And you see that as vindication? Initially, the Sand Creek engagement was reported as a victory against a brave opponent. Within weeks, however, witnesses and survivors raised a controversy about possible massacre. Several investigations were conducted – two by the military, and one by the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War. The panel declared:[40] “ As to Colonel Chivington, your committee can hardly find fitting terms to describe his conduct. Wearing the uniform of the United States, which should be the emblem of justice and humanity; holding the important position of commander of a military district, and therefore having the honor of the government to that extent in his keeping, he deliberately planned and executed a foul and dastardly massacre which would have disgraced the verist [sic] savage among those who were the victims of his cruelty. Having full knowledge of their friendly character, having himself been instrumental to some extent in placing them in their position of fancied security, he took advantage of their in-apprehension and defenceless [sic] condition to gratify the worst passions that ever cursed the heart of man. Whatever influence this may have had upon Colonel Chivington, the truth is that he surprised and murdered, in cold blood, the unsuspecting men, women, and children on Sand creek, who had every reason to believe they were under the protection of the United States authorities, and then returned to Denver and boasted of the brave deed he and the men under his command had performed. In conclusion, your committee are of the opinion that for the purpose of vindicating the cause of justice and upholding the honor of the nation, prompt and energetic measures should be at once taken to remove from office those who have thus disgraced the government by whom they are employed, and to punish, as their crimes deserve, those who have been guilty of these brutal and cowardly acts.
Government really whitewashed that one, didn’t they?
Anybody who tries to defend Chivington is an idiot.
But so are those who try to portray what happened at Sand Creek as the norm. It just wasn’t. A book I read recently about the history of Indian/white conflicts spent five pages detailing the Sand Creek atrocities, and perhaps a total of three pages in the entire book detailing Indian-committed atrocities.
OTOH, similar (and far worse) atrocities to those committed at Sand Creek were the normal way of war for many Indian tribes. AFAIK, nobody even claimed that Indian prisoners were taken at Sand Creek so they could be slowly tortured to death at leisure. Yet that was the common practice for many Indian tribes.