Classic "He said, she said" scenario we have here. Depending on who's telling the story as to which side is demonized the most. The truth lies somewhere in between. However, there is NEVER an excuse for taking the lives of innocent women and children. And most certainly, there's NO HONOR in desecrating the bodies of those slain in battle. This is one of the most egregious acts of barbarism I've ever heard of. "Vengence is MINE, sayeth the Lord". There was no justice served 11-29-1864.
2 hirds of the murdered indians in Sand Creek where women and children. THis wasn`t a battle. It was a massacre. But the so called indian wars historian talks more baout the killed us Soldiers. That shown a lot about american racism lasting until today.
Post on utube how the Setters rode West with a (Buffalo Extermination) program met to Starve the Plains Natives into submission. Which anybody who knows basics information about Plains Natives knows the Baffalo was everything to the Native's their food source and their home.
Maybe this is why they were raiding Wagons and towns. to get food sense their main food supply was becoming depleted by the New setters coming in. Its not like they were getting enought for their Indian Agencys.
That's a good point Dealz. The eradication of the buffalo was no doubt factor in the conflicts over the years. I wouldn't deny it. Cutting off the food supply is common tactic in warfare. If you can't feed yourself you can't fight. Any city that has ever been besieged or nation that has been naval blockaded can testify to that. Of course in 1864 the Buffalo and other game were not completely gone.
Presumably the Cheyenne didn't take horses, women and mutilate people because they were hungry though. You would think these raiders wouldn't be kidnapping women and girls if they were having trouble feeding themselves because then you just have another mouth to feed. Actions like that make one question how tight the food supply really was.
The video actually disputes there was any peace made between Black Kettle and Chivington at Camp Weld. There was certainly no peace made ''a day before.''
Governor Evans sent a letter the day after Camp Weld to Sam Colley telling him that they had made NO peace with the Cheyenne and told him not to issue rations to them.
No one ever has asserted John Chivington gave the Cheyenne any flag.
Major Edward Wynkoop who had been in command of Fort Lyon may have promised them protection and issued them rations. THIS WAS THE REASON GENERL CURTIS REMOVED WYNKOOP FROM COMMAND THOUGH. Wynkoop was issuing rations to Indians the Army considered hostile.
When the Sand Creek event occurred Major Scott Anthony was in charge of Fort Lyon. He made NO promise of protection to the Indians. He told them he COULD NOT make peace with them which is why he sent them away from the Fort. Major Anthony says he told the Cheyenne to stay away from the Fort and even FIRED ON THEM several days before Chivington arrived when the Cheyenne approached the Fort. Hardly a friendly act is it?
Non of this should should be taken to mean that killing noncombatants is an acceptable practice. There is a great deal wrong and misrepresented about Sand Creek though.
You TELL only from your side of the story. I wathced this 3 times not once did they say how Chief Black Kettle made peace with John Chivington i believe a day before the Sand Creek Massacre. Tell how Black kettle camp even flew the American flag over their camp given to them by John Chivingtonand and still got massacred.
TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH. You say the Lakota and Chennye were raiding wagon trails and towns. MAYBE FOR FOOD. You don't mention the millions of Baffalo's killed by the Setters.
Also to any reasonable clear thinking person out there reading this who realizes
that everything they dislike and disagree with isn't ''Nazism'' I'd like to say I do not consider Lakota or Cheyenne ''Nazi's'' the below is merely a demonstration of how easy it is to combine historical fact with over the top rhetoric about Nazism.
I enjoyed how the white accounts were stretched to the limits of the immagination to justify the Sand Creek massac.., I mean um, "battle". For an encore, maybe the producers of this unbiased historical 'documentery' can do a peice about how the Jews provoked the Nazis to retaliate against them for starting World War 1.
Yeah I know slaughtering white people is just harmless innocent fun.
That's why I love to dwell on the Nazi genocide campaign of the Lakota Sioux against the Pawnee, Kiowa, Ponca, Otos and Crows. Lakota stealing their land like the greedy horrid people they were.
The Crow and Pawnee just wanted to love them and welcomed them with open arms. Such genocidal Nazi hate on the Part of the Lakota.
7thUSCavalryman, I think what "bigchief1" was saying, very sarcastically, is that the Jews started WW1 so "the Nazis retaliated against them" with WW2 -- as an analogy to your perspectives.
I'm not going to explain this, again. You obviously don't get it. I'm not going to waste any more of my time on this blog. You may have the last word. I'm not going to feed your hate and anger.
It is a fact that you can find plenty of examples of killing of non-combatants, torture, and mutilation in INDIAN on INDIAN warfare from this period and in the archaeological record just before the arrival of Europeans. This is not seen in European vs European warfare of the age. Think about that for a second before you start spouting off about ''Nazism.''
Just some more very white-man biased accounts of history, blaming the Natives to justify their "savage" behavior to the Natives, and grossly minimizing what they (the whites) did to the Natives during the Sand Creek Massacre. I don't blame the Natives for not wanting the white people there and wanting to chase them away. Look at how they've been treated to this day.
People need to get away from the grade school garbage history books and read real accounts, journals, diarys etc from people who WERE there, people who watched their familys gutted. Atrocities were commited by both sides, red and white NOT just whites, you as well as most of the population have mislearned. . Don't just blame whites. It was another era, completely different than we know, if we lived back then we might have a different view depending on our situation.
The "grade school garbage history books" I read and initially learned from was extremely "white biased" -- history books written by whites, justifying their behavior by blaming the Natives instead of taking responsibility. White people came here from Europe, lied to the Natives, stole their land, promoted and encouraged genocide, etc. This behavior can never be justified, no matter when it happened. It seems like white males are the most defensive and most unwilling to look at it objectively.
The responses you give make you sound like a very angry man. If you are mostly either Pawnee , Crow, or any other nation that warred with Lakota, the information about the "Sioux/Lakota - Pawnee" "war" is directly from your Native ancestors, and your perspective isn't from the sensationalized white-man's stories, then I can understand your rage towards the Lakotas from this. (continued)
Was your father also a hateful angry hypocrite like you who when noting ''two wrongs'' calls the one ''genocide'' and yet thinks that the other isn't even important. Did he also sent around and ruminate on the evil ''genocide'' and ''oppression'' of the ''white man'' while thinking of everyone else's actions ''oh well thats how things were done back then. Free passes for everyone.''
Hey, there is no point in arguing, evidently we are wrong and know squat. I guess Indians of all tribes loved each other just like brothers. the storys of mutilating, raping, stealing, slavery from different tribes are a White lie! I guess I'll throw all my research away and look at ledger book drawings.
I hope you find peace within yourself for your anger and hatred that is directed towards yourself and others coming to understand human history in totality and cease your race based demonization campaign. Smiley face and hugs. :)
However, if you are Euro-American and IF (big "if") these stories would happen to be at least partially true, then, like my father used to say "two wrongs don't make a right" -- it's none of "white-man's" or any outsider's business to become involved in civil conflicts. Therefore, IF (big if) these stories are true, then that makes the "white man" at least just as "evil" as the Lakota. I sincerely wish for you to find peace within yourself.
I think its funny that after you monstrously apply your hateful one sided condemnations on an entire race of people that you have the gall to call anyone angry.
You have been sent the pictures of the cut up dismembered bones of 500 Indians from the massacre of Crow creek and you say ''big if'' thats it's even true yet you worship this story of the worst version of Sand Creek with many question marks about it.
DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7thUSCavalryman I came here to see if you would Atleast tell BOTH sides of the story Wants again you only tell 1 side
TELL THE WHOLE THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Angered By The Minnesota Massacre. I bet the Dakota's were agery about the their women being dishorned by the Minnestians who the Cheifs reported but nothing was, I bet the Dakota's were angery about how Andrew Myrick who they came to, too recieve food from when told, SAID IF THEY ARE HUNGERY LET ME EAT GRASS.
I bet the Sioux were pissed off about the 86 Brule butched at that MASSACRE they call The Of Ash Hollow. In which 86 Sioux were killed.
TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH,
Tell how The battle Of Ash Hollow started. OVER 1 missing Cow how the Calvery shoot and killed the Sioux Chief Conquering Bear from behind. Even tho Conquering Bear tried to pay back the Cow that Stranded away from the Oregon Trail with 5 horses. I bet the Dakota's were pissed about that.
I'm going to post my response about this in the side bar and send it to you in a private messege. I don't want the information about Sand Creek to roll off because that is more important to this video.
Again, the Arapahoe split the Cheyenne tribe into two separate bands. The two tribes had different grounds and areas of preference. The Northern band was and still is in the Wyoming territory and the Southern band remained in the Area of Holly, Colorado and more along the Garden of the Gods area which has an exhibit of Arapahoe and Southern Cheyenne gatherings. Most of the information you will not find in any book, and the best proof is the archaeological evidence seen with the eyes.
Here it is again the same attitude that the soldiers had when they mutilated women is the same attitude that you feel justified to express in your comments!
No, the research does not indicate that the S. Cheyenne did not continue the Dog Soldier society as indicated by Archaeological evidence. The Archaeological evidence as held by the Colorado History museum disproves that the Southern Cheyenne had any involvement. The best thig is to read the case that occured and the trial records. Many records are still held here at the Colorado Supreme Court Library. So, it is the Southern Cheyenne that I am defending because it was proven in court.
u know nothing, the southern cheyennes have dogsoldier society, u get your information from books which are written by whiteman. our stories are still told from genertaion to generation. if u knew anything there are 2 bands the tsitsitas and the sutao, those are the 2 major bands not the north and south. there is more than just 2 bands of cheyennes
Another aspect is historical accounts that at the time was seen by survivors. I do like the video but much of the Archaeological evidence here in Colorado and New Mexico, inculding my families history around Holly Colorado have always indicated another side to the story that people would like to call Cheyenne militarism, but in actuality like in court, the most fertile land was in SE CO, like Rocky Ford - and trying to link the two bands was trying to accuse innocent Southern Cheyenne.
No, there is a lumping of people together, which is why in the court hearing it was defined that the Southern Cheyenne were separate and distinct. This separation was also supported by evidence that the Southern Cheyenne did not possess. Also, it was Arapahoe and Southern Cheyenne at Sand Creek - and it is the "crock" part without Archaeological evidence and exhibits that you are saying discounts historical recordings of languages by Spanish priests before 1700 here in Colorado.
Classic "He said, she said" scenario we have here. Depending on who's telling the story as to which side is demonized the most. The truth lies somewhere in between. However, there is NEVER an excuse for taking the lives of innocent women and children. And most certainly, there's NO HONOR in desecrating the bodies of those slain in battle. This is one of the most egregious acts of barbarism I've ever heard of. "Vengence is MINE, sayeth the Lord". There was no justice served 11-29-1864.
oldenmcgroen 5 months ago
2 hirds of the murdered indians in Sand Creek where women and children. THis wasn`t a battle. It was a massacre. But the so called indian wars historian talks more baout the killed us Soldiers. That shown a lot about american racism lasting until today.
Stevenoodlesgrunow 2 years ago 5
Post on utube how the Setters rode West with a (Buffalo Extermination) program met to Starve the Plains Natives into submission. Which anybody who knows basics information about Plains Natives knows the Baffalo was everything to the Native's their food source and their home.
Maybe this is why they were raiding Wagons and towns. to get food sense their main food supply was becoming depleted by the New setters coming in. Its not like they were getting enought for their Indian Agencys.
Dealz1988 2 years ago
That's a good point Dealz. The eradication of the buffalo was no doubt factor in the conflicts over the years. I wouldn't deny it. Cutting off the food supply is common tactic in warfare. If you can't feed yourself you can't fight. Any city that has ever been besieged or nation that has been naval blockaded can testify to that. Of course in 1864 the Buffalo and other game were not completely gone.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Presumably the Cheyenne didn't take horses, women and mutilate people because they were hungry though. You would think these raiders wouldn't be kidnapping women and girls if they were having trouble feeding themselves because then you just have another mouth to feed. Actions like that make one question how tight the food supply really was.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
The video actually disputes there was any peace made between Black Kettle and Chivington at Camp Weld. There was certainly no peace made ''a day before.''
Governor Evans sent a letter the day after Camp Weld to Sam Colley telling him that they had made NO peace with the Cheyenne and told him not to issue rations to them.
No one ever has asserted John Chivington gave the Cheyenne any flag.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Major Edward Wynkoop who had been in command of Fort Lyon may have promised them protection and issued them rations. THIS WAS THE REASON GENERL CURTIS REMOVED WYNKOOP FROM COMMAND THOUGH. Wynkoop was issuing rations to Indians the Army considered hostile.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
When the Sand Creek event occurred Major Scott Anthony was in charge of Fort Lyon. He made NO promise of protection to the Indians. He told them he COULD NOT make peace with them which is why he sent them away from the Fort. Major Anthony says he told the Cheyenne to stay away from the Fort and even FIRED ON THEM several days before Chivington arrived when the Cheyenne approached the Fort. Hardly a friendly act is it?
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
I'm going to link that bit from ''The Fighting Cheyennes in the top of the side bar and send it to you in private message.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Non of this should should be taken to mean that killing noncombatants is an acceptable practice. There is a great deal wrong and misrepresented about Sand Creek though.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
You TELL only from your side of the story. I wathced this 3 times not once did they say how Chief Black Kettle made peace with John Chivington i believe a day before the Sand Creek Massacre. Tell how Black kettle camp even flew the American flag over their camp given to them by John Chivingtonand and still got massacred.
TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH. You say the Lakota and Chennye were raiding wagon trails and towns. MAYBE FOR FOOD. You don't mention the millions of Baffalo's killed by the Setters.
Dealz1988 2 years ago
Also to any reasonable clear thinking person out there reading this who realizes
that everything they dislike and disagree with isn't ''Nazism'' I'd like to say I do not consider Lakota or Cheyenne ''Nazi's'' the below is merely a demonstration of how easy it is to combine historical fact with over the top rhetoric about Nazism.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
I enjoyed how the white accounts were stretched to the limits of the immagination to justify the Sand Creek massac.., I mean um, "battle". For an encore, maybe the producers of this unbiased historical 'documentery' can do a peice about how the Jews provoked the Nazis to retaliate against them for starting World War 1.
bigchief1 2 years ago 8
Yeah I know slaughtering white people is just harmless innocent fun.
That's why I love to dwell on the Nazi genocide campaign of the Lakota Sioux against the Pawnee, Kiowa, Ponca, Otos and Crows. Lakota stealing their land like the greedy horrid people they were.
The Crow and Pawnee just wanted to love them and welcomed them with open arms. Such genocidal Nazi hate on the Part of the Lakota.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Also my dear expert on everything Nazi, I think you should be made aware that the Nazis were in World War II, not I.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
7thUSCavalryman, I think what "bigchief1" was saying, very sarcastically, is that the Jews started WW1 so "the Nazis retaliated against them" with WW2 -- as an analogy to your perspectives.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
The Jews started WWI? What are you talking about?
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
I'm not going to explain this, again. You obviously don't get it. I'm not going to waste any more of my time on this blog. You may have the last word. I'm not going to feed your hate and anger.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
The Cheyene were the Lakota's little brother helpers in their Nazism against the other sweet peaceful Indian tribes of the Plains.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
It is a fact that you can find plenty of examples of killing of non-combatants, torture, and mutilation in INDIAN on INDIAN warfare from this period and in the archaeological record just before the arrival of Europeans. This is not seen in European vs European warfare of the age. Think about that for a second before you start spouting off about ''Nazism.''
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Just some more very white-man biased accounts of history, blaming the Natives to justify their "savage" behavior to the Natives, and grossly minimizing what they (the whites) did to the Natives during the Sand Creek Massacre. I don't blame the Natives for not wanting the white people there and wanting to chase them away. Look at how they've been treated to this day.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
People need to get away from the grade school garbage history books and read real accounts, journals, diarys etc from people who WERE there, people who watched their familys gutted. Atrocities were commited by both sides, red and white NOT just whites, you as well as most of the population have mislearned. . Don't just blame whites. It was another era, completely different than we know, if we lived back then we might have a different view depending on our situation.
coloradocav 2 years ago
The "grade school garbage history books" I read and initially learned from was extremely "white biased" -- history books written by whites, justifying their behavior by blaming the Natives instead of taking responsibility. White people came here from Europe, lied to the Natives, stole their land, promoted and encouraged genocide, etc. This behavior can never be justified, no matter when it happened. It seems like white males are the most defensive and most unwilling to look at it objectively.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
Maybe you should actually learn some history about the American Indians constantly slaughtering and torturing OTHER INDIAN women and children!
Do you blame the ''natives'' for not wanting other ''NATIVES'' there i.e. letting them continue to breath?
Do you hate the Lakota for stealing peoples land and killing Pawnees?
No you think they're tony the tiger great and you don't care!
You are the biased one who has no knowledge of Human history.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Part 1 of 2:
7thUSCalvaryman,
The responses you give make you sound like a very angry man. If you are mostly either Pawnee , Crow, or any other nation that warred with Lakota, the information about the "Sioux/Lakota - Pawnee" "war" is directly from your Native ancestors, and your perspective isn't from the sensationalized white-man's stories, then I can understand your rage towards the Lakotas from this. (continued)
ayemaya75 2 years ago
Was your father also a hateful angry hypocrite like you who when noting ''two wrongs'' calls the one ''genocide'' and yet thinks that the other isn't even important. Did he also sent around and ruminate on the evil ''genocide'' and ''oppression'' of the ''white man'' while thinking of everyone else's actions ''oh well thats how things were done back then. Free passes for everyone.''
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Name calling is immature.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
Then you should stop doing it then.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Hey, there is no point in arguing, evidently we are wrong and know squat. I guess Indians of all tribes loved each other just like brothers. the storys of mutilating, raping, stealing, slavery from different tribes are a White lie! I guess I'll throw all my research away and look at ledger book drawings.
coloradocav 2 years ago
I hope you find peace within yourself for your anger and hatred that is directed towards yourself and others coming to understand human history in totality and cease your race based demonization campaign. Smiley face and hugs. :)
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
The only anger and hatred is coming from you.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
No you a horrible hater who encourages violence against others! You should be ashamed of your actions!
Thanks for your passive aggressive rants that use guilt as a weapon though. Puppies and Ice Cream. :)
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Part 2 of 2, continuation to 7thUSCavalryman:
However, if you are Euro-American and IF (big "if") these stories would happen to be at least partially true, then, like my father used to say "two wrongs don't make a right" -- it's none of "white-man's" or any outsider's business to become involved in civil conflicts. Therefore, IF (big if) these stories are true, then that makes the "white man" at least just as "evil" as the Lakota. I sincerely wish for you to find peace within yourself.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
I think its funny that after you monstrously apply your hateful one sided condemnations on an entire race of people that you have the gall to call anyone angry.
You have been sent the pictures of the cut up dismembered bones of 500 Indians from the massacre of Crow creek and you say ''big if'' thats it's even true yet you worship this story of the worst version of Sand Creek with many question marks about it.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
The only "hate" is from you.
ayemaya75 2 years ago
No you it from you silly. :)
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7thUSCavalryman I came here to see if you would Atleast tell BOTH sides of the story Wants again you only tell 1 side
TELL THE WHOLE THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Angered By The Minnesota Massacre. I bet the Dakota's were agery about the their women being dishorned by the Minnestians who the Cheifs reported but nothing was, I bet the Dakota's were angery about how Andrew Myrick who they came to, too recieve food from when told, SAID IF THEY ARE HUNGERY LET ME EAT GRASS.
Dealz1988 2 years ago
I met if their hungry let them eat Grass.
I bet the Sioux were pissed off about the 86 Brule butched at that MASSACRE they call The Of Ash Hollow. In which 86 Sioux were killed.
TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH,
Tell how The battle Of Ash Hollow started. OVER 1 missing Cow how the Calvery shoot and killed the Sioux Chief Conquering Bear from behind. Even tho Conquering Bear tried to pay back the Cow that Stranded away from the Oregon Trail with 5 horses. I bet the Dakota's were pissed about that.
Dealz1988 2 years ago
I'm going to post my response about this in the side bar and send it to you in a private messege. I don't want the information about Sand Creek to roll off because that is more important to this video.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
LMAOO....Delusive truth in a twisted address.
1134Karnage 2 years ago
what a bunch of bullshit.
mukaluk09 2 years ago
Again, the Arapahoe split the Cheyenne tribe into two separate bands. The two tribes had different grounds and areas of preference. The Northern band was and still is in the Wyoming territory and the Southern band remained in the Area of Holly, Colorado and more along the Garden of the Gods area which has an exhibit of Arapahoe and Southern Cheyenne gatherings. Most of the information you will not find in any book, and the best proof is the archaeological evidence seen with the eyes.
lloron74 2 years ago
what a load of crock
rockynanach 2 years ago
I know, can you believe some people call the Cheyenne peaceful?
Quite a load of crock indeed.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
Here it is again the same attitude that the soldiers had when they mutilated women is the same attitude that you feel justified to express in your comments!
lloron74 2 years ago 4
There you go. My comments saying the Cheyenne weren't pacifists is the same thing as mutilating women.
Reason shines so bright in this age of ours.
7thUSCavalryman 2 years ago
No, the research does not indicate that the S. Cheyenne did not continue the Dog Soldier society as indicated by Archaeological evidence. The Archaeological evidence as held by the Colorado History museum disproves that the Southern Cheyenne had any involvement. The best thig is to read the case that occured and the trial records. Many records are still held here at the Colorado Supreme Court Library. So, it is the Southern Cheyenne that I am defending because it was proven in court.
lloron74 2 years ago
u know nothing, the southern cheyennes have dogsoldier society, u get your information from books which are written by whiteman. our stories are still told from genertaion to generation. if u knew anything there are 2 bands the tsitsitas and the sutao, those are the 2 major bands not the north and south. there is more than just 2 bands of cheyennes
greendaddy101 2 years ago
Another aspect is historical accounts that at the time was seen by survivors. I do like the video but much of the Archaeological evidence here in Colorado and New Mexico, inculding my families history around Holly Colorado have always indicated another side to the story that people would like to call Cheyenne militarism, but in actuality like in court, the most fertile land was in SE CO, like Rocky Ford - and trying to link the two bands was trying to accuse innocent Southern Cheyenne.
lloron74 2 years ago
No, there is a lumping of people together, which is why in the court hearing it was defined that the Southern Cheyenne were separate and distinct. This separation was also supported by evidence that the Southern Cheyenne did not possess. Also, it was Arapahoe and Southern Cheyenne at Sand Creek - and it is the "crock" part without Archaeological evidence and exhibits that you are saying discounts historical recordings of languages by Spanish priests before 1700 here in Colorado.
lloron74 2 years ago