I’m going to admit something here:I love to read historical markers,and I generally keep one eye peeled for them because they can be so unexpectedly interesting or intriguing. I can’t seem to resist a bronze plaque. I was in Denver last week for a workshop and for the AIC annual meeting,and I spent some time exploring the area around the Colorado capitol building.
Part of the reason that historical markers fascinate me is that they provide a glimpse of what was thought by some group of influential persons at some point in time,as to be truth so important that it should be immortalized in fifty words or less and riveted to something immoveable. Thinking about the preservation of heritage as a starting point,there are some similarities in intent between this and archives that are readily apparent:obviously the sign shows information that was meant to be preserved,as well as shared with a wider public audience. The paths diverge here;the marker was created with the intent of display,and the preservation of the plaque itself is not necessarily the intent,while documents housed in an archive are generally judged to be of enduring value and were created as a byproduct of some activity.
However,here’s where things meet back up for me:is the plaque a transactional record of an activity? I think that it can be. For example,one of the plaques on the plaza in front of the capitol building reads as follows:
The controversy surrounding this Civil War monument has become a symbol of Coloradans’struggle to understand and take responsibility for our past. On November 29,1864,Colorado’s First and Third Cavalry,commanded by Colonel John Chivington,attacked Chief Black Kettle’s peaceful camp of Cheyenne and Arapahoe Indians on the banks of Sand Creek,about 180 miles southeast of here. In the surprise attack,soldiers killed more than 150 of the village’s 500 inhabitants. Most of the victims were elderly men,women,and children.
Though some civilians and military personnel immediately denounced the attack as a massacre,others claimed the village was a legitimate target. This Civil War monument,paid for by funds from the Pioneers’Association and the State,was erected on July 24,1909,to honor all Colorado soldiers who had fought in battles of the Civil War in Colorado and elsewhere. By designating Sand Creek a battle,the monument’s designers mischaracterized the actual events. Protests led by some Sand Creek descendants and others throughout the twentieth century have since led to the widespread recognition of the tragedy as the Sand Creek Massacre.
This plaque was authorized by Senate Joint Resolution 99-017
This marker was clearly added more recently,and reflects a shift in both understanding and public attitude,as well as considerable pressure and discussion by various groups. While I’m not sure I’d consider the marker to be something that I’d add to my collection,I do think that a discussion of the historical or informational value is a valid one,and I think that documents created as a product of the discussion and shift in sentiment would be interesting and of enduring value to persons seeking to understand how historical memory can change.