In the book “Crazy Horse and Custer: The Parallel Lives of Two American Warriors” by Stephen E. Ambrose, the lives of these two great historical rivals are revealed. Ambrose revealed a clash of two cultures during the Civil War of Little Bighorn, on June 25, 1876. The titular characters in this historical event are Crazy Horse, a Native American warrior famed for his resistance to the colonial forces, and General Custer, a white American cavalry officer renowned for his escapades into the Western frontier. The subtitle to the book gives an impression that the eponymous characters’ lives run parallel to each other. And yet, upon closer inspection, the lives of Crazy Horse and Custer could not have been more different. This is due in large part to the culture from which these men were brought up.
The Native Americans valued social collectiveness and held a deep respect for the land they inhabited. The white settlers often intruded upon this land and worked towards individual goals instead of societal interest. Ambrose also points out that Native Americans typically valued age as the source of wisdom and endless knowledge, while white Americans concentrated on individual competence and achievement (Ambrose, 1996).
Ambrose gives vivid descriptions about the two men’s childhood. Crazy Horse – Curly, as a child – was “never struck by an adult” while growing up. He was pampered and absorbed quickly into the Native American community. On the other hand, Autie – Custer’s nickname as a kid – grew up being physically punished for his mistakes and transgressions. This may be a central point in the culture between the two societies. Ogala society, being collectivist, attempts to harmonize their children with the community quickly. This is so because conflict between family members is not favored in collectivist societies. On the other hand, American society favored individualism greatly – and Autie’s parents revered this idea. Autie was punished regularly as a form of learning.
In one chapter, Ambrose says, “The ultimate difference between the two men was their moods. Custer was never satisfied with where he wasHe was always in a state of becoming. Crazy Horsewas in a state of being.” This can also be attributed to both men’s culture. Custer strived for self-identity in a culture where worth can only be achieved either in the battlefield or in the bank. Crazy Horse, on the other hand, grew up in a society where worth can be had in one’s social relationships. It was only when the things that he loved the most were endangered that he came to arms.
Ambrose fairly represents both sides of the battle, but he frequently expresses his thoughts on cultural differences, stating that in his mind the Native American way of humility and respect surpassed that of a white person’s understanding. Ambrose doesn’t necessarily say that the whites were wrong in engaging in the battle, but he does imply that Crazy Horse was justified in taking action against them (Ambrose, 1996).
These types of cultural conflicts still persist within today’s society. Misunderstandings between cultures lead can often escalate into war. When looking at the fallacy of Custer and Crazy Horse, we can see why age and experience is valued when choosing leaders of today. The competency of leaders must be determined to insure they are able to adequately fulfill their role. In conclusion, there are many similarities and difference between these two historical figures. The centerpiece battle was perpetuated by the fact that these two men had vastly different cultural upbringings that taught them to value different things, family and society in Crazy Horse’s case and money and fame in Custer’s. If only people would understand the differences between their societies, then such tragedies as the Battle of Little Bighorn would not have had happened, and such loss of life would not have been necessary.
Reference
Ambrose, S. (1996) “Crazy Horse and Custer: The Parallel Lives of Two American Warriors” New York: Anchor Books of Random House.
