(2010)A thorough analysis of Custer's Last Stand in 1876. Gives a real feel of what went on using Indian and military sources to extrapolate what must have happened when there were no survivors. Second book by this author (Mayflower) and he is as good as any in history story telling that is not a history text (although it probably could be with extensive end notes, bibliography, appendices and index. Bruce Trinque (Amazon.com customer review):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.

With my over 50 books on Custers last stand to compare too, I was hoping on a new outlook and evaluation of the battle. It gave lots of sideline background that was moderately interesting, but as to further analysis there was very little, and some relevant material was completely ignored. There is so much disjointed material already written, coordinating it would be useful, but this does little to clarify the story. There is little , purpose, with all the other books written on this subject, to superficially rehash. . ( )

It's my opinion that the author inserts his personality more than I care for but I'm aware and look passed that trait. I trust his research. ( )

Non-fiction title covering General George Armstrong Custer and the Hunkpapa Lakota leader, Sitting Bull against the backdrop of the Battle of Little Bighorn-- With an even-handed approach to both leaders, the author takes a new look at the iconic battle waged in Montana. Philbrick attempts to mitigate both the hagiography and the propaganda surrounding Custer & Sitting Bull respectively and; to reconstruct the motivations and movements of the battle about which there is a lot still unknown. Listening to this in audio does a disservice to the work: The lack of having corresponding maps at hand is keenly felt and; the narrator barely survives criticism in his voicing of Native American people. ( )

I was initially a little reluctant to pick this book up, since we've all read the story of Custer's Last Stand, both the old version which portrays him as the iconic American hero, as well as the version which shows him as an egotistical glory-seeker who foolishly led his troops to their deaths. But there's always more to the story, and Philbrick is the type of author who seems to have an ability to dig into historical archives and bring out little known facts, making you feel like there's much more to the story than you'd ever considered before. There was a lot more to the story than I'd been exposed to before, and was glad I finally read the book. ( )