Sand Creek Massacre - PBS

[Californian]

Sand Creek Massacre
- Season 2 Episode 210 | 58m 19s

www.pbs.org/video/colorado-experience-sand-creek-massacre/

What would lead approximately 675 volunteer soldiers to attack a peaceful settlement of Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians in southeastern Colorado Territory? On November 29, 1864, Colonel John Chivington led a group to do just that, resulting in the deaths of over one hundred men, women and children. This episode revisits the horrific events and uncovers the history 150 years later.
Originally Aired: 27 Nov 2014

[shan]

Californian,

I've just watched, and very much enjoyed the documentary of Sand Creek, and I wonder if anyone out there has read the Greg Michno book on the subject.

I read it a couple of months ago and for those of you who haven't, it presents a very different version of the story. Apart from the politics, and its a very exhaustively researched book, he argues that it was more of a battle than a massacre. Now I don't know either way. I've read his book which says one thing, and now I've watched this documentary which says the complete opposite.

I'm assuming that one of them is wrong, or is fake news as we say these days, so I'm asking if anyone else has read the Michno book, and if so, what do they think of it?

Low Dog

[chicheman]

Hello,

I was finding this interview with Greg Michno about Sand Creek and his book or statements :

juliarobb.com/blog/greg-michno-writes-balanced-frontier-history/

Very different opinions and statements and it´s going against many well researched known facts, oral history of the Cheyennes and Arapahos, accounts of eye witnesses, etc. I think to recall that in George B. Grinnell´s Fighting Cheyennes is a good account about the fact that the majority of the Cheyennes kept peacefull that year and especially Black Kettle´s people and village was, though the Dog Soldier´s where angry and fighting. And sure had reasons for that I think. I didn´t read the book yet, but sounds strange to me what I learned from that interview. And what about the many killed women and children - that could be called a battle ? Not in my eyes so.

chicheman

[Californian]

hello Shan and Chicheman

I concur with Chicheman's conclusion generally and overall. An unprovoked massacre it was perpetrated by a motley crew of short-term conscripted volunteers out to kill Indians. The prevailing sentiment in those days was largely racist motivated, an invader that deemed himself superior and regarded the indigenous population inhabiting these parts as vermin, undeserving to inhabit the lands that was theirs for eons. Also history is mostly written by the victors of conflicts, although in the case of the Sand Creek massacre there was almost instantly an outcry that prompted investigative hearings. Everyone is entitled to one's own opinion and as Greg Michno stated in the interview, the audience he intended to reach was ...himself. Certainly atrocities were committed by both sides, yet one still has to keep the perspective of the views of the invaders and equally those of the people defending their homeland and way of life.

Incidentally there is a revisionist website out there on the internet on the subject of Wounded Knee, another massacre.  armyatwoundedknee.com/

[chicheman]

Well said Californian, my opinion too. Greetings from Germany