Originally Posted by dpd
Seems to me that Custer didn't actually know how to fight Indians. He was very successful during the Civil War, but the Indians fought differently .

I would argue that Custer knew exactly how to fight Plains Indians. Stealth followed by speed and surprise. The object to being in part to capture women and children which would limit further hostilities. This tactic having worked for Custer against the Cheyennes in ‘68 and for Ranald McKenzie against the Comanches in ‘74.

Custer’s tactics could have worked fine against a regular-sized Indian camp.

Quote
Indians during battle didn't need to be commanded.

Yes and no. Speaking in generalities Indians did not so much fight battles as much as they went on raids. It was all about stealth followed by speed and surprise, preferably with the odds heavily in their favor. Achieving that required coordinated actions under the direction of a leader, part of whose prestige depended upon keeping everyone alive.

OTOH so much surprise and confusion at the LBH, with an unprecedented number of combatants present on the Indian side. Not much in the way of instructions was needed anyway.

Quote
After watching some of the videos it seems Custer thought the Indians would run away instead of run to the fight.

Because they almost always did as long as their women and children could escape also.

Quote
The evidence of the way the Indians mutilated the soldier's bodies showed how brutal they fought.


Seems like they did that most of the time to everyone they killed regardless of the circumstances, tho exceptionally brave fallen enemies might be left untouched or even covered with a buffalo robe.

Quote
Seems like he should have turned back and waited for more troops and artillery.

By which time there might be no hostiles within 50 miles….

"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744