Wikipedia

User:Mcb133aco/sandbox

< User:Mcb133aco
  • Dakota Sioux Once Lived in Georgia?, Gary C. Daniels, January 9, 2017. LostWorlds.org, 2024 [167]
  • The Yanktonai claimed the Santee sold their land. Indian Difficulties, The Weekly Pioneer and Democrat, July 1, 1858, p.1 [168]
  • Indian depredations, The Weekly Pioneer and Democrat, June 24, 1858, p.5, Chronicling American, 2024,Library of Congress[169]
  • Another and a War Message, Saint Paul Weekly Minnesotan, June 26, 1858, p.2, Chronicling American, 2024,Library of Congress[170]
  • Santee sold Yanktonai land and collecting annuites for it. Indian Difficulties - Sacking Medary, The Weekly Pioneer and Democrat, July 01, 1858, p.6, Chronicling American, 2024,Library of Congress [171]
  • While Minnesota was still a Territory The Minnesota River was called the St. Peters River or simply the Peters. The Yankton Sioux claimed from the Big Sioux River to the Peters[1]
  • The Dakota War of 1862, Columns of Vengeance, Paul N. Beck, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman OK, p.47
  • Major Crandall Retirement Bio, 1st PITS Superintendent [2]
  • 1857 Trouble With Indians in Minnesota Troops Sent, The Kanzas News, August 15, 1857, p.2, Chronicling American, 2024,Library of Congress [172] Ten companies from Forts Independence, Hamilton, Mackinaw, Sault Ste Marie were sent to Fort Snelling because of the Chippewa.
  • By 1862 the eastern Dacotah were tactically compromised - The Origins of the Dakota-Chippewa War, Chapter 1: Valley of Plenty, River of Conflict: A Historic Resource Study of the Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway, National Park Service, Oct 2002 [173]


Calling "Warriors" ~ "Soldiers" is bigotry edit

Calling a Warrior a Soldier is insulting to the Warrior's ancestral heritage, concept of self, as well as their cultural legacy. In the pantheon of war, a Warrior ranks above a Soldier in both status and respect. To be a warrior is a cultural identify while to be a soldier is an occupational choice. The words and concepts are not interchangeable. Those that use the word "soldiers" in place of "warriors" do so in the belief that they are reversing a racist narrative when the are actually promoting one and using Wikipedia to do it.


Soldiers vs Warriors

akiçita:Definition in the Dakota Dictionary Online @ University of Minnesota: "warrior".[3] The dictionary has no listing for the word "soldier". According to the 1852 Riggs Dakota Dictionary the primary meaning of the word AKICITA is "warrior". The 1890 reprint of the dictionary leaves the definition unchanged. Both editions list "soldier" as a secondary definition. Given that the war took place between publications of the two Riggs the definition listed in them is the most applicable to the Dakota War narrative, not one published 100 years post-war. O cites the current Sissiton Dictionary without explanation as to why the historic primary definition has been replaced by the historic secondary definition. That raises the question of creditability of the source O cites. The change in definitions is significant enough to raise the question of editor bias in the source. There are too many sources written by amateurs concerning the war. The revisionist effort to paint Little Crows warriors as soldiers is an example. "Soldiers" are trained in the "conventional warfare" of their period. Warriors are trained as "asymmetrical warfare" fighters or guerrillas throughout history. The Military History project does not interchange combatants of one type of warfare with the other and identify all as being the same. The Military History Project should not grade this article above a "C" while it identifies Little Crows warriors were soldiers. Using "soldiers" in place of "warriors" is an attempt to rewrite the historic narrative. The use of Soldier for Warrior reflects a revisionist rewrite utilizing inaccurate terminology. The fact that C can cite multiple editors that failed to verify correct terminology and comprehend the content illustrates a Wikipedia issue whereby poorly researched sources are given creditability by meeting the reliability standard of simply getting published. The Dakota War soldiers vs warriors is an example of this.

ielquiparle https://fmp.cla.umn.edu/dakota/recordlist.php



  • Only house on White Bear lake arsoned and looted. Capt Freeman's Report, St. Cloud Democrat. Pub. Date October 9, 1862 [174]
  • Guerilla Parties ~ Rules of War, Dr. Lieber The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume], September 19, 1862, Image 6, Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Lib. of Congress. [175]
  • Sibley, To Wasbasha: "Do not approach unless in daylight under a flag of truce"The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume], September 19, 1862, Image 6, Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Lib. of Congress. [176]
  • Lines of Defense: Chengwatana-fort Abercrombie Sauk Center-Iowa,[4]
    • Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Lib. of Congress. [177]
  • Koposia="Light footed", "The Whereabouts of the Indians, Philadelphia Inquirer, July 1863, p.3 [178]
  • 1st U.S. Volunteers, p. 285, Confederate turncoats[179]
  • Library of Congress [180]
  • 2nd Military Commission, Indianer gefangene vor eninen Kreigsgericht, Minnesota Staats-Zeitung. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.), September 26, 1863, Image 3, Library of Congress, Washington D.C. [182]
  • The Acton Massacre committed by Little Six's band, Highy interesting Facts, Chicago Tribune, 2023 Newspapers.com

30 Aug 1862, Sat · Page 2, [183]

Minnesota's Frontier Babcock MHS June 1963 [184] Fortification map

  • Sale of Fort Snelling, The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume], January 16, 1863, Image 5, Library of Congress, [185]</ref>

Medicine Cow

== your expertise == peace maker 67 I received a request from the Minnesota History Project to review the Dakota War article. I did and responded it was in need of a complete rewrite. The existing article has a poor lead for an Encyclopedia article. It fails to introduce a chronology that leads to a summation of the hostilities. The body lacks balance, substance, neutrality, and precision. Presentism is given undue weight that is not properly identified or discussed citing biased sources. I did a rewrite that I posted only to have it reverted immediately. It was not reverted for pov, ci, accuracy, or vandalism. The revert was for "too much at one time". From that I learned the article has two primary editors. It is my opinion that both have NPOV issues and one has taken ownership of the article. The other should have a COI tag for all articles related to the Dakota War as they have a problem with neutrality. The upside to that revert was I continued to work on the balance of the rewrite.User:Mcb133aco/New sandbox I have reached the point where I would like a outside input, actually I very much need it. I have asked a number of editors now, to no avail. It is large, however a review of other "war" articles shows that they all are way over the Wiki preferred standard.

Is there any chance you could look at that article? You are not American, have a Military background, and have the editing credentials necessary to get the article on track. I wont clutter up your talk page. If you are willing, I have a more detailed message at the top of my sandbox

I am contacting you as opposed to going to the teahouse or village pump for your experience and neutrality. I apologize for the intrusion as I expect you have many other things you could be doing. I very much would appreciate your direction at this point. Dakota War article seems to be the product of two editors, one who has taken "Ownership" of the article, the other is indigenous with an evident pov. I rewrote their effort as the "edit as you go" consensus approach was not going to improve the content in my lifetime. The "Owner" immediately reverted my effort. However, it was not for vandalism, COI, or pov. The stated reason was "too much" or "too large". When I posted the rewrite I posted an abbreviated bullet list of reasons for the re-write. The "Owner" is now using that list as the basis to re-edit the War. That's great, but I do not view it as good faith editing, I view it is a a form of plagiarism. They are using the reverted information I posted to re-write and re-post

The "Dakota War' may be unique in military history. The Military History Project evaluation of the War article identified "no time line" as an issue. I had included it both in the leade and the War's chronology in a bullet list. I defined the two War Models applicable to the war: indigenous Dacotah vs Euro-American and explained applicability. I explained the basis and authority of the military commission. I explained how Lincoln's trial review methodology was not haphazard and reflected the trial documents. I explained the militarization of the Minnesota frontier and posted an illustration. The State went from 3 Forts to over 60 military forts, stockades and outposts in less than a year. I pointed out that Lincoln issued General Order 100 4 months post Mankato that is the basis for the Geneva Conventions. It falls within the time frame of Dakota War which makes it relevant. I pointed out the war crimes of both sides in relation to the Geneva Conventions. I also posted that Lincoln made the largest mass commutation in conjunction with ordering the largest mass hanging.

The current article does not include is that the Chippewa sent Lincoln a letter offering to go war for the U.S. so Lincoln could send Minnesota's troops to fight the confederacy. Had Lincoln accepted the Sioux would not have surrendered to the Chippewa, there would have been no trials, no hangings, no Dakota 38. Lincoln's not accepting the offer saved hundreds of Sioux and Chippewa from dying. Multiple online sources have posted the letter or reference it. Does anything I just described as qualify as "original research"?
The current article refers Dacotah Warriors as soldiers. There are several issues with that. From the Military History perspective I explained to the Owner that soldiers are trained in the conventional warfare of their era while warriors are trained in asymmetrical warfare and the two labels are not interchangeable. That was waste of time.
I also made an issue of institutionalized racial language in the article. It is racist to refer to one side by a color (white) when the other side is not identified by color in the same manner.
All of this content was not part of the article when I did the rewrite. I reached out the Minnesota Project starting with the editor that asked my input and have gotten no response. I reached out to your equals at the Minnesota Project and have gotten no reply. So, I am hoping the Military History Project will be more be more productive.
To me there is a major issue with the "Dakota War" title. The word Dakota refers to all "Dakota" people while the War was almost exclusively Mdewakanton. Using Dakota paints the non-involved tribes with the war crimes of the Mdewakanton
  • User:Mcb133aco/New sandbox: Dakota War article re-write [186]
  • User:Mcb133aco/sandbox: Mdewakanton-Wahpekute 38 +2 Mankato Hangings article [187]
  • Letter to Lincoln in "The Weekly Pioneer and Democrat" , p. 3 [188]
  • article : "Chippewas on the War Path", Goodhue Republican Vol. 6 No. 3, Sept 12, 1863, Minnesota Historical Society, 345 Kellogg Blvd, St Paul, MN [189]. This group went to Fort Ripley to await a reply.
  • article "Chippewa Chiefs State Capitol", The Weekly Pioneer and Democrat. [volume], September 26, 1862 [190]. Gov. Ramsey told the Chippewa Lincoln was too busy to deal with their offer to fight the Sioux. There is so much to say and I do not want to clutter up your talk-page. The Dakota War really needs an editor of your caliber. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Mdewakanton-Wahpekute 38 +2 edit

 
Common depiction of the execution scene at Mankato, without snow or winter apparel,in December 1862.
 
Basic monument erected in 1912 by two veterans of the uprising, Judge Lorin Cray and General James H. Baker, to mark the 50th anniversary of "the city's most significant event".[7]
 
The 1973 Mankato War Crimes Execution replacement monument.
 
Proximity of the 1862 mass grave
 
Memorial listing the executed at Reconciliation Park in Mankato Minnesota today.[8]
 
Mankato's indigenous themed Reconciliation Park[8]
 
Mdewakanton Chief Cut Nose, Little Crow's senior lieutenant[9]
 
Mdewakanton leader Medicine Bottle
 
Mdewakanton Chief Little Six hung at Fort Snelling

On December 26 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota, 38 Mdewakanton and Whapetkute warriors were executed as ordered by a Minnesota USV Military Commission and approved by President Lincoln. As of July 2022 it is both the largest mass execution and the largest act of executive clemency in the history of the United States.[10] Military Commissions date to the Mexican-American War and allegedly have yet to be determined as to their authority to determine violations of the "Laws of War".[11]: p.65  Some claim the Laws of War did not apply to the indigious peoples because the Laws of War were/are "white". Some say the woman and children they were charged with murdering were not War Crimes, they were a "military necessity" in the Dacotah war model.[11]: p.88  Today the presentism narrative to Minnesota's historic narrative of the murders, massacres, rapes and outrages, is that those concepts did not exist in the indigenous warfare model,so no war crimes were committed. The Mdewakanton were a sovereign indigenous nation.[11] That narrative claims the Mdewakanton were convicted, not for the crime of murder, but for killings resulting from warfare as defined by the Dacotah. Under the Dacotah war model those deaths are "legitimate" as opposed to "criminal".[11]: p.14  There is controversy over what constitutes a war crime, and whose concept of acceptable conduct in war is legally applicable, the Dakota war model or the European-American model.[12]: p.146-50  War to the Mdewakanton forces was not governed by any moral constraints. War was total against the designated enemy, no holds barred no quarter or compassion given, whether the target was a combatant or non-combatant. Simply put, it was one death inflicted upon the Dacotah meant one death inflicted upon their enemy. The Dacotah model is legitimate until foreign concepts are introduced that corrupt the model. Flag of truce, surrender, pows, pow treatment, fairness, compassion for non-combatants, legal rights, legal status, and courts are all elements foreign of the Dakota model and once they are introduced or are expected, then the European-American warfare model becomes the applicable model to the hostilities because, that is where those concepts originate.[12]: p.146-50  The "one for one" in death count of the Dacotah's model did not happen in 1862 and it was not what the Mdewakanton force expected upon "surrender" at Camp Release. The Mdewakanton forces expected "fair treatment" as "prisoners of war" from the Euro-American model under a "flag of truce".[12]: p.146-50  That is not what they would have received from the Dakota War model. Paradoxically, most on the American side wanted Dacotah war model justice. General Sibley said that they would be treated fairly as only the "murders" were wanted.[13] Once the Mdewakanton decided to go to war, their intent was to remove all "whites" from the Minnesota River Valley. Their actions in the first days of the hostilities confirm that was their mission and today that mission would be described by some as forced displacements while others would call them an ethnic cleansing. Which ever term is used, when it was over, Minnesota had nearly no eastern Dacotah or Winnebago peoples remaining in the state and the Minnesota frontier had been completely depopulated. The Chippewa bands in the north or Yankton Sioux in the southwest were not affected and their treaties remained intact. When he heard that females had been killed Chief Little Crow responded that the "whites" would come and "they would be like wolfs after rabbits following the hard moon of January", he was right.[14][15] Four months following the hangings Lincoln issued General Order 100 the precursor to the Geneva Conventions.

More than 80 years before the Geneva Conventions were written and the Nuremberg trials were held, Minnesota held War Crime trials at the Lower Sioux Agency in the fall of 1862 producing 303 military execution sentences that required Presidential review. General Henry H. Sibley selected a military tribunal of Minnesota USV to prosecute the alleged massacres and atrocities committed against the people of the State of Minnesota by the Mdewakanton and their allies.[16] War Crimes had not been prosecuted before in the United States. It would not be until post-WWII that "massacres and atrocities" committed against civilians were identified by the international community as War Crimes. None of the tribunal had legal training. That led to many legalities not being observed, like court impartiality, no representation, and no discovery or cross examination or defense witnesses.[17][18] It also explains the simplicity of charges: murder, rape, massacres, and atrocities. No one was charged with aiding and abetting, looting or horse stealing. Since the tribunal did not know Minnesota's legalities common law should have been applied. It was not, none were charged for being accessories. "Common law separates accessories to crime into four categories. A principal in the first degree actually committed the crime. A principal in the second degree was present at the scene of the crime and assisted in its commission. An accessory before the fact was not present at the scene of the crime, but helped prepare for its commission. An accessory after the fact scene of the crime, but helped prepare for its commission. An accessory after the fact helped a party to the crime after its commission by providing comfort, aid, and assistance in escaping or avoiding arrest and prosecution or conviction."[19] Child endangerment as a legality did not exist. The legal issues before them were not for either a military or civilian court they were for a War Crimes Tribunal and the Hague did not exist. Even-so, out of the 490 cases 162 were dismissed, 18 got prison sentences, while 303 got the death sentence. Had it been left to the citizens of Minnesota they all would have hung. Because the USV were Federalized into national service the sentences were subject to review by the commander in chief, President Abraham Lincoln. The word he received was 800 unarmed Minnesota citizens had been massacred by the Sioux. Historians of differing POVs have cited numbers ranging from the 360 to 800 plus, what ever it is it remains in the hundreds including an African American.[20][21][22] One historian reviewing the records says 30% of the civilians were young children. Lincoln had anticipated multiple charges of rape. Instead there were hundreds of charges of murder. The remains woman and children were found charred at multiple farmsteads. Two pregnant females were disemboweled and the infants killed. The lawyer in Lincoln saw many issues and he really did not want to deal with any of it. He wanted to delegate it back to the Army and sought input from Joseph Holt the Army Judge Advocate General. General Holt said "no" he could not, it was his to deal with.[23] Stuck with it Lincoln had all of the case transcripts sent to Washington D.C. for him to review. What he had had never been prosecuted before. His office received many telegrams imploring a quick decision for swift justice. Instead Lincoln gave it thought. and received a telegram from General Pope in St Paul advised that a decision was needed soon or there would be a civil disorder in Minnesota. Which was why there would not be a blanket pardon, it would not happen. Lincoln did not want to hang 303 Sioux yet he felt that there was a need for justice even is it was flawed. It was his reasoning that kept the trials focused on their purpose, the War Crimes. He realized that cases could be separated for "military" conventional warfare against Minnesota USV and "massacres and atrocities" against Minnesota citizens.[23] Using this distinction provided him the methodology to sort the cases into two piles with 40 to be executed for War Crimes, commuting 262 from execution and one to prison.[23] The citizens of Minnesota were unhappy with his verdicts at the time and today Lincoln is vilified by the media.[24]

  • After 150 years the narrative of the hostilities is not not agreed upon. Academics and the Minnesota Historical Society have changed the name of the narrative and give the deaths of the Minnesotans little importance. A historian in 1968 stated the alleged atrocities were myth[25] and another called the hangings atrocities.[26]

The Uprising Hostilities:

Both Little Crow, leader of the Mdewakanton forces, and Lt. Timothy Sheehan, the Fort Ridgely commander, placed the blame for the hostilities on Indian Agent Thomas Galbraith with his stocked warehouses.[27] He had extended credit to the Sisseton and Wahpeton tribes at the Upper Sioux Agency, but refused the Mdewakanton and Wahpekute tribes at the Lower Sioux Agency.[27] Galbraith's employee Andrew Myrick made history with his comment "So far as I am concerned, if they are hungry, let them eat grass or their own dung."[28]

When President Lincoln received word of the Santee Sioux uprising in August 1862 he federalized the various state militia[29] along side the Minnesota Volunteer Infantry With the civil war going on Lincoln had no Federal troops to spare. All regular USA had been withdrawn from Minnesota to engage the Confederacy. There was a single regular U.S. Army enlisted-man remaining in Minnesota during the hostilities. General Pope arrived a month after the hostilities began, but never left his Hotel in St. Paul. The 17 August Acton Massacre was the start when four Wahpeton tribemen stole eggs.[30] That night Little Crows leadership was sought. He advised against war, but was called a coward and lead his men to war against his better judgement. The next day over 160 civilians were killed in Renville County alone.[31] alone starting with the Massacre at the Lower Agency and followed by the Beaver Creek Massacre[32] Across the Minnesota frontier, counties adjoining the Eastern Sioux reservation were attacked, primarily by Mdewakanton tribesmen killing 250 unarmed civilians, men, woman, children and infants in the first three days.[29] The hostilities started at the Lower Sioux Agency Then came the Battle of New Ulm or New Ulm Massacre followed by the attack and seige of Fort Ridgely. The Fort was responsible for the security of the two indian agencies of the reservation and the disbursement of the tribal annuities. The Fort's translator was bi-racial French-Dakotah and dressed in native apparel to go check the Upper Sioux Agency and found no one alive.[33] At Beaver creek he saw 50 family's laying dead.[33] More followed at Lake Shetek Massacre in Redwood County, and West Lake Massacre[34][35] in Kandiyohi County, and the Manannah Massacre in Meeker County[36] The scale of the white settlers killed was unprecedented in the colonization of North America.[37] At the outbreak of hostilities unarmed civilians were the primary targets with some taken prisoner. When the hostilities ended hundreds of Minnesotans had been murdered by the Mdewakanton and their allies.[38] One historian has found that 30% of the civilians killed were children under ten years of age.[38] Those numbers are not universally agreed upon.[39] [40] Governor Ramsey had changed the dynamic of the hostilities when he placed a $25.00 bounty on their scalps which was a paid execution of a combatant by a non-combatant. The majority of the Santee Sioux fled the State and Ramsey's replacement in the Governor's office Henry Swift had increased the bounty to $200.00 ensuring they would not return. The initial hostilities ended 37 days later with the Mdewakanton force Surrender at Camp Release. There the female prisoners taken by Little Crow's warriors were released to Brig. Gen.Sibley's Minnesota troops. Lincoln sent the General John Pope to command the Department of Minnesota, who arrived near the end of the hostilities.[29] The hostile tribes were the nine Mdewakanton bands plus the Wahpekutes. Initially 400 Sissiton and Wahpeton joined from the northern agency,[41] but most of them decided to return north. There were a few Winnebago at the Lower Sioux Agency when it was over run.[42] They would be amongst the men surrendering at Camp Release and one was sentenced to prison. Hostile bands of Sisseton have been identified for the attacks on Fort Abercrombie and West Lake. Sisseton chiefs Standing Buffalo, Red Iron and Waanatan, told Little Crow if he brought the war to the upper reservation the Sisseton would go to war against the Mdewakanton.[12]: p.35  In 1923 Shatterlee attributed the attack at Slaughter slough on the renegade Wahpekute chief Inkpaduta though others credit the Sisseton. The Dakota not involved were the Yanktons, Yanktonnai, and as well as the majority of the Sisseton, and Wahpeton. A small number of Mdewakanton were labeled "Loyal Mdewakanton" for providing safety or assistance to U.S. Americans. Amongst the Mdewakanton there were leaders and men that also refused to go to war; Chiefs Wabasha, Wacouta, and Red legs. They were labeled "friendlies" by the Government and "cut hairs" or "dutchmen" by fellow Dacotah.

The Chippewa

 
Minnesota monument to Chief Mou-Zoo-Mau-Nee and his 700 Mille Lacs band warriors defending Fort Ripley during the Sioux outbreak. Dedicated 1914 at the Fort Ridgely because Fort Ripley was abandoned and unused by then. The monument is the same size as the one the State put up for the men of the 5th Minnesota that died at Ridgely and Redwood Ferry.

Chief Hole In the Day of the Gull Lake Band of Chippewa made the news by threatening to join Little Crow. Other bands of Chippewa did not share his view of the Sioux. Chief Mou-Zoo-Mau-Nee of the Mille Lacs band sent 700-750 warriors to Fort Ripley to reinforce the garrison in the event the Fort was attacked.[43]

On 2 September two Mille Lacs band Chiefs sent Lincoln a letter offering to fight the Sioux so Minnesotans could go fight the south. Had Lincoln accepted the offer it is unknown how the other bands of Chippewa would have responded, but the Mdewakanton were primary force at war the other Dacotah were leaving the state. Accepting their offer would have meant there would have been no trials and no executions. Lincoln saved hundreds of Mdewakanton women and children by not setting the Chippewa on the warpath for the U.S. This fact that is not mentioned in the Lincoln narrative in the presentism of today. The letter was published in St Paul on 13 September 1862, by the New York Times on the 14th, and by the Chicago Times on 16 September 1862. The Chicago Times Volume VIII No. 27 published the letter in entirety:

"His Excellency the Governor of Minnesota: Fond du Lac, St. Louis Reservation 2 September , 1862

We the undersigned Chiefs of the Chippewas of Lake Superior, do petition through you, to the President of the United States, the Great Father, as in hereinafter set forth: My Father we have heard and do hear every day and through the half breeds who are more enlightened than we are, that you are in trouble with your own people: and that they are very strong. We hear that one of your Red children has taken up the knife and tomahawk against you; that they have killed and murdered men, woman and children. That they have destroyed everything they could lay their hands on. They are blind and do not appreciate your great kindness. The Great Spirit looks down on that people with great vengeance. We raise the spirit of the Chippewa enemies to avenge the wrongs perpetrated on their white brethren.

My Father, you know he is our enemy, therefore we beg that you give us the chance to show that we are your friends and wish to serve you, to help you preserve the peace and tranquility among your children. We are willing to go and put down the evil spirit of my old enemy. Give us an opportunity to show you that we are loyal to the Great Father and his laws, and that we appreciate his kindness towards us. We think that our Great Father has enough to do down south for his solider: let him sen them down there, and send us to fight our red enemey. We are ready to go. We are willing to obey orders, and be lead by a white Captain, but on the battlefield we want our own Captains and fight in our own mode of fighting. Pay our expenses while we are gone. We also wish to raise our men our way, as we have been accustomed to raising men for a "war party." We also think that it would be just and right , if we should whip them that their annunities should be paid to those that would go fight.

My Father give us your consent, and we will get the Lake Superior Chippewas, with our half-breed children, to arise en masse to your help. Provide us with arms and ammunition, and we willing to go. My Father the, the door is open to me to help you, shut it not again in my face. We are willing to go. Our Fathers have driven them from this country, and if you had not come between us we would have chased them still further. Our young men are anxious to go show you that we are your friends. We know that we cannot do and drill like your soldiers, because we do not understand each other - our talk is different. We would offer you our services as well to fight your own people down there were it not for that, but send send us against our own color and we can fight. You will please answer and address Joseph Gurrol, Bayfield Wisconsin.

Naw-Gaw-Nub, Chief, Shin-Gwack, Chief

This letter was first published on the front page of the St Paul Pioneer and Democrat on 11 September, 1862. The next day, 12 September it made the Goodhue Republican, On Sept 14 The New York Times references the Chippewa offer, [44] The Chicago Times published it verbatim on the 16th, and The Pioneer and Democrat reprinted it again on the 19th.

On 3 October another Mille Lacs band Chief offered to go on the warpath against the Sioux near St. Cloud, Minnesota.[45] The post Commander at Fort Ripley extended State hospitality to the Chief and his warriors until a response was received.

The Chiefs of 21 bands of Chippewa held a war council in front of the State Capitol the day before the Surrender at Camp Release and were told Lincoln was busy by Gov Ramsey.[46][47][48]

Chippewa from White Earth enlisted at St Cloud for service in Company G of the 9th Minnesota between August 16-22, 1862. They were tasked with patrolling the Red River Trail between St Cloud and Fort Abercrombie.[49] [50] In September they were posted forward to Fort Abercrombie.

Camp Release aftermath:

At Camp Release 269 non-combatants were released by the Mdewakanton force. Five were males with the balance being women and a few children. The printed narrative during their captivity was that the Sioux had violated them, that is what Lincoln was told by Gen. Pope. At Camp Release the combatant males were separated from their woman by ruse and taken into custody. This caused tribesmen's family's: women, children and elderly to turn themselves over to the Minnesota State force. They were desperate with their male providers gone and no annuity money to pay for staples. They were transferred to Fort Snelling where the State had a stock pile of stores sufficient to sustain their number. Leaving them without provisions or protection on the prairie was not an option as they would die from starvation or at the hands of settlers. When the woman's wagon column made the trek to Fort Snelling it stretched out over four miles and was harassed along the way.

  • According to a letter Sibley wrote his wife 15 prisoners were injured during their transfer from the Redwood Agency trial site to Camp Lincoln at Mankato as well as some of his troops. Two prisoners , Ohomni and Oyateicasna died from the attack.[12]: p.117 
  • The people in Henderson attacked the woman's wagon column, throwing scalding water from the buildings that burned those it hit.[52] One native mother had a settler woman snatch and injure her baby, causing the infant's death. Shortly after reaching Fort Snelling one Mdewakanton woman was raped while another was "accidentally" shot awaiting Lincoln's decision.[53] That caused the erection of a palisade around the encampment for safety. (see Part III. Status and Treatment of Protected Persons)
  • The Geneva conventions makes distinctions regarding female prisoners. Those detained accompanying non-combatant males are considered civilian prisoners. Those detained accompanying combatant males are considered prisoners of war.

The War Crimes

  • Minnesota State Senator Wilkinson wrote to President Lincoln: "These Indians are called by some prisoners of war. There was no war about it. It was wholesale robbery, rape, murder. These Indians were not at war with their murdered victims."[54]
  • General Pope wrote to General Sibley Sept 28, 1862: "The horrible massacres of women and children and the outrageous abuse of female prisoners, still alive, call for punishment beyond human power to inflict-" The letter indicates that the authorities did not view the hostilities as acts of war.[55] This point of view provided the basis for the use of the word Uprising in the "white narrative".

When belligerents go to war they have a set of rules: the Dacotah's were kill or be killed and win or withdraw. When it became apparent they would not win they chose not to retreat, but instead to surrender and become prisoners. Surrender and becoming prisoners was not part of the Dakota rules of war. Before that the opposing forces had met under "flags of truce". Those concepts are European-American and by surrendering, the Dakotah model of war was forfeit, meaning that many of their actions were War Crimes under the European-American war model.[12]: p.146  Some claim that Dakotah sovereignty exempted the Mdewakanton from being judged by the Military commission. Sovereignty has no relevance to a Military Commission proceeding.[12]: p.148-50  The Mdewakanton warriors lodge made the removal of "whites" from the Minnesota River Valley their mission. The hostilities of the first week bear out they attempted complete that mission with 23 Counties depopulated. Wikipedia describes the removal of an ethnic group from where there are living as ethnic cleansing. When the hostilities ended that is what happened to the four eastern Dakota nations.

When it comes to the historic record, the discussion of the crimes committed is a toxic subject.[12]: p. 228  However, verifiable first hand accounts provide sufficient evidence that War crimes were committed.[12] In 1862 the term "Massacre" was used to describe multiple Mdewakanton incidents where Mdewakanton belligerents killed unarmed men, woman, children, and babies. Wikipedia states that there is not a consensus even today for the definition of Massacre. However, Wikipedia describes War crimes as the killing of unarmed men, woman, children and infants. Massacre is repeatedly used to identify the actions of the Mdewakanton force in the historic narrative: Acton Massacre, Lower Sioux Agency Massacre, New Ulm, Massacre, Beaver Creek Massacre, Manannah Massacre, Belmont Massacre,[56] West Lake Massacre.[57] and the Massacre at Lake Shetek. Of those massacred over 30% were children.[58] Indian Agent Major Thomas J. Galbraith compiled a record listing 644 citizens massacred along with 93 Minnesota USV and militia killed in the hostilities.[59][60] Today there are claims that Galbraith's numbers were wrong.[61] The Dakota death numbers were unknown and remain that way. After 150 years there is no way to verify the atrocities for fact or embellishment. There is no way to know how many pioneers were simply passing through the area heading for the Dakota Territory at the time, or were there for business, or were visiting. There was one known African American killed in Renville County whose corpse was mutilated.[62] Human remains were being found in Southern Minnesota up until World War I, sixty years later, so the actual number will never be known.[63] There were multiple victims that were scalped.[36][64] In Renville County one child had his face blown off.[62] The four children of one settler were kicked to death, others were beaten to death. Their cause of death would be described as from torture or brutality.[62][65] There are multiple sites where the brunt corpses woman and children were found.[62][66] Two pregnant females were disemboweled.[62] A two day old baby was injured beyond aid at the Lower Sioux Agency.[66] Babies that became prisoners with their mothers were killed for crying.[67][68] Many victims died from gunfire, one was shot in the back 8 times.[36] There are multiple accounts of bodies having been mutilated and skulls being crushed.[67][69][70] The accounts of crushed skulls are to be expected as the standard side weapon of the Dakota nations was the iŋyaŋ iŋjátʾe. Breaking bone was it's sole purpose and Americans called them skull crackers.[71] The Mdewaketon and their allies had taken 269, mostly females, prisoner. The 1862 news media narrative was that they had been taken for non-consensual sex. see Article 27 Geneva Conventions The differentiation between fact and fiction on female abuse remains in dispute.[72] One source states that nearly all of the young girls and middle-aged women were forced into relationships. [73] The native narrative was they wanted wife's and that is how Dacotah warfare worked. There are three documented cases of female captives being "adopted" and protected by Mdewakanton families.[72] Rape in 1862 was not a topic for polite conversation, meaning that there were women present. Only two women endured the humiliation of appearing before the tribunal to identify their assailants, but others are documented, with multiple gang rapes.[63] One 10 year old girl was abused to death.[66] Another gang rape-murder was recorded at Norwegian Grove.[74]: p.111  In one case the woman bore a child and was abandoned by her husband.[12] In another case the woman miscarried and suffered a mental breakdown.[12]: p.225  The record identifies two females that were decapitated one whose head was not recovered.[63][67] At the Lower Sioux Agency two men were decapitated and with the Doctor Humphrey's head found scalped.[69] One of the first to die was the ferryman at Redwood Ferry. He was decapitated, disemboweled and dismembered. His hands and feet were cut off and shoved into the body cavity.[75][66] One of the convicted on the gallows stated to the onlookers, if a decapitated body was found near New Ulm with the head placed on the crotch that was his handiwork.[76] Another decapitation was found six miles from New Ulm.[77] In 1862 there were no public social services and in St. Paul alone, there were 23 widows and 57 children that had lost both parents.[78][79] If there were more in the other refugee centers at Mankato and St. Peter the MHS has not published the numbers. Settlers totaling 43,000 fled 23 counties leaving everything to be pillaged.[63][74] Theft by belligerents is called looting or pillaging and is a War Crime. Plunder describes whatever is stole. The trader's warehouse inventories, the farmer's homesteads, livestock, and horses[74] were all taken.[5][66][80] Commission proceedings aside, horse stealing was a hanging offense across the entire American west. At least one prisoner was charged with horse theft, but the charge was dropped because it could not be proven beyond doubt. Lincoln made it clear that combat itself was not a crime. One combatant killing another is killing, it is not murder. However, looting done by a belligerent during a war is a War Crime.[81] This rule's origins start with Lincoln's General Order 100.

  • The Federal Government was accountable for the grievances of the Santee Sioux regarding the agents representing the Federal government.
  • The USA Field Manual states “maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime. Section A. Respect for the dead,Practice Relating to Rule 113 Geneva Conventions.[82]
  • Victims[83] Meeker County[84], Renville County[67], Kandiyohi County[65], Lac du Parle County[85], Brown County[86], Redwood County[87], Nicollet County, Jackson County[56] Swift County,
  • The over 100 of infants and children killed makes the term infanticide applicable to the Mdewakanton actions from the American perspective.[12]: p.163, 170  From the Dacotah perspective it was "conventional warfare". The differences being a cultural clash of definitions and values that is irreconcilable.
  • Victims of the uprising.[88]
  • In 1862 there were no public social services and in St. Paul alone, there were 23 widows and 57 children that had lost both parents.[89][90] If there were more in the other refugee centers at Mankato and St. Peter the MHS has not published the numbers.

USV Military Commission

The commander of the Minnesota troops, General Sibley, immediately created a military commission to "try summarily" the actions of the 490 detained men for possible trial of the alleged crimes and atrocities the commission had heard of or personally seen.[91] To be tried summarily in the United States today is reserved for minor crimes not capitol offences, but it does mean there is no jury. The trials took place in the conflict"s theater of hostilities, beginning at Camp Release and completed at the Lower Sioux Agency. Both locations were affected by the hostilities and were not neutral ground for a trial. The commission's neutrality was an issue to the Army and Lincoln.[92] The men were all from Minnesota, with many having been involved in the hostilities.[92] However, a complete redo was not an option with the Civil War going on and the citizen anger in Minnesota. Most of the detained were Mdewakanton, but some of their allies were there too, a minority were bi-racial, one was African-American and another was Anglo-American. All those selected for the commission were officers from Minnesota's USV Infantry Regiments. Most were not professional soldiers by training and had volunteered for service to fight the Confederacy. None were regular U.S. Army or came with legal backgrounds. Once the tribunal was selected and called to order, most cases were summarily reviewed, some very quickly.[92] The combined interrogations, depositions and trials started at Camp Release, but were moved and completed at the Redwood Agency.[93] The purpose of the commission was to review some of the military conduct of the Mdewakanton force until General Pope intervened and demanded that it be all conduct. When done, the tribunal had reviewed 480 cases, sending 397 to trial, convicting 321 of which 303 received the death penalty.[92][40] The condemned were moved, in a single file column to Mankato, the nearest intact population center. The column was attacked by a mob in New Ulm and two prisoners later died from injuries a second attack was thwarted.[94] The settlers wanted to extract vengeance and retribution without waiting for justice.[95] The second attack prompted moving the prisoners to a more secure location in Mankato.[95]

A Military Commission, by it's very nature, is not the same as either a military court or civilian court. Having an attorney was not a "right" it was a "privilege".[96] U.S. Military law is not the same as U.S. Civil law and never has been.

  • Military commissions were born out of necessity. Operating outside the realm of conventional criminal, and civil courts, they are unique proceedings in which enemy forces are tried during times of war or rebellion. Military commissions are a form of military tribunal, though the terms are sometimes used interchangeably. Tribunals only try members of enemy armies, not civilians who have allegedly broken the law (though sometimes civilians accused of being combatants are tried in a tribunal). Military officers, fulfilling the role of jurors, act as judges and impose the sentence."[97]
  • Major General Henry W. Halleck, legal authority on military law wrote in 1862: "Congress has recognized the lawfulness of these tribunals (commissions), and, in a measure regulated their proceedings, but it has not defined or limited their jurisdiction..."[98][12]: p.150 
  • That year General Halleck also wrote: "Many classes of people cannot be arraigned before (a Military court martial)... and many crimes committed ... cannot be tried under the "Articles of War." Military commissions must be resorted to for such cases and these commissions should be ordered by the same authority..."[98]
  • Article 56 of the Articles of War: "Whosoever shall relieve the enemy with money, victuals, or ammunition, or shall knowingly harbor or protect an enemy shall suffer death, or such other punishment as shall be ordered by the sentence of a court martial."
  • A question of whether General Sibley had the authority to organize a military tribunal has been raised without mentioning the tribunal was intended to address the war crimes not military or civil crimes.[92]

Judges: Military Tribunal[99]

  • Colonel William Crooks, 6th Minnesota[100]
  • Colonel William Marshall, 7th Minnesota [100]
  • Captain Hiram P.Grant, 6th Minnesota[100]
  • Captain Hiram S. Bailey, 6th Minnesota[100]
  • Major George Bradley 7th Minnesota (replaced Colonel Marshall after the first 29 cases)[101]
  • Captain Rollin Olin (judge advocate) 3rd Minnesota passed on to Issac Heard St. Paul attorney. Both men were on Colonel Sibley's staff. Capt. Olin was also the Assistant Minnesota Adjutant General[100]

Executioner:

  • Captain William J. Duley 7th Minnesota[101] (3 daughters killed at Slaughter slough and wife taken as a pow)

Provost marshal:

  • Major William Henry Forbes on General Sibley's staff (wife Canadian/Sioux)[102] Knew how to speak Dakota from many years of trading with them.

Commission interrogator and interpreter:[101]

State's witness:

  • Defendent # 1: Joseph Godfrey was a bi-racial French Canadian-African American living amongst the Mdewaketon who admitted killing 17 women and children.[104] In today's terms Godfrey turned state's evidence.[92] Immunity was a legality that was 100 years in the making in the United States.[105] He had two charges, both of which should have put him on the gallows. In return for his testimony the tribunal requested Lincoln reduce his sentence to prison. The Sioux understood what he was doing and gave him the name "Atokte" for "the slayer of many".[105] Renaming Godfrey indicates the prisoners knew what he was doing and what the consequences would be.

note:[18] Tribunal bias was obvious to Lincoln and historians have made an issue of it. There was no possibility of a complete redo of all the trials and not commuting all the trails has left Lincoln subject claims of bigotry and murder. A reasonable outcome for that course of action is not published.

Lincoln's methodology for the Commutations:[106]

The tribunal's findings were not what President Lincoln was expecting. He had anticipated multiple charges of rape and pillage. For Lincoln the violation of females was top of the crimes list, but just two women identified their assailants.[107] Atrocities like mutilations and scalpings were known. Only Chaskadon was identified for disembowelment and no one for scalping. The main charges were murder and massacres. Lincoln's list has been reviewed and there are two men that it is not apparent why they were on the execution list. No one was identified for the deaths by fire or the children kicked to death of the other disembowelment. Today the Geneva conventions define the deliberate killing of unarmed civilians as war crimes. The legalities of aiding and abetting or for being accessories or complicity, or child endangerment did not exist. Bishop Henry Whipple is credited for the number of commutations Lincoln made, but there is no documentation to support that. Lincoln had legal concerns with the Minnesota's USV tribunal. There is no documentation that any of the tribunal had any legal training. The entire affair caused him consternation, causing him to not quickly sign off on the executions. Lincoln's legal methodology reduced the number of death sentences by identifying the charges into two types, conventional warfare or military combat vs. warfare or atrocities against the civil population.[108] In other words ,War Crimes. Using this guideline he commuted 262 leaving 40 for the gallows. However, the tribunal had requested that he commute Godfrey's sentence to prison which he did. Lincoln sent General Sibley the names of 39 for execution.[109] General Sibley on his own commuted one man when a verified alibi was produced. Were it not for Lincoln, all 303 would have been executed.[110] Governor Ramsey told Lincoln he would have gotten more reelecction votes if he had hung them all. Lincoln's response was “I could not afford to hang men for votes.” [111]

The Executions:

The prisoners were placed under heavy guard with the statewide animosity towards them across Minnesota. The citizenry was completely unhappy with Lincoln's actions.[112] Both Gen. Pope and ex-Governor Ramsey called for annulment of Santee Sioux treaties as well their exile from Minnesota.[40] The Winnebago people had the misfortune of having their reservation in the theater of action. They had no involvement in the hostilities, but were relocated for their own safety. The treaties with the Chippewa and Yankton Sioux were not undone. Those whose execution was commuted remained incarcerated as there was no where in Minnesota that they could have been safely released. The 6th and 7th Minnesota Infantry Regiments plus Companies of the 9th Minnesota ,10th Minnesota and 2nd Minnesota Cavalry were assigned as the execution detail.[113][114] The 7th Minnesota was the lead unit of the military contingent. Colonel Stephen Miller of the 7th Minnesota declared martial law banning the sale or consumption of alcohol within a 10 mile radius of Mankato.[17] At Mankato the prisoner's spouses made their meals. That itself was a form of retribution having to see their men subjugated as they were. Prior to the hanging the prisoners were chained in pairs to the floor.[74]

The gallows was engineered specifically for a mass execution. It was suspended platform walkway 20' square rigged to single a guy pole in the center. It had ten nooses per side and was designed to drop from under the condemned with the cutting of a single rope. The executions were delayed because of a shortage of rope needed. The gallows worked as designed except Marpiya te ajun's rope broke.[12]: 122  Accounts say he appeared dead on the ground, but a new rope was thrown over the gallows beam and he was hauled up again anyway.[12]: 122  The accounts read that it was a sight no one wanted to see again, but there was subdued cheering when it was over.

December brought sub-zero temperatures and the ground was frozen except for the river banks along the Minnesota River. It was close by, as the gallows overlooked the river The time of the execution was 10:00 December 26, 1862. There was snow on the ground and the temperature was 15° F. An estimated crowd of 4,000 were keep back by a military cordon surrounding the gallows at the time of the execution. A mass grave had been dug in an unfrozen river bar. Company F 7th Minnesota was the burial party commanded by Col. Marshall. A heavy guard was posted at the site, but the next morning the bodies were gone. The historical narrative says the dead were removed to serve as medical cadavers.[61]

Three of the Santee Sioux leaders made across the border into Canada. Two of them, Medicine Bottle and Little Six were drugged, strapped to sleds, and delivered to Minnesota troops at the border in exchange for the bounty. They were taken to Fort Snelling where they were tried and executed for being leaders of the murders.

Lincoln's Executive Order of December 1863:[115][116]

  • Aichaga. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . To Grow Upon
  • Amdacha. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Broken to Pieces
  • Baptiste Campbell . . . . . . (French-Dacotah bi-racial)
  • Cetan hunka. . . . . . . . . . . The Parent Hawk(medicine man convicted for massacre)
  • Chanka hdo. . . . . . . . . . . .Near the Woods
  • Chaska dan . . . . . . . . . . . convicted of disemboweling a pregnant female (execution historically questioned)[117][116]
  • Dowan niye. . . . . . . . . . . .The Singer
  • Had hin hda. . . . . . . . . . . To Make a Rattling Noise
  • Hepan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . family name for a second son
  • Henry Milord . . . . . . . . . . (French-Dacotah bi-racial)
  • Hapinkpa . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tip of the Horn
  • Hepidan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .family name for a third son
  • Hinhan-shoon-koyag-mani . .Walks Clothed in an Owl’s Tail
  • Ho tan inku. . . . . . . . . . . . .Voice Heard in Returning
  • Hypolite Auge . . . . . . . . . . (French-Dacotah bi-racial)To Grow Upon
  • Ite duta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scarlet Face
  • Maka te najin. . . . . . . . . . .Stands Upon Earth
  • Marpiya te najin. . . . . . . . .Stands on a Cloud (Cut Nose)[118][9] (convicted for massacre, killing 18 women and children plus 5 men)
  • Maza-bomidu. . . . . . . . . . Iron Blower
  • Mehu we mea. . . . . . . . . .He Comes for Me
  • Nape shuha. . . . . . . . . . . Does Not Flee
  • Oyate tonwan. . . . . . . . . .The Coming People
  • Pazi kuta mani. . . . . . . . . Walks Prepared to Shoot
  • Radainyanka. . . . . . . . . . Rattling Runner[119]
  • Sna-mani. . . . . . . . . . . . . Tinkling Walker
  • Taju-xa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Red Otter, convicted of rape[120]
  • Te-he-hdo-ne-cha. . . . . . . Wind Comes Back (convicted of rape)[121]
  • Tate kage, . . . . . . . . . . . . Wind Maker (execution historically questioned)[116]
  • Tipi-hdo-niche. . . . . . . . . .Forbids His Dwelling
  • Tunkan icha ta mani. . . . .Walks With His Grandfather
  • Tunkan koyag I najin. . . . Stands Clothed with His Grandfather
  • Wahena,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . translation unknown
  • Wakan tanka. . . . . . . . . . Great Spirit
  • Wakinyan na. . . . . . . . . . Little Thunder
  • Wapa-duta. . . . . . . . . . . Scarlet Leaf
  • Wasicun. . . . . . . . . . . . . Little White man (caucasian adopted by the Mdewakanton)[122]
  • Wyata-tonwan. . . . . . . . .His People
  • Xunka ska. . . . . . . . . . . .White Dog (execution historically questioned)[116]
  • Tate mima . . . . . . . . . . . Round wind (late communtation)
  • Atokte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The slayer of many, Godfrey (commuted to prison)[92]
  • Maznopinka . . . . . . . . . . . Only Winnebago convicted. Was sent to prison

Lincoln's Executive Order of November 1863:

  • Sakpedan . . . . . . . . . . . Little Six ( admitted killing 50)[123]
  • Pejuhuta-tha . . . . . . . . . Medicine Bottle[116]

Afterwards: The History of the Unresolved Legacy edit

 
Department of the Northwest Forts and Stockades 1862-65.
  • What began in August 1862 did not end with the trials and hangings. Once Minnesota went to war the trials were but a pause in the resulting history. It would not be until May 1866 that Minnesota put it's swords down and abandoned all the fortifications built in response to the Uprising. The War was comprised of phases: The Sioux Uprising and militarization and depopulation of the Minnesota frontier, Camp Release Surrender, 1862 war crime trials, 1862 Presidential commutations and death sentences, eastern Dakota diaspora, Sibley 1863 Expedition, the Moscow Expedition,[124] Sulley's 1864 Expedition, Fort Dilts rescue, 1865 War crime trials, 1865 commutation and executions, Sulley's 1865 Expedition. Minnesota ceased in-state Cavalry patrols in May 1866 and abandoned or dismantled it's stockades and fortifications.
  • The eastern Dakota Diaspora began before the hostilities were over. Over 4,000 Sisseton and Whapaton made for the plains not wanting to suffer for the Mdewakanton's actions.
  • The killings in Minnesota did not stop with the trials or hangings. Small bands of hostiles continued to kill for three more years killing 21.[125] In 1863 the 8th Minnesota lost more men in Minnesota than Sibley's entire expedition did in Dakota Territory.[126]
    • When the Winnebago were forced to leave their reservation they killed and scalped two Dakota that had been hiding amongst them.
    • In Wright County five civilians were killed in 1863. Little Crow was wearing the jacket of one of the victims when he was killed.[127]
    • 1863 Killings in Watonwan and Cottonwood Counties[128]
    • 1864-5 McLeod, Nicollet and Blue Earth Counties, In 1864 Blue Earth County The Willow Creek Massacre, and in 1865 the killing of the Jewittt family.[129][130]
    • It is believed that a nine year old child was the last victim of the Uprising in 1865.[131]
  • A month an a half after the hangings Congress passed the Act of Feb 16, 1863.[134] It abrogated and annulled all treaties of the four bands of Santee Sioux. It forfeited their reservation lands and called for the removal of the Santee Sioux from Minnesota. Two weeks Congress passed the Sioux-Dakota Removal Act of 1863.[134] On February 21 the Winnebago Removal Act was approved followed on March 3 by the Sioux-Dakota Removal Act.[135] (see Article 49, Geneva Conventions)
  • Pike island encampment safety and public curiosity. (see Article 13 public curiosity and Article 50 Children Geneva Conventions)[136]
  • In April 1863, 277 Santee Sioux men, 16 woman, 2 children and one Winnebago boarded ariverboat at Mankato for the Camp Kearney Army prison at Davenport, Iowa. The reason they were sent south was to keep Minnesotans, civilian and military from being able harm them.[139] At Fort Snelling 1,600 Santee Sioux embarked riverboats for Crook Creek and their diaspora. (see Article 49, Geneva Conventions)
  • People in Renville County believed August Busse was so angered when his parents killers were pardoned he became an Indian hunter and that he died at the Little Big Horn.[62]
  • 1863 Both Lt. Sheehan and Little Crow placed the blame for the hostilities on Indian Agent Galbraith with his stocked warehouses. He had extended credit to the Sisseton and Wahpeton at the Upper Sioux Agency and not for the Mdewakanton and Wahpekute at the Lower Sioux.[140]
  • 1863 “The state reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory. The sum is more than all the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth."[141] The Daily Republican, Winona, MN 1863 reflected a racial opinion in Minnesota. (see Article 32)
  • Four months after the hangings Lincoln issued General Order 100. General Order 100 is cited as the direct predecessor to the Geneva Conventions.
  • The Wiseman massacre in 1863 is tired to the events in Minnesota. The belligerents were suspected to be Inkpaduta's band of Wahpekute.[142]
  • April of 1864 President Lincoln pardoned four men that had been tried in 1862: Eyo-jan-jan, Ta-ho-hpe-wa-kan, Ta-pay-ta-tan-ka, and Wee-yoo-ha.[143]
  • December 1864 agents crossed the international border to drug and kidnap two wanted Mdewakanton, Little Six and Medicine Bottle. They were brought back to the US-British border and handed over to Minnesota Cavalry for trial and hanging at Fort Snelling the first week of January. The Hudson Bay Company had no treaty agreement with the U.S. regarding such matters and did not want to be involved in United State's matters.
  • 1865 Congressional Hearings chaired by Wisconsin Senator James R. Doolittle into Sioux Complaints from the Yankton and Dakota tribes.[145] That found: "Many agents, teachers, and employees of the government, are inefficient, faithless, and even guilty of peculations are fraudulent practices upon the government and upon the Indians." Yankton Chief Medicine Cow testified that Government Agents were the cause of the Minnesota problems. What those agents did in Minnesota was a harbinger of what was coming for the other tribes of the plains it turned out.
  • Oct 1865 three more War crime trials were held at Fort Snelling. Little Crows son got prison Little Six and Medicine Bottle were executed by hanging on November 5.[143]
  • 1865 The people of Mankato held a citizen's trial of the accused perpetrator of the Jewitt killings and lynched him.[146] He was a brother to one of those executed at Manakato.To Grow Upon[116]
  • In 1866 two European-American men dressed in native apparel were lynched in New Ulm.[146]
  • On 22 March 1866 President Andrew Johnson released the remaining 177 men Lincoln sent to Prison in Iowa.
  • 1868 Minnesota Historical Society was given Little Crows Scalp.[147] Post cards and Steroviews were sold of the MHS display.[148][149] (see Article 16 Geneva Conventions)
  • In 1869 John Zeller committed suicide at age 19. At age 14 he witnessed both of his parents being killed as well as his 5 siblings west of New Ulm.[150] The trauma had haunted him.
  • On December 26, 1887 the Minnesota Historical Society received a braid taken from a corpse at Mankato on December 26, 1862.[151]
  • On 4-11-1890 Congress reversed the 1863 Acts with a new Agreement with the Sisseton and Wahpeton Sioux.[152]
  • 1896 Minnesota Historical Society was given Little Crow's skull. The Society displayed them as war trophies in the State Capitol until 1915.[153] (see Article 16 Geneva Conventions)[154]
  • In 1908 the first neutral point of view history of the hostilities was published titled Great Sioux Outbreak of 1862.[155] Authored by Return I. Holcombe, the book insists that the majority of the belligerents were Mdewakanton and deliberately excludes the atrocities for not being "agreeable of profitable".[155]
  • In 1912 a 8,500 lb. granite monument was erected at the War Crimes execution site as a historical reminder.[156] When Judge Lorin Cray (ex-9th Minnesota at Mankato) made it's dedication he rejected the idea that the monument inappropriately glorified the execution by stating he “wished to have it understood that the monument [was] not erected to gloat over the deaths of the redmen,” but was intended “simply to record accurately an event in history” that should be not be forgotten.[157] What he stated was, that the monument should be viewed with a neutral point of view. But it was not. The social movements of the Vietnam era including AIM voiced disapproval, though many thought the Minnesota Historical Society would obstruct its removal.[157] Some felt the monument brought an unwholesome image to Mankato and promoted an unbalanced white historical narrative even thoough Judge Cray stated there was no narrative intended.[157] Because 50 year anniversaries are interpreted to be celebrations activists painted the monument with that bias. The neutral point of view that it was intended as a historical reminder that the people should learn from and not forget, as Judge Cray said it was intended, was lost to a biased narrative.
  • The City of Mankato removed it from public display in 1971. .[156] The city stored it into the 1990s when disappeared and is now unaccounted for.[156] The city has not held anyone accountable for the loss of public property nor have the police received a theft report for the missing monument. A different monument was placed at the hanging site shortly after the removal of the 1912 stone. Across the street a park was created to promote reconciliation. Just beyond that lies the river bank where the mass grave was. The park has a native american theme that reflects little to the killings or atrocities that brought the War Crime executions to Mankato.
  • Today the Minnesota Historical Society posts a curriculum for educators utilizing a revised history of the hostilities produced by the University of Minnesota Center of Holocaust and Genocide Studies that does not have a neutral point of view.[158] Today many academics as well as the Minnesota Historical Society have adopted Holcombes approach not using words that refer to the War Crimes: massacres, atrocities, mutilations, scalpings, decapitations, disembowelment or rapes. The Society's "The US-Dakota War of 1862" makes no mention of Minnesota citizens killed or how they were killed.[159] One PhD has called for a "public moratorium on white-victims rhetoric.”

The War's presentism fails to identify a complete timeline for the war or mention the disagreeable vocabulary of the war or the Chippewa. It uses color to identify race for one side of the war and derogatory terms for bi-racial people.


  • Presentism claims the War Crimes were indigenous conventional warfare. One professor says Lincoln should have released the accused "because it was general military practice" and that "he ordered the executions because of his bigotry for native Americans".[18]
  • Presentism argues that the Mdewakanton warriors should have been treated the same as confederate soldiers, as though no war crimes had been committed. Along with that there are calls for indigenous warriors to be called soldiers. That claim equates native specialists in asymmetrical warfare or guerrilla warfare[160] with soldiers trained in the conventional warfare of their time.
  • Presentism claims that the Mdewakanton force were "legitimate belligerents of a sovereign nation in a "legitimate war" and therefore could not be tried before a Military Commission like "common criminals for civil crimes".[11]: p.143  The record shows the Mdewakanton force was tried before a U.S. Military commission created solely for the purpose of trying foreign national combatants for crimes against a civil population. Presentism attempts to legitimatize the War Crimes by claiming they were not crimes under the Dacotah war model. That argument lost merit when the Dacotah war model was corrupted by adopting war concepts that were European-American. [161]
  • Presentism claims that the accused did not understand the proceedings or their situation without substantiating that claim. The historic record does not state that the proceedings were translated while it does indicate that there were multiple individuals involved in the proceedings that were bi-lingual.[18] The record also states that the Mdewakanton gave defendent number 1 the name “Atokte” meaning “slayer of many” for his testimony against twelve that were executed.[105]
  • Presentism calls Lincoln a murderer for executing War Criminals.[24] In Portland Oregon Lincoln's Statue was toppled and the base defaced with "Dakota 38" referencing the 1862 executions.[162][163] At the University of Wisconsin Madison the student body voted to remove Lincoln statues there for the same reason.[163][164] Minnesota Public Radio called the tribunal a Kangaroo Court.[165] Had Lincoln commuted all of the men, they would have been released without horses, weapons and a $200 bounty on their heads, 120 miles from Dakota Territory, amongst people who wanted vengeance. Lincolns solution provided enough justice to placate the citizenry.
  • Presentism promotes Return I. Holcombe's censoring of objectionable vocabulary referring to the 1862 War Crimes: massacres, atrocities, mutilations, scalping's, decapitations, disembowelments or rapes. The MHS posting "The US-Dakota War of 1862" makes no mention of Minnesota citizens killed or their circumstances.[167] One PhD has called for a "public moratorium on white-victims rhetoric.” Another historian has written, "that if Minnesotan's did not have a native American bias before the hostilities they absolutely did after".[12] Another has pointed out what some call is hate is the lingering animosity for all the children and women killed. The media in 1862 made the deaths of the kids and women personal by publishing their names and ages for all of the State to know.[12]: p.105  What the "white" Minnesotan's wanted justice under the Dacotah war model: a life for a life. The 38 executions did not equal justice under the Dacotah model. That has never balanced for the deaths of the kids and woman alone, nor considering the women taken prisoner for marital duty or the murders committed, from the American perspective. Added to the racial bias that developed from the attacks, Minnesotan's responded to the kids deaths with an intensity that academics dismiss as pure bigotry as opposed to outrage and indignation.[12]: p.105  The relevance of the children and women killed is not included at Mankato's Reconciliation Park for contributing to the park's existence. There too the Chippewa are not included in the indigious narrative. Minnesota Public Radio posted that a participant at Mankato's Reconciliation Park was glad his ancestors killed the "whites" to protect the Dacotah children.[161] Balance to almost anything published concerning the war is problematic with the Chippewa offers to fight for Lincoln unreported.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mcb133aco/sandbox&oldid=1222142011"