The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn

After reading a number of books on the LBH, including the excellent "Terrible Glory" recently, it is hard to expect another book to have anything new or much more interesting on the LBH. What the author brings is a pretty intense analysis of the major participants of Custer's command while providing a very good descriptive of Sitting Bull and to a lesser extend Gall and the many other leading warriors of the Sioux and Cheyenne such as Lame Whiteman. Aside from a pretty reasonable evaluation of Custer's personality and perceptions of him by others, the author's views on Benteen, Reno and Gerard are the most interesting. One of the many myraid of questions about the LHH is why Benteen was unable to join Custer although ordered to support him. Benteen noted afterwards that he valley hunting to the left in accordance with Custer's orders that took him miles away from the main trail. Darling, in book "Benteen's Scout to the Left", offers that Benteen did not go much further than an extra mile than Custer/Reno's main route to the morass. It has noted by witnesses such as Lt. Weir that Benteen dawdled, particularly when he returned to the morass and main trail. As noted by the author, Boston Custer passes Benteen at the morass and ends up with his brother on Last Stand Hill. Benteen fought bravely and became the nominal leader on Benteen-Reno hill but the author describes Benteen as indifferent as a troop commander as evidenced by his lack of action to have his men entrench or form barricades although his men were the most exposed company on the line. There are several questions asking why Custer subdivided his last battalion with Calhoun and Keogh along with some or all of company C on or near Calhoun Hill while Custer advanced with his remaining companies. The author theorizes that the companies on Calhoun Hill may have offered a bridgehead to connect with Benteen. If true, it was a connection that never materialized leaving Custer's command separated while the Indians skilled and sudden attacks shattered the forces at Calhoun Hill. The author describes Reno as relatively competent but troubled and whose abilities were hampered by alcohol, the author supports testimony that Reno was intoxicated or working in that direction. But as scout George Herendeen notes, having scout Bloody Knifes brains splattered all over Reno certainly contributed to Reno's loss of composure leading directly to his disorganized scramble from the cottonwoods. The Scout Geraud is also closely evaluated as a competent scout but whose constant ingraining attempts to climb into Custer's inner command circle conflicts with his primary responsibilities as a translator and front man for the 7th's Crow and Arikara scouts. And it is Gerard that announces to Custer near Lone Tepee "Here are your Indians running like devils". Of course the big difference from most Custer literature is the author's embracing of Peter Thompson's writings and comments as the last man, along with Trooper Watson, to see Custer alive and his battalion. Many previous researchers and authors have dismissed Thompson's testimony as balderdash; however, Philbrick notes that Thompson never wavered or changed his testimony. Arikara scouts have testified that they came upon Thompson and Watson after the scouts crossed the river, leaving the valley. One of Thompson's questionable views is seeing Custer freeing a Cheyenne or Sioux woman from a Crow or Arikara's rope. The book is very well written and is an exciting read. The author's details on the key Native American's involved in the attack includes first hand acounts from them as well and the brief bio on Sitting Bull is excellent including his unfortunate demise fueled by fears by the reservation superintendent who recognized Sitting Bull as a powerful leader and arival to his policies. Other notable bios are on Gibbon, who fails to notify Terry of the early dispositions of the Indians; Terry, whose orders are purposely vague to Custer; and Crook, whose leaving the field after the Battle of The Rosebud with no effort to attempt communication with Terry was not his finest moment. Another interesting nugget, the author offers that Terry held up Captain Marsh and his riverboat, the Far West, with the wounded in order to buy time to come up with a report on the fiasco. In addition, the author offers an understanding of the difference of opinions between the surviving Crow Scouts who were with Custer yet disagreed with the better known Curley. The author attributes it primarily to professional jealousy that is raised to the attention of the famous Native American photography Curtis. The book is written in more of a narrative style with no footnotes but the author has a flowing detail frame of reference with discussion for every chapter in the rear of the book that is quite interesting. A book that would be truly fascinating, if enough detail can be found, would be on scout George Herendeen who hid a dozen abandoned troopers in the woods left behind by Reno, shepherding them safely back to Benteen-Reno Hill after the Indians changed course to attack Custer. Herendeen was the one who never seemed to lose his head and testified straight forward and honestly at the Reno court of inquiry.

Nathaniel Philbrick is normally associated with nautical history, so it might be something of a surprise that in "The Last Stand" he has chronicled the Battle of the Little Bighorn, a military event that took place about as far from the ocean as you can get. But, it might be remembered that a large part of his "Mayflower" book was focused on the violent relations between the Pilgrims and Indians and on the slightly later King Phillip's War. Here in "The Last Stand", the author has returned to the subject of white-Indian relations and has created a vivid, engaging book.Philbrick's "The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn" quite naturally invites comparison with 2008's "A Terrible Glory: Custer and the Little Bighorn" by James Donovan, about the same subject. Although both volumes present lengthy, quite comprehensive narratives, they do differ significantly. Donovan's book takes a more straightforward approach, while Philbrick's is more consciously "literary" in style, filled with numerous colorful incidents almost cinematic in impact. Additionally, Philbrick's "The Last Stand" devotes somewhat more attention to the Indian side of the story than does Donovan's volume.Which book is "better"? The answer to that undoubtedly depends on the reader and his/her needs and expectations. Philbrick's volume is perhaps the more suited for random browsing or reading a chapter at a time, while Donovan's is probably better suited for focused, prolonged study. I personally enjoyed both Philbrick's and Donovan's volumes. Both books are representative of a much more balanced, even-handed approach to the Little Bighorn battle than had been characteristic of the past. Originally, accounts tended to overly laud Custer and his soldiers as peerless representatives of Civilization, done to death by a savage, scarcely human foe. By the latter part of the Twentieth century, however, it had become commonplace to reverse roles, depicting Custer and his men as mindless murderers and the Indians as peaceful, innocent victims. We now seem to have finally reached a point, as demonstrated in both Philbrick's "The Last Stand" and also Donovan's "A Terrible Glory", where the participants on both sides can be depicted as three-dimensional, realistic blends of virtue and flaw, neither demons nor angels.Any serious student of the Little Bighorn battle - I count myself among them - can find elements in Philbrick's book (as in Donovan's) with which to disagree. The events are complex enough and the evidence sufficiently murky that this is inevitable. I cannot say that I learned anything wholly new here, but then again I've been studying the Little Bighorn battle for more than 40 years. An intelligent general reader, previously uninformed about the details, can come away from "The Last Stand" with a good understanding of the events and the people involved on both sides. If that reader should wish to proceed further with studying the battle, Philbrick supplies detailed notes and source lists.

Wunderbare Aufarbeitung des Themas ohne sich gnadenlos in Details zu verlieren, wiewohl er davon mehr als genug präsentiert. So vieles das ich nicht wußte und das ganze noch sehr unvoreingenommen und klar beschrieben. Liest sich auch gut und ist nicht langweilig. Kann ich nur empfehlen.

I remember vividly, as a child, putting together a Panini sticker book about the Far West simply entitled "West" (see attachment). I was equally mesmerized by the smart American soldiers in their dashing uniforms as I was by the pageantry of the Native American Indians.However, the lasting image from that sticker book that is forever etched in my mind was the centerfold of Custer's Last Stand at the Battle of the Little Bighorn. The centerfold foreground depicted a soldier of Custer's 7th Cavalry (with hindsight it could have been Custer himself), lying on his back against his dead mount, desperately attempting to shoot a Lakota Sioux warrior who was closing in on him with his lethal tomahawk.Thirty or so years later, this ghastly scene rose from the slumber of my psyche and prompted me to look up the Battle of the Little Bighorn; which brought me to Nathaniel Philbrick's "The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull and the Battle of the Little Bighorn".For the uninitiated, in June 1876 the Battle of Little Bighorn saw about seven hundred soldiers of the U.S Army 7th Cavalry challenge approximately seven thousand Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho under the leadership of Chief Sitting Bull at the Little Bighorn. The U.S Cavalry received their comeuppance when five of the 7th Cavalry twelve companies were annihilated and every single man (officers and soldiers) of Custer's two hundred strong battalion, including General George Armstrong Custer himself, was killed.Without either bias or prejudice towards either party and with the support of first hand witness accounts, archival documents and a sprinkle of conjecture in the climax, Nathaniel Philbrick manages the difficult task of presenting a compendium of facts, point of views, thoughts and feelings in a very engaging, immersive and arresting account that will grab your attention and hold it until the very end.Whilst the crux of the matter at hand is the battle at the Little Bighorn, the book doesn't delve directly into the battle. Instead, it starts by setting the scene where this epic drama took place, introducing the various protagonists on both sides of the conundrum: sketching their characters, highlighting their strengths, exposing their flaws and fears; and their relationships friendly and otherwise; as well as the political tension, which would eventually permeate the battlefield and contribute to Custer's demise; and following the battle, an examination of the aftermath of the battle on the survivors.The approach, presentation and writing style of Nathaniel Philbrick makes for compelling reading. The amount of detail on display never hinders but only serves to reel the reader in and helps to put everything in perspective. This is a book that can easily be read multiple times without ever getting boring. I have read it twice already and can see myself diving into it again at some point in the future. There is so much to process that every revisit seems like a fresh read.Enticing and highly recommended!

..had passed before white people managed to end the Natives lifestyle.This masterpiece by Nathaniel Philbrick (who keeps writing extraordinary books) presents the symbolic struggle of Lakota/Cheyenne and their last confrontation with the invaders. Even when I was a small boy, I heard about Sitting Bull and Custer. But now, after many years, I have finally learned the details and significance of this tragic battle. The book is so colorful and vivid that I could not stop reading. I still cannot stop thinking about characters and people involved, those who died and survived. I endlessly wonder whether the whole story could have less dramatic conclusion. Probably not..as history teaches us repeatedly about English-Indian relations; check titles in chronological order: "Mayflower" (end of East Coast tribes), "The War that Made America" (fate of Mohawks and other Great Lakes People), "Blood and Thunder" (subduing Navajo Nation) and "Empire of the Summer Moon" (pacification of Comanche).

This is a meticulously researched, fluently written account of am iconic battle. Packed with detail,with very full notes, this is an excellent summary of the circumstances of The Battle of Little Bighorn. Ultimately, it is a sad tale, and a comment on the callous imperialism common to many white races in the nineteenth century. The Americans had as much right to Indian territory as the British had to the Zulu lands. Like Lord Chelmsford at Isandlwana, Custer and co had it coming to them. "Manifest destiny " ? - manifest brutality, more like.

Arrived in good condition Which is good because it’s a gift