The Ashes of Waco: An Investigation
| Company type | Book |
|---|---|
| Industry | Publishing |
| Founded | 1995 |
| Founder | Dick J. Reavis |
| Products | Non-fiction book |
The Ashes of Waco: An Investigation is a 1995 non-fiction work by journalist Dick J. Reavis that examines the Waco siege. Reavis, who serves as an English professor at North Carolina State University and has experience as a reporter for both the San Antonio Light and the San Antonio Express, originally published this book through Simon & Schuster in 1995; it was later republished by Syracuse University Press in 1998. Scholar Catherine Wessinger notes that Reavis contends the complete narrative of the Davidian disaster was partly concealed due to FBI information control and limited journalistic inquiry. The research for this book was conducted while Reavis was employed at the Dallas Observer.
Reception
Religious studies expert Catherine Wessinger observed that although Reavis’s investigation seems comprehensive, readers must rely on his claims since the book lacks detailed citations. She commended his empathetic depiction of the Branch Davidians, David Koresh, and federal agents, describing it as a "solid introduction" to the Waco siege for a general audience.
Legal academic Dean M. Kelley considered The Ashes of Waco to be the "most reliable and vivid source" available concerning the incident.
Jacob Sullum from Reason characterized the book as "detailed and engaging," praising Reavis for his careful, impartial approach to the cause of the April 19, 1993 fire.
Nancy Ammerman emphasized Reavis’s access to exclusive materials such as FBI negotiation transcripts and lauded his thorough examination of Branch Davidian religious beliefs. Likewise, Murray Seeger in Nieman Reports acknowledged his insightful theological analysis.
Caroline Hartse critiqued the text for its insufficient thematic depth and absence of citations, also pointing out some distracting passages unrelated to the core siege story.
Libertarian writer Carol Moore recognized the book’s usefulness as an introductory resource but maintained that only independent investigators could fully uncover Waco’s truth.
Timothy K. McMorrow, writing in Trial, questioned certain assertions and described Reavis’s portrayal of Koresh as bordering on sycophantic.
In Military Law Review, LeAnne Burch faulted Reavis for failing to suggest alternatives to federal tactics or to clarify key events, accusing him of exhibiting an antigovernment stance.
Ashley Fantz of CNN labeled the work "comprehensive," while a review in the American Journal of Criminal Law called it an "in-depth examination" of the standoff. B. Seth Bailey praised it as thought-provoking and a valuable reference, though he noted it raises more questions than it answers.
Gregg Easterbrook, writing for Washington Monthly, regarded the book as "excellent" despite its average literary style and disagreed with Reavis’s portrayal of Koresh as occasionally a "misunderstood kid."