HistoryNet mastheadHistoryNetShop Summer Catalog

Sand Creek Massacre: The Real Villains

 | Wild West  | 5 comments  | Print This Post  | Email This Post

Also responsible were the Indian agents and traders who realized that the battle, if represented as a massacre, would be a way to make money. The crooked traders and agents were doubly culpable. First, their cheating of the Indians caused more raiding, proved that the white man’s word meant nothing and ripened the conditions for conflict. Second, they were among those who cried foul most vociferously. They were the promoters and advertisers of the Sand Creek affair.

Subscribe Today

Subscribe to Wild West magazine

Sam Colley was so blatantly ‘fork-tongued’ that it is amazing someone did not challenge his post-battle statements. Colley supplied Evans with information from white traders that the Indians would go to war in the spring of 1864. He recommended that fort garrison strengths be increased. He was active in annuity swindles. He told Chivington that he had done all in his power but could not stop the Indians from raiding, and that only a sound whipping would restore peace. He told men of the 3rd Colorado that the Indians needed punishment. Colley even told Chivington where the Arapahos were camped so they could be attacked.

After Sand Creek, Colley did an about-face, criticized the Army and mourned the loss of ‘his’ goods. He complained about his losses and the bad treatment of the Indians. He wrote to his cousin Dole, to Usher and to Doolittle that the Indians were all under his protection and that the chiefs were doing all they could to keep the peace. In 1865 he testified that the Indians had been at peace and were friendly. Colley could have given Wynkoop a run for his money in the greatest liar competition. Yet Colley, like Wynkoop, Soule and Smith, provided the testimony that the authorities wanted to hear.

John Smith did not appear to be as upset about the death of his son as he did about losing property, although that property may not have been his to lose. He and Colley schemed to make Sand Creek into a massacre to collect money from damage claims, blaming the Army for attacking peaceful Indians and destroying their property in the process.

A third group responsible for the fighting at Sand Creek and its ghastly portrayal consisted of several members of the 1st Colorado. The person most responsible was Edward Wynkoop. Were it not for his continuous violation of orders, there never would have been a battle. Before he went over the edge into total denial, he realized his culpability when, in January 1865, he admitted that taking the Indians to Denver was ‘a mistake of which I have since become painfully aware.’ Even so, Wynkoop never seemed to recognize that taking the Indians to headquarters in the wrong district was not the only problem. To cover up his own mistakes, Wynkoop screamed loudest of all. He knew he was responsible for what happened, and he felt betrayed by a superior officer he believed would support him. He needed to quickly shift the blame and was wild to strike at someone–Chivington was the perfect target. Returning Wynkoop to command at Fort Lyon and having him conduct the investigation guaranteed that facts would not be found and justice would not be served.

Soule and to a lesser extent Cramer were Wynkoop’s right-hand men in the persecution of Chivington and in depicting the battle as a massacre. Although they participated little, they were among the most vocal concerning what they said they saw, and even concocted things they didn’t see. Both men made up statements that Chivington had refused to save Jack Smith. Both said they would not allow their companies to ‘burn powder’ during the battle, and both later swallowed their prior boasts during the court of inquiry and admitted that they had been firing.

Appointing Sam Tappan president of the court further ensured that the truth would not come out. This bitter enemy of Chivington’s got his revenge for what he considered he had endured at his colonel’s hands for nearly three years. Tappan’s actions in court–his admission of witnesses, depositions, hearsay evidence–and his rulings showed his public prejudice. His diary showed his private prejudice.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Tags: , , , , ,

HistoryNet.com Subject Locator
  1. 5 Comments to “Sand Creek Massacre: The Real Villains”

  2. Thanks to Greg Michno for his consistently flawless histories.
    About the Sand Creek Military Hearings in Denver that followed,
    Chivington’s first two requests during his testimony were first
    that Samuel F. Tappan recuse himself from presiding due to
    obvious bias. When Tappan refused, Chivington then asked the
    committee to open the hearings to the press and public. Tappan
    again refused, securing for himself unfettered revenge on
    Chivington for Tappan’s humiliation at Glorieta. (by petition of a
    majority of junior officers of the First Colorado Volunteer Infantry
    after Glorieta, then-Major Chivington was chosen over Lt. Col.
    Tappan to become Colonel in command. Tappan, a former
    newspaper reporter and acquaintance of Gen. Sherman, seemed
    to acquiese and bided his time for revenge. I like to think of
    Tappan the historical charachter as “Press Trash with-a-grudge”)

    By Curt Neeley on Oct 23, 2008 at 11:06 pm

  3. IDK know mudh about it but it seems to me the americans were being pretty unfair!!

    By Anne Barington on Apr 23, 2009 at 4:09 pm

  4. Where did you get your info. saying he was {wynkoop} a vilian is the most stupid thing I have ever heard about sandcreek, also john smith was a trader who’s son was murdered by chivingtons men for being a half breed. I would like to know where you got your info or did you write it down read it, and then used it

    By Brad Long on Aug 16, 2009 at 12:57 am

  5. Much is made of Samuel F. Tappan’s diary. Was the diary ever published. If so, how could one see it?
    Thanks,
    Tom

    By Tom Stohlgren on Aug 23, 2009 at 1:43 pm

  6. re Tom Stohlgren’ question, Sam Tappan’s writings are said to be available through Kansas State Historical Society. Also, look up Kevin Cahill or KClonewolf on the internet. I think he has posted an extensive Sand Creek bibliography.

    As for Michno’s credibility, he is the most thorough about his sourcing of any I’ve read and has an encyclopedic memory that has helped him connect many Sand Creek dots. Also, I like Irving Howbert’s first-hand description of the Sand Creek fight in his MEMORIES OF A LIFETIME IN THE PIKES PEAK REGION, available at history.oldcolo.com book store. And a recently discovered description by John Coplen adds to Howbert’s version.

    However, the Massacre version will probably always prevail because too many careers and paychecks depend on it, plus it’s probably the most popular Fairy Tale ever concocted. I’d think the Cheyenne activists would eventually be embarassed by the hype.

    Also, Michno’s BATTLE AT SAND CREEK, The Military Perspective is an excellent read on the subject, as well as his ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE INDIAN WARS and his and Susan’s
    A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH about women and childrens miseries while captive of the Plains tribes during that era.

    By Curt Neeley on Aug 27, 2009 at 12:31 am

Post a Comment

Please note that HistoryNet Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions. If you have a question about our magazines, please use the contact us form.

Related Articles



SPONSORED SITES







HistoryNet Article Archives Historynet Spacer

OPINION POLL

Which of these fields of endeavor have had the most impact on the course of human history?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

See previous polls

STAY CONNECTED WITH US

RSS Feed
 
Get Our Daily HistoryNet Email
 
 


What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

 Get our RSS!
 Newsletter Signup

From Our Magazines

Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer!

Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Contact Us|Advertise With Us|Subscription Help