By Mike Bowen, co-author, We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site
It’s uncertain what year the location below the bluff at what is now the National Park Service Sand Creek site was accepted as the alleged location of Black Kettle’s village and battle area. In 1937 that site was believed to be the right location. We know now that site is not the correct location—the real location is substantiated by over 4,000 village and battle artifacts found over two miles up the creek from the NPS site, on the Bowen family ranch.
From our book:
Two hundred Boy Scouts from 132 troops in Southeast Colorado converged at the traditional site for a re-enactment in 1937. There were over 700 spectators. Henry McKibbon of Troop 221 portrayed Black Kettle, and Floyd Colyer of Troop 222 played the role of Colonel Chivington—both from Lamar.
I believe the small part the NPS has includes the seven tipi Arapaho camp which the soldiers also used for their campsite and to care for their wounded. In the March ‘99 meeting with Christine and Lysa, the video I played for them shows me pointing on a map where I believe they would find artifacts. I was precisely right. In this ¼ mile-long area, a mile below our property, or about one mile north of the monument, they found nearly 400 artifacts, with a mixture of both Indian and military items. There were 174 unfired musket balls found in a single hole. Some of the Indian things included a few arrowheads, cone tinklers, a coffee grinder, an ax head, awls, and scraping tools. Some of the military items included a spur, buckles, horseshoes, a few bullets, buttons, and a canteen stopper. Everything else happened up the creek. These artifacts were displayed at the Cow Palace in Lamar.
They also found fragments from a spherical case cannonball on the west side of the creek beside the trail road that went to the monument. They didn’t find a single .69 caliber lead ball, yet the case shot was filled with them. Neither did they find a Bormann fuse. There should have been a lot more fragments—they only found four. Did some of the Boy Scouts find them on our cannonball field when they camped at the traditional site in 1937? Perhaps the Scout leader told the boys they couldn’t take them, so they tossed them out along the trail road. I asked the NPS if I could compare their fragments with mine to check if they fit together. If they did, then someone indeed found them on our site. So far, they haven’t accepted my request.
Not all of their artifacts displayed at the Cow Palace were from the 1860s. I noticed a metal rod with some bends in it and informed NPS lead archaeologist Doug Scott it was a Model T Ford carburetor control rod from the 1920s, definitely not from the 1860s. I knew that part from restoring Model Ts. (We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site)
The four shell fragments the NPS Sand Creek team dug up were not only a mile up the creek from their bluff, they were found along a trail road. Shell fragments don’t explode and end up all in a line close to each other. They were likely dropped there, and possibly by some of the Boy Scouts in 1937. They also should have found the .69 caliber lead balls that filled the case shot. They didn’t find any. They also didn’t find a single Bormann fuse. And as stated above, of their nearly 400 finds, 174 unfired musket balls were found in a single hole.
We believe the site the NPS found was part of the Arapaho camp. The soldiers used that part of the village for the hospital. Since the musket balls found were clearly unfired, it’s likely a soldier dropped a bag of them. It certainly was not a battle area.
When Chuck asked the NPS Sand Creek Superintendent, Alexa Roberts, to see if the shell fragments they found fit together with his they were not interested in checking. They knew their shell fragments didn’t land there authentically—they were dropped there. Chuck found matching shell fragments over 100 yards apart at the Lost Sand Creek Site.
In reality, the NPS Sand Creek personnel knows the truth about Sand Creek but refuses to acknowledge the Bowens’ massive artifact discovery or tell the soldiers’ running battle account which is verified by the Bowens’ discovery.
Front: Chuck’s late brother Scott Bowen, Sheri Bowen, Chuck Bowen and Former National Park Service Sand Creek Superintendent, Alexa Roberts. Back: Butch Kelley. Artifacts in photo include cannonball shell fragments, .69 caliber lead balls, bullets, horseshoes, plus more. Alexa Roberts, former NPS Sand Creek Superintendent; former NPS Lead Archaeologist, Dr. Scott; and former NPS Sand Creek team historian, Jerome Greene, all identified hundreds of Sand Creek artifacts in the Bowens’ home, on separate visits. They were all well aware of the thousands of artifacts the Bowens discovered.
It seems the massacre story, whose only source is oral history, is given more credence, without any physical evidence to back it up. There were over 70 soldier casualties at Sand Creek, and a soldier was the first killed in the engagement (The Rocky Mountain News (Daily), Volume 5, Number 114, January, 1865;Official Report Of The Battle Of Sand Creek; Report of the Secretary of War –39th Congress, 2nd Session). The soldiers rode about 200 miles to fight a village full of warriors, and when they rode through the Denver area they traveled through snow and harsh cold weather, some even getting frostbite on their feet. It is well documented there were about 700 soldiers at Sand Creek, and if the village was only filled with defenseless women, children and elderly, that event would have been quick and without a single soldier casualty. It’s also well documented the Sand Creek event went on for several hours, from just as the sun was coming up into the afternoon (Official Report Of The Battle Of Sand Creek; Report of the Secretary of War –39th Congress, 2nd Session).
We can’t allow an emotional story to overtake truth just for the sake of being politically correct. Political correctness is generally not accurate. We must allow the truth to speak. When information is silenced and/or minimized, it’s most often to keep people from knowing the truth. One thing is certain: truth isn’t based on what we think or how we feel. Truth is truth, and it cannot be changed. It can be rebranded as a lie, which is what happened with Sand Creek. It was celebrated as a battle in Colorado Territory, but told as a massacre in the newspapers back east, in a political attempt to destroy Colonel Chivington (Great Battle With Indians! The Savages Dispersed! 500 Indians Killed, The Rocky Mountain News (Daily), December 8, 1864). There’s no denying he was a hero at Glorieta, but we’re somehow supposed to believe he turned into a villain at Sand Creek.
Even George Bent said the Cheyenne Dog Soldiers (warriors) were raiding all along the Platte in Colorado Territory during the summer of 1864, several months before Sand Creek (Bent to Hyde 2-28-1906, Bent to Hyde 5-3-1905). These raids led to General Curtis calling for the Indians to be dealt with. See our blog about it here: GeneralCurtis. This information isn’t included with the “official” Sand Creek account told by the NPS. Our Republican State Representatives who claim to be about freedom of speech and seeking truth refuse to look at all of the information regarding Sand Creek, including most importantly, the artifacts and the eyewitness accounts that are verified by those artifacts. So, we’re asking for your help. Please reach out to the representatives in your area and ask them to give a careful look at our Sand Creek site discovery, read our book and look at all of the information concerning Sand Creek, then make a logical educated conclusion on what they believe, instead of accepting a story that isn’t verified by archaeological evidence. There is also a Colorado senate bill, SB25-123, that would require Sand Creek to be taught as a genocide in Colorado schools. Please also ask your representatives to vote no on that bill. Here is a link to the bill: SB25-123.
Sand Creek was far from a genocide—it was a hard-fought fight on both sides. George Bent called it a fight, a battle, an affair and just simply, Sand Creek. In his few references using the word massacre, he was calling it by the name he was given, such as “Chivington’s Massacre.” See chapter four of our book, We Found the Lost Sand Creek Site, to see more on how George Bent referenced Sand Creek.
We will begin a new blog series over the next few weeks that will focus on each of the massacre claims, citing photos of artifacts, maps, eyewitness accounts and more to dispute those claims and clarify what really happened at Sand Creek. Some of the massacre claims include: the Indians were unarmed, they hadn’t committed any atrocities or depredations, they were camped in a small congested area below a bluff where they couldn’t see an approaching enemy, it was a village of only women, children, and elderly, and the soldiers killed them as they came out of their tipis, to name a few.
We are about telling the truth—we’ve been researching the Sand Creek event, studying eyewitness accounts and searching for artifacts for 30 years.
It’s not just about what artifacts were found, but where they were found. The artifacts were found starting about two miles up the creek from the NPS bluff, and stretching for several more miles. The village was spread out over about 2-3 miles, as Sand Creek is known for being a dry creek, and they placed tipis along the creek near small pools of water. There would also be extra space between tipis for the Indians to tether their horse. The artifacts also tell us there was very little fighting in the village, and per George Bent, the Indians saw the soldiers coming from several miles away and fled the village. The event quickly became a running battle with Indians dispersing, some running up the creek and some running away from it in various directions. This forced the soldiers to break off and chase fleeing Indians, allowing Indians to create opportunities to single out soldiers and kill them.
Our discovery of the real Sand Creek site and the story that tells, which clarifies the event as a running battle and a village filled with warriors, is being silenced and minimized.
Help us get the truth out about Sand Creek. Share this blog on Facebook and email it to your friends and family. Click on Blog at the top of the page—we have over 30 pages of blogs on this website.
Click on the Buy the Book tab in the top right of the page.
