Archaeological Insights into the Custer Battle: An Assessment of the 1984 Field Season/With Map

Rating:
Summary: Yet Another Version of an Unanswerable Question
Review: Having read a lot of popular material re: the Battle of the Little Bighorm it was with a mix of interest and apprehension I started on thisone. And what a surprise it was ... no technical lingo, and where it was used adequate explanations were included. There is a balance between the unfurling of historical events, what was discovered about them and how it enhances our insight of what may have happened. The book narrows-down many of the options while at the same time creates newones. The reader expecting the ultimate answers will be dissappointed. Reads like a novel excepts a few parts where fire-arms and types of ammunition are discussed. Not to be missed by Custer-buffs and people interested in popular archaeology. Too bad many drawings are included of the survey-activities on the battlefield and not actual photo-evidence.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent study of archaeological remains on the LBH
Review: I don't understand where most of these previous reviewers are coming from. This is not meant to be a "theory-book" on the battle of the Little Bighorn. All it is is as an "assessment of the 1984 field season" of archaeological work on the battlefield. As that it functions well, with complete descriptions of the recovered artifacts and many sketches and pictures. There are only about 15 pages about the way the battle itself went, and it just correlates the artifacts in a preliminary way to how the battle may have progressed. It's nothing to get upset over. As for the Kansas City reviewer, he must be on another planet. Kuhlman's work was not "ripped without mercy" in this book. As a matter of fact, I don't think Kuhlman was even mentioned at all.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent study of archaeological remains on the LBH
Review: IT WOULD BE MORE INTERESTING TO READ THE BIBLE BACKWARDS, VERY BORING PAPERWEIGHT - WASTED $ 16.00. ONLY A FEW PICTURES, VERY SMALL DRAWINGS AND TOO MANY WORDS.

Rating:
Summary: Archaeological evidence paints the picture
Review: Reading accounts of the Battle of the Little Bighorn sometimes leaves a mass of confusion to the reader. Even visitation to the site does not always enable oneself to clearly picture the events of that day. This book, which does not attempt to explain why things happened does much to set the scene and completes the picture that is painted by the numerous accounts of what happened. The reader may find this book to be dry, perhaps repetitious in some place, but in the end, will appreciate the information that is provided. Be aware that reading this book will forever cause the reader to imediately reject any printed material on The Battle of the Bighorn, that is not properly (and correctly) researched. This book is a good reference for any library.

Rating:
Summary: Archaeological evidence paints the picture
Review: Reading accounts of the Battle of the Little Bighorn sometimes leaves a mass of confusion to the reader. Even visitation to the site does not always enable oneself to clearly picture the events of that day. This book, which does not attempt to explain why things happened does much to set the scene and completes the picture that is painted by the numerous accounts of what happened. The reader may find this book to be dry, perhaps repetitious in some place, but in the end, will appreciate the information that is provided. Be aware that reading this book will forever cause the reader to imediately reject any printed material on The Battle of the Bighorn, that is not properly (and correctly) researched. This book is a good reference for any library.

Rating:
Summary: It sheds new light on the battle
Review: This is an excellent book because it cuts through the partisan pro Custer, anti Custer views that are the main theme in almost all the books about the battle written to date. I highly recommend all the books written by Fox on this subject because he has no pre conceived ideas or biases. He bases his interpretations on the physical evidence remaining at the site and draws his conclusions from that evidence.