Customer Reviews

Archaeological Perspectives on the Battle of the Little Bighorn

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This a great reference book for those interested in the mystery of the LBH. The digs followed a grass fire that provided an opportunity for archaeological excavations. Helps lend credence to the accuracy of markers, IDs the 40 odd bogus markers with Custer and indications of cause of death and mutilations based on skeleton remains. Also lends proof that the latter burials were haphazard at best and guess work at identifying the dead. Great gems in the possible identification of the scout Mitch Bouyer and a trooper skeleton far from the field that may have been trying to escape. Great detail on weapons used and provides evidence that the Indians had significant fire power with repeaters. Also, covers Reno-Benteen field and provides detail on possible military and Indian positions. Deep ravine is still a mystery, why couldn't remains of the 28 fallen troopers be found? If you have a Custer library, this is a great book to have.

Even though I know all the writers of this book, I'm still NOT biased when I say that Scotts, et al book has changed interpretation dramatically on the Little Bighorn fight. Having worked at the Little Bighorn Battlefield as an interpreter in 1985, I personally know how this interpretation changed, i.e. before the archaeological digs of 1984-85, most of us believed that Custer's men fell mostly to arrows. We now know that the U.S. soldier's were outgunned, thanks to this field work and as reported in the book. Since Scott's final report, headstones on the battlefield marking where "unknown soldier's" fell have been replaced by actual names, e.g. Mitch Bouyer. This reality came to place thanks to the forensic work of Dr. Clyde Snow (his complete report is included in this book). Finally, Scott and his team create a vivid picture of where the Indian warriors moved over the battlefield fighting for their families down the hill and across the river.

Even though I know all the writers of this book, I'm still NOT biased when I say that Scotts, et al book has changed interpretation dramatically on the Little Bighorn fight. Having worked at the Little Bighorn Battlefield as an interpreter in 1985, I personally know how this interpretation changed, i.e. before the archaeological digs of 1984-85, most of us believed that Custer's men fell mostly to arrows. We now know that the U.S. soldier's were outgunned, thanks to this field work and as reported in the book.

Since Scott's final report, headstones on the battlefield marking where "unknown soldier's" fell have been replaced by actual names, e.g. Mitch Bouyer. This reality came to place thanks to the forensic work of Dr. Clyde Snow (his complete report is included in this book).

Finally, Scott and his team create a vivid picture of where the soldiers and the Indian warriors moved over the battlefield fighting for what they believed was right.

I was lucky enough to visit the Battlefield in 1984 shortly after the fire and the first field season. I have visited it twice more since. The last time I was armed with not only Richard Allen Fox's book but this one as well.

Having an abiding interest in the battle for over 30 years it is amazing how the application of good sound science has unraveled many of the "mysteries" and myths associated with what happened on those dusty slopes the day of the battle.

This book delves more into the personal fate of numerous combatants as evidenced by their remains found on the battlefield.

The mere fact that so numerous remains were there to be found after reported exhumation and reburial under the monument, shows that then as now "good enough for government work" still has the same meaning.

If you are interested in the fate of individuals, the nuts and bolts of the recovery of remains, this book is for you. If you are more interested in the unraveling of the mystery of the battle itself. Richard Alan Fox's book Archaeology, History and Custer's Last Battle will appeal to you more. It details the unraveling of the stages of the battle using firearm forensic techniques and puts to bed the notion that Custer died in a glorious last stand.

Rather the famed 7th Cavalry disintegrated into a panic stricken mob, and at the last it was every man for himself, as the last 28 lone survivors on foot and horseback fled Last Stand Hill for the illusion of saftey of the Deep Ravine.

Both books are excellent and both will help final dispel the myths surrounding the battle.

This book goes into great detail about the archeology performed on the battlefield site. It has the feel of being written for an audience of archeologists rather than just a casual reader. If you are an archeologist, the book probably rates a five. If you are really interested in the battle, I also recommend it. If you just want to learn the basics of the battle, howver, other titles are probably more appropriate.

Richard Allen Fox has the ability to look at the physical evidence and make his theories about what happened either mesh with history or make us rethink what history says about the event. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to look at the battle from the physical remains left on the site.

This is a significant scholarly work. Using the evidence they collected, the authors can support a credible theory for the pattern of the Indian attack. They apparently identify the remains of Mitch Boyer and his final position on the field, and also provide evidence leaning toward potential identifications of one or two troopers on the field. The analysis of cartridge, shell, and bullet artifacts is exhaustive, helping to nail down trooper and Indian firing positions with some weaker support of movement of individual weapons across the course of the battle.

The scientific archeological evidence suggests or may resolve many mysteries:

1) This book apparently supports theories that Custer evidently had time to make a rudimentary quick deployment in a V shaped line with its point at last stand hill. Clearly, positions chaotically and quickly fell, but a snap decision had evidently been made on how to contain the Indian attack following what was likely a rapid initial retreat
2) The Indians were well armed with repeating weapons adequate to maintain constant pressure and control the momentum after deployment. The historical record already implies this, but this investigation goes much further in making statistical inferences of weapon types and numbers and their location on the field.
3) That the Indians and troopers may have been more or less equally plagued with misfires and jammed cartridges, but that this alone didn't decide the battle. The Seventh's position was probably too weak to defend, and Indian firepower and quick movement too overwhelming to permit the cavalry to retreat further and make adjustments.
4) Some of the current markers on the field are incorrectly placed or there may be too many in some locations.

There are probably four stages to Custer's fight. The first was his initial approach to the village. The second was his retreat and fight to the finish. The third was the battle's ending where a possible breakout might have been attempted by a group of survivors. The fourth is the Indian `clean-up' of the battle field finishing off wounded. For me, this book settles many questions regarding the sequence of the second stage of the battle. Uncertainties remain regarding Custer's initial assault on the village, the beginning of his retreat, whether a breakout attempt occurred into the Deep Ravine, and the final stages of the action. This book does address these issues without resolution, but likely more archeology work is necessary along and within the river, within the area occupied by the village, and within the deep ravine.

I think one other thing this book clarifies for me is that Custer and his troopers were not incompetent in their actions, but, unlike Reno, just didn't have the time or fortuity to be able to find a position that could be defended given Indian weapons and tactics. I think an unresolved issue is whether he could have chosen to fight a running retreat, or whether Indian pressure and contact was so intense that a deployment seemed necessary.

I would recommend this book to anyone who has a strong interest in the battle.

Archaeology and the Battle of the Little Big Horn, what's there not to like! Nicely written with fascinating photographs. Starting at $8, what a bargain!

You must be a Custer Battlefield purist to fully enjoy this work. It was like reading a college textbook that had been written for other professors. Unfortunately, it was not written by someone who had an understanding of weaving a story together and properly illustrating that story visually.

As a collector of firearms of this period, an avid metal detectorist and an amateur historical archaeologist, I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It is, at it's heart, an archaeological report but still reads like a narrative. The conclusions are plainly laid out and technical information organized in a usable format.
Scott's excavations and subsequent book has obviously influenced contemporary thought as to what actually happened at LBH. However, the evidence is presented without being wrought with arguments and innuendo concerning troop movements and commanders' motivations and invites the reader to further research in order to draw one's own conclusions. The use of modern ballistic techniques that allowed Scott to narrow and confirm the exact type and number of weapons used at the battle is an important and useful study for collectors of Indian Wars firearms.

The book could have greatly benefited from a color section that displayed the finds and excavations in greater detail.