Thank you for your kind words. As I said in the post, it took me a lot of years to get to this point.

I wholeheartedly agree with you about the Sklenar book. I likewise think it’s one of the best of the modern generation of Little Big Horn books. I also liked Jim Donovan’s book a great deal.

Eric

I would also urge Custer addicts (not at all a derogatory term!) to also read Larry Sklenar’s To Hell With Honor, for which I would vote as one of the best recent books about Custer and the Little Bighorn battle.

You’ve got it exactly right. How wise is it to pitch into a very large force of the enemy without a shred of information about their strength or dispositions, as Custer did there? It was terribly unwise.

Having gotten himself into that mess, he was at his best, and I give him credit for that.

Eric

As a self-avowed “student” of Custer, I greatly enjoy your blog and especially this post. Could you elaborate on what you consider his mistakes to be at Trevilian Station? I assume they have to do with a lack of proper scouting or allowing Col Alger to charge the largely unguarded Rebel wagon train without having the entire brigade ready to support him. Few battles are fought without mistakes (especially when commanded by someone as young as Custer), but I’ve always thought Custer’s “First Last Stand” at Trevilian Station (Day One) was actually one of his finest hours as a commander. Once his brigade was encircled by the Confederate cavalry, Custer did an impressive job leading the Wolverines for hours under absolutely dire circumstances. He personally led multiple mounted and dismounted charges, was “everywhere at once,” and was hit several times by spent balls. Not every brigade commander could have survived such a desperate situation. Even Rosser gave his friend (and nemesis) high praise for his actions that day. I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on this aspect of the Custer’s generalship.

Sincerely,
Dave Chapman

Your comment is not germane to this post. Indeed it is quite off-topic.

I tried very hard to tell you that I want nothing to do with you or this discussion. Apparently, you refuse to accept that. And so, you insisted on persisting in this idiocy against my wishes and by insisting on posting more slander. Given those facts, are you REALLY surprised that I might not respond well? Or perhaps that was precisely the result you were attempting to engineer. It doesn’t matter. Regardless of what you may think, this discussion is over, right here and right now.

Opinions are like assholes, Mr. Barrett. Everybody has one. Since you seem to have many more than others, well, draw your own conclusions….

I really don’t care about your nonsensical and moronic theory. I don’t care what you think. I don’t care what you want me to address in my book, which was not written to satisfy your unreasonable and unrealistic demands. I can’t think of anything I care about less than what you think, provided that you cease and desist from slandering a book you have never bothered to read. Got it? Can I possibly be any more direct than that? Will that finally sink into that thick head of yours?

I won’t delete your comment now, but the next time you feel the need to waste my bandwidth and leave me an inappropriate comment in an inappropriate place, it, as well as the original comment, will be deleted and your IP address will be permanently banned. Just try me if you don’t believe me. I am as serious as a heart attack. I pay for this website, so I get to make the rules. And candidly, I cannot imagine anything that I care about less than whether you like my rules.

I made it clear that I was finished with you and your nonsense, but you just won’t let it go. So, I’m going to say it one more time, in case you are so unbelievably dense as to not believe me: I AM FINISHED WITH YOU, YOUR SLANDER, AND WITH THIS DISCUSSION. LEAVE ME ALONE. NOW.

I trust that I have made myself abundantly clear.

Goodbye, Mr. Barrett. This discussion–which I never wanted, which I consider slanderous, tortious and actionable, and which you persist in trying to prolong–is now over, and for good this time. If you have even some semblance of a brain in your head–and each time you insist on posting more of your nonsensical crap here or on your grossly inappropriate, slanderous, and unfair “review” on Amazon, I become more and more convinced that you truly are either galactically stupid or that you are nothing but a loathsome troll with no life who really needs to crawl back under whatever rock you crawled out from under (and I genuinely believe you are a troll)–you will forget you ever heard my name, ever saw this website, or ever chose to engage me in a discussion I never, ever wanted to have in the first place. Again, just try me if you have any questions about whether I’m serious. But consider yourself warned of the consequences if you do…..

“Greetings from Amazon.com Customer Discussions,
Because you requested to be notified when people commented on your review of “Protecting the Flanks: The Battles for Brinkerhoff’s Ridge and East Cavalry Field, Battle of Gettysburg, July 2-3, 1863 (Discovering Civil War America)”, we are sending you this e-mail.

Jun 26, 2012 4:20:47 PM PDT
Eric J. Wittenberg says:
I’m done with you, sporto. I’m even more done with your slander.
Consider yourself on notice. One more slanderous comment and you will have more trouble to deal with than you ever imagined. I trust that I have made myself abundantly clear.”

I thought that I would at least get in touch wit ya since Amazon wiped out your handy threat. Such a nasty…they will not carry your “rants”.

Anyway…I did today enjoy a reading of you web material on Buford…such an awesome fellow; along with his crew of tough staff!
Of course I do not expect to be allowed to discuss much history with you here so I won’t wear out any fun ride.

I don’t even mind your attitude tho’ really Gen…you outflank yourself with unnecessary stuff. Really…climb back on yer saddle fella!

Say…didn’t Imboden’s Northwestern Brigade have over two thousand fresh cavalry and a battery of arty with him at Lee’s center? And that is Lee’s only flank protection if in fact he feared such a bold attack from Meade. Certainly Lee had no reason to fear a safe-as-can-be Gregg – – he has his tight orders. He does brillant to cut the Wolverines and friends lose!
I do sincerely trust that your newly revised book on East Cavalry engagements will deal with the strongest military probability that Stuart’s division is 1) not at all on any competent line of battle – – how far from Ewell is he? Point? In fact, Lee fears no flank attack at all. And 2) Strategic Envelopement. Deal with that…it is important. Stuart failed to succeed in completing it. So often historians like yourself hug those after battle reports as if they were not political documents…which they were. 3) Perhaps there is no resolution to some of these most engrossing issues…like this one of Stuart’s intent. His military effect [that is different] is clear: attack down the Pike into Meade’s rear lines…even a chaotic mess there would have vastly aided Pickett.
With working with these carefully [if you can], Lee and Stuart will end up looking like bumbling fools.

It does no service to good history to threaten or try and bluster your way to prevent those who have legitimate questions such as these or accuse them of slanderous behavior. Dust off yer pants…get back on the horse. I for one like your books…but who dear General owns all the truth on all the Battlefield?

Best wishes, Chris Barrett

I left Davis off the list because, other than the Harpers Ferry breakout, he was really largely unproven when he was killed.

Eric