Removal, Relocation, Reinterpretation/Recontextualization Frameworks. Explore definitions here.
Introduction
This case study was created to collect information regarding the removal and recontextualization of Denver’s Civil War Memorial that stood on the west steps of the Colorado State Capitol from 1909 to 2020. June of 2020 saw the removal of three Denver monuments within a three block radius surrounding the Colorado State Capitol. The Civil War Memorial’s statue was found laying on the ground, removed from its pedestal, on the morning of June 25, 2020. The individuals who are responsible for this action are not known. On June 26, 2020, a bronze sculpture that sat atop a pedestal with a plaque containing the inscription “In Honor of Christopher Columbus” located in Denver’s Civic Center Park was found removed from its pedestal. Lastly, a statue of Kit Carson at the top of Denver’s Pioneer Monument, located at the intersection of Broadway Street and West Colfax Avenue, was proactively removed by the City of Denver on June 26, 2020.
It is clear that June 2020 marked a moment in which Denver was forced to consider the story of Colorado that is told through its public art, and whether this story is representative of the state’s true, complex, and dark history. This case study will focus on Denver’s Civil War Memorial, residing in the Colorado state history museum, the History Colorado Center, at the time of writing. Several years later, it is yet to be seen what will come of the sculpture previously associated with the “In Honor of Christopher Columbus” plaque and the Kit Carson statue that was removed from the Pioneer Monument.
Section 1: Methodology
This case study involved semi-structured interviews, archival research, and public document review. Perspectives provided by interviewees are incorporated throughout this report. Direct quotes are utilized as much as possible to maintain the voice of participants. There are additional perspectives relevant to this conversation that were not obtained due to time and scope of project constraints. It is considered a limitation of this case study.
| Name | Title (current or former)* |
| Thomas Allen (Northern Arapaho/Sac and Fox/Euchee) | Denver American Indian Commissioner, founding member of Native American Housing Circle |
| Max Bear (Cheyenne and Arapaho) | Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma |
| Sam Bock | Former Exhibition Developer at History Colorado Center |
| Derek Everett | Historian, Colorado State Capitol Scholar |
| Jason Hanson | Chief Creative Officer at History Colorado Center |
| Ari Kelman | Historian, Author of A Misplaced Massacre |
| Kathryn Redhorse (Lakota and Navajo) | Executive Director of the Colorado Commission on Indian Affairs |
| Elleni Sclavenitis | Executive Director of the Sand Creek Massacre Foundation |
| Shannon Voirol | Former Director of Exhibitions at History Colorado Center |
*Please note that many of these individuals fill multiple titles and positions that are not included here.
Section 2: Background
2.1. The Memorial’s Inception
Denver’s Civil War Memorial was inspired by a visit of the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR), a national association of Union Civil War veterans, to Denver in 1905. At the turn of the twentieth century, the GAR was one of the most politically and economically powerful organizations in the United States. Upon arrival in Denver for their annual convention, members of the GAR were surprised to find that Denver and Colorado’s State Capitol Building lacked a monument to Colorado’s veterans of the Civil War. The territory of Colorado had fought for the Union in the civil war, and played a relatively minor though regionally significant role (Everett 2005). Notably, the battle of Glorieta Pass in the territory of New Mexico was a victory by Colorado infantry soldiers which allowed the “Colorado goldfields, the target of an invading army to relieve the financially strapped Southern Confederacy, [to] remai[n] in Northern hands” (ibid., 12).
Colorado State Capitol Scholar Derek Everett points to a line written by Stuart McConnell stating that “the GAR spoke the language of monuments” (personal interview, July 19, 2023). The organization’s affinity for honoring Union veterans via statue ultimately led to the proposal for a Colorado Union Soldier memorial on Capitol grounds. The statue of an unidentified, dismounted cavalry soldier was designed by John D. Howland, a veteran of the Battle of Glorieta Pass and the Colorado Infantry. The statue stood upon a square pedestal, covered on each face with a plaque that listed Colorado soldiers who had fought and died for the Union as well as other details of the state’s involvement. On the west-facing plaque, the last “Battle and Engagement” listed was “Sand Creek, Colo., 1864.” Under “Military Organizations in the Civil War,” the First Colorado Infantry (later, the First Colorado Cavalry), is associated with the leadership of “Col. John P. Slough” and “Col. John M. Chivington.” The implications of these inscriptions will be discussed below. The memorial was completed and unveiled in 1909 on the west steps of the Colorado State Capitol building.
2.2. The Sand Creek Massacre of 1864
The Sand Creek Massacre was not a battle or engagement. This is a fact undisputed by historians today. On November 29, 1864, members of the Colorado (U.S.) Volunteer Cavalry led by Colonel John M. Chivington attacked a peaceful camp of Cheyenne and Arapaho people along Sand Creek on the eastern plains of the Colorado territory. Members of the Cheyenne and Arapaho community present at the time of attack were mostly women, children, and elderly men. Several weeks before the Massacre, Cheyenne council chief Black Kettle and Arapaho chief Left Hand had established a truce with Major Edward W. Wynkoop, who promised safety if the Cheyenne and Arapaho camped along Sand Creek, near Fort Lyon. In the early morning of November 29, 1864, Colonel John M. Chivington led Colorado troops to the peaceful encampment seeking violence. Chief Black Kettle raised an American flag with a white cloth underneath it to indicate that this was a peaceful camp that had established a truce with Major Edward W. Wynkoop. Chivington chose to ignore this sign, and led members of the Colorado volunteer troops in a violent massacre of Cheyenne and Arapaho people. The Cheyenne and Arapaho, who had been promised safety, had little time to react to such unanticipated violence. Some fled, while others attempted to mount a defense. The Colorado troops committed atrocities at Sand Creek, defiled the bodies of their victims, and considered themselves victorious in an event that cannot be classified as a battle.
Two company commanders who were present at the Sand Creek Massacre, Capt. Silas Soule and Lt. Joseph Cramer, condemned the actions of the Colorado troops led by John M. Chivington as inhumane and ordered their companies to stand down. Both individuals wrote letters to Major Edward W. Wynkoop describing what they had witnessed at Sand Creek and calling for the investigation of what was surely not a battle, but a massacre. The U.S. government launched an investigation into the actions of Chivington and Colorado troops at Sand Creek, in which “the powerful Joint Committee on the Conduct of the [Civil] War, the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the Tribes, and an army commission all initiated hearings, and all came to the same conclusion: Sand Creek was a massacre of Indians who were under the protection of the U.S. government” (Clemmer-smith et. al 2014, 7). In Article 6 of the Treaty of Little Arkansas, ratified May 22, 1866, the U.S. Government admits responsibility for the Sand Creek Massacre:
The United States being desirous to express its condemnation of, and, as far As may be, repudiate the gross and wanton out-rages perpetrated against certain Bands of Cheyenne and Arrapahoe Indians, on the twenty-ninth day of November, A.D. 1864, at Sand Creek, in Colorado Territory, while the said Indians were at peace with the United States, and under its flag, whose Protection they had by lawful authority been promised and induced to seek, and the Government being desirous to make some suitable reparation for the injuries then done… (ibid., 1).
Those who were instrumental in perpetrating violence at Sand Creek, such as Colonel John M. Chivington, worked to maintain a narrative of memorialization that depicted Sand Creek as a battle against hostile Indians. This narrative was supported locally by media outlets such as the Rocky Mountain News, and a public whose frontier mentality based in white supremacy supported violence against the Colorado territory’s Native communities. Despite an official investigation by the U.S. Government that determined Sand Creek was a massacre, Chivington’s narrative of Sand Creek as a battle was supported by Denverites of the day. Following his death in 1894, many of Chivington’s followers “tried to embed their colonel’s Sand Creek stories in the glorious Civil War narrative being constructed by heritage groups around the United States – work that culminated in Colorado with the unveiling of the memorial on the Capitol steps in 1909” (Kelman 2013, 94).
The inclusion of Sand Creek on the Civil War Memorial’s list of “Battles and Engagements” was significant, as it appeared to “san[d] down the rough edges and carv[e] John Chivington’s narrative of the slaughter into stone” (ibid., 74). This statuary symbol remained as it stood until 2002.
It is important to note that today, members of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe (Montana), the Northern Arapaho Tribe (Wyoming), and the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes (Oklahoma) are still seeking reparations promised in Article 6 of the Treaty of Little Arkansas, ratified in 1866.
On December 3, 2014, former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper delivered a speech at the Colorado State Capitol in remembrance of the 150th commemoration of the Sand Creek Massacre. This speech was the first formal apology for the events of the Sand Creek Massacre by the state of Colorado. Governor Hickenlooper stated,
Today, we gather here to fully acknowledge what happened: the massacre of Sand Creek. There is no rationalizing it, there is no sugar-coating history. We should not be afraid to criticize and condemn what is inexcusable. So I am here to offer something that has been long in coming. On behalf of the State of Colorado, I want to apologize (SMCC n.d.).
When asked what the Sand Creek Massacre means to the Northern Arapaho today, Thomas Allen (Northern Arapaho/Sac and Fox/Euchee) shared, “That’s a complex question because it was very impactful. Where they are now is because of [the Sand Creek Massacre]. After that, the government told them to walk. So they walked…. My people still remember that [Denver] is our homeland. And our traditional medicine and our traditional food are still here… it’s really important to understand that this is, this was, our home and we’re no longer here… We’re not museum pieces. We’re contemporary. Even in my job, I have to remind people that I’m not a museum piece, I’m a person. I’m human, and so, I’m going to have human reactions to atrocities that happened and have the emotion attached with that. I want acknowledgement and healing so we can move on, into the future and be stronger by being connected as a people, as humans” (personal interview, August 9, 2023). The trauma of the Sand Creek Massacre lives on with the Northern Arapaho, Northern Cheyenne, and Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho today. The effects of colonialism and the removal of tribes from their homelands have impacted the lives of generations of Native communities. The Sand Creek Massacre is just one part of this story.
A complete discussion of the atrocities committed by Colorado troops and Colonel Chivington at Sand Creek is outside the scope of this case study. For further reading regarding the Sand Creek Massacre, please consider the resources listed in the History Colorado Center’s guide.
2.3. An Attempt at Recontextualization, 1998-2002
In 1998, Colorado Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell sponsored a bill known as the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site Study Act, which marked the legislative beginning of the establishment of the Sand Creek National Historic Site in eastern Colorado. In the same year, Colorado Senator Bob Martinez proposed the removal of Sand Creek from the list of “Battles and Engagements” on the Civil War Memorial’s west-facing pedestal plaque. This was done so on the basis that the Sand Creek Massacre was incorrectly listed as a battle. As a result, a joint resolution was passed by the state legislature to erase Sand Creek from the monument.
David Halaas, a former Colorado State Historian who had developed a close relationship with Steve Brady, President of the Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Descendants, and Laird Cometsevah, President of the Southern Cheyenne Sand Creek Descendants, found it alarming that the state legislature had made this decision without consulting tribal representatives. At the time, “Halaas feared that the legislature’s benign revisionism might inadvertently undermine the impact of Senator Campbell’s memorialization efforts” (Kelman 2013, 76). Halaas made Laird Cometsevah and Steve Brady aware of the resolution. As a result, Cometsevah and Brady wrote a letter to the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Colorado stating:
As the authorized representatives of the Northern Cheyenne and Southern Cheyenne Sand Creek Descendants we strongly and gratefully support the efforts of the Colorado State Legislature to recognize the November 29, 1864, Sand Creek Massacre as a massacre and not a ‘battle’ and as an act of genocide on a known peaceful village of Cheyenne Indians under the leadership of Chief Black Kettle. However, we respectfully request that the world ‘SAND CREEK’ presently engraved on the Civil War Memorial be retained. Rather than erase the words ‘SAND CREEK’ from the list of ‘Battles and Engagements,’ we wish that interpretative signage be placed around the Civil War Memorial statue that would inform and educate the public about the holocaust of Sand Creek and its meaning to all people (Brady and Cometsevah 1998).
This request was debated and ultimately fulfilled. The text of the plaque was written by the Colorado Historical Society and approved by the Colorado legislature’s Capitol Building Advisory Committee. Once again, Sand Creek Massacre descendants were not consulted on the project of reinterpreting the Civil War Memorial. Via their own initiative, descendants voiced their opinions regarding the plaque, which were said to be considered by the Capitol Building Advisory Committee. The plaque itself sits face up on a sandstone platform surrounding the monument on the capitol’s west steps. It was unveiled at a ceremony on the anniversary of the Sand Creek Massacre, November 29, 2002. Several have noted that it is difficult to see the recontextualization plaque while viewing the monument as it may be under plant coverage or blend into the sandstone wall.
2.4. The Memorial in June 2020
At the end of May 2020, the Colorado State Capitol Building became a battleground. The building was vandalized, windows were broken, and graffiti covered the landscape. The Civil War Memorial on the west steps was not immune to the powerful movement led by some of Denver’s citizens.
On one day in June 2020, the statue was accompanied by signs that read “STOP KILLING US” and “I CAN’T BREATHE.” In addition, the sandstone base was covered with graffiti that stated “Decolonize Denver,” “No Hero, F*** Pios,” and “No Justice, No Peace.” Citizens also used chalk on the sandstone platform, writing “Black Lives Matter. Native Lives Matter. This statue represents hate!”
In a news conference the day before the Civil War Memorial’s toppling, June 24, 2020, former Denver Mayor Michael Hancock stated, “Not only must we create spaces where people feel accepted and respected, but we must also find ways to provide that opportunity for people to understand the history of certain monuments and why they existed in the first place and why they ought to be removed or renamed” (Staeger 2020).
On the morning of June 25, the Civil War Memorial’s statue was found off its pedestal and laying on the ground. City of Denver crew removed the statue, the four plaques located on its pedestal, and two Civil War era cannons that had stood on either side of the Union Cavalryman. In a statement immediately following the incident, Governor Polis said he was “outraged at the damage to a statue that commemorates the Union heroes of the Civil War who fought and lost their lives to end slavery. This statue will be repaired, and we will use every tool at our disposal to work with Denver police and to hold accountable those responsible for the damage whether they are hooligans, white supremacists, confederate sympathizers or drunk teenagers” (Tabachnik and Bradbury 2020). Additionally, Mayor Michael Hancock announced that the city would create a commission to “evaluate Denver landmarks and public spaces, including public art, associated with racist groups or ideologies” (ibid.). It is unclear whether this statement by former Mayor Hancock has come to fruition. It is known that the City of Denver asked the State Historian’s Council to review the names of city assets in the fall of 2020 for association with problematic individuals or events. The following are some citizen perspectives collected by journalists on the ground June 25, 2020, in the aftermath of the statue’s toppling. Those who were named at the time of reporting are also named here.
Perspectives
Denver Resident: “We shouldn’t be celebrating the genocide of Indigenous people. That is what this represents. It is a symbol of white supremacy” (Tabachnik and Bradbury 2020).
Citizen 1: “We figured what better way to get rid of a statue that represents racism” (“Civil War Statue… 2020).
Citizen 2: “We have to get rid of every racist monument in this country. We have to do it in our own backyard. I don’t know who did this but I thank them” (“Civil War Statue… 2020).
Citizen 3: “I know that [soldier] is one of many men who were part of the Sand Creek massacre and many other genocidal acts that happened throughout Colorado’s early histories” (“Civil War Statue… 2020).
Sage Naumann, spokesman for Colorado state Senate Republicans in June 2020: “The tearing down and desecrating of a memorial primarily dedicated to those who fought and died on behalf of the Union and for the abolition of slavery should be disturbing to any Coloradan and any American” (Colorado Public Radio Staff 2020).
Herb Welsh (Northern Arapaho): “The soldier that sat there on the Capitol Hill was completely insulting to the Cheyenne-Arapaho people…. Not only to us. To our ancestors… Some people will call it vandalism. Some people will call it criminal. But it had an effect” (Colorado Public Radio Staff 2020).
Tom Noel, co-director of the public history program at the University of Colorado, Denver, in June 2020: “I personally like these monuments — and like them kept up — because they remind us what happened in the past” (Frank and Ochsner 2020).
On August 21, 2020, Chief Creative Officer at the History Colorado Center, Jason Hanson, proposed to the Capitol Building Advisory Committee that the state history museum be loaned the statue for an exhibition. The proposal passed without objection.
2.5. The Memorial Today
In August 2023, the monument’s pedestal remains in its original location with a wood box surrounding it. The posters on its face are leftover prints from Colorado Governor Jared Polis’ 2022 re-election campaign, placed there as a way to cover the plain box.
The statue portion remains in the History Colorado Center, where it has been since October 2020. On May 20, 2022, the Capitol Building Advisory Committee (CBAC) approved the motion to loan the memorial (statue and plinth) on a long-term basis to the Colorado Department of Military and Veterans Affairs in Centennial, Colorado. Greg Dorman, interim Deputy Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Military and Veterans Affairs in November 2021, stated the organization was looking forward to “preserving that piece of history while telling the entire story” (CBAC 2021). It remains to be seen when this move will occur. At the time of writing, the statue is on display in the History Colorado Center. The details of this exhibition will be discussed further below.
2.6. The History Colorado Center
The History Colorado Center is Colorado’s state history museum located in Denver’s Golden Triangle district. The organization was founded in 1879 as the State Historical and Natural History Society. At the time of its inception, “the Colorado State Historical and Natural History Society was founded on the notion of manifest destiny, that the colonial settler expansion of the West was a success to be documented, gathered, preserved, and disseminated to the larger publics” (Ohaus 2023). The Colorado State Historical Society and Natural History Society subsequently split, and the Colorado State Museum was opened in 1915 across the street from the Capitol building to house the Historical Society’s collection. The museum moved to several different locations before settling in its current home that opened to the public in 2012. In 2008, the Colorado State Historical Society changed its name to History Colorado. Today, the History Colorado Center, one of History Colorado’s seven museums, is located at the intersection of Broadway and 12th street in downtown Denver.
History Colorado describes itself as follows:
History Colorado creates a better future for Colorado by inspiring wonder in our past. At History Colorado, we believe in making Colorado’s history accessible and in creating opportunities that connect people to Colorado and our past to cultivate an informed future. We are Colorado!
Established in 1879, History Colorado is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization and an agency of the State of Colorado under the Department of Higher Education. We are the trusted leader in helping people understand what it means to be a Coloradan—by sharing powerful stories, honoring our state’s treasured memories, and creating vibrant communities…
At its heart, History Colorado fosters cultural understanding, preserves and protects the physical, cultural, and emotional places that are important to our communities, and encourages appreciation of what makes Colorado Colorado (History Colorado n.d.).
2.7. The Evolving Role of Museums
Museums began as, and remain, repositories for the preservation and conservation of culturally significant objects. However, expectations of how museums should serve as resources for the public has evolved significantly over time. Museums have long been considered public serving institutions, but the emphasis on public engagement and the social role of museums did not gain momentum until the 1960s and 70s. This occurred with the rise of the “new museology” movement, one that “emphasized the democratization of museums, in principle and practice, and challenged them to be more socially relevant, responsible, and engaged” (Kreps 2020, 12). The social, political, and civil rights movements of the 1960s are believed to have influenced the rise of the new museology movement (ibid.). Writing in 1992, Ivan Karp identified museums and other civil institutions as “social apparatuses responsible for providing the arenas and contexts in which people define, debate, and contest their identities, and produce and reproduce their living circumstances, their beliefs and values, and ultimately their social order” (4).
In addition to the new museology movement, there were other significant developments in the museum field occurring at the end of the 20th century. The passing of NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection & Repatriation Act) in 1990 signified a meaningful turning point in the relationship between museums and source communities. Additionally, conversations surrounding the decolonization of museums, which had represented progressive museology since the 1980s, gained momentum in the following decade (Kreps 2020). This occurred alongside debates regarding the politics of cultural representation and the questioning of museum authority. Questions regarding representation in museums ask “how meanings come to be inscribed and by whom, and how some come to be regarded as ‘right’ or taken as a given” (MacDonald 2006, 3). In the United States, these questions are particularly relevant to the museum representation of Native American communities whose culture has historically been portrayed with an ignorance that Richard Hill (2000) calls “museum myopia,” a reductionist approach that leads to dangerous “cultural cliches” regarding contemporary Native communities (42).
Socially engaged museums now recognize the power that they hold via their ability to “select cultural products for official safe-keeping, for posterity and public display- a process which recognizes and affirms some identities, and omits to recognize and affirm others” (MacDonald 2006, 4). Museums, along with monuments and history books, have historically naturalized a particular “grand narrative of the nation,” one that tells the story of the United States from a white, male, eurocentric perspective (Crooke 2006). However, work can and has been done in an attempt to correct this. In the 21st century, “community history, exhibitions, and museums are advocated as a means to move away from the grand narratives of the history of the nation and the state and an opportunity to give voice and authorship to those who were formerly excluded” (ibid., 183).
Over time, History Colorado has adopted this methodology for bringing historically excluded perspectives and voices into their museums and handing over some level of museum authority. This can be seen in the Civil War Memorial statue exhibition, where basic information regarding the historical context of the monument is provided by History Colorado and all statements regarding the monument controversy itself are community sourced.
Section 3: Results
3.1. The Controversy
The Colorado Civil War Memorial has been determined to be oppressive and harmful to the Indigenous communities that descend from those who were victims of the Sand Creek Massacre. The Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the Northern Arapaho Tribe, and the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes continue to experience the effects of this historical trauma today. By listing the Sand Creek Massacre as a “Battle or Engagement,” the memorial stands as a symbol of the false narrative Colonel John Chivington created in 1864 regarding the atrocities he and Colorado troops committed at Sand Creek. This false narrative does not appropriately acknowledge the white supremacist frontier ideology that led to the Sand Creek Massacre or the historical trauma that persists in Native communities today.
Perspectives
Thomas Allen (Northern Arapaho/Sac and Fox/Euchee), Denver American Indian Commissioner, describes why the Civil War Memorial is controversial: “It paid homage to what went on at Sand Creek. Plain and simple. It romanticized it for one, and it was also hero-making of people who did atrocious things to Native Americans, to old men, women, and children… When they have a statue like that and call it ‘heritage,’ they also have to pay homage to the actual facts” (personal interview, August 9, 2023).
Max Bear (Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho), Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho, states, “The only thing that made it controversial for us, the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, is that when they put the plaque up and that monument, they put on there the Battle of Sand Creek and they gave it the year 1864. And Sand Creek wasn’t a battle… that’s disrespectful. That is undermining the actual histories of everything…. I know there’s a legion of people in this country that are ready to change our history, to put it in their own perspective, to make it feel better for, not me, but the people who actually committed these atrocities…. When I first saw the statue, they had on there…. the Battle of Sand Creek as one of the battles that Colorado was involved in during the Civil War. But it wasn’t a part of the Civil War. It was [part of] manifest destiny, doctrine of discovery – the atrocities that followed that. That’s what the Sand Creek Massacre was a part of. It wasn’t part of the Civil War. It was a part of the invasion of colonization… that’s the kind of thing that we try to correct, try to get people to understand.
There was no war here. There was no war. We didn’t go to Europe and declare war on Europeans. They came here, invaded this country, started at the east coast and started their way in… and manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery gave them the divine right to take this land. So, that’s what we protect against. We were protecting against invaders. We weren’t at war with anybody. We didn’t declare war on anybody. There were treaties that were signed and we only gave up because we were close to annihilation. Extinction. Not naturally… they threw everything they could at us… biological, chemical… and social warfare. All that is still taking place, too. So, those are the things that bother us when we see things like the Battle of Sand Creek” (personal interview, July 25, 2023).
The following statement was made to the Capitol Development Committee at a February 25, 2021, meeting discussing the placement of the Sand Creek Massacre Memorial.
Otto Braided Hair (Northern Cheyenne), Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Tribal Representative in February 2021, stated, “We’ve arranged to have a healing run commemoration event at the end of November every year and we conclude on the steps of the west lawn and have to see that soldier every time we go to the capitol. It’s not just only for our annual commemorations, we do other business there, and we have to see that soldier. I just don’t understand why that soldier continues to be glorified. I don’t understand when what they represent was so wrong… it was not right to attack women and children. I think that soldier may belong out east some place where they battled with other men and other cavalry, other military. They may have done great deeds out there. They strategized and did such military tactics, but that soldier, in my opinion, doesn’t belong there in Colorado, especially at the Capitol. Because it was so wrong what they’d done. Not only attacking the women and children, elders. But they butchered them up. And then they burned whatever was left down there, including the bodies… that’s what the soldiers did. What the soldier represents for us… that’s not something to be proud of… that was wrong, and the statue represents that… Congressional hearings condemned what Chivington called a battle, it was condemned and called a massacre… for many people that soldier represents manifest destiny and greed” (Capitol Development Committee 2021).
3.2. Exhibition in the History Colorado Center
3.2.a. Interpretive Strategy
According to Chief Creative Officer, Jason Hanson, the History Colorado Center Exhibition Development team created a three-part interpretive strategy for the monument’s display.
| Historical background of the events the monument was designed to commemorate, which included the actions of Coloradans fighting with the Union forces during the Civil War and the removal of tribes from their homeland. | |
| Background on the monument’s origin and what led to its establishment in 1909. | |
| Addressing the meaning of the monument today. |
The contemporary perspectives featured in part three include quotes from Gail Ridgely (Tribal Historian and Sand Creek Massacre Descendant, Northern Arapaho Tribe), Derek R. Everett (Colorado Historian and State Capitol Scholar), Tim Drago (Founder of the Colorado Veterans Monument), Flint Whitlock (member of Board of Directors of the Broomfield Veterans Museum), Fred Mosqueda (Southern Arapaho Coordinator, Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribe), and Adri Norris (Artist).
The collection of these perspectives, particularly in the short timeline of the exhibition’s creation, was facilitated by pre-existing relationships between History Colorado and community partners. Notably, the History Colorado team had been working closely with Gail Ridgely and Fred Mosqueda for years leading up to the opening of the History Colorado Center’s Sand Creek Massacre exhibit.
To answer the question of what the monument means today via community-sourced perspectives was a critical element of the statue’s exhibition. It was an important way to improve on the recontextualization that occurred via installation of a plaque at the base of the monument in 2002, which contained text attempting to explain the contemporary meaning of the monument that was written without consulting tribal representatives. This effort did not engage with community perspectives, and was ultimately insufficient in some way, considering the events that followed.
The approach of including community perspectives to explore a monument’s meaning today can extend to other controversial monuments. Jason Hanson shares,
With the third phase [of the interpretive strategy], that’s where the role of the museum today is not to be the omniscient voice anymore. We realized it really needed to get into ‘What does this monument mean?,’ but that wasn’t ours to say. Monuments change their meaning over time. When they are installed, they are good faith efforts by one generation to capture what they think is important for future generations to know about and to transmit that. But our understanding of what’s important changes over time, our feelings about some of the values of previous generations change over time, and so the meaning of these monuments changes over time. In order to represent that, we knew we couldn’t just have our team write a panel that explains the meaning of the monument. So we reached out to different stakeholders and asked them what it means to them. And thought of as many different stakeholders as we could – Tribal Representatives that we’ve worked with in the past, artists, historians, veterans, you see all of them represented (personal interview, August 15, 2023).
Phase three of the interpretive strategy, seen on the “reader rail,” is only part of the dialogue that is prompted by this monument’s exhibition. Via a “talk back wall” within a few feet of the statue, visitors are invited to join the conversation.
3.2.b. Visitor Engagement
Directly across from the exhibit, visitors participate in the conversation via sticky notes. The prompt asks: “Do we need monuments? What do you think their purpose should be?”
One can observe what appears to be children’s handwriting, writing in different languages, and doodles covering the notes of the “talk back wall.”
The high level of visitor engagement with this participatory exhibition element has resulted in a “robust conversation” in which visitors “express quite complex thoughts about monuments” (Jason Hanson, personal interview, August 15, 2023). Arrows drawn between post-it notes indicate “chains of conversations” where visitors engage with each other on the anonymous talk back wall (ibid.). Some notes contain thoughts that are so expressive they barely fit on the paper. The goal of this participatory element, echoed by members of the Exhibition Development team, was to incite conversation.
Shannon Voirol, former Director of Exhibitions at History Colorado, shares that this was a moment when the exhibit team thought, “let’s let our public talk it out to each other. We’re always trying to pull back the museum’s authoritarian centralized voice and let our visitors do the talking and have the dialogue amongst themselves” (personal interview, July 26, 2023).
Sam Bock, former Exhibition Developer at History Colorado, notes that “conversation was really the goal of bringing the monument [to the History Colorado Center]. And that conversation happens on sticky notes in the museum…we wanted to show the range of thinking on this monument, its role, and what should be done with it” (personal interview, August 8, 2023).
Jason Hanson shares that the talk back wall “is accomplishing what we wanted to accomplish with it, which is creating that space where people can think about it not in a confrontational way, but in a way that they can understand other people’s views on it and be thoughtful about how they respond to those” (personal interview, August 15, 2023).
3.2.c. Why Put a Monument in a Museum?
History Colorado’s work with the Civil War Memorial’s statue creates an opportunity to explore the potential value of placing a monument in a museum. Members of the Exhibits Development team who worked on this project share their thoughts on the value of the controversial Union Soldier statue’s exhibition in History Colorado. Generally, it is believed that placing a monument in the museum space allows for critical inquiry, civil dialogue, and consideration of the monument’s greater historical context in a way that may not be achievable in other settings.
Jason Hanson notes that “a big piece of it is creating the space for civil and civic contemplation and conversation.” While this type of dialogue might be hard to engage with on the street or at the height of protest, “[the History Colorado Center] is the place for it” (personal interview, August 15, 2023).
Shannon Voirol shares that “Statues can be revered or ignored when they’re in situ. I think for a lot of people, their meaning is up for question and up for critical inquiry once they’re in a museum, so it has a very different meaning… I think people consider [monuments] much more when they’re here, like they do any artifact we bring in” (personal interview, July 26, 2023).
Sam Bock states that “Something that has been, for about 100 years, part of the urban landscape… sort of fades into the background of all the other statues at the Capitol… but at an exhibit in a museum, you’re asked to engage with something in a more direct way… and it really causes the visitor to interrogate something and to think about it in a different context or bigger historical context than when it’s just outside… The contemporary political questions sort of came with the monument when it came through the doors, and we couldn’t ignore that, that had to be the feature. I think a lot of the time in history organizations and history museums, [the visitor] is encouraged to, sort of, take at face value the gravity and significance of whatever [they’re] looking at… this one met this moment in time where people were questioning” (personal interview, August 8, 2023).
When preparing to exhibit a controversial item such as the statue from the Civil War Memorial, the History Colorado team had some concerns regarding protestors or other forms of push back from the community. However, these concerns did not materialize. Hanson attributes this to the transparency that History Colorado operated with throughout the exhibition process. Transparency as simple as “Hey, we’re going to put this on display. We understand that you may have some strong feelings about this. We’re inviting you into the process.” This invitation connects to History Colorado’s dedication to co-authorship, a practice in which historical narratives shared by museums are authored in collaboration with the people or communities whose story it is to tell.
Exhibiting a monument in a museum also creates an opportunity to present the object such that visitors can relate to it spatially in a way that is not often possible. In History Colorado, the Union Soldier statue is located at about ground level on the first floor. The soldier is no longer towering above the viewer. Its location in History Colorado’s atrium is very intentional, sitting at the base of a staircase that allows the statue to be viewed from above.
Jason Hanson shares that “We wanted people to be able to see it from different angles. Monuments, we’re always looking up at them. That’s intentional. It’s hardwired into human nature that when you’re looking up at something, it triggers a different response than when you’re looking down or eye level” (personal interview, August 15, 2023). By providing a view of the monument from above, visitors can begin to break down the awe-inspiring status that comes with a statue’s towering pedestal placement. Shannon Voirol expands on the statue’s placement, stating, “When you’re out in a big space and it’s on a pedestal and it’s above you, there’s so much to take in. He is humanized [in the exhibit space]. We wanted to get him pretty close to the floor so you could at least get a realistic sense of his size and really look at him” (personal interview, July 26, 2023). In reality, the soldier is only about 1.5 times the size of a human. At ground level, the soldier no longer appears immortal, but surprisingly ordinary.
3.3. Perspectives From Outside the Museum
Thomas Allen (Northern Arapaho/Sac and Fox/Euchee) shares his belief in the value of placing this type of monument in a national museum: “It’s a hot topic in this whole nation. And I think there should be a museum to commemorate all the statues that are taken down.” With Denver’s Civil War Memorial, “There’s a Civil War aspect to it, and that’s a convenient way to hide behind covert racism. That’s also another thread into white supremacy, white privilege.” He poses an alternative, “What about the [National Museum of the American Indian] funded by the Smithsonian? Perfect place, that’s new. That’s the idea of telling a new story” (personal interview, August 9, 2023).
Max Bear (Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho) states that before a monument is placed in a museum or elsewhere, the question is “What are they going to do with it? That’s what you need to answer first. What are their intentions with it? Are they going to tell a good story? Are they going to make up a story?” He continues, “Years ago, somebody thought we should be honoring our Civil War veterans. Today, we need to tell the story of why these things were put up, how they got put up, and why there were no objections to it. That’s the story that needs to be told… I would like to see these monuments in museums, but with the right story behind it. The right narrative. [The narrative of] what actually happened” (personal interview, July 25, 2023).
Derek Everett shares,“My personal preference, long term, would be to see it back with some sort of better thought out discussion of Colorado during the 1860s on the Capitol grounds. I am a big fan of having it where it is right now… and the fact that it’s not just locked up in some vaults and never seen again. The fact that it is still part of the conversation, part of the consciousness, with the wall of sticky notes where people can jot down their thoughts. You think about this conversation that is still unfolding. You walk in, you see the statue, and then you see comments from different people in the community – and then, you know, you write your own thoughts on the wall” (personal interview, July 19, 2023).
Elleni Sclavenitis, Executive Director of the Sand Creek Massacre Foundation, shares, “I think History Colorado is a good location. It should have been preserved as it was, with all the tags on it… there were tags on it that referred directly to Sand Creek. To me, that should have stayed on there. But History Colorado is not a bad place. Personally, I would love to see that preserved in a very public space. As it was, would be ideal…. but I think it should stay at History Colorado. I don’t think it should go to the [Colorado Department of Military and Veterans Affairs], because I think if it goes to [CDMVA], it goes back into the context of a war monument, honoring the Civil War Union soldiers and that perspective on Colorado history and Colorado Union soldiers, which is problematic. Also, that removes the context of it being toppled in 2020.” Ms. Sclavenitis adds that the presence of the separate Sand Creek Massacre exhibition at History Colorado makes the museum a good location for the monument at this time (personal interview, July 27, 2023).
Ms. Sclavenitis is referencing graffiti that covered the statue when it was toppled. Before it arrived at History Colorado, most of the graffiti was removed by an unknown entity. Per History Colorado’s policy, the museum was not involved in removing any graffiti from the statue. What was on the statue when it arrived at the museum has been preserved.
3.4. Looking Ahead
As mentioned, the statue’s next location has already been determined to be the Colorado Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. It remains to be seen when this move will occur, and what will be done with the statue in terms of recontextualization.
A Sand Creek Massacre Memorial was proposed for the Colorado Capitol building grounds to the Capitol Building Advisory Committee (CBAC) in August 2016. In November 2016, CBAC voted to approve the recommendation for the acceptance of the Sand Creek Memorial donation. Colorado Senate Joint Resolution 17-016, passed in 2017, approved the plan for the installation of the proposed sculpture and accompanying explanatory plaque on the state capitol grounds. This plan did not specify the placement of the memorial. Over time, at subsequent Capitol Building Advisory Committee meetings, the location of the new memorial has been discussed extensively. The original proposal was to place the Sand Creek Massacre Memorial in the northwestern area of the capitol grounds, just north of the Civil War Memorial on the west side of the capitol (One Earth Future Foundation 2016). There was concern from some individuals that placing the memorial in the northwest area would clutter the grounds or interfere with the ability of Capitol building employees to deposit snow in that location during the wintertime. As a result, there were suggestions that the memorial be installed in a less prominent location on another side of the building or across the street in Lincoln Veterans Memorial Park. David Halaas advocated for the tribes based on his long-standing relationship with representatives at a February 2017 CBAC meeting, stating, “the reason they had chosen the site right next to the monument is that there is a relationship between the Civil War Monument and the Sand Creek Memorial… so it’s important to the tribes that the memorial be located as close as it can to the Civil War monument with an unobstructed view” (CBAC 2017).
At another point prior to its toppling, Tribal Representatives had expressed desire for the Sand Creek Memorial to be installed in the location where the Civil War Memorial stood, replacing it on the Capitol’s west steps (Capitol Development Committee 2021). The Capitol Building Advisory Committee was not willing to remove the monument that had been in this prominent location since 1909. The statue was then toppled in June 2020. At a meeting of the Capitol Development Committee on February 25, 2021, Representative Susan Lontine, chair of CBAC, proposed that the Sand Creek Memorial be placed where the Civil War Memorial had previously stood. The extended debate regarding placement and the artwork of the memorial has resulted in little to no movement on the project. The memorial is still in process, without a clear timeline on when it may be completed or installed. The following are statements regarding the significance of successfully installing a Sand Creek Memorial on the Colorado State Capitol grounds.
Perspectives
Thomas Allen (Northern Arapaho/Sac and Fox/Euchee) shares that it would be “very impactful… a path to healing because it is recognition…starting these conversations and understanding we’re all human. [The Sand Creek Massacre] was, very, very, bad and atrocious, but acknowledging that is the first part of healing.” He also notes that a critical part of establishing the memorial is “the consensus of everybody who is involved. All the tribes, the people here, commissioners, state, all the people who have a stake in this” (personal interview, August 9, 2023).
Max Bear (Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho) shares that Coloradans should “acknowledge their history. Embrace it. This is their history as much as it is ours. Our homeland is Colorado… we were brought here to Oklahoma. We were captured. We were made to surrender. And they said, well, all of Oklahoma is going to be Indian land. So we’re going to take all the Indians in the United States and we’re going to put them in Oklahoma…What’s left of them, anyway, after we wipe them out. So, they brought us to Oklahoma – that’s our territory, our homeland was Colorado… It should be important to embrace their history… Colorado’s growing rapidly and there’s a lot of people that don’t know [the state’s history]” (personal interview, July 25, 2023).
The following are statements made to the Capitol Development Committee at a February 25, 2021, meeting discussing the placement of the Sand Creek Massacre Memorial.
Ryan Ortiz (Northern Arapaho), Northern Arapaho Sand Creek Tribal Representative in February 2021, stated “The Sand Creek Massacre, for tribal people… is the start of what is now known as historical trauma for our people. Our people have lived through a lot over the course of these years and this, for the Cheyenne and Arapaho people, is the origin of that historical trauma…not very often in history do we have a chance to atone for our ancestors’ mistakes, and this is an opportunity that’s presented in front of us to do that and to foster the education and understanding and the healing” (Capitol Development Committee 2021).
Otto Braided Hair (Northern Cheyenne), Northern Cheyenne Sand Creek Tribal Representative in February 2021, stated “Through all this we’re looking for healing… we want to feel pride again. We want to see something respectful and something with dignity – that gives our people dignity… After [Governor Hickenlooper’s] apology, we didn’t ask for anything back, we didn’t ask for the city, we didn’t ask for the towns, we didn’t ask for anything. But we do want that spot out there on the west lawn for our memorial. And it should memorialize the nations and the history of Colorado. The Colorado territory, not just the state” (Capitol Development Committee 2021).
References
“About History Colorado.” n.d. History Colorado. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://www.historycolorado.org/about
Brady, Steve and Laird Cometsevah. 1998. “Re: Senate Joint Resolution 98-034: Concerning the removal of the words ‘Sand Creek’ from the Civil War Memorial located on the grounds of the Colorado State Capitol.” Letter to the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Colorado. July 25, 1998.
Capitol Building Advisory Committee. 2017. Audio Recording of Meeting. Colorado General Assembly. February 17, 2017. https://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00327/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20230816/50/567#info_
Capitol Building Advisory Committee. 2021. Audio Recording of Meeting. Colorado General Assembly. November 19, 2021. https://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00327/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20230822/50/12476#agenda_
Capitol Development Committee. 2021. Audio Recording of Meeting. Colorado General Assembly. February 25, 2021. https://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00327/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20230816/50/10719#agenda_
“Civil War Statue In Front of Colorado State Capitol Pulled Down.” 2020. CBS News. June 25, 2020. https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/civil-war-statue-knocked-down-colorado-state-capitol/
Clemmer-Smith, Richard, Alan Gilbert, David Fridtjof Halaas, Billy J. Stratton, George
- Tinker, and Nancy D. Wadsworth. 2014. “Report of the John Evans Study Committee University of Denver” Report. University of Denver.
Coel, Margaret. 1992. The Colorado State Capitol. The Colorado General Assembly: Denver.
Colorado Public Radio Staff. 2020. “Colorado Civil War Soldier Statue Torn Down at the Capitol.” Colorado Public Radio. June 25, 2020. https://www.cpr.org/2020/06/25/colorado-civil-war-soldier-statue-torn-down-at-the-capitol/
Crooke, Elizabeth. 2006. “Museums and Community.” In A Companion to Museum Studies, edited by Sharon MacDonald, 170-187. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Davidson, Sarah. 2021. “Monumental Change: Recontextualization and Inclusion Through the Lens of Denver’s Civil War Monument and the Sand Creek Massacre.” Master’s Thesis. University of Denver.
Doss, Erika. 2010. Memorial Mania: Public Feeling in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
—2014. “Public Art, Public Response: Negotiating Civic Shame in Duluth, Minnesota.” Indiana Magazine of History vol. 110, no. 1: 40-46.
Everett, Derek. 2005. The Colorado State Capitol. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.
Frank, John and Evan Ochsner. 2020. “Civil War monument at Colorado Capitol torn down and marred by graffiti. Gov. Jared Polis vows to repair “statue that commemorates the Union heroes of the Civil War who fought and lost their lives to end slavery.” The Colorado Sun. June 25, 2020. https://coloradosun.com/2020/06/25/civil-war-monument-colorado-capitol/
Franz, Scott. 2021. “Colorado Lawmakers Poised To Replace Capitol’s Civil War Monument With Sand Creek Massacre Memorial.” Community Radio for Northern Colorado. March 2, 2021. https://www.kunc.org/news/2021-03-02/colorado-lawmakers-poised-to-replace-capitols-civil-war-monument-with-sand-creek-massacre-memorial
Hanson, Jason. 2023. “Changing of the Guard: Colorado’s Toppled Civil War Monument And A New Conversation About How We Commemorate The Past.” The Colorado Magazine (spring/summer 2023): 18-26.
Hill, Richard W. 2000. “The Museum Indian: Still Frozen in Time and Mind.” Museum News vol. 79, no. 3.
Karp, Ivan, 1992. “Introduction.” In Museums and Communities, edited by Ivan Karp, Christine Mueller-Kreamer, and Steven Lavine, 1-17. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Kelman, Ari. 2013. A Misplaced Massacre : Struggling over the Memory of Sand Creek. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kreps, Christina. 2020. Museums and Anthropology in the Age of Engagement. New York: Routledge.
Lonetree, Amy. 2021. “Decolonizing Museums, Memorials, and Monuments.” The Public Historian vol. 43, no. 4: 21-27.
MacDonald, Sharon. 2006. “Introduction.” In A Companion to Museum Studies, edited by Sharon MacDonald, 1-16. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Ohaus, Madeline. 2023. Queer Is Here, Hopefully to Stay: The Incorporation and Reception of LGBTQ+ History at the History Colorado Center. Master’s thesis, University of Denver.
One Earth Future Foundation. 2016. “Application for a Permanent Gift of an Object of Art or a Memorial in the State Capitol or on the Ground of the State Capitol.” Proposal, submitted to the Capitol Building Advisory Committee, Colorad General Assembly, on August 19, 2016. http://coga.prod.acquia-sites.com/sites/default/files/html-attachments/j_cbac_2016a_20160819t150143z1__hearing_summary/Attachment%20B.pdf
Sand Creek Massacre Commemoration Commission (SCMCC). N.d. Transcription of Governor Hickenlooper’s speech at the Colorado State Capitol in remembrance of the 150th Commemoration of the Sand Creek Massacre. Accessed June 20, 2023.https://sandcreekmassacre150.wordpress.com/resources/information/.
“Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site – Places.” 2020. National Park Service. April 4, 2020. https://www.nps.gov/sand/learn/historyculture/places.htm
Sand Creek Massacre Syllabus, The. 2022. The History Colorado Center. Resource guide. https://www.historycolorado.org/story/2022/12/09/sand-creek-massacre-syllabus
Savage, Kirk. 1999. “The Past in the Present: The Life of Memorials,” Harvard Design Magazine vol. 9 (Fall 1999), no. 14.
Staeger, Steve. 2020. “The story behind the Christopher Columbus statue in Denver.” 9News. June 24, 2020. https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/denver-christopher-columbus-statue-history/73-6559623c-72eb-4d92-bf55-829990757b88
Tabachnik, Sam and Shelly Bradbury. 2020. “Civil War monument at Colorado Capitol that includes Sand Creek Massacre commemoration toppled overnight Incident comes as Denver embarks on a reevaluation of the city’s landmarks and public art.” Denver Post. June 25, 2020. https://www.denverpost.com/2020/06/25/colorado-civil-war-statute-monument-toppled/
Thompson, Erica. 2022. Smashing Statues. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
![The statue of Indro Montanelli in La stanza di Montanelli [Montanelli’s Room]. Photo Credit: Author.](https://worldheritageusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/indro-1024x678.jpg)
