Oh What a Slaughter: Massacres in the American West 1846 - 1890

by Larry McMurtry, Michael Prichard (Narrator)

Here are the true stories of the West's most terrible massacres-Sacramento River, Mountain Meadows, Sand Creek, Marias River, Camp Grant, and Wounded Knee, among others. These massacres involved Americans killing Indians, but also Indians killing Americans and, in the case of the currently hugely controversial Mountain Meadows Massacre in 1857, Mormons slaughtering a party of American settlers, including women and children. McMurtry's evocative descriptions of these events recall their full horror, and the deep, constant apprehension and dread endured by both pioneers and Indians. By modern standards the death tolls were often small-Custer's defeat in 1876 was the only encounter to involve more than two hundred dead-yet in the thinly populated West of that time, the violent extinction of a hundred people had a colossal impact on all sides. Though the perpetrators often went unpunished, many guilty and traumatized men felt compelled to tell and retell the horror they had committed. Nephi Johnson, one of the participants in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, died crying "Blood, blood, blood!" McMurtry's powerful prose captures the gritty essence of this tumultuous and pivotal era, and the fascinating and remarkable men and women-American and Indian, celebrated and forgotten-who shaped the West, and would kill to keep it.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, American History, Westerns, Native American, War, Indigenous

Audio CD

First published November 1, 2005

About the author

Larry Jeff McMurtry was an American novelist, essayist, and screenwriter whose work was predominantly set in either the Old West or contemporary Texas. His novels included Horseman, Pass By (1962), The Last Picture Show (1966), and Terms of Endearment (1975), which were adapted into films. Films adapted from McMurtry's works earned 34 Oscar nominations (13 wins). He was also a prominent book collector and bookseller.
His 1985 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel Lonesome Dove was adapted into a television miniseries that earned 18 Emmy Award nominations (seven wins). The subsequent three novels in his Lonesome Dove series were adapted as three more miniseries, earning eight more Emmy nominations. McMurtry and co-writer Diana Ossana adapted the screenplay for Brokeback Mountain (2005), which earned eight Academy Award nominations with three wins, including McMurtry and Ossana for Best Adapted Screenplay. In 2014, McMurtry received the National Humanities Medal.
In Tracy Daugherty's 2023 biography of McMurtry, the biographer quotes critic Dave Hickey as saying about McMurtry: "Larry is a writer, and it's kind of like being a critter. If you leave a cow alone, he'll eat grass. If you leave Larry alone, he'll write books. When he's in public, he may say hello and goodbye, but otherwise he is just resting, getting ready to go write."

Reviews

[☼Bookish in Virginia☼ · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've read quite a few reviews of "Oh, What a Slaughter" and I have to say that I'm surprised that most reviewers seem to have missed what this book is really about (my humble opinion, of course).

"Oh, What a Slaughter" is not a popular pulp book about the Old West, nor is it your standard military or political history. If it was, McMurtry would have talked more about the famous individuals that were involved in these incidents, and/or he would have written more about how these events changed the course of American history.

But he basically ignores both of those prospectives and we find instead a much different analysis, principally a focus on the intimate circumstances that allowed the massacres to occur.

Oh What A Slaughter is, in other words, a study of Violence. But not the professional violence of organized armies that meet on a field, nor the personal sort of violence that erupts when two people come to blows. But rather the sort of violence that can emerge when small groups are overcome by fear and stress.

McMurtry asks what happens to men that they can get so worked up that they act out of character to what they profess as their standards. How it is that ‘normal’ men can find themselves in a state of mind where murdering unarmed women and little children is acceptable. And where skinning the 'enemy' and wearing their private parts as a hatband or using them a tobacco pouch becomes a symbol of pride.

McMurtry examines these questions and builds a case that connects these violent episodes to what scientists now know about human physiology and psychology.


The most interestingly aspect of this book for me was McMurtry's arguments that related to exaggerated historical records. I'm sure you know what I mean if you are at all acquainted with ancient or medieval sources. There are simply circumstances where otherwise reliable individuals quote figures that are just unbelievable -- be it the numbers of ships launched, or the numbers of opponents met. McMurtry argues that the exaggeration is perfectly understandable if you take into account what modern science knows about human biology and physiology.

If you take the problem of body counts as an example, McMurtry would say that inaccuracies stem from two effects. The first being the actual physical difficulty of counting people who have been thoroughly dismembered. And the second being that adrenaline serves to alter how events are perceived.


To conclude, I'd say that if this type of approach to history interests you at all, that you pick up this little volume. It's a quick read and one that illuminated some aspects of warfare that I hadn't considered before.


Talking Points:::
Oh, What a Slaughter is an astute study of fear and violence and how these two emotions work to affect the perception of historical events. It's a thought provoking book that focuses on the psychological, physiological, and cultural elements that make massacres possible.

The book is a quick read and has many interesting old photos.

McMurtry makes quite a few smart observations that are worth applying to other historical contexts. [A point made more or less in the introduction where McMurtry points out similarities between events in the 1800's and more recent events in Rwanda and the United States (9/11/01).:]

It should be noted that while the author outlines the events of different massacres, his focus is not on historical details. Or to put it a bit differently: Students of humanity and war-in-the-abstract will probably find the book of interest. Readers expecting a detailed history will probably go away unfulfilled.

Recommended to students of history.



Here are the Chapter Headings:

The Meat Shop
The Vulnerable Pioneer
The Big Massacres and Some Others
The Moral Taint
Did Kit Regret?
Counts
Images, Heroes, Stars
The Sacrament River Massacre, Spring 1846
The Mountain Meadows Massacre, September 11, 1857
Mountain Meadows (II)
Sand Creek, November 29, 1864
The Marias River Massacre, January 23, 1870
The Camp Grant Massacre, April 30, 1871
The Broken Hoop: 1871-1890
Wounded Knee, December 29, 1890
Wounded Knee (II)
Wounded Knee (III)
The Waning Moon
Bibliographical Note
Index

[Philip · Rating 3 out of 5]

4 stars for the subject matter, but just 2 for presentation. For a writer of McMurtry's stature, this was pretty sloppily put together. He wanders, he repeats himself, has a number of endless run-on sentences (example: "Tecumseh's brother, Handsome Lake, preached some such doctrine and - nearer in time to Wounded Knee, so did the Apache prophet Noch-ay-del-klin, who lived near Cibecue Creek in Arizona, where he was killed, along with a number of his followers, by soldiers who thought his preachings were stirring up the natives they wanted to settle and subdue"), and overall shows none of the spark, enthusiasm or joy of language that make even his worst stories a fun read.

But the factual information was interesting, if universally horrifying. Of particular note, I had never before heard of the 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre, where a mixed group of Mormons and Paiutes (but mostly Mormons) slaughtered some 130 unarmed men, women and children. Brigham Young tried to cover up the massacre for years (he comes off as a total jerk here), and the LSD church still refuses to acknowledge many details of the "incident," as the now-enormously wealthy organization is afraid of being sued back to the Stone Age by descendants of the few survivors.

So interesting material on some historical events with which I wasn't already familiar - but I really expected more from McMurtry.

[Kathy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well-researched and written.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

McMurtry examines six western massacres, paying particular attention to Mountain Meadows, Sand Creek, and Wounded Knee. This book worked well right after reading Dee Brown, McMurtry puts the incidents in a little more context. I found the section about Mountain Meadows the most interesting since somehow I had never heard of it. Current attempts by the Mormans to deny their role in the massacre only increased my interest.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow, that was a quick read to be sure! This book, published in 2005, is only 161 pages long and it is copiously illustrated ( but no maps, which I always like!). So not much detail on the massacres in the West that McMurtry discusses. I think he was more interested in making some points about the massacres, such as about the motivations of participants in committing atrocities, rather than give detailed accounts of the events.
I was familiar with most of the massacres McMurtry describes, especially Wounded Knee but also Camp Grant and Sand Creek. Concerning the others, such as Mountain Meadows, I have read only a little. McMurtry does provide a bibliographical note so one could follow up and read about the history he presents in more depth.
I felt like giving this extremely slim volume among all the books that Larry McMurtry (1936-2021) has written only 3 stars. But it is McMurtry, one of my favorite authors, so I'll give it 4 stars, especially as regarding the importance of the content.

[Matthew Arnold · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5- a brief, editorial look at several American massacres in the West. Interesting but not Larry’s best work.

[Jeff · Rating 1 out of 5]

Poor historiography and too much author opinion. McMurtry acknowledges that some of these massacre chain-of-events are hard to piece together, yet still comes to the absolute conclusion that the Mormon Church, and not rogue units, instigated, or at the very least condoned Mountain Meadows despite a continuing legitimate debate based on source documents. He inconsistently gives the U.S. Army a break at Wounded Knee saying that differing reports make it nearly impossible to determine how the massacre occurred or who is to blame. Comparing Sitting Bull and the Sioux to "Afghans in Cuba," telling stories of getting lost and driving around the Sand Creek Massacre site, and weighing the artistic merits of monuments are useless to the reader, unclear, and sound too much like punditry. References to revisionist "Little Big Man" disgust me as much as any other faux-history like "They Died with Their Boots On." Is there any evidence or proof that Custer died during a spell of lunacy (or even conversely during a courageous spell)? Then don't mention it in a serious historical piece! Finally, don't use paintings of Custer at the Battle of Little Bighorn as the cover of the book if you readily admit that it was a battle and not a massacre and barely address it. If it is (which most modern historians agree was not), then use it for the cover of your book. For serious Western history, stick with Utley or Hutton and avoid McMurtry.

[superawesomekt · Rating 3 out of 5]

What I liked: thoughtful commentary, an accessible summary of big Western massacres. this would be a great introduction for someone who doesn't want to read a thick tome, but wants more commentary than Wikipedia.

that being said...

I was a little disappointed in the style of this book. 1) Its organization is a little strange. McMurtry first rambles/muses in a few chapters about massacres in general, references some of the massacres he has yet to tell the reader about, and acknowledges that almost everything in the book is uncertain, speculative, guess-work. I'm glad he states that upfront, but it is a little odd to so frame a book of history. I dunno.

2) some of the massacre summaries/ commentaries are quite lengthy (multiple chapters) and others are spartan.

3) He alludes to characters or concepts but doesn't explain them fully in some cases, which makes me a little unsure about the comprehensivenes of his research. Examples: Kit Carson, ghost dances, blood atonement, etc. He references them enough that they warrant a tangential explanation, in my opinion.

4) I agree with other reviewers that I think he should have given this book more than 150 pages. I think he had some very interesting commentary that could have been fleshed out, and I would have liked to have had more detail from the histories. I did take notes from his bibliography for additional reading.

Overall, not a bad survey of a very sad and very murky part of American history.

[P.S. Winn · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great book, even though it is heart breaking. The terrible massacres in America's history should never be forgotten and this book looks at them in a well written collection.

[Joshua · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pop culture had me excited to read this book, thinking it would be heroic, brazen battles of the West between cowboys and Indians. A massacre, however, is defined as being particularly one sided, or a "brutal slaughter of people." Women and children were also perhaps the main victims of such massacres, and were often mutilated in ways you can't imagine. Some of the massacres occurred in the heat of the moment because of heightened emotions, but others were much more calculated, like the Mountain Meadows Massacre that was planned and executed by the Mormon church.

The historical context regarding the expansion of the American West and the displacement of the Native Americans was a cool window of history to peer through, and probably the best part of the book. The pictures of the Indian Chiefs throughout were also really cool.

However, the writing of the book was left to be desired, which can't be said often about McMurtry. His prowess undoubtedly lies within fiction, with his nonfiction seeming too conversational and choppy. Miniature tangents are always branching off of sentences, meaning the pages are just littered with em dashes and commas, and it just makes it difficult to read smoothly. There is seldom any rhythm, and unfortunately, I found myself rereading a bunch of paragraphs. It took away from the content and had me excited to finish the book when I finally did.

[Ryan · Rating 3 out of 5]

It’s a good survey of the events covered for readers that are unfamiliar with them or the characters involved. There’s a decent bibliographical reference at the end as well. It’s a short book, but the clunky prose in various sections slowed me down quite a bit. It read like a rushed undergrad research paper at times. I enjoyed the Mountain Meadows Massacre section. That portion of the book was what I hoped the rest of the book would be like. Instead, there was a lot of meandering and repetition throughout.

[Peyton Livermore]

black kettle you are so important to me

i have more to say i just don’t really have the right words for it but this is a good take on why violence happens when tensions are high and people are scared

[Louis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Larry McMurtry has admitted he prefers nonfiction reading to fiction for the past few years. This book grew out of his many years of historical research for his westerns. He takes the word massacre as his jumping-off point; he looks at a half-dozen such slaughters in the frontier west: Sacramento River (1846), Mountain Meadows (1857), Sand Creek (1864), Marias River (1870), Camp Grant (1871) and Wounded Knee (1890). While McMurtry's conveys a comfort level with the events he chronicles (and his writing is as sharp as ever), there is still a problem: the book is skimpy on detail. He assumes his readers know these stories as well as does he. This cuts down on the satisfaction most readers will feel upon concluding the book. Still, this book does work as an introduction to the study of western massacres. When the short bibliography is included, McMurtry succeeds in offering a place to start for students of this aspect of frontier history. I still wish he had gone into detail, though.

[Fara · Rating 4 out of 5]

McMurtry discusses six massacres that occurred in the American West between 1846 and 1890 - most of Indians, some of whites, and their causes and aftermaths. Periodically, he puts them in context to other massacres, historical and contemporary. It's a dark book, but a good one, a reminder of how our own history in the US is riddled with human passion and mistake. It's also a good study of how government policy is as slow to change as the people who make it, not matter what one individual knows or promises.

[Jess · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very informative. This was mostly about the lesser known massacres that occurred out west. I'm so close to finishing "Black Hills" and there is a lot of the Sioux language throughout and mentioning of many historical figures. That book is the reason why I wanted to learn more about this subject. I also read "Custer" by McMurtry a little while back so I guess that's the book that started it all for me.

[Jimmy · Rating 4 out of 5]

McMurtry discusses 6 massacres in the Old West: Sacramento River, Mountain Meadows, Sand Creek, Marias River, Camp Grant, and Wounded Knee. Along the way he refers to other massacres leading up to the main one or that happened as a result. He tries to look behind the scenes to figure out why people commit massacres. He discusses the efforts to find out the truth, including body counts. He looks into whether or not perpetrators felt guilty later. I believe he is fair-minded in his approach.

[Connie Hernandez · Rating 1 out of 5]

If I could give this book 0 stars I would.

This book is entirely too empathetic to the colonists. Not even getting into McMurtry's meandering writing style (the first several chapters keep mentioning that he will be talking about a topic instead of just getting to said topic), the first chunk of this book is divested to discussing how "sad" and "regretful" the genocidal colonists were after they had massacred the natives, and how it's only natural for the colonists to be scared and apprehensive given the time period. McMurtry does speak clearly that Native Americans of the era were unjustly and brutally killed by whites, but referenced majority white sources, spoke to a white audience and white peers, talking about Native Americans in the past tense. The only difference between pro-colonizer texts and this one, is that McMurtry establishes that "killing is bad", but does not seem to be having a discussion with and centering the voices of the victims, or even giving them equal space to verify the information he's delivering.

Edit: it appears that McMurtry isn't even a historian, and upon dipping just a toe into one other book - Native American Testimony - one particular piece of false, poorly researched info from McMurtry sticks out to me. That is, the "unidentifiable" California native peoples, who were completely obscure to a point of namelessness - according the McMurtry's research. In this other book I'm reading, there's already ample information, reference, and absolutely naming of southwest Native tribes. I could not recommend this book less.

[Randal · Rating 4 out of 5]

If I had a more fine-grained set of tags, I would file this under persuasive nonfiction. This isn't a comprehensive look at massacres, or even of the six massacres he chooses to highlight. Instead, it's the author, who has written about plenty of violence in his many Western novels, looking at what makes these events happen, and offering a personal take on each.

He attempts to connect those events with more current ones -- 9/11 and Rwanda -- but I think the most contemporary takeway is the gradual buildup of apprehension. McMurtry argues that gradual mistrust / misunderstanding of others leads to apprehension, and when it reaches a certain level, apprehension becomes viewed as fact, which leads directly to violent action.

If enough people believe that immigrants are all violent rapists and terrorists, sooner or later someone is going to act on those rumors, arguing that it was self-defense by first strike, as the chief perpetrator of the Sand Creek massacre did, successfully.

Not brilliantly edited (sooo many uses of "meat shop"), but well-argued, with fascinating photos of many of the main characters of the various tragedies. A quick read and good starter into a deeper study of the blood-soaked history of the American West.

PS NOT recommended for devout Mormons, who will not like the chapter on the Mountain Meadows Massacre, at all.

[Cody · Rating 2 out of 5]

McMurtry’s “Oh What a Slaughter” focuses on some of the notable massacres that have happened within the United States during the 1800’s, primarily focusing on the slaughter of indigenous peoples. It’s a tough subject to read about, but it’s important to remember these events, not letting them get lost to time, showing that brutality that white settlers exacted onto the peoples who were here long before. McMurtry manages to make this subject feel bloated, seeming to be more interested in writing of his own muses on the topic, rather than create a factual recreation of the events. There’s a time and place to discuss the matters of human brutality and the horrors that people are capable of, but I don’t believe this was the book to make these discussions prevalent. This is more-or-less McMurtry wanting to hear himself talk about a subject however he wants, which left a bitter taste after finishing. These massacres are very important to read about, so it’s a shame that they weren’t presented in a better way in this novel.

[Bob Cantrell · Rating 5 out of 5]

The other side of the coin

This is short book, but it packs a punch. I majored in History in college so a several of these massacres were known to me: The Mountain Meadows, Sand Creek and Wounded Knee. Mcmurty doesn't go into the Fetterman and Custer Massacres, because they dealt with the military being the victims. The majority were massacres of Native-Americans with The Mountain Meadows massacre being a wagon train of immigrants from Arkansas. In each of these tragic events women and children were brutally murdered by their attackers. If you want to get a feel for what was done in the name of Western Expansion then this is good place to begin. One last thing this book will make you wonder, just who were the savages.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting analysis of why humans commit massacres and a look at 6 of them that occurred between 1846 and 1890. The massacres are:

The Sacramento River Massacre - Spring 1846
The Mountain Meadows Massacre - September 11, 1857
The Sand Creek Massacre - November 29, 1864
The Marias River Massacre - January 23, 1870
The Camp Grant Massacre - April 30, 1871
The Wounded Knee Massacre - December 29, 1890

The book takes a quick look at the reasons and outcome from these horrible events.

It seems wrong to say this was an enjoyable read. More like it was a thought provoking, informational read. I was aware of 3 of these massacres before reading this book: Mountain Meadows, Sand Creek and Wounded Knee.

[Thomas Horton · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a huge McMurtry fan I was curious what non-fiction from him would look like. He obviously does plenty of research for his historical fiction, so I knew it would at least be informative. I was so pleasantly surprised by his writing style for non-fiction. It is so conversational; reading this book feels like sitting down to talk with a good friend who is very knowledgeable and opinionated on a subject. I was a little worried that McMurtry would lose his voice in non-fiction, but it is so clearly and pleasantly present. As for the subject matter, for something so dark and bloody, McMurtry does not make it dense. He is respectful but efficient with his words. He is humorous at times, solemn when needed, and unsparing of condemnation.

[Jay · Rating 2 out of 5]

An enjoyable but useless look at various massacres. McMurtry is a great writer, but he has nothing much to add here. His attempts to look at the human tendency towards mass murder are, at best, superficial, and he also fails to properly define many of the concepts he frequently cites. On top of that, because details on some of these incidents are scarce, many chapters are little more than, "...and a lot of people died." The lack of detail may not be the author's fault, but he deals with it poorly.
This isn't a bad read, really, but it is not a good book. There are better, deeper studies on this subject; read one of those.

[Nathan Velson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A morbid little book that briefly examines a number of massacres that occurred in the American West, from famous incidents such as Sand Creek and Wounded Knee, to lesser known events that are just as tragic and consequential. I've always enjoyed MrMurtry's shorter works of nonfiction/essays/musings. McMurtry doesn't really have anything new or profound to say here except general comments on fear and human nature, clash of cultures etc., but its a quick and enjoyable read for those interested in western history.

[Jayson · Rating 1 out of 5]

I was very disappointed with this book. It doesn’t read like a history. It’s obviously not his usual fiction story telling. I finished not knowing what it was. It seems very disjointed as it it jumps back and forth with references to the other events. The picking and choosing of references to believe and others to dismiss was hard to swallow. Interjected opinions that made some slaughters seem more acceptable was a very sad thing to read. I’m a fan of McMurtry, but this seemed like a swing and a miss in a different genre.

[Don Conway-Long · Rating 4 out of 5]

A non-academic thought-piece on the long slow destruction of Native Americans by the white settler population and their government protectors. The story is told by McMurty the cowboy, but makes an honest effort to examine critically white genocidal destruction through examples of massacres, ending, of course, with a three chapter tale of Wounded Knee.
Give me a wish: it would be that every advocate of American exceptionalism be required to read McMurtry's essay, among a just a few other works I would love to add.

[Randal · Rating 2 out of 5]

This isn't really a history book and yet it's not really historiography either, though it's closer this than anything else. I wouldn't recommend this because I'm not really sure of its purpose or who would be a good audience for it; if you don't know anything about the four events covered, the book will make no sense, and if you do know enough, you're better off reading four different volumes that cover each event in turn.

[Michele Lawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a very concise overview of some of the most tragic massacres between the settlers of the American West and native American Indians. It seems so sad that in an area as vast as the Great Plains and the American West, these two nations could not find a way to share the riches of the land. Greed, and the belief in the manifest destiny of immigrants to this land, destroyed the great tribes and a great people.

[Lynsea Montanari · Rating 3 out of 5]

As an indigenous educator I was really excited to read this book and learn what it had to give to me. The book was fine. I did glen some interesting information. However I was missing the point. Typically there’s some kind of narrative a greater message that leads you through a book. Whereas in this book A little disjointed and all over the place. I can’t say that I wouldn’t recommend it but it would would be rare.

[Bram Macgregor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short bit of non fiction from Larry McMurtry on the massacres we committed against the Native Americans in the 1800’s and the violence they committed against us.

It’s pretty solid. Read it last year because it was the only McMurtry they had at my school library. My school library sucks. It’s filled with young adult garbage and a whole lot of fiction that panders to a specific demographic (sexuality).

4/5