In general I thought the author rightfully portrayed both good and bad traits and actions of George Armstrong Custer's character. I assume that this is historical fiction so, of course, some of it including dialogue is fictionalized, while some of it is historically correct. The book made me want to do more research about Custer. It appeared that he was an obedient soldier and did as he was commanded to do while being trusted by his superiors to employ his judgement. He may have been fighting for somebody else's land, but isn't that what he was told to do? The book ran hot and cold with me, but one thing it did was pique my curiosity and change my opinion about Custer, in more than one direction. I had no idea he was a womanizer despite his seemingly true love for Libbie, and I can't admire that. Sending his cook out somewhere else to eat would have been far more expedient than taking any time to defend her. He must have been a fair man, and I think we saw that in many other instances. So...I have to be fair to him and say he was like all of us. He had mixed emotions, mixed behavior, good and bad character traits. I respected him more throughout the book and by the end of it than before I read it.