The Great Indian Wars 1540-1890 (TV Series 1991– ) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Inconsistencies make reliability questionable
mpnnsn-1298221 September 2022
I liked this when it was new, thirty years ago. I re-watched it and although I still like it, I was amazed at the errors. As I saw more errors I started to question the reliability of some of their 'facts'.

It has been too long, so nothing is going to change, but the viewer should be aware.

Here are a couple examples from the second episode; The Cavalry:

1) At about 0:21:11 they show a graphic map of Fort Larned. Fort Larned is about 50 miles south of present day Hays, KS. The map shown doesn't have Kansas at all, but has identified the state as Nebraska.

2) While mentioning the Donner Party, they show a picture of Mormon Handcart Pioneers. The Donner Party started in 1846. This was ten years before the first Mormon Handcart Pioneer. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints used trains of handcarts from 1856 to 1860 as a quick (relatively speaking, since they were faster than oxen or horse drawn wagons) and inexpensive way for over 3000 immigrants that wanted to be with the Church in Salt Lake City.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Great!
crwdennis-cd7 May 2020
Really enjoyable, exciting documentary about the wars on the great Plains between the American Indians and the US cavalry. Covered a number of skirmishes and engagements which I had not heard of before, along with the more famous characters such as Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and Geronimo. Recommend on Prime.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Really well done, an honest look at both sides for once
renegadedogis20 December 2020
Honest documentary, rare these days. Made in 2009, definitely worth a look if you like American history.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Fantastic documentary with lots of varied historical media
dtboling22 March 2021
A very well done documentary about the history behind the white man's wars with the native Americans. The series is extremely detailed and used a vast array of historical media to tell its story. There are drawings, photos, wood carvings, interviews and even some vintage video. But the best part may be that there is very little socio-political slant, if any. I'm no expert but I think the story is told factually, fairly and equally from all sides. We really enjoyed watching and learning some history that we missed in school.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One-sided
desertwamp26 February 2022
As an Indigenous person (Wampanoag) I was interested in viewing this film. Unfortunately it quickly became apparent the film series was another example of a one-sided interpretation of the so-called Indian Wars perpetuated in American history lessons . I would not recommend this film series to anyone truly seeking a deeper understanding of Tribal Nations and Indigenous perspectives on the Indian Wars. Rather, I would recommend the series "We Shall Remain" which includes Indigenous perspectives and more wholistic coverage on topics such as Indian Wars and other historical points-experiences concerning Indigenous peoples and Tribal Nations in America.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A Product of its Time
crimeagainstcreation11 March 2022
This is a quite interesting documentary series, basically due to the topic. However, the highly inconsistent use of expressions, names, and even false use of photo material, as well as only having partly bias 'expertise', and exclusively with Euro American participation, makes it less credible. It seems to be a typical product of its time.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Poorly one-white-man-sided stories
ptmtiare23 November 2021
Just another justification of white mans attempt to genocide and "scorching the earth" as so many of the white men honored in this supposed documentary. Not one single account by ancestry of the native americans, but all complete stories honoring the white men who's only goal was to set out and "hunt the indians".

Watch true documentaries of those that were forced out from their homelands.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Viewer beware - unreliable
larry-3947429 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I agree with most of the low reviews already given. This is basically a white supremacist perspective of the so-called Indian Wars. It ought to be called The Great White Man's War on the Indigenous People of North America. Based on the errors and bias in this presentation, I'm not sure what to believe. Often they gave casualty figures for the white folks and soldiers, but no casualty figures for the natives, as if they don't count.

In one section, focused on 1860-61, they had a guy saying the outfit of the dragoons included a Colt .45 revolver made in 1873. Ditto for the Springfield 1873 rifle. Huh? This came much later, obviously, and they were used by the cavalry (including Custer's 7th), not the dragoons.

In Episode 2: The Cavalry, the narrator says: Now that their lands had officially become part of the United States . . . Official according to whom? IF some of the natives agreed to this, it was coerced by the business end of gun, only after the natives were harassed to the point of starvation and annihilation.

In this same episode featuring the cavalry, the Fetterman massacre is mentioned, but there is no mention of Custer's battle at the LIttle Big Horn. Why? The Custer battle is mentioned in passing in other episodes, but no details of what occurred.

Also sloppiness: they spelled "cavalry" as "calvary" in the subtitles, and spelled "principals" as "principles." Sheesh, who edited this?

I could go on, but I will leave that to real historians.

I would recommend this mockumentary only to those interested in seeing how "history" can be slanted toward a particular perspective; in this case the perspective of the European conquerors. But this should not be used as a presentation in a school classroom as a history lesson, or interpreted as such by any thinking person with an interest in history.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed