Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Re-examined [Paperback]

Richard Allan Fox Jr. (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 15, 1997

On the afternoon of June 25, 1867, an overwhelming force of Sioux and Cheyenne Indians quickly mounted a savage onslaught against General George Armstrong Custer’s battalion, driving the doomed troopers of the U.S. Seventh Cavalry to a small hill overlooking the Little Bighorn River, where Custer and his men bravely erected their heroic last stand.

So goes the myth of the Battle of the Little Bighorn, a myth perpetuated and reinforced for over 100 years. In truth, however, "Custer’s Last Stand" was neither the last of the fighting nor a stand.

Using innovative and standard archaeological techniques, combined with historical documents and Indian eyewitness accounts, Richard Allan Fox, Jr. vividly replays this battle in astonishing detail. Through bullets, spent cartridges, and other material data, Fox identifies combat positions and tracks soldiers and Indians across the Battlefield. Guided by the history beneath our feet, and listening to the previously ignored Indian testimonies, Fox reveals scenes of panic and collapse and, ultimately, a story of the Custer battle quite different from the fatalistic versions of history. According to the author, the five companies of the Seventh Cavalry entered the fray in good order, following planned strategies and displaying tactical stability. It was the sudden disintegration of this cohesion that caused the troopers’ defeat. The end came quickly, unexpectedly, and largely amid terror and disarray. Archaeological evidences show that there was no determined fighting and little firearm resistance. The last soldiers to be killed had rushed from Custer Hill.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

Fox (anthropology, Univ. of South Dakota), one of the principal investigators of the archaeological remains of the Custer battlefield, combines an analysis of his investigations with the primary historical record to provide a detailed account of the Custer battle. He builds his case carefully, explaining the methods and objectives of archaeology before reviewing and interpreting the record. Rather than upholding the myth of a determined group fighting against overwhelming odds, Fox shows that Custer's defeat resulted from the sudden disintegration of tactical stability--there was no "last stand." Fox provides a framework in which history and archaeology as equal partners can be used to analyze battles; his results are clear and accessible to the lay reader as well as the specialist. This landmark study renders obsolete previous accounts. Essential for academic libraries and collections on the West and military history.
- Stephen H. Peters, Northern Michigan Univ. Lib., Marquette
Copyright 1993 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Product Details

• Paperback: 416 pages
• Publisher: University of Oklahoma Press (September 15, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0806129980
• ISBN-13: 978-0806129983
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 5.9 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (34 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #293,264 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

73 of 84 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Well written book, no matter what you think., May 2, 2002

By 

Graham Henderson - See all my reviews

This review is from: Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Re-examined (Paperback)

I think the polarisation of the reviews here tells the whole story. You are either going to love this book or hate it. Those who favour the revisionist view will love it, and those who like the accepted, "historical" image of Custer's Last Stand are going to hate it.

So let me help you to figure out whether you want this book or not. For me there should be a middle ground. You can disagree -- but you have to admire the scholarship and the effort. Fox clearly stands on his own -- a "blazed pine in a clearing of Custer devotees" (to paraphrase James Fenmore Cooper).

In a nutshell, Fox's thesis is that there WAS no last stand. He took advantage of the burndown that occured some years back to get in there with metal detectors. He undertook a minute forensic examination of the battlefield. For Fox, the evidence seemed to suggest a rout. Were there to have been a last stand, one would have expected multiple shell casings from a given gun in a given firing position. In fact, he could find no evidence of this. What he did find was shell casings from the same gun in positions that suggested the individual firing the gun was "vectoring" -- i.e. constantly on the move. The image is of a group of men running, stopping briefly to fire over their shoulders, and then moving on. This is but one of dozens of examples he gives.

As with any evidence, it is open to interpretation. And people will always disagree. But agree or disagree with Fox, the reason the book HAS to get four stars and not one, is that it is so well written, so persuasively written. I do not believe a book earns a one star review because it advances a thesis that may be incorrect. For me? I have to say the jury is still out.

Yet Fox is persuasive not only because of the archeological evidence, but because he relies quite heavily upon the oral tradition handed down by the aboriginal fighters who were present that day.

I find it amusing that certain of Fox's detractors actually purport to RELY on the oral evidence. For generations the accepted view of the battle completely IGNORED the oral historical evidence. And, indeed, the preponderance of this evidence favours Fox's view. One has to decide for oneself whether there is credence to be given to the oral histories -- I am not so sure how much credence should be given.

Fox also analyses then current manuals of combat to try and figure out how Custer's men would have fought and stationed themselves -- and again, he makes this evidence neatly fit his hypothesis.

Now, we have to be careful about something here. Fox at no time questions the heroism of the men involved in this struggle -- though Custer's command performance clearly ranks up there with the top dumb ... performances of all time -- but his men were brave, fought valiantly and died heroically.

So, if you absolutely LOVE the accepted view of Custer -- be preared for a rough ride. But if you have an open mind and are ready for an extremely interesting, but rough, ride buy this book.

And, one foot note - something that has always saddenly me is the treatment doled out by history to Major Reno and Captain Benteen. These guys DID conduct a displined, last ditch defence. And did so dug into a hillside for THREE days. There is no debate about this at ALL. They were down to throwing rocks at their tormentors when the Souix suddenly pulled out. Yet such was Custer's luster, that Reno was branded a coward for NOT going to his commander's aid -- even though that was clearly impossible. He was originally buried in a paurer's grave. Scandalous. WILL SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE A MOVIE ABOUT MAJOR RENO?

39 of 45 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Archaelogical Findings & Literary Research Are Fascinating, December 17, 1999

By 

Daniel Hurley (Chesapeake, VA.) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Reexamined (Hardcover)

After reading this book I only wish that I had read it before I visited the LBH this past September. Dr. Fox provides great detail to properly explain how the excavations and laboratory findings were done and in explaining what they mean. This detail is neccessary to understand Dr. Fox's explanation of what he thinks ocurred at Custer's battleridge. After reading the evidence first, then his well researched literary quotes, his conclusions on the Custer portion of the battle are very believable and fit well with the Indian oral histories. I found it very revealing and immensely stimulating. The early chapters may seem slow to someone who does not appreciate archaelogy but it picks up speed as Fox moves to his conclusion which is virtually a climax of the battle. I have reread several sections and it's a mainstay in my Custer library.

38 of 44 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The most exhaustive, complete and accurate work yet., July 6, 1999

By 

m13 (Folsom, CA USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Re-examined (Paperback)

As a cultural anthropologist with emphasis on plains indian tribes and history and a frequent visitor to the Little Big Horn Battlefield Monument, I have read Mr. Fox's book a number of times and have gone over the ground with it in hand. I have also read many of the other accounts, both contemporary and historical to attempt an understanding of what occurred at the Little Big Horn. Fox's precise, analytical and well-reasoned account, taking into consideration the physical evidence at the site, seems irrefutable. Contrary to one reviewer, I found no evidence of "rambling" at all, but a thorough analysis of all aspects of the battle from archeological evidence, oral and written histories to US Army Calvary tacitcs in use at the time, that support Fox's thesis, which is different and original from all that have preceeded it. Congratulations to Mr. Fox for a model of historical, archeological and anthropological research. I believe he has indeed broken new ground in the field. If you have any interest at all in the plains tribes, Custer or western history you owe it to yourself to read this fine book.