Though the war that ranged across southwestern Minnesota in 1862 between settler-colonists and a faction of Dakota people lasted for six weeks, its causes were decades in the making. Its effects are still felt today.
In 1851, after the treaties of Mendota and Traverse des Sioux, the US government removed most of the Dakota people living in Minnesota Territory (their homeland, called Mni Sota Makoce in the Dakota language) to a reservation on either side of the Minnesota River. The Treaty of Washington (1858) confined them to a smaller area south of the river.
Being restricted to one place made it hard for Dakota people to practice their traditional lifeways, which involved hunting migratory game and moving their homes seasonally. The terms of the treaties and the work of missionaries focused on forcing them to abandon their culture — in effect, to stop being Dakota. To survive, some adopted European American farming methods, cut their hair, and converted to Christianity. Others resisted assimilation by, for example, continuing to hunt and practice ceremonies. Many assimilated in some ways while resisting in others.
Immigrants flooded into southwestern Minnesota Territory in the 1850s, especially eager to claim land near rivers like the Minnesota. The U.S. government, however, failed to fulfill its treaty obligations to the Dakota. It built few schools, offered insufficient education in farming, and charged exorbitant prices for homesteading goods. Many Dakota people used what money they did receive to pay off inflated debts and fraudulent traders.
By the summer of 1862, Dakota people on the reservation were in desperate straits—many of them starving. Game was scarce. The corn crop of 1861 had been meager. Annuity payments, which would have covered the cost of food and goods, were late, but traders refused to extend credit. Lower Sioux Agency storekeeper Andrew Myrick told the hungry Dakota to “eat grass or their own dung.”
On August 17, the tense situation reached a climax when four Dakota hunters killed five settlers in Acton Township. In the middle of the night, a group of Mdewakanton men persuaded a reluctant Ta Oyate Duta (His Red Nation, also known as Little Crow) to continue the fight against the United States in an all-out war. In response, the Dakota divided into two main factions: the farmers, or “cut hairs,” who argued for peace, and others (particularly young Mdewakanton men) who supported violent resistance.
The following day, Ta Oyate Duta’s party attacked the Lower Sioux Agency and homesteads in Brown and Renville Counties. On August 19 it reached New Ulm, where the townspeople erected a defensive barricade after a protracted skirmish.
The state’s leaders hurried to organize an army from a population already depleted by recruitment for the Civil War. Governor Alexander Ramsey placed Henry Sibley in charge of U.S. forces that engaged the Dakota in battles at Fort Ridgely (August 20 and 22), New Ulm (August 25), Birch Coulee (September 3–4), and Acton, Forest City, Hutchinson, and Fort Abercrombie (September 3–4).
During the six-week conflict, the Dakota participants who chose violent resistance killed more than 600 settlers, including women and children; the number of Dakota casualties is unrecorded. Fewer than 1,000 Dakota, out of a population of more than 7,000, participated. Many saved settlers’ lives; some, like Gabriel Renville, joined a lodge dedicated to peace.
At the war’s final engagement, the Battle of Wood Lake (September 23), Sibley’s forces defeated the Dakota. Ta Oyate Duta and other Mdewakanton fled to Dakota Territory or Canada. On September 26, settlers who had been held hostage or protected by different Dakota factions gathered at a site that came to be known as Camp Release.
After the war, the US government nullified its treaties with the Dakota, dissolved their reservation, and publicly executed thirty-eight Dakota men in Mankato at the largest mass hanging in the nation’s history. Meanwhile, it removed about 1,600 Dakota non-combatants to a concentration camp at Fort Snelling, where they remained imprisoned during the winter of 1862–1863. Though they had not participated in the war, nearly 2,000 Ho-Chunk people living at Blue Earth, along with the Dakota at the fort, were removed the following spring to a reservation in Dakota Territory and, later, Nebraska. The government allowed a few Dakota who had supported peace to stay, including the family of Wakinyanwaste (Good Thunder), who were close to Episcopal Bishop of Minnesota Henry Benjamin Whipple.
The war devastated people throughout south-central Minnesota. Settlers mourned their dead and abandoned claims across southern and western Minnesota. For the Dakota, the grief was deepened by the prospect of exile from their homeland. It wasn’t until the 1880s that exiled families began to return to their relatives who had stayed in Mni Sota Makoce. Together, they built communities at Prairie Island, Shakopee, and the sites of the Upper and Lower Sioux Agencies.
For more information on this topic, check out the original entry on MNopedia.
The European colonizers were in the midst of knowingly committing genocide. They used any resistance as an excuse to continue their violence and officially break treaties they had been de facto in violation of from the moment they were signed. Keep in mind that a significant factor in the American Revolution. Per the declaration of independence “He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.” which refers the British having recently acknowledged native sovereignty in most of the land west of the Appalachians. The colonists were determined to profit from expansionist genocide.
The 2nd amendment as well as much put in place to allow colonists to maintain slavery and expand west through genocide as it was to protect the people from tyranny. The wealthy European men who wrote the constitution and amendments did so largely to maintain their wealth and way of life. This was built upon slavery and expansion west. They also didn’t have much motivation to ensure any resistance to their leadership was well-armed. The Whiskey Rebellion happened only 4 years after the Constitution was ratified and quickly gave evidence that national leadership didn’t have patients for armed resistance to their policies.
You make a number of allegations, too many to address individually.
One implicit assumption stands out: that the few spoke for the many. The Declaration was an incendiary document, intended to inflame the sentiments of the colonists by reminding them in the most compelling terms of the injustices and claimed injustices of George III in his almost 80 year reign.
The 2nd Amendment was grounded in many facets of life in the newly formed states, including defense against attacks from the indigenous people whose lands they occupied.
Many government officials did indeed do what they could to eradicate the American Indian. Others resisted but lacked the power at the moment to stop the persistent slaughter. Newly arrived European settlers often knew little of the actions that had made land available to them, at least initially. Some “colonists [may have been] determined to profit from expansionist genocide” but you go too far in attributing that goal to all. Sadly, many of those who qualify for your description became heroes in later accounts of their actions and motivation. Yes, they were in fact “white washed.”
One of the “injustices” they were complaining about was being asked to temper was their genocidal expansion. Not really in line with the ideals often used when describing the founding of the United States.
The “attacks” of the indigenous people were in defense of their homes. It was the colonists attacking, not the other way around. Their need for weapons relative to that interaction was simply to further their genocidal expansion. The 2nd amendment was not driven only by this fact but it was a very critical element. There were no colonist victims. Just a few invaders who were killed during their invasion. The language used should accurately reflect the truth of what happened otherwise the white-washing is simply perpetuated.
It isn’t credible to believe that colonists did not appreciate the essence of what they were doing. They were very clearly and knowingly profiting from genocide because they clearly knew the land was already occupied and had been taken by force. They were just alright with it because they didn’t consider indigenous people to be actual people. Genocide might have been the goal their own personal profit sure was. Genocide was simply something they were willing to engage in and promote to get the land and resources they wanted.
The expansionist policies of the United States were clearly and knowingly genocidal. Offering “free land” to people who settled the west was a much less expensive and more effective method than simply marching through and slaughtering indigenous people. The settlers were the weapons.
In my genealogical research several years ago, I discovered that I am a direct descendant of people who were members of both of the Dakota factions. Gabriel Renville, a fur trader, farmer, and the leader of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Dakota is an ancestor of mine, as is a young warrior under Little Crow named Louis Labelle. LaBelle was from a family of French and Indian fur trappers and was my mother’s grandfather. He probably knew Renville pretty well since both were in the fur business and ended up on different branches of my family tree.
Louis LaBelle was among the 300 Little Crow warriors who was sentenced to hang, but a last minute reprieve from Lincoln trimmed the list to 38 because Lincoln only agreed to hang those who were found to or admitted to have actually committed murder or rape. LaBelle was spared to enable me to be born.
I’m pretty sure that’s not the reason Lincoln commuted his sentence, Dennis.
Actually it was the reason he commuted the vast majority of the sentences. He personally reviewed every case himself.
Can anyone tell us how the Dakota label this conflict? Every name I’ve found has a distinctly European flavor. E,g, the Dakota Uprising.
It WAS an uprising due to the outrage of the late delivery of the government’s promised payment of money and provisions (later to be found stored at Fort Snelling) and the local traders unwilling to extend credit even though they knew it was supposedly on its way. When the four hunters were caught stealing a farmer’s pig to feed their families, the shooting started. But it was an “uprising” to protest the government’s ineptness or promise breaking, take your pick. It was taken out on the settler population because they weren’t welcome either.
Nothing’s changed because not enough Indians vote republican.
Great article and good comments; but Dennis you would have to look high and low up here in the Leach lake area to find a Native American who would lower himself to the point of voting for a Republican.
Especially given how hard Republicans have worked to suppress the vote of people living on reservations. Not to mention the fact Republicans continue to elect and support overt white supremacists. Tucker Carlson is basically repeating a homogenized version of the Daily Stormer under the banner of America First.
Ironically, President Nixon is noted for his enlightened treatment of Indians and Indian issues. I believe that it was under his administration that the federal government ended the “Voluntary Relocation Program,” which consisted of giving participants $200 and a one-way ticket to a city they had never seen. Nixon also shifted federal policy to self-determination for Indians.
A common spirit animal among the Sioux is the turtle. The turtle is self-sufficient and self-contained. He carries his home with him and doesn’t rely on others for shelter. The young men were raised to be hunters and warriors and to protect their families at all costs and to eventually be rewarded in the afterlife.
That doesn’t sound like anything a liberal democrat could relate to. The Sioux men I know say that their biggest enemy is the white liberal.
Well, I tend toward libertarian thinking, the classic definition of small “L” liberal. Republicans are, however, a party that openly welcomes and supports Christian nationalism and white supremacy. Just being the superficial alternative to “white liberalism” doesn’t make them the good guys.
If that were true, how do you explain that the number of Blacks and Hispanics who voted for Trump in 2020 was greater than in 2016? (https://nypost.com/2020/11/07/why-trump-grew-his-numbers-with-black-and-latino-voters/) He received more votes from those two demographics (plus gay people) than any republican candidate in history.
First, a NY Post article isn’t very convincing. Even if it references Edison Research it failed to link to the actual polls. So I went and looked. Tthe black vote remained 92%-8% in favor of Democrats and self-identified LGBTQIA was 86%-10%. The Hispanic numbers look better for Trumpists but keep in mind that there is often a large divide in class/race withing the Hispanic community with the “upper” strata tied to their European, white, Spanish heritage and others who identify more closely with their indigenous background. A divide Trump was happy to exploit. So while there may have been some “gains” it isn’t like they showcase evidence against my claims.
I was purposeful in my use of terms. Christian nationalism is a powerful force among those with conservative social values. Especially that anti-gay bigotry that runs so deeply in today’s Republicans. But I prefer to look at the actual legislation and policies Republicans are enacting rather than poll numbers showing the impact of their propaganda for evidence of their intent. A majority of Russians support their invasion, it doesn’t make the actions justified.
The fascist policies which Republicans are working to enact belie their false rhetoric of “liberty”. Multiple states working to criminalize gender identity they don’t agree with, to make crossing state lines to receive medical care a felony. They are also working to criminalize teaching actual history if it upsets white supremacists by using facts rather than the white-washed myth of our history. They are fomenting militant vigilantism with many of these policies by making reporting on your neighbor for money a key component. Their praise of Rittenhouse and the terrorists like the Proud Boys, 3 Percenters, and Oath Keepers should make this clear. Especially when the election lie is considered. By using obvious lies to sow distrust in the election they are weakening the country they pretend to care about to provide space for these people to gain power. All piped into houses by the likes of Stormfront’s favorite talking head Tucker Carlson.
The idea of the “independently minded Republican” is a complete myth. Perpetuated despite all evidence to the contrary because it fits within the framework of Christian Nationalism on which their party is built. Sinclar Lewis was correct when he said “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.” It is the same thing that happened in Germany with Hitler and with Putin in Russia. Create a myth of national exceptionalism based on a false idea of history, tied together by religious fervor-headed demagogue.
If you actually believe in liberty and aren’t just using it as a fashion statement you should make sure your party purges those who are open fascists and white supremacists rather than giving them a supportive home. You could also work to figure out why the areas that vote Republican are largely the ones most dependent on government assistance. Might as well figure out why so many spent so much time praising Putin as well. (Hint, they share his ideas)
” The Sioux men I know say that their biggest enemy is the white liberal.”
Well Dennis, I have my issues with certain white liberals on occasion. I’m sure my battle with Pat Terry and complaints about “liberal” journalists have not gone unnoticed around here, but your complaints seem a little incoherent.
You DO realize that Lincoln’s Republican Party, unlike the Republican Party of today, was the liberal Party of it’s era right? The guys who attacked Fort Sumter and went on to create the KKK, Jim Crow, and launch the war on drugs with all it’s various assaults on civil rights are the intellectual and moral ancestors of the Trump’s Republican Party, not Lincoln. The guys who wanted to hang 300 Indians in 1862 weren’t the liberal faction, and Lincoln’s impulse to pardon or commute all but 38 of the 300 slated to hang was a liberal impulse. According your own research then you owe your very existence to a liberal white guy.
Now it’s true that the Allotment Act and the boarding schools were liberal programs of their days, but your fond memories of your time in boarding school are on record. Likewise you seem to embrace the anti-tribal collectivism and rugged individualism and self sufficiency that the Allotment Act sought to promote, you almost seem to suggest that the Allotment Act could represent Turtle Clan principles; in that regard I’m not sure you represent all Sioux men. Meanwhile most liberals TODAY who know anything about the boarding schools and the Allotment Act classify them as settler colonial oppression, subjugation, and genocide.
As for people of color who voted for Republicans or Trump, I would simply refer you back to your own suggestion that people don’t always vote in their own best interest, such as Indian people who vote for Democrats.
Meanwhile we can note that while the guys who STILL walk around waving the Confederate flag may not have created the boarding schools and Allotment Act, they never opposed those programs or became champions of native American sovereignty, on the contrary. The idea that the guys who want to roll back the 20th century will be less oppressive than “liberals” doesn’t seem to be very rational. Some distrust of liberals makes sense, but Fascism is no antidote.
“It is bad for young men to be fed by the agent, it makes them lazy and drunken. All agency Indians I have seen are worthless. They are neither red warriors nor white farmers. They are neither wolf nor dog.” – Sitting Bull
Keep in mind, Republican-run states and counties are by far more dependent on assistance than those run by Democrats. Republicans only use the idea of self-reliance as a marketing wrapper on their means of Christian Nationalist oppression. This has never been more clear than right now. They complain about high gas prices and would rather support a fascist dictator. They are passing laws that are the equivalent of reimposing Jim Crow both through voter suppression (based on their election lie) and more directly by criminalizing people in the LGBTQ community. The same people that are all for owning firearms and self-defense unless you are black or brown. Then like Regan did once the Black Panthers started to arm themselves, they switch over to a “law-and-order” mode. All of which is right out of the Putin, fascist, autocratic playbook. Whatever Goldwater set of ideals ever existed in the Republican party are completely dead.
“Nothing’s changed because not enough Indians vote republican.”
That’s quite a leap. And it feels a little…racist. Somehow your wisdom far exceeds those of the Indigenous population who choose to not to vote the way you do? But you’ll say it’s not racist because you are a person whose ancestry includes Native People (a claim you lean on quite a bit while claiming no white privilege), so you can’t possibly be racist. And yet…
It’s also quite funny because you equate the backstabbing of the government then to your perceived ineptness of government today. I think you’ll find little similarity in the attitude toward Indigenous people between the aggressively expansionist US government from the bad old days of Manifest Destiny to the complacent US government today. After all, at the time of the Dakota War, nearly everyone was politically united in how to treat the Indigenous tribes – beat them, cheat them, and kill them if necessary (or if some hot headed General feels like it). Today, the only thing united about the political spectrum within the US is that we ignore the tribes as much as possible. In any case, nothing good will come of voting for Republicans. At least not for anyone not already wealthy. And, sadly, that includes the vast majority of Americans, but especially American Indians. It’s not like any politicians with the power to do so are clamoring to return land and/or provide reparations to the people our government has wronged. But especially not Republicans, like yourself, who subscribe to the “Bootstrap Philosophy (for everyone but myself).”
It’s not that republican politicians are going to DO anything for them, my point is that not voting republican allows the white liberals to win and thereby continue to rule over them as they would farm animals. At least republican philosophy would allow them to be free men. Not that most of them would know what to do with it now anyway since they’ve been corrupted by the leftist education establishment.
Dennis, I hate to say it but the fact that you think being ruled over by fascists would be an improvement of some kind is a little bizarre. I can understand mistrust of the government but trusting Republicans more than Democrats is a contribution to your own oppression. Whatever, it’s still a free country, vote while you still can.
Mankato’s gruesome historic mass hanging was still commemorated back in the early 60s, with a 5-10 ton stone marker that brought shame to many residents. The marker was moved, replaced with commissioned limestone sculptures celebrating the Dakota, and the making of a Land of Memories Park that is the site of the annual Wacipi– a traditional Native American gathering, a celebration of life, pride, and honor. Meaning “they all dance” in the Dakota language.
The marker of the dark day after Christmas 1862 still was there until 1994 when it “disappeared”. Mankato’s mayor at the time, a locally famous (from his high school days as a champion heavy weight wrestler) became implicated by gossip that he knew where the marker had gone.
To this day, maybe only Stan Christ knows where it is, but Mankato folks owe him a debt of gratitude for that contribution to the on-going reconciliation efforts between area residents and their past.
Mayor Christ “…says his grandfather was three-fourths Dakota and his dad’s mother was a Blackfoot, so by his rough measure he’s half Indian.”
This is a good story fromthe local Free Press from back then:
https://www.mankatofreepress.com/archives/ex-mankato-mayor-christ-weighs-in-missing-dakota-war-marker/article_a05bbe0f-5122-56af-b5d1-1336c95ebb81.html
I visited the major battle sites back in 2011, a year before the 2012 150th remembrance year. I photographed each site as a 360 degree panoramic photograph. The photos were taken on the actual calendar date of the event/battle back in 1862. You can view the photos here: https://1862dakotawarsitestoday.com/.
This is great. Thank you for sharing.