Review - "Honey Springs, Oklahoma: Historical Archaeology of a Civil War Battlefield" William Lees

[Honey Springs, Oklahoma: Historical Archaeology of a Civil War Battlefield by William B. Lees (Texas A&M University Press, 2025) Hardcover, maps, photos, illustrations, tables, notes, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:xx,269/327. ISBN:978-1-64843-293-4. $50]

On July 17, 1863, two armies (large ones by frontier Trans-Mississippi theater standards) clashed north of Honey Springs in Indian Territory. The Union army led by aggressive Frontier District commander James Blunt trounced a Confederate force assembled by General Douglas Cooper to oppose the federal advance down the Texas Road, a key military artery in the region. A clear Union tactical victory, the battle was also a major strategic defeat for the Confederate forces, one that further splintered tribal alliances already shaken by prior events and military disasters such as the October 22, 1862 Battle of Old Fort Wayne. Even though many modern historians recognize Honey Springs as being the most consequential Civil War battle fought in Indian Territory, the clash still lacks a book-length treatment. Why that significance, combined with the battle's exceptional stature as a triracial Civil War engagement with allied Indians forming the majority of combatants on both sides, has not garnered more published scholarly attention beyond articles and book chapters remains curious. Thankfully, archaeologist William Lees has stepped in to address that longstanding gap. While not a conventional narrative history, his newly published Honey Springs, Oklahoma: Historical Archaeology of a Civil War Battlefield represents the battle's first major standalone study of any kind.

In Honey Springs, Oklahoma, Lees employs the three-headed interpretive approach that a number of his colleagues have used to noteworthy effect in fostering fresh understanding of both obscure and well-known Civil War military events. Thus, in addition to piecing together a picture of the Honey Springs battle through traditional documentary resources (including "memory" writings such as contemporary letters, journals, official reports, etc.), this study incorporates conflict archaeology methodologies pioneered decades ago by Douglas Scott and others along with extensive terrain analysis supported by widely accepted analytical frameworks such the KOCOA system developed by the U.S. military as a way to "help military strategists evaluate landscape for tactical or defensive advantage and risk" (pg. 5).

Setting the stage, memory sources and official documents were used by Lees to construct a chapter-length narrative overview of the Honey Springs battle along with meticulously crafted orders of battle. In addition to compiling numbers and losses data, that lengthy discussion of army structure and makeup secures a great many details that are central to getting the most out of the archaeological part of the investigation. Identifying and matching uniform, equipment, and weaponry information to specific units allowed the author to use artifact evidence mapping of such items as a reliable means of tracing likely unit positions and locations of concentrated fighting on the battlefield.

Though the author readily acknowledges that the sheer amount and degree of artifact information presented in the book might be tedious to the general reader, his extensive examination of fired and unfired/dropped ammunition (and his documentation of their locations through precise GIS mapping) is for others a fascinating exercise in locating and following opposing battle lines through artifact analysis. The amount of artillery ammunition (in particular case and canister shot) found during Lees's many archaeological surveys of the battlefield matches the use of that arm as revealed in the written documentation. Generally speaking, the great preponderance of spherical ball ammunition of all kinds might seem unusual for a mid-war battle, but many units that served along the trans-Mississippi frontier (especially the Confederate regiments and the Indian units of both sides) had to make due with second and even third-rate arms. Also speaking to theater shortages of military-grade armaments (particularly on the Confederate side) is the large number of civilian-caliber shoulder arm ammunition found on the Honey Springs battlefield.

Diversity of arms and ammunition findings was in many ways expected, but one class of artifact was exceptionally striking. Civil War Indian units were routinely issued available firearms just like their white and black compatriots, but it is nevertheless intriguing that arrowheads made out of reshaped metal were also uncovered during the field surveys. Some maintain that the arrowheads are not battle related, but Lees persuasively determines that contextual correlation with other battlefield artifact evidence points strongly toward a linkage. As Lees explains, the arrow tips also provide further evidence that tribal allies did not entirely discard older martial traditions upon enrollment in regularly organized Union and Confederate units (though it is possible that inadequate arms and ammunition drove some amount of bow and arrow use as well).

In addition to employing GIS mapping to reveal battle lines, likely positions of particular units along those lines, and areas of the heaviest combat, the archaeological investigations of Lees and his colleagues were able to clearly delineate the boundaries of the fighting and separate the battle into three distinct phases labeled by the author as the "Prairie," "Elk Creek," and "Pumpkin Ridge" engagements. Interestingly, Lees's team also found archaeological evidence of another engagement (north of the Prairie clash) not specifically referenced in memory sources. Light in nature, this is thought to have been outpost skirmishing that preceded the main battle.

The U.S. military's battlespace and KOCOA [an acronym representing "Key Terrain, Observation and Fields of Fire, Concealment and Cover, Obstacles, and Avenues of Approach"] concepts of terrain analysis are applied in detailed fashion by the author to all three aforementioned sectors of the battlefield. That process ends up deeply informing our assessments of tactical decision-making during the Honey Springs battle along with the many ways in which topography and other terrain considerations affected battlefield deployments and, ultimately, the nature and foci of the fighting.

The results of Lees's memory, archaeology, and terrain analysis investigations suggest that Cooper's curved battle line established just north of Elm Creek, variously estimated as being between 1 and 1.5 miles in length, was the best position available to receive Blunt's attack. With broad open space in front, a favorable position for both placement of his army's lone battery and utilization of the treeline for cover, Cooper faced off against Blunt's advancing army and its twelve guns (artifact GIS mapping also hints very strongly at a treeline location much closer to Elk Creek than previously realized). Surprisingly, archaeology reveals that fighting on the Prairie battlefield existed on a very narrow front, perhaps only one-third of mile in width (at the center and right of the Confederate defensive line, straddling the Texas Road). With memory sources suggesting engagement on a much wider front, this was a surprising finding. Though the Elk Creek valley has been heavily visited by relic hunters, remaining archaeological evidence strongly indicates a precise location for the Elm Creek bridge. Those artifacts and the reality of overwhelming Union artillery superiority strongly point toward an Elk Creek engagement of only brief duration after the sudden Confederate collapse and withdrawal from the prairie engagement just to the north. Terrain analysis revealing the extent of higher ground north of the creek also supports Cooper's decision to not initially deploy his forces along the waterway's south bank. Finally, the archaeology associated with the Pumpkin Ridge engagement confirms the existence of a determined Confederate stand (most likely from Colonel Tandy Walker's well-regarded First Choctaw and Chickasaw regiment, previously in reserve) that arguably prevented Cooper's general withdrawal from becoming a rout.

While the GIS mapping of the artifact evidence is prodigious, the only Honey Springs battle map included in the book is a reproduction of Wiley Britton's crude schematic drawing first published in 1899. Unfortunately, the volume misses the opportunity to apply the cutting-edge findings of its investigative triad of memory, archaeology, and terrain analysis toward another useful end, that of producing state of the art tactical maps of the Prairie, Elk Creek, and Pumpkin Ridge engagements.

Clearly, multiple factors played a part in Cooper's defeat. Never highly regarded for his generalship, Cooper apparently did not order his forces to prepare temporary breastworks or other improvements to his defensive position, nor did he designate a fallback position to his subordinates. The lack of archaeological evidence of significant fighting on the Confederate left supports Creek Confederate officer George Washington Grayson's critical contention that Cooper did not manage to get all, or even most, of his available forces up to the fighting front before Blunt struck Cooper's center and right with local numerical superiority, breaking the Confederate line. It seems clear that firepower disparities out of Cooper's control, notably the 12:4 superiority in Union artillery pieces, also played a major role in the Confederate defeat. In addition to the fact that Cherokee Confederate Colonel Stand Watie's absence from his unit while on detached service during the battle created a leadership vacuum that was inadequately filled, Lees points out that tribal tactics rarely involved standing up against artillery, and that martial tradition also might have had a significant impact on large parts of Cooper's command being absent from the fighting front. Lees does address Cooper's post-battle (and perhaps self-serving) complaint that defective gunpowder was the primary cause of his defeat. It is a difficult matter to assess in terms of reality versus perception, but the author brings up a good point that the effective stand at Pumpkin Ridge demonstrated that at least some of the units in the Confederate army had decent quality powder supplies available.

Filled with noteworthy insights and persuasive interpretation, William Lees's Honey Springs, Oklahoma is highly recommended for its fresh and fulsome contributions to our modern understanding of an understudied trans-Mississippi battle with a highly consequential shadow. Significantly, Lees's impressive work further buttresses growing recognition that conflict archaeology possesses a unique and highly valuable utility in the multi-disciplinary investigation of Civil War campfires and battlefields. Highly recommended.