Killing Custer

I found this book to be very interesting. As many others have pointed out it gave a completely different perspective on the Battle of Little Big Horn, and the battles leading up to it than we ever really learn in school. I never really realized how much of a myth Custer really is. He never really did anything that incredible, and dying is what really made him become the iconic figure he is today. It makes me wonder if we would have even know of Custer if he had made it out of the battle alive.
In relation to today's discussion of the "victors" and how they are portrayed. I found a passage on 100 to be very interesting. Welch was discussing his visit to the Little Big Horn battle sight which was at that time known as "Custer Battle Field National Monument." The author at that time raised the question of Why is the battle field named after the loser of the battle? We learn that the field is then renamed Little Bighorn Battle field National Monument, after much controversy by state senators. I feel that this is a good example of how the "victors" of the battle we portrayed. The fact that even in 1991 ( when the battle field name was changed) and even today Custer is looked at as such a hero and iconic figure is interesting.