Final answer:
The passage suggests that Custer's actions reflected d) contempt for the Native Americans' skills and strategic capabilities, given his underestimation of their forces and lack of preparation for battle.
Step-by-step explanation:
The passage describes Custer's approach and tactics with the Native Americans. It mentions his infamous reputation among scholars of Native American history,
his ill-fated assumption of the size of the Lakota Sioux forces, and his lack of preparation and reconnaissance leading to a 'fatal charge.' Considering the context of Custer's actions and decisions,
his approach seems to reflect a combination of arrogance and underestimation of the Native Americans. One could infer that Custer's actions demonstrate d) contempt for Native Americans' strategic and tactical skills,
as he did not take the necessary steps to understand the strength and positions of the Native forces adequately before engaging in battle.
On a broader historical scale, the actions of many officers and policies during the period reflected a general contempt for or devaluation of Native American capabilities and sovereignty.
The mention of President Andrew Johnson and the US Army projecting their views on Native American tribes further illustrates this attitude, as does the policy justification based on the alleged collusion of Native American tribes with the Confederacy.
Thus, the broader historical context supports the interpretation that the passage suggests contempt for the skills and political stance of the Native Americans.