhat. Lol 
A lot of stuff is written disregarding other perspectives which lessens it’s credibility.


----------



## Pepper (May 31, 2021)

According to this, Custer was a stalwart officer surrounded by corrupt idiots:


----------



## Murrmurr (May 31, 2021)

Keesha said:


> I hold the Sioux warriors in the highest esteem also but I don’t really know the story since I wasn’t there. I also wonder about many history books and how accurate they are. Like; was Christopher Columbus the first person to discover America but weren’t the Vikings there first? Plus what about natives of the land they didn’t know about?
> A lot of stuff is written disregarding other perspectives which lessens it’s credibility.


History is complex. Children's text books simplify everything, and it's true that sometimes they flat out get it wrong or purposefully leave a bunch of stuff out, especially if it reflects poorly on the early colonists, citizens, policies and government.

Columbus wasn't the first to "discover" America, but as far as we know he was the first to proclaim it in the name of the king; as belonging to Spain. That's what that's all about....an official land-grab.


----------



## Tish (May 31, 2021)

fmdog44 said:


> The Lakotas took nothing from his corpse because he committed suicide making him a coward and if you took from a coward you will act as one.


Wow, I had no idea about that belief.


----------



## Aunt Bea (May 31, 2021)

Here is an account that supports the suicide theory.

https://nevada-today.com/did-custer-commit-suicide/


----------



## Keesha (May 31, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> History is complex. Children's text books simplify everything, and it's true that sometimes they flat out get it wrong or purposefully leave a bunch of stuff out, especially if it reflects poorly on the early colonists, citizens, policies and government.
> 
> Columbus wasn't the first to "discover" America, but as far as we know he was the first to proclaim it in the name of the king; as belonging to Spain. That's what that's all about....an official land-grab.


An official land grab. Yes.
The reason I don’t believe a lot of history is because it’s written in a biased manner for reasons other than providing true history.
I felt sorry for the Indians.
https://www.history.com/news/little-bighorn-battle-facts-causes


----------



## Llynn (May 31, 2021)

"Son of the Morning Star" IMHO is among the best books about Custer and the battle.


----------



## Lewkat (May 31, 2021)

Ancient history is largely oral and depending on how one hears it told is what we wind up with.  Interpreting ancient writings is also a hit and miss situation, but we have to use some common sense in what to believe based on the environment of the day, etc.  First of all, Custer was far too young to be a general for heaven's sake.


----------



## fmdog44 (May 31, 2021)

The verbal account I saw the Native Indian said it was obvious some of the soldiers shot each other so they would not be tortured. Also there were so many arrows flying many Indians were found to be killed arrows. Whatever happened I love the Old West history and all phases of it. I would not like to live in those days but I love to read about them. Wyatt Earp is one of the most interesting figures of those days.


----------



## Buckeye (May 31, 2021)

And if you are ever in lovely Monroe, MI, you will want to visit the Custer Statue

Custer Statue

Yes, I've seen it.  Custer was a West Point graduate (1861), as is my son.  As I recall , Custer was last in his class, making him the class "goat".


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 1, 2021)

there is so much wrong in this post I aint even gonna try ! ! !


----------



## Keesha (Jun 1, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> there is so much wrong in this post I aint even gonna try ! ! !


Which one? .. lol


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 1, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> there is so much wrong in this post I aint even gonna try ! ! !


Like the rest of us you weren't there so you don't know either.


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 1, 2021)

number one.. custer was not a general at the little big horn!
and why even today people still think columbus discovered america is beyond me!!


----------



## Verisure (Jun 2, 2021)

fmdog44 said:


> No one knows but one  account from a Lakota member I watched on youtube said he had one hole in his chest and one in his forehead. He had short hair and was not wearing his buckskin coat The Lakotas took nothing from his corpse because he committed suicide making him a coward and if you took from a coward you will act as one. I am guessing the short hair an absence of his buckskin coat was his idea of making the warriors believe he was not Custer. Apparently many soldiers committed suicide when they knew they had no chance of survival.  Apparently there were about 7,000 Indians. This account also claims there were seven tribes total in the battles at the Little Big Horn area and four soldiers commanders.


This makes a whole lot more sense than the official version. Aren't they always?


----------



## Verisure (Jun 2, 2021)

fmdog44 said:


> Like the rest of us you weren't there so you don't know either.


Agreed. To say it is wrong means you think you know what is right. And well ....... I'm a-gonna' tell ya' something you may not already know. It were Jack Crabb who done went and put down the most reliable account what it was that happened over there at the Little Big Horn. And that's a dad-gum fact!
​


----------



## Keesha (Jun 2, 2021)

Verisure said:


> Agreed. To say it is wrong means you think you know what is right. And well ....... I'm a-gonna' tell ya' something you may not already know. It were Jack Crabb who done went and put down the most reliable account what it was that happened over there at the Little Big Horn. And that's a dad-gum fact!
> ​


And you know this because you ‘were’ there?  lol


----------



## Chet (Jun 2, 2021)

fmdog44 said:


> The verbal account I saw the Native Indian said it was obvious some of the soldiers shot each other* so they would not be tortured*. Also there were so many arrows flying many Indians were found to be killed arrows. Whatever happened I love the Old West history and all phases of it. I would not like to live in those days but I love to read about them. Wyatt Earp is one of the most interesting figures of those days.


Torturing of defeated enemies was a common practice for Native Americans on the east coast as well. I read several books on the Battle of Wyoming in Pennsylvania. (The original Wyoming was not the state of that name.) The worst account of torture I read was to cut open the abdomen of a prisoner and tie one end of the large intestine to a tree and then chase the prisoner around the tree. Some were simply burned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wyoming


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 2, 2021)

custer may well have been an egomaniac, but he was quite well respected by his men during his service in the civil war. But like many people found himself in trouble, courtmartialed for wrong doing and dismissed from the army. Later reinstated and sent out west where he again did well this time againist the american indians.
The references about custer I read many years ago were provided by sacagawea family members. They relate the fact that custer had taken an indian woman to bed and thus considered to have been married to her. after the battle at the little big horn custer was about to be scalped and his bodied ravaged but sisters of the woman he had bedded stopped this because they considered him family. I dont believe custer committed suicide but he may have asked one of his men to kill him, and since as noted above I was not there so officially I dont know! I have been to that battle field years ago! and there is a lot more to the tale!!!!


----------



## Alligatorob (Jun 2, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> there is a lot more to the tale!!!!


I am sure there is, but no one is ever likely to know the whole truth.  The only survivors were not historians so we can't expect a lot of accuracy in many of the accounts.  About all that can be done is to piece together what is known to try and glean a story that is at least consistent with the known facts.  Committing suicide or asking one of his men to assist may well make sense, he likely would have assumed capture would mean a long and painful death.

I also feel bad about what we did to the Native Americans, but given history and human nature its was probably and inevitable outcome.  Even today similar things happen, perhaps on a different scale and the details always vary, but its happening.  In the US today those us of European descent are slowly being displaced by folks from other parts of the world.  Fortunately its peaceful (mostly), but the end result will probably be similar.  We will be an ever shrinking minority of the population soon.  Not saying it good or bad, it just is.

Of course Columbus did not "discover" America, that happened, for humans, many thousands of years earlier.  However his exploration was a big part of what first opened the Americas to European settlement and exploitation.  Still worthy of note, I don't think we should consider him hero or villain, just a part of history.  He does help mark the beginning of an important era.  Not sure it he worthy of an official holiday though.


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 2, 2021)

I dont call them native americans since there were already a peoples here, instead I prefer to call them american indians, and if you really indulged yourself into the research you will find the "indians" did to other "indians" a lot worse than what the "white" man ever did!!


----------



## Alligatorob (Jun 3, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> I dont call them native americans since there were already a peoples here


What is this?  Who came to the Americas first?


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 3, 2021)

ancestral lineage shows that the current population of american indian came after the clovis people.


----------



## Alligatorob (Jun 3, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> ancestral lineage shows that the current population of american indian came after the clovis people.


Thanks, did not know that.  Do we know what happened to the Clovis people?


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 3, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> I dont call them native americans since there were already a peoples here, instead I prefer to call them american indians, and if you really indulged yourself into the research you will find the "indians" did to other "indians" a lot worse than what the "white" man ever did!!


They were natives to this land and the name of this land is America therefore....


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 3, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> number one.. custer was not a general at the little big horn!
> and why even today people still think columbus discovered america is beyond me!!


He was always referred to as "the general" because he rose to the rank of major general during the civil war. His last rank was Lt. colonel


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 3, 2021)

fmdog44 said "They were natives to this land and the name of this land is America therefore...."

Definition of native (Entry 2 of 2) 1 : one born or reared in a particular place. 2a : an original or indigenous inhabitant. b : something indigenous to a particular locality. 3 : a local resident especially : a person who has always lived in a place as distinguished from a visitor or a temporary resident.

thusly  according to fmdog44 since I was born here in 'america' I am a native american... hi ya hi ya woo ya


----------



## Pepper (Jun 3, 2021)

Reminds me of a song, don't know why, But


----------



## Pepper (Jun 3, 2021)

*


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 3, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> fmdog44 said "They were natives to this land and the name of this land is America therefore...."
> 
> Definition of native (Entry 2 of 2) 1 : one born or reared in a particular place. 2a : an original or indigenous inhabitant. b : something indigenous to a particular locality. 3 : a local resident especially : a person who has always lived in a place as distinguished from a visitor or a temporary resident.
> 
> thusly  according to fmdog44 since I was born here in 'america' I am a native american... hi ya hi ya woo ya


No Einstein you have it backwards and  you are not a native but you might make a fine sqaw. Oh, and thank you for the C & P definition of "native".


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 3, 2021)

well okay then how about websters
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/native
and if I would make a fine squaw would you be my beyatch!!


----------



## 911 (Jun 3, 2021)

I don’t know much about General Custer, but if you want to talk about the Civil War and especially the battles at Chancellorsville and Gettysburg, you’ve come to the right place. I am not a CW historian, but living close to G’burg, I have studied the war for many years and decided to also include the battle at Chancellorsville.


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 3, 2021)

911... my dads side of the family is from west virginia...apparently at the battle of the woods I lost a great great uncle who was shot in the foot and developed gangrene and died...I also lost a great great uncle in a pow camp in ohio from a childhood disease of some sort.....


----------



## Alligatorob (Jun 3, 2021)

My great great great grandfather was a Confederate in Picket's Charge, and one of the few to make it up the hill and survive.  He spent the rest of the war in an Ohio POW camp.  He went to the 50th reunion of the battle and took my grandfather with him, who was about 20 at the time.  I grew up hearing those stories over and over again.  Here is his Wikitree page: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Burtchaell-141 

He is my most recent immigrant ancestor, coming from Ireland in the 1850s.  All others were here well before 1800.  Don't feel like that makes me a "Native American" in the aboriginal sense, but yes I am native to this land, and feel no attachment to any other.


----------



## chic (Jun 4, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> number one.. custer was not a general at the little big horn!
> and why even today people still think columbus discovered america is beyond me!!


That's right. He had been demoded to colonel. IDK whether Custer's men commited suicide. I'm sure some did rather than risk capture. There were less than 300 men vs maybe 7,000 Indians of various tribes!   Talk about being outnumbered.

But, let's not forget, Custer was probably the worst General in military history.


----------



## Ken N Tx (Jun 4, 2021)

My GG Grandfather survived 3 years of the Civil War..


----------



## 911 (Jun 4, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> 911... my dads side of the family is from west virginia...apparently at the battle of the woods I lost a great great uncle who was shot in the foot and developed gangrene and died...I also lost a great great uncle in a pow camp in ohio from a childhood disease of some sort.....


Well now, that's interesting. There are various lists on the internet of who died at G'burg. If it's not there, I think that you can enter the name yourself. The woods that you refer to, do you know the name? There are a few, but the most notable one is Pitzer's Woods, which is located on Seminary Ridge and was a bloody site to behold on 7/3/1863. 

For information purposes only: A lot of men, like thousands of men, died from gangrene after being shot. There wasn't any penicillin at the time, so all they could do was to keep the wounds clean and give the injured morphine for the pain. Many of these victims had to have their limbs amputated to survive. 

We have to keep in mind that little to nothing was known about keeping medical instruments clean and sterilized. Infections could also come from dirty instruments. Back then, medics knew nothing about boiling water to sterilize their instruments, including such things as knives and saws for operations and amputations. Cut a leg off with a dirty saw to help prevent gangrene from killing the injured man and they may die anyway from Sepsis due to a dirty saw. Doesn't sound fair, does it?  

Each year on 7/1-7/3 the Reenactment of the Battles take place. It's something to see, especially if you have never seen it before. The battle that I find most interesting and exciting is Pickett's Charge. It only lasted about an hour, but had a devastating effect on the South's ability to win the G'burg battles. It was after this battle that Lee decided to withdraw his troops and go back down south and to never invade the North again.

It was 4 months later that President Lincoln gave his famous Gettysburg Address at the new National Cemetery. Years back, my wife and I took a train ride, which followed the path Lincoln took on his way to G'burg to give his Address to the Nation. I think Lincoln's train went faster than ours did. I would bet my house that we didn't go over 15 mph the whole ride.


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 4, 2021)

911 I stand corrected after some research I found that I had misquoted my info... it was the battle of the wildernes of which I speak


----------



## fmdog44 (Jun 4, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> well okay then how about websters
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/native
> and if I would make a fine squaw would you be my beyatch!!


You first then I'll call you


----------



## 911 (Jun 4, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> 911 I stand corrected after some research I found that I had misquoted my info... it was the battle of the wildernes of which I speak


No problem. I remember reading about this battle because the hero and considered the best General at the battle of G’burg was General Meade who along with General Grant took on Lee’s army. I think that it was the first battle where Grant and Lee fought it out and no winner was ever declared.


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 5, 2021)

so much of the history of the south was lost during the civil war because the union soldiers burned the courthouses down destroying all the records.. the best source of lineage comes from family bibles where many families kept records of births/deaths.


----------



## cdestroyer (Jun 6, 2021)

What is the proper terminology: Indigenous, Indigenous Peoples, Native American, or American Indian?
Generally, Indigenous refers to those peoples with pre-existing sovereignty who were living together as a community prior to contact with settler populations, most often – though not exclusively – Europeans. Indigenous is the most inclusive term, as there are Indigenous peoples on every continent throughout the world – such as the Sami in Sweden, the First Nations in Canada, Mayas in Mexico and Guatemala, and the Ainu in Japan – fighting to remain culturally intact on their land bases. Indigenous Peoples refers to a group of Indigenous peoples with a shared national identity, such as “Navajo” or “Sami,” and is the equivalent of saying “the American people.” Native American and American Indian are terms used to refer to peoples living within what is now the United States prior to European contact. American Indian has a specific legal context because the branch of law, Federal Indian Law, uses this terminology. American Indian is also used by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget through the U.S. Census Bureau. Whenever possible, it is best to use the name of an individual’s particular Indigenous community or nation of people; for example, “Tongva,”  “Tataviam” and “Chumash” are the Indigenous Peoples of the Los Angeles area, and they are also “American Indian,” “Native American,” and “Indigenous.”


----------



## ohioboy (Jun 12, 2021)

cdestroyer said:


> Native American and American Indian are terms used to refer to peoples living within what is now the United States prior to European contact. American Indian has a specific legal context because the branch of law, Federal Indian Law, uses this terminology.


The Bureau of Indian Affairs lists 574 federally recognized Tribes.


----------

