Thursday, October 17, 2013

Sand Creek Massacre

What is the Sand Creek Massacre? After numerous stories, what really happened? Were the Native Americans peaceful people, or were they actually the provokers themselves? Not much is clear, but hopefully the accounts and details of the crime will give us a better understanding of what happened on that cold, winter day.

According to the History Channel Online, one of the main cause's of the Sand Creek Massacre was the debate on who was entitled to control the Great Plans all the way to Eastern Colorado. In 1851, the Fort Laramie Treaty was signed and put into effect immediately. It guaranteed ownership from the area north of the Arkansas River to the Nebraska border, to the Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes. Over the next ten years or so, new settlers of the Euro-American descent, started to arrive. They were miners and had intentions of mining the Rocky Mountains for gold. The Cheyenne Delegation, headed by Black Kettle accepted new settlement terms on February 8, 1861. The terms were so terrible that not after long, the Native American's were unable to sustain their tribes. A feeble piece of land, 600 square miles, was given to them, and their old land was taken. Annuity payments were also awarded to the Native Americans, but it did not offer much help to them. 

http://bit.ly/H94Hmc
I found one very helpful article from the History Study Center that gave me more information about the massacre. Not but three years after the settlement, The Sand Creek Massacre, out of the blue, took place. On November 29, 1864, 500 members of the Cheyenne tribe camped outside a military fort, at Sand Creek, Colorado. They were promised protection through the winter, as long as they stayed in that spot. Their leader, Black Kettle, had months of wavering peace talks that dwindled down to barely anything. And as the Massacre happened, it seemed like the talks did absolutely nothing. As he and his tribe saw American troops approaching their camp, he raised the American flag, as a sign of peace and unity. The Colonel in charge, John Chivington, ignored the two flags being displayed and forced the attack on the Indians. According to Reuters, Even another man, White Antelope, an elderly tribesman tried to stop the approaching militia. He crossed his arms in front of them, which meant peace or that they did not want to fight, but instead he was shot point-blank. Another History Study Center article detailed that Colonel Chivington killed and mutilated more than half of the entire population at the camp. On his return to Denver, his soldiers carried 100 "scalps" of Indians and were cheered on by many civilians. An official investigation was put on by a Congressional Committee, but no military leaders or soldiers were ever put on trial for it.

http://bit.ly/1bMxxlV
For background on this massacre, I collected Congressional accounts from the website known as History Colorado. A helpful document let me view each person's sworn-under-oath testimony, word by word. Colonel Chivington, a Native American caught up in the attack and a Lieutenant all were questioned about the event. Colonel Chivington went on to say in that interview, "From all I could learn, I arrived at the conclusion that but few women or children had been slain. I am of the opinion that when the attack was made on the Indian camp the greater numbers of squaws and children made their escape, while the warriors remained to fight my troops. / I had no reason to believe that Black Kettle and the Indians with him were in good faith at peace with the whites." This account does not make a lot of sense to me, as Black Kettle had peace talks for months with the American Army, and now Chivington says that he doesn't think they were at peach with the whites. An Indian, George Bent told about what happened during the battle. "We ran about two miles up the creek, I think, and then came to a place where the banks were very high and steep. There a large body of Indians had stopped under the shelter of the banks, and the older men and women had dug holes or piles under the banks, in which people were hiding. Just as our party reached this point I was struck in the hip by a bullet and knocked down; but I managed to tumble into one of the holes and lay there among the warriors, women, and children." The most shocking testimony would be that of one of Colonel Chivington's own men, Lieutenant Cramer. He went on to testify; "Q: At anytime during the attack on Black Kettle's camp did the Indians appear in line of battle? A: Not that I saw. Q: Were any of the Indian women and children killed and mutilated while attempting to escape? A: They were; they were followed and killed, but I don't know when they were mutilated." In my opinion, the Colonel was simply trying to cover his own person and life, while the Lieutenant knew that he had to tell the truth. Clearly there is an inconsistency between all the accounts, but they each tell a different point of view, which allows for us to piece together the events that made this massacre terrible.

http://bit.ly/GWOX5b
Even in today's society, descendants of those killed in the massacre, still care, and file lawsuits against the United States Federal Government. An article on Huffington Post's website details that the Native American's claim that the government has not paid the full amount of reparations to their people. They believe that no matter how long it has been since the event, the government is still the one at fault and the Native American's alive today still hold the government very high in accountability. While nothing can be done to ever repay the horrendous acts of stupidity, they still believe that they and their people are entitled to compensation for it. Homer Flute, shown in the picture, fourth from the left, went on to the following quote to the Native News Network about the incident and the lawsuit; "It has been nearly 150 years since our ancestors were deceived by a promise of peace and safety by flying the American flag and a white flag of truce in their camp at Sand Creek. Colonel Chivington, commanded the United States troops in the murder and mutilation of our ancestors."



2. History Channel

  • I used the History Channel's helpful website for pre-massacre facts and information.

3. History Study Center and History Study Center 2 and Reuters

  • I used these three sources for the main information, including the battle and the facts of what happened. 

4. History Colorado

  • This source allowed me to see the accounts of each interview with Congress.

5. Huffington Post and Native News Network

  • The modern take on the Sand Creek Massacre; lets the reader know that people still care about those who lost their lives.