Wednesday, May 3, 2017

The Crow Creek Massacre -- Revealed How Indians Massacred Indians

Dear Friends,

Because I've written about warfare between Native American tribes, a reader wrote to take me to task and tell me that I "should know" that he was told by an "accredited professor," and "not by just by some blogger," that "Native Americans did not wage war on each other until after European Whites arrived in North America. That it was the White man who set Native American against Native American."

Friends, he was told this in an American university in a class that studies Native American history. So let's talk about that. Let's talk about the type of warfare that Native Americans waged upon each other long before Europeans, "the white man", ever stepped foot on North American soil. Let's talk about how ruthless Native Americans were when slaughtering other Native American tribes. Let's talk about how Native American Indian tribes massacred other Indians tribes. Let's talk about the fact that in many cases warfare between the various tribes were so horrendous that they would be considered genocidal by today's standards.

The Crow Creek Massacre is an example of this. The Crow Creek Massacre is a prime example of Native American warfare that was waged on each other. The Crow Creek Massacre took place between Native American tribes at a site near Chamberlain, South Dakota, at the confluence of Wolf and Crow Creeks. The area where the massacre took place is now in the Crow Creek Indian Reservation.

The Crow Creek Massacre took place in the early 1300s. Yes, about the year 1325. That's well over 150 years before explorer Christopher Columbus found the Bahamas in 1492. It is certainly earlier than when explorer John Cabot landed on the coast of North America in 1497. Cabot being the first European to explore the North America mainland since the Viking visits in the 11th century.

The Crow Creek Massacre, and the Crow Creek Site, the site of the massacre near Chamberlain, South Dakota, is today an archaeological site and a U.S. National Historic Landmark. An excavation of part of the site was done in the 1950s, with additional excavations in 1978 and later.

In 1978, South Dakota State Archaeologists toured the Crow Creek site, which had been known and had some professional excavation in the 1950s. They discovered human bones eroding from the end of the fortification ditch. After they received permission to excavate the site from the reservation tribal council, and following consultation about how to proceed and agreement for reburial of remains on site, archaeology teams recovered the skeletal remains of at least 486 Crow Creek villagers.

The remains of the villagers of Crow Creek were discovered in a fortification ditch. That's where they were buried about the year 1325, and covered with a small layer of clay from the river bottom. As for the layer of clay covering the bodies, they were coated by a "thin and scattered layer of bones." And no, no one knows exactly why that was done. 

Ancestors of Mandan people were the first to occupy the area sometime after the year 900 AD. They built numerous earth lodges there. After them, around the year 1150. the Central Plains Indian tribe, the Arikara is believed to have moved into the area. They were from what is today Nebraska. 

Researchers really don't know if the Arikara tribe chased the Mandan out or if they simply moved into the abandoned village. Either way, the Arikara expanded the village and even built an additional 55 lodges there. And yes, there is evidence that the Arikara built well-planned out defensive positions for its village. Yes, walls and fortifications to keep out intruders wanting to do them harm. And friends, these were farmers not mounted warriors.

Worried about war and being invaded from other tribes even then, that Arikara tribe is known to have built a moat and a fortification around their village to keep out other attacking tribes. It was when the tribe started work on replacing that earlier fortification with a new fortification and ditch around the expanded village that an attack occurred. That attack from another tribe resulted in the massacre. Yes, the Native American tribe attacked the Arikara and killed all there. And yes, they hunted down those who fled and killed them as well.

The massacre took place just before dawn. While the tribe of Native American who slaughtered the Arikara are unknown. It is believed that Native Americans warriors, numbered over 1,500 of them, overran the deep ditch and breached the break in the fortifications intended to protect the Arikara tribe from attacking tribes.

Why did the Arikara need a fortification, a wall, a defense? 

Well, despite the lie that all Native American peoples were peaceful, the Arikara tribe knew better and needed a wall to protect themselves. And even though a horrible drought at the time set a state of hunger on the tribe, the tribe still grew. The new wall was needed because they needed more room for a growing population. This meant they needed to move their fortification outward.

Researchers say the remains reveal the facts of their untimely deaths and events of the massacre, and they also reveal other aspects of their lives. For example, there is evidence of nutritional deficiencies, and the presence of animal bones in the fortification ditch gave credence to the fact that villagers ate their dogs because of hunger. They may have been facing starvation because of a recurring drought.

As for the massacre? The remains reveal that the tribe that attacked them were opportunists in that they took advantage of a break in the new fortification to commence their invasion. That break came about when the villagers moved their palisade wall outward to make more room for their growing tribe. So make no mistake about it, the wars they waged one each other were horrendous. And in this case, the invading tribe came in to kill everyone there. This is including women and children who tried to flee. It is believed that while some made it and escaped, others were captured and killed and mutilated.

Archaeologists from the University of South Dakota, found that the remains of the 486 people there were all killed during the attack. The vast majority of the remains showed signs of ritual mutilation, particularly dismemberment and the scalpings. This shows that scalping was done long before Europeans arrived in North America. So when one hears the myth that Native American Indians learned scalping from the Europeans, since this all took place 150 years before European Whites ever arrived here, you know that that myth is a lie. 

Most reports on the massacre agree that 90% of Indians in that village were scalped. But, there are those who state that it could have been as high as 100%. This is based on skeletal remains that exhibit cuts on their skulls indicative of scalping. Research shows that men, women, and children were scalped. The only difference is that the younger children were cut higher on the skull. 

The Native American invaders shot stone-tipped arrows at the defenders who met them. They used stone axes, wooden clubs, and spears when they closed in on the defenders. They used their stone axes to hack their victim apart and stone knives scalp the dead. There is an abundance of evidence of wounds, "butchering marks" and scalping. 

As far as other signs of ritual mutilation that have been found at the Crow Creek Massacre site, researchers found that tongues had been removed, teeth were broken, many were beheaded, hands and feet had been cut off, and there were other forms of dismemberment in the form of genital mutilation. All of those who were slaughtered showed signs of malnutrition and many had evidence of being wounded in other attacks.

Researchers say the remains revealed evidence of previous warfare with other tribes. According to researchers, evidence of previous warfare was present in the skeletal remains because they showed evidence of earlier wounds. In fact, there is evidence that two men had apparently been scalped previously and survived. The two found had survived previous scalping incidents and both had wounds that were in the process of healing when they were finally killed. Other evidence found is that of others being wounded by arrows, the points of which remained in the legs and were overgrown by bone. 

Since many of the bodies were missing limbs, it is believed that the attacking tribe may have taken those limbs as trophies. Researchers also saw the tongue removal, the decapitation, and the dismemberment of the victims in addition to the scalping that was performed, all as being standard practice in Native American warfare. 

Also, it should be noted that the bodies were burned, and there is evidence of limbs being removed by various means. In fact researchers believe that many of the mutilations could have been traumatic enough to result in death. Yes, that means that they were being mutilated while still alive.

The evidence of being wounded in other attacks and the taking of war trophies was a revelation for history revisionists who claim that Native American cultures lived in complete harmony with each other. Because of what was found and what is seen as indisputable fact, the Crow Creek Massacre shows that tribes were under a lot more stress from other warring tribes than once thought.

In fact, now researchers have theorized that the people were attacked by others or several other groups for the arable land and resources. Arable land is land capable of being plowed and used to grow crops. Yes, for all of the same reasons that Europeans and those on other continents have waged war on each other. 

The bodies found in the fortification ditch were piled as deep as four feet in some areas. The bodies showed evidence of having been laid out and exposed to weather and scavenging animals over a period of time. In fact, the bodies of the villagers are said to have laid out on the open ground for weeks after the attack. Yes, laid out all while wolves and coyotes, crows and vultures picked at their bones. And yes, researchers also believe that scavengers might have dug up these remains as a food source later. It is for that reason that many of the bodies were found to have their bones separated and located elsewhere apart from the rest of their bodies before the burial.

According to what I've read, it's not clear who buried the victims of the massacre. It may have been the attacking tribe, or it may have been escaped villagers who returned and found the slaughter. The survivors may have returned and buried their people in a mass grave. Then again, they may have been buried by members of an affiliated village that discovered the massacre scene.

The Crow Creek Massacre site has been designated 39BF11 under the Smithsonian site numbering system. The site is located on lands now under the control of the US Army Corps of Engineers due to its flood control and other projects on the river. So all and all, the location of the Crow Creek Massacre is now a well-preserved archaeological site.

Today the descendants of those people live in North Dakota as the Mandan and Arikara nations, respectively, of the Three Affiliated Tribes, along with the Hidatsa tribe.

So there you go. Like it or not, there is a general rewrite of American History these days. And that's especially true when it comes to Native American history. Most of it is an attempt to portray North American Indian tribes as living in peace and harmony with each other before Europeans set foot on this continent. There are classes in high schools, colleges and universities that are stating that they did, even though that's just not true. Even though that's a lie.

Whether it's taking a look at The Tonkawa Massacre of 1862, or The Pawnee Massacre - Sundown of the Pawnee Indians, there is so much evidence that points to the fact that Native Americans waged horrific war upon each other for hundreds of years. Yes, before and after Europeans arrived here.

And if you want to know how many tribes waged war upon each other, imagine this if you would, researchers have found that only about 13% of all of the tribes actually avoided warfare with other Indian nations. Imagine that, only 13 % of the hundreds of tribes that we know of avoided going to war with other Native Americans.

So why aren't people being taught that fact today? Why are young people being taught the lie that "Native Americans did not wage war on each other until after European Whites arrived in North America. That it was the White man who set Native American against Native American."? Why aren't people being taught how Native American tribes understood the importance of protecting their own people with security barriers?

Well, that's a question that should be looked at because it goes to the heart of why people re-write history to support their own self-serving agendas.

And yes, that's just the way I see things.

Tom Correa


  1. This is interesting. I think the reason we are taught false info is to make the white man look more evil. There is a tendency to do that these days.

    1. Definitely. Mention this on Twitter to any 20 something in California and they go nuts

  2. Excellent read, the information is enlightening. I think your use of coarse terms could have been avoided....and as a historical account, these facts could be absorbed much easier if presented in a manner less abrupt. MW

  3. Thank you Tom for your enlightning article , I will remember it forever, I need information like this to enable me to discus and enlightn others

  4. I knew that native Americans had fought and killed each other when I was a kid. This new history rewrite going on in schools, universities, and homes teaching that the indians lived in harmony before the Europeans came to thier Eden.
    This lie is being perpetrated by the far left communist facist new Democrats, yes democrats.
    Tom this was an excellent read and presented as always by the tangible truth.

  5. Thanks for being direct and to the point, no reason to soften something that isn't pretty. This is true. Same as slavery. Native Americans have always raided each other and captured people for slaves. I am part NA, and I won't put my head in the sand about this. All races have done this, and many still are. Thanks for your articles. They're great.

  6. I, long ago, came to the realization that the history (and most of the science) I was force fed in elementary and secondary school was false. Or at the very least skewed. One of my husbands ancestors was a teacher around the turn of the last century, and the history books she taught from are downright funny by today's standards. The old adage that history is written by the victorious needs to be taken into account. This more modern message of our (European) ancestors killing peaceful aboriginal peoples is just more "politically correct" tripe. We (European settlers) didn't invent genocide or slavery or even cruelty. Man has been doing that since Cain and Abel.

  7. This article lacks a lot. So the reason for this article was "a reader wrote to take me to task and tell me that I "should know" that he was told by an "accredited professor," and "not by just by some blogger," that "Native Americans did not wage war on each other until after European Whites arrived in North America." So you got your head up because some reader related a second or third hand statement? Could it be that the "reader" just made it up. t

    1. Hello Frank, The reader could have made it up in an effort to put me in my place so to speak. But since I have had other readers who have told me similar things coming from their teachers and professors over the years, I have no reason to doubt that revisionist history is being fed to students today. There is something else, it is a matter of trust. I have a sort of duty to trust what my readers tell me. Yes, in the very same way that I trust your unbiased honesty when you say that "this article lacks a lot." While I wonder what it's lacking, I have reported on all of the details that I can find on this. If you know of things that I left out, please don't hesitate to write and let me know what they may be so that I can update this article. My email address is

      Until then, thanks for visiting my site. Tom

  8. I am really curious how the author knows the attack came just before dawn? Did archeologists find a broken watch with an arrowhead in the face which stopped it at the time of the attack?

    1. Hello Frank, I read that researchers used various methods of examining what they found. While I read where researchers believe that the attack came before dawn, I have no idea how they determined this. Thanks for visiting my site. Tom

    2. There may have been carbon evidence of fires that had died out (indicating pre-dawn), or fires being built (indicating early dawn), or early morning activity (food preparation) in the area. Forensic and anthropological scientists have all sorts of ways to discern details.

  9. Great Story.
    Sometimes you can not stress the point enough.
    I think the same is true with all history taught in american schools. Misleading and agenda focused.
    You can see it in the news everyday and with the removal of the CSA flags and memorials, the lack to enforce laws against illegal's etc.....

  10. I assumed what the tribes did to one another, was common knowledge. 75% of the American History I was taught as fact, has been debunked in recent years.

  11. The Vikings were here before this so it must be the Vikings fault LOL

  12. Great article, Tom. Glad I found your blog and will visit more to see other things you have published. It has seemed to me in my school history that so little was written about Native Americans before whitey came along. But seem to remember the Iroquois nations arose to keep themselves from killing each other as well as trade and defense from nations to the west. I am from Illinois originally and the University of Illinois teams are called the Illini after the Illini tribe. Supposedly, this was a small tribe that was wiped out by some band of Sioux. I do not know if true or not.

  13. My only criticism, you left out the slaughter of Kiowa women, children and the elderly in what is now western Oklahoma. While the men were out hunting, a party of Osage came to the village killing as many Kiowa as they could. The cut the heads off many of the women, and put them in the shiny brass buckets which had only recently been traded for. The location of this site is now called Cut Throat Gap.

    1. Actual, I've been working on the Cut Throat Gap massacre and a couple of others. I should have them out very soon. Thanks for visiting my site. Tom

  14. Thank you sir, for writing the truth, at a time when truth is in short supply. Well written!

  15. Very interesting.. Thank you. There are a lot of liberal teachers teaching our kids. We as the parents need to correct what they have been told. As in proof of what your saying.....


Thank you for your comment.