Dave Fudally's Book Review
Here is Dave Fudally's book review of Mni Sota Makoce: The Land of the Dakota, a book co-authored by Bruce White and Gwen Westerman.
In this book review Fudally uses the term Camp Coldwater. It's a common term that is used to describe Coldwater Spring and the land surrounding it. Camp Coldwater is located in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
------------ Coldwater Spring ---------------------------------------------------------------------
By Dave Fudally, Historian
I would not buy this book and I will state my reasons. This book is written with agenda bias to present a story by choosing information that supports only their new creation story and new sacred spring story by leaving out facts known on Dakota Indian history and the Camp Coldwater historic site. These left out facts are from their same references listed. I have 26 years of study and personal knowledge on each of the subjects.
1. Author states on page 3 "In an account from around 1720, an unknown Frenchman recorded the Dakota belief that the first of their people came from the ground on the prairie between the mouth of the Minnesota River and the falls of the St Anthony." On page 61 author writes when he refers to dating from around 1720 French account recorded that the Dakota noted "they say that the first Sioux and the first woman came out of the ground which produced them in a prairie below the falls of the St. Anthony and that the earth was formed by the turtle, for which they give no beginning." Bruce White's written testimony in court says, "the first Sciou and the first woman of their tribe came out of the earth, which brought them forth on the prairie below St Anthony Falls."
NOTE: Quote does not say anything about the mouth of the Mn river in which author is trying to link this quote to as the creation place of the Dakota. What the author doesn't say, is this is partial quote from Bruce White affidavit for court made on November 27, 2006, as part of comments submitted during the National Park Service Bureau of Mines -Twin Cities Campus Draft EIS comment period. Which states, "1720 French manuscript account of the "Sioux or Nadouesis, "a reference to terms invented by the Ojibwe to describe the Dakota people, states that according to the belief of the people themselves "the first Sciou and the first woman of their tribe came out of the earth, which brought them forth on a prairie below St. Anthony Falls."
NOTE: Author has two different translations for date he gives for whatever was really written in French manuscript. Two say dating from around 1720, one says 1720 French manuscript. This is poor translation at best.
NOTE: Author says 3 versions of where location was, 1. "on the prairie between the mouth of the Minnesota River and the falls of the St Anthony." 2. "which produced them in a prairie below the falls of the St. Anthony." 3. "which brought them forth on a prairie below St. Anthony Falls," Poor innacurate translation again. Not one says creation at the mouth on the Mn river as the author links to his words pg 61, "the statement about the origin of Dakota people relates closely to later accounts of Dakota traditions about Bdote and may have been a part of a longer narrative heard by the French person who recorded the information. May have? What is the real translation?
NOTE: So this creation statement is based upon "terms invented by an Ojibway to describe the Dakota people," So story is said invented by Ojibway, translated into French, then translated into English. Author unknown.
NOTE: Ask yourself why author left out more information known in his own testimony given in court, hiding that it was "TERMS INVENTED BY OJIBWE" translated to French, which then had to be translated into English? Clearly this is NOT Dakota oral or written creation story and this original author is unknown! Implying it was Frenchman who received info right from Dakota people is wrong!
NOTE: author states on page 61, "on the one hand, some may be a mixture of beliefs from various native groups, such as the reference to the turtle. ... But as is the case in many non-Dakota sources, the author only wrote down what interested him, without regard for the meaning and context of the information for the Dakota people." The author himself doubts the accuracy of the French manuscript, and says it may be a mixture from various native groups. I will take his word at this and judge this multiple location, and multiple time period story by one or more different native sources, written by an unknown Frenchman, but "may have been a part of a longer narrative heard by the French person who recorded the information," to be of NO VALUE! I await an honest unbiased translation of the French manuscript and the source it came from. To this historian it has NO value.
2. Author states on page 4, "H. Keating, a geologist, who came to the Minnesota area on an exploratory expedition in 1823, observed, "The Dahcotas have no tradition of having ever emigrated, from any other place, to the spot upon which they now reside; they believe that they were created by the Supreme Being on the lands which that at present occupy.
NOTE: This reference has no business being in a book where credibility of the study of Dakota history is taken seriously. To find this as a credible historic statement one would have to ignore all the French religious clergy, and French explorers who found the Dakota village sites at first contact in mid 1600's at about the lakes around Lake Mille Lacs and just east and west of Lake Mille Lacs. One would have to ignore "Modern" archeology findings that show the oldest Dakota site origination again in the lake Mille Lacs area and NOT at the mouth of the Mn River area. One would have to ignore the documentation of the French finding the first Dakota village that Dakota migrated to at the mouth of the MN River in 1689. As a serious historian of Dakota study...I find this authors statement of zero value and misleading of known facts.
3. A Dakota creation site story is presented in this book on page 4. The author states, "A writer in the early 1850s, probably one of the white missionaries among the Dakota, reported 'One great natural fact which perhaps ought to be recognized and recorded at the start, is this,viz: That the mouth of the Minnesota river, lies immediately over the center of earth and under the center of the heavens.'" The writer of that statement may have been the missionary Stephen R. Riggs." NOTE: It is 100 % clear, it is the EXACT quote from "Gatherings from Traditional history of the Mdewakantonwan Dakotas," Dakota Friend article, May 1851, by Gideon Pond . On the same page of this Gideon Pond "Dakota Friend" May 1851 article, 2 paragraphs down from the quote author used in their book, Gideon Pond states, "it asserts that they sprang into existence about the lakes at the head of the Rum River." Thus the author of this book quotes only the first part of Pond's statement, making it appear as if the (unknown) author of their statement was saying, that the Dakota creation was at the mouth of the Minnesota River! When in fact Gideon Pond finishes his thoughts, makes it clear that the Dakota creation story is as he stated, "it asserts that they sprang into existence at the head of the Rum River." The author does have the (UNKNOWN) Gideon Pond Dakota Friend May 1851 article as they use it as a reference #2, listing this reference on page 235.
NOTE: Ask yourself, when the source is KNOWN by the author why did they say it may have been Stephen Riggs? Why did author leave out the "sprang into existence about the lakes at the head of the Rum River" a real Dakota creation quote?
NOTE: I also sent Bruce White email referring to this same Dakota Friend article where I wrote, "I told Brown and Mendota boys Dakota friend writing of Ponds, Miss R. and Mn R. over the center of their earth/heaven story and..... head of Rum river Dakota creation site. Too bad they forgot to use that last part." Ref email to 4:42PM 4/15/11 to his email firstname.lastname@example.org. So author had this reference to (Unknown) author, and did the same as what I stated in the email to White that the Mendota boys did. TOO BAD THEY FORGOT TO USE THE SECOND PART!
This REAL Dakota creation quote does not fit with the author's new creation at the mouth of Mn. River theme in this book. So the author short quotes and leaves out the real meaning of references he uses.
4. In this book on page 4, author quotes Missionary Stephen Riggs ref# 2 Dakota Grammar pg 164 Ref listed on page 235 stating, The writer of that statement may have been the missionary Stephen Riggs, who later stated, "The Mdewakantonwan think that the mouth of the Minnesota River is precisely over the center of earth and that they occupy the gate that opens into the western world,"
NOTE: WHY does this book author leave out the rest of Riggs following sentences? "These considerations serve to give them importance in their own estimation. On the other hand, the Sisitonwan and Ihanktonwan allege, that they live on the great water-shed of this great part of the continent, from which the stream runs northward and eastward and southward and westward, THEY must be about the center of the earth; and they urge this fact as entitling them to the precedence. It is singular that the Titonwan, who are the largest band of the Dakotas, do not appear to claim the chief place for themselves, but yield to the pretensions of the Ihanktonwan,..."
NOTE: What this whole thought process of Riggs shows, is he was clearly talking about the domain area of the Dakotas, and not any creation sites story.
The rest of Riggs original quote do not support the author's new Dakota creation story, at the mouth of the Minnesota River, as the author repeats often in their book. So it was simply LEFT OUT. Riggs was not talking about a Dakota creation site as authors would have you believe when they short quoted Missionary Stephen Riggs in their own book.
5. In this book on page 4 author uses reference V. This reference is listed on page 235. Under this listing author states, "The same belief about the mouth of the Minnesota river was mentioned in Neil, History of Minnesota,1."
NOTE: On page 50, History of Minnesota Neil 1882, Book states, "Between the land of Lake Superior and the Mississippi river, above the falls of Saint Anthony, is a country of many lakes.....When the Dakotahs were first noticed by the Europeans adventurer, large numbers were occupying this region of the country, and appropriately called by the voyageur, People of the Lakes,1. And this tradition, asserts that here was the ancient centre of this tribe."
NOTE: So the author's claim about "the same belief about the mouth of the Minnesota river" is FALSE. Ask yourself how does the ancient centre land above the Falls of St Anthony and above statement translate into something about the creation at mouth of the Minnesota River? It does not!
6. The author states in this book on page 19, "BDOTE The place of first creation is at the confluence of the Minnesota and the Mississippi Rivers, where the Dakota people came from the stars to be on the earth. Two bluffs were formed from the earth, one called Caske Tanka and the other Caske Cistinna. The earth opened herself in that way, and from the mud the creator made the first Dakota man and woman. Because Dakota were made from the earth, she is called Ina, mother."
NOTE: Author has NO source for this statement. No value.
7. Author states on page 19, "In 1720 a French account recorded that the Dakota "say the first Sciou and the first woman of their tribe came out of the earth, which brought them forth on the prairie below St Anthony Falls." "This statement is perhaps the first written record of the importance to the Dakota of the area around Bdote."
NOTE: Quote does not say ANYTHING about the mouth of the Mn river (Bdote) in which author is trying to link to one of his three creation of Dakota, location translations. "Perhaps" ...has no value!
NOTE: See point number 1 above.
NOTE: LeSueur in 1700 had one name for the Dakota who arrived at their new village site in 1689 near the mouth of the Mn river, this was the Mantantons (Village of the great lake which empties into a small one.) This name fits the location of Long Meadow lake 3 miles up the mouth of the Mn River. LeSueur had another name for the Dakota still living at the south end of Mille lacs lake, the Mendeoucantons, village of Spirit lake. Due to severe Dakota wars against Eastern native tribes below the St Croix river on the Mississippi river late 1680's, French trade with Dakota was taking place with Mantantantons and above the St Anthony falls area with Mdewakantons. This site above the falls where the Mdewakantons traded with the French became known as Wa-kpa-a-ton-we-dan, Those-who-dwell-on-the-creek., because they had their village on Rice Creek. Ref: History of Minnesota 1873 edition by Rev Neil.
If this unknown Frenchman in this untranslated French manuscript, had direct contact with the Dakota, why would there not be a Dakota contact band name with said French document of one of the three I named above? These would be the Dakota he would have contact with. LeSueur and Perrot as well as others documented who they dealt with. Historians from 1640 and up, including myself, document the Dakota migration from their villages about the lakes at the head of the Rum River, to exact village sites due to trade with other natives and with French, north east into Wisc and to Lake Pepin on the Mississippi river 1685, then due to war, FINALLY on the Mn and St Croix River in 1689. These Dakota in 1680 actually avoided the mouth of the Mn River (Bdote) in 1680 as the war party with Father Hennepin returned to their villages about Mille lacs lake. The author does not give the name of the village or the name of Dakotas from that supposed creation place. Again, I find this somewhere around 1720 untranslated French manuscript of no value until there is a source of French author and unbiased translation of said manuscript.
8. The author states further on page 19, More than 100 years later, missionary Stephen Riggs wrote, "The Medewakanton think that the mouth of the Minnesota river is precisely over the center of the earth, and that they occupy the gate that opens to the west. Ref #8 which is listed on page 235 Riggs Dakota Grammar.
NOTE: Once more ask yourself , WHY does this book author leave out the rest of Riggs following sentences? "These considerations serve to give them importance in their own estimation. On the other hand, the Sisitonwan and Ihanktonwan allege, that they live on the great water-shed of this great part of the continent, from which the stream runs northward and eastward and southward and westward, THEY must be about the center of the earth; and they urge this fact as entitling them to the precedence. It is singular that the Titonwan, who are the largest band of the Dakotas, do not appear to claim the chief place for themselves, but yield to the pretensions of the Ihanktonwan,..."
Once again, what this whole thought process of Riggs shows, is he was clearly talking about the domain area of the Dakotas, and not any creation sites story. The rest of Riggs original quote do not support the author new Dakota creation story, at the mouth of the Minnesota River, as the author repeats often in their book. So it was simply LEFT OUT. Riggs was not talking about a Dakota creation site as authors would have you believe when they short quoted Missionary Stephen Riggs in their own book...
9. In this book on page 20, The author states "The area of the Bdote....It is according to Dakota oral traditions, a place of creation." The author references #V. Gideon Pond's "Dakota Friend" May 1851 article listed on page 248. The author also references Riggs Dakota Grammar pg 164. The author also references History of Minnesota Neil 1882.
NOTE: In fact NONE of the 3 articles the author references say the area of the Bdote is a place of Dakota creation!
NOTE: Ref Article 1. The Gideon Pond Dakota Friend May 1851 article states "it asserts that they sprang into existence about the lakes at the head of the Rum River."
NOTE: Ref Article 2 . See Point #3 above for Riggs Grammar p 164 quote.
NOTE: Ref Article 3. On page 50, History of Minnesota Neil 1882, Book states, "Between the land of Lake Superior and the Mississippi river, above the falls of Saint Anthony, is a country of many lakes.....When the Dakotahs were first noticed by the Europeans adventurer, large numbers were occupying this region of the country, and appropriately called by the voyageur, People of the Lakes,1. And this tradition, asserts that here was the ancient centre of this tribe."
NOTE: Thus the author does not support their claim with these references given, but gives 3 references that DISPUTE their claim of creation at the mouth of the Minnesota River.
NOTE: Ask yourself, why did the author change the Dakota creation story to the meeting of the Mississippi river and Minnesota/St Peter river from about the lakes at the head of the Rum River? Why were there only cherry picked sentences only to support their new story?
10. The author states in their book, "The first place of creation is at the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers," However, this theme is disputed by the Dakota themselves.
NOTE: Black Tomahawk Mdewakanton Dakota Indian historian early 1800's, documents the Dakota taking the lands of the Iowa Indians in 3 battles along the St Peter River Near Peter Quinn's home (East Bloomington), Grey Iron's planting field (South of St. Peter R. (present Burnsville/Eagan border/Hwy 13 and Hwy 77) and at Pilot Knob hill (Mendota). Gideon Ponds states that Black Tomahawks said, "that in the earliest years of the existence of the Dakotas, they became acquainted with the Iowa Indians, and that they lived in a village at the place which is now called Oak Grove, seven or eight miles from Fort Snelling, on the north side of the Minnesota River. The numerous little mounds which are to be seen about Oak Grove, he says, are the works of the Iowa Indians. The Old man says, that in ancient times, when the Dakota had no arms but the bow and stone axes manufactured from the same materials, these little mounds which we now see at the placed above named, were the dwellings of the Iowas. They were the enemies of the Dakotas, who used occasionally to make a war path from Mille Lac, where they then resided, down to the Iowa village, and carry off with them their scalps, which made glad the hearts of their wives and daughters."
Black Tomahawk then goes on to tell of the 3 battles removing Iowa Indians from Bloomington, Eagan, and Mendota Pilot Knob hill, and numerous other sidebar stories. Ref: Mn Historical Collections, Iowa Indians and the Mounds by Gideon Pond.
The final battles to remove the Iowa may be about the year 1685, as Nicolas Perrot last trades with Iowa Indians above Lake Pepin 1684. Ref history of Hennepin County, Neil 1881.
NOTE: Conclusion....Hard to be the Dakota place of creation at the mouth of the MN. River that author claims, when the Dakota themselves document taking the land from the Iowa while the Dakota lived in the region about Mille lacs lake.
11. The author states on page 45, "On May 8th, 1689 he (Nicolas Perrot) led a ceremony there to take possession, in the name of Louis XIV, of the entire upper Mississippi region. The details of the claim include a kind of inventory of Dakota groups and suggestions about where they were located,. Perrot stated that the French had visited and thereby claimed. The country of the Nadouesioux on the banks of the rive St Croix, and the entry (History of Henn Cty 1881 Neil says "mouth") of the St. Peter, on the bank of which were the Mantantaun (History of Henn. Cty 1881 Neil uses Mantantans) and farther up in the lands (History of Henn. Cty 1881 Neil uses (and further up into the interior) to the northeast of the Mississippi as far as Menchokatoux [or possibly Menehokatoux, possibly from Mni coka tunwan, meaning" village in the center of the water," probably Mille Lacs] (History of Henn Cty 1881 Neil uses" [Med-ay-wah-kawn-tawn], where live the greatest part of the Songeskitons and other Nadouesioux who are to the northeast of the Mississippi.(History of Henn. Cty 1881, Neil uses, "with whom dwell the majority of the Songeskitons[Se-see-twans] and other Nadouessioux.
NOTE: This is the first documented Dakota village,"at the mouth of the river St. Pierre (MN River), on the bank of which were Mantantans" Ref: History of Henn. Cty. 1881 Neil,in 1689 by Nicolas Perrot. If this site was the Dakota creation site "mouth of the Minnesota River", why was this the first Dakota village documented at the mouth of the Minnesota river in the year 1689?
NOTE: Since the author states this Bdote is the place of Dakota creation, are they suggesting that all the Dakota already living about the lakes area at the head of the Rum river don't exist? Are they suggesting that all trade up to this time with Dakota at village sites at Mille Lacs and below trade post Ft St. Antoine at Lake Pepin was fictional? In order to fit their creation story at the mouth of the Minnesota river it has to be so!
12. Pipestone National Monument sign in S.W Mn. The Historical marker there states. "The Oneota Culture AD:900 to 1700:Trader and Village Dwellers. By about 1000 AD the Oneota culture had developed from the indigenous woodland Mississippian culture that influenced the lifestyle of the upper Missouri Valley. The Oneota left hundreds of sites across the Midwest......The Oneota way of life dominated this area until the late 1600's when in contact with advancing Europeon cultures and the accompanying diseases and trade wars, splintered the Oneota nation into smaller nations. These smaller groups eventually coalesced into numerous nations, including the Ioway, Ho-Chunk and the Otoe. 1600-Present Post European Contact By the time of the fur trade, the Ioway and the Otoe people were already in the region. They are thought to be the descendents of the Mississippian and Oneoto people. The Siouian � speaking Dakota people arrived during the late 1600's to the mid 1700's replacing the earlier cultures. While considered by many to be the first inhabitants of southwestern Minnesota their arrival is relatively recent and their occupation short compared the the previous inhabitants. The Dakota, the predominant Indian culture here today were originally from Northern Minnesota."
NOTE: Archeology and studies done for Pipestone National Monument Historic site give fact that Iowa Indians were still in Pipestone Mn area late 1600's. Ref: Photo of the historical marker story per Dave Fudally. Ref supplied upon request.
NOTE: This documentation lends credence to the Iowa Indians living in Mn and the removal of the Iowa Indians by the Dakota as also mentioned by Black Tomahawk in point # 8. Also the sign states the Dakota came from Northern Minnesota.
13. The author on page 54, when talking about LeSueur meeting Mantantan Dakota, writes, "it was not their custom to hunt in that region (Blue Earth river and St. Peter river) without being invited by those to whom it belonged to." The book author states same page 54, "it provides no evidence to disprove the idea that many Dakota were spending much of the year in the the region already."
NOTE: No evidence to disprove that many Dakota were spending much of the year in the region already? Well, not when author leaves out the facts from their own references they use, that it was still the Ayavois and Otactatas land! Why did the author leave out The Mantantan Dakota saying to LeSueur, "who told him the river belonged to the Scioux of the west, the Ayavois, and the Otactatas,"... "he must establish himself on the Mississippi, near the mouth of the St. Pierre, where the Ayavois, Otactatas, and the other Scioux could go as well."
NOTE: Also left out, "On the 22nd two Canadians were sent out to invite the Ayavois and Otoctatas to come and make a village near the fort because these Indians are laborious and accustomed to cultivate the ground, and he hoped to obtain provisions from them and make them work the mines."
NOTE: Also left out the letter LeSueur received on his travels to the Minnesota and Blue Earth river which states, "July 10th 1700...I have the honour to write to you to inform you that the Sagiestas have been defeated by the Scioux and the Ayavois."
NOTE: Also left out is the comment "On the 16th, the Scioux returned to their village and reported that the Ayavois and Octatas were gone to establish themselves towards the Missouri River near the Maha, who dwell in that region."
NOTE: So this author leaves out all these facts about the Ayavois and Octatatas that LeSueur was expecting to find about the Blue Earth River and the Minnesota river. As we see, On page 55 author states, "LeSueur's accounts suggest these various groups of Dakota had been in the Minnesota River region for a long time." On page 56 the author once again talking of LeSueur states, "This account suggests the Dakota were not recent arrivals in the region."
The agenda of this author is quite clear to this historian, that in order to lay claim to the mouth of the Minnesota river to be the new Dakota creation site, facts of the Ayavois and Octatas living in the area up to 1700 must be eliminated. Author attempts to ingrain the thought Dakota were in this stretch of the Minnesota river a longer time than reality documented by LeSueur. Ask yourself, why did author just leave out those facts that state during the year 1700, the Ayavois and Octatas were in control of the Minnesota River per Mantanton Dakota, and LeSueur was expecting to find them there? Ref: Memoires de Mr. Le Sueur and History of Hennepin County 1881 Rev Neil.
14. Author states on page 25, Mille Lacs, After the flood, some of the people lived under the water at Bde Tanka of Bde Wakan. One day a young boy and his sister were walking together. The boy looked up and saw mniyomni to, a blue whirlpool, above them and reached up for it. The whirlpool pulled him up to the surface and threw him out onto the shore. A beautiful place of trees and hills. His sister followed the bubbles of the mniyomni, reached up, and was also thrown ashore. She followed her brother's footprints, eating roots and berries along the way, and picked up a small stone to suck in order to quench her thirst. Amazed at the beauty of the place, she was distracted and swallowed the stone. It traveled through her body and was born a child called Inyan Hoksida, Stone Boy. This is how the people walked out of the lake and became people who walk on the land again.
NOTE: No reference given, yet it is a Dakota creation story at Mille Lacs lake. It supports the creation story of Gideon Pond "Dakota Friend" May 1851 article that says "it asserts that they sprang into existence about the lakes at the head of the Rum River." It does not support new Dakota creation story "at the mouth of the St Peter river," stated by the author in this book.
15. The author states on page 29, "One of the earliest written accounts of the migration of Dakota people away from Mille Lacs area was recorded in Dakota language by Wambdi Okiya in 1837. Writing to the missionary Thomas Williamson, Wambdi Okiya said, "FROM THE BEGINNING when the Dakota grew, the present Chippewa country belonged to the Dakota they say.... My fathers told it thus. What is called Knife Lake was the Mdewakantons planting ground, they say; and Wazina Ha Wakpa [Pine Bark River], used to be the land of the Wahpehtons, they say. They planted there, they say.... But for some unknown reason, they came here and remained, because there was much buffalo on the open prairie, and the Chippewas came and took up their home there, it is said. Because all the wise men are now dead, nobody mentions these things, and so it is.
NOTE: This 1837 article does NOT SAY "from the beginning" the Dakota migrated from the mouth of the Minnesota River. Again the author gives documented story FROM THE BEGINNING of migration from Mille Lacs lake "This supports again Gideon Pond "Dakota Friend" May 1851 article "it asserts they sprang into existence about the lakes at the head of the Rum River."
16. The authors mention the first contact of whites (French) with the Dakota. Those sources given, tell of the Dakota first contact villages with whites west of Lake Superior around Mille Lacs and north, west, and east of Mille Lacs lake. Not one mentions villages at the meeting of the Mississippi River and Mn River. By 1680 with Father Hennepin and DuLuth going up and down the Mississippi River River, not once was there any mention of villages or sacred sites in the "Bdote area or mention of the mouth of the Minnesota River being sacred creation area.
17. The registered Dakota tribe member Leonard Wabasha placed a historical marker at the head of the Rum River stating this site as the Dakota creation site. The marker placed there states, "Kathio a place of choice. Homeland of the Dakota. My people are the Mdewakanton Dakota Oyate. Mdewakanton means the people of Spirit Lake. Today that lake is known as Mille Lacs. This landscape is sacred to the Mdewakanton Oyate because one Otkaheya Woyakapi (creation story) says we were created here. It is especially pleasing for me to come here and walk these trails, because about 1718 the first chief Wapahasha was born here, at the headwaters of Spirit River. I am the eighth in the line of hereditary chiefs. Leonard E. Wabasha (Hepan) Lower Sioux (Dakota) Indian Community.
NOTE: Direct family Dakota oral tradition and documentation states this is the Dakota place of creation.
18. Bruce White in the book talks about Camp Coldwater as a sacred Dakota site. What Bruce White does not tell you is, the sacred Dakota tree and spring story was actually made up by two white environmentalist activists who wanted to stop Hwy 55 from going through Minnehaha Park land, and a neighborhood north one-half mile away from Camp Coldwater. The two white environmentalist activists chose Mendota group of Dakota natives because they needed help to protest the hwy 55 construction going through Minnehaha Park in Mpls. Dakota Mendota leader Bob Brown confirms how these environmentalists were searching for some natives to help them in their protest against hwy 55. Bob Brown tells of the meeting with one of the protesters named Bob Greenberg at Bob Brown's home 1998. Bob Greenberg, called Clyde Bellecourt, who gave them Chris Leith's name to call. Chris Leith gave to Bob Greenberg, Bob Browns name to call. Bob Greenberg then called Bob Brown, who stated they (Mendota native group) needed land for a casino and a few days later, one of the two white environmentalists activists, (Mary Jo Iverson) took Bob Brown to trees, spring, and the river area, where Bob Brown and relatives learned of the stories by Mary Jo. In the book OUR WAY OR THE HIGHWAY by Mary Losure, Mary Losure interview with Bob Greenberg, Bob Brown, Linda Brown, and Carol Kratz among others confirms the above statements. Ref: "OUR WAY OR THE HIGHWAY."
NOTE: Bruce White also uses this same Ref. source book as reference, but cleverly leaves out the above documented story from his book.
19. Carol Kratz in a documented radio interview on Jan 12, 1999 at 12:30PM on KVSC radio (88.1 in Minneapolis), documents that Dakota Mendota people never heard of, never been to, never saw Camp Coldwater until Mary Jo Iverson (opposed hwy 55 activist) and Carol Kratz (home in the way of hwy 55) took them there the very first time in 1998. This was the birth of sacred tree and sacred spring stories event. Per Carol, "it was Bob Greenberg that approached the Dakota Mdewakanton, and that was only a couple of weeks before August 10th when they stopped the houses from being torn down. So that's how they, they didn't even know about their Native lands here in this area, so Bob explained it all to them, and they came out to my house and I called Mary Jo Iverson, who is another very active person in trying to stop this highway. So the Dakota Mdewakantons came to my house, Mary Jo came over and we took them on a long tour down by the Camp Coldwater Creek and the spring and the whole area, and they were shocked. They were just shocked, and it seemed kind of strange to us too, that they hadn't known about it, but they didn't know. So that's when, on August 10th... I can't remember if they came that day or the following day and put up a tipi in my front yard, and they've been there ever since, also learning about all their Native culture and all the sacred sites. So they've been in a learning process themselves, we all have. So that's how they got involved."
NOTE: This radio interview confirms the Mary Losure book story of Mary Jo taking Bob Brown and relatives to Camp Coldwater, to the trees, the spring and the river area in above point #16. Native sacred stories told by the two white activists who were trying to find a way to stop construction of Hwy 55.
20. Bruce White in this book on page 213, uses Gary Cavender as source for sacred Camp Coldwater site claim. Gary never heard of, never saw, never been to Camp Coldwater until I lectured of my Camp Coldwater village discovery and preservation efforts at Dakota Society meeting, starting fall of 1991. I was a founding member of the Dakota Society whose mission was to preserve Dakota Indian and Native heritage. I had called Gary Cavender and Jim Jones in 1997 in regards to two native artifacts I located on STATE park land, NOT the BOM fed land. Gary never became personally/tribally involved with CCW/BOM land until Jim Jones, Tribal Council Rep, notified SHPO MNHS office, on Jan 23, 1998 via letter, that Gary Cavender and Mr. Ross of Shakopee band, wished to be notified of the status of a traditional culture property on or near the HWY 55 and hwy 62 project. Camp Coldwater springs, are partially contained in the Bureau of Mines property.
NOTE: Gary after that was NEVER interested in preservation of those two artifacts and their location.
NOTE: Gary Cavender never told anyone about ANY story about CCW before this 1998 SHPO document was filed. I had called and notified Gary Cavender about the activists telling Bob Brown and Jim Anderson the fake sacred stories in the fall of 1998. I also went to his home in the fall of 1998 to pick up books I had borrowed him, and we discussed it again outside his home. I was more than shocked to see a few years later, that Gary Cavender spoke of Camp Coldwater as a sacred place when he never knew anything about the site other than what I had told him years earlier. I confronted Gary about this before his death. I documented it.
21. Bruce White in his book on page 92, says when talking about the boundaries of Morgan's Mound (Mary Eastman author of sacred description of the hill calls it Morgan's Bluff and the Indians called it God's house), That the boundaries of this hill and the boundaries of the sacred site are matters of discussion......it is clear the "dwelling place of the god's" included nearby (Coldwater spring). Repeatedly in his book White calls Camp Coldwater spring a sacred native site.
NOTE: White's claim "it is clear" "included nearby Coldwater spring," is pure nonsense and fabrication. Mary Eastman in 1849 describes white children burials on the hill called Morgans Bluff. This hill is clearly marked on a number of maps which Bruce White has in his possession.. The cemetery is also marked on plat maps on this hill. The cemetery was removed when the land was open for housing. Ref Lt Thompson 1839 map of Ft Snelling military reservation and vicinity on Page 145 of White's own book! 1873 plat map showing cemetery on hill area of Morgans mound, and ANY topographical map you choose. The 1839 Thompson map and 1873 plat map are in the Braun Intertec report of the Bureau of Mines Oct 10, 1996 report that Bruce White did a report on, called "Why the map matters!"
NOTE: Mary Eastman writes in 1849 on page 2, "In sight of Ft. Snelling is a beautiful hill called Morgan's Bluff; the Indians called it God's House." They have a tradition that it is the residence of their god of waters, whom they call Unk-ta-he. Nothing can be more lovely than the situation and appearance of this hill; it commands on every side a magnificent view, and during the summer it is carpeted with long grass and prairie flowers. But to those who have lived the past few years at Fort Snelling, this hill presents another source of interest. On top are buried three young children, who were models of health and beauty until the scarlet fever found it's way into regions hitherto shielded from it's approach." Ref "Dahcotah or The Life and legends of the Sioux" By May Eastman.
There is nothing stated sacred at Camp Coldwater or below the hill known as God's House as fabricated by Bruce White in his book on page 92.
NOTE: Mary Eastman writes in 1849 on page 156 about Morgan's Bluff , Unktahe, the god of waters, is much reverenced by the Dahcotahs, Morgan's bluff, near Fort Snelling, is called God's House, by the Dahcotahs; they say it is the residence of Unktahe, and under the hill is a subterranean passage, through which they say the water-god passes when he enters the St Peter's. He is said to be as large as a house." This clearly eliminates Camp Coldwater springs as being related to God's House subterranean passage as Camp Coldwater springs flow into the Mississippi River and NOT INTO THE ST PETER RIVER as Mary Eastmans states water god enters.
NOTE: Morgan's Mound is over a one-half mile away (3000 ft), S.W. from Camp Coldwater. The boundaries are quite clear. Borders on South by 59th street, West 42nd Ave, North by hwy 62, East on 46th ave. It is clear by the maps and all topographical maps the boundaries do NOT include any of the Veterans Hospital as White mentions on page 220 in his book. The Veterans Hospital land is N.W. Of Camp Coldwater springs.
NOTE: Thomas Shaw, one of Bruce White's co authors personally and professionally investigated the hill known as Morgans Mound (Morgan's Bluff, God's House, Wakan Tipi) for the ancient cemetery as mentioned by Mary Eastman in her book Dahcotah, or Life and legends of the Sioux". This was a work assignment for Mr. Shaw when Hwy 55 and Hwy 62 construction was going on. At a speech at the Gideon Pond interpretive site in Oct 2012, Thomas Shaw confirmed to me, the site of Morgan's Bluff as Borders on South by 59th street, West 42nd Ave S., North by hwy 62, East on 46th ave S.
Again this eliminates any of Bruce White's claims of Vets Hospital containing any part of Wakan Tipi in relation to Morgan's Mound.
NOTE: There are 2 subterranean spring/caves just one-half mile (Lincoln) and 1 mile (Bergen) east of the sacred hill (Morgans Bluff), and one-half mile east another open spring closer to the sacred hill. Why aren't any of those springs made the "sacred spring" with the subterranean passage from Wakan Tipi (God's House/Morgans mound, Morgan's bluff) by the authors? They are just as close and even match the story better that Mary Eastman tells. WHY?...because the land at those other springs were not Fed land going to possibly be available if the Feds no longer wanted the land. Land was needed for a casino. Those springs could not help the two activists (who created the sacred native stories) in stopping hwy 55 as they never knew of them!
In 1998, 29 acres of federal land surrounding the CCW spring might be available, IF, it was taken out of Federal ownership, and it WAS NOT. The land remained under fed ownership and is now Coldwater Unit National Park.
22. The TCP native status for CCW author White laments in his book, needs to have 50 years backwards of continuous Native use. It does NOT as the clock just started ticking in 1998 with false claims of sacred site by white environmentalist activists! Stating new oral traditions since 1998 and "what if" as if fact, does NOT meet the standards of this historian. Instead of presenting all the facts, the author presents half truths in an attempt to convince those who don't know their history, that the stories of other areas and other places, actually happened at CCW instead! This isn't reading history "between the lines" -it's not even to the level of conjecture. It's the appearance of not using facts, to reach a desired conclusion, to discredit the authors of the TCP status, who simply found that the sacred stories are less than 50 years old.
23. Bruce White in his book page 93 states Ruth Landis story where, The Dakota chief was named "Shakopee" and had a village in a area near the former Ford factory in St. Paul and near Minnehaha falls in Minneapolis, a place which may have been at or near Coldwater. But the story also says that the event took place at the town of Shakopee,.....
NOTE: White interjects his own thoughts adding Coldwater as if it was part of the story.....Make believe comments are not history nor facts. This story has no historical value whatsoever.
24. Author Bruce White throughout his book deliberately misnames Camp Coldwater as Mni Sni his own made up name. White knows the only name Dakota had for Camp Coldwater was "Where-The-Drifter-Was-Killed" or in Dakota, KA-HBO-KA-KTE. This real name was because of a Dakota Chief and son were both killed at Camp Coldwater in 1841 in an ambush by Ojibway warriors. Ref: Where the Waters Gather and the Rivers Meet." by Paul Durand, Ref Samuel Pond, Frederick W. Pearsall, and Bruce White himself "What's in a Name" Minnesotahistory.net
NOTE: Why would White not use the real name given by Dakota to Camp Coldwater?
This name does not fit with a sacred sounding site. In fact, in 1820, the year the military first lived at CCW, there was a murder committed by one Dakota chief named White Buzzard (White Bustard) upon another Dakota chief over whiskey given out by Col/ Leavenworth. Ref: Autobiography of Taliaferro Mn Historical Collections.
At CCW during 1838 two Dakota attacked and killed one Ottawa and wounded another who were with Ojibway Chief Hole in The day. When one of the Dakota was scalping the dead Ottawa the Ojibways attacked and mortally wounded one of the two Dakota, who fled. Ref . History of Minnesota By William Watts Folwell 1956 Vol 1, pg 151-152
Five killings at Camp Coldwater hardly qualify this site as a sacred place, or a place of safe passage or a neutral site as claimed by White, the Mendota group, and Eddie Benton on page 93. The claims of a place of safe passage, neutral site for all natives, began with a story of a spring in Arkansas that I told to Bob Brown at Camp Coldwater when standing above the CCW spring. The story was about a spring so remote that tribes agreed to make it a "safe place of passage." This story was transferred to CCW spring by Mendota group. I also said how we had skunky MPLS water in early 1960's, and we came to spring with a few jugs of water for my mom's coffee. Mendota group transferred this story to themselves saying how they stood in line for water in late 70's. Several more stories like this false....Including people calling me an archeologist and using my name illegally on court documents supporting Eddie Benton sacred CCW stories. These are hardly the actions of people who care about real history being told at Camp Coldwater.
25. Author on page 32 uses Scott Anfinson (archeologist) reference from 1984 to attempt to link Dakota to Indian Mounds along the Mississippi River and Minnesota river as if they were built by Dakota Indians. At a speech at Gideon Pond home interpretive center Oct 2012, Bruce White made the statement about mounds along the Minnesota river, that 'if Scott Anfinson says they MIGHT be Dakota....welllll...giggle giggle...Scott Anfinson never said this statement....In fact before the meeting in an email to me, Scott Anfinson wrote, "OCT 18 2012 Dave: It's hard to say when the Dakota began to occupy the Mendota area. They clearly recognize east central Minnesota as their ancient homeland and this appears to be centered around Lake Mille Lacs and Knife Lake. Sandy Lake pottery seems to be associated with the Dakota beginning about 1000 years ago and was a type of pottery they were using when Hennepin visited them at Lake Mille Lacs in 1680. The few Late Prehistoric ceramics we have from the Twin Cities appear to be Oneota types closer related to the Oto, but some of this type is also found at Lake Mille Lacs. There is no Sandy Lake pottery that has been found in the metro area. Dakota peoples clearly were moving west and south in proto-historic times. What they considered the southernmost part of their "homeland" in the Late Prehistoric is anyone's guess. There is clearly a relationship between mound concentrations and early historic Dakota villages, but these areas tended to be "good-living" areas (e.g., Lake Minnetonka, Red Wing, Mille Lacs ) that many groups have concentrated in for the last several thousand years. Scott Anfinson State Archaeologist
NOTE: This statement from Mr Anfinson makes it clear Bruce White misstated any thoughts of Scott Anfinson that Indian mounds along the Minnesota were of Dakota origin.
Conclusion: The author of this book, short quotes statements from reference sources he uses to create history that does not exist. The author has an agenda creating new sacred districts when no such thought or value were given by the Dakota of the past, that he claims to be telling the story about. The author tries to create a sacred site at Camp Coldwater that clearly is known to be of environmentalist activists creation, to stop Hwy 55 from going through Minnehaha park and through homes. There is ZERO documentation of anything sacred or sacred stories at Camp Coldwater before 1998. Claiming ceremonies that might have been at Camp Coldwater and objects that may be near camp Coldwater as used in sacred ceremonies is nothing but wishful what if thinking. No documentation, no proof whatsoever, NO VALUE! Furthermore, documentation does show that Mendota people got their sacred stories from the activists, and the Mendota people were looking for land for a casino.
There is some value to documented stories in the book, however so much of certain events in Dakota history are left out, ...for a reason, that it spoils the real Dakota history that is known to historians.
I could go on with more complaints about the book MNI Sota Makoce, The Land of The Dakota, but I think you get the general idea.
There is an old saying and I will clean up the last part of it...If you know facts but choose not to use them, in order to further your agenda, it is wrong! No one has the right to change history from what it was.
BEST simple sources for Dakota Migration from creation site (Mille Lacs Lake) to Mn River area, My favorite, "History of Hennepin County" 1881 Rev Neil. "History of Ojibway People" by William Warren. "Kinship of Another kind" by Gary Anderson. "The Dakota as they were in 1834" S. Pond. Anything by Samuel and Gideon Pond.