Take a photo of a barcode or cover
89 reviews for:
The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn
Nathaniel Philbrick
3.83 AVERAGE
89 reviews for:
The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn
Nathaniel Philbrick
3.83 AVERAGE
History of the events leading up to the battle known as Custer's last stand. Includes personal correspondence and accounts of various civil war generals and officers in the US Army woven around the career of General Custer.
Not an easy read, but gives you an entirely new perspective on Custer.
informative
slow-paced
Super interesting book about an event I knew little about. I really enjoyed Philbrick's style. I'm going to look for more historical books by him.
The reputation of most military 'heroes' has a tendency to rise and fall with the prevailing attitudes of each era. In his day Custer was considered the archetypal American hero: brave, swaggering, uncompromising, a physical representation of the great American spirit in buckskin and spurs. To me, all I've ever known of him was the flipside of that: an arrogant, reckless, vainglorious soldier whose unquenchable quest for personal glory got him and his entire command slaughtered.
Philbrick doesn't set out to demolish or confirm either of these Custers. His portrayal won't overturn anyone's already-established opinion of Custer, and one of the real strengths of this book is that both portrayals are as valid as the other. All history is by its very nature conjecture, and Custer's Last Stand can be simultaneously a courageous last stand against overwhelming odds, an American Thermopylae, and a classic example of hubris and just desserts.
Where Philbrick does succeed admirably in setting Custer's 'last stand' in its context. Indeed, this whole book is context: since Custer's entire command was wiped out, any account of the actual battle at the Little Bighorn is necessarily historical guesswork, and Philbrick wisely avoids focusing on too much detail on the actual battle itself. That this book is still just as gripping as if the whole thing had been exhaustively documented is a real testament to the skill of the author.
Philbrick doesn't set out to demolish or confirm either of these Custers. His portrayal won't overturn anyone's already-established opinion of Custer, and one of the real strengths of this book is that both portrayals are as valid as the other. All history is by its very nature conjecture, and Custer's Last Stand can be simultaneously a courageous last stand against overwhelming odds, an American Thermopylae, and a classic example of hubris and just desserts.
Where Philbrick does succeed admirably in setting Custer's 'last stand' in its context. Indeed, this whole book is context: since Custer's entire command was wiped out, any account of the actual battle at the Little Bighorn is necessarily historical guesswork, and Philbrick wisely avoids focusing on too much detail on the actual battle itself. That this book is still just as gripping as if the whole thing had been exhaustively documented is a real testament to the skill of the author.
I liked this book. It was easy to get through and gave a general idea of the battle. What I didn't like of this book is that it was entitled "The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull and the Battle of The Little Bighorn". There was definitely not enough on Custer or Sitting Bull. That is really what I was hoping for when I picked this book up. Actually in this book, there was less on those two and their role than there was on others.
First, the negatives: I don't really think this title is fair, because there was so much more about Custer and the US soldiers than there was about Sitting Bull and the Native warriors, just in terms of quantity of the narrative. Overall the story is there, but it's pretty lopsided on the details. Also, I know that there are many folks (Custer buffs, I know you are out there) that would argue that this is not nearly as detailed as it could be, but in my world, this is a PLAY BY PLAY. I am not a battle-enthusiast, so I don't really need to see all of the maps and know exactly what sort of bullet casings were used, but I know those that would love that stuff and there is some of that in here, but not enough to make me want to stop reading.
I liked this for the human stuff. What made Custer tick? What context existed that caused him to make the decisions he did? It struck me how so much of this battle was about- seems callous to say this- workplace politics. This lieutenant hated his boss (Custer) so he didn't work well with him, and that Major had a beef with that person in his regiment because of some gossip that was spread last year during a different battle. For real? Yeah, turns out. For real. All the workplace bullshizz you have going on at your job is the same shit that these dudes have and more. The battle and the context is obviously sickening, but that aspect brought the sickening to kind of a new level for me.
I liked this for the human stuff. What made Custer tick? What context existed that caused him to make the decisions he did? It struck me how so much of this battle was about- seems callous to say this- workplace politics. This lieutenant hated his boss (Custer) so he didn't work well with him, and that Major had a beef with that person in his regiment because of some gossip that was spread last year during a different battle. For real? Yeah, turns out. For real. All the workplace bullshizz you have going on at your job is the same shit that these dudes have and more. The battle and the context is obviously sickening, but that aspect brought the sickening to kind of a new level for me.
Pretty well-structured for military history book. You get to hear the battle from not only the perspectives of Reno and Benteen, but also of Sitting Bull and (to a lesser extent) Crazy Horse and a few more common soldiers on each side. Of course it's a bit anti-climactic since no one knows exactly what happened with Custer's battalion (no survivors), but the grim description of the post-battle field is jaw-dropping. More importantly, it accomplished what The Killer Angels accomplished: making each man seem truly human -- flawed and complex. 3.5
I'm very glad I read this book. Prior to doing so, I knew only the basic, highly sensationalized details of the infamous battle. While I'm still a bit iffy on Philbrick's choice to include tales of the "Indian supernatural" (aka Sitting Bull's visions and etc) as quasifactual, I thought this was a well-written book. I love the fact that Philbrick gives fairly equal and detailed background description of the events leading up to the "Last Stand." He also very carefully navigated the treacherous waters caused by lack of evidence in certain arenas of the battle. (In other words, he took later accounts with a grain of salt because all the participants in certain parts of the battle were killed thus leaving now first hand narrative evidence.)
On top of the excellent narrative, the book was read by a fairly decent narrator. That always makes an audiobook immensely more pleasurable.
I would definitely recommend this book.
On top of the excellent narrative, the book was read by a fairly decent narrator. That always makes an audiobook immensely more pleasurable.
I would definitely recommend this book.