|
Post by dT on Oct 6, 2015 13:48:56 GMT -5
Are there any historians, or Nde tribal members, who can share more information about the Camp Grant Massacre? I am especially interested in the point of view of Apache members about what happened, and the events the led up to this terrible event.
thanks, dT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2015 17:59:51 GMT -5
why don't you get off your lazy ass and research it? Thanks!!!
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 6, 2015 18:27:14 GMT -5
Because the books only give one point of view. I'm looking for the Nde point of view.
Why don't you learn to be polite?
|
|
|
Post by Mithlo on Oct 7, 2015 0:14:06 GMT -5
HEY REDPAINT.....Whats with this? Why don't you just go find yourself a Facebook Hategroup Forum where they welcome your kind of rudeness!! This is NOT the way nor the PLACE for such!!!! Your "mouthing" is not N'de way!!
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 7, 2015 9:28:30 GMT -5
If you look at the account of the "facts" about the Camp Grant Massacre that are given in Wikipedia (for example) - they don't add up. It is reported that 144 Apaches died, nearly all of them were women and children. This means there must have been at least 70 warriors - my estimate. Those warriors lived at the camp ... but they are reported as being "hunting in the mountains" at the time of the massacre.
It is very surprising that all of those warriors were gone from the camp ... at the same time?
1. I find it difficult to believe that every Apache warrior would leave an important camp, with nobody remaining to guard it. That was not an Apache custom. It seems more likely that the warriors would only leave, if they were given a promise that the camp was being protected.
2. The account says that the Army had assigned Lt. Whitman and his men to look after the Indians. But Lt. Whitman didn't see the approach of 150 armed men (6 white, 48 Mexican, 92 O'odham) to the Apache camp? How can you miss the approach of 150 armed men on horseback?
The story implies treachery, or that Lt. Whitman wasn't doing his job. It seems more likely that Oury - who was the leader of the people who killed the Apaches - had some type of inside knowledge ... that led to him to believe that camp was unprotected at that time.
I will take a look at the book by Karl Jacoby. Maybe that has better answers. I suspect that there are Nde folks who know a lot more about what happened.
|
|
|
Post by jasper4 on Oct 7, 2015 11:31:33 GMT -5
In the pre-dawn hours of April 30, 1871, eight men and 110 women and children were brutally murdered in the brief span of 30 minutes. In addition, 28 Arivaipa Apache papoose were kidnapped from the grisly scene for sale in the child slave trade. The corpses left to rot in the morning sun of Arivaipa Canyon were a macabre sight to Dr. Conant B. Briesly, the first white man to chronicle the sight when he arrived at half past seven the same morning. By eight o'clock that morning, the mongrel band responsible for the gruesome massacre was breakfasting and celebrating their victory over an Indian tribe of defenseless, sleeping victims. What prompted 148 Arizonans -- comprised of six Anglos, 94 San Xavier Papagos and 48 Mexicans -- to commit such an atrocity? This dark page in Arizona's Territorial diary was written in Arivaipa Apache blood. There is no physical marker to mark the site. However, this day has not been forgotten by the relatives of those slain, the Arivaipa Apaches. This attempt at genocide is known as the Camp Grant Massacre. source is Arizona's Camp Grant Massacre - DesertUSA www.desertusa.com/desert-people/camp-grant-az.html
|
|
|
Post by jasper4 on Oct 7, 2015 11:41:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 7, 2015 12:04:18 GMT -5
Jasper4 ... thank you. I will be in Arizona again in a few weeks. I will try to visit the place where this happened. This was a dark day in Arizona's history - that is for sure. The fact that no-one was held responsible .... VERY BAD!
The participation of the 48 Mexicans in this, and the kidnapping of the Apache children to Mexico, shows that there was a plan. I do not believe that the Mexicans would attack an Apache camp, if they thought the Apache warriors were defending it. It would be suicide - the Apache warriors would kill them. Somehow these attackers (commanded by Oury) had very good knowledge that the Apache camp was undefended. There must have been a spy - this was not possible without advance knowledge. It was a very treacherous murder of innocent women and children.
|
|
|
Post by chicheman on Oct 7, 2015 18:36:26 GMT -5
Thank you all for those Informations about this terrible massacre. It was truely a shame,the killing of mainly helpless woman and children. This reminds me on such terrible Events as Sand Creek, Bear River or Wounded Knee. This is what I found some months ago,Nde voices to find here : interstice.us/apachestelltheirstory/history-massacre.htm (may want check out all the links). chicheman
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 8, 2015 22:51:20 GMT -5
quite a good summary of the Massacre can be found here. the account is balanced. southernarizonaguide.com/the-camp-grant-massacre-arizona-territory-1871/It is notable that this account cites an official report by Lt. Whitman that the Apache warriors were in the camp, and that the men fled at the first signs of the attack. The warriors had few weapons, because the Army had demanded that they be turned in (in exchange for rations). Still, I am surprised by this behavior ... the warriors running away. Something is still not properly understood, this is not the behavior of Apaches. The account also explains that an attempt to warn Whitman was blocked by the citizens of Tucson. That may be true, but it does not explain why Whitman failed to have any guards posted in the area. And it definitely does NOT explain why Whitman's Army detachment failed to come to the rescue of the Apaches immediately - when they heard gunfire. The sound of many rifles (fired by the White attackers and Mexicans) must have been very clear. There is no explanation for why Whitman's men did not respond immediately to stop the massacre. Bill Oury - leader of the Massacre Party - was a former Texas Ranger who settled in Arizona and became a cattle rancher. Apparently Oury had lost a number of very good cattle to Apache raiders over the previous couple of years. Since the Massacre happened in 1871, that would mean that some (unidentified) Apaches were active against Oury's ranch during the years 1869-1871. Lt. Whitman states that these Raiders could not have been the Apaches near Camp Grant. Head counts showed that the Camp Grant Apaches were only gone for a day or two in small numbers - this would not explain a long multi-day raid. Therefore, it is possible that other Western Apache bands were raiding Oury. But it is also entirely possible that the raids against Oury (and other ranchers) came from Cochise and his men, who had taken refuge in the Dragoon Mountains during that time period. The Dragoons are south and east of Tucson. It's a long distance, but well within the endurance of the Chokonen Chiricahua warriors who served under Cochise. So the bottom line is ... Oury slaughtered innocent women and children, and the Apaches who were murdered had nothing to do with the stolen cattle from his ranch. Ironically, Bill Oury went on to serve as the Sheriff of Pima County after the massacre, and was never held accountable for this brutal incident.
|
|
|
Post by cinemo on Oct 9, 2015 13:26:16 GMT -5
The actual reason for that massacre was – greed of some businessmen. After introduction of president Grant's „Peace Policy“ , many businessmen in Arizona feared a shrinkage of their contracts with the government and the Army. Many Tucson businessmen were involved in supplying Army posts and garrisons in Arizona. The feeding program being tried out at Camp Grant could potentially lead to the pacification of the Apache, the reduction of the Army garrisons and the suppression of this lucrative business. Regarding that massacre, please read a letter, written by Lieut. Royal E. Whitman, 3d U.S. Cavalry, and the affidavit of the post surgeon at Camp Grant : www.nanations.com/dishonor/massacres-of-apache.htmcinemo
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 9, 2015 23:38:49 GMT -5
Cinemo ... thank you for finding that letter.
these words ... "I immediately sent the two interpreters, mounted, to the Indian camp, with orders to tell the chiefs the exact state of things, and for them to bring their entire party inside the post. As I had no cavalry, and but about fifty infantry (all recruits), and no other officer, I could not leave the post to go to their defense. My messengers returned in about an hour with intelligence that they could find no living Indians."
In my opinion ... a bad response by Whitman. Whitman had 50 men, with arms. and he is saying that he is not prepared to walk on foot to the Apache camp to provide a defense. In addition, no guards were posted with the Apaches at all. This is gross incompetence. It doesn't look like anyone was trying very hard to really protect the Indians, despite the promises made by the Army. I also don't believe that Whitman could have failed to hear the rifle shots in the distance.
I personally suspect that Oury, who led the massacre, had information that most of the warriors were not in the camp. And apparently Oury was also well aware that Whitman would not come to intervene. It seems very possible - that Oury deliberately set out to exterminate the Apache woman and children. That was the intended mission. But I have no proof of this ... it's probably impossible to ever prove/disprove. I will keep digging for documents.
thanks for posting! dT
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 10, 2015 13:08:18 GMT -5
I am taking time to try to piece together ... WHAT really happened?
Lt. Whitman was very new to Arizona. He had only been recently deployed. He was sent to Arizona in the middle of the Apache Wars. Whitman quickly found himself with impossible expectations. Cochise was still at war, and causing major casualties and damage. Whitman did not have any mounted Cavalry, only foot soldiers inside his fort. No doubt Whitman was very aware about the Chiricahua Apache attack on Fort Bowie (The Battle of Apache Pass, 1862, attack by Cochise on Army fort near Willcox, Arizona). Probably he decided to avoid risking his men by sending them outside on foot. This meant that really Lt. Whitman was not properly equipped by the US Army to do his job. The people in Arizona did not want a "peace" with the Apaches - they wanted them destroyed. Whitman could not go and fight the Apaches. It's not surprising that the white people in Tucson decided that Whitman and his men were useless. This probably explains why Whitman was reluctant to go to the assistance of the Apaches in Camp Grant.
At the same time .. the Apaches at Fort Grant were essentially "set up". The Washington Government was pursuing a policy of putting Indians on reservations. So the Western Apaches were disarmed, in exchange for rations. But the white people in Tucson were scamming the Government system. They took the money for meat and grains from the Government, but substituted poor quality food. The Indian agents were also scamming the system by taking some of the supplies and re-selling them. So the Apaches did not get the food that they were promised, and not good quality food. Worst of all, the Western Apaches near Camp Grant were completely unprotected. Lt. Whitman could not come to their assistance if there was a major problem - but this fact was never communicated to the Apaches. They were extremely vulnerable in their camp.
Bill Oury figured all of this out - and exploited it. He had the skills of a Texas Ranger, and knew how to set up ambushes and travel over remote country. Many white people in Arizona had strong bigotry and hatred against the Apaches anyway - this was the middle of the Apache Wars. A lot of cruelty existed on both sides, and the settlers knew that the Apaches could be very unforgiving. It seems clear that Oury knew he would be killing a lot of women and children in his attack ... and apparently this was his attitude. If you look at the words of Britton Davis in his book "The Truth About Geronimo", he says that renegade Apaches were hunted down like bad dogs. Not people, just dogs. Bill Oury had the same attitude, and applied it to all Apaches ... woman and children as well.
The result was a tragedy.
Many things still do not add up.
1. Why did all of the Apache warriors leave the camp before the attack? Were they tricked? The 'explanation' that they were all hunting seems very unlikely. Over 100 warriors, all hunting, and no guards at their camp?? Doubtful.
2. Whitman says that he got word of the attack on the morning it happened, while he was eating breakfast. Really - how??? If a rider came from Tuscon, that would mean they rode through the night. Again, not likely. There are big questions about whether some soldiers at Camp Grant were complicit in letting the Apaches be slaughtered (not necessarily Whitman, but other soldiers under him).
3. It seems likely that Whitman's men MUST have heard the shooting during the massacre at the Apache camp. He did not report this, and apparently did not respond immediately.
4. The attacking party is reported to have used the major road connecting Tucson with Camp Grant. Surely a lot of people must have noticed 150 armed men going down that road? There appears to be a Conspiracy of Silence about Oury and his Massacre Party.
dT
|
|
|
Post by cinemo on Oct 10, 2015 14:07:27 GMT -5
I think, in that case we can't accuse Lieutenant Whitman to a great extent . He was unaware of that insidious massacre , because the plans by the Tucson posse were secretly made to go to Camp Grant. ….April 28th a large group of men gathered on the Hiillto Creek several miles from Tucson. They had left town in small groups to avoid the notice of the soldiers at Fort Lowell on the edge of the settlement...After a few preliminaries, such as sending men to Canada del Oro to stop all persons going toward Camp Grant until seven in the morning of April 30th,the party got under way ( this is similar as Col. Chivington did at Sand Creek ) And, Whitman ' s cavalry was incomplete, owing to the fact that Captain Stanwood with his cavalry company was absent. In the aftermath, Lt. Whitman’s report and his sympathy for the Indians earned him a court martial on charges of drunkenness, trumped up by Governor Safford. As in my last posting here are letters, that were published on May 31, 1871, by the New York Times : query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9802EEDF1F3AEF3BBC4950DFB366838A669FDE„ dT “ , Your question: Were the Aravaipa warriors absent during the attack ? See Whitman ' s letter : ...It has been said that the men were not there: they were all there. On the 28th we counted one hundred and twenty-eight men, a small number being absent for mescal, all of whom have since been in. ( end of citation ) The attack was so swift, and such a surprise that they ( the warriors ) could put up no defence. A messenger was dispatched from Camp Lowell to Camp Grant with orders to stop the attack.This messenger was intercepted and detained for a couple of hours. cinemo
|
|
|
Post by dT on Oct 10, 2015 21:21:19 GMT -5
Cinemo ... I didn't read all of the links of that page yet. Thank you. It speaks volumes about the public sentiment in Arizona, that the Governor of Arizona would court-martial Whitman for making sympathetic statements about the Indians. Yet, the Governor knew full well that it was women and children that were slaughtered.
I think that you are right - Whitman is exonerated by the fact that there was a Cavalry detachment (Stanwood) and they were absent. But I notice the absence of that Cavalry was very convenient timing for Oury and his Massacre Party - I think he must have been informed that Stanwood would not be present.
Yes, I did see Whitman's report that the 128 warriors were present on the 28'th, just 2 days before the massacre. I cannot imagine how these men could flee, leaving their women and children behind. The Chief Eskiminzen grabbed his youngest daughter and ran with her to the hills. He was a Pinal Apache, by the way. But apparently few other Aravaipa did this .. it seems difficult to understand. The O'odham warriors who attacked (92 men) were mainly armed with clubs and knives, and the Aravaipa could have defended with knives and arrows if they stayed organized. Yes certainly the Mexican and White Men had rifles, but it is reported they mostly shot at escapers. So most victims were bludgeoned or stabbed to death. But it is hard to judge the actions of the warriors - WE WERE NOT THERE. It is easy for me to write words on a computer, not so easy to be there on a dark morning in Arizona. I still think there is more to the story, and why the warriors did what they did.
Thank you with your help with the research articles!
My Friend Jasper4 is Correct - This was a DARK DAY for Arizona.
|
|