Oklahoma Books

Short stories on the careers of various gunfighters with a slant towards those from Texas. The stories are well written, fast moving with colorful language.

Many of his sources were first-hand accounts since the original was published in +/- 1934. Cunningham does not make judgements about the gunfighters, but the reader will note that the good guys were not always good and the bad guys weren't always bad. Some of the "gunfights" were nothing more than cold-blooded murders and reminded me of the "gang" killings in many of our larger cities today.

For those interested in self defense, the introduction by Rosa offers an observation that is proved true in many of the stories: "The true gunfighter was already confident of the result when he drew and fired. The mistake so many fast-draw fanatics make is to believe that speed is of essence, whereas a cool, cold-blooded, and determined approach, backed by the killer instinct, invariably wins."

Great book for those interested in western gunfighters.

I have bought several copies of this book since first reading it a few
years ago ... a recommendation in itself.

Triggernometry is a classic that should be in the collection of every student and enthusiast of the Old West. Cunningham provides an revealing window into the life and attitudes of the times. If some of the attitudes expressed in the book seem shocking today, remember the difference 100+ years can make in a culture. This book belongs right between Elmer Keith's "Sixguns", and the Zane Grey collection. While it presents some information that has since been revised through the work of other historians, Cunningham does a marvelous job of presenting the human side of the gunmen of the Old West.

Unlike other reviewers I did not find the contents to be a textbook of racism. One must be aware of the history of the times. Many of the politicos of the age were not interested in the rebuilding of the Union only the destruction of Southron culture. Many unqualified, angry blacks were given appointments with the State Police; therfore, men like Hardin and Lowerey responded to the circumstances with blood and fire. The author, living in the latter days of this periods, heard and saw it with the ears and eyes of a man of the age. Reenforced my beliefs regarding the Earps and soft soaped Billy the Kid. Excellent read!

I really enjoyed this book as it provided insight into some men who are long since forgotten with their stories buried by the likes of Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday and Wild Bill etc. Unlike another reviewer I saw nothing racist about this book. It's not the author's responsiblity to sympathize with anyone. He just related the facts as he believed them. This is my favorite old west book of all time. Ah the good old days!

It's been a while since I read this book but I can tell you that it hit me in the gut. It was a book about Timothy McVeigh, one of America's dispicable criminals. I think the section in the book that struck me most was when the Feds went to his father's house. His father, a proud American, and former military man himself was shocked by the Feds treating him at first as if he was involved with his son's actions. You got the impression that the Feds felt sorry for this man who fathered Timothy and why wouldn't you be? As the Feds got to know the father, their guards went down because they realized that father and son were completely different in their views. A father is a proud American and the son is completely not. You read about how the divorce and his views of his mother helped shape his thinking. His relationship with his sisters and others also gave us insight to this lonely human being who obviously was distraught, mistrustful, and dangerous to his country after serving his country in 1991 Desert Storm. You begin to ask so many questions about why and how this disaster of the bomb going off at the Murrah building in Oklahoma City could have happened. The book answers or provides to clues to understanding him but it doesn't justify his actions. No, he was guilty of a horrendous crime which proved no purpose. He was ready to get arrested, sentenced, and executed. He showed no remorse to the victims, living and deceased, from his actions. Not a tear or a I'm sorry. Nothing, here was a great American soldier who became an American terrorist long before the events of September 11, 2001 crept in to our histories. Lana Padilla, Terry Nichols' former wife, wrote that it would have been easier to accept a foreigner and not a domestic terrorist. She is right! We could have taken it if it was a complete foreigner and stranger to our country! I remember thinking people were saying Middle Eastern terrorists but how wrong, how so wrong.

An otherwise fine account of the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City is spoiled by being overly sympathetic & uncritical in its portrayal of Tim McVeigh. The book includes very good material about McVeigh, boosted by interviews with him ... & that's also its weakness. Perhaps the interviews drew the authors in a little too much to McVeigh. They didn't cross the line by much, but they did cross it. He is, after all, a mass murderer, even if he is also likeable. The portrayal of McVeigh's father is a particular strength of the book.

Books about terrorists and sociopaths always seem to inspire reviewers to use words like "chilling." It may be a cliche, but this massive, exhaustively researched biography of Timothy McVeigh is just that -- chilling. You will be left with a good understanding of how McVeigh did it, and why he says he did it. I would have liked more psychological insights into McVeigh's state of mind, however. How does an intelligent kid from a pretty ordinary blue-collar family go from somewht alienated teenager (nothing atypical there) to decorated soldier to gun nut to obsessed drifter to mass murderer? At one point the book quotes McVeigh's court-appointed psychiatrist who says it's "unfortunate" that McVeigh didn't get some "counseling." Isn't that the understatement of the century!

I read this book, and it is an excellent study of McVeigh. However, let me point out that I read the hardcover version, which was published before Tim's execution. Still, Tim had many ups and downs of his life. I'm sure that many people, myself included, have some sort of disrespect for the government, and the authors present Tim's case remarkably presented. But instead of using letters to congressmen urging them to change the system, McVeigh decided to take human life to make his case. This shows how extreme hatred of the government can become if one's twisted mind believes that killing is the only way to be heard. Second, I kind of sympathize with some periods of McVeigh's life that I've pretty much led myself, such as isolation from the social world (except for, in McVeigh's case, gun enthisiasts). This is a must read and an alert that any crazy American can fight for rights by selfishly ending promising lives.

We can add this book to the numerous articles done by CNN,ABC and NBC and the many other government mouthpieces that have given us plenty of sensationalism and "flexible facts" and biased hype, but very little truth, hard core FACTS and the undeniable evidence that points to a larger conspiracy and a huge government cover up. Just like the networks, the authors of the book put forth only what the government wants the masses to see. You don't get the facts when you read this book, people you get fantasy/fiction. If you want FACTS I suggest you visit the Official Oklahoma City Bombing Investigation team's website. Oklahoma State representative Charles Key has done a wonderful job investigating the bombing and his Final Report provides us with the evidence that didn't make it to trial-the numerous eyewitnesses who were not called to testify despite the important events they witnessed on April 19,1995. McVeigh was NOT the lone bomber and anyone who thinks so just does NOT have the facts at hand. GET THEM. Put this work of fiction down and honor the victims of the OKC bombing by seeking the TRUTH.

This is a great concise work of biography and history, written by one of the greatest living historians of the American West. I think some of the reviewers miss the point:this is a biogtraphy first, and an analysis of Little Bighorn secondly. This is probably the best bio of Custer for the interested to start with because of its meticulous research and the brevity of its length. Once you read "Cavalier in Buckskin" do not be surprised if you seek out Utley's other fine works of Western and Native American history. Utley's a class act, and so is this fine work which combines the best of academic and popular history. If you're at all curious-READ IT!

I have been an avid reader of Custer related literature
through the years and this is simply the best book on the market
on George Armstrong Custer. As a graduate student at Mississippi
State University and taking a course on the American West I gave
a lecture on Custer and recommended this book to the class.
Mr. Utley gives great detail on Custer's life. As with any
reader of Custer the debate rages on about General Terry's orders
to Custer and if they were obeyed or not. The author brought
out something I had not read before and that being the affidavet
of a cook who overheard a conservation between Terry and Custer.
A great book on Custer and especially on the Battle of the
Little Bighorn. Also, being a Civil War buff I liked the way the author mentioned how former Confederate generals were some
of Custer's biggest defenders after the battle.
If one were looking for a starting place on Custer this book
would be the one.

This is a very short biography (just under 200 pages, not counting the pictures) of one of the most flamboyant and controversial military figures in our nation's history. Volumes could be written about George Custer, and indeed have been, and yet still there could never be a consensus as to the man's character, his skill as a warrior, and the amount of blame he should shoulder for charging headlong into immortality when he and part of his regiment were wiped out at the Little Bighorn. Custer is one of those figures on whom it would be difficult to write a good biography in 500 pages. Somehow, Utley has done it in 200.

This work is by no means thorough, but rather provides a good introduction and outline of Custer's life. Not a lot of detail is provided about any one phase of Custer's adult life--boy general, frontier greenhorn, Indian fighter extraordinaire--and yet there is enough information here to get a good idea of what Custer the man must have been like. I think it is outside of the scope of this book to psychoanalyze this complex individual, or to analyze his several controversial achievements, from Civil War battles to an Indian attack on the Washita River to rushing into battle at the Little Bighorn without the necessary reconnaissance, and yet Utley manages to put things into a perspective that at least seems reasonable and fair, if not conclusive. His section on the Little Bighorn battle is concise, to the point, and objective, and, though he tends to imply that the blame for Custer's death cannot be fixed entirely on Custer's rashness, yet he does not attempt to deify or exonerate the man wholly from blame.

This book was meant to be a short introduction into Custer's life, and in that it fills its purpose completely. For students seeking a deeper and more thorough understanding of Custer, however, a larger work is needed. Still, this book is immensely valuable in that it provides a short, objective, and concise narrative of the life of George Armstrong Custer.

This biography of George Armstrong Custer devotes most of its pages to his post Civil War career. Most people only know that he died at the Little Bighorn battle; they know the legend or the symbol, not the real person. Chapter 1 discusses his legend from 1876 to the present. Before his last campaign Custer charged the Grant administration with fraud and corruption. So whether he was a "victim of Grant's Indian policy" or a "foolhardy glory hunter" depended on the politics of the beholder.

Custer's postwar career depended on the support of Sherman and Sheridan ("Custer never let me down"). Since the Indians kept far away from the railroads, building the Northern Pacific railroad would ethnically cleanse the northern Dakota territory. The railroads were given tens of thousands of square miles of land ("sunblasted in summer, frozen in winter" p.125). They could not be sold to settlers until Indians were removed and neutralized. Settlers would then buy railroad lands, then use the railroad to transport their produce and supplies. The army's task was to implement this political policy; they only followed orders. There were treaties such as at Medicine Lodge in October 1867. But the Indians had no idea that they were giving up the country they claimed as their own (p.59).

The announced purpose of the Black Hills Expedition of 1874 was to find a site for a new fort, and for scientific exploration. The discovery of gold meant that miners would flock to these Indian lands via the Northern Pacific. The chief geologist, and Lt. Col. Fred Grant, cast doubt on this report: it might have been planted (p.141)! These lands could not be developed while the Indians held title, unless a war was created to negate the treaty (p.147). The Interior Dept. issued an ultimatum to the Sitting Bull bands: move to the Great Sioux Reservation or be driven in (p.156). But the Indians were immobilized in winter! Their failure to migrate was used to start a war. The military campaign started in April 1876. Custer believed that the Indians should be civilized into Christian farmers, but "if I were an Indian I often think that I would prefer to adhere to the free open plains rather than submit to a reservation" (p.149).

Just before his last campaign Custer testified against the actions of Secretary of War Belknap. Was he looking for some heroic action to gain popular acclaim? Was he suffering from any ailment that could affect his judgment? Chapter 9 discusses the "Judgments" on the defeat. Utley wonders if Custer received his chest wound at the beginning of the battle, and this demoralized and confused their defense? This would account for much that is puzzling about the battle (p.199). Those paintings of "Custer's Last Stand" are imagined. The Sioux fired their rifles and arrows from long range while concealed (p.190). They were too smart for a "Charge of the Light Brigade".

Robert M. Utley is probably our most thoughtful scholar of George Armstrong Custer and his ultimate demise at the Little Bighorn in 1876. He has studied Custer since a boy, including writing his Master's thesis on him and spending years as a guide at the Custer Battlefield site in Montana. One of Utley's purposes behind writing this book was to "coerce me into deciding what I thought" of Custer. It's pretty obvious by the end that he thinks pretty highly of him, despite all his faults. Custer was a man full of contradictions: he demanded obedience to orders from others but didn't feel he needed to obey orders himself; he could be cruel to some while favoring select others; he was generous and selfish, egotistical as well as modest. (Perhaps the biggest contradiction was how one of the most successful Civil War cavalry generals could come to so ignoble an end.)

Men either hated or loved him; few were indifferent - thus the controversy regarding his actions on the Little Bighorn. Utley believes that Custer acted as one would expect a self-assured, ambitious, enterprising (critics, of course, would use different adjectives: self-serving, glory-seeking, impulsive) officer to act at the Last Stand, even though he had limited information, and finds more fault with Reno's and Benteen's inaction at the crucial moment when more decisive action may have saved the day. But no one will ever know with total exactness what happened that day, which is why the legend of Custer looms so large. And for Utley that is the "significant Custer," the one that has made the biggest "impact on human minds." Utley writes about that Custer with critical admiration, and one appreciates the controlled, clear-eyed appraisal. It's the best short biography on Custer out there.

Gall. Lakota war chief.
I want to thank Robert W. Larson for his contribution to one of the most important hunkpapa war chiefs: Gall.
I think Robert M. Utley said it right: "Robert Larson has rescued from obscurity one of the most prominent leaders of the Lakota Sioux".
I am from the Netherlands, Europe, and I read for several years now about the history of the sioux peoples, especcialy 2 tribes: the Mdewakantons and the Hunkpapas.
The book "Gall. Lakota war chief" is for me a beautiful contribution to the Sioux history.
If somebody wants to react, do not hesitate and mail me please.
I am looking for more information of the Mdewakantons chief Little Crow.
In my opinion the most important chief of the Dakota tribes.

The life of Gall of the Hunkpapa Lakota (Sioux) who lived from 1840 to 1894 has long been a footnote of history, someone who shows up alongside Custer, Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse but never comes to the fore to offer his own story. With so many first class biographies of his contemporaries such as Crazy Horse and Custer and Sitting Bull: The Life and Times of an American Patriot there was always a need for a biography of Gall.

Born in 1840 he was a famed warrior in his twenties and served under Sitting Bull during the Battle of the Little Bighorn in 1876, and later fled to Canada with him until his surrender. Gall settled in the Dakotas as a farmer and Judge of the Court of Indian Affairs on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation and apparently became friendly with local white settlers in his later years. He turned against Sitting Bull when the older chief become involved with the Ghost Dance movement.

Gall lived on the Standing Rock Agency until his death December 5, 1895.

This is a wonderful contribution to scholarish on the American West and on the American Indian and finally provides a chapter in the life of one of the greatest warriors of the American West,

Seth J. Frantzman

Other Native American leaders such as Sitting Bull, Geronimo, Chief Joseph, and others have had volumes written about them so it was entirely appropriate that Lakota Chief Gall was given his due. Gall received his name from his mother who saw him eating the gall bladder of a freshly killed buffalo. Gall's mentor during his formative years was the Hunkpapa Sioux chief Sitting Bull. Various engagements such as the Sand Creek Massacre, the Fetterman Fight outside of Fort Phil Kearny, the Battle of the Rosebud, and the Little Big Horn are covered. Bloody Knife, a member of the Crow tribe and George Custer's favorite scout, was a bitter enemy of Gall's. When author Robert Larson isn't sure of certain facts regarding Gall he theorizes what his role may have been. Gall had two wives and three of his children killed during Reno's attack at the Little Big Horn enraging Gall to seek vengeance. Chiefs Gall and Sitting Bull sought refuge in Canada during the mid 1770s. Canada was willing to grant their followers asylum provided they obeyed the Queen's laws, but would not provide them with a reservation or feed them. Gall later split with his mentor Sitting Bull by living on the Standing Rock reservation which borders the two Dakotas, and his willingness to accept the role of a farmer. Gall was one of those termed a progressive while those like Sitting Bull who clung to traditional ways was called a traditionalist. The death of Sitting Bull who later left Canada to live on the Standing Rock reservation, and the tragedy at Wounded Knee in December of 1890 are also covered. Gall put on considerable weight in his later years (close to 300 pounds) and died in December of 1894 of natural causes. Sadly Gall has been neglected and not as well known as Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, but Robert Larson has done a wonderful job in putting this biography together. I believe Gall would be well pleased.

Gall was a Hunkpapa warrior and Lakota chief who resisted efforts by the U.S. government to annex the Black Hills - and led a charge to attack Custer's men on the other side of Little Bighorn. Despite his achievements there has been much controversy surrounding Gall's role and contribution to the conflict, and retired history professor Robert W. Larson here sorts through different reports, views and source materials to paint a new portrait of Gall's character. College-level holdings strong in Native American history will find it a scholarly survey that covers the known extent of Gall's life, using rare Standing Rock Reservation records, among others, to recreate and add depth to standard reports. It's a highly recommended library addition for any specialty collection.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

I just finished reading this "first ever" biography of the Lakota (Hunkpapa) Indian leader Gall (Pizi) by Robert W. Larson, retired Professor of History (from the University of Northern Colorado, Greeley) and writer, and found it very informative. I want to recommend it to all serious Indian Wars students and frontier history buffs.

It is, doubtless by necessity, somewhat speculative regarding Gall's exact whereabouts and activities during certain phases of his life, as sufficient biographical source material is sometimes lacking. That is to be expected and is quite understandable -- there are obvious gaps in the record. Further, Gall certainly lived in the shadows of more renowned Lakota chiefs such as Sitting Bull (for many years, Gall was one of his loyal lieutenants) and Crazy Horse.

But regardless, Gall was quite a phenomenon in his own right. At the time, U.S. soldiers called him the "Fighting Cock of the Sioux", and Libbie Custer, even while continuing to grieve the loss of her husband at the Little Big Horn, upon first seeing his picture (which was taken in 1881 at Ft. Buford by David F. Barry), observed that he appeared to be one "fine specimen of a warrior". And so he was, according to all accounts. He wasn't notably tall, at least by modern day standards, but he was well-built, strong, athletic, and courageous. And, not unlike Custer, he apparently didn't mind being conspicuous on the battlefield, such as by wearing red.

Larson's approach is scholarly (there are copious end notes) and, at times, though always reliably competent and straightforward, some readers might find his writing style to be a bit on the dry side. But, even so, for people of my ilk who are fascinated with this era of history, the subject matter will inevitably keep one turning the pages.

This book is worthwhile, especially regarding information that it presents on lesser-known actions and incidents. While plenty of ink has been devoted to the Little Big Horn fight, Larson's book doesn't focus too much on the xs and os of that conflict, opting instead to bring out all kinds of interesting details regarding the lesser known parts of the Great Sioux War era, the sojourn of the "hostile" Lakotas in Canada prior to their ultimate surrender, reservation life at Standing Rock, etc. I personally appreciated reading and learning more about these things.

This spring I enrolled in PSCI 398 Domestic Terrisom. As part of my outside reading, I came across this book. I found that it was very informative and offered a new insight into what happend in Oklahoma City. Though I read this book on my own time, it gave me lots of good ideas on how to explore the question that plagued my class "What is domestic terriosm?" This books explains why everyone including the guilty deserve a defense.

Stephen Jones, the lead counsel for Timothy McVeigh, writes an engrossing book that is not only about his client's case, but gives equal treatment about a nefarious government reminescent of Rome of the Roman Empire. In his writings Jones not only presents many deficiencies in the Federal government's case against McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing, but also paints the picture of a government agency completely hell-bent on "winning." Jones, in advocating for his client, contends that the prosecution's case was incomplete and circumstantial; exculpatory evidence was either withheld or stalled that could have helped in giving McVeigh a fair trial.

In his analysis, Jones does raise enough doubt in McVeigh's "direct" involvement in the bombing, and more that one can of worms is opened. For example, an extra leg is found in the Murrah Building rubble that does not belong to any victim. Additionally, several red flags that are discovered by Jones and his team may imply that the bombing was planned from abroad. For example, how can only two men plan and execute such a bombing of such magnitude, something said to be impossible by bomb experts in other countries where this kind of thing is routine? Jones questions Terry Nichols' ignorance of the OKC bombing plans. Nichols made several trips and many telephone calls to the Philippines, a hotbed of terrorist activity -- that's never taken seriously in connecting Nichols, much less in mitigating McVeigh.

Jones' book is also his own biography foray into a high profile case that transformed his life and his beliefs about U.S. justice. His book, as he writes, is not meant to cash in on this case, but to expose the truth. Jones believes McVeigh should have been found not guilty (Read especially the acknowledgements!), and portrays his client as a man, not the demon characterized by the press. Although Jones does not offer why McVeigh was involved at all, this would seem to be covered by attorney-client privilege. Despite this, whether or not Jones convinces the general public of the facts that McVeigh did not receive a fair trial and that the government successfully hid the truth is left for the reader.

In trying to justify his defense of Tim McVeigh, which needs no defense, since we all know everyone is entitled to a good defense no matter what the crime, Stephen Jones tries to convince us that Tim McVeigh may not be guilty of bombing the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, or at least that there are a number of others involved.

His main defense consists of trying to convince the reader that certain eye witnesses do not agree with each other on important sightings of McVeigh, but you don't have to know much about legal proceedings to know how unreliable eye witnesses can be. Another strong pillar of his defense is the finding of an unidentifiable leg in the bomb debris. A leg that apparently belongs to none of the known victims. Presumably, the owner walked away on his remaining leg and never showed up at any hospital in the area. Presumably, the medical examiners trying to patch up numerous body parts got it all right and could not have made a mistake.

On top of that, Jones was a party to fake confession of McVeigh's that was designed to confuse far right milita units who might be talked to admitting things they knew about, since Tim had already taken credit for the bombing. This little subterfuge backfired on the defense when the Dallas Morning Times illegally learned about it and proceeded to tell the world about the confession, not realizing it was fake.

But like all murder trials, you can't help but feel the accused is guilty when he won't take the stand in his own defense. McVeigh taking the stand was never even considered as far as I can determine from this account of the story. And since McVeigh would rather go to his death, and Nichols to life in prison, rather than incriminate anyone else, one can only conclude they are truly guilty.

Nevertheless, I recommend this book to all buffs of courtroom trials and conspiracy buffs who can probably have a lot of fun with it.

Stephen Jones blends an insightful analysis of the events that have transpired since April 19, 1995 and the date of McVeigh's execution in Terre Haute, Indiana based on two important premises: The government investigation was incomplete and McVeigh did not receive a fair trial. This is as much a book for law students as it is for conspiracy artists. Jones' southern charm comes forth in his capacity as author yet his role as defense lawyer never escapes the reader. Jones covers his bases much of the time, pointing out early in the prologue that he would not have been able to write this detailed account of his conversations with McVeigh had McVeigh's appellate team attacked his capacity as a lawyer during McVeigh's trial.

This book is far from sensational and actually is closer to a calm, reasoned look at both McVeigh as a person and United States v. McVeigh as a trial set in perhaps the most bizarre and compromising circumstances in the past fifty years. This book perfectly suits any law school course involving mass destruction or suits any university course concerning political dissent or even the political science of law.

Others Unknown put into print what the majority of thinking Americans sensed about the Oklahoma City Bombing.

There had to be more people involved.

It all started with the FBI drawings of mystery man number 3, who was described by no more than 3 people to have been with McVeigh. He looked Middle Eastern. Hmmm, nope no terrorist acts would ever occur on American soil right. Then the second little facts that weren't put to light, the bomb making materials that they had receipts for would never have been enough to do that sort of damage. And on it goes.

The interesting thing is that Stephen Jones (the author and McVeighs attorney) even points the finger at Osama Bin Laden back in 1998. Hello is anybody listening. Hindsight is great, but I think we all knew there was more than meets the eye about this ordeal.

The weakest part of the book is that MR. Jones never delves deep enough into why the government cover-up. He barely scratches the surface, but I think that is the real mystery. Why was the government not screaming that we know there was at least one other person involved and we need to find him? Is it simply that Bill Clinton didn't want to rock the boat? Could it have been that he was trying to create a legacy for himself, other than ????gate (you fill in the scandal)? Did he think naming an Arab as a suspect might destroy peace talks with Israel and Palestine? These are all only conjectures but the book should have hit these issues harder.

Overall a good book, especially for the ignorant Americans who are spoon-fed their daily dose of propaganda from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Etc., and think its news.

Having seen enough movies and tv shows featuring Hickok as character, I wanted to know the story behind the legend. This book does it. The author is an authority on Hickok and has written extensively about him. The book is clearly well-researched and heavily annotated. All that to the side, it is an entertaining read.

Hickok would have done as well today as he did back then. There was truth to his reputation. He was tough, brave, charming, funny and a peerless gunman. At the same time, he knew how to exploit his reputation and did so. That's what makes him so interesting today. Here is a person who knew the value of self-promotion and celebrity a century and a half ago before they became the science they are today.

Joseph G Rosa did a wonderful job in his research. The world, in an effort to depict Wild Bill as an exciting, rutheless, bloodthirsty gunfighter, has tainted the man behind the name. He was anything but bloodthirsty. His desire was to make things right, he was soft on the inside, behind those iron fists, was a caring, gentle man. Rosa did an excellent job as he gives us a true glimps into Wild Bill's world. He starts at the begining, when Wild Bill was just a child and goes from there to his adventures into becomming the gunfighter that we learn about reading this book, not the gunfighter Hollywood depicts, he was never that man. Anyone wanting to learn of the true west will enjoy reading this book.

While others seemingly do scant research about Wild Bill or they are unable to communicate, Rosa's "They Called Him Wild Bill" is simply the best biography about Hickok I have ever read. The book is documented with both a myriad of legal documents and newspaper accounts (the latter can certainly be misleading, as they can be today), and Rosa is a gifted author.

You might find that your conception about Wild Bill changes after you read this book. (And if you saw that "laughable" movie titled "Wild Bill" with Jeff Bridges playing Bill, you'll realize why I call that movie "laughable" if you do read this book.)

You might not care for Wild Bill if you read this book, or...

Well, read it and decide for yourself.

No one presents Hickok as does Rosa. Period.

I've read several other books on famous Western characters that by far surpass this work. Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday, Custer, Billy The Kid, etc.. After reading some reviews here, I purchased the book and read it. I was very dissappointed in it. It gives a little info on James Butler Hickock's younger years and just briefyly covers his various "gunfights". The book states that he killed an estimated numbers of men but doesn't go into a whole lot of detail about them. The author plugs in lot of "hearsay' of the time and then attempts to dispute alot of it but not very successfully. The contains a lot of letters from various individuals and then the author states that the content of these letters are untrue. So why print it then? He also includes a large amount of information about "other" Wild Bill's throughout the book which to me was a waste of time. I didn't by the book to read about other people who were also called Wild Bill. Overall, pretty poor. Should have bought a different book. Don't waste your money.

Make no mistake, this is the most meticulously researched and likely the definitive biograhy of that great American archetype, William Butler Hickok, known to history as "Wild Bill." Mr. Rosa spent decades researching this book and his thoroughness and dedication show on every page. The real "Wild Bill's" life is full of holes, obscured by myth and legend, and to Mr. Rosa's eternal credit, he has done as much as anyone could to sift through that to close the gaps and bring to life a sharp picture of the real man. Also brought to life by Mr. Rosa is a cast of original characters, friendsand enemies alike, who crossed Wild Bill's path. Yet there is a cost to the reader: You too will sift through numerous lengthy documents, reminiscences, newspaper reports, and letters printed in type difficult to distinguish from the author's own text (editor's fault). These verbatim transcripts often seem interminable and are difficult to wade through at times. Much of that stuff could've been slipped into appendices or end notes. This is not a book for casual or easy reading but an absolute must for anyone interested in the real history of the American West.

Boy...Lewis sure is a witty fellow!!...I like his writing style...very descriptive....a true social observer.....A lot of "savage Indians" and interesting characters with Green River knives along young Mr.Garrard's journey .....some of the language is VERY un-PC by today's standards....I'm surprised Al Sharpton hasn't called for a boycott of this book ;)...Nice footnotes and forward....They say it is a classic Southwest history book and I agree...

I've read a number of histories of this period and have at times seen historians' references to this book. I've considered reading it for about thirty years and finally purchased it. I had no idea what a well written and entertaining book this was. If you've any interest in the late fur trade era, you should get this one.

Lewis H. Garrard was an exuberant 17 year old tourist in the Old West of 1846-1847. He traveled down the Santa Fe Trail with a wagon train and stopped off at Bent's Fort on the Arkansas River of Colorado and spent a couple of months with the Cheyenne Indians and the traders and mountain men who lived around the fort. When Governor Charles Bent of New Mexico and twenty others were killed in Taos in an Mexican/Indian uprising he joined an informal expedition of mountain men to take revenge. His group arrived after the U.S. army had recaptured Taos, but Garrard was in Taos for the trial and hanging of nine of the revolutionary trouble-makers, even loaning the hangman several lariats when he ran short. "Wah-to-yah" is said to be the only account of the trial and hanging of the Taos revolutionaries.

Garrard was a lot more tolerant than most travelers, obviously enjoying the company of the Cheyennes and his extravagant and untutored White companions. He feels the need to express himself occasionally about moral issues and the lack of civilized values of the Indians, Mexicans, and other prairie dwellers - but his condemnations are rote rather than persuasive. Garrard, we imagine, probably shared buffalo robes with comely young Cheyenne women and thoroughly enjoyed the experience, as he did buffalo hunting, dog-meat feasts, and tall tale sessions with the mountain men. He also demonstrates a moral core, condemning the U.S war against Mexico and the wholesale hanging of the revolutionaries in Taos -- sentiments which were not popular in the West at the time.

"Wah-to-yah" -- the Indian name for the Spanish Peaks of southern Colorado -- is perhaps the best account you will find of a young man's adventures in the Old West of mountain men and unconquered Indians. It is similar to Francis Parkman's "The Oregon Trail." The two young men were in the West during the same year but Garrard's book is "the fresher, the more revealing, the more engaging, the less labored" in the words of A. B. Guthrie's introduction to "Wah-to-yah." Garrard is a likeable person; Parkman is not. Both were keen observers and good writers.

"Wah-to-yah" is on the short list of essential books about the Old West. It's easy and engaging reading. We need an annotated edition, however, which will tell us more about the many characters - some of them famous, such as Kit Carson -- Garrard meets and the places he visits and put the book in its historical context of its times.

Smallchief

Lewis H. Garrard was an exuberant 17 year old tourist in the Old West of 1846-1847. He traveled down the Santa Fe Trail with a wagon train and stopped off at Bent's Fort on the Arkansas River of Colorado and spent a couple of months with the Cheyenne Indians and the traders and mountain men who lived around the fort. When Governor Charles Bent of New Mexico and twenty others were killed in Taos in an Mexican/Indian uprising he joined an informal expedition of mountain men to take revenge. His group arrived after the U.S. army had recaptured Taos, but Garrard was in Taos for the trial and hanging of nine of the revolutionary trouble-makers, even loaning the hangman several lariats when he ran short. "Wah-to-yah" is said to be the only account of the trial and hanging of the Taos revolutionaries.

Garrard was a lot more tolerant than most travelers, obviously enjoying the company of the Cheyennes and his extravagant and untutored White companions. He feels the need to express himself occasionally about moral issues and the lack of civilized values of the Indians, Mexicans, and other prairie dwellers - but his condemnations are rote rather than persuasive. Garrard, we imagine, probably shared buffalo robes with comely young Cheyenne women and thoroughly enjoyed the experience, as he did buffalo hunting, dog-meat feasts, and tall tale sessions with the mountain men. He also demonstrates a moral core, condemning the U.S war against Mexico and the wholesale hanging of the revolutionaries in Taos -- sentiments which were not popular in the West at the time.

"Wah-to-yah" -- the Indian name for the Spanish Peaks of southern Colorado -- is perhaps the best account you will find of a young man's adventures in the Old West of mountain men and unconquered Indians. It is similar to Francis Parkman's "The Oregon Trail." The two young men were in the West during the same year but Garrard's book is "the fresher, the more revealing, the more engaging, the less labored" in the words of A. B. Guthrie's introduction to "Wah-to-yah." Garrard is a likeable person; Parkman is not. Both were keen observers and good writers.

"Wah-to-yah" is on the short list of essential books about the Old West. It's easy and engaging reading. We need an annotated edition, however, which will tell us more about the many characters - some of them famous, such as Kit Carson -- Garrard meets and the places he visits and put the book in its historical context of its times.

Smallchief

Main character - Lewis H. Garrard
Location - present-day American southwest
Story - Adventure of a seventeen year old among the Indians (mainly Cheyenne) and Indian traders
This book is absolutely brilliant! Lewis experienced a time and place that is gone forever and he documented it with a style, flair and grasp of the English language that most of us will never possess. I can't recommend this book enough. It is essential reading for those interested in the Old West and have no choice but to live vicariously through books such as Garrards. Again, this book is truly brilliant. It is literature of the highest degree. Thank you Lewis for putting your western adventure down in words for all to enjoy. Well, at least those with enough good taste to seek out such a book.

Several years ago while at work, it became evident that at least for several weeks Billy Joels'well known song, "The Ballad Of Billy The Kid" was getting airplay at the same time each week. We could almost predict it and kind of expected it.I had heard it before but never really listened to it closely.Now, I was paying attention to every line as others may have,and took it for fact.This was right up until I heard a well known disc jockey discount the song and state that much of what was in the song was not fact at all but just made up ,fabricated and just literal allusion. At first I was taken aback, a little annoyed, but then I realized that Mr. Joel had to rhyme his words and possibly used what worked and to hell with the facts,which of course, was his prerogative.In doing so however, he did Billy The Kid a great injustice.Now I became curious for real facts about Billy and I did some searching and boy was I astounded at what I found.His life was nothing at all like the song or even what I had thought Billy the Kid was like based on my general knowledge of him picked up along the way.I envisioned a killer cowboy,a bank robbing,train robbing outlaw terrorizing the early west.Well,I have since developed an enduring respect for him after reading a very accurate and truthful history of him as written by Frederick Nolan.This book reads like a Russian novel.There are so many characters and people involved in the Kids world it boggles the mind.This book is completely filled with photos,maps,references and mini histories, one doesn't know where to begin. It does get jumpy at times where I felt lost in all the action but each chapter ends well seemingly tying up all the loose ends.How these guys did it and why anybody would go west is beyond me.But go they did and it was less than placid. The early west was a dry, dusty violent place and the Kid was right in the middle of it.His beginnings were confusing from a historical point of view due to lack of information and it seems he rarely experienced any lengthy periods of true peace.He always had to scrape for an existence,fight for scraps and he did defend himself as any respectable person would.He killed when absolutely necessary and was not the sociopathic killer history's tall tales have made him out to be.He had emotion,compassion and youthful exuberance and was well liked among his peers and was respected as well for his sense of fair play and justice.This it seems, was all for nought for his death was both tragic and violent at the hand of Pat Garrett who has his own version to tell and did for profit.He lived his life as best he could under the circumstances and remains a tragically misunderstood chapter of our midwest history. Just a blip on the radar, but a person who stood fast for his rights and was cheated out of a fair shake on more than one occasion. Nolan reflects that and is honest in his assessment of just what is truth and what is fiction.He attempts to dispell the myths and report the events down to their absolute truths without using dramatic,theatrical scenes.I did alot of research on Billy and boiled down the real books on his life.This book glared like a beacon for its honest assessment of just who and what Billy Antrum,and then Billy Bonney and then who became finally, Billy The Kid, was and what his life was from its mysterious beginings to its abrupt yet vague end.If Billy the Kid is a source of mystery that needs to be cleared then Nolans book is it.It is clearly evident that he did his research and would not fabricate facts to enhance the history.I recommend this book to Mr. Billy Joel.Perhaps he could compose a second edition more accurate to poor Billy Bonney to give him proper justice.As a book about the man and his times I highly recommend it.It is an arduous but fun read and when you hear the above noted song you will smile to yourself and know better and perhaps hold a place in your heart for the young man that history crucified perhaps a bit prematurely.The book is tops if you need or want to know Billy the Kid.

Nolan does a great job in describing the events of Billy the Kids life. One of the best historians out there. i would recommend this book for all who are interested in Billy The Kid. Unlike the book written by Jim Johnson this book is full of facts.

Fred Nolan is one of the most recognized and popular historians of the old west, but where he makes many of his mistakes is by repeating too many things written by previous authors without sufficient evidence. I find most of his statements impossible to prove incorrect, but there are a few problems in his writing. Also, the editing of his book has a few flaws in that there are many glowing contradictions within the book. But, if you can figure out where the errors were made, the rest of the book is interesting and appears to be factual. In comparison to the other books currently on the market on Billy, this is one of the better ones, especially if like good pictures..

Frederick Nolan has established a book on "Billy the Kid," which out does most before and after it's initial publication in 1999. An easy to follow book for all readers that tells the true story based on documentation and "real" proof to the life and death of "Billy the Kid." Bye far the best out there on this subject matter. Purchase it!!!

Mike Koch, Author of "The Kimes Gang."

What lacks in this describtion in the life og Billy the Kid, is a bit more detail in the last chapters. Clearly Frederick Nolan is most interestet in the Lincoln County War - thats why I give the book 4 stars and not 5.

Having said that I must hurry to make clear that this book probaly is the best biografy to read about Billy the Kid if you are just af normal human being knowning nothing first hand of the old west.
I am such a person, and when I started reading the book, Frederick Nolan unfolded the true old west before my eyes in a manner I have never imagined anyone would be able to. He writes in a nice easy-to-read way even for a guy like me who hasn't got english as my first language. He mannages to tell all the details of the story in such a way, that it is easy to understand what was going on, and why people were acting as the were - and that is a very big accevement as some subjekts in the book - for exampel the Lincoln County War - is af very complicated affair involving many different persons.

Frederik Nolans mission with this book is to show us the kid as he were in the old west as it was in the late 1870ties. And he succedes. He shows us a young man with a difficult childhood who has driftet from one bad area to another only to end up in the lions cave - Lincoln County - where a great cattle-war is about to break. And from their on his fate is seeled. Being the one he is with the past he has - he has no chance of avoiding bekomming a part of the war, and in the end one of the most feared - and wanted - outlaws in the territorry.

I picked up this book because when I initially read the plot it was like someone had taken a page out of my own life. My "Chebon" was a well known pow-wow dancer. All I can say there is that I wished he'd done a disappearing act like "Chebon"; it would've saved me alot of grief. Potts does a good enough job with the descriptions of pow-wow; although I think she could fine tune her character development and dialogue. I wanted to feel more sisterhood with Ilianna but her 'history' was awfully vague. Same with Chebon. There were numerous printing errors in my copy of the book, but this may be what happens when you self-publish which I think is the case here, but I could be mistaken. I was disappointed with the ending; after experiencing a major burn, the character seemed to have learned very little from her experience. I think Potts had an opportunity to bring the vibrancy of pow-wow, the cultural conflicts between NDN men and White women, and more, to her readers and fell short.

Forty-two year old Ilianna Marshall has a job, a house, her hobbies, and a best friend, but no romance to erase the remnants of an unhappy marriage and lonely nights. Attending a powwow and meeting Chebon Charboneau, a Native American, remedies that problem. The two share a weekend of love that will last for a lifetime--she hopes and he promises. She hopes she's not being used. She doesn't want to be just a powwow pickup. She wants desperately to believe Chebon's promises, but should she?

Leanna Potts writes a fulfilling story of a woman's hunger for love and the cost of satisfaction. Lovers of romance stories will savor every moment Ilianna and Chebon spend together. And, the way the book ends, romance lovers will beg for the sequel.

Have just finished a great summer time read, "PowWow Pickup" by Leanna Potts. The heroine Ilianna Marshall is recovering, but slowly, from a loveless marriage. As therapy she attends a local powwow. She also hopes it will get her in touch with her Native American background which has largely been ignored by her mother. While there, she meets and falls in love with Chebon, a Grass Dancer

The author paints a vivid picture of the modern powwow. One can see the costumes, hear the drums, smell the dust and gain understanding of this little known slice of ethnic culture. Tenderly and with sensitive awareness of her needs Chebon breaks through the shell Ilianna has built around herself. Would that we all could have such a lover!

The surprising ending sends a realistic message about romance in the Twenty First century. Well written, with lively dialogue, colorful descriptions and true to life situations, Powwow Pickup is bound to hold your interest.

Reviewed by Betty Wold,Phoenix,AZ

As a avid reader, I go through books of multiple types like candy. It is at times, very difficult to keep me engrossed. This book was gripping from the first page. The author has managed to include native american lore, romance, mystery and plain good fiction while at the same time staying realistic. The combination is very difficult to find in one place, not so with Powwow Pickup. The author's ability to reach into the human heart and pull out emotions that all of us have probably felt at some time is uncanny. The author is truelly on the rise.

I LOVED this book and couldn't put it down until I finished. It's a romance set in a contemporary Native American background, which is difficult to find today. Illiana, the main character, is a woman still bitter after a divorce, but who feels an instant attraction that she resists to Chebon, a grass dancer she meets at a powwow. He overcomes her insecurities and uncertainties about getting to know him, and they have a short, wonderful romance. The sense of loss and betrayal Illiana feels when she and Chebon part is palpable. The author has a great ability to make her characters real, interesting, and strongly capturing the reader's empathy. I look forward to more from this writer.

quienes desertaron del ejercito invasor, pues se rebelaron ante la injusta guerra impuesta por el ya poderoso vecino del norte a la república del sur, recien independizada, quince años tenia como tal, enconrandose debilitada por una serie de pugnas inetrnas, las cuales por cierto, habian sido atizadas por el primer representante oficial del vecino del norte, se trato de una gvulgar uerra de conquista, la mas injusta que han visto los tiempos, por eso no es de extrañar que el ejercito invasor expe- rimentara el mas alto porcentaje de desercion durante una guerra, Polk, su mentor Jackson, Gaynes, Taylor, Scott, Pillow y demas caterva hoy por hoy se cuecen todos los dias en el infierno.

This book chronicles the rise and fall of the Saint Patrick's Battalion, "The San Patricios," a notable arm of the Mexican Army during the War of 1846-1848. Two hundred deserters from the U. S. Army joined the San Patricios and fought against their former comrades in five major battles. As detailed by the author, the history of the San Patricios is a woeful tale of angry, bewildered, naive, or calculating young men, from varied backgrounds, who deserted for a myriad of reasons and paid a fearful price.

John Riley, the Irish born originator and organizer of the San Patricios, was a soldier of fortune who survived all of his wars. (Riley had the distinction of serving three different national flags in the 19th century) Two-fifths of the San Patricios were from Ireland and the remainder from other European nations or the United States. All of the deserters had been privates in the U. S. Army and several were noted troublemakers.

The casualties suffered by the San Patricios at Churubusco on August 20, 1847, were devastating. Three hours after the battle had commenced, 60% of the two hundred and four men were either dead or had been captured by the Americans. Of the 85 San Patricios taken prisoner, 72 including Major John Riley were tried for desertion. All were found guilty except for one man who was judged insane. Fifty men were condemned to death by hanging, fifteen were to suffer lesser punishments, and five were pardoned.

On September 10, Riley and 14 men were brutally whipped and branded with a large "D." Sixteen of the condemned were hanged that day and four others the following day. The remaining men were positioned two days later on a scaffold overlooking Chapultepec Castle awaiting an American victory. When this occurred, 30 San Patricios were to be launched into eternity. A macabre chapter took place when the condemned men viewed the American flag being raised over the castle. They cheered with eyes uplifted and their loyalties reclaimed at the instant of their deaths.

The victory over Mexico was celebrated by the U. S. military and by politicians as it was the first war fought and won on foreign soil. It involved the first large scale amphibious landing of troops; it provided the U. S. Army with its first experience in occupying a foreign capital; and it crowned manifest destiny as the harbinger of America's future. Four officers who fought in the war became U. S. Presidents and forty-three officers became noted generals in the American civil war.

Mexico lost the war because the balance between politics and the military became unhinged and thus destroyed any semblance of strategy. This resulted in a lack of control on the battlefield. Few Mexican commanders had any idea as to what was happening during most battles. Their tactics were poorly conceived and doomed to failure although the bravery of the Mexican soldier was unquestioned. The difference between the two sides was the fact the President of Mexico also conducted field operations; a relic of European command structure unsuited for the innovative strategy employed by the Americans.

There were many reasons why American soldiers deserted during the Mexican War; the highest desertion rate in any foreign war fought by the United States. The reasons were varied: the severe regimentation of 19th century military life; the harsh and cruel punishment for the slightest infraction; the unpopularity of the war; the Catholic issue; economic enticements offered by the Mexicans such as higher pay, land grants, and higher rank; the widespread prejudice toward foreign born soldiers; and the lack of promotion or advancement in the U. S. Army.

The members of the San Patricios weren't cowards despite the opprobrious words heaped on them by the Americans. Their proficiency and bravery in battle elicited the highest praise from the Mexican Government, "...all the time the attack(s) lasted they sustained the fire with extraordinary courage." On September 12, the anniversary of the hangings and on every Saint Patrick's Day, ceremonies are held in San Angel, a suburb of Mexico City to honor these heroes of Mexico.

Robert Miller constructed his story from known data and from sources hitherto unread. He manages to combine, arrange, and connect a mass of facts with the insight of a very good historian yet his careful scholarship doesn't interfere with nor detract from an exciting tale. He writes with a flowing style so clear and alive that the reader is drawn into this book with pleasure. The footnotes, bibliography, and index are comprehensive and reflect a very thorough job. The battle maps are adequate. It's unfortunate no pictures or paintings exist in order to identify members of the San Patricios.

Miller's book isn't about leaders, winners, or losers. It's about people with their strengths and their weaknesses; their virtues and their vices; and the realization that some people when beguiled by perceived glory, might take a final and fatal step in their lives. If good writing and careful scholarship are signs of a professional than Robert Ryal Miller is a stylish professional indeed.

This is an OK book on the subject, but unfortunately it turns a blind eye to the true reasons why a large number of immigrant Catholic soldiers deserted from the U.S. army before and during the war with Mexico. Nativism and anti-Catholic prejudice were the norm among military officers of that day. Violence, abuse, religious persecution, and unfair punishments were routinely directed against Irish and German soldiers like a hellish disease.

The courts that condemned the deserters did not allow religion or racial prejudice as a defense in the trials and that is why so many of the "San Patricios" cited abduction by Mexican "rancheros" or drunkenness as the reason they went "over the hill." Their fates at trial were assured from the beginning. The author doesn't take this into account, and in this sense one concludes that the research was shallow.

A better book is "The Rogue's March" by Peter Stevens.

With the exception of two romantic novels and an amateur 1986 stage play,
no treatment of the history of The Saint Patrick's Battalion was available
until the publcation of this volume.

This unique unit, composed almost entirely of U.S. Army deserters, the
majority of them Irish-born, operated as part of Antonio de Santa Ana's
army during the Mexican-American war of 1846-1848.

Described by the author as a group of "bewildered young men", they were
idolized in Mexico as martyrs and heroes while being despised in North
America as traitors and deserters.

For deserters, they were certainly fond of warfare. Participating in
five major battles, including Buena Vista and Churubusco, the
artillery and infantry units of their battalion typically suffered
combat casualties upwards of fifty percent.

The author, Robert Ryal Miller, tells their story well - from the inception
of their unit to the last days of the war and beyond. Especially gripping
is his description of the despicable U.S. Colonel William Selby Harney's
punishment of thirty captured "San Patricios". He timed the hanging of
his captives (including Francis O'Connor, who had lost both legs to cannon
fire and had to be propped up on the gallows) to coincide with the raising
of the American flag at the conclusion of the assault on Chapultepec castle.

Miller does his best to deal with the many myths that surround the "Batallion
de San Patricio", including the one that has them establishing San Patricio,
Texas and, for the most part, succeeds. However, as Thoreau once said: "Some
circumstantial evidence is too strong to ignore - such as a trout in the milk".

This excellent (and long past due) history is enhanced by the inclusion of
a preface, illustrations, maps, tables, an appendix, notes and a bibliography.

Miller does a nice job keeping the reader's interest and his presentation of the facts is clear and upfront. However, more than a few times he does go out of his way to present his opinion that the San Patricios where more likely motivated by personal benefit than a search for justice. Fortunately, he doesn't allow his opinion get in the way of the facts letting the reader make his own informed decision.