a2 Hitory - BLBH Essay

8/11/2019 a2 Hitory - BLBH Essay

1/4

Isabella Gazi 13AO

Leadership was the main reason for the defeat of General Custer at the Battle of Little Big Horn

1876. How far do you agree with this statement?

The quality of leadership bestowed upon the American soldiers fighting in the Battle of Little Big

Horn no doubt would have played a pivotal role in defining their fates. However, to say that

leadership was the most important reason for General Custers defeat would be doing a great

injustice to the more-than-competent and skilled members of the army as the failure of this

particular battle extends far beyond poor leadership.

General Custer (also known as the Boy General for attaining the status of General in the Union

Army at the mere age of 23) with his record for never having lost a single battle was chosen to lead

the operation, although his generalship cannot go unfaulted.

Custers generalship has been criticised by both historians and colleagues of his. To start with, many

people claim that Custer disobeying the instructions of his commanding officer, General Alfred Howe

Terry (who had decades of experience) was his first major downfall. Terry informed and warnedCuster about the dangers of crossing Wolf Mountainsomething which Custer not only ordered his

men to do on June 25th

1876, but to do so with great urgency and immediacy.

However, others claim that it is unfair to criticise Custer for making this decision. Firstly, Custer knew

that because his men had been spotted by some of the native Americans, they absolutely had to

make the move to cross Wolf Mountain otherwise the tribe would flee (and it had already taken the

7th

cavalry a month to find the Native Americans) or prepare for battle, advantageously giving them

more time to prepare than the army would have done. Moreover, in his orders, Terrywho had

faith in Custers strategies and tactics - granted the Boy General permission to use his own

judgement should circumstances warrant a change in planof which they most certainly did.

There was also a hint of arrogance to Custers entire approach to the war as he brought along __

family members and a newspaper reporter to the battle, presumably to show off and have the

glories of the Americans documented for all to see. It is possible that his slightly pompous attitude

may have led to his downfall, although this would be an unfair claim to make. Custers assumption

that the 7th

cavalry would prevail was based on entirely logical reasoning; he himself had never lost a

battle, the Native Americans weaponry was more primitive (and thus, by presumption, less

effective) and they were outnumbered. This supposed air of arrogance is unlikely to have affected

Custers strategies and tactics, and there must be a better explanation for the cavalrys resounding

defeat.

On the other hand, Custers decision to dividethe 7th

Cavalry into 4 different sections was one that

turned out the be problematicthis division allowed the Native Americans to be defeated one by

one, as opposed to as one large army which may have proved to be advantageous. Benteen thought

that this division of labour would prove to be costly and he was rightit cost Custer and 267 of his

soldiers their lives.

However, once again it would not be fair to criticise Custer for thisdividing up the force and

creating a pincer movement (/enveloping the flank) is a standard military procedure which is still

used in many armies to this day. Other pragmatic problems prevented the pincer movement forming

as planned, and so it is unfair to blame this aspect of Custers generalship for the loss.


2/4

Isabella Gazi 13AO

If the leadership at the Battle of Little Big Horn didnt lead to its defeat, then what did? Many claim

that the communication to and from the cavalry members is what failed the Americans but how fair

a judgement is this to make?

Visual communication for many soldiers had been impaired from an early point during the battle2

miles away from the Custer battle at Weir point, soldiers tried to observe the events of the battle to

no avail for a major dust cloud was impairing their vision. This meant that the soldiers could not rely

on visual communication and so they could not rely on their sensessomething that is vital on the

battlefield. However, it is important to note that this minor setback that had little impact on the

remainder of the battle is not a satisfactory explanation for the American defeat.

The poor standard of written communication may have impacted the course of the battlewhen

Custer sent a note over to Benteen, the ambiguity of the written message confused Benteen who in

turn was unsure what to prioritisemaking a quick arrival to the scene of the battle or delivering

the ammunition. His decision to deliver the ammunition as opposed to making a swift journey to the

scene proved to be fatal for many of the soldiers in the 7thcavalry and so communication (or lack

thereof) is of paramount importance in terms of leading to the defeat of the US Cavalry at Little Big

Horn. However, it is also important to remember that all of the battles that the cavalry fought in

prior to Little Big Horn were all plagued by the communication difficulties, and yet all of Custers

battles managed to be resounding successes.

Lastly, the messenger who Custer had sent over to Benteen to deliver the note was John Martini, an

Italian immigrant who only spoke broken English. When Benteen questioned him on the events at

the hill, Martini said they skeddaddlin which, to Benteen, meant that the Native Americans were

fleeing and that the Americans had the upper hand, and so Benteen believed that he could afford to

wait for the ammunition before making his way over there. This miscommunication error

undoubtedly changed the course of the battle.

Whilst both the leadership decisions and the communicative facilities were pivotal in determining

the fate of the battle, communication most definitely played a greater role in the American forces

demise. Many of the leadership decisions that have been called into question were impaired by lack

of instant and reliable communication methods e.g. had Custers men been able to communicate

with one another instantaneously, the decision to divide the cavalry up into groups of 3 regiments

wouldnt have faced such criticism. Furthermore, it was the miscommunication errors that were

most costly to the warCusters mens chances of survival would probably have been rather high

had they all been able to execute their given orders to their best abilities. When looking at aspects of

the battle such as Major Reno being unaware that Custers men werent following his, or Renos

withdrawal to the woods, it is important to note that the fast-past, ever-changing nature of warfare

wasnt to blame for the Americans defeat but rather the inability to confer with the other groups

and amend the existing strategic decisions, and so communication (or the lack thereof) was the main

reason for the defeat of General Custers forces at the Battle of Little Big Horn.


3/4

Isabella Gazi 13AO

- Shade of arroganceBoy General, first at age 23, the youngest general in the Union army

Hired a reporter to come with him

- Hammer and Anvil tactic

-

US Dept of the interior bureau of Indian affairs estimated 1000 native American warriorsin

reality this was 5000

- Believed that the village would scatter to protect women + children (is it fair to blame him

for this?). This timeIndians had nowhere to scatter tostayed and fought.

Crossing Wolf Mountain (was Custer disobeying Terry?)

Dividing the 7th

Cavalry into 4 sections (Benteen thought this a bad idea)

Moving away from Reno (without informing Reno)

Not crossing the river & setting up a defensive position on Greasy Grass Ridge

MAJOR RENO:

Told he would be supported but unaware Custer was not following him (depends upon your

interpretation of supported)

Withdrew to the cotton woods

Panic to Reno Hill

Ordered the dig in at Reno Hill (wounded)

Denied Captain Weir (who tried anyway)

CAPTAIN BENTEEN:

Thought the dividing of the command a risk

Abandoned his area of the mission to rejoin the others

Interpretation of Martini message

Saved Reno on Reno Hill

Supported Reno in denying Captain Weir

COMMUNICATION:

-

Visual: Soldiers observe the Custer battle from Weir point. At this distance of about 2 miles

all that could be seen was a dust cloud. Frequently the soldiers were out of visual comm..


4/4

Isabella Gazi 13AO

-

Auditory: Bugle calls were used as signals. No help arrived. Sound carries but one needs o

act on it.

- Written: Written communicationwritten in haste = open to interpretation. Benteen did

not know what to prioritisemaking a quick arrival or delivering the ammunition.

-

MESSENGER: John MartiniItalian immigrant who spoke broken English.

HOWEVER: all previous battlesfought in the same, communication-less difficulties and managed to

be a success.

Documents

a2 Hitory - BLBH Essay