James Donovan at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument (courtesy Carolyn Bennett)A Terrible Glory: Custer and the Little Bighorn—the Last Great Battle of the American West
(2008, Little, Brown and Company, New York, $26.99).
Combining a natural storytelling ability, recent archaeological and forensic data and mostly primary sources—including several obscure and unpublished accounts—Donovan has created a 544-page book that is being heralded as “exemplary,” “the new benchmark,” “gripping” and “the most memorable, readable, maybe best, book on [the battle] to date.”
Donovan, who also works as a literary agent in Dallas, spoke to Wild West about George Custer, the Little Bighorn, history and his book.
‘I didn’t grow up with Custer’s infallible beau sabreur fixed in my head, so I wasn’t seeking to defend him as I wrote this’
What drew you to Custer and the Little Bighorn?
Unlike many writers on the subject I’ve met, I didn’t see They Died With Their Boots On when I was a kid and fall in love with Errol Flynn as Custer. About a decade ago, I had written a few small-scale, non-history books, and I wanted to tackle something bigger. A writer I know who had authored several history books suggested we collaborate on a coffee-table book on Custer and the Battle of the Little Bighorn. He was busy at the time, so he suggested I write the first half, and he’d handle the second half. I began reading and fell in love with the subject—I couldn’t get enough of it. When I finished the first half, my co-author begged off and encouraged me to finish it. I did, happily, and the book was published in 2001—Custer and the Little Bighorn: The Man, the Mystery, the Myth.
Subscribe Today
What made you want to delve further into the story?
A coffee-table book by nature isn’t an in-depth examination of a subject. But the more I read, the more I realized that in the past quarter century there has been a great amount of new research, findings and analysis—archaeological findings that have been forensically analyzed to reveal significant information about the battle that we didn’t know before, and enlightening re-evaluation of the many Indian accounts, which had never been taken very seriously for a variety of reasons. The books that used this significant information were either too small in focus or, ironically, too large—David Evans’ admirable Custer’s Last Fight comes to mind. And few of them placed the battle in the context of the times, and no one told the full story of the aftermath, including the fascinating Reno Court of Inquiry two and a half years later. I didn’t see anything out there that achieved what I thought the subject deserved—a synthesis of all those findings with every primary account of the battle to produce a dramatic, accessible narrative of one of American history’s greatest sagas; and a likely and realistic explanation of what really happened to Custer and his five companies.
On what did you rely for source material?
I wanted to look at every primary account of the battle ever recorded, because that’s the only way to do it right. I knew there would be a lot of material, but I wasn’t prepared for how much there was. This is the most written-about battle in our history, after all—more than Gettysburg, which was far more important in the grand scheme of things. And we forget that thousands of Indians witnessed and/or participated in Custer’s destruction, and about 350 troopers who were besieged four miles away also survived; quite a few of them gave accounts. There might be as many as 200 Indian accounts, or even more, produced over the next 75 years—some of the Sioux and Cheyenne lived to ripe old ages. The last known battle participant, Dewey Beard, died in 1955, if you can believe that. But for a century those accounts weren’t given much respect, for several reasons. Many were contradictory, or appeared so, and some of the early ones had been embroidered or altered by reporters who wanted to spice a story up, faulty interpreters or the subjects themselves, some of whom were wary of retribution for their actions. And, of course, it’s a well-known historiographical phenomenon that witnesses to any single event will see and report it in different ways. So most researchers just threw up their hands and used little or none of the Indian testimony.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to
Loading ...
10 Comments to “Interview with George Custer Expert James Donovan”
As for the new Alamo book, there are PLENTY of realiable, military, Mexican side accounts, all written down shortly after the battle, in pen. However, one has to do their research, however, they(the mss) are practically under our noses! These accounts are backed up by Mexican army charts, and official dispatches, papers, and Mexican field reports. No tepee here. Also, I hope that Mr. Donovan does not compare the Alamo and Thermopylae as if they are the same in spirit and purpose. Many people wrongfully do this erroneous comparison, however, they are as different as night and day. For instance, the ancient Greeks were really defending their home ground from an invader, however, the so-called, Anglo-Texans were in the process of STEALING land! See the difference, folks? I know you do.
By Roger Borroel on Apr 8, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Arrogance in abundance. Humility non-existent.
By tjaldie23@peoplepc.com on Apr 9, 2009 at 12:18 am
I’m a big fan of the West. It seems that Mr. Donovan has done is
homework and you must respect that. I agree with Mr. Borroel about the Alamo and Thermopylae.
By Bill Stalzer on Apr 22, 2009 at 11:56 am
Nice article. Haven’t read the book yet, but I agree with one statement he made that kind of makes me want to read it. All too often historians have a specific point they wish to make, and even if unintentionally, tend to search for items that support that particular point, sometimes to the exclusion of other facts that may muddy the waters a bit.
This is why I don’t think I would read a book by Mr. Borroel. His comment above tends to make one think that he has already reached such a conclusion, and his book would probably support it. I much prefer to get all the facts from all sides, then determine for myself these things. So I will probably get Mr. Donavan’s book.
By Dale Decker on Apr 28, 2009 at 12:12 am
I am a 30 year Custer “buff” and have read dozens of books on the battle, been to the battlefield every year, re-enacted the battle, etc., and I truly believe “A Terrible Glory” is the best book on the subject in many years, maybe the best of all with the possible exception of William Graham’s “The Custer Myth”. He has done an excellent job of synthesizing all the available information, the new with the old, and in a very readable fashion. I think it will be the new “gold standard” among Custer scholars.
By Jon Heitland on May 12, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Like the life of Sinatra, the full scope of Custer and his accension into the american consciousness will probably prove too big for Hollywood, and too politically incorrect to even attempt to objectify in the wake of the red mans plight in our nation. I would pay to see the definitive portrayal of Custer in an Olver Stone film however, if for no other reason than to just piss off the status quo. I think that alone would have pleased Custer.
By Peter Thompson on May 24, 2009 at 10:15 pm
I have yet to read the book, however, many accounts of the resulting battle tend to not include contributing factors.Custer’s hatred of Ulysses S. Grant and his preoccupation with becoming the next President of the USA resulted in his haste, leaving gattling guns behind as not to slow the 7th Cavary down so he could travel to Washington to declare his candidacy. Disentary, among the troops. Being undergunned, single-shot breechloaders vs. the indians Winchesters. The troops carrying 4-months backpay having been paid just before the campaign.
By Myles Keough on May 25, 2009 at 1:27 pm
I have just finished Mr. Donovan’s superb book and want to tell him what a great work of history he produced. I too, like many others have read many of the more recommended books on the subject of the Battle of the Little Bighorn, and Mr. Donovan’s book is by far the most readable, complete, and entertaining. Truly a modern classic of history. Well done sir! Thanks for confirming my conclusions as to Custer’s greatest mistakes. I agree that his mistakes were violating the principle of mass and lack of any reconnaissance of the actual objective area. His narrative just feels so complete as to allow the reader to truly reach finality on the subject.
By LaMar Stellfox on Jun 8, 2009 at 12:28 am
I would like to know what clothing, equipment the 7th Cavalry wore at Little Big Horn. We are trying to do an authentic copy of the troopers gear. Thanks, Richard
By Richard Jesse on Jul 9, 2009 at 12:26 am
I have not read Mr Donovan’s book so I don’t know what conclusions he arrives at regarding how the battle onfolded. But of the Custer books and narratives I have read the one I found the most compelling (as far as how the battle itself unfolded) was Sole Survivor by Douglas W. Ellison. I’m not talking about the sole survivor (Frank Finkel) that he presents in this book, but rather the troop movements (Custer’s)and most probable strategies employed. I think archaeological evidence that was later found in the scientific investigation after the grass fire on the battlefield bears his theory out.
By NorPlains on Nov 18, 2009 at 3:34 am