|
| Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Reexamined | 
 enlarge | Author: Richard A. Fox
Publisher: University of Oklahoma Press
Category: Book
List Price: $15.16
Buy New: $13.90
You Save: $1.26 (8%)
New (10) Used (11) Collectible (2) from $6.27
Avg. Customer Rating:  23 reviews
Sales Rank: 424174
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 411
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.3
Dimensions (in): 9 x 5.9 x 1
ISBN: 0806129980
Dewey Decimal Number: 930
EAN: 9780806129983
ASIN: 0806129980
Publication Date: September 1997
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: Brand New, Perfect Condition, Please allow 4-14 business days for delivery. 100% Money Back Guarantee, Over 1,000,000 customers served.
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 18 more reviews...
 Difficult read December 9, 2008
While I agree with most of the author's conclusions, I will say it was written in a very disjointed and hard to read style. Very typical "academic" professorial book. Very dry, wordy, and it went off on tangets about the virtues of archaeology vs oral tradition that had little to do with the subject.
The author was very loose with what he considered "Facts", and took the tiniest shred of evidence that supported his conclusions to be solid facts, while anything against it was shot down.
The fact is, we will never understand exactly what happened that day. The author makes some brilliant guesses, but then irritates the reader by considering them facts to build the rest of his case on. The most glaring problem I saw was using Indian accounts to "prove" Custer rode on to the second ford, then returned and hung out on Cemetery hill for an hour or two. Nothing really definitively supports this either way, and the author should admit its only his guess as to what happened. The book gives some good insight to what happened, it just needs to be written in a better flowing style, and those things that can't be proven need to be stated as such.
 Not Quite the Definitive Book on the Little Big Horn -- But Close September 24, 2008
5 out of 5 found this review helpful
This volume should be the primary book on the Battle of the Little Big Horn for serious historians whether or not one agrees with the author's conclusions. His theories concerning the progress of the battle are supported better than the best of the more generally accepted ones by archaeological evidence, contemporary accounts, and near-contemporary analyses.
This book should be purchased in tandem with Scott, Fox, Connor and Harmon, "Archaeological Perspectives on the Battle of the Little Bighorn." For the story of Custer himself, I recommend Connell's "Son of the Morning Star", Stewart's "Custer's Luck", and Custer's own "My Life on the Plains" edited by Milo Quaife. The Scott, et al, book provides much more detail evidence supporting the author's theory of the battle, and combining it with the subject of this review, one might even consider them compelling. At any rate, they must be read and considered before coming to an opinion concerning the progress of the battle.
I was surprised by the negative reviews, particularly since this work is so well written, researched, and structured. If a reader doesn't like the author's conclusions, then all right, but the book at a minimum should receive four stars. Of all the books on Custer's annihilation, this book is the most heavily researched and supported by the evidence (in my opinion.) I would like one of the negative reviewers to produce a competitor so that evidence can be compared with evidence.
This book does not detract from the fighting qualities of the 7th Cavalry, but does not present the image of a heroic band of warriors, clustered around their leader, selling their lives as dearly as possible. Instead the image is more complex. The two wings of Custer's detachment maintained their discipline until L Company was decimated after C Company was defeated in Calhoun's Coulee/Ridge, Keogh's Company I was swept up on the ridge from south to north by the Indian rush, and E and F companies rallied to Last Stand Hill. There order was maintained until half were dead or wounded, and the able-bodied soldiers, mostly from Company E, charged down the hill into the Deep Ravine (the South Skirmish Line area) where all were killed. Immediately thereafter, the remainder of the men, probably all wounded, on Custer's Hill were overrun and killed.
The major bit of evidence still outstanding in support of this theory is that cutting of the Deep Ravine has so far failed to find the 28 bodies of the soldiers supposedly buried there in a cluster (see Scott, et al.) If these bodies are unearthed or another explanation is found, then this work can most probably be considered definitive. Personally, I await such evidence with baited breath.
At any rate, this book and the others I have listed above belong on the shelves of everyone interested in Custer, the Battle of the Little Big Horn, and Indian Wars in the West.
What ACTUALLY happened at Little Bighorn (Greasy Grass) September 2, 2008
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
Hint: It WASN'T a glorious, mythical "Last Stand" on Custer Hill.
Page 221: "There is neither archaeological nor historical evidence of a ... famous last stand and ... Monument Hill area did not even see the last of the fighting."
Many modern Little Bighorn historians give lip service to the idea of giving new attention to traditional Indian accounts of the battle or to the latest archaeological findings.
Well, Fox does more than lip service. He actually gives full attention to both areas.
As he's a professional archaeologist himself, the second half comes naturally, and occupies the first third of the book. His extensive study of cartridge and bullet remains from both 7th Cav and Indian groups is detailed in the first third of the book.
Then, he takes an open-minded look at Indian accounts, with proper skepticism toward inflated claims, when warranted, as well as proper claim toward facile dismissal of many of their claims, often used by partisans (usually Custer hagiographers) with axes to grind.
This takes up about half the book.
The final one-sixth can be characterized by the name of one chapter: "Fate, Blame and Strategy." Fox is clearly a neutralist, but your typical Custer hagiographer has already written him off as hopelessly biased in a few reviews here.
What actually happened is troopers that were poorly trained, had single-shot rifles great at long distance but behind the firepower of either Henry repeaters or bows and arrows at closer distance -- not to mention war clubs and such at closest distance, and who eventually panicked and bunched themselves around commanders -- Keough, then Custer -- while firing few shots. (Note: Fox shows the same happened with Fetterman's troops.)
No "cowardice." Fox says that's a false dilemma, cowardice vs. glory. Rather, it was combat shock. The troops were routed and panicked, to put it bluntly.
And,some troopers escaped Custer Hill and made a break for the river, only to get forced into Deep Ravine. That was where a less-than-glorious Last Stand occurred.
How much of the combat shock was Custer's fault, due to bad tactics, ignoring his scouts, etc.? Fox doesn't go into that detail, but I'd say around 25-33 percent myself. That said, this does remove the "Reno was drunk" or "Reno blew it" claims of Custer hagiagraphers from reality.
This is a great book; I've just given you the surface only of why.
Useful, But Incomplete July 27, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I do not doubt Dr Fox summarises accurately the recent archeological evidence, and is the only book--as opposed to article--to do so. His interpretation of that evidence is much less reliable. For example, if his sample is accurate, and 3% of all Springfield carbine rounds jammed and had to be pried out of the breech with a knife, this does NOT mean that only 6 of 210 carbines misfired. It means that if a weapon fired 10 rounds, there was a 26% chance of jamming--and indeed, he quotes but ignores burial party accounts of "dozens" of jammed weapons the victorious Sioux and Commanche didn't even bother to carry away. His confidence that he knows the distribution of companies between wings because he knows what Upton's CAVALRY TCTICS prescribed bespeaks a man who never served in any branch of any service. Clearly he never heard that "doctrine is the opinion of the senior officer present." Other instances abound.
Buy the book. James Donovan quarried it heavily for TERRIBLE CLORY and gave Dr. Fox less credit than was his due. But don't take the conclusions as seriously as the evidence.
 Interesting analysis- Wrong conclusions March 2, 2008
7 out of 11 found this review helpful
The book is an interesting read, however his conclusions that there was no "Last Stand" due to lack of archaeological evidence is simply wrong (a simple research on Indian casualties in '06 showed that 200 warriors had been killed on the battlefield alone, which couldn't be the case if Custer's men had actually shown little resistance and lasted over 2 hours). The fact that this fight occurred over 100 years ago, a visitor center built, monuments and markers placed, not to mention scores of relic hunters picking the hill clean for years (until 1984), and changes in the topography have contaminated any evidence or lack thereof. No conclusions are possible according to what was or what was not found on that hill. Certainly not enough to prove his theories.
He does rely heavily on Indian oral accounts. However, I was disturbed by his continued excuse to discount every account that contradicted his own conclusions, claiming that they were merely telling their white interviewers what white America wanted to hear. He seems to only accept their statements as valid as long as they coincide with his theories.
Would I recommend this book? While I agree it is interesting, it simply cannot be considered a reliable version of what took place on that hill in 1876. There are better books available.
|
|
|
VicenzaWebMarketing.com | |
|
