{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_49031/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_49031","id":"gutenberg_49031","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/49031","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: History - American","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Creek Indians","Creek language","Creek language -- Texts","Indians of North America -- Folklore","Indians of North America -- Southern States"],"text":"Owing to the absence of the Author on official duties in the Indian\nTerritory, the Map which should accompany this volume has not been\nprepared. It will therefore be issued with the second volume.\n\n\n\n\n  BRINTON'S LIBRARY OF\n  ABORIGINAL AMERICAN LITERATURE.\n  NUMBER IV.\n\n\n  A\n\n  MIGRATION LEGEND\n\n  OF THE\n\n  CREEK INDIANS,\n\n  WITH A LINGUISTIC, HISTORIC AND ETHNOGRAPHIC INTRODUCTION,\n\n  BY\n\n  ALBERT S. GATSCHET,\n  OF THE U. S. BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY, WASHINGTON, D. C.\n\n  VOLUME I.\n\n\n  \u039d\u1fb1\u03c6\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2' \u1f70\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd1\u03bd\n  \u1fb0\u03c1\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd.\n                    _Epicharmus._\n\n\n  PHILADELPHIA:\n  D. G. BRINTON.\n  1884.\n\n\n\n\nPREFATORY NOTE.\n\n\nIn the present work, Mr. Gatschet has carried out a much needed\ninvestigation. The tribes who inhabited the watershed of the north\nshore of the Mexican Gulf must always occupy a prominent place in the\nstudy of American Ethnology, as possibly connecting the races of North\nand South America, and those of the Valley of the Mississippi with\nthose of Anahuac and Mayapan.\n\nYears ago the general editor of this series stated, in various\npublications, the problems that region offers, and on finding the\nremarkable legend of Chekilli, translated it and published it, as\npointing to a solution of some of the questions involved. This legend\nhas, at his request, been taken by Mr. Gatschet as a centre around\nwhich to group the ethnography of that whole territory, as well as a\ncareful analysis of the legend and its language.\n\nThe first volume contains the general discussion of the subject, and\ncloses with the Creek version of the Legend and its translation. The\nsecond will contain the Hitchiti Version, the Notes, and Vocabulary.\n\nOne statement of the author, overlooked in the proof reading, seems of\nsufficient importance to be corrected here. The _Choctaw Grammar_ of\nthe late Rev. Cyrus Byington was published _complete_, and from his\n_last revision_ (1866-68), not as an extract from his first draft, as\nstated on page 117. The full particulars are given in the Introduction\nto the Grammar.\n\n                                                           THE EDITOR.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nThe present publication proposes to bring before the public, in\npopular form, some scientific results obtained while studying the\nlanguage and ethnology of the Creek tribe and its ethnic congeners.\nThe method of furthering ethnographic study by all the means which the\nstudy of language can afford, has been too little appreciated up to\nthe present time, but has been constantly kept in view in this\npublication. Language is not only the most general and important help\nto ethnology, but outside of race, it is also the most ancient of all;\nethnologists are well aware of this fact, but do not generally apply\nit to their studies, because they find it too tedious to acquire the\nlanguage of unlettered tribes by staying long enough among them.\n\nThe help afforded to linguistic studies by the books published in and\nupon the Indian languages is valuable only for a few among the great\nnumber of the dialects. The majority of them are laid down in\nphonetically defective missionary alphabets, about which we are\nprompted to repeat what the citizens of the young colony of Mexico\nwrote to the government of Spain, in Cortez's time: \"Send to us pious\nand Christian men, as preachers, bishops and missionaries, but do not\nsend us scholars, who, with their pettifogging distinctions and love\nof contention, create nothing but disorder and strife.\"[1] In the same\nmanner, some Creek scholars and churchmen agreed five times in\nsuccession, before 1853, upon standard alphabets to be followed in\ntranscribing Creek, but, as Judge G. W. Stidham justly remarks, _made\nit worse each time_. To arrive at trustworthy results, it is therefore\nnecessary to investigate the forms of speech as they are in use among\nthe Indians themselves.\n\n    [Footnote 1: Quotation, _ad sensum_, from Bernal Diaz' \"Historia\n    verdadera.\"]\n\nVery few statements of the Kasi'hta migration legend can be made\navailable for history. It is wholly legendary, in its first portion\neven mythical; it is of a comparatively remote age, exceedingly\ninstructive for ethnography and for the development of religious\nideas; it is full of that sort of _na\u00efvet\u00e9_ which we like so much to\nmeet in the mental productions of our aborigines, and affords striking\ninstances of the debasing and brutalizing influence of the\nunrestricted belief in the supernatural and miraculous. Of the\nsun-worship, which underlies the religions of all the tribes in the\nGulf territories, only slight intimations are contained in the\nKasi'hta legend, and the important problem, whether the Creeks ever\ncrossed the Mississippi river from west to east in their migrations,\nseems to be settled by it in the negative, although other legends may\nbe adduced as speaking in its favor.\n\nOwing to deficient information on several Maskoki dialects, I have not\ntouched the problem of their comparative age. From the few indications\non hand, I am inclined to think that Alibamu and Koass\u00e1ti possess more\nand Cha'hta less archaic forms than the other dialect-groups.\n\nFrom Rev. H. C. Buckner's Creek Grammar, with its numerous defects, I\nhave extracted but a few conjugational forms of the verb isita _to\ntake_, but have availed myself of some linguistic manuscripts of Mrs.\nA. E. W. Robertson, the industrious teacher and translator of many\nparts of the Bible into Creek.\n\nThe re-translation of the legend into Creek and Hitchiti is due to\nJudge G. W. Stidham, of Eufaula, Indian Territory, who in infancy\nwitnessed the emigration of his tribe, the Hitchiti, from the\nChatahuchi river into their present location. My heartfelt thanks are\nalso due to other Indians, who have materially helped me in my\nrepeated revisions of the subject matter embodied in these volumes,\nand in other investigations. They were the Creek delegates to the\nFederal government, Chiefs Chicote and Ispahidshi, Messrs. S. B.\nCallaghan, Grayson and Hodge.\n\nI also fully acknowledge the services tendered by the officers of the\nU. S. Bureau of Ethnology, as well as by Dr. Daniel G. Brinton and by\nGeneral Albert Pike, who placed the rich shelves of their libraries at\nmy disposition. In the kindest manner I was furnished with scientific\nstatements of various kinds by Messrs. W. R. Gerard, C. C. Royce and\nDr. W. C. Hoffmann.\n\n                                                           THE AUTHOR.\n  _Washington, August, 1884._\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n  _FIRST PART._\n\n                                                                  PAGE\n\n  THE SOUTHERN FAMILIES OF INDIANS                                   9\n\n  _I. Linguistic Groups of the Gulf States._\n\n      Timucua, 11. Calusa, 13. Tequesta, 15. Kataba, 15. Yuchi, 17.\n      Cheroki, 24. Arkansas, 29. Taensa, 30. Tangipahoa, 34. Naktche,\n      34. Tonica, 39. Adai, 41. Pani, 42. Shetimasha, 44. At\u00e1kapa, 45.\n      Bidai, 47. Koroa, 47. The Westo and Stono Indians, 48. The\n      Linguistic Map, 49.\n\n  _II. The Maskoki Family._\n\n      The Common Maskoki Language, 53. The Name Maskoki, 58. Tribal\n      Divisions; the Yamassi, 62. Yamacraw, 65. Seminole, 66.\n      Apalachi, 74. Mikasuki, 76. Hitchiti, 77. The Hitchiti Dialect,\n      80. Alibamu, 85. Koass\u00e1ti, 89. Chicasa, 90. Tribes on the Yazoo\n      River, 97. Cha'hta, 100. The Cha'hta Language, 116.\n\n  _III. The Creek Indians._\n\n      Creek Settlements, 120. List of Towns, 124. The Indian Pathways,\n      151. The Creek Government, 152. Tribal Divisions and Gentes,\n      153. Civil Government, 156. The Warrior Class, 158. War Titles,\n      160. War Customs, 164. Organization of the Confederacy, 168. The\n      Public Square, 171. The Annual Busk, 177. Further Ethnographic\n      Notes, 183. Creek History, 188. The Creek Dialect, 198. Lexical\n      Affinities, 212.\n\n\n  _SECOND PART._\n\n  _The Kasi'hta Migration Legend._\n\n      Indian Migration Legends, 214. Migration Legends of the Creek\n      Tribes, 222. Tchikilli's Kasi'hta Legend, 235. The Text, 237.\n      The Translation, 244.\n\n\n\n\nA MIGRATION LEGEND OF THE CREEK INDIANS.\n\n\n\n\nFIRST OR GENERAL PART.\n\n\nTHE SOUTHERN FAMILIES OF INDIANS.\n\nThe early explorers of the Gulf territories have left to posterity a\nlarge amount of information concerning the natives whom they met as\nfriends or fought as enemies. They have described their picturesque\nattire, their curious, sometimes awkward, habits and customs, their\ndwellings and plantations, their government in times of peace and war,\nas exhaustively as they could do, or thought fit to do. They\ndistinguished tribes from confederacies, and called the latter\nkingdoms and empires, governed by princes, kings and emperors. But the\ncharacteristics of race and language, which are the most important for\nethnology, because they are the most ancient in their origin, are not\noften alluded to by them, and when the modern sciences of anthropology\nand ethnology had been established on solid principles many of these\nsouthern races had already disappeared or intermingled, and scientific\ninquiry came too late for their investigation.\n\nA full elucidation of the history and antiquities of the subject of\nour inquiries, the Creeks, is possible only after having obtained an\nexhaustive knowledge of the tribes and nations living around them. The\nmore populous among them have preserved their language and remember\nmany of their ancestors' customs and habits, so that active\nexploration in the field can still be helpful to us in many respects\nin tracing and rediscovering their ancient condition. Three centuries\nago the tribes of the Maskoki family must have predominated in power\nover all their neighbors, as they do even now in numbers, and had\nformed confederacies uniting distant tribes. Whether they ever crossed\nthe Mississippi river or not, the Indians of this family are as\nthoroughly southern as their neighbors, and seem to have inhabited\nsouthern lands for times immemorial. The scientists who now claim that\nthey descend from the mound builders, do so only on the belief that\nthey must have dwelt for uncounted centuries in the fertile tracts\nwhere Hernando de Soto found them, and where they have remained up to\na recent epoch. In the territory once occupied by their tribes no\ntopographic name appears to point to an earlier and alien population;\nand as to their exterior, the peculiar olive admixture to their\ncinnamon complexion is a characteristic which they have in common with\nall other southern tribes.\n\nMy introduction to the Kasi'hta national legend proposes to assign to\nthe Creeks: (1) their proper position in the Maskoki family and among\ntheir other neighbors; and (2) to describe some of their ethnologic\ncharacteristics. The material has been divided in several chapters,\nwhich I have in their logical sequence arranged as follows:\n\n    Linguistic families traceable within the Gulf States.\n\n    The Maskoki group; its historic subdivisions.\n\n    The Creek Indians; tribal topography, historic and ethnographic\n    notices, sketch of their language.\n\n\nI. LINGUISTIC GROUPS OF THE GULF STATES.\n\nIn the history of the Creeks, and in their legends of migration, many\nreferences occur to the tribes around them, with whom they came in\ncontact. These contacts were chiefly of a hostile character, for the\nnormal state of barbaric tribes is to live in almost permanent mutual\nconflicts. What follows is an attempt to enumerate and sketch them,\nthe sketch to be of a prevalently topographic nature. We are not\nthoroughly acquainted with the racial or anthropological peculiarities\nof the nations surrounding the Maskoki proper on all sides, but in\ntheir languages we possess an excellent help for classifying them.\nLanguage is not an absolute indicator of race, but it is more so in\nAmerica than elsewhere, for the _large number_ of linguistic families\nin the western hemisphere proves that the populations speaking their\ndialects have suffered less than in the eastern by encroachment,\nforeign admixture, forcible alteration or entire destruction.\n\nBeginning at the southeast, we first meet the historic Timucua family,\nthe tribes of which are extinct at the present time; and after\ndescribing the Indians of the Floridian Peninsula, southern extremity,\nwe pass over to the Yuchi, on Savannah river, to the Naktche, Taensa\nand the other stocks once settled along and beyond the mighty Uk'hina,\nor \"water road\" of the Mississippi river.\n\n\nTIMUCUA.\n\nIn the sixteenth century the Timucua inhabited the northern and middle\nportion of the peninsula of Florida, and although their exact limits\nto the north are unknown, they held a portion of Florida bordering on\nGeorgia, and some of the coast islands in the Atlantic Ocean, as Guale\n(then the name of Amelia) and others. The more populous settlements of\nthese Indians lay on the eastern coast of Florida, along the St.\nJohn's river and its tributaries, and in the northeastern angle of the\nGulf of Mexico. Their southernmost villages known to us were\nHirrihigua, near Tampa Bay, and Tucururu, near Cape Ca\u00f1averal, on the\nAtlantic Coast.\n\nThe people received its name from one of their villages called\nTimagoa, Thimagoua (_Timoga_ on De Bry's map), situated on one of the\nwestern tributaries of St. John's river, and having some political\nimportance. The name means _lord, ruler, master_ [atimuca \"waited\nupon (muca) by servants (ati)];\" and the people's name is written\nAtimuca early in the eighteenth century. We first become acquainted\nwith their numerous tribes through the memoir of Alvar Nu\u00f1ez Cabe\u00e7a de\nVaca, the three chroniclers of de Soto's expedition, and more fully\nthrough R\u00e9n\u00e9 de Laudonni\u00e8re (1564). Two missionaries of the Franciscan\norder, Francisco Pareja (1612 sqq.) and Gregorio de Mouilla (1635),\nhave composed devotional books in their vocalic language. De Bry's\n_Brevis Narratio_, Frankfort a. M., 1591, contains a map of their\ncountry, and engravings representing their dwellings, fights, dances\nand mode of living.\n\nA few words of their language (_lengua timuquana_ in Spanish) show\naffinity with Maskoki, others with Carib. From 1595 A. D. they\ngradually became converted to Christianity, revolted in 1687 against\ntheir Spanish oppressors, and early in the eighteenth century (1706)\nwere so reduced in number that they yielded easily to the attacks of\nthe Y\u00e1massi Indians, who, instigated by English colonists, made\nincursions upon their villages from the North. Their last remnants\nwithdrew to the Mosquito Lagoon, in Volusia County, Florida, where the\nname of the Tomoco river still recalls their tribal name.\n\nIn 1564, R\u00e9n\u00e9 de Laudonni\u00e8re heard of five head chiefs (paracusi) of\nconfederacies in the Timucua country, and from Pareja we can infer\nthat seven or more dialects were spoken in its circumference. The five\nhead chiefs, Saturiwa, Holata Utina, Potanu, Onethcaqua and Hostaqua\nare only tribal names (in the second, Utina is the tribal\nappellation), and the dialects, as far as known, were those of\nTimagoa, Potanu, Itafi, the Fresh-Water district, Tucururu, Santa\nLucia de Acuera, and Mocama (\"on the coast\"). The last but one\nprobably coincided with that of A\u00efs.\n\nThe _A\u00efs Indians_, who held the coast from Cape Ca\u00f1averal, where the\nSpaniards had the post Santa Lucia, to a lagoon once called\nA\u00efsahatcha (viz., _A\u00efs river_), were considered as a people distinct\nfrom the Timucua. They worshiped the sun in the shape of a stuffed\ndeer raised upon the end of a high beam planted in the ground; this\ngave, probably, origin to their name A\u00efs, for B. Romans interprets\nA\u00efsahatcha by _Deer river_ (itchi, itche _deer_, in Creek and\nSeminole). Their territory formed the northern part of the \"province\"\nof Tequesta. Cf. B. Romans, East and West Florida (New York, 1775),\npp. 2. 260. 273. 281. Herrera, Dec. IV, 4, 7. Barcia, Ensayo, p. 118.\n\n\nCALUSA.\n\nThe languages spoken by the Calusa and by the people next in order,\nthe Tequesta, are unknown to us, and thus cannot be mentioned here as\nforming separate linguistic stocks. I simply make mention of these\ntribes, because they were regarded as people distinct from the Timucua\nand the tribes of Maskoki origin.\n\nThe Calusa held the southwestern extremity of Florida, and their\ntribal name is left recorded in Calusahatchi, a river south of Tampa\nbay. They are called Calos on de Bry's map (1591), otherwise Colusa,\nCallos, Carlos, and formed a confederacy of many villages, the names\nof which are given in the memoir of Hernando d'Escalante Fontanedo\n(M\u00e9moire sur la Floride, in Ternaux-Compans' Collection XX, p. 22;\ntranslated from the original Spanish). These names were written down\nin 1559, and do not show much affinity with Timucua; but since they\nare the only remnants of the Calusa language, I present the full list:\n\"Tampa, Tomo, Tuchi, Sogo, No (which signifies 'beloved village'),\nSinapa, Sinaesta, Metamapo, Sacaspada, Calaobe, Estame, Yagua, Guaya,\nGuevu, Muspa, Casitoa, Tatesta, Coyovea, Jutun, Tequemapo, Comachica,\nQuiseyove and two others in the vicinity. There are others in the\ninterior, near Lake Mayaimi--viz., Cutespa, Tavaguemue, Tomsobe,\nEnempa and twenty others. Two upon the Lucayos obey to the cacique of\nCarlos, Guarunguve and Cuchiaga. Carlos and his deceased father were\nthe rulers of these fifty towns.\" Fontanedo states that he was\nprisoner in these parts from his thirteenth to his thirtieth year;\nthat he knew four languages, but was not familiar with those of A\u00efs\nand Teaga, not having been there.\n\nOne of these names is decidedly Spanish, Sacaspada or\n\"Draw-the-sword\"; two others appear to be Timucua, Calaobe (kala\n_fruit_; abo _stalk, tree_) and Comachica (hica _land, country_).\nSome may be explained by the Creek language, but only one of them,\nTampa (it\u00edmpi _close to it, near it_) is Creek to a certainty; Tuchi\nresembles t\u00fatchi _kidneys_; Sogo, s\u00e1-uka _rattle, gourd-rattle_, and\nNo is the radix of a-no-k\u00edtcha _lover_, anuk\u00eddsh\u0101s _I love_, which\nagrees with the interpretation given by Fontanedo. Tavaguemue may\npossibly contain the Creek t\u00e1wa _sumach_; Mayaimi (Lake), which\nFontanedo explains by \"_very large_,\" the Creek augmentative term\nm\u00e1hi, and Guevu the Creek u-\u00edwa _water_.\n\nThe Spanish orthography, in which these names are laid down, is\nunfitted for transcribing Indian languages, perhaps as much\nso as the English orthography; nevertheless, we recognize the\nfrequently-occurring terminal -esta, -sta, which sounds quite like\nTimucua. There are no doubt many geographic terms, taken from\nSeminole-Creek, in the south of the peninsula as well as in the north;\nit only remains to determine what age we have to ascribe to them.\n\nThe Calusa bore the reputation of being a savage and rapacious people,\nand B. Romans (p. 292) denounces them as having been pirates. He\ninforms us (p. 289), that \"at Sandy Point, the southern extremity of\nthe peninsula, are large fields, being the lands formerly planted by\nthe Colusa savages;\" and that \"they were driven away from the\ncontinent by the Creeks, their more potent neighbors.\" In 1763 the\nremnants, about eighty families, went to Havannah from their last\npossessions at Cayos Vacos and Cayo Hueso (hueso, _bone_), where\nRomans saw the rests of their stone habitations (p. 291); now called\nCayos bajos and Key West.\n\nOn the languages spoken in these parts more will be found under the\nheading \"Seminole.\"\n\n\nTEQUESTA.\n\nOf the Tequesta people on the southeastern end of the peninsula we\nknow still less than of the Calusa Indians. There was a tradition that\nthey were the same people which held the Bahama or Lucayo Islands, and\nthe local names of the Florida coast given by Fontanedo may partly\nrefer to this nationality.\n\nThey obtained their name from a village, Tequesta, which lay on a\nriver coming from Lake Mayaimi (Fontanedo in Ternaux-C., XX, p. 14)\nand was visited by Walter Raleigh (Barcia, Ensayo, p. 161). The lands\nof the A\u00efs formed the northern portion of the Tequesta domains, and a\nplace called Mocossou is located there on de Bry's map.\n\nThis extinct tribe does not seem to have come in contact with the\nCreeks, though its area is now inhabited by Seminoles.\n\n\nKATABA.\n\nThe Kataba Indians of North and South Carolina are mentioned here only\nincidentally, as they do not appear to have had much intercourse with\nany Maskoki tribe. The real extent of this linguistic group is\nunknown; being in want of any vocabularies besides that of the Kataba,\non Kataba river, S. C., and of the Woccons, settled near the coast of\nN. C., we are not inclined to trust implicitly the statement of Adair,\nwho speaks of a large Kataba confederacy embracing twenty-eight\nvillages \"of different nations,\" on Santee, Combahee, Congaree and\nother rivers, and speaking dialects of the Kataba language. The\nWaterees, seen by Lawson, probably belonged to this stock, and the\nWoccons lived contiguous to the Tuscarora-Iroquois tribe.\n\nThe passage of Adair being the only notice on the extent of the Kataba\nlanguage found in the early authors, excepting Lawson, I transcribe it\nhere in full (History, pp. 224. 225): \"About the year 1743, the nation\n(of the Katahba) consisted of almost four hundred warriors, of above\ntwenty different dialects. I shall mention a few of the national names\nof those who make up this mixed language; the _K\u00e1tahba_ is the\nstandard or court dialect--the _Wateree_, who make up a large town;\n_Een\u00f3, Char\u00e0h_, ||_-wah_, now _Chowan, Canggaree, Nachee, Yamasee,\nCoosah_, etc. Their country had an old waste field of seven miles\nextent, and several others of smaller dimensions, which shows that\nthey were formerly a numerous people, to cultivate so much land with\ntheir dull stone axes, etc.\"\n\nAfter Char\u00e0h a new page begins, and the _-wah_ following, which has no\nconnection with what precedes, proves that there is a printer's\nlacune, perhaps of a whole line. Een\u00f3 is given by Lawson as a\nTuscarora town;[2] Char\u00e0h is the ancient Sara, Saura, Saraw or Sarau\nmentioned by Lederer and others. The \"Nachee\" certainly did not speak\na Kataba language, nor is there much probability that the Y\u00e1massi did\nso. By the Coosah are probably meant the Indians living on\nCoosawhatchee river, South Carolina, near Savannah. Adair, in his\nquality as trader, had visited the Kataba settlements personally.[3]\n\n    [Footnote 2: Reprint of 1860, pp. 97. 100. 101. 383.]\n\n    [Footnote 3: Cf. B. R. Carroll, Histor. Collect. of S. C., II,\n    p. 243. Lawson states that the Congaree dialect was not\n    understood by the Waterees and Chicarees.]\n\nP\u00e9nicaut, in his \"Relation,\"[4] mentions a curious fact, which proves\nthat the alliances of the Kataba extended over a wide territory in the\nSouth. In 1708, the Alibamu had invited warriors of the Cheroki, Abika\nand Kataba (here called _Cadapouces, Canapouces_) to an expedition\nagainst the Mobilians and the French at Fort Mobile. These hordes\narrived near the bay, and were supposed to number four thousand men;\nthey withdrew without inflicting much damage. More about this\nexpedition under \"Alibamu,\" q. v.\n\n    [Footnote 4: Margry, _D\u00e9couvertes_, V, 477.]\n\n\nYUCHI.\n\nNone of all the allophylic tribes referred to in this First Part stood\nin closer connection with the Creeks or Maskoki proper than the Yuchi\nor Uchee Indians. They constituted a portion of their confederacy from\nthe middle of the eighteenth century, and this gives us the\nopportunity to discuss their peculiarities more in detail than those\nof the other \"outsiders.\" They have preserved their own language and\ncustoms; no mention is made of them in the migration legend, and the\nCreeks have always considered them as a peculiar people.\n\nGeneral Pleasant Porter has kindly favored me with a few ethnologic\npoints, gained by himself from Yuchi Indians, who inhabit the largest\ntown in the Creek Nation, Indian Terr., with a population of about\n500. \"In bodily size they are smaller than the Creeks, but lithe and\nof wiry musculature, the muscles often protruding from the body. Their\ndescent is in the male line, and they were once polygamous. It is a\ndisputed fact whether they ever observed the custom of flattening\ntheir children's heads, like some of their neighbors. They call\nthemselves _children of the Sun_, and sun worship seems to have been\nmore pronounced here than with other tribes of the Gulf States. The\nmonthly efflux of the Sun, whom they considered as of the female sex,\nfell to the earth, as they say, and from this the Yuchi people took\nits origin. They increase in number at the present time, and a part of\nthem are still pagans. Popularly expressed, their language sounds\n'like the warble of the prairie-chickens.' It is stated that their\nconjurers' songs give a clue to all their antiquities and symbolic\ncustoms. They exclude the use of salt from all drugs which serve them\nas medicine. While engaged in making medicine they sing the above\nsongs for a time; then comes the oral portion of their ritual, which\nis followed by other songs.\"\n\nNot much is known of their language, but it might be easily obtained\nfrom the natives familiar with English. From what we know of it, it\nshows no radical affinity with any known American tongue, and its\nphonetics have often been noticed for their strangeness. They are said\nto speak with an abundance of arrested sounds or voice-checks, from\nwhich they start again with a jerk of the voice. The accent often\nrests on the ultima (Powell's mscr. vocabulary), and Ware ascribes to\nthem, though wrongly, the Hottentot _cluck_.\n\nThe numerals follow the decimal, not the quinary system as they do in\nthe Maskoki languages. The lack of a dual form in the intransitive\nverb also distinguishes Yuchi from the latter.\n\nThe earliest habitat of the Yuchi, as far as traceable, was on both\nsides of the Savannah river, and Yuchi towns existed there down to the\nmiddle of the eighteenth century.\n\nWhen Commander H. de Soto reached these parts with his army, the\n\"queen\" (se\u00f1ora, ca\u00e7ica) of the country met him at the town Cofeta\u00e7que\n_on a barge_, a circumstance which testifies to the existence of a\nconsiderable water-course there. Cofeta\u00e7que, written also Cofitachiqui\n(Biedma), Cofachiqui (Garcilaso de la Vega), Cutifachiqui (consonants\ninverted, Elvas) was seven days' march from Chalaque (Cheroki)\n\"province,\" and distant from the sea about thirty leagues, as stated\nby the natives of the place. There were many ruined towns in the\nvicinity, we are told by the Fidalgo de Elvas. One league from there,\nin the direction up stream, was Talomeco town, the \"temple\" of which\nis described as a wonderful and curious structure by Garcilaso. Many\nmodern historians have located these towns on the middle course of\nSavannah river, and Charles C. Jones (Hernando de Soto, 1880; pp. 27.\n29) believes, with other investigators, that Cofeta\u00e7que stood at\nSilver Bluff, on the left bank of the Savannah river, about\ntwenty-five miles by water below Augusta. The domains of that \"queen,\"\nor, as we would express it, the towns and lands of that confederacy,\nextended from there up to the Cheroki mountains.\n\nThe name Cofita-chiqui seems to prove by itself that these towns were\ninhabited by Yuchi Indians; for it contains kowita, the Yuchi term for\n_Indian_, and apparently \"Indian of our own tribe.\" This term appears\nin all the vocabularies: kaw\u00edta, _man, male_; kohwita, ko-ita, plural\nkohino'h, _man_; kota, _man_, contracted from kow'ta, kowita; also in\ncompounds: kow\u0115t-ten-ch\u014d\u014d, _chief_; koh\u00edtta makinnung, _chief of a\npeople_. The terms for the parts of the human body all begin with ko-.\nThe second part of the name, -chiqui, is a term foreign to Yuchi, but\nfound in all the dialects of Maskoki in the function of _house_,\n_dwelling_, (tch\u00faku, tch\u00f3ko, and in the eastern or Apalachian\ndialects, tch\u00edki) and has to be rendered here in the collective sense\nof _houses, town_. Local names to be compared with Cofitachiqui are:\nCofachi, further south, and Acapachiqui, a tract of land near\nApalache.\n\nThe signification of the name Yutchi, plural Yutchih\u00e1, by which this\npeople calls itself, is unknown. All the surrounding Indian tribes\ncall them Yuchi, with the exception of the Len\u00e1pi or Delawares, who\nstyle them Tahogal\u00e9wi.\n\nBut there are two sides to this question. We find the local name\nKaw\u00edta, evidently the above term, twice on middle Chatahuchi river,\nand also in Cofetalaya, settlements of the Cha'hta Indians in Tala and\nGreen counties, Mississippi. Did any Yuchi ever live in these\nlocalities in earlier epochs? Garcilaso de Vega, Florida III, c. 10,\nstates that Juan Ortiz, who had been in the Floridian peninsula\nbefore, acted as interpreter at Cofitachiqui. This raises the query,\ndid the natives of this \"capital\" speak Creek or Yuchi? Who will\nattempt to give an irrefutable answer to this query?\n\nThe existence of a \"queen\" or ca\u00e7ica, that is, of a chief's widow\ninvested with the authority of a chief, seems to show that Cofeta\u00e7que\ntown or confederacy did not belong to the Maskoki connection, for we\nfind no similar instance in Creek towns. Among the Yuchi, succession\nis in the male line, but the Hitchiti possess a legendary tradition,\naccording to which the first chief that ever stood at the head of\ntheir community was a woman.\n\nTo determine the extent of the lands inhabited or claimed by the Yuchi\nin de Soto's time, is next to impossible. At a later period they lived\non the eastern side of the Savannah river, and on its western side as\nfar as Ogeechee river, and upon tracts above and below Augusta,\nGeorgia. These tracts were claimed by them as late as 1736. John\nFilson, in his \"Discovery etc. of Kentucky\" vol. II, 84-87 (1793),\ngives a list of thirty Indian tribes, and a statement on Yuchi towns,\nwhich he must have obtained from a much older source: \"Uchees occupy\nfour different places of residence, at the head of St. John's, the\nfork of St. Mary's, the head of Cannouchee and the head of St.\nTillis.[5] These rivers rise on the borders of Georgia and run\nseparately into the ocean.\" To Cannouchee answers a place _Canosi_,\nmentioned in Juan de la Vandera's narrative (1569); the name, however,\nis Creek and not Yuchi. Hawkins states that formerly Yuchi were\nsettled in small villages at Ponpon, Saltketchers and Silver Bluff, S.\nC., and on the Ogeechee river, Ga. In 1739 a Yuchi town existed on the\nSavannah river, twenty-five miles above Ebenezer, which is in\nEffingham county, Georgia, near Savannah City (Jones, Tomochichi, p.\n117; see next page).\n\n    [Footnote 5: The present Satilla river; falsely written St.\n    Illa, Santilla, St. Tillie.]\n\nFrom notices contained in the first volume of Urlsperger's\n\"Ausf\u00fchrliche Nachricht,\" pp. 845. 850-851, we gather the facts that\nthis Yuchi town was five miles above the Apalachicola Fort, which\nstood in the \"Pallachucla savanna,\" and that its inhabitants\ncelebrated an annual busk, which was at times visited by the\ncolonists. Governor Oglethorpe concluded an alliance with this town,\nand when he exchanged presents to confirm the agreement made, he\nobtained skins from these Indians. Rev. Boltzius, the minister of the\nSalzburger emigrants, settled in the vicinity, depicts their character\nin dark colors; he states \"they are much inclined to Robbing and\nStealing,\" but was evidently influenced by the Y\u00e1massi and Yamacraw in\ntheir vicinity, who hated them as a race foreign to themselves. Of\nthese he says, \"these Creeks are Honest, Serviceable and\nDisinterested.\"[6]\n\n    [Footnote 6: Extract from Rev. B's Journal; London, 1734, 12mo,\n    p. 37.]\n\nThe reason why the Yuchi people gradually left their old seats and\npassed over to Chatahuchi and Flint rivers is stated as follows by\nBenj. Hawkins, United States Agent among the Creeks in his instructive\n\"Sketch of the Creek Country\" (1799).[7]\n\n    [Footnote 7: Collections of the Georgia Historical Society, vol.\n    III, part first, pp. 61-63 (Savannah, 1848).]\n\nIn 1729, \"Captain Ellick,\" an old chief of Kas\u00ed'hta, married three\nYuchi women and brought them to Kas\u00ed'hta. This was greatly disliked by\nhis townspeople, and he was prevailed upon to move across Chatahuchi\nriver, opposite to where Yuchi town was in Hawkins' time; he settled\nthere with his three brothers, two of whom had intermarried with\nYuchis. After this, the chief collected all the Yuchi people, gave\nthem lands on the site of Yuchi town, and there they settled.\n\nHawkins eulogizes the people by stating that they are more civil,\norderly and industrious than their neighbors (the Lower Creeks), the\nmen more attached to their wives, and these more chaste. He estimates\nthe number of their warriors (\"gun-men\"), including those of the three\nbranch villages, at about two hundred and fifty. These branch towns\nwere Intatchk\u00e1lgi, \"beaver-dam people\";[8] Padshil\u00e4\u00edka, \"pigeon\nroost\"; and Tokog\u00e1lgi, \"tad-pole people\", on Flint river and its side\ncreeks; while a few Yuchi had gone to the Upper Creeks and settled\nthere at Sawan\u00f3gi. Yuchi, the main town, lay on the western bank of\nChatahuchi river, on a tributary called Yuchi creek, ten and one-half\nmiles below Kaw\u00edta Talah\u00e1ssi, and two miles above Osutchi. Another\nwater course, called \"Uchee river,\" runs from the west into Oklokoni\nriver, or \"Yellow Water,\" in the southwestern corner of the State of\nGeorgia. Morse, in his list of Seminole settlements (1822), mentions a\nYuchi town near Mikasuki, Florida.\n\n    [Footnote 8: See below: List of Creek Settlements.]\n\nThe main Yuchi town on Chatahuchi river was built in a vast plain\nrising from the river. W. Bartram, who saw it in 1775, depicts it as\nthe largest, most compact, and best situated Indian town he ever saw;\nthe habitations were large and neatly built, the walls of the houses\nconsisted of a wooden frame, lathed and plastered inside and outside\nwith a reddish clay, and roofed with cypress bark or shingles. He\nestimated the number of the inhabitants at one thousand or fifteen\nhundred. They were usually at variance with the Maskoki confederacy,\nand \"did not mix\" with its people, but were wise enough to unite with\nthem against a common enemy (Travels, pp. 386. 387).\n\nThe early reports may often have unconsciously included the Yuchi\namong the Apalachi[9] and Apalatch\u00fakla. Among the chiefs who\naccompanied Tomochichi, miko of the Yamacraw Indians, to England in\n1733, was Umphichi or Umpeachy, \"a Uchee chief from Palachocolas.\"[10]\n\n    [Footnote 9: Cf. Gallatin, Synopsis, p. 95.]\n\n    [Footnote 10: Chas. C. Jones, Tomochichi, pp. 58. 83.]\n\nWilliam Bartram, who traveled through these parts from 1773 to 1778,\nand published his \"Travels\" many years later,[11] calls them \"Uche or\nSavannuca,\" which is the Creek Sawan\u00f3gi, or \"dwellers upon Savannah\nriver.\" This name Savannuca, and many equally sounding names, have\ncaused much confusion concerning a supposed immigration of the\nSh\u00e1wano or Shawnee Indians (of the Algonkin race) into Georgia, among\nhistorians not posted in Indian languages. Sawan\u00f3gi is derived from\nSavannah river, which is named after the prairies extending on both\nsides, these being called in Spanish sabana. Sabana, and savane in the\nCanadian French, designate a grassy plain, level country, prairie,\nalso in Span. pasture extending over a plain; from Latin sabana\n_napkin_. It still occurs in some local names of Canada and of Spanish\nAmerica. But this term has nothing at all in common with the Algonkin\nword sh\u00e1wano _south_, from which are derived the tribal names: Sh\u00e1wano\nor Shawnee, once on Ohio and Cumberland rivers and their tributaries;\nChowan in Southern Virginia; Siwoneys in Connecticut; Sawannoe in New\nJersey (about 1616); Chaouanons, the southern division of the Illinois\nor Maskoutens.\n\n    [Footnote 11: Published Philadelphia, 1791.]\n\nThese tribes, and many others characterized as _southerners_ by the\nsame or similar Algonkin names, had no connection among themselves,\nbesides the affinity in their dialects, which for the Chowans is not\neven certain. The tradition that Sh\u00e1wanos existed in Upper Georgia,\naround Tug\u0115lo, and on the head waters of the large Georgia rivers,\nrequires therefore further examination. Milfort, in his M\u00e9moire (pp.\n9. 10) states that lands were obtained from \"les Savanogu\u00e9s, sauvages\nqui habitent cette partie (de Tougoulou),\" for the plantation of\nvineyards, about 1775. The name of the Suwanee river, Florida, and\nthat of Suwanee Creek and town, northeast of Atlanta, Georgia, seem to\ncontain the Creek term saw\u00e1ni _echo_. By all means, these names cannot\nserve to prove the presence of the Sh\u00e1wano tribe in these eastern\nparts, but a settlement of Sh\u00e1wanos, also called Sawan\u00f3gi, existed on\nTallapoosa river, where they seem to have been mixed with Yuchi.[12]\n\n    [Footnote 12: Cf. List of Creek Towns, and P\u00e9nicaut, in B.\n    French, Hist. Coll. La., new series, p. 126; Force, Some Notices\n    on Indians of Ohio, p. 22.]\n\nA. Gallatin, \"Synopsis of the Indian Tribes,\" p. 95, mentions a\ntradition, according to which \"the ancient seats of the Yuchi were\neast of the Coosa, and probably of the Chatahuchi river, and that they\nconsider themselves as the most ancient inhabitants of the country.\"\nOf which country? If the whole country is meant, which was at the dawn\nof history held by Maskoki tribes, the name of the Yazoo river may be\nadduced as an argument for the truth of this tradition, for yasu,\nyashu is the Yuchi term for _leaf_ and any _leaf-bearing tree_, even\n_pines_ (from y\u00e1, _wood, tree_), and Kaw\u00edta has been mentioned\nabove. From a thorough comparative study of the Yuchi language, the\nMaskoki dialects and the local nomenclature of the country, we can\nalone expect any reliable information upon the extent and the area of\nterritory anciently held by the Yuchi; but at present it is safest to\nlocate their \"priscan home\" upon both sides of Lower Savannah river.\n\n\nCHEROKI.\n\nIntercourse between the Creek and the Cheroki Indians must have taken\nplace in prehistoric times, as evidenced by local names, and more so\nby Cheroki terms adopted into the Creek language.\n\nThe Cheroki, or more correctly, Ts\u00e1lagi nation is essentially a hill\npeople; their numerous settlements were divided into two great\nsections by the watershed ridge of the Alleghany mountains, in their\nlanguage Un\u00e9ga kat\u00fasi (\"_white, whitish mountains_\"), of which even\nnow a portion is called \"Smoky Mountains.\" Northwest of that ridge lay\nthe Cheroki villages of the _Overhill settlement_, \u00d3tari, \u00d3tali (\"_up,\nabove_\"), along the Great and Little Tennessee rivers and their\ntributaries, while southeast of it, in the mountains of North Carolina\nand on the head waters of the Georgia rivers, extended the towns of\nthe _Lower Cheroki_, or Erati (in Cheroki \u00e9lati, _below, nether_).\nThere were also a number of Cheroki villages in the northern parts of\nAlabama State, and du Pratz distinctly states, that the \"Ch\u00e9raquies\"\nlived east of the Ab\u00e9-ikas.[13] While calling a person of their own\npeople by the name of Ats\u00e1lagi, in the plural Anits\u00e1lagi, they\ncomprise all the Creeks under the name of K\u00fasa, from Coosa river, or\nmore probably from the ancient, far-famed town of the same name:\nAg\u00fasa, K\u00fasa, G\u00fasa, _a Creek person_; Anig\u00fasa, _the Creek people_; G\u00fasa\nuniwon\u00ed'hsti, _the Creek language_.\n\n    [Footnote 13: Le Page du Pratz, Hist. de la Louisiane, II, p.\n    208 sq. (Paris, 1758): \"A l'est des Ab\u00e9-ikas sont les\n    Ch\u00e9raquis.\"]\n\nThe Cheroki language was spoken in many dialects before the people\nemigrated to the lands allotted to them in the northeastern part of\nthe Indian Territory, and even now a difference may be observed\nbetween the Western Cheroki and the Eastern or Mountain Cheroki, which\nis the language of the people that remained in the hills of Western\nNorth Carolina and Eastern Tennessee.[14] Mr. Horatio Hale has\nrecently demonstrated the affinity of Cheroki with the Iroquois\nstock;[15] Wend\u00e1t and Tuscarora form other dialectic branches of it,\nshowing much closer relation to the Iroquois dialects of Western New\nYork than Cheroki. Thirty-two terms of the Keowe dialect (Lower\nCheroki), taken down by B. Hawkins, are embodied in an unpublished\nvocabulary, which is in the possession of the American Philosophical\nSociety in Philadelphia.[16] Another ancient dialect is that of Kit\u00f3wa\nor Kit\u00faa; this is the name by which the Cheroki are known among\nseveral northern tribes, as Delawares and Sh\u00e1wano (cf. below); it was\nalso the name of a secret society among the Cheroki, which existed at\nthe time of the Secession war.\n\n    [Footnote 14: The Mountain Cheroki are centering around\n    Quallatown, Haywood county, N. C., and an United States agent is\n    residing in their country. Their population is about 1600;\n    others live in Northern Georgia.]\n\n    [Footnote 15: H. Hale, \"Indian Migrations, as evidenced by\n    language.\" American Antiquarian, vol. V, pp. 18-28 and 108-124\n    (1883).]\n\n    [Footnote 16: The name Keowe is taken from a narcotic plant used\n    for catching fish, which grew in the vicinity of that village.]\n\nThe Cheroki Indians are bodily well developed, rather tall in stature\nand of an irritable temper, flashing up easily. In the eighteenth\ncentury they were engaged in constant wars, and from their mountain\nfastnesses made sallies upon all the surrounding Indian tribes. The\nIroquois or \"Northern Indians\" attacked them in their own country, as\nthey also did the Kataba and Western Algonkins. A warlike spirit\npervaded the whole Cheroki nation, and even women participated in\ntheir raids and fights.[17]\n\n    [Footnote 17: Lieut. H. Timberlake, Memoirs (London, 1765), pp.\n    70. 71. Urlsperger, Nachricht, I, p. 658, where they are called\n    \"Tzerrickey Indianer.\" D. Coxe calls them Sulluggees.]\n\nWm. Bartram states, that the Cheroki men had a lighter and more olive\ncomplexion than the contiguous Creek tribes, adding that some of their\nyoung girls were nearly as fair and blooming as European women. H.\nTimberlake, who visited a portion of their villages (on Great\nTennessee river) in 1762, represents them as of a middle stature,\nstraight, well built, with small heads and feet, and of an olive\ncolor, though generally painted. They shaved the hair of their heads,\nand many of the old people had it plucked out by the roots, the\nscalp-lock only remaining. The ears were slit and stretched to an\nenormous circumference, an operation which caused them incredible pain\nand was adopted from the Sh\u00e1wano or some other northern nation. The\nwomen wore the hair long, even reaching to the knees, but plucked it\nout from all the other parts of the body, especially the looser part\nof the sex (Memoirs, pp. 49-51). Polygamy then existed among them.\nThey erected houses extending sometimes from sixty to seventy feet in\nlength, but rarely over sixteen in width, and covered them with narrow\nboards. Some of these houses were two stories high, and a hot-house or\nsudatory stood close to every one of these capacious structures. They\nalso made bark canoes and canoes of poplar[18] or pine, from thirty to\nforty feet long and about _two_ feet broad, with flat bottoms and\nsides. Pottery was made by them of red and white clay (_Ibid._, pp.\n59-62).\n\n    [Footnote 18: The term for _poplar_, ts\u00edyu, is also the term for\n    _canoe_ and for _trough_.]\n\nThe male population was divided into a class of head-men or chiefs,\nrecruited by popular election, the selection being made among the most\nvalorous men and the best orators in their councils; and in two\nclasses of \"yeomen\": the \"warriors\" and the \"fighting men,\" these\nbeing inferior to the warriors.\n\nDistinction in reward of exploits was conferred through the honorary\ntitles of Outacity, \"man killer,\" Kolona, \"raven\" and \"Beloved,\" names\nto which parallels will be found among the Creeks. (_Ibid._, pp. 70,\n71.)\n\nSeven clans or gentes exist among the Cheroki, and many of them\nobserve to the present day the regulations imposed by the gentile\norganization. They will not marry into their own gens or phratry, for\ninstance. The totems of these gentes (anat\u00e1ya\u207fwe, _gens, clan_)\nwere obtained in 1880 from Mr. Richard Wolf, delegate of the people to\nthe United States government, as follows:\n\n    1. Aniweyahi\u00e1 anat\u00e1ya\u207fwe, _wolf_ gens, the most important of\n    all.\n\n    2. Ane-igil\u00f3hi anat\u00e1ya\u207fwe, _long hair_ gens.\n\n    3. Anigodeg\u0113\u2032we, the gens to which Mr. Wolf belongs. They can\n    marry into all gentes, except into the _long hair_ clan, because\n    this contains their \"_aunts_\" (\u00e4`loki).\n\n    4. Anits\u012b\u2032skwa, _bird_ gens.\n\n    5. Aniw\u014d\u2032te, _paint_ gens; (w\u014d\u2032te, wo\u2032de, _clay_; aniw\u014d\u2032ti,\n    _paint_).\n\n    6. Anigo-ul\u00e9, anikul\u00e9, _acorn_ gens.\n\n    7. Anisah\u00f3ne, _blue_ gens.\n\nBesides the fact that gentes Nos. 2 and 3 belong to one phratry, the\nother phratries and their names were not remembered by the informant.\nThe prefix ani- marks the plural of animate beings.\n\nThe list of totemic gentes printed in Lewis H. Morgan, Ancient\nSociety, p. 164, differs from the above in giving ten gentes, two\nbeing extinct, and one or two being perhaps phratries and not\ngentes:--\n\n1. _Wolf_, aniwh\u00edya. 2. _Red paint_, aniw\u00f3te. 3. _Long prairie_,\nanig\u00e4tag\u00e1ni'h. 4. _Deaf_ (a bird), dsuliniana. 5. _Holly tree_,\nanisd\u00e1sdi. 6. _Deer_, anik\u00e1wi'h. 7. _Blue_, anisah\u00f3kni. 8. _Long\nhair_, anikal\u00f3hai. 9. _Acorn_, anids\u00fala (extinct). 10. _Bird_,\nanids\u00e9skwa (extinct).\n\nThe names of several Cheroki towns are mentioned by the historians of\nde Soto's expedition, which traversed a portion of their country; by\nAdair, Timberlake and by Wm. Bartram, who has left a long list of\ntheir settlements.\n\nThe rare publication: Weston (Pl. Chas. Jennett), Documents connected\nwith the History of South Carolina, London, 1856, 4to, contains an\narticle by de Brahm, which gives an ethnologic sketch and many other\nparticulars of the Southern Indians, and especially refers to the\nCheroki (pp. 218-227). The English-Cheroki war, from February to\nAugust, 1760, is narrated pp. 208-213.\n\nThe tradition that the Cheroki, or rather a portion of them, were\nfound living in caves, is substantiated by the appellation\n\"Cave-dwellers,\" given to them by the Northern Indians. The Comanches\ncall them Ebikuita; the Senecas, Uy\u00e1da, cave-men; the Wend\u00e1t,\nUwat\u00e1yo-r\u00f3no, from uwat\u00e1yo, which in their language means \"_hole_ in\nthe ground, _cave_;\" the Sh\u00e1wano call them Katow\u00e1, plural Katow\u00e1gi;\nand the Delawares by the same name, Gatohu\u00e1 (Barton, Appendix, p. 8:\nGatt\u00f3chwa). This refers to Kit\u00f3wa, one of their towns previously\nmentioned. Caves of the old Cheroki country were examined by\narch\u00e6ologists, and some of them showed marks of former occupation,\nespecially caves in Sullivan and Hawkins counties, Tennessee. This\nreminds us of the Troglodyt\u00e6 and Mandrit\u00e6 of ancient times, of the\nCliff-Dwellers on Upper Colorado river, New Mexico, and of other\nAmerican tribes, which lived in caves. Thus a Shasti tribe, the\nWeohow, are reported to have received this name from a \"stone house\"\nor rock dwelling situated in their country, east of Shasta River and\nsouth of the Siskiyou Mountains.[19]\n\n    [Footnote 19: Cf. Ind. Affairs' Report, 1864, p. 120.]\n\nLists of the ancient Cheroki towns will be found in W. Bartram's\nTravels, p. 371-372 (forty-three), in H. Timberlake (his map is also\nreproduced in Jefferys' Topography of N. A., an atlas in fol., 1762),\nand in J. Gerar W. de Brahm, Hist. of the Prov. of Georgia, Wormsloe\n1849, fol., p. 54.\n\n\nARKANSAS.\n\nNone of the numerous Algonkin tribes lived in the immediate\nneighborhood of the Maskoki family of Indians, but of the Dakotan\nstock the Arkansas (originally \u00c1kans\u0101--the Akansea of Father\nGravier), dwelt in close proximity, and had frequent intercourse with\nthis Southern nation.\n\nP\u00e9nicaut relates[20] that the French commander, Lemoyne d'Iberville,\nsailed up the Mississippi river, and sixty leagues above the mouth of\nthe Yazoo found the mouth of the Arkansas river; eight leagues above,\non the same western shore, was the nation of the Arkansas, and in\ntheir town were two other \"nations,\" called Torimas and Kappas. By\nthese warlike and hunting tribes he was received in a friendly manner.\nThe men are described as stout and thick-set (gros et trapus), the\nwomen as pretty and light-complexioned. Imahao, another Arkansas\nvillage, is mentioned in Margry IV, 179. The affluent of the\nMississippi on which the Arkansas were settled was, according to D.\nCoxe, Carolana, p. 11, the Ousoutowy river: another name for Arkansas\nriver.[21]\n\n    [Footnote 20: Margry, P., D\u00e9couvertes et Etablissements des\n    Fran\u00e7ais dans l'ouest et dans le Sud de l'Am\u00e9rique\n    Septentrionale, Paris, 1876, etc., V, 402.]\n\n    [Footnote 21: cf. D. Coxe, Carolana, pp. 11. 13.]\n\nFrom Rev. J. Owen Dorsey, who makes a special study of all the Dakota\ntribes, I obtained the following oral information, founded on his\npersonal intercourse with individuals of the K\u00e1ppa tribe:\n\n\"\u00c1kansa is the Algonkin name by which the K\u00e1pa, Qu\u00e1pa were called by\nthe eastern Indians, as Illinois, etc. They call themselves Ug\u00e1\u03c7pa\nand once lived in four villages, two of which were on Mississippi, two\non Arkansas river, near its mouth: Their towns, though now transferred\nto the Indian Territory, northeastern angle, have preserved the same\nnames:\n\n    \"1. Uga\u03c7p\u00e1\u03c7ti or 'real K\u00e1pa.' Ug\u00e1\u03c7pa means 'down stream,' just\n    as O\u2032maha means 'up stream.'\n\n    \"2. Tiwad\u00edma\u207f, called Toriman by French authors.\n\n    \"3. Uzuti\u00fahe, corrupted into O\u2032sotchoue, O\u2032sochi, Southois by\n    the French authors. Probably means: 'village upon low-land\n    level.'\n\n    \"4. Ta\u207fwa\u207fzhika or 'small village;' corrupted into Topinga,\n    Tonginga, Donginga by the French.\n\n\"The Pacaha 'province' of de Soto's historians is a name inverted from\nCapaha, which is Ug\u00e1\u03c7pa. The form Qu\u00e1pa is incorrect, for K\u00e1pa (or\nK\u00e1paha of La Salle), which is abbreviated from Ug\u00e1\u03c7pa.\"\n\nIn 1721 LaHarpe saw three of their villages on the Mississippi river,\nand noticed snake worship among these Indians.\n\n\nTAENSA.\n\n\nI. THE NORTHERN TAENSA.\n\nOn account of the recent discovery of their consonantic language,\nwhich proves to be disconnected from any other aboriginal tongue\nspoken in North America, a peculiar interest attaches itself to the\ntribe of the Taensa Indians, whose cabins stood in Tensas county,\nLouisiana, bordering east on Mississippi river. The Tensas river, in\nFrench _Bayou Tensa_, which joins the Washita river at Trinity City,\nafter forming a prodigious number of bends, and flowing past a\nmultitude of artificial mounds, still keeps up the memory of this\nextinct tribe.\n\nIn March 1700, the French commander L. d'Iberville calculated the\ndistance from the landing of the Natchez to that of the Taensas,\nfollowing the river, at about 15-1/2 leagues, and in the air-line,\n11-1/4 leagues. That Taensa landing, at the foot of a bluff nine\nhundred feet high (150 _toises_), was about 32\u00b05\u00b4 Lat., while\nd'Iberville, trusting his inaccurate methods of measuring, located it\nat 32\u00b047\u00b4 Lat. (Margry IV, 413).\n\nThe tribe occupied seven villages at the time of d'Iberville's visit,\nwhich were distant four leagues from the Mississippi river, and\ngrouped around a semi-circular lake, probably _Lake St. Joseph_. One\nhundred and twenty of these cabins were extending for two leagues on\nthe lake shore, and a \"temple\" was among them. The missionary\nMontigny, who visited the locality about the same epoch, estimated the\npopulation of that part of the Taensa settlement which he saw at 400\npersons. \"They were scattered over an area of eight leagues, and their\ncabins lay along a river.\"\n\nThe seven villages visited by d'Iberville constitute _one town_ only,\nas he was told. This means to say that they formed a confederacy. A\nTaensa Indian, who accompanied him, gave their names in the Chicasa\ntrade language, or, as the French called it, the Mobilian jargon\n(Margry IV, 179).\n\n     1. Ta\u00ebnsas; from Cha'hta ta\u207fdshi _maize_.\n\n     2. Ohytoucoulas; perhaps from \u00fati _chestnut_; cf. ut\u00e1pa\n        _chestnut eater_. For -ougoula, cf. p. 36.\n\n     3. Nyhougoulas;\n\n     4. Couthaougoulas; from Cha'hta uk'h\u00e1ta\u03c7 _lake_.\n\n     5. Conchayon; cf. Cha'hta k\u00f3nshak _reed, species of cane_.\n\n     6. Talaspa; probably from ta`lapi _five_, or ta`lepa _hundred_.\n\n     7. Chaoucoula; from Cha'hta issi _deer_, or h\u00e1tche _river,\n        water-course_.\n\nIn the Taensa Grammar and Vocabulary of Haumont\u00e9, Parisot and Adam\n(Paris, 1882), the name by which the people called itself is\nH\u00e2striryini \"_warriors, men, tribe_;\" cf. p. 91: h\u00e2stri _to fight_,\n_make war_; h\u00e2strir _warrior, man_; h\u00e2striryi _people, tribe_; but\nTensagini also occurs in the texts, which would point to an extensive\nmaize culture.\n\nThe Taensa were sun worshipers, and had a temple with idols and a\nperpetual fire. When d'Iberville sojourned among them, lightning\nstruck their temple and destroyed it, upon which the mothers\nsacrificed their infants, to appease the wrath of the incensed deity,\nby throwing them into the burning edifice (Margry IV, 414, etc.; V,\n398). The people then rubbed their faces and bodies with _earth_.\nNothing definite is known about their gentes, phratries and totems.\nSeveral French authors represent them as speaking the Naktche language\n(which is untrue) and as being of the same nation.[22] D'Iberville\nstates that their language differed from that of the Huma tribe.\n\n    [Footnote 22: Grammaire et Voc. Taensa, _Introd._, pp. xii. xiv.\n    Compare also Margry, _D\u00e9c. et Etabl._, I, 556-557, 566-568,\n    600-602, 609-610, 616; IV, 414. Their temple, described by le\n    Sieur de Tonty (traveling with la Salle in 1682) in French,\n    Hist. Coll. of La., I, pp. 61. 64.]\n\nThe remnants of a tribe called Mosopellea, probably of\nIllinois-Algonkin origin and previously residing west of the \"Isle of\nTamaroa,\" on western shore of Mississippi river, joined the Taensa,\nand were met there in 1682 by Tonti. They had been almost annihilated\nby the Iroquois.[23]\n\n    [Footnote 23: Margry I, 610. Mosopolea, _ibid._ II, 237;\n    Monsopela, on the map in D. Coxe, Carolana.]\n\nThe Taensa had, at one time, formed an alliance with the Koroa, then\non Yazoo river, and another with the Arkansas Indians.\n\nThe Taensa grammar speaks of a northern and of a southern, more\npolished dialect, but does not locate them topographically. The only\nword of Taensa which I have found to agree with any other language, is\nista _eye_; it also occurs in Southern Dakotan dialects.\n\n\nII. THE SOUTHERN TAENSA.\n\nIn early colonial times a portion of the Northern Taensa, driven from\ntheir homes on the Taensa river by the rage of the Chicasa, fled to\nthe Mobilians. The French settled them on the western side of Mobile\nbay, below Fort St. Louis, and thirty miles above Fort Cond\u00e9, which\nstood on the site of the present city of Mobile.[24] The French called\nthem \"les petits Ta\u00ebnsas\" in contradistinction to the \"great (or\nnorthern) Ta\u00ebnsas,\" on Mississippi and Taensa rivers. About the middle\nof the eighteenth century one hundred of their cabins stood _north_ of\nthe French fort St. Louis, and also north of the Tohome Indian\nsettlement. The Taensa were then speaking their native language and,\nbesides this, a corrupt Chicasa dialect, called the Mobilian language\nby the French.[25] Subsequently they must have removed from there to\nthe eastern channel, for Bartram, Travels, pp. 401. 403, describes\nTaensa there as a \"pretty high bluff, on the eastern channel of the\ngreat Mobile river, about thirty miles above Fort Cond\u00e9, or city of\nMobile, at the head of the bay ... with many artificial mounds of\nearth and other ruins.\" During the wars of 1813-15 the adjacent\ncountry is called the \"Tensaw country.\"\n\n    [Footnote 24: At that time they were warring unsuccessfully\n    against the Huma (1713); P\u00e9nicaut (in Margry V, 508. 509) saw\n    them at Manchac.]\n\n    [Footnote 25: T. Jefferys, Hist. of French Dominions in America;\n    London, 1761; I, p. 162, sq.]\n\nIt is not unlikely that these Taensa were identical with the \"petits\nTa\u00ebnsas\" seen by Lemoyne d'Iberville at the Huma town in March 1700,\nand described by him as migratory, but living most of the time at\nthree days' distance west of Huma, and then warring against the\nBayogoulas. They gained their sustenance by hunting, though buffaloes\nwere scarce in their country, and were men of a fine physique (Margry\nIV, 408). In 1702 they defeated the Bayogoulas and burnt their village\non Mississippi river; the Bayogoulas fled to the French fort on that\nriver, then commanded by Mr. St. Denis. If identical with the Taensa\non Mobile river, these fights of theirs must have occurred during\ntheir passage from the North to the bay of Mobile.\n\n\nIII. THE TANGIPAHOA.\n\nA third tribe, which may have stood in some connection with the two\ntribes above, are the _Tangipahoa Indians_ settled in various places\neast of New Orleans, especially on Tangipahoa river, in southeastern\nLouisiana. A French author states that they formed one of the seven\nvillages of the Acolapissa. The name is written in different ways, and\nis interpreted by Gov. Allen Wright as \"those who gather maize\nstalks,\" from t\u00e1\u207fdshe _maize_; \u00e1pi _stalk, cob_; \u00e1yua _they gather_.\nP\u00e9nicaut defines the name differently, for he states (Margry V, 387)\n\"we found (northwest of Lake Pontchartrain) a river, Tandgepao, which\nin the Indian signifies '_bled blanc_.'\" The Taensapaoa tribe, on the\nriver of the same name, is referred to in Bartram, Travels, p. 422;\ncf. p. 423. We have no notice concerning the language spoken by this\ntribe, which was, perhaps, incorporated into the Cha'hta living now\naround New Orleans; thus we are unable to decide whether they spoke\nCha'hta, like the other Acolapissa, or another tongue. The Tangibao\ntribe was \"destroyed by the Oumas,\" as stated in a passage of Margry\n(IV, 168); by which is meant, that they were scattered and their\ntribal connection disrupted.\n\n\nNAKTCHE.\n\nOf the Lower Mississippi tribes the most powerful and populous was\nthat of the Naktche, settled at the beginning of the eighteenth\ncentury in nine villages on and about St. Catherine creek (L\u00fakfi-\u00e1kula\nin Cha'hta: \"_clay-digging place_,\" to daub houses with), in a\nbeautiful and fertile country. This stream wends its way first south,\nthen west, in a semi-circular course, around the present city of\nNatchez, Mississippi, and runs at an average distance of three to\nfour miles from it. Other Naktche villages existed in its vicinity.\n\nN\u00e1ktche is the correct form of the tribal name, though this people\nappears to have called itself by some other appellation. Natchez is\nthe old-fashioned plural adopted from French orthography; we might\njust as well write Iroquoiz, Islinoiz or Adayez, instead of the\nterminal -s now designating the plural in French. The Cheroki Indians\ncall a Nache, Natche or N\u00e1ktche person A\u2032no\u03c7tse, A\u2032nno\u03c7tse,\nthe people or tribe An\u00edno\u03c7tse, shortened into Ani`htse, which proves\nthat a guttural has been elided from the present form of the name.\nIsalakti, from whom Albert Gallatin obtained a vocabulary of the\nlanguage, called himself a Nahktse, not a Natche chief.\n\nThe name is of Shetimasha origin, I have reasons to assume. N\u00e1ksh in\nthat language means _one that is in a hurry, one running_, n\u00e1ksh\nas\u00ed,[26] abbrev. n\u00e1ksh _warrior_; and the earliest French explorers\nmay have heard that name from the Shetimasha Indians settled on the\nMississippi, where Bayou Lafourche, also called the river of the\nShetimasha, branches off from it. Should the name belong to the\nChicasa trade language, we might think of the Cha'hta adverb: naksika\n_aside, away from_, referring to the site of the Naktche villages at\nsome distance from the great \"water-road,\" the Mississippi river.\n\n    [Footnote 26: Literally, \"a hurrying man.\" In the sign language\n    of the Mississippi plains, the sign for _fighting_ or _battle_\n    is the same as for _riding a horse_.]\n\nThe Naktche tribe owes its celebrity and almost romantic fame to\nseveral causes: their towns were populous, the government more\ncentralized than that of the surrounding native populations; the\nFrench settled in their vicinity, and hence their authors have left to\nposterity more information concerning their confederacy than\nconcerning other tribes; their stubborn resistance to French\nencroachments gave them a high reputation for bravery; their religious\ncustoms, centering in a highly developed sun-worship, made of them an\nobject of curious interest and far-going ethnologic speculation for\nthe white colonists, whose views on the Naktche we must receive with\nthe utmost caution.\n\nL. d'Iberville reports, that at the time of his visit (March 1699) the\nvillages of the Naktche made up _one town_ only, and formed a complex\nof contiguous villages called Th\u00e9lo\u00ebl or Th\u00e9co\u00ebl[27] (Margry IV, 179).\n\n    [Footnote 27: The handwriting of this name is indistinct, but in\n    the sequel, wherever this name is mentioned, Margry prints it\n    Th\u00e9lo\u00ebl. There can scarcely be any doubt of its identity with\n    Thoucoue, the seventh village in the list.]\n\nThe annalist P\u00e9nicaut, who visited these parts in 1704, states that\nthe nine villages were situated in a delightful country, swarming with\nbuffaloes, drained by rivulets and partly wooded. The village or\nresidence of the head chief, _the Sun_, lay one league from the\nMississippi river, and three other villages were on a brook, at a\ndistance of half a league from each other. He alludes to their human\nsacrifices, the frequency of infanticide, and gives descriptions of\ntheir temple, perpetual fire, their \"_marche des cadavres_\" and\narticles of dress. The house of the Sun was large enough to contain\nfour thousand persons; he had female servants called _oulchil tichon_,\nand thirty male attendants (\"laquais\") or _lo\u00fc\u00e9s_, the Allouez of\nother chroniclers. Mother-right prevailed among them (Margry V,\n444-456).\n\nThe Taensa guide, who accompanied d'Iberville to the Naktche tribe in\n1699, furnished him a list of the nine villages, their names being\ngiven in the Chicasa trade language. I presume that they are given in\nthe topographical order as they followed each other on St. Catharine\ncreek, from its mouth upward, since the \"Nach\u00e9s\" village or residence\nof the Sun was distant one league only from the Mississippi river. We\nare not acquainted with the names given to these villages in the\nNaktche language. The etymologies of the Cha'hta language were\nobtained from Allen Wright; the suffixed word -ougoula is the Cha'hta\n\u00f3kla _people, tribe_.\n\n     1. Nach\u00e9s;\n\n     2. Pochougoula; \"_pond-lily people_,\" from Cha'hta p\u00e1ntchi\n        _pond lily_.\n\n     3. Ousagoucoulas; \"_hickory people_,\" from Cha'hta \u00fb\u2032ssak,\n        \u00f3ssak _hickory_.\n\n     4. Cogoucoulas; \"_swan people_,\" from \u00f3kok _swan_.\n\n     5. Yatanocas;\n\n     6. Ymacachas; almost homonymous with the Arkansas village\n        Imahao, mentioned above.\n\n     7. Thoucoue; probably identical with Th\u00e9lo\u00ebl (cf. above) and\n        the Thioux of later authors.\n\n     8. Tougoulas; \"_wood_ or _forest people_\" from iti _wood_.\n\n     9. Achougoulas; \"_pipe people_,\" from ashunga _pipe_,\n        literally, \"the thing they smoke from;\" cf. sh\u00fangali _I\n        smoke from_.\n\nAlthough these names are considerably frenchified in their\northography, the meaning of some admits of no doubt. When I visited\nNatchez city in January 1882, I was informed that the White Apple\nvillage, called Apilua (Vpelois) and mentioned by Le Page du Pratz, is\nsupposed to have existed twelve to fifteen miles southeast of the\ncity. The White Earth village and the village of the Meal were other\nsettlements of theirs. Owing to incessant rains, I could not explore\nthe sites to their full extent, but found a flat mound south of St.\nCatharine's creek, with a diameter of thirty-two feet and perfectly\ncircular, which lay at the same distance from the Mississippi as given\nabove for the residence of the Sun. Col. J. F. H. Claiborne's _History\nof Mississippi_, vol. I, 40-47, gives valuable extracts from French\narchives, pointing to the real sites of the Naktche habitations. The\ncolossal mound of Seltzer-town stands but a short distance from the\ncreek alluded to, and is fourteen miles from Natchez city to the\nnortheast.\n\nThe settlement of the French on the heights of Natchez, the growing\nanimosity of the natives against the intruders, the three successive\nwars, the massacre of the colonists in November, 1729, and the final\ndispersion of the tribe in February 1730, are well-known historic\nfacts and need not be repeated in this volume. The disorganized\nwarriors retreated with their families to different parts of the\ncountry. One party fled across Mississippi river to some locality near\nTrinity City, La., where they entrenched themselves, but were\nattacked, defeated and partly captured by a body of French troops two\nyears later. Another party reached the Chicasa country and was granted\na home and protection by that tribe; but the revengeful French\ncolonists declared war upon the hospitable Chicasa for sheltering\ntheir mortal enemies, and invaded their lands by way of the Yazoo\nriver in 1736, but were compelled to retreat after suffering\nconsiderable loss. Fort Tombigbee, constructed in 1735, served as a\nsecond base for the French operations. Further French-Chicasa wars\noccurred in 1739-40 and in 1748.[28]\n\n    [Footnote 28: Cf. Adair, History, p. 354 sqq. On Fort Tombigbee,\n    _ibid._, pp. 285, 291.]\n\nLater on, we find their remnants among the Creeks, who had provided\nthem with seats on Upper Coosa river, and incorporated them into their\nconfederacy. They built a village called Naktche, and a part of them\nwent to reside in the neighboring Abik\u00fadshi town. Naktche town lay, in\nB. Hawkins' time (1799), on a creek of the same name, joining Coosa\nriver sixty miles above its confluence with Tallapoosa river, and\nharbored from fifty to one hundred warriors (Hawkins, p. 42). A number\nof Naktche families, speaking their paternal language, now live in the\nhilly parts of the Cheroki Nation, Indian Territory.\n\nA body of Indians, called by French and English writers Thioux and\nGrigras, remained in the vicinity of the Natchez colony after the\ndeparture of the Naktche Indians, who had been the ruling tribe of the\nconfederacy. It is doubtful whether these two divisions were of\nforeign or of Naktche origin, though the latter seems improbable. The\nGrigras were called so on account of a peculiarity in their\npronunciation; it probably referred to what the French call\n_grasseyer_, and the Canadian French _parler gras_.[29] Eleven Sh\u00e1wano\nwere once brought to the villages as captives, and were known there as\n\"Stinkards,\" \"Puants,\" terms which served to interpret the Naktche\nterm m\u00e9tsmetskop _miserable, bad, wretched, inferior_.\n\n    [Footnote 29: It is stated that the Thioux were a small body of\n    Indians, reduced in numbers by the Chicasa, and then\n    incorporated by the Naktche; their language possessed the sound\n    R. If this latter statement is true, their language was neither\n    of the Naktche nor of the Maskoki or Dakota family. In\n    conversation the Grigras often used this word _grigra_, which\n    also implies the use of the articulation R. Cf. Le Page du\n    Pratz, IV, chap, ii, sect. 1; Jefferys, French Dom. in America,\n    p. 162, and what is said of the Sh\u00e1wano under Yuchi, p.]\n\nThe scanty vocabularies which we possess of the Naktche language\ncontain a sprinkling of foreign terms adopted from the Chicasa or\nMobilian. Two languages at least were spoken before 1730 in the\nNaktche villages; the Naktche by the ruling class or tribe; the other,\nthe Chicasa or trade language by the \"low people;\" and hence the\nmixture referred to. Du Pratz gives specimens of both. Naktche is a\nvocalic language, rich in verbal forms, and, to judge from a few\nspecimens, polysynthetic to a considerable degree in its affixes.\n\n\nTONICA.\n\nMigratory dispositions seem to have inhered to the Tonica or Tunica\ntribe in a higher degree than to their southern neighbors, for in the\nshort lapse of two centuries we see them stationed at more than three\nplaces.\n\nIn a letter addressed by Commander Lemoyne d'Iberville to the Minister\nof the French Navy, dated from Bayogoulas, February 26th, 1700, he\nstates that an English fur-trader and Indian slave-jobber had just\nvisited the Tonica, who are on a river emptying into the Mississippi,\ntwenty leagues above the Taensa Indians, at some distance from the\nChicasa, and 170 leagues from the Gulf of Mexico. When d'Iberville\nascended the Yazoo river in the same year, he found a village of this\ntribe on its right (or western) bank, four days' travel from the\nNatchez landing. Seven villages were seen upon this river, which is\nnavigable for sixty leagues. The Tonica village, the lowest of them,\nwas two days' travel from Thysia, the uppermost (Margry IV, 180. 362.\n398; V, 401). La Harpe mentions the establishment of a mission house\namong the Tonica on Yazoo river.[30]\n\n    [Footnote 30: French, Hist. Coll. III, 16; cf. Margry V, 525.\n    The names of these villages to be given under Chicasa, q. v.]\n\nIn 1706, when expecting to become involved in a conflict with the\nChicasa and Alibamu Indians, the Tonica tribe, or a part of it, fled\nsouthward to the towns of the Huma, and massacred a number of these\nnear the site where New Orleans was built afterwards (French, Hist.\nColl. of La., III, 35). The \"Tunica Old Fields\" lay in Tunica county,\nMississippi State, opposite Helena, Arkansas. Cf. Cha'hta.\n\nThey subsequently lived at the Tonica Bluffs, on the east shore of the\nMississippi river, two leagues below the influx of the Red river. T.\nJefferys, who in 1761 gave a description of their village and chief's\nhouse, states that they had settled on a hill near the \"River of the\nTunicas,\" which comes from the Lake of the Tunicas, and that in close\nvicinity two other villages were existing (Hist. of French Dominions,\nI, 145-146).[31] Th. Hutchins, Louisiana and West Florida, Phila.,\n1784, p. 44, locates them a few miles below that spot, opposite Pointe\nCoup\u00e9e and ten miles below the Pascagoulas, on Mississippi river. So\ndoes also Baudry de Lozi\u00e8res in 1802, who speaks of a population of\none hundred and twenty men.\n\n    [Footnote 31: This was probably the place where Le Page du Pratz\n    saw them (about 1720 or 1725): \"vis-\u00e0-vis de la Rivi\u00e8re Rouge,\"\n    II, 220-221.]\n\nIn 1817, a portion of the tribe, if not the whole, had gone up the Red\nriver and settled at Avoyelles, ninety miles above its confluence\nwith the Mississippi. A group of these Indians is now in Calcasieu\ncounty, Louisiana, in the neighborhood of Lake Charles City.\n\nA separate chapter has been devoted to this tribe, because there is a\nstrong probability that their language differed entirely from the rest\nof the Southern tongues. Le Page du Pratz, l.l., in confirming this\nstatement, testifies to the existence of the sound R in their\nlanguage, which occurs neither in Naktche nor in the Maskoki dialects\nor Shetimasha (II, 220-221). We possess no vocabulary of it, and even\nthe tribal name belongs to Chicasa: t\u00fannig _post, pillar, support_,\nprobably post of territorial demarcation of their lands on the Yazoo\nriver. The only direct intimation which I possess on that tongue is a\ncorrespondence of Alphonse L. Pinart, who saw some Tonica individuals,\nand inferred from their terms that they _might_ belong to the great\nPani stock of the Western plains.\n\n\nAD\u00c1I.\n\nOf this small and obscure Indian community mention is made much\nearlier than of all the other tribes hitherto spoken of in this\nvolume, for Cabe\u00e7a de Vaca, in his _Naufragios_, mentions them among\nthe inland tribes as Atayos. In the list of eight Caddo villages,\ngiven by a Taensa guide to L. d'Iberville on his expedition up the Red\nriver (March 1699), they figure as the Natao (Margry IV, 178).\n\nThe Ad\u00e1i, At\u00e1-i, H\u00e1ta-i, Adayes (incorrectly called _Adaize_) seem to\nhave persisted at their ancient home, where they formed a tribe\nbelonging to the Caddo confederacy. Charlevoix (Hist. de la Nouvelle\nFrance, ed. Shea VI, p. 24) relates that a Spanish mission was founded\namong the Adaes in 1715. A Spanish fort existed there, seven leagues\nwest of Natchitoches, as late as the commencement of the nineteenth\ncentury. Baudry de Lozi\u00e8res puts their population at one hundred men\n(1802), and Morse (1822) at thirty, who then passed their days in\nidleness on the Bayou Pierre of Red river. Even at the present time\nthey are remembered as a former division of the Caddo confederacy, and\ncalled H\u00e1ta-i by the Caddo, who are settled in the southeastern part\nof the Indian Territory.\n\nA list of about 300 Ad\u00e1i words was gathered in 1802 by Martin Duralde,\nwhich proves it to be a vocalic language independent of any other,\nthough a few affinities are traceable with the Pani dialects. The\northography of that vocabulary cannot, however, be fully relied on.\nThe original is in the library of the American Philosophical Society,\nin Philadelphia. Rob. G. Latham, in his \"Opuscula; Essays, chiefly\nphilological,\" etc., London 1860; pp. 402-404, has compared Adahi\nwords with the corresponding terms of other North American languages,\nbut without arriving at a definite result.\n\n\nPANI.\n\nThe great family of Pani Indians has, in historic times, extended from\nthe Platte river southward to the Gulf of Mexico. From the main stock,\nthe Sanish or Arikari have wandered on their hunting trips north to\nthe Middle Missouri river, while the Pani, in four divisions, had the\nPlatte and its tributaries for their headquarters. The southern tribes\nare the Witchita, the Tow\u00e1kone or Three Canes, who speak the Witchita\ndialect, the Kichai and the originally Texan tribes of the Caddo and\nWaco (W\u00e9ko, in Spanish: Hueco.)[32]\n\n    [Footnote 32: Cf. R. G. Latham, Opuscula, p. 400, who was the\n    first to hint at a possible affinity of Caddo to Pani.]\n\nThe Pani family was too remote from the Maskoki tribes to enter in\ndirect connection with them. Some of the southern septs had\nintercourse with them, mainly through the French colonists. Fights\nbetween Caddos and Cha'hta are recorded for the eighteenth century.\nThe Pani family is mentioned here simply because the legendary caves\nfrom which the Creek nation is said to have sprung lay on Red river,\nwithin the limits of the territory held by some of the southern Pani\nnations.\n\nWhen L. d'Iberville ascended the western branch of the Red river, now\ncalled Red river (the eastern branch being Washita or Black river), in\nMarch 1699, he saw and visited eight villages of the Caddo connection.\nHis Taensa guide named them as follows:\n\n     Yatach\u00e9; called Y\u00e1tassi by Americans.\n\n     Nactythos; they are the Natchitoches.\n\n     Yesito;\n\n     Natao; the Ad\u00e1i above.\n\n     Cachaymons;\n\n     Cadodaquis; full form, Cado-hadatcho or \"_chief tribe_.\"\n\n     Natach\u00e9s;\n\n     Natsytos.\n\nThe Cachaymons and the Cadodaquis had been previously visited by\nCavelier de la Salle, when returning from the Cenys, in the central\nparts of Texas.[33]\n\n    [Footnote 33: Cf. Margry IV, 178. 313. 409.]\n\nThe Caddo confederacy consists of the following divisions or tribes,\nas given me by a Caddo Indian in 1882:\n\n     Kado proper; k\u00e1do means _chief, principal_.\n\n     Anad\u00e1ko, Anad\u0101ku; also Nandako.\n\n     Ainai, Ayenai; also Hini, Inies upon an affluent of Sabine\n        river; identical with the Tachies (Sibley). From this tribal\n        name is derived _Texas_, anciently Tachus, Taxus.\n\n     Natchidosh, Nash\u00e9dosh; the Natchitoches.\n\n     Y\u00e1tassi.\n\n     Anabaida\u00edtcho, Nab\u00e1datsu; the Nabedatches, who are nearly\n        extinct now.\n\n     N\u00e1tassi; identical with the Natach\u00e9s above.\n\n     Nak\u00fah\u0115d\u014dtch, Nakohod\u00f3tse; the Nagogdoches.\n\n     Assine, Ass\u00edni; the Asinays of French explorers.\n\n     Hada\u00ed; the Ad\u00e1i, Ad\u00e1ye, q. v.\n\n     Yow\u0101\u2032ni, now in Texas.\n\n     A\u2032-ish; a few of these are now living in Texas, called Alish,\n        Eyish by former writers.\n\nThe Caddo relate, as being the mythical origin of their nation, that\nthey came from a water-sink in Louisiana, went westward, shoved up\nearth by means of arrow-heads, and thus made a mountain. The totems of\ntheir gentes once were, as far as remembered, _bear_ n\u00e1-ustse,\n_panther_ k\u00f6\u2032she, _wolf_ t\u00e1-isha, _snake_ k\u00edka, _wild-cat_ wad\u00f3,\n_owl_ n\u00e9a, \u00f3-ush.\n\nWhen Milfort passed through the Red river country about 1780, the\nCaddo, whom he describes as fallacious in trading, were at war with\nthe Cha'hta (M\u00e9moire, p. 95).\n\nIn 1705 some Colapissa from the Talcatcha river, four leagues from\nLake Pontchartrain, settled upon the northern bank of this lake at\nCastembayouque (now Bayou Castin, at Mandeville), and were joined, six\nmonths after, by a party of \"Nassitoches,\" whom famine had driven from\ntheir homes on Red river.[34]\n\n    [Footnote 34: P\u00e9nicaut, in Margry V, 459-462.]\n\n\nSHETIMASHA.\n\nThese natives once dwelt in numerous settlements clustering around\nBayou Lafourche, Grand river (or Bayou Atchafalaya), and chiefly\naround Grand Lake or Lake of the Shetimasha. All that is left of\nthem--about fifty-five Indians, of a parentage strongly mixed with\nwhite blood, reside at Charenton, St. Mary's Parish, on the\nsouthwestern side of the lake, though a few are scattered through the\nforests on Grand river. They call themselves _P\u00e1ntch p\u00ednunkansh_, \"men\naltogether red.\" The name Shetimasha, by which they are generally\nknown, is of Cha'hta origin, and means \"they possess (im\u00e1sha) cooking\nvessels (tch\u00fati).\" Their central place of worship was three miles\nnorth of Charenton, on a small inlet of Grand Lake. They worshiped\nthere, by dances and exhaustive fasting, their principal deity,\nK\u00fat-N\u00e4h\u00e4nsh, the \"mid-day sun.\"\n\nThey were not warlike, and never figured prominently in colonial\nhistory. When a portion of the tribe, settled on Bayou Lafourche, had\nmurdered Mr. Saint-Cosme, a Naktche missionary descending the\nMississippi river in 1703, they were attacked by the colonists and\ntheir Indian allies. The war ended with a speedy submission of the\nsavages. They called the Naktche Indians their brothers, and their\nmyths related that their \"Great Spirit\" created them in the country of\nthat people, and gave them laws, women and tobacco. The Cha'hta\ntribes, who attempted to deprive them of their native land, made\ncontinual forays upon them during the eighteenth century.\n\nThese Indians were strict monogamists. The chieftaincy was a life-long\noffice among them. The chiefs lived in lodges larger than those of the\ncommon people, and their tobacco pipes were larger than those of the\nwarriors. The foreheads of the children were subjected to the\nflattening process.[35]\n\n    [Footnote 35: Of these Indians I have given an ethnographic\n    sketch in: Transact. Anthropolog. Society of Washington, 1883,\n    Vol. II, pp. 148-158.]\n\nTheir language is extremely polysynthetic as far as derivation by\nsuffixes is concerned, and there are also a number of prefixes. For\nthe pronouns _thou_ and _ye_ a common and a reverential form are in\nuse. The faculty for forming compound words is considerable, and the\nnumerals show the decimal form of computation.\n\n\nAT\u00c1KAPA.\n\nTo close the list of the linguistic families encircling the Maskoki\nstock, we mention the At\u00e1kapa, a language which has been studied but\nvery imperfectly. This tribe once existed upon the upper Bayou T\u00e8che\nnorthwest and west of the Shetimasha, north and northwest of the\nOpelousa Indians, and from the T\u00e8che extended beyond Vermilion river,\nperhaps down to the sea coast. The At\u00e1kapa of old were a well-made\nrace of excellent hunters, but had, as their name indicates, the\nreputation of being anthropophagists (Cha'hta: h\u00e1tak, hattak _person_,\n\u00e1pa _to eat_). At first, they suffered no intrusion of the colonists\ninto their territory and cut off expeditions attempting to penetrate\ninto their seats. During the nineteenth century they retreated toward\nthe Sabine river. The name by which they call themselves is unknown;\nperhaps it is Skunnemoke, which was the name of one of their villages\non Vermilion river, six leagues west of New Iberia. Cf. Th. Hutchins\n(Phila., 1784).\n\nThe scanty vocabulary of their language, taken in 1802, shows clusters\nof consonants, especially at the end of words, but with its queer,\nhalf-Spanish orthography does not appear to form a reliable basis for\nlinguistic conclusions. A few words agree with T\u00f3nkaw\u0113, the\nlanguage of a small Texan tribe; and according to tradition, the\nKar\u00e1nkawas, once the giant people of Matagorda bay, on the Texan\nCoast, spoke a dialect of At\u00e1kapa. These three tribes were, like all\nother Texan tribes, reputed to be anthropophagists. In extenuation of\nthis charge, Milfort asserts that they \"do not eat men, but roast them\nonly, on account of the cruelties first enacted against their\nancestors by the Spaniards\" (p. 90). This remark refers to a tribe,\nalso called At\u00e1kapas, which he met at a distance of five days' travel\nwest of St. Bernard bay.\n\nWe have but few notices of expeditions sent by French colonists to\nexplore the unknown interior of what forms now the State of Louisiana.\nOne of these, consisting of three Frenchmen, was in 1703 directed to\nexplore the tribes about the river de la Madeleine, now Bayou T\u00e8che.\nThe two men who returned reported to have met seven \"nations\" there;\nthe man they lost was eaten by the natives, and this misfortune\nprompted them to a speedy departure. The location seems to point to\nthe territory of the At\u00e1kapa.[36]\n\n    [Footnote 36: P\u00e9nicaut, in Margry V, 440.]\n\nThe enumeration of the southern linguistic stocks winds up with the\nAt\u00e1kapa; but it comprises only the families the existence of which is\nproved by vocabularies. Tonica and the recently-discovered Taensa\nfurnish the proof that the Gulf States may have harbored, or still\nharbor, allophylic tribes speaking languages unknown to us. The areas\nof the southern languages being usually small, they could easily\nescape discovery, insomuch as the attention of the explorers and\ncolonists was directed more toward ethnography than toward aboriginal\nlinguistics.\n\nThe southern tribes which _I suspect_ of speaking or having spoken\nallophylic languages, are the Bidai, the Koroa, the Westo and Stono\nIndians.\n\n\nBIDAI.\n\nRev. Morse, in his Report to the Government (1822), states that their\nhome is on the western or right side of Trinity river, Texas,\nsixty-five miles above its mouth, and that they count one hundred and\ntwenty people. In 1850 a small settlement of five or six Bidai\nfamilies existed on Lower Sabine River.\n\nThe Opelousas of Louisiana and the Cances of Texas spoke languages\ndiffering from all others around them.[37]\n\n    [Footnote 37: American State Papers, I, pp. 722-24.]\n\n\nKOROA.\n\nThe earliest home of this tribe, which figures extensively in French\ncolonial history, is a mountainous tract on the western shore of\nMississippi river, eight leagues above the Natchez landing. They were\nvisited there, early in 1682, by the explorer, C. de la Salle, who\nnoticed the compression of their skulls (Margry I, 558. 566). They\nwere a warlike and determined people of hunters. In 1705 a party of\nthem, hired by the French priest Foucault to convey him by water to\nthe Yazoos, murderously dispatched him with two other Frenchmen\n(P\u00e9nicaut, in Margry V, 458). A companion of C. de la Salle (in 1682)\nnoticed that the \"language of the Coroa differed from that of the\nTinsa and Natch\u00e9,\" but that in his opinion their manners and customs\nwere the same (Margry I, 558).\n\nKoroas afterward figure as one of the tribes settled on Yazoo river,\nformerly called also River of the Chicasa, and are mentioned there by\nD. Coxe, Carolana (1742), p. 10, as Kourouas. They were then the\nallies of the Chicasa, but afterward merged in the Cha'hta people, who\ncall them K\u00f3lwa, K\u00falua. Allen Wright, descended from a grandfather of\nthis tribe, states that the term is neither Cha'hta nor Chicasa, and\nthat the Koroa spoke a language differing entirely from Cha'hta.[38] A\nplace Kolua is now in Coahoma county, probably far distant from the\nancient home of this tribe. The origin of the name is unknown; the\nCha'hta word: k\u00e1\u207flo _strong, powerful_, presents some analogy in sound.\n\n    [Footnote 38: This is corroborated by the fact that the sound R\n    did exist in the Koroa language: Jefferys (1761), I, 163.]\n\n\nTHE WESTO AND STONO INDIANS\n\nlived in the vicinity of the English colony at Charleston, South\nCarolina. Their predatory habits made them particularly troublesome in\n1669-1671 and in 1674, when they had to be repulsed by an army of\nvolunteers. The Stonos must have lived north of the colony, or on the\nupper course of some river, for, in 1674, they are described as\n\"coming down\" (Hewat, Histor. Account of S. C. and Ga., London 1779;\nI, 51. 77). Stono Inlet is the name of a cove near Charleston. Both\ntribes also met with disastrous reverses at the hands of the Savannah\nIndians, probably the Y\u00e1massi (Archdale). They are both mentioned as\nhaving belonged to the Kataba confederacy, but this does not by any\nmeans prove that they spoke Kataba or a dialect of it. As to the name,\nthe Westo Indians may be identified with the Oustacs of Lederer (who\nare reported as being at war with the Usherees), and with the Hostaqua\nof Ren\u00e9 de Laudonni\u00e8re, who mentions them as forming a confederacy\nunder a paracusi in the northern parts of the \"Floridian\" territory.\nPossibly the Creek word \u014d\u2032sta _four_, in the sense of \"four\nallied tribes,\" has given origin to this tribal name (ost\u00e1ka in\nAlibamu).\n\nThe affinity of the extinct Congaree Indians, on Congaree river, is\ndoubtful also; Lawson relates that they did not understand the speech\nof the Waterees and Chicarees. Cf. Kataba. Owing to the inactivity of\nthe local historians, our ethnographic information on the North and\nSouth Carolina Indians is extremely meagre and unsatisfactory.\n\n\nREMARKS TO THE LINGUISTIC MAP.\n\nThe linguistic map added to this volume is an attempt to locate, in a\ngeneral way, the settlements pertaining to the Indians of each of the\nlinguistic stocks of the Gulf States, as far as traceable in the\neighteenth century. Some of them, as the Timucua and Y\u00e1massi\nsettlements, are taken from dates somewhat earlier, while the location\nof the At\u00e1kapa tribe is known to us only from the first decennium of\nthe nineteenth century. The marking of the linguistic areas by dots,\npointing to the tribal settlements, answers much better the purpose\nthan the coloring of large areas, which conveys the erroneous\nimpression that the population was scattered all over a certain\ncountry. This will do very well for densely populated countries, or\nfor tracts inhabited by roving, erratic Indians, whom we meet only on\nthe west side of the Mississippi river. The Gulf States' Indians were\nno longer in the condition of pure hunting tribes; they had settled in\nstationary villages, and derived the main part of their sustenance\nfrom agriculture and fishing.\n\nThe location of the Chicasa, Cheroki, Seminole and Caddo (Pani) tribes\nwere not indicated with that completeness which the subject requires.\nThe northwest corner of the map shows the tracts occupied at present\nin the Indian Territory by tribes of Maskoki lineage.\n\n\nII. THE MASKOKI FAMILY.\n\nAmong the various nationalities of the Gulf territories the Maskoki\nfamily of tribes occupied a central and commanding position. Not only\nthe large extent of territory held by them, but also their numbers,\ntheir prowess in war, and a certain degree of mental culture and\nself-esteem made of the Maskoki one of the most important groups in\nIndian history. From their ethnologic condition of later times, we\ninfer that these tribes have extended for many centuries back in time,\nfrom the Atlantic to the Mississippi and beyond that river, and from\nthe Apalachian ridge to the Gulf of Mexico. With short intermissions\nthey kept up warfare with all the circumjacent Indian communities, and\nalso among each other. All the various dispositions of the human mind\nare represented in the Maskoki tribes. We have the cruel and lurking\nChicasa, the powerful and ingenious but treacherous and corruptible\nCha'hta, the magnanimous and hospitable, proud and revengeful Creek,\nthe aggressive Alibamu, the quarrelsome Y\u00e1massi, and the self-willed,\nindependent Seminole, jealous of the enjoyment of his savage freedom\nin the swamps and everglades of the semi-tropical peninsula.\n\nThe irresolute and egotistic policy of these tribes often caused\nserious difficulties to the government of the English and French\ncolonies, and some of them constantly wavered in their adhesion\nbetween the French and the English cause. The American government\novercame their opposition easily whenever a conflict presented itself\n(the Seminole war forms an exception), because, like all the Indians,\nthey never knew how to unite against a common foe.\n\nThe two main branches of the stock, the Creek and the Cha'hta Indians,\nwere constantly at war, and the remembrance of their deadly conflicts\nhas now passed to their descendants in the form of folklore. The two\ndiffer anthropologically in their exterior, the people of the western\nor Cha'hta branch being thick-set and heavy, that of the eastern or\nCreek connection more lithe and tall. Prognathism is not frequent\namong them, and the complexion of both is a rather dark cinnamon, with\nthe southern olive tinge. The general intelligence of this gifted race\nrenders it susceptible for civilization, endows it with eloquence, but\ndoes not always restrain it from the outbursts of the wildest passion.\n\nAmong the tribes of the Maskoki family, we notice the following\nethnographic practices: the use of the red and white colors as symbols\nof war and peace, an extensive system of totemic gentes, the use of\nthe Ilex cassine for the manufacture of the black drink, the erection\nof artificial mounds, the belief in a deity called \"Master of Life,\"\nand original sun-worship. The eastern tribes all had an annual\nfestival in the town square, called a _fast_ (p\u00faskita in Creek), and\nsome traces of it may be found also among the western connection. In\nthe eastern and western branch (also among the Naktche people) the\nchildren belong to the gens of the mother, a custom which differs from\nthat of the Yuchi and dates from high antiquity. No instances of\nanthropophagy are recorded, but the custom of scalping seems to have\nbeen indigenous among them. The early Timucua scalped their enemies\nand dried the scalps over their camp-fires. The artificial flattening\nof the foreheads of male infants seems to have prevailed in the\nwestern branch only, but some kind of skull deformation could be\nobserved throughout the Gulf territories. The re-interment of dead\nbodies, after cleaning their bones from the adhering muscles several\nmonths after death, is recorded more especially for the western\nbranch, but was probably observed among all tribes in various\nmodifications.\n\nNone of the customs just enumerated was peculiar to the Maskoki\ntribes, but common throughout the south, many of them being found in\nthe north also. They were mentioned here only, to give _in their\ntotality_ a fair ethnographic picture of the Maskoki nationality.\n\nThe genealogy of the Maskoki tribes cannot be established on\nanthropological, that is racial, characteristics; these Indians\nformerly incorporated so many alien elements into their towns, and\nhave become so largely mixed with half-castes in the nineteenth\ncentury, that a division on racial grounds has become almost\nimpossible.\n\nHence, the only characteristic by which a subdivision of the family\ncan be attempted, is that of _language_. Following their ancient\ntopographic location from east to west, we obtain the following\nsynopsis:\n\n_First branch, or Maskoki proper._ The Creek, Maskok\u00e1lgi or Maskoki\nproper, settled on Coosa, Tallapoosa, Upper and Middle Chatahuchi\nrivers. From these branched off by segmentation the Creek portion of\nthe Seminoles, of the Y\u00e1massi and of the little Yamacraw community.\n\n_Second, or Apalachian branch._ This southeastern division, which may\nbe called also _a parte potiori_ the Hitchiti connection, anciently\ncomprised the tribes on the Lower Chatahuchi river and, east from\nthere, the extinct Apalachi, the Mikasuki, and the Hitchiti portion of\nthe Seminoles, Y\u00e1massi and Yamacraws.\n\n_Third, or Alibamu branch_ comprised the Alibamu villages on the river\nof that name; to them belonged the Koass\u00e1ti and Witumka on Coosa\nriver, its northern affluent.\n\n_Fourth, Western or Cha'hta branch._ From the main people, the\nCha'hta, settled in the middle portions of the State of Mississippi,\nthe Chicasa, Pascagoula, Biloxi, Huma and other tribes once became\nseparated through segmentation.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe strongest evidence for a community of origin of the Maskoki tribes\nis furnished by the fact that _their dialects belong to one linguistic\nfamily_. The numerous incorporations of foreign elements have not been\nable to alter the purity of their language; the number of intrusive\nwords is very small, and the grammar has repelled every foreign\nintrusion. This is the inference we draw from their best studied\ndialects, for with some of them, as with \u00c1bika, we are not acquainted\nat all, and with others very imperfectly. The principal dialects of\nthe family greatly differ from each other; Cha'hta, for instance, is\nunintelligible to the Creek, Koass\u00e1ti and Hitchiti people, and the\nspeech of each of these three tribes is not understood by the two\nothers. When Albert Gallatin published his vocabularies of Cha'hta and\nCreek, he was uncertain at first whether they were related to each\nother or not. On the other side, the difference between Cha'hta and\nChicasa, and between Creek and Seminole, is so insignificant that\nthese dialects may be considered as practically identical. The degree\nof dialectic difference points approximately to the date of the\nseparation of the respective communities, and untold centuries must\nhave elapsed since the two main branches of the family were torn\nasunder, for Cha'hta differs about as much from Creek as the literary\nGerman does from Icelandic.\n\n\nTHE COMMON MASKOKI LANGUAGE.\n\nAlthough the dialects of Maskoki do not now diverge from each other\nmore than did the Semitic dialects two thousand years ago, the time\nwhen they all had a common language, or, in other words, the time\npreceding the separation into four divisions must lie further back\nthan eight or ten thousand years. We cannot expect to reconstruct the\nparent Maskoki language spoken at that time but very imperfectly,\nsince the oldest text known to exist in any of the dialects dates from\nA. D. 1688 only. An approach to its reconstruction could be attempted\nby carefully comparing the lexicon and grammatic forms of the dialects\npresently spoken, and an individual acquainted with them all, or at\nleast with their four representatives, might also compose _a\ncomparative grammar_ of these dialects as spoken at the present epoch\nof their development, which would reveal many points concerning the\nancient or historic shape of the language once common to all these\ntribes.\n\nWhat the Maskoki dialects presently spoken, _as far as published_,\nhave in common, may be stated in a general way in the following\noutlines:\n\n_Phonetics._--The dialects possess the sound f and the palatalized l\n(`l), but lack th, v and r, while nasalization of the vocalic element\nis more peculiar to the western than to the eastern divisions. There\nis a tendency to pronounce the _mutes_ or checks by applying the\ntongue to the alveolar part of the palate. The phonetic system is as\nfollows:\n\n                       EXPLOSIVES:                   BREATHS:\n\n              Not aspirated.  Aspirated.   Spirants.  Nasals.  Trills.\n\n  Gutturals  k         g          \u03c7            h\n\n  Palatals   tch, ts   dsh, ds                 y         \u0144       `l\n\n  Linguals   k\u2032        g\u2032                      sh                 l\n\n  Dentals    t         d                       s         n\n\n  Labials    p         b           f           w         m\n\n  _Vowels_:--i, e, \u0101, a, o, u; with their long and nasalized sounds.\n\nThe syllable is quite simple in its structure; it consists either of a\nvowel only, or begins with one consonant (in the eastern division with\none or two), and ends in a vowel. Deviations from this rule must be\nexplained by phonetic alteration, elision, etc. The frequent\noccurrence of homonymous terms forms a peculiar difficulty in the\nstudy of the dialects.\n\n_Morphology._--No thorough distinction exists between the different\nparts of speech, none especially between the nominal and the verbal\nelement. The fact that all adjectives can be verbified, could be\nbetter expressed as follows: The adjectives used attributively are\nparticiples of attributive verbs and inflected for number like these,\ntheir so-called plural being the plural form of a verb. This we\nobserve in Iroquois, Taensa and many other American languages; it also\nexplains the position of the adjective _after_ the noun qualified.\nSome forms of the finite verb represent true verbs, while others, like\nthe Creek forms, with tcha-, tchi-, pu-, etc., prefixed, which is the\npossessive pronoun, are nominal forms, and represent _nomina agentis_\nand _nomina actionis_. The three cases of the noun are not accurately\ndistinguished from each other in their functions; substantives form\ndiminutives in -odshi, -osi, -usi, etc. The distinction between\nanimate and inanimate gender is not made in this language family; much\nless that between the male and the female sex. The possessive pronoun\nof the third person singular and plural (im-, in-, i-) is prefixed in\nthe same manner to substantives to indicate possession, as it is to\nverbs to show that an act is performed in the interest or to the\ndetriment of the verbal subject or object. The Cha'hta alone\ndistinguishes between the inclusive and the exclusive pronouns _we,\nour, ours_. A dual exists neither in the noun nor in the pronoun,\nbut in most of the intransitive verbs. The numerals are built upon the\nquinary system, the numeral system most frequent in North America. The\nverb forms a considerable number of tenses and incorporates the\nprefixed object-pronoun, the interrogative and the negative particle;\nit has a form for the passive and one for the reflective voice. By a\nsort of reduplication a distributive form is produced in the verb,\nadjective and some numerals, which often has a frequentative and\niterative function. The lack of a true relative pronoun and of a true\nsubstantive verb is supplied in different ways by the various\ndialects; the former, for instance, by the frequent use of the verbal\nin -t. Derivatives are formed by prefixation and suffixation, many of\nthe derivational being identical with inflectional affixes in these\ndialects.\n\nAlthough Maskoki speech, taken as a whole, belongs to the\nagglutinative type of languages, some forms of it, especially the\npredicative inflection of the verb and the vocalic changes in the\nradicals, strongly remind us of the inflective languages. Words,\nphrases and sentences are sometimes composed by syncope, a process\nwhich is more characteristic of the agglutinative than of the\ninflective type, and is by no means confined to the languages of\nAmerica.\n\nIn the following _comparative table_ I have gathered some terms of\nMaskoki which coincide in two or more of the dialects. The table may\nbe helpful for giving a general idea of the lexical differences\nexisting between the dialects explored:\n\n  ------------+----------+------------+-------------+-----------+-----------\n              | Cha'hta. |  Chicasa.  |  Alibamu.   | Koass\u00e1ti. |   Creek.\n  ------------+----------+------------+-------------+-----------+-----------\n  Warrior     |t\u00e1ska     |t\u00e1ska       |tastenuk\u00edha  |tastan\u00f3ki  |task\u00e1ya\n  Woman       |oh\u00f3yo     |eh\u00f3, ih\u00f3    |             |t\u00e9yi       |h\u00f3kti\n  Foot        |\u00edyi       |iyi         |i-p\u00e1t'ha     |i-p\u00e1t'ha   |\u00edli\n  Village,town|t\u00e1maha    |\u00f3kla        |\u00f3la          |\u00f3la        |t\u00e1lofa\n  Chief       |m\u00edngo     |m\u00ednko       |m\u00edko         |m\u00edku       |miko\n  House       |tch\u00faka    |tch\u00faka      |ish\u00e1         |\u00edsa        |tch\u00fa'ku\n  Knife       |b\u00e1shpo    |bushpo      |             |           |isl\u00e1fka\n  Canoe       |p\u00edni      |p\u00edni        |             |           |pi`l\u00fadshi\n  Fire        |l\u00faak      |l\u00faak        |\u00edti          |tigba      |t\u00fatka\n  Water       |\u00f3ka, uk'ha|\u00f3ka         |\u00f3ki          |\u00f3ki        |o-\u00edwa, u-\u00edwa\n  Earth, land |y\u00e1kni     |y\u00e1k'ne      |ih\u00e1ni        |ih\u00e1ni      |\u00edkana\n  Stone, rock |t\u00e1li      |t\u00e1le        |t\u00e1li         |t\u00e1li       |tch\u00e1to\n  Wood        |\u00edti       |iti         |itu          |\u00edtu        |itu\n  Sun         |h\u00e1shi     |hash\u00e9       |hasie        |h\u00e1si       |h\u00e1si\n  Moon        |h\u00e1shi     |hash\u00e9 nenak\u00e1|hasi-nissi   |ni\u2032la h\u00e1si |h\u00e1s-'lisi\n  Thunder     |hil\u00f3ha    |hil\u00f3ha      |tonok\u00f3\u03c7ha    |winei'hk\u00e1  |tin\u00edtki\n  Pine        |t\u00edak      |t\u00edak        |tch\u00faye       |tch\u00faye     |\n  Maize       |t\u00e1ntchi   |t\u00e1ntchi     |tchasi\u00e9      |tch\u00e1si     |\u00e1dshi, \u00e1tchi\n  Grass       |h\u00e1shuk    |h\u00e1shuk      |\u00e1ssi         |p\u00e1hi       |p\u00e1hi\n  Bear        |n\u00edta      |nita        |n\u00edkta        |nikta      |nok'h\u00fasi\n  Deer        |issi      |\u00edssi        |\u00edtchu        |idshu      |\u00edtchu\n  Bird        |h\u00fashi     |fush\u00e9       |f\u00f3si         |fosi       |f\u00fasua\n  Fish        |nan\u00ed      |nann\u00e9       |'l\u00e1`lu       |'l\u00e1`lu     |'l\u00e1`lu\n  Good        |atch\u00fakma  |atch\u00fakma    |kan\u00f3asu      |k\u00e1heno,k\u00e1nu|hi`li\n  White       |h\u00e1ta, t\u00f3bi|tohobi      |h\u00e1tka        |h\u00e1tga      |h\u00e1tki\n  Red         |h\u00famma     |h\u00f3mma       |h\u00famma        |h\u00famma      |tch\u00e1ti\n  Black       |l\u00fasa      |l\u00f3sa        |l\u00f3tcha       |l\u00fadsa      |l\u00e1sti\n  All         |m\u00f3ma      |oklunh\u00e1     |wayam\u00falu     |wayili     |om\u00e1lga\n  One         |atch\u00e1fa   |tch\u00e1ffa     |tchaf\u00e1ka     |tchaf\u00e1ka   |h\u00e1mgin\n  Two         |t\u00faklo     |t\u00f3kolo      |tokol\u00f3       |t\u00faglo      |hok\u00f3lin\n  Three       |tutch\u00edna  |totch\u00e9na    |tut'tch\u00edna   |tutch\u00ednan  |tut'tch\u00ednin\n  Four        |\u00fashta     |osht\u00e1       |ost\u00e1ka       |ost\u00e1kan    |\u00f3shtin\n  Five        |ta`l\u00e1pi   |ta`l\u00e1pe     |ta`l\u00e1pi      |tsahup\u00e1ga  |tcha'hk\u00edpin\n  Six         |han\u00e1li    |hann\u00e1le     |h\u00e1nali       |ahanna\u2032lin |ip\u00e1kin\n  Seven       |unt\u00faklo   |ontokl\u00f3     |hont\u00f3k'lo    |hont\u00f3klun  |kolap\u00e1kin\n  Eight       |untotch\u00edna|ontutch\u00e9na  |hontot'tchina|undets\u00ednan |tchinap\u00e1kin\n  Nine        |tchak\u00e1li  |tchak\u00e1le    |ibitch\u00e1'hkali|pitchak\u00e1lin|ostap\u00e0kin\n  Ten         |pok\u00f3li    |pok\u00f3le      |pok\u00f3li       |pok\u00f3le     |p\u00e1lin\n  To see      |pisa      |p\u00edssa       |hitchas      |hitchus    |h\u00eddshita\n  ------------+----------+------------+-------------+-----------+-----------\n\n  ------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-------------\n              |  Seminole.   |   Hitchiti.   |    Apalachi.   |  Mikasuki.\n  ------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-------------\n  Warrior     |task\u00e1ya       |h\u00fa\u2032li-tipi     |taskaia         |tasiki\u00e1'hli\n  Woman       |h\u00f3kti         |t\u00e4\u00edgi          |                |taiki\n  Foot        |ili           |i-pal\u00e1shi      |ia, ya          |ili-palasi\n  Village,town|t\u00e1lofa        |\u00f3kli           |t\u00f3fun(obj. case)|\u00f3kli\n  Chief       |miko          |miki           |                |miki\n  House       |tch\u00fbku        |tch\u00edki         |tch\u00edka          |tch\u00edki\n  Knife       |isl\u00e1tka       |iskalafki      |                |iskalafki\n  Canoe       |pi`l\u00f3dshi(dim)|pi`l\u00f3tsi, pi`li|                |pi`l\u00f3dshi(dim)\n  Fire        |t\u00fatka         |\u00edti            |                |\u00edti\n  Water       |o-\u00edwa         |\u00f3ki            |                |\u00f3ki\n  Earth, land |\u00edkana         |y\u00e1kni          |                |y\u00e1kni\n  Stone, rock |tch\u00e1to        |t\u00e1li           |                |tale\n  Wood        |\u00edtu           |ah\u00ed            |                |a`li\n  Sun         |h\u00e1si          |h\u00e1si           |                |hasi\n  Moon        |              |has-\u00f3tali      |hitok (_month_) | has-otali\n  Thunder     |tin\u00edtki       |tonuk\u00e1'htchi   |                |tonokatchi\n  Pine        |tch\u00f3li        |               |                |tchoyi\n  Maize       |\u00e1dshi         |\u00e1spi           |                |\u00e1spi\n  Grass       |p\u00e1hi          |               |                |p\u00e1hi\n  Bear        |nokose        |no\u03c7\u016b'si        |                |n\u00f3kosi\n  Deer        |\u00edtcho         |itchi          |                |itchi\n  Bird        |fosua, f\u00faswa  |fosi           |                |fusi\n  Fish        |'la`lu        |'l\u00e1`li         |                |'l\u00e1`li\n  Good        |hi`li         |h\u00ed`li          |                |h\u00ed`li\n  White       |h\u00e1tki         |h\u00e1tgi          |                |hatki\n  Red         |tch\u00e1ti        |kitistchi      |                |kitiski\n  Black       |l\u00e1sti         |l\u00f3dshi         |                |l\u00fatchi\n  All         |om\u00e1lga        |l\u00e1pki          |\u00e1mali, il\u00fangta  |l\u00e1pki\n  One         |h\u00e1mgin        |`l\u00e1min         |                |'l\u00e1min\n  Two         |hok\u00f3lin       |t\u00faklan         |                |t\u00f3klan\n  Three       |tut'tchinin   |tutch\u00ednan      |tusa            |tot'tch\u00ednan\n  Four        |\u00f3shtin        |sit\u00e1kin        |                |tchit\u00e1kin\n  Five        |tcha'hki\u2032pin  |tch\u00e1kgipan     |                |tcha\u2032hk\u00edpin\n  Six         |ip\u00e1kin        |ipagin         |                |ip\u00e1kin\n  Seven       |kolap\u00e1kin     |kolap\u00e1kin      |                |kolap\u00e1kin\n  Eight       |tchinap\u00e1kin   |tusnap\u00e1kin     |                |tosnap\u00e1kin\n  Nine        |ostap\u00e1kin     |ustapakin      |                |ostap\u00e1kin\n  Ten         |p\u00e1lin         |pok\u00f3lin        |                |pok\u00f3lin\n  To see      |hidshita      |hitch\u00edgi       |pitcha          |hidsh\u00edki\n  ------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+-------------\n\nThe Chicasa of this comparative table is from a vocabulary taken by G.\nGibbs (1866); the Seminole and the Mikasuki from Buckingham Smith's\nvocabularies printed in the Historical Magazine (Morrisania, N. Y.)\nfor August, 1866, and in W. W. Beach's: Indian Miscellany, Albany\n1877, p. 120-126. The latter differs but little from the Mikasuki of\nG. Gibbs, in the linguistic collection of the Bureau of Ethnology in\nWashington. The few words of Apalachi were drawn from the missive\nsent, A. D. 1688, to the king of Spain, to be mentioned under\n\"Apalachi\"; the Koass\u00e1ti terms I obtained in part at the Indian\ntraining school at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, partly from Gen. Alb.\nPike's vocabularies, which also furnished the Alibamu terms.\n\nReaders will perceive at the first glance that Cha'hta is practically\nthe same language as Chicasa, Creek as Seminole and Hitchiti as\nMikasuki. Alibamu forms a dialect for itself, leaning more toward\nCha'hta than Creek. The southeastern group holds a middle position\nbetween Cha'hta and Creek. As far as the queer and inaccurate Spanish\northography of Apalachi enables us to judge, this dialect again\ndiffers somewhat from Hitchiti and Mikasuki. It will be well to\nremember that in Indian and all illiterate languages the sounds of the\nsame organ-class are _interchangeable_; thus, a word may be\n_correctly_ pronounced and written in six, ten, or twelve different\nways. Tch\u00e1to _rock, stone_ can be pronounced tch\u00e1tu, tch\u00e1do, tch\u00e1du,\nts\u00e1to, ts\u00e1tu, ts\u00e1do, ts\u00e1du, etc. This explains many of the apparent\ndiscrepancies observed in the comparative table, and in our texts\nprinted below.\n\nA comparative study of the existing Maskoki vocabularies would be very\nfruitful for the ethnographic history of the tribes, and likely to\ndisclose the relative epochs of their settlement, if those that we\nhave now could be thoroughly relied on. In the comparative table\nsubjoined I have received only such terms that answer to this\nrequisite.\n\nThere are terms which occur in all dialects in the same or nearly the\nsame form, as h\u00e1si _sun_, \u00edtchu, \u00edssi _deer_, \u00f3fi, \u00edfa _dog_, the\nterms for _chief, black, yellow, bird, snake, buffalo, turtle, fox_\n(also in Cheroki: tsu'hl\u00e1), the numerals and the personal pronouns;\nthey must, therefore, have been once the common property of the still\nundivided, primordial tribe. The fact that the words for _chief_\n(m\u00edki, m\u00edngo, m\u00edko), for hol\u00e1'hta, and for _warrior_ (t\u00e1ska, task\u00e1ya),\nagree in all dialects, points to the fact that when the tribes\nseparated they lived under similar social conditions which they have\nkept up ever since. The terms for _maize_ disagree but apparently, and\nseem to be reducible to one radix, atch or ash; the terms for _dog_\nagree in all dialects--hence, the Maskoki tribes planted maize and\nkept dogs before, probably many centuries before they separated; and\nthe term \u00edfa went over from them to the Timucua. The word for\n_buffalo_, y\u00e1nase, is the same in all dialects, and was probably\nobtained from the North, since the term occurs in Cheroki also (y\u00e1'hsa\nin Eastern Cheroki). The name for _salt_, h\u00e1pi, a mineral which had a\nsacrificial importance, is found also in Yuchi in the form t\u00e1pi, but\nCreek has \u00f3k-tchanua, Hitchiti: ok-tch\u00e1hane. The term for _tobacco_\nagrees in all divisions of the stock (haktch\u00famma), except in the Creek\nbranch, where it is called h\u00edtchi, h\u00eddshi. This weed is said to have\nreceived its Maskoki names from a similarity of the top of the green\nplant with the phallus, which is called in Alibamu and Hitchiti:\n\u00f3ktchi or \u00e1ktchi.\n\n\nTHE NAME MASKOKI; ITS USE AND SIGNIFICATION.\n\nMask\u00f3ki, Mask\u00f3gi, isti Mask\u00f3ki, designates a single person of the\nCreek tribe, and forms, as a collective plural, Maskok\u00e1lgi, the Creek\ncommunity, the Creek people, the Creek Indians. English authors write\nthis name Muscogee, Muskhogee, and its plural Muscogulgee. The first\nsyllable, as pronounced by the Creek Indians, contains a clear, short\na, and that the name was written Muscogee and not Mascogee, is not to\nbe wondered at, for the English language, with its surd, indistinct\nand strongly modified vocalization, will convert the clearest a into a\nu. Whether the name Maskoki was given to the Creeks before or after\nthe incorporation of the towns speaking other languages than theirs,\nwe are unable to tell, but the name figures in some of the oldest\ndocuments on this people. The accent is usually laid on the middle\nsyllable: Mask\u00f3ki, Mask\u00f3gi. None of the tribes are able to explain the\nname from their own language.\n\nThe Cheroki call a Creek Indian K\u00fasa, the nation Ani-k\u00fasa, probably\nbecause K\u00fasa was the first Creek town they met, when coming from their\ncountry along Coosa river, Alabama. But why did the English colonists\ncall them _Creek_ Indians? Because, when the English traders entered\nthe Maskoki country from Charleston or Savannah, they had to cross a\nnumber of streams and creeks, especially between the Chatahuchi and\nSavannah rivers. Gallatin thought it probable that the inhabitants of\nthe country adjacent to Savannah river were called Creeks from an\nearly time (Synopsis, p. 94). The French settlers rendered the term\nLower Creeks by \"Basses-Rivi\u00e8res.\"\n\nThe Wend\u00e1t or Hurons call the Creek people Ku-\u00fb\u2032sha, having obtained\nthe name from the Cheroki. The Foxes or Utagami call one Creek man\nU'mashgo \u00e1nene-u, the people U\u2032mashgohak. B. S. Barton, New Views\n(1798), Appendix p. 8, states that the Delawares call the Creeks\nMasquachki: \"swampland.\"\n\nCaleb Swan, who wrote a report on the Creek people in 1791, mentions\n(Schoolcraft V, 259) a tradition current among them, that they\nincorporated the Alibamu first, then the Koass\u00e1ti, then the Naktche,\nand finally the Sh\u00e1wano. In his time the Sh\u00e1wano had four towns on the\nTallapoosa river, and other Sh\u00e1wano (from the northwest) increased\ntheir population every year by large numbers. One of these towns was\ncalled Sawan\u00f3gi, another Kanhatki. A Muscogee creek is near Columbus,\nrunning into Chatahuchi river from the east. \"Muskhogans\" inhabited\nthe tract north of Pensacola.\n\nThe term is not derived from any known Maskoki word. If oki _water_\nformed a component part of it, it would stand first, as in the\nHitchiti geographic terms Ok\u0115l\u00e1kni \"_yellow water_,\" Okifen\u00f3ke\n\"_wavering, shaking waters_,\" Okm\u00falgi \"_bubbling water_,\" Okitch\u00f3bi\n\"_river_,\" lit. \"_large river_.\" We are therefore entitled to look out\nfor a Sh\u00e1wano origin of the tribal name, and remember the fact that\nthe Creek Indians called the Sh\u00e1wano and the Len\u00e1pe (Delawares) their\ngrandfathers. It will be appropriate to consult also the other\nAlgonkin languages for proper names comparable with the one which\noccupies our attention.\n\nThe Sh\u00e1wano call a Creek person Hum\u00e1sko, the Creek people Humask\u00f3gi.\nHere the hu- is the predicative prefix: _he is, she is, they are,_ and\nappears often as ho-, hui-, ku-. Thus Humask\u00f3gi means \"_they are\nMasko_\", the suffix -gi, -ki being the plural ending of the animate\norder of substantives in Sh\u00e1wano. A word masko is not traceable at\npresent in that language, but muski\u00e9gui means _lake, pond_,\nm'skiegu-pki or muski\u00e9gu-pki _timbered swamp_, musk'h\u00e1nui nep\u00ed _the\nwater_ (nep\u00ed) _rises up to, surrounds_, but does not cover up.\nMiskekopke in Caleb Atwater's vocabulary (Arch\u00e6ol. Americ. I, p. 290),\nsignifies _wet ground, swamp_. Rev. Lacombe's Cree or Knisteno\nDictionary gives: maskek _marsh, swamp, trembling ground_ unsafe to\nwalk upon; Maskekowiyiniw _the Maskegons_ or _Bogmen_, a tribe of\nCrees, also called Maskekowok, who were formerly Odshibw\u0113 Indians, but\nleft Lake Superior to join the Crees; their name forms a striking\nparallel to our southern Maskoki. Rev. Watkins' Cree Dictionary, with\nits English, unscientific orthography, has musk\u0101g, musk\u0101k _swamp,\nmarsh_; Musk\u0101goo _Swampy Indian, Maskegon_; Musk\u0101goowew _he is a\nSwampy Indian_. Here the predicative suffix -wew is placed after the\nnoun, while hu- of Sh\u00e1wano stands before it. The Odshibw\u0113 Dictionary\nof Bishop Baraga has m\u00e1shkig, plur. m\u00e1skigon _swamp, marsh_; Mashki\nsibi _Bad River_; a corrupt form standing for Mashkigi sibi _Swamp\nRiver_. In Abn\u00e1ki we have megu\u00e4'k _fresh water marsh_, maskehegat\n_fetid water_.\n\nThe Sh\u00e1wano word for _creek, brook, branch of river_ is metht\u00e9kui;\nSh\u00e1wano often has th where the northern dialects have s (th\u00edpi\n_river_, in Potawat. and Sauk: sibe, in Odshibw\u0113: sibi) and hence\nthe radix meth- is probably identical with mas- in maskek.\n\nThe country inhabited by the Maskoki proper abounds in creek bottoms\noverflowed in the rainy season, as the country around Opel\u00edka\n\"_swamp-site_\" (from Creek: op\u00edlua, ap\u00edlua _swamp_, l\u00e4\u00edkita _to be\nstretched out_), Opil-`l\u00e1ko \"_great swamp_,\" west of the above\n(Hawkins, p. 50) and many other places rendered uninhabitable by the\nmoisture of the ground. The countries of the Cha'hta and Chicasa also\nformed a succession of swamps, low grounds and marshes. In view of the\nfact that no other general name for the whole Creek nation was known\nto exist save Maskoki, and that the legend and the chroniclers of de\nSoto's expedition speak of single tribes only, we are entitled to\nassume this foreign origin for the name until a better one is\npresented. Another instance of an Algonkin name of an Indian\nnationality adopted by the Maskoki is that of isti Natu\u00e1gi, or the\n\"_enemies creeping up stealthily_,\" lit., \"_snake-men_,\" by which the\nIroquois, or Five Nations, are meant.[39]\n\n    [Footnote 39: By this same name the Algonkins designated many\n    other Indians hostile to them; it appears in Nottoway,\n    Nadouessioux, etc.]\n\nIn this publication I call the Maskoki proper by the name of Creeks\nonly, and have used their name on account of the _central_ location\nand commanding position of the Maskoki proper, to whom this\nappellation properly belongs, to designate _the whole Cha'hta-Maskoki\nfamily of Indians_.\n\nIt will also be remembered that several of the larger communities of\nAmerican Indians are known to the white population exclusively\nthrough names borrowed from other languages than their own, as, for\ninstance, the Kalap\u00faya of Oregon, who call themselves Am\u0113\u2032nmei,\nKalap\u00faya (anciently Kalap\u00fayua) being of Chinook origin, and the Pani,\nwhose name is, according to J. H. Trumbull, taken from an Algonkin\ndialect, and means _lungy, not bellicose, inferior_, while their\nown name is Tsar\u00edksi ts\u00e1riks \"_men of men_.\"[40] Foreign names have\nalso been given to the smaller tribes of the Shetimasha and At\u00e1kapa,\nnames which are of Cha'hta origin; v. supra. The Patagonian and\nArgentinian tribes are mostly known to us under Chilian names, and the\nAimbor\u00e9 or Nkr\u00e4\u2032kmun of Brazil we know only under the Portuguese\nname Botocudos.\n\n    [Footnote 40: Prof. J. B. Dunbar, who composed an interesting\n    ethnologic article on this tribe, thinks that Pani is a true\n    Pani word: p\u00e1riki _horn_, meaning their scalp lock; Magazine of\n    American History, 1880 (April number), p. 245.]\n\n\nTHE TRIBAL DIVISIONS OF THE MASKOKI FAMILY.\n\n\nY\u00c1MASSI.\n\nAs early as the latter half of the sixteenth century, a tribe speaking\na Maskoki language was settled on the shores of the Atlantic ocean, on\nlands included at present in the State of South Carolina, and from\nthese shores they extended to some distance inland. In that country\nRen\u00e9 de Laudonni\u00e8re in 1564 established a fortification in Port Royal\nBay, called Charlefort, and the terms transmitted by him, being all of\nCreek origin, leave no doubt about the affinity of the natives,\nyatiqui _interpreter_, tola _laurel_, Olataraca, viz.: hol\u00e1'hta `l\u00e1ko,\nnom. pr. \"_the great leader_.\" Shortly after, the Spanish captain Juan\nPardo led an expedition (1566-67) through the countries along Savannah\nriver, and the local names found in the report made of it by Juan de\nla Vandera (1569) also point to the presence of a people speaking\nCreek established on both sides of that river:[41] Ahoya \"_two\ngoing_\"; Issa Cr. \u00eddshu \"_deer_\"; Solameco, Cr. s\u00fali miko \"_buzzard\nchief_\"; Canosi, Cr. ikan\u014d\u2032dshi \"_graves are there_\"--the name of\nCannouchee river, Georgia.\n\n    [Footnote 41: Cf. Buck. Smith, Coleccion de Documentos ineditos,\n    I, p. 15-19 (Madrid, 1857).]\n\nAfter the lapse of a century, when British colonists began to settle\nin larger numbers in these parts, a tribe called Y\u00e1massi (Yemasee,\nYamasee, Yemmassaws, etc.) appears in the colonial documents as\nsettled there, and in the maritime tracts of Georgia and Eastern\nFlorida. Thus G. R. Fairbanks, History of St. Augustine (1858), p.\n125, mentions the following dates from Spanish annals: \"The Yemasees,\nalways peaceful and manageable, had a principal town, Macarisqui, near\nSt. Augustine. In 1680 they revolted, because the Spaniards had\nexecuted one of their principal chiefs at St. Augustine; and in 1686\nthey made a general attack on the Spaniards, and became their mortal\nenemies.\"\n\nThe inroads of the Y\u00e1massi, in Cr. Yamass\u00e1lgi, made in 1687 and 1706\nupon the christianized Timucua have been alluded to under \"Timucua\"\n(p. 12).\n\nThe English surveyor Lawson, who traveled through these parts in 1701,\ncalls them Savannah Indians, stating that they are \"a famous, warlike,\nfriendly nation of Indians, living at the south end of Ashley river.\"\n(Reprint of 1860, p. 75.) Governor Archdale also calls them\n_Savannahs_[42] in 1695; hence they were named like the Yuchi, either\nfrom the Savannah river, or from the savanas or prairies of the\nsouthern parts of South Carolina. The Yuchi probably lived northwest\nof them. A few miles north of Savannah city there is a town and\nrailroad crossing, Yemassee, which perpetuates their tribal name.\nAnother ancient authority locates some between the Combahee and the\nSavannah river, and there stood their largest town, Pocotaligo.[43]\nHewat (1779) states that they possessed a large territory lying\nbackward from Port Royal Island, in his time called Indian Land (Hist.\nAcc., I, 213). Cf. Westo and Stono Indians, p. 48.\n\n    [Footnote 42: Description of Carolina, London, 1707. The Y\u00e1massi\n    then lived about eighty miles from Charleston, and extended\n    their hunting excursions almost to St. Augustine.]\n\n    [Footnote 43: Gallatin, Synopsis, p. 84, recalls the\n    circumstance that Poketalico is also the name of a tributary of\n    the Great Kanawha river. This seems to point to a foreign origin\n    of that name.]\n\nThey had been the staunchest Indian supporters of the new British\ncolony, and had sent 28 men of auxiliary troops to Colonel Barnwell,\nto defeat the Tuscarora insurrection on the coast of North Carolina\n(1712-13), when they suddenly revolted on April 15th, 1715, committed\nthe most atrocious deeds against helpless colonists, and showed\nthemselves to be quite the reverse of what their name indicates\n(y\u00e1masi, y\u00e1massi, the Creek term for _mild, gentle, peaceable_[44]).\nAmong their confederates in the unprovoked insurrection were Kataba,\nCheroki and Congari Indians. Wholesale massacres of colonists occurred\naround Pocotaligo, on Port Royal Island and at Stono, and the number\nof victims was estimated at four hundred. A force of volunteers,\ncommanded by Governor Craven, defeated them at Saltketchers, on Upper\nCombahee river, southern branch, and drove them over Savannah river,\nbut for a while they continued their depredations from their places of\nrefuge (Hewat, Histor. Acc., I, 213-222).\n\n    [Footnote 44: Verbified in tchay\u00e1mass\u00efs: I am friendly, liberal,\n    generous, hospitable.]\n\nNames of Y\u00e1massi Indians mentioned at that period also testify to\ntheir Creek provenience. The name of a man called Sanute is explained\nby Cr. san\u00f3dsh\u00e4s _I encamp near_, or _with somebody_; that of\nIshiagaska (Tchiagaska?) by \u00edka ak\u00e1ska _his scraped_ or _shaved head_;\nor issi ak\u00e1ska _his hair (on body) removed_. At a public council held\nat Savannah, in May 1733, a Lower Creek chief from Kaw\u00edta expressed\nthe hope that the Y\u00e1massi may be in time _reunited to his people_; a\nfact which fully proves the ethnic affinity of the two national\nbodies.[45]\n\n    [Footnote 45: Cf. Jones, Tomochichi, p. 31.]\n\nIn Thomas Jeffery's Map of Florida, which stands opposite the\ntitle-page of John Bartram, Descr. of East Florida, London, 1769, 4to,\na tract on the northeast shore of Pensacola bay is marked \"Yamase\nLand.\"\n\nA tradition is current among the Creeks, that the Y\u00e1massi were reduced\nand exterminated by them, but it is difficult to trace the date of\nthat event. W. Bartram, Travels, p. 137, speaks of the \"sepulchres or\ntumuli of the Yamasees who were here slain in the last decisive\nbattle, the Creeks having driven them to this point, between the\ndoubling of the river (St. Juan, Florida), where few of them escaped\nthe fury of the conquerors.... There were nearly thirty of these\ncemeteries of the dead,\" etc.; cf. _ibid._, p. 183. 516. Forty or\nfifty of them fled to St. Augustine and other coast fortresses, and\nwere protected by the Spanish authorities; p. 55. 485. 390.\n\nAfter the middle of the eighteenth century the name Y\u00e1massi disappears\nfrom the annals as that of a distinct tribe. They were now merged into\nthe Seminoles; they continued long to exist as one of their _bands_\nwest of the Savannah river, and it is reported \"that the Yemasi band\nof Creeks refused to fight in the British-American war of 1813.\"\n\nAll the above dates permit us to conclude that, ethnographically, the\nY\u00e1massi were for the main part of Creek origin, but that some foreign\nadmixture, either Kataba or Yuchi, had taken place, which will account\nfor the presence of their local names of foreign origin. The\nApalachian or Hitchiti branch of the Maskoki family must have also\nfurnished elements to those Y\u00e1massi who were settled southwest of\nSavannah city, for that was the country in which the Apalachian branch\nwas established.\n\n\nYAMACRAW.\n\nThis small tribe is known only through its connection with the young\nBritish colony of Savannah and the protection which its chief,\nTomochichi, extended over it. This chief, from some unknown reason,\nhad separated from his mother tribe of Apalatch\u00fakla town, and went to\nreside upon a river bluff four miles above the site of Savannah city.\nHe subsequently visited England and its court with Esquire Oglethorpe\n(in 1733), and died, about ninety-seven years old, in 1739, highly\nrespected by his Indians and the colonists. The Yamacraw Indians, who\nhad followed him to the Savannah river, consisted mainly of\ndisaffected Lower Creek and of some Y\u00e1massi Indians.\n\nThe Creeks cannot give any account of the name Yamacraw, and the R,\nwhich is a component sound of it, does not occur in any of the Maskoki\ndialects nor in Yuchi. Cf. Chas. C. Jones, Historical Sketch of\nTomo-chi-chi, mico of the Yamacraws. Albany, 1868, 8vo.\n\n\nSEMINOLE.\n\nThe term seman\u00f3le, or isti siman\u00f3le, signifies _separatist_ or\n_runaway_, and as a tribal name points to the Indians who left the\nCreek, especially the Lower Creek settlements, for Florida, to live,\nhunt and fish there in entire independence. The term does not mean\n_wild, savage_, as frequently stated; if applied now in this sense\nto animals, it is because of its original meaning, \"what has become a\nrunaway\": p\u00ednua siman\u00f3le _wild turkey_ (cf. p\u00edn-ap\u00faiga _domesticated\nturkey_), tchu-\u00e1ta seman\u00f3li, _antelope_, literally, \"goat turned\nrunaway, wild,\" from tchu-\u00e1ta, \u00edtchu h\u00e1ta _goat_, lit., \"bleating\ndeer.\"[46] The present Seminoles of Florida call themselves\nIkani\u00fa-ksalgi or \"Peninsula-People\" (from \u00edkana _land_, ni\u00faksa, for\nin-y\u00faksa _its point, its promontory_, -algi: collective ending);\nanother name for them is Tallah\u00e1ski, from their town Tallahassie, now\ncapital of the State of Florida. The Wend\u00e1t or Hurons call them\nUngiay\u00f3-rono, \"Peninsula-People,\" from ungi\u00e1yo _peninsula_. In Creek,\nthe Florida peninsula is called also Ikan-f\u00e1ski, the \"Pointed Land,\"\nthe Seminoles: Ikanaf\u00e1skalgi \"people of the pointed land.\" The name\nmost commonly given to the Seminoles in the Indian Territory by the\nCreeks is Siman\u014d\u2032lalgi, by the Hitchiti: Siman\u014d\u2032la'li.\n\n    [Footnote 46: This adjective is found verbified in\n    isiman\u014dl\u0103idshit \"he has caused himself to be a runaway.\"]\n\nIndians speaking the Creek language lived in the south of the\npeninsula as early as the sixteenth century. This fact is fully proved\nby the local names and by other terms used in these parts transmitted\nby Fontanedo (in 1559, cf. Calusa): seletega! \"_run hither!_\" now\npronounced sil\u00edtiga, sil\u00edtka, abbrev. from isil\u00edtka; isil\u00edtk\u00e4s _I run\naway_, lit., I carry myself away, off; l\u00edtk\u00e4s _I am running_. Sil\u00edtiga\nis now used as a personal name among the Creeks.\n\nWe have seen that a portion of Fontanedo's local names of the Calusa\ncountry are of Creek origin, and that another portion is probably\nTimucua. The rest of them, like Yagua and others, seem to be of\nCaribbean origin, and a transient or stationary population of Caribs\nis mentioned by Hervas, _Catalogo de las lenguas_ I, p. 386 as having\nlived in the Apalachi country.[47]\n\n    [Footnote 47: Cf. Proceed. Am. Philos. Society of Phila., 1880,\n    pp. 466, 478.]\n\nThe hostile encounter between Creeks and Calusa, mentioned by Romans\n(cf. Calusa), probably took place about A. D. 1700, but the name\nSeminole does not appear as early as that. Previous to that event the\nCreeks seem to have held only the coast line and the north part of\nwhat is now the area of Florida State. A further accession resulted\nfrom the arrival of the Y\u00e1massi, whom Governor Craven had driven into\nGeorgia and into the arms of their enemies, the Spaniards of Florida,\nafter suppressing the revolt of 1715 in which they had participated.\n\nThe Seminoles of modern times are a people compounded of the following\nelements: separatists from the Lower Creek and Hitchiti towns;\nremnants of tribes partly civilized by the Spaniards; Y\u00e1massi Indians\nand some negroes. According to Hawkins, Sketch of the Creek Country\n(1799), pp. 25. 26, they had emigrated from Ok\u00f3ni, S\u00e1wokli, Yuf\u00e1la,\nTam\u00e1`la, Apalatch\u00fakla and Hitchiti (all of which are Lower Creek\ntowns), being invited to Florida by the plenty of game, the mildness\nof the climate and the productiveness of the soil. The Seminoles\nmentioned by him inhabited the whole peninsula, from Apalachicola\nriver to the \"Florida Point,\" and had the following seven towns:\nSeman\u00f3le Talah\u00e1ssi, Mikasuki, Witchot\u00fakmi, Alachua, Oklaw\u00e1ha `l\u00e1ko,\nTalua-tch\u00e1pk-ap\u00f3pka, Kalusa-h\u00e1tchi. Some of the larger immigrations\nfrom the Creek towns into those parts occurred: in 1750, after the end\nof the Revolutionary war, in 1808 and after the revolt of the Upper\nCreeks in 1814.\n\nWhen Wm. Bartram traveled through the Seminole country, about 1773, he\nwas informed that Cuscowilla, a town on a lake of the same name and a\nsort of Seminole capital, had been built by Indians from Ok\u00f3ni old\ntown, settled upon the Alachua plains: \"They abdicated the ancient\nAlachua town on the borders of the savanna, about fifty miles west\nfrom the river San Juan, and built here, calling the new town\nCuscowilla. (About 1710) they had emigrated from Oconee town, on the\nOconee river, on account of the proximity of the white people.\" They\nformerly waged war with the \"Tomocos (Timucua), Utinas, Calloosas,\nYamases\" and other Florida tribes.[48]\n\n    [Footnote 48: Wm. Bartram, Travels, p. 97. 179. 190-193. 216.\n    217. 251. 379-380. The name Cuscowilla bears a curious\n    resemblance to the Chicasa town Tuskawillao, mentioned by Adair,\n    History, p. 353. Cf. also Ok\u00f3ni, in List of Creek Settlements.]\n\nThe Seminoles were always regarded as a sort of outcasts by the Creek\ntribes from which they had seceded, and no doubt there were reasons\nfor this. The emigration included many of the more turbulent elements\nof the population, and the mere fact that many of them spoke another\ndialect than the Maskoki proper (some belonging to the Hitchiti or\nsoutheastern division of the family) is likely to have cast a shadow\nupon them. The anecdote narrated by Milfort (M\u00e9moire, p. 311-317)\nfurnishes ample proof of the low esteem in which the Seminoles were\nheld by the Creeks. But, on the other side, emigration was favored by\nthe Creek communities themselves through the practice observed by some\nof their number to send away a part of their young men to form branch\nvillages, whenever the number of the inhabitants began to exceed two\nhundred. Several towns will be found in our \"List of Creek\nSettlements,\" in which the process of segmentation was going on upon a\nlarge scale in the eighteenth century.\n\nThe Seminoles first appear as a distinct politic body in American\nhistory under one of their chiefs, called King Payne, at the beginning\nof this century. This refers more particularly to the Seminoles of the\nnorthern parts of what is now Florida; these Indians showed, like the\nCreeks, hostile intentions towards the thirteen states during and\nafter the Revolution, and conjointly with the Upper Creeks on\nTallapoosa river concluded a treaty of friendship with the Spaniards\nat Pensacola in May, 1784. Although under Spanish control, the\nSeminoles entered into hostilities with the Americans in 1793 and in\n1812. In the latter year Payne m\u00edko was killed in a battle at Alachua,\nand his brother, the influential Bowlegs, died soon after. These\nunruly tribes surprised and massacred American settlers on the Satilla\nriver, Georgia, in 1817, and another conflict began, which terminated\nin the destruction of the Mikasuki and Suwanee river towns of the\nSeminoles by General Jackson, in April, 1818. After the cession of\nFlorida, and its incorporation into the American Union (1819), the\nSeminoles gave up all their territory by the treaty of Fort Moultrie,\nSeptember 18th, 1823, receiving in exchange goods and annuities. When\nthe government concluded to move these Indians west of the Mississippi\nriver, a treaty of a conditional character was concluded with them at\nPayne's Landing, in 1832. The larger portion were removed, but the\nmore stubborn part dissented, and thus gave origin to one of the\ngravest conflicts which ever occurred between Indians and whites. The\nSeminole war began with the massacre of Major Dade's command near\nWahoo swamp, December 28th, 1835, and continued with unabated fury for\nfive years, entailing an immense expenditure of money and lives. A\nnumber of Creek warriors joined the hostile Seminoles in 1836.\n\nA census of the Seminoles taken in 1822 gave a population of 3899,\nwith 800 negroes belonging to them. The population of the Seminoles in\nthe Indian Territory amounted to 2667 in 1881 (Ind. Affairs' Rep.),\nand that of the Florida Seminoles will be stated below. There are some\nSeminoles now in Mexico, who went there with their negro slaves.\n\nThe settlements of the Seminoles were partly erratic, comparable to\nhunters' camps, partly stationary. The stationary villages existed\nchiefly in the northern parts of the Seminole lands, corresponding to\nSouthern Georgia and Northern Florida of our days. A very instructive\ntable exists of some of their stationary villages, drawn up by Capt.\nYoung, and printed in Rev. Morse's Report on the Indians of the United\nStates (1822), p. 364. This table however includes, with a few\nexceptions, only places situated near Apalachicola river (east and\nwest of it), in Alabama, Georgia and Florida; the list was probably\nmade at a time when Florida was still under Spanish domination, which\naccounts for the fact that the county names are not added to the\nlocalities. Many of these towns were, in fact, Lower Creek towns and\nnot belonging to the Seminole proper, all of whom lived east of\nApalachicola river, mostly at some distance from it. Seminole and\nLower Creek were, in earlier times, often regarded as identical\nappellations; cf. Milfort, M\u00e9m., p. 118.\n\nThe remarks included in parentheses were added by myself.\n\n     LIST OF SEMINOLE SETTLEMENTS.\n\n     Micasukeys--(In eastern part of Leon county, Florida).\n\n     Fowl Towns--Twelve miles east of Fort Scott (a place \"Fowl\n        Town\" is now in Decatur county, Georgia, on eastern shore of\n        Chatahuchi river).\n\n     Oka-tiokinans--Near Fort Gaines (the Oki-tiy\u00e1kni of our List of\n        Creek Settlements; Fort Gaines is on Chatahuchi river, Clay\n        county, Georgia, 31\u00b0 38\u00b4 Lat.)\n\n     Uchees--Near the Mikasukey.\n\n     Ehawhokales--On Apalachicola (river).\n\n     Ocheeses--At Ocheese Bluff (Ocheese in southeast corner of\n        Jackson county, Florida, western shore of Apalachicola\n        river; cf. List).\n\n     Tamatles--Seven miles from the Ocheeses. (Cf. Tam\u00e1`li, in List\n        of Creek Settlements.)\n\n     Attapulgas--On Little river, a branch of Okalokina (now\n        Oklokonee river, or \"Yellow Water,\" from \u00f3ki _water_, l\u00e1kni\n        _yellow_, in Hitchiti; the place is in Decatur county,\n        Georgia. From \u00edtu-p\u00falga, _boring holes into wood_ to make\n        fire: p\u00falg\u00e4s _I bore_, \u00edtu _wood_).\n\n     Telmocresses--West side of Chatahoochee river (is T\u00e1lua\n        m\u00fatchasi, \"Newtown\").\n\n     Cheskitalowas--West side of Chatahoochee river (Chiska tal\u00f3fa\n        of the Lower Creeks, q. v.)\n\n     Wekivas--Four miles above the Cheskitalowas.\n\n     Emussas--Two miles above the Wekivas (Omussee creek runs into\n        Chatahuchi river from the west, 31\u00b0 20\u00b4 Lat.; im\u00fassa\n        signifies: _tributary, branch, creek joining another\n        water-course_; from the verb im-\u00f3s\u00e4s).\n\n     Ufallahs--Twelve miles above Fort Gaines (Yuf\u00e1la, now Eufaula,\n        on west bank of Chatahuchi river, 31\u00b0 55\u00b4 Lat.)\n\n     Red Grounds--Two miles above the line (or Georgia boundary;\n        Ikan-tch\u00e1ti in Creek).\n\n     Etohussewakkes--Three miles above Fort Gaines (from \u00edtu _log_,\n        h\u00e1ssi _old_, w\u00e1k\u00e4s, _I lie on the ground_).\n\n     Tattowhehallys--Scattered among other towns (probably t\u00e1lua\n        h\u00e1llui \"upper town\").\n\n     Tallehassas--On the road from Okalokina (Oklokonee river) to\n        Mikasukey (now Tallahassie, or \"Old City,\" the capital of\n        Florida State).\n\n     Owassissas--On east waters of St. Mark's river (Wacissa, Basisa\n        is a river with a Timucua name).\n\n     Chehaws--On the Flint river (comprehends the villages planted\n        there from Chiaha, on Chatahuchi river).\n\n     Tallewheanas--East side of Flint river (is H\u00f3tali huy\u00e1na; cf.\n        List of Creek Settlements).\n\n     Oakmulges--East of Flint river, near the Tallewheanas.\n\nFrom reports of the eighteenth century we learn that in the south of\nthe Floridian peninsula the Seminoles were scattered in small bodies,\nin barren deserts, forests, etc., and that at intervals they assembled\nto take black drink or deliberate on tribal matters. It is also stated\nthat in consequence of their separation the Seminole language had\nchanged greatly from the original Creek; a statement which is not\nborne out by recent investigations, and probably refers only to the\nSeminole towns speaking Hitchiti dialects.\n\nBy order of the Bureau of Ethnology, Rev. Clay MacCauley in 1880\nvisited the Seminoles settled in the southern parts of the peninsula,\nto take their census and institute ethnologic researches. He found\nthat their population amounted to 208 Indians, and that they lived in\nfive settlements to which he gave the following names:\n\n    1. Miami settlement; this is the old name of Mayaimi Lake, and\n    has nothing in common with the Miami-Algonkin tribe.\n\n    2. Big Cypress, 26\u00b0 30\u00b4 Lat.\n\n    3. Fish-eating Creek, 26\u00b0 37\u00b4; head-chief Tusten\u00faggi.\n\n    4. Cow Creek, fifteen miles north of Lake Okitch\u00f3bi.\n\n    5. Catfish Lake, 28\u00b0 Lat. The late Chipko was chief there, who\n    had been present with Osceola at the Dade massacre in 1835.\n\nTraces of languages other than the Seminole were not discovered by\nhim.\n\nIn December 1882 J. Francis Le Baron transmitted to the Smithsonian\nInstitution a few ethnologic notices and a vocabulary obtained from\nthe Seminole Indians of Chipko's (since deceased) band, which he had\nvisited in March 1881 in their village near Lake Pierce. The dialect\nof the vocabulary does not differ from Creek in any appreciable\ndegree. On marriage customs and the annual busk of these Indians he\nmakes the following remarks: \"They do not marry or intermix with the\nwhites, and are very jealous of the virtue of their women, punishing\nwith death any squaw that accepts the attentions of a white man. Some\nSeminoles exhibit a mixture of negro blood, but some are very tall,\nfine-looking savages. Their three tribes live at Chipko town, near\nLake Oketchobee, and in the Everglades. They have a semi-religious\nannual festival in June or July, called the green corn dance, the new\ncorn being then ripe enough to be eaten. Plurality of wives is\nforbidden by their laws. Tom Tiger, a fine-looking Indian, is said to\nhave broken this rule by marrying two wives, for which misdemeanor he\nwas banished from the tribe. He traveled about one hundred miles to\nthe nearest tribe in the Everglades, and jumped unseen into the ring\nat the green corn dance. This procured him absolution, conformably to\ntheir laws.\"\n\nWe have deemed it appropriate to dwell at length on the history,\ntopography and peculiar customs of the Seminoles on account of their\nidentity with the Creek Indians, the main object of this research. We\nnow pass over to the Southeastern or Apalachian group of Maskoki.\n\n\nAPALACHI.\n\nThe Hitchiti, Mikasuki and Apalachi languages form a dialectic group\ndistinct from Creek and the western dialects, and the people speaking\nthem must once have had a common origin. The proper names Apalachi and\nApalatch\u00fakli are now extinct as tribal names, but are of very ancient\ndate. The auriferous ledges of the Cheroki country were said to be\nwithin \"the extreme confines of the Apalachi province\" (Fontanedo,\n1559), and the Apalachi found by Narvaez was fifteen days' march north\nof Aute,[49] a roadstead or harbor on the Gulf of Mexico, though the\nIndians had stated to him that it lay at a distance of nine days'\ntravel only. The \"province\" of Apalachi probably included the upper\npart or the whole of the Chatahuchi river basin, and on account of the\nending -okla in Apalatch\u00fakla, its origin must be sought in the Cha'hta\nor Hitchiti dialect. Rev. Byington explains it by _helping people_,\n_allies_, in the Cha'hta ap\u0103l\u0103tchi \u00f3kla, but the original form\nof the name is Apala\u03c7tchi \u00f3kli, not ap\u00e1latchi; -\u03c7tchi is a\nHitchiti suffix of adjectives, and ap\u00e1lui in that dialect means \"_on\nthe other side of_.\" Hence the adjective ap\u00e1la\u03c7tchi: \"those\n(_people_ \u00f3kli) on the other side, shore or river.\"\n\n    [Footnote 49: Perhaps from the Hitchiti term a-\u00fatilis \"_I build\n    or kindle a fire_.\"]\n\nThe town of Apalachi, on Apalache bay, must be kept clearly distinct\nfrom the town of Apalachicola, or Apalatch\u00fakla, about fifty miles\nfurther west, on the river then called by the same name.\n\nApalachi town was north of Apalachi bay, the principal port of which\nis now St. Marks. This was probably the place after which \"Apalache\nprovincia\" was named in de Soto's time; Biedma, one of his historians,\nstates (in Smith, Docum. ined., I, 48. 49), that \"this province was\ndivided by a river from the country east of it, having Aguile as\nfrontierstown. Apalachi has many towns and produces much food, and\n(the Indians) call this land visited by us Yustaga.\" This river was\nprobably the St. Mark's river. Both names are also distinguished as\nbelonging to separate communities in Margry IV, 96. 117 (1699) and IV,\n309. The western \"Palachees\" are laid down on the map in Dan. Coxe,\nCarolana, on Chatahuchi river, the eastern \"Palachees\" on a river in\nthe northeast angle of the Gulf of Mexico; north of the latter are the\nTommachees (Timucua). At present, a northwestern affluent of Okoni\nriver, in Upper Georgia, is called Apalache river.\n\nApalatch\u00fakla, a name originally belonging to a _tribe_, was in early\ntimes transferred to the river, now Chatahuchi, and from this to all\nthe towns of the Lower Creeks. An instance of this is given by L.\nd'Iberville, who states (Margry IV, 594. 595) that in 1701 a\ndifficulty arose between the Apalachicolys and the Apalachis on\naccount of depredations committed; that the Spanish call those Indians\nApalachicolys, the French Conchaques, and that they counted about 2000\nfamilies--an equal number of men being ascribed to the Apalachis, who\nwere under Spanish rule.\n\nThe name of the tribe and town was Apalatch\u00fakla, also written\nPallachucla, Palachicola. This town was on the western bank of\nChatahuchi river, 1-1/2 miles below Chiaha. In early times its tribe\nwas the most important among the Lower Creeks, adverse to warfare, a\n\"peace or white town,\" and called by the people T\u00e1lua `l\u00e1ko, _Great\nTown_. Like the town Apalachi, the inhabitants of this town spoke a\ndialect resembling Hitchiti very closely. Apalachicola river is now\nthe name of Chatahuchi river below its junction with the Flint river.\nMore about this town in the: List of Creek Settlements.\n\nLater in the sixteenth century the boundary between the Timucua and\nthe _Apalachi_ lands is stated to have been on or near the Vacissa\nriver; Ibitachuco or _Black Lake_ being the eastern Apalachi boundary,\nthe westernmost town of the Timucua being Asile (Ausile, Oxilla).\n\nIn 1638 the Indians of Apalachi made war against the Spanish\ncolonists. Although the governor of Florida had but few troops to\noppose, he marched against them and daunted their aggressiveness\n(sobervia) by forcing them to a disastrous retreat and following them\ninto their own country (Barcia, Ensayo, p. 203).\n\nIn 1688 a number of Apalachi chiefs (caciques) addressed a letter of\ncomplaint to Charles the Second, king of Spain (\u20201700), concerning the\nexactions to which their former governors had subjected them, and\nother topics relating to their actual condition. The towns mentioned\nin the letter are San Luis de Apalachi, Ibitachuco, Pattali, Santa\nCruz, Talpatqui, Vasisa, San Marcos. The original, with its Spanish\ntranslation, was reproduced in a fac-simile edition in 1860 by\nBuckingham Smith (fol.), and other documents written in Apalachi are\npreserved in the archives of Havana, the seat of the archbishopric, to\nwhich Apalachi and all the other settlements comprised within the\ndiocese of St. Helena belonged.\n\nChristianized Apalachis, who had been frequently raided by Alibamu\nIndians, fled in 1705 to the French colony at Mobile, where Governor\nde Bienville gave them lands and grain-seed to settle between the\nMobilian and Tohome tribe; cf. P\u00e9nicaut in Margry V, 461. 485, where\ntheir religious festivals and other customs are described. Like the\nApalachis, the tribe of the heathen Taouachas had quitted the Spanish\nterritory for being harassed by the Alibamu, and fled southwest to the\nFrench, who settled them on Mobile river, one league above the\nApalachis (1710; in Margry V, 485-487). Some Cha'hta refugees had been\nsettled at the \"Anse des Chactas,\" on Mobile bay, the year preceding.\nIn the nineteenth century the last remnants of the Apalachi tribe were\nliving on the Bayou Rapide, in Louisiana, and about A. D. 1815 counted\nfourteen families.\n\n\nMIKASUKI.\n\n\"Miccosukee\" is a town of Florida, near the northern border of the\nState, in Leon county, built on the western shore of the lake of the\nsame name. The tribe established there speaks the Hitchiti language,\nand must hence have separated from some town or towns of the Lower\nCreeks speaking that language.\n\nThe tribe was reckoned among the Seminole Indians, but does not figure\nprominently in Indian history before the outbreak of the Seminole war\nof 1817. It then raised the \"red pole\" as a sign of war, and became\nconspicuous as a sort of political centre for these Southern\n\"soreheads.\" The vocabularies of that dialect show it to be\npractically identical with that of Hitchiti town. Cf. the comparative\ntable, p. 56. More notices on this tribe will be found under: Seminole.\n\n\nHITCHITI.\n\nThe Hitchiti tribe, of whose language we present an extensive specimen\nin this volume, also belongs to the southeastern group, which I have\ncalled Apalachian.\n\nHitchiti town was, in Hawkins' time, established on the eastern bank\nof Chatahuchi river, four miles below Chiaha. The natives possessed a\nnarrow strip of good land bordering on the river, and had the\nreputation of being honest and industrious. They obtained their name\nfrom Hitchiti creek, so called at its junction with Chatahuchi river,\n[and in its upper course Ah\u00edki (Ouhe-gee); cf. List] from Creek:\nah\u00edtchita \"_to look up_ (the stream).\" They had spread out into two\nbranch settlements: Hitchit\u00fadshi or Little Hitchiti, on both sides of\nFlint river, below the junction of Kitchofuni creek, which passes\nthrough a county named after it; and Tutal\u00f3si on Tutalosi creek, a\nbranch of Kitchofuni creek, twenty miles west of Hitchit\u00fadshi\n(Hawkins, p. 60. 65). The existence of several Hitchiti towns is\nmentioned by C. Swan in 1791; and Wm. Bartram states that they \"speak\nthe Stincard language.\" There is a popular saying among the Creeks,\nthat the ancient name of the tribe was Atch\u00edk'hade, a Hitchiti word\nwhich signifies _white heap_ (of ashes).\n\nSome Hitchiti Indians trace their mythic origin to a fall from the\nsky, but my informants, Chicote and G. W. Stidham, gave me the\nfollowing tale: \"Their ancestors first appeared in the country by\ncoming out of a canebrake or reed thicket (\u00fatski in Hitchiti) near the\nsea coast. They sunned and dried their children during four days, then\nset out, arrived at a lake and stopped there. Some thought it was the\nsea, but it was a lake; they set out again, traveled up a stream and\nsettled there for a permanency.\" Another tradition says that this\npeople was the first to settle at the site of Okmulgi town, an ancient\ncapital of the confederacy.\n\nThe tribe was a member of the Creek confederacy and does not figure\nprominently in history. The first mention I can find of it, is of the\nyear 1733, when Gov. Oglethorpe met the Lower Creek chiefs at\nSavannah, Ga., to conciliate their tribes in his favor. The \"Echetas\"\nhad sent their war-chiefs, Chutabeeche and Robin with four attendants\n(Ch. C. Jones, Tomochichi, p. 28). The Yutchit\u00e1lgi of our legend, who\nwere represented at the Savannah council of 1735 by \"Tomehuichi, dog\nking of the Euchitaws,\" are probably the Hitchiti, not the Yuchi. Wm.\nBartram calls them (1773) \"Echetas\" also.\n\nThe dialect spoken by the Hitchiti and Mikasuki once spread over an\nextensive area, for local names are worded in it from the Chatahuchi\nriver in an eastern direction up to the Atlantic coast. To these\nbelong those mentioned under \"the name Maskoki,\" p. 58.\n\nAccording to Wm. Bartram, Travels, pp. 462-464, the following towns on\nChatahuchi river spoke the \"Stincard\" language, that is a language\ndiffering from Creek or Muscogulge: Ch\u00edaha (Chehaw), Hitchiti\n(Echeta), Ok\u00f3ni (Occone), the two S\u00e1wokli (Swaglaw, Great and Little).\nFrom this it becomes probable, though not certain, that the dialect\nknown to us as Hitchiti was common to them all. The S\u00e1wokli tribe,\nsettled in the Indian Territory, have united there with the Hitchiti,\na circumstance which seems to point to ancient relationship.\n\nLike the Creeks, the Hitchiti have an ancient _female_ dialect, still\nremembered and perhaps spoken by the older people, which was formerly\nthe language of the males also. The woman language existing among the\nCreek Indians is called by them also the _ancient_ language. A\nthorough study of these archaic remnants would certainly throw light\non the early local distribution of the tribes and dialects of the\nMaskoki in the Gulf States.\n\nHUNTER'S SONG.\n\nThe following ancient hunting song may serve as a specimen of the\nfemale dialect of Hitchiti; the ending _-i_ of the verbs, standing\ninstead of _-is_ of the male dialect, proves it to be worded in that\narchaic form of speech. Obtained from Judge G. W. Stidham:\n\n      H\u00e1ntun tal\u00e1nkawati \u0101\u2032klig; \u00e9yali.\n        Sut\u00e1! kay\u00e1! kayap'h\u00fa!\n      aluktchabakliw\u00e1ti \u0101\u2032klig; \u00e9yali.\n        Sut\u00e1! kay\u00e1! kayap'h\u00fa!\n      aluktigonknaw\u00e1ti \u0101\u2032klig; \u00e1yali.\n        Sut\u00e1! kay\u00e1! kayap'h\u00fa!\n      aluk'hadsh\u00e1-aliwati \u0101\u2032klig; \u00e9yali.\n        Sut\u00e1! kay\u00e1! kayap'h\u00fa!\n      h\u00e1ntun ayaw\u00e1ti \u0101\u2032klig; \u00e1yali.\n        Sut\u00e1! kay\u00e1! kayap'h\u00fa!\n\n      Somewhere (the deer) lies on the ground, I think; I walk about.\n                Awake, arise, stand up!\n      It is raising up its head, I believe; I walk about.\n                Awake, arise, stand up!\n      It attempts to rise, I believe; I walk about.\n                Awake, arise, stand up!\n      Slowly it raises its body, I think; I walk about.\n                Awake, arise, stand up!\n      It has now risen on its feet, I presume; I walk about.\n                Awake, arise, stand up!\n\nAt every second line of this song the singer kicks at a log, feigning\nto start up the deer by the noise from its recesses in the woods. The\nsong-lines are repeated thrice, in a slow and plaintive tune, except\nthe refrain, which is sung or rather spoken in a quicker measure, and\n_once_ only. For the words of the text and of the refrain, cf. the\nHitchiti Glossary.\n\n\nTHE HITCHITI DIALECT\n\nof the Maskoki language-family is analogous, though by no means\nidentical with the Creek dialect in its grammatic outlines. Many\npoints of comparison will readily suggest themselves to our readers,\nand enable us to be comparatively short in the following sketch.\n\nThe female dialect is an archaic form of Hitchiti parallel to archaic\nCreek; both were formerly spoken by both sexes. Only the common form\n(or male language) of Hitchiti will be considered here.\n\n\nPHONETICS.\n\nThe _phonetic system_ is the same as in Creek, except that the sonant\nmutes, b, g, are more distinctly heard (d is quite rare). The\nprocesses of alternation are the same in both dialects. Many vowels of\nsubstantives are short in Creek, which appear long in Hitchiti: \u0103\u2032pi\n_tree_: H. \u0101\u2032pi; h\u0103\u2032si _sun, moon_: H. h\u0101\u2032si; n\u012d\u2032ta _day_: H. n\u00edta\netc.\n\n\nMORPHOLOGY.\n\n_Noun._ The case inflection of the substantive, adjective, of some\npronouns and of the nominal forms of the verb is effected by the\nsuffixes: -i for the absolute, -ut for the subjective, -un for the\nobjective case: y\u00e1ti _person_, y\u00e1tut, y\u00e1tun; n\u00e1ki _what, which_,\nn\u00e1kut, n\u00e1kun. A few verbals inflect in -a, -at, -an; for instance,\nthose terminating in -hunga.\n\nThe diminutive ending is the same as in Creek: -odshi, -udshi.\n\nTo the Creek collective suffix -algi corresponds -a'li, which is, in\nfact, the third person of a verbal plural: m\u00edki _chief_, mik\u00e1'li _the\nclass of chiefs_ and: \"_they are chiefs_.\" Mask\u00f3ki: Maskok\u00e1'li _the\nCreek people_; f\u00e1pli'hitchi wind, f\u00e1pli'htcha'li _wind clan, wind gens_.\n\nHitchiti has a greater power of verbifying substantives than Creek:\nm\u00edki _chief_, mik\u00f3lis _I am chief_; tch\u00f3yi _pine-tree_, tch\u00f3yus _it is\na pine tree_.\n\nThere is no real substantive verb in the language, and adjectives,\nwhen becoming verbified, are turned into attributive verbs, as in\nCreek: w\u00e1nti _strong, hard_; tsaw\u00e1ntus _I am strong_; w\u00e1ntus _he, it\nis strong, hard_; w\u00e1ntatik _not strong_; w\u00e1ntigus _he is very strong_;\nw\u00e1ntatis he is not strong; wanta'hl\u00e1tis _he is not strong at all_.\n\nThe gradation of the adjective is expressed either by the attributive\nverb, to which isi-, is- is prefixed, or in some other ways\nsyntactically:\n\n     K\u00fadsuni tch\u00e1tu-kun\u00e1wun is\u00ednwant\u00fbs _iron is harder than silver_.\n\n     ukitch\u00fabi okil\u00f3si ihayu\u03c7k\u00edki o'lat\u00edwats a _lake is deeper\n        than a river_; lit. \"to river the lake in its depth does not\n        come up.\" This may also be expressed: okil\u00f3si (u)kitch\u00f3bi\n        isihayu\u03c7k\u00fawats; lit. \"a lake (than) a river more-deepens.\"\n\n     y\u00e1 hali'hl\u00f3s\u0103ka l\u00e1pkun u\u207fwe\u00edkas _this boy is the tallest_;\n        lit. \"this boy all surpasses in height.\"\n\n     y\u00e1t y\u00e1kni tch\u00e4\u00edh'-apiktcha\u03c7\u00e1yus _this is the highest\n        mountain_; lit. \"this ground-high stands ahead.\"\n\nThe numeral has two forms for the cardinal number: one used\nattributively, and another, abbreviated from it, used exclusively for\ncounting; there are, outside of this, forms for the ordinal, for the\ndistributive, and for the adverbial numeral. The list of the numerals\nis as follows:\n\n          _Cardinals._       _Ordinals._      _Distributive._    _Adverbial._\n    1 `l\u00e1min     `l\u00e1hai'h \u00edndshuatki        `l\u00e1hamin         a`la'hmi\n                         \"_beginning_.\"\n    2 t\u00faklan     tuk\u0101\u2032    sat\u00f3klaka         tukl\u00e1kan         sat\u00fakla'h\n    3 tutch\u00ednan  tutchi   satotch\u00ednaka      tutchin\u00e1kan      atutch\u00edna'h\n    4 sit\u00e1kin    s\u00edta'h   is\u00edtagika         sitah\u00e1kin        as\u00edtagi\n    5 tcha\u03c7g\u00edpan tch\u00e1'hgi istcha\u03c7g\u00edpaka     tcha\u03c7gip\u00e1kan     ats\u00e1'hgipi\n    6 \u00edpagin     \u00edpa      isip\u00e1gaka         ipah\u00e1kan         is\u00edpagi\n    7 kulap\u00e1kin  k\u00falapa   iskulap\u00e1kika      kulap\u00e1hakan      iskulap\u00e1ki\n    8 tusnap\u00e1kin tusnap\u00e1  istusnap\u00e1kika     tusnap\u00e1hakan     istusnap\u00e1ki\n    9 ustap\u00e1kin  ustap\u00e1   isustap\u00e1kika      ustap\u00e1hakan      isustap\u00e1ki\n   10 pok\u00f3lin    puk\u00fa     ispok\u00f3lika        puk\u00falakan        ispuk\u00fali\n   20   pok\u00f3li t\u00faklan     ispokol-t\u00faklaka   pok\u00f3-tuk\u00falakan   ispuk\u00fali-t\u00faklan\n  100   tch\u00fakpi `l\u00e1min    istchukpi-`l\u00e1mika tchukpi-`l\u00e1makan istchukpi-`l\u00e1min\n\n  _Folded four times_ is expressed by the cardinal: po`l\u00f3tki s\u00edtaki;\n  _folded eight times_: po`l\u00f3tki tusnap\u00e1kin.\n\nThe _personal pronoun_ appears in different forms: subjective\nabsolute; subjective prefixed to verbs and objective pronoun.\n\n      Subjective absolute:      Subj. prefixed:         Objective:\n  _I_           \u0101\u2032ni          tcha-, am-, an-, a-     tcha-\n  _thou_        tch\u00ed'hni      tchi-                   tchi-\n  _he, she, it_ \u00ed'hni                                 im-, in-, i-\n  _we_          p\u00fa'hni        pu-, po-                pu-\n  _ye_          tchi'hnit\u00e1ki  tchi-, inverted: \u00edtch-  tchi-, w. suffix\n  _they_        i'hnit\u00e1ki                             im-, in-, i-\n\n\u00e1n\u0101li (usually \u00e1nalut) _myself_, 2 s. tch\u00ed'hn\u0101li, 3 s.\n\u00ed'hn\u0101li; p\u00fa'hn\u0101li _ourselves_, 2 pl. tchi'hn\u0101lit\u00e1ki, 3 pl.\ni'hnalit\u00e1ki.\n\n  _The possessive pronoun._\n\n  _my_              am-, an-, a-         tcha-, inverted: atch-\n  _thy_             tchi-,               tchi-, inverted: itch-\n  _his, her, its_   im-, in-, i-         im-, in-, i-\n  _our_             p\u00fa'hni, pu-          pun-, pu-, po-\n  _your_            tch\u00ed\u03c7tchi, tchi-     tchi-, with suffix\n  _their_           im-, in-, i-         i- etc., with suffix.\n\n     tch\u00e1lbi _my hand_ or _hands_, tch\u00edlbi, \u00edlbi; p\u00falbi _our hand_\n        or _hands_, tch\u00edlbu\u03c7tchi, \u00edlbi.\n\n     \u00e1ntchiki _my house_ or _houses_; tch\u00edntchiki, \u00edntchiki;\n        p\u00fantchiki, tch\u00edntchigo\u03c7tchi, \u00edntchigo\u03c7tchi.\n\n     _Demonstrative pronouns_: ma, m\u00fbt, m\u00fbn (Cr. ma); y\u00e1, y\u00e1t, y\u00e1n\n        or y\u00fbn (Cr. h\u00eda); y\u00e1kti, y\u00e1ktut, y\u00e1ktun (Cr. \u00e1sa); m\u00e1'hmali\n        _the same_.\n\n     _Demonstr.-relat. pronoun_: n\u00e1ki, n\u00e1kut, n\u00e1kun _which, what_.\n\n     _Interrogative pronouns_: n\u00f3`li? n\u00f3`lut or n\u00f3`lut i? n\u00f3`lun or\n        n\u00f3`lun i? _who?_ n\u00e1ki? n\u00e1kut? n\u00e1kun? _which? what?_ n\u00e1kon\n        i? _what is it_?\n\n_The Hitchiti verb_ equals the Creek verb in the abundance of\ninflectional forms. In order to show the inflection of a verb (or\nrather a part of it), going parallel to the one chosen as the Creek\nparadigm, we select \u00edsiki _to take, to carry_; \u00e1wiki being used when\na plurality of objects is concerned; Creek: \u00edsita, tch\u00e1wita.\n\n     \u00edsilis _I take_, 2 s. \u00edsitskas, 3 s. \u00edsis; 1 pl. \u00edsikas, 2 pl.\n        is\u00e1tchkas, 3 pl. \u00edsa`li.\n\n     \u00e1walis _I take_, pl. of obj., 2 s. awitskas, 3 s. \u00e1was; 1 pl.\n        \u00e1wikas, 2 pl. \u00e1watskas, 3 pl. \u00e1wa`lis.\n\n     \u00ed'hsilis _I took_ a short time ago (Cr. \u00edsayanks); \u00e1'hwalis.\n\n     \u00eds\u0101nis _I took_ several days ago (Cr. is\u0101\u00edmatas); also _I\n        had taken_; \u00e1w\u0101nis.\n\n     \u00edsiliktas _I have taken_ many years ago (Cr. \u012bs\u00e1yantas);\n        \u00e1waliktas.\n\n     \u00edsil\u0101lis _I shall take_ (Cr. is\u00e1`lis); \u00e1wal\u0101lis.\n\n     \u00edsis! pl. \u00edsitis! _take it_! \u0101\u2032wis! \u0101\u2032witis! (or \u0101'watis!)\n\n     \u00edsi\u03c7tchi _having taken, holding in one's hands_; \u00e1wi\u03c7tchi.\n\n     \u00ed'hsik (object) _taken_, part. pass.; \u00e1\u2032hwak.\n\n     \u00edsigi, \u00edsiki _to take, the taking_; \u00e1wigi, \u00e1wiki.\n\n     \u00edsi, \u00edsut, \u00edsun _one who takes, carries_; \u00e1wi, \u00e1wut, \u00e1wun.\n\n     isih\u00fanka, -at, -an _one who took, has taken_; awih\u00fanka, -at, -an.\n\n     is\u00e1hika, -at, -an _one who is going to take_; aw\u00e1hika, -at, -an.\n\nFrom this verb \u00edsiki, \u00e1wiki the language does not form any passive,\nreciprocal, reflective and causative voice, but employs verbs from\nother radices instead. The interrogative and negative inflection is as\nfollows:\n\n     \u00edsatas _I do not take_, 2 s. \u00edsitskatis, 3 s. \u00edsitis; 1 pl.\n        is\u00edkatis, 2 pl. is\u00e1tskatis, 3 pl. (?); \u00e1watas _I do not\n        take_, pl. of obj., aw\u00edtskatis etc.\n\n     \u00edsilus? _do I take_? 2 s. \u00edsitskus? 3 s. \u00edsus? 1 pl. \u00edsig\u014d?\n        2 pl. \u00edsatsk\u014d? 3 pl. (?). \u00e1walus? _do I take_? etc.\n\n     isat\u00e4\u2032s\u014ds? _do I not take_? 2 s. isitskatib\u014ds? 3 s. isit\u00eds\u014ds?\n        1 pl. isikat\u00edb\u014ds? 2 pl. isatskat\u00edb\u014ds? 3 pl. (?). awat\u00e4\u2032s\u014ds?\n        _do I not take_? etc.\n\nA form for the 3. pl. was remembered by none of my informants, who\nstate that the Hitchiti render it by a circumscriptive sentence.\n\nA specimen of the objective or compound conjugation of the verb _I\nstrike_, bat\u0101\u2032plilis, runs as follows:\n\n  _I strike thee once_       tchibat\u00e1plilis, _repeatedly_ tchib\u00e1taspilis\n  _I strike him, her once_   bat\u0101\u2032plilis                  bat\u00e1spilis\n              _ye_           tchibatap'h\u00f3lilis            tchibatas'h\u00f3pilis\n              _them_         batas'h\u00fapilis                batas'h\u00fapilis\n  _He, she strikes me once_: tch\u00e1bataplis, _repeatedly_:  tchab\u00e1taspis\n              _thee_         tch\u00edbataplis                 tchib\u00e1taspis\n              _him, her_     bat\u00e1plis                     bat\u00e1spis\n              _us_           p\u00fabataplis                   pub\u00e1taspis\n              _ye_           tchibatap'h\u00f3lis              tchibatas'h\u00f3pis\n              _them_         bat\u00e1spis                     batas'h\u00f3pis\n\nThe same verb _to strike_ gives origin to the following _genera\nverbi_, each appearing under two different forms, and all being quoted\nin the present tense of the declarative mode, affirmative voice:\n\n  _Active_:     bat\u0101\u2032plilis    _I strike_ (now) _by one blow_\n                bat\u0101\u2032spilis    _I strike_ (now) _by several blows_\n  _Passive_:    tchab\u00e1tapkas   _I am struck once, by one blow_\n                tchab\u00e1taspkas  _I am struck more than once_ (obsolete)\n  _Reciprocal_: itibat\u00e1plikas  _we strike each other once_\n                itibat\u00e1spigas  _we strike each other repeatedly_\n  _Reflective_: ilbat\u0101\u2032plilis  _I strike myself by one blow_\n                ilbat\u00e1spilis   _I strike myself by several blows_\n  _Causative_:  batapl\u00eddshilis _I cause to strike once_\n                batasp\u00eddshilis _I cause to strike repeatedly_.\n\n     _Postpositions_ govern the absolute case of the noun just as\n        they do in Creek:\n\n     k\u00f3nut tch\u00edgi \u00ed-a\u03c7nun i-aul\u00eddshis _the skunk stays under the\n        house_.\n\n     s\u00e1wut \u00e1hi \u00edgapun untch\u00f3\u03c7olis _the racoon sits on the top of\n        the tree_.\n\n     \u00f3taki lab\u00e1ki _near_ or _around an island_.\n\n     \u00f3tagi ap\u00e1lu-un _on the other side of the island_.\n\n     y\u00e1ntuntun hitchk\u00e1tigan _beyond sight_, is an instance of a\n        postposition figuring as preposition, and is connected with\n        the objective case of a noun. It is not a real postposition,\n        but an adverb used in this function.\n\n\nALIBAMU.\n\nThe disconnected remarks on the Alibamu Indians which we find in the\ndocuments and chronicles represent them as early settlers on Alabama\nriver, at a moderate distance from the confluence of Coosa and\nTallapoosa rivers. In our legend they are introduced among the four\ntribes contending for the honor of being the most ancient and\nvalorous.\n\nD. Coxe, Carolana, p. 24 mentions their tribal name in the following\nconnection: \"On Coussa river[50] are the Ullibalies[51], Olibahalies,\nAllibamus; below them the Tallises.\" Allen Wright derives Alibamu\n(also written Allibamous, Alibami, Alb\u00e1mu, incorrectly Alibamon) from\nCha'hta: \u00e1lba _thicket_ and \u00e1yalmu, _place cleared_ (of trees,\nthickets): \u00e1lba ayam\u00fale _I open_ or _clear the thicket_. If this\nderivation is correct, the name, with its generic definition, could\napply to many localities simultaneously. Let us hear what Sekopechi or\n\"Perseverance,\" an old man of that tribe, related to Agent Eakin\nconcerning their early migrations and settlements. (Schoolcraft,\nIndians I, 266 sqq):\n\n    [Footnote 50: Anciently Coosa, Coussa river was a name given to\n    our Coosa river, as well as to its lower course below the\n    junction of Tallapoosa, now called Alabama river. Wright's Ch.\n    Dictionary has: alua _a burnt place_.]\n\n    [Footnote 51: In the report of the Fidalgo de Elvas, Ullibahali,\n    a walled town, is not identical with Alimamu. Ullibahali is a\n    name composed of the Alibamu: \u00f3li _village, town_ and the\n    Hitchiti: b\u00e1hali _down stream_, and _southward_, which is the\n    Creek w\u00e1hali _South_.]\n\n\"The Great Spirit brought the Alabama Indians from the ground between\nthe Cahawba and Alabama rivers, and they believe that they are of\nright possessors of this soil. The Muscogees formerly called\nthemselves Alabamians (\"thicket-clearers\"?), but other tribes called\nthem Oke-choy-atte, \"life.\"[52] The earliest oral tradition of the\nAlibamu of a migration is, that they migrated from the Cahawba and\nAlabama rivers to the junction of the Tuscaloosa (?) and Coosa rivers,\nwhere they sojourned for two years. After this they dwelt at the\njunction of the Coosa and Alabama rivers, on the west side of what was\nsubsequently the site of Fort Jackson. It is supposed that at this\ntime they numbered fifty effective men. They claimed the country from\nFort Jackson to New Orleans for their hunting grounds.\"\n\n    [Footnote 52: Oktch\u00f3yi is the Cha'hta term for _living, alive_.]\n\nWhatever may be the real foundation of this confused narrative, it\nseems that the Alibamu reached their later seats from a country lying\nto the west or southwest, and that they showed a preference for\nriver-junctions, for this enabled them to take fish in two rivers\nsimultaneously. Another migration legend of this tribe, as related by\nMilfort, will be given and accounted for below.\n\nBiedma relates that H. de Soto, when reaching the \"Alibamo province,\"\nhad to fight the natives entrenched within a palisaded fort (fuerte de\nAlibamo, Garc., de la Vega) and the Fidalgo of Elvas: that the\ncacique of Chica\u00e7a came with the caciques of Alimamu and of\nNicalasa,[53] whereupon a fight took place. But that Alibamo province\nlay _northwest_ of Chica\u00e7a town and province, and was reached only\nafter passing the Chocchechuma village on Yazoo river; it was probably\nnot the Alibamu tribe of the later centuries. In the report of Tristan\nde Luna's expedition no mention is made of the Alibamu Indians, though\nit speaks of \"Rio Olibahali.\"\n\n    [Footnote 53: Gallatin, Syn. p. 105, proposes to read Nita-lusa,\n    _Black Bear_.]\n\nIn 1702 five French traders started with ten Alibamu natives from\nMobile, for the country where the tribe resided. They were killed by\nthese guides when at a distance of ten leagues from the Alibamu\nvillage, and M. de Bienville, then governor of the French colony,\nresolved to make war on the tribe. He started with a force of seventy\nFrenchmen and eighteen hundred Indian auxiliaries; the latter deserted\nafter a march of six days, and finally the party was compelled to\nreturn. A second expedition, consisting of Frenchmen only, was not\nmore successful, and had to redescend Alabama river in canoes. Mr. de\nBoisbriand, the leader of a third expedition, finally succeeded in\ndestroying a camp of Alibamu, sixty-five miles up the river, in\nkilling the inmates and capturing their women and children, who were\ngiven to the Mobilians, their allies.[54] This action was only the\nfirst of a series of subsequent troubles.\n\n    [Footnote 54: Relation of P\u00e9nicaut, in Margry V, 424-432.]\n\nAn alliance concluded by the Alibamu with the Mobilians did not last\nlong, for in 1708 they arrived with a host of Cheroki, Abika and\nKataba Indians, in the vicinity of the French fort on Mobile Bay,\nwhere Naniabas, Tohomes and Mobilians had settled, but were foiled in\ntheir attack upon the Mobilians through the watchfulness of the tribe\nand of the French colonists. The whole force of their aggressors and\ntheir allies combined was estimated at four thousand warriors (_id._,\nMargry V, 477-478; cf. 427).\n\nIn 1713, after the Alibamu had made an inroad into the Carolinas with\na host of Kataba and Abika Indians, their confederates, the head-chief\nof the first-named tribe besought the French commander at Mobile bay\nto erect a fort in his own country. The offer was accepted, and the\ntribe was helpful in erecting a spacious fort of about three hundred\nfeet square, on a bluff overlooking the river, and close to their\nvillage (_id._, Margry V, 510-511). This fort, built near the junction\nof Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers, was called Fort Toulouse, and by the\nBritish colonists Fort Albamu, or Alebama garrison.\n\nWhen Fort Toulouse was abandoned in 1762, some Alibamu Indians\nfollowed the French, and established themselves about sixty miles\nabove New Orleans, on Mississippi river, near the Huma village. Th.\nHutchins (1784), p. 39. estimates the number of their warriors settled\nthere at thirty. Subsequently they passed into the interior of\nLouisiana, where some are hunting and roving in the woods at the\npresent time. The majority, however, settled in Polk county, in the\nsoutheastern corner of Texas, became agriculturists, and about 1862\nnumbered over two hundred persons. Some Alibamu reside in the Indian\nTerritory. Cf. Buschmann, Spuren d. azt. Spr., p. 424.\n\nThe former seats of the tribe, near the site of the present capital,\nMontgomery, are described as follows:\n\nColonel Benj. Hawkins, United States Agent among the Creeks, saw four\nAlibamu towns on Alabama river, below Koass\u00e1ti. \"The inhabitants are\nprobably the ancient Alabamas, and formerly had a regular town.\"\n(Sketch of the Creek Country, pp. 35-37, 1799.) The three first were\nsurrounded by fertile lands, and lay on the eastern bank of Alabama\nriver. Their names were as follows:\n\nIkan-tch\u00e1ti or \"Red Ground,\" a small village, with poor and indolent\ninhabitants.\n\nTaw\u00e1ssa or Tawasa, three miles below Ikan-tch\u00e1ti, a small village on\na high bluff. Called Taouacha by the French, cf. Tohome. The Koass\u00e1ti\nword tabasa means _widower, widow_.\n\nPaw\u00f3kti, small town on a bluff; two miles below Taw\u00e1ssa.\n\nA\u2032tagi, a village four miles below the above, situated on the\nwestern bank, and spreading along it for two miles. Also written\nAt-tau-gee, Autaugee, Autobi. Autauga county is named after it.\n\nThese Alibamu could raise in all about eighty warriors; they did not\nconform to Creek custom, nor did they apply the Creek law for the\npunishment of adultery. Although hospitable to white people, they had\nvery little intercourse with them. Whenever a white person had eaten\nof a dish and left it, they threw the rest away, and washed everything\nhandled by the guest immediately. The above towns, together with\nOktchoy\u00fadshi and Koass\u00e1ti were, upon a decree of the national council\nat Tukabatchi, November 27th, 1799, united into one group or class\nunder one \"warrior of the nation.\" The dignitary elected to that post\nof honor was Hu`lipoyi of Oktchoy\u00fadshi, who had the war titles of\nh\u00e1dsho and tust\u0115n\u00faggi. (Hawkins, pp. 51. 52.) Cf. Witumka.\n\n\nKOASS\u00c1TI.\n\nThe ancient seat of this tribe was in Hawkins' time (1799), on the\nright or northern bank of Alabama river, three miles below the\nconfluence of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers. Coosada, Elmore county,\nAlabama, is built on the same spot. \"They are not Creeks,\" says\nHawkins (p. 35), \"although they conform to their ceremonies; a part of\nthis town moved lately beyond the Mississippi, and have settled\nthere.\" G. W. Stidham, who visited their settlement in Polk county,\nTexas, during the Secession war, states that they lived there east of\nthe Alibamu, numbered about 200 persons, were pure-blooded and very\nsuperstitious. Some Creek Indians are with them, who formerly lived in\nFlorida, between the Seminoles and the Lower Creeks.\n\nTheir tribal name is differently spelt: Coosadas, Ko\u00f6sati, Kos\u00e1di,\nCoushatees, etc. Milfort, M\u00e9m. p. 265, writes it Coussehat\u00e9. This\ntribe must not be confounded with the Conshacs, q. v.\n\nFrom an Alibamu Indian, Sekopechi, we have a statement on the\nlanguages spoken by the people of the Creek confederacy (Schoolcraft,\nIndians, I, 266 sq.): \"The Muskogees speak six different dialects:\nMuskogee, Hitchitee, Nauchee, Euchee, Alabama and Aquassawtee, but all\nof them generally understand the Muskogee language.\" This seems to\nindicate that the Alibamu dialect differs from Koass\u00e1ti, for this is\nmeant by Aquassawtee; but the vocabularies of General Albert Pike show\nthat both forms of speech are practically one and the same language.\n\nHistoric notices of this tribe after its emigration to western parts\nwere collected by Prof. Buschmann, Spuren d. aztek. Sprache, p. 430.\nMany Koass\u00e1ti live scattered among the Creeks in the Creek Nation,\nIndian Territory, at Yuf\u00e1la, for instance.\n\n_Witumka_, on Coosa river, spoke, according to Bartram, the \"Stincard\"\nlanguage, and was a town of the Alibamu division. Cf. List of Creek\nSettlements.\n\n\nCHICASA.\n\nThe northern parts of Mississippi State contain the earliest homes of\nthe warlike tribe of Chicasa Indians which historical documents enable\nus to trace. Pontotoc county was the centre of their habitations in\nthe eighteenth century, and was so probably at the time of the\nColumbian discovery; settlements of the tribe scattered along the\nMississippi river, in West Tennessee and in Kentucky up to Ohio river,\nare reported by the later chroniclers.\n\nIn the year 1540 the army of Hernando de Soto crossed a portion of\ntheir territory, called by its historians \"Chica\u00e7a provincia,\" and\nalso visited a town of this name, with a smaller settlement\n(alojamiento) in its vicinity named Chica\u00e7illa.\n\nTwo rivers anciently bore the name of \"Chicasa river,\" not because\nthey were partially or exclusively inhabited by tribes of this\nnationality, but because their headwaters lay within the Chicasa\nboundaries. This gives us a clue to the topographic position of the\nChicasa settlements. Jefferys (I, 153), states that \"Chicasa river is\nthe Maubile or Mobile river, running north and south (now called Lower\nAlibama river), and that it takes its rise in the country of the\nChicasaws in three streams.\" When L. d'Iberville traveled up the Yazoo\nriver, the villages on its banks were referred to him as lying on \"la\nrivi\u00e8re des Chicachas.\"[55]\n\n    [Footnote 55: Margry IV, 180.]\n\nThe most lucid and comprehensive account of the Chicasa _settlements_\nis found in Adair's History.\n\nJames Adair, who was for several years a trader among the Chicasa,\ngives the following account of their country and settlements (History,\np. 352, sq.): \"The Chikkasah country lies in about thirty-five degrees\nN. Lat., at the distance of one hundred and sixty miles from the\neastern side of the Mississippi ... about half way from Mobille to the\nIllinois, etc. The Chikkasah are now settled between the heads of two\nof the most western branches of Mobille river and within twelve miles\nof Tahre Hache (Tallahatchie).... In 1720 they had four contiguous\nsettlements, which lay nearly in the form of three parts of a square,\nonly that the eastern side was five miles shorter than the western,\nwith the open part toward the Choktah. One was called Yaneka, about a\nmile wide and six miles long ...; another was ten miles long ... and\nfrom one to two miles broad. The towns were called Shatara,\nChookheereso, Hykehah, Tuskawillao, and Phalacheho. The other square,\nChookka Phar\u00e1ah or \"the long-house,\" was single and ran four miles in\nlength and one mile in breadth. It was more populous than their whole\nnation contains at present ... scarcely 450 warriors.\" From Adair's\ntext it appears that the three towns were but a short distance from\nthe fortified places held by them at the time when he composed his\nHistory (published 1775). They were about Pontotoc or Dallas counties,\nMississippi.\n\nThe Chicasa settlements are referred to in detail by B. Romans, East\nand West Florida, p. 63: \"They live in the centre of an uneven and\nlarge nitrous savannah; have in it one town, long one mile and a half,\nvery narrow and irregular; this they divide into seven (towns), by the\nnames of Melattaw 'hat and feather,' Chatelaw 'copper town,'\nChukafalaya 'long town,' Tuckahaw 'a certain weed,' Ashuck hooma 'red\ngrass.' Formerly the whole of them were enclosed in palisadoes.\"\nUnfortunately, this list gives only five towns instead of the seven\nreferred to.\n\nD. Coxe, Carolana (1741) says, when speaking of the Tennessee river\n(p. 13. 14): \"River of the Cusates, Cheraquees or Kasqui river ...; a\ncataract is on it, also the tribe of the Chicazas.\" An early French\nreport alludes to one of their villages, situated thirty leagues\ninward from a place forty leagues above the mouth of Arkansas river.\n\"From Abeeka to the Chickasaw towns the distance is about one hundred\nand fifty-nine miles, crossing many savannahs;\" B. Romans, E. and W.\nFlorida, p. 313.\n\nThrough all the epochs of colonial _history_ the Chicasa people\nmaintained their old reputation for independence and bravery. They\nwere constantly engaged in quarrels and broils with all their Indian\nneighbors: sometimes with the cognate Cha'hta and with the Creeks, at\nother times with the Cheroki, Illinois, Kickapu, Sh\u00e1wano, Tonica,\nMobilians, Osage and Arkansas (Kapaha) Indians. In 1732 they cut to\npieces a war party of the Iroquois invading their territory, but in\n1748 co\u00f6perated against the French with that confederacy. J. Haywood,\nin his Natural and Aboriginal History of Tennessee (1823), p. 240,\nalludes to a tradition purporting that the Chicasa had formerly\nassisted the Cheroki in driving the Shawanese from the Cumberland\nriver; the Cheroki desired war, and attacked the Chicasa shortly\nbefore 1769, but were utterly defeated by them at the \"Chicasa Old\nFields,\" and retreated by way of Cumberland river and the Cany Fork.\nOn the authority of chief Chenubbee, the same author states (p. 290)\nthat a part of the Chicasa established themselves on Savannah river,\nopposite Augusta, but that misunderstandings with the Creeks made them\ngo west again. In 1795 the Chicasa claimed the land opposite Augusta,\nand sent a memorial to the United States Government to substantiate\nthat claim. Another fraction of the tribe, called the Lightwood-Knots,\nwent to war with the Creeks, but were reduced by them, and have lived\nwith them in peace ever since. These facts seem to have some reference\nto the settlement of a Chicasa band near Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta, and east of that\ntown; cf. Kas\u00ed'hta.\n\nP\u00e9nicaut mentions an intertribal war between them and the Cha'hta, and\nrelates a case of treason committed by a Cha'hta chief in 1703.[56] A\nwar with the Creeks occurred in 1793, in which the Americans stood on\nthe Chicasa side.\n\n    [Footnote 56: Margry V, 433 sqq.]\n\nThe policy of the Chicasa in regard to the white colonists was that of\na steady and protracted enmity against the French. This feeling was\nproduced as well by the intrigues of the British traders residing\namong them as by their hatred of the Cha'hta, who had entered into\nfriendly relations with the French colonists, though they could not,\nby any means, be called their trusty allies. By establishing fortified\nposts on the Yazoo and Little Tombigbee rivers,[57] the French\nthreatened the independence of these Indians, who began hostilities\nagainst them in 1722, near the Yazoo post, and urged the Naktche to a\nstubborn resistance against French encroachments. They sheltered the\nretreating Naktche against the pursuing French,[58] besieged the\ncommander Denys at Fort Natchitoches, though they were repulsed there\nwith considerable loss, defeated the French invading their country at\nAmalahta (1736), at the Long House, or Tch\u00faka fal\u00e1ya (Adair, p. 354),\nand other points, and in the second attack of 1739-40 also baffled\ntheir attempts at conquering portions of Chicasa territory.\n\n    [Footnote 57: The site once occupied by Fort Tombigbee is now\n    called Jones' Bluff, on Little Tombigbee river. Cf. Dumont in B.\n    F. French, Histor. Coll. of La., V, 106 and Note.]\n\n    [Footnote 58: Adair, History, p. 353, asserts that the real\n    cause of the third Naktche-French war lay in the instigations of\n    the Chicasa. On the causes and progress of the hostilities\n    between the French and the Chicasa, cf. pp. 353-358. They\n    attacked there his own trading house, cf. p. 357. Cf. also\n    Naktche, in this vol., pp. 34-39.]\n\nThe relations of these Indians with the United States were regulated\nby a treaty concluded at Hopewell, 1786, with Pio mico and other\nChicasa chiefs. Their territory was then fixed at the Ohio river on\nthe north side, and by a boundary line passing through Northern\nMississippi on the south side. They began to emigrate to the west of\nArkansas river early in this century, and in 1822 the population\nremaining in their old seats amounted to 3625. Treaties for the\nremoval of the remainder were concluded at Pontotoc creek, October\n20th, 1832, and at Washington, May 24th, 1834.\n\nAfter their establishment in the Indian Territory the political\nconnections still existing between them and the Cha'hta were severed\nby a treaty signed June 22d, 1855. The line of demarcation separating\nthe two \"nations,\" and following the meridian, is not, however, of a\nbinding character, for individuals of both peoples settle east or west\nof it, wherever they please (G. W. Stidham).\n\nNo plausible analysis of the _name_ Chicasa, which many western\ntribes, as well as the Chicasa themselves, pronounce Shikasa,\nSh\u00edkasha, has yet been suggested. Near the Gulf coast it occurs in\nmany local names, and also in Chickasawhay river, Mississippi, the\nbanks of which were inhabited by Cha'hta people.\n\nIn language and customs they differ but little from their southern\nneighbors, the Cha'hta, and must be considered as a northern branch of\nthem. Both have two phratries only, each of which were (originally)\nsubdivided, in an equal manner, into four gentes; but the\nthorough-going difference in the totems of the 8-12 gentes points to a\nvery ancient separation of the two national bodies.\n\nThe Chicasa _language_ served as a medium of commercial and tribal\nintercourse to all the nations inhabiting the shores of the great\nUk-'hina (\"water road\"), or Lower Mississippi river. Jefferys (I,\n165), compares it to the \"lingua franca in the Levant; they call it\nthe vulgar tongue.\" A special mention of some tribes which spoke it is\nmade by L. d'Iberville[59]: \"Bayagoula, Ouma, Chicacha, Colapissa show\nlittle difference in their language;\" and \"The Oumas, Bayogoulas,\nThelo\u00ebl, Taensas, the Coloas, the Chycacha, the Napissa, the Ouachas,\nChoutymachas, Yagenechito, speak the same language and understand the\nBilochy, the Pascoboula.\" As we have seen before, three of the above\ntribes, the Naktche portion of the Th\u00e9lo\u00ebl settlements, the Taensa and\nthe Shetimasha had their own languages, but availed themselves of the\nChicasa for the purposes of intertribal barter, exchange and\ncommunication. The most important passages on this medium of trade are\ncontained in Le Page du Pratz, _Histoire_ (II, 218. 219): \"La langue\nTchicacha est parl\u00e9e aussi par les Chatkas (sic!) et (corrompue) par\nles Taensas; cette langue corrompue est appel\u00e9e _Mobilienne_ par les\nFran\u00e7ais,\" etc., and in Margry V, 442, where P\u00e9nicaut alleges to have\nstudied the languages of the Louisiana savages pretty thoroughly for\nfive years, \"surtout le Mobilien, qui est le principal et qu'on entend\npar toutes les nations.\" Cf. the article Naktche.\n\n    [Footnote 59: Margry IV, 412 and 184.]\n\nA few terms in which Chicasa differs from main Cha'hta are as follows:\n\n  Chicasa ku\u00edshto _panther_,   Cha'hta ku\u00edtchito\n          k\u00f3e _domestic cat_,          k\u00e1to (Spanish)\n          \u00edsto _large_,                tch\u00edto\n          iskitin\u00fasa _small_,          iskitin\u0115\n          h\u00fashi _bird_,                f\u00fashi\n\nThe Chicasa trade language also adopted a few terms from northern\nlanguages, as:\n\n     p\u00edshu _lynx_, from Odshibw\u0113 pish\u012bu; also an Odshibw\u0113 totem-clan.\n\n     piak\u00edmina _persimmon_, changed in the French Creole dialect to\n        _plaquemine_.\n\n     shishikushi _gourd-rattle_ or _drum_, Margry IV, 175.\n\n     sacacuya _war-whoop_, la hu\u00e9e.\n\nLewis H. Morgan published in his _Ancient Society_ (New York, 1877).\np. 163, a communication from Rev. Chas. C. Copeland, missionary among\nthe Chicasa Indians, on the totemic _gentes_ observed by him. Copeland\nstates that the descent is in the female line, that no intermarriage\ntakes place among individuals of the same gens, and that property as\nwell as the office of chief is hereditary in the gens. The following\nlist will show how considerably he differs from Gibbs' list inserted\nbelow:\n\n_Panther phratry_, k\u00f3a. Its gentes: 1. k\u00f3-intchush, _wild cat_; 2.\nf\u00fashi, _bird_; 3. n\u00e1nni, _fish_; 4. issi, _deer_.\n\n_Spanish phratry_, Ishp\u00e1ni. Its gentes: 1. sh\u00e1wi _racoon_; 2. Ishp\u00e1ni\n_Spanish_; 3. m\u00edngo _Royal_; 4. husk\u00f3ni; 5. t\u00fanni _squirrel_; 6.\nhotchon tch\u00e1pa _alligator_; 7. nash\u00f3ba _wolf_; 8. tch\u00fa'hla\n_blackbird_.\n\nFurther investigations will show whether the two gentes, Ishp\u00e1ni and\nmingo, are not in fact one and the same, as they appear in Gibbs'\nlist. This list is taken from a manuscript note to his Chicasa\nvocabulary, and contains nine \"clans\" or iksa, y\u00e9ksa:\n\n     Sp\u00e1ne or _Spanish_ gens; m\u00edngos or chiefs could be chosen from\n        this gens only, and were hereditary in the female line;\n        sh\u0103-\u00e9 or _racoon_ gens; second chiefs or headmen were\n        selected from it; kuishto or _tiger_ gens; ko-intch\u016bsh or\n        _catamount_ gens; n\u00e1ni or _fish_ gens; \u00edssi or _deer_ gens;\n        hal\u00f3ba or? gens; fosh\u00e9 or _bird_ gens; hu\u207fshkon\u00e9 or\n        _skunk_ gens, the least respected of them all.\n\nAn account in Schoolcraft, Indians I, 311, describes the mode of\ntribal government, and the method by which the chiefs ratified the\nlaws passed. Sick people, when wealthy, treated their friends to a\nsort of donation party (or p\u00f3tlatch of the Pacific coast) after their\nrecovery; a custom called tonshpash\u00fapa by the tribe.\n\n\nTRIBES ON THE YAZOO RIVER.\n\nAlong the Yazoo river existed a series of towns which seem to have\nbeen independent at the time of their discovery, but at a late period,\nabout 1836, were incorporated into the Chicasa people. Some were\ninhabited by powerful and influential tribes, but it is uncertain\nwhether any of them were of Maskoki lineage and language or not.[60]\nDuring the third Naktche-French war, the Yazoo tribes suffered\nconsiderably from attacks directed upon them by the Arkansas Indians.\nThe countries along Yazoo river are low and swampy grounds, subject to\ninundations, especially the narrow strip of land extending between\nthat river and the Mississippi.\n\n    [Footnote 60: I have treated of some of these tribes (Tonica,\n    Koroa) in separate articles. Moncachtape said to du Pratz, that\n    the Yazoo Indians regarded the Chicasa as their elders, \"since\n    from them came the language of the country.\"]\n\nThe Taensa guide who accompanied Lemoyne d'Iberville, up the Yazoo\nriver in March 1699, enumerated the villages seen on its low banks in\ntheir succession from southwest to northeast, as follows (Margry IV,\n180):\n\n     1. Tonica, four days' travel from the Naktche and two days'\n        travel from the uppermost town, Thysia. Cf. Tonica, p. 39 sqq.\n\n     2. Ouispe; the Oussip\u00e9s of P\u00e9nicaut.\n\n     3. Opocoulas. They are the Affagoulas, Offogoula, Ouf\u00e9ogoulas\n        or \"Dog-People\" of the later authors, and in 1784 some of\n        them are mentioned as residing eight miles above Pointe\n        Coup\u00e9e, on W. bank of Mississippi river.\n\n     4. Taposa; the Tapouchas of Baudry de Lozi\u00e8re.\n\n     5. Chaquesauma. This important tribe, written also Chokeechuma,\n        Chactchioumas, Saques'h\u00fama, etc., are the Saquechuma visited\n        by a detachment of de Soto's army in their walled town\n        (1540). The name signifies \"red crabs.\" Cf. Adair, History,\n        p. 352: \"Tahre-hache (Tallahatchi),[61] which lower down is\n        called Chokchooma river, as that nation made their first\n        settlements there, after they came on the other side of\n        Mississippi.... The Chicasaw, Choktah and also the\n        Chokchooma, who in process of time were forced by war to\n        settle between the two former nations, came together from\n        the west as one family,\" etc. Cf. B. Romans, p. 315. _Crab,\n        crawfish_ is s\u00f3ktchu in Creek, s\u00e1ktchi in Hitchiti.\n\n    [Footnote 61: A large northern affluent of Yazoo river, in\n    northern parts of Mississippi State.]\n\n     6. Outapa; called Epitoupa, Ibitoupas in other documents.\n\n     7. Thysia; at six days' canoe travel (forty-two leagues) from\n        the Naktche. They are the Tihiou of Dan. Coxe (1741).\n\nP\u00e9nicaut, who accompanied d'Iberville in this expedition, gives an\naccount of the Yazoo villages, which differs in some respects from the\nabove: Going up the river of the Yazoux for four leagues, there are\nfound on the right the villages inhabited by six savage nations,\ncalled \"les Yasoux, les Offogoulas, les Tonicas, les Coroas, les\nOuitoupas et les Oussip\u00e9s.\" A French priest had already fixed himself\nin one of the villages for their conversion.[62]\n\n    [Footnote 62: Cf. Margry V, 401 and Note.]\n\nD'Iberville was also informed that the Chicasa and the Napissas formed\na union, and that the villages of both were standing close to each\nother. The term Napissa, in Cha'hta na\u207fpissa, means _spy, sentinel,\nwatcher_, and corresponds in signification to Akolapissa, name of a\ntribe between Mobile Bay and New Orleans, q. v. Compare also the\nNapochies, who, at the time of Tristan de Luna's visit, warred with\nthe Co\u00e7a (or Kusa, on Coosa river?): \"Co\u00e7as tenian guerra con los\nNapochies\"; Barcia, Ensayo, p. 37.\n\nD. Coxe, Carolana, p. 10, gives the Yazoo towns in the following\norder: The lowest is Yassaues or Yassa (Yazoo), then Tounica, Kouroua,\nSamboukia, Tihiou, Epitoupa. Their enumeration by Baudry de Lozi\u00e8re,\n1802, is as follows: \"Yazoos, Offogoulas, Coroas are united, and live\non Yazoo river in one village; strength, 120 men. Chacchioumas,\nIbitoupas, Tapouchas in one settlement on Upper Yazoo river, forty\nleagues from the above.\" Cf. Koroa.\n\nAnother Yazoo tribe, mentioned at a later period as confederated with\nthe Chicasa are the Tch\u00fala, Chola or \"Foxes.\"\n\nYazoo is not a Cha'hta word, although the Cha'hta had a \"clan\" of that\nname: Y\u0101\u2032sho \u00f3kla, Y\u00e1shukla, as I am informed by Gov. Allen\nWright.[63] T. Jefferys (I, 144) reports the Yazoos to be the allies\nof the \"Cherokees, who are under the protection of Great Britain.\" He\nalso states that the French post was three leagues from the mouth of\nYazoo river, close to a village inhabited by a medley of Yazoo,\nCouroas and Ofogoula Indians, and mentions the tribes in the following\norder (I, 163): \"Yazoo Indians, about 100 huts; further up, Coroas,\nabout 40 huts; Chactioumas or \"red lobsters\", about 50 huts, on same\nriver; Ouf\u00e9-ouglas, about 60 huts; Tapoussas, not over 25 huts.\"\n\n    [Footnote 63: Cf. article on Yuchi, p. 24.]\n\n\nCHA'HTA.\n\nThe southwestern area of the Maskoki territory was occupied by the\nCha'hta people, and in the eighteenth century this was probably the\nmost populous of all Maskoki divisions. They dwelt in the middle and\nsouthern parts of what is now Mississippi State, where, according to\nearly authors, they had from fifty to seventy villages; they then\nextended from the Mississippi to Tombigbee river, and east of it.\n\nThe tribes of Tuskalusa or Black Warrior, and that of Mauvila, which\noffered such a bold resistance to H. de Soto's soldiers, were of\nCha'hta lineage, though it is not possible at present to state the\nlocation of their towns at so remote a period.\n\nOn account of their vicinity to the French colonies at Mobile, Biloxi,\nNew Orleans, and on other points of the Lower Mississippi, the Cha'hta\nassociated early with the colonists, and became their allies in Indian\nwars. The French and British traders called them T\u00eates-Plattes,\nFlatheads. In the third French war against the Naktche a large body of\nCha'hta warriors served as allies under the French commander, and on\nJanuary 27, 1730, before daylight, made a furious onslaught on their\nprincipal village, killing sixty enemies and rescuing fifty-nine\nFrench women and children and one hundred and fifty negro slaves\npreviously captured by the tribe (Claiborne, Mississippi, I, 45. 46).\nIn the Chicasa war fourteen hundred Cha'hta Indians aided the French\narmy in its attack on the Ch\u00faka p'h\u00e1raah or Long-House Town, as\nauxiliaries (Adair, History, p. 354).\n\nThey continued friends of the French until (as stated by Romans,\nFlorida, p. 74) some English traders found means to draw the eastern\nparty and the district of Coosa (together called Oypat-oocooloo,\n\"small nation\") into a civil war with the western divisions, called\nOocooloo-Falaya (\"long tribe\"), Oocooloo-Hanal\u00e9 (\"six tribes\"), and\nChickasawhays, which, after many conflicts and the destruction of East\nCongeeto, ended with the peace of 1763.\n\nThe Cha'hta did not rely so much on the products of the chase, as\nother tribes, but preferred to till the ground extensively and with\ncare. Later travelers, like Adair, depict their character and morality\nin very dark colors. In war, the Cha'hta east of the Mississippi river\nwere less aggressive than those who resided west of it, for the policy\nof keeping in the defensive agreed best with their dull and slow\ndisposition of mind. About 1732, the ordinary, though contested\nboundary between them and the Creek confederacy was the ridge that\nseparates the waters of the Tombigbee from those of the Alabama river.\nTheir principal wars, always defensive and not very sanguinary, were\nfought with the Creeks; in a conflict of six years, 1765-1771, they\nlost about three hundred men (Gallatin, Synopsis, p. 100). Claiborne\nmentions a battle fought between the two nations on the eastern bank\nof Noxubee river, about five miles west of Cooksville, Noxubee County,\nMississippi. Charles Dobbs, the settler at the farm including the\nburying-ground of those who fell in that battle, opened it in 1832,\nand found many Spanish dollars in the graves. It was some three\nhundred yards northeast of the junction of Shuqualak creek with the\nriver. A decisive victory of the Cha'hta took place at Nusic-heah, or\nLine creek, over the Chocchuma Indians, who belonged to the Chicasa\nconnection; the battle occurred south of that creek, at a locality\nnamed Lyon's Bluff.[64]\n\n    [Footnote 64: Claiborne, Mississippi, Appendix, I, p. 485. 486.]\n\nMilfort establishes a thorough distinction between the northern and\nthe southern Cha'hta as to their pursuits of life and moral character.\nThe Cha'hta of the northern section are warlike and brave, wear\ngarments, and crop their hair in Creek fashion. The southern Cha'hta,\nsettled on fertile ground west of Mobile and southwest of Pascogoula,\nare dirty, indolent and cowardly, miserably dressed and inveterate\nbeggars. Both sections could in his time raise six thousand warriors\n(p. 285-292). The mortuary customs, part of which were exceedingly\nbarbaric, are spoken of with many details by Milfort (p. 292-304);\ntheir practices in cases of divorce and adultery (p. 304-311) are\ndwelt upon by several other writers, and were of a revolting\ncharacter.[65]\n\n    [Footnote 65: Cf. B. Romans, E. and W. Florida, p. 86-89.]\n\nNo mention is made of the \"great house\" or \"the square\" in Cha'hta\ntowns, as it existed in every one of the larger Creek communities, nor\nof the green corn dance. But they had the favorite game of chunk\u00e9, and\nplayed at ball between village and village (B. Romans, p. 79. 80). The\nmen assisted their wives in their agricultural labors and in many\nother works connected with the household.[66] The practice of\nflattening the heads extended to the male children only; the Aimar\u00e1 of\nPeru observed the same exclusive custom.\n\n    [Footnote 66: B. Romans, p. 86. He describes education among the\n    Cha'hta, p. 76. 77; the sarbacane or blow-gun, p. 77.]\n\nThe collecting and cleaning of the bones of corpses was a custom\nexisting throughout the southern as well as the northern Indians east\nof Mississippi river, and among some tribes west of it. Every tribe\npracticed it in a different manner; the Cha'hta employed for the\ncleaning: \"old gentlemen with very long nails,\" and deposited the\nremains, placed in boxes, in the bone houses existing in every\ntown.[67] Tombigbee river received its name from this class of men:\nit\u00fambi-b\u00edkpi \"coffin-maker.\" The Indians at Fort Orange or Albany\n(probably the Mohawks) bound up the cleaned bones in small bundles and\nburied them: De Vries, Voyages (1642) p. 164; the Nanticokes removed\nthem to the place from which the tribe had emigrated (Heckewelder,\nDelawares, p. 75 sq.) Similar customs were observed among the\nDakota-Santees, Shetimashas and several South American tribes.\nCaptain Smith mentions the quiogozon or burial place of Virginia\nchiefs.[68]\n\n    [Footnote 67: B. Romans, p. 89. 90.]\n\n    [Footnote 68: Cf. Lawson, History of Carolina (Reprint 1860), p.\n    297. More information on Cha'hta burials will be found in H. C.\n    Yarrow, _Indian mortuary customs_; in First Report of U. S.\n    Bureau of Ethnology, 1879-1880; especially p. 185.]\n\nThe Cha'hta also had the custom, observed down to the present century,\nof setting up poles around their new graves, on which they hung hoops,\nwreaths, etc., for the spirit to ascend upon. Around these the\nsurvivors gathered every day at sunrise, noon, sunset, emitting\nconvulsive cries during thirty to forty days. On the last day all\nneighbors assembled, the poles were pulled up, and the lamentation\nended with drinking, carousing and great disorders.[69]\n\n    [Footnote 69: Missionary Herald of Boston, 1828 (vol. xxiv) p.\n    380, in an article on Religious Opinions, etc., of the Choctaws,\n    by Rev. Alfred Wright.]\n\nThe Chicasa are not known to have settled _west_ of the Mississippi\nriver to any extensive degree, but their southern neighbors and\nrelations, the Cha'hta, did so at an early epoch, no doubt prompted by\nthe increase of population. The Cha'hta emigrating to these western\nparts were looked at by their countrymen at home in the same light as\nthe Seminoles were by the Creeks. They were considered as outcasts, on\naccount of the turbulent and lawless elements which made up a large\npart of them.\n\nOn the middle course of Red river Milfort met a body of Cha'hta\nIndians, who had quitted their country about 1755 in quest of better\nhunting grounds, and were involved in frequent quarrels with the\nCaddos (p. 95).\n\nThe French found several Cha'hta tribes, as the Bayogoula, Huma and\nAcolapissa, settled upon Mississippi river. In the eighteenth century\nthe inland Shetimasha on Grand Lake were constantly harassed by\nCha'hta incursions. About 1809 a Cha'hta village existed on Washita\nriver, another on Bayou Chicot, Opelousas Parish, Louisiana. Morse\nmentions for 1820 twelve hundred Cha'hta Indians on the Sabine and\nNeche rivers, one hundred and forty on Red river near Nanatsoho, or\nPecan Point, and many lived scattered around that district. At the\npresent time (1882), encampments of Biloxis, who speak the Cha'hta\nlanguage, exist in the forests of Louisiana south of Red river.\n\nThe Cha'hta nation is formally, though not locally, divided into two\n\u00edksa (y\u00e9ksa) or _kinships_, which exist promiscuously throughout their\nterritory. These divisions were defined by Allen Wright as: 1.\nKash\u00e1p-\u00fakla or kash\u00e1pa \u00fak\u0115la (\u00f3kla) \"part of the people;\" 2. \u00dakla\ni\u207fhul\u00e1'hta \"people of the headmen.\"\n\nBesides this, there is another formal division into three \u00f3kla,\ndistricts or _fires_, the names of which were partly alluded to in the\npassage from B. Romans:\n\n     \u00f3kla f\u00e1laya \"long people\";\n\n     \u00e1hepat \u00f3kla \"potato-eating people\";\n\n     \u00f3kla h\u00e1nnali \"Sixtown people,\" who used a special dialect.\n\nThe list of Cha'hta gentes, as printed in Lewis H. Morgan, _Ancient\nSociety_,[70] stands as follows:\n\n    [Footnote 70: Published New York, 1877. pp. 99. 162.]\n\n_First phratry:_ k\u00fashap \u00f3kla or Divided People. Four gentes: 1.\nkush-iksa, _reed gens_. 2. Law okla. 3. Lulak-iksa. 4. Linoklusha.\n\n_Second phratry:_ w\u00e1taki hul\u00e1ta or Beloved People, \"people of\nhead-men\": Four gentes: 1. chufan \u00edksa, _beloved people_. 2. iskul\u00e1ni,\n_small (people)_; 3. chito, _large (people)_; 4. shakch-\u00fakla,\n_cray-fish people_.\n\nProperty and the office of chief was hereditary in the gens.\n\nAs far as the wording is concerned, Morgan's list is not satisfactory,\nbut being the only one extant I present it as it is.\n\nRev. Alfred Wright, missionary of the Cha'hta, knows of six gentes\nonly, but states that there were two great families who could not\nintermarry. These were, as stated by Morgan, the reed gens and the\nchufan gens. Wright then continues: \"Woman's brothers are considered\nnatural guardians of the children, even during father's lifetime;\ncounsel was taken for criminals from their phratry, the opposite\nphratry, or rather the principal men of this, acting as accusers. If\nthey failed to adjust the case, the principal men of the next larger\ndivision took it up; if they also failed, the case then came before\nthe itimoklushas and the shakch-uklas, whose decision was final. This\npractice is falling in disuse now.\" A business-like and truly judicial\nproceeding like this does much honor to the character and policy of\nthe Cha'hta, and will be found in but a few other Indian communities.\nIt must have acted powerfully against the prevailing practice of\nfamily revenge, and served to establish a state of safety for the\nlives of individuals.\n\nMore points on Cha'hta ethnography will be found in the Notes to B. F.\nFrench, Histor. Collect, of La., III, 128-139.\n\nThe _legends_ of the Cha'hta speak of a giant race, peaceable and\nagricultural (nah\u00fallo)[71], and also of a cannibal race, both of which\nthey met east of the Mississippi river.\n\n    [Footnote 71: Nah\u00fallo, nah\u00fanlo means: greater, higher race,\n    eminent race; though the original meaning is that of \"more\n    sacred, more honorable.\" A white man is called by the Cha'hta:\n    nah\u00fallo.]\n\nThe Cha'hta trace their _mythic origin_ from the \"Stooping, Leaning or\nWinding Hill,\" N\u00e1ni W\u00e1ya, a mound of fifty feet altitude, situated in\nWinston county, Mississippi, on the headwaters of Pearl river. The top\nof this \"birthplace\" of the nation is level, and has a surface of\nabout one-fourth of an acre. One legend states, that the Cha'hta\narrived there, after crossing the Mississippi and separating from the\nChicasa, who went north during an epidemic. Nanna Waya creek runs\nthrough the southeastern parts of Winston county, Miss.\n\nAnother place, far-famed in Cha'hta folklore, was the \"House of\nWarriors,\" Taska-tch\u00faka, the oldest settlement in the nation, and\nstanding on the verge of the K\u00fashtush[72]. It lay in Neshoba county,\nMississippi. It was a sort of temple, and the Unkala, a priestly\norder, had the custody or care of it. The I\u2032ksa A\u2032numpule or\n\"clan-speakers\" prepared the bones of great warriors for burial, and\nthe Unkala went at the head of the mourners to that temple, chanting\nhymns in an unknown tongue.[73]\n\n    [Footnote 72: _Custusha_ creek runs into Kentawha creek,\n    affluent of Big Black river, in Neshoba county.]\n\n    [Footnote 73: Claiborne, Mississippi, I, p. 518.]\n\nThe curious tale of the origin of the Cha'hta from N\u00e1ni W\u00e1ya has been\noften referred to by authors. B. Romans states that they showed the\n\"hole in the ground,\" from which they came, between their nation and\nthe Chicasa, and told the colonists that their neighbors were\nsurprised at seeing a people rise at once out of the earth (p. 71).\nThe most circumstantial account of this preternatural occurrence is\nlaid down in the following narrative.[74] \"When the earth was a level\nplain in the condition of a quagmire, a superior being, in appearance\na _red man_, came down from above, and alighting near the centre of\nthe Choctaw nation, threw up a large mound or hill, called Nanne\nWayah, _stooping_ or _sloping hill_. Then he caused the red people to\ncome out of it, and when he supposed that a sufficient number had come\nout, he stamped on the ground with his foot. When this signal of his\npower was given, some were partly formed, others were just raising\ntheir heads above the mud, emerging into light,[75] and struggling\ninto life.... Thus seated on the area of their hill, they were told by\ntheir Creator they should live forever. But they did not seem to\nunderstand what he had told them; therefore he took away from them the\ngrant of immortality, and made them subject to death. The earth then\nindurated, the hills were formed by the agitation of the waters and\nwinds on the soft mud. The Creator then told the people that the earth\nwould bring forth the chestnut, hickory nut and acorn; it is likely\nthat maize was discovered, but long afterward, by a crow. Men began to\ncover themselves by the long moss (abundant in southern climates),\nwhich they tied around their waists; then were invented bow and\narrows, and the skins of the game used for clothing.\"\n\n    [Footnote 74: Missionary Herald, 1828, p. 181.]\n\n    [Footnote 75: Compare the poetic vision, parallel to this,\n    contained in Ezekiel, ch. 39.]\n\nHere the creation of the Cha'hta is made coeval with the creation of\nthe earth, and some features of the story give evidence of modern and\nrationalistic tendencies of the relator. Other Cha'hta traditions\nstate that the people came from the west, and stopped at Nani Waya,\nonly to obtain their laws and phratries from the Creator--a story made\nto resemble the legislation on Mount Sinai. Other legends conveyed the\nbelief that the emerging from the sacred hill took place only four or\nfive generations before.[76]\n\n    [Footnote 76: Missionary Herald, 1828, p. 215.]\n\nThe emerging of the human beings from the top of a hill is an event\nnot unheard of in American mythology, and should not be associated\nwith a simultaneous _creation_ of man. It refers to the coming up of\nprimeval man from a lower world into a pre\u00ebxistent upper world,\nthrough some orifice. A graphic representation of this idea will be\nfound in the N\u00e1vajo creation myth, published in Amer. Antiquarian V,\n207-224, from which extracts are given in this volume below. Five\ndifferent worlds are there supposed to have existed, superposed to\neach other, and some of the orifices through which the \"old people\"\ncrawled up are visible at the present time.\n\nThe published maps of the Cha'hta country, drawn in colonial times,\nare too imperfect to give us a clear idea of the situation of their\n_towns_. From more recent sources it appears that these settlements\nconsisted of smaller groups of cabins clustered together in tribes,\nperhaps also after _gentes_, as we see it done among the Mississippi\ntribes and in a few instances among the Creeks.\n\nThe \"old Choctaw Boundary Line,\" as marked upon the U. S. Land Office\nmap of 1878, runs from Prentiss, a point on the Mississippi river in\nBolivar county (33\u00b0 37\u00b4 Lat.), Miss., in a southeastern direction to a\npoint on Yazoo river, in Holmes county. The \"Chicasaw Boundary Line\"\nruns from the Tunica Old Fields, in Tunica county, opposite Helena, on\nMississippi river (34\u00b0 33\u00b4 Lat.), southeast through Coffeeville in\nYallabusha county, to a point in Sumner county, eastern part. The\n\"Choctaw Boundary Line\" passes from east to west, following\napproximately the 31\u00b0 50\u00b4 of Lat., from the Eastern boundary of\nMississippi State to the southwest corner of Copiah county. All these\nboundary lines were run after the conclusion of the treaty at Doak's\nStand.\n\nThe _Cusha_ Indians, also called Coosa, Coosahs, had settlements on\nthe Cusha creeks, in Lauderdale county.\n\nThe _Ukla-fal\u00e1ya_, or \"Long People,\" were settled in Leake county. (?)\n\nThe _Cofetal\u00e1ya_ were inhabiting Atala and Choctaw counties, settled\nat French Camp, etc., on the old military road leading to Old Doak's\nStand; General Jackson advanced through this road, when marching south\nto meet the English army.\n\n_Pineshuk Indians_, on a branch of Pearl river, in Winston county.\n\n_Boguechito Indians_, on stream of the same name in Neshoba county,\nnear Philadelphia. Some Mugulashas lived in the Boguechito district;\nWiatakali was one of the villages. \"Yazoo Old Village\" also stood in\nNeshoba county.\n\n_Sixtowns_ or English-Towns, a group of six villages in Smith and\nJasper counties. Adair, p. 298, mentions \"seven towns that lie close\ntogether and next to New Orleans\", perhaps meaning these. The names of\nthe six towns were as follows: Chinokabi, Okatallia, Killis-tamaha\n(k\u00edlis, in Creek: ink\u00edlisi, is _English_), Tallatown, Nashoweya,\nBishkon.\n\n_Sukinatchi_ or \"Factory Indians\" settlement, in Lowndes and Kemper\ncounties. Allamutcha Old Town was ten miles from Sukinatchi creek.\n\n_Yauana_, Yowanne was a palisaded town on Pascagoula river, or one of\nits affluents; cf. Adair, History, 297-299. 301. He calls it remote\nbut considerable; it has its name from a worm, very destructive to\ncorn in the wet season. French maps place it on the same river, where\n\"Chicachae\" fort stood above, and call it: \"Yauana, dernier village\ndes Choctaws.\" \"Yoani, on the banks of the Pasca Oocooloo\n(Pascagoula)\"; B. Romans, p. 86.\n\nAn old Cha'hta _Agency_ was in Oktibbeha county.\n\n_Cobb Indians_; west of Pearl river.\n\n_Shuqualak_ in Noxubee county.\n\n_Chicasawhay Indians_ on river of the same name, an affluent of the\nPascagoula river; B. Romans, p. 86, states, that \"the Choctaws of\nChicasahay and the Yoani on Pasca Oocooloo river\" are the only Cha'hta\nable to swim.\n\nIt may be collected from the above, that the main settlements of the\nNorthern Cha'hta were between Mobile and Big Black river, east and\nwest, and between 32\u00b0 and 33\u00b0 30\u00b4 Lat., where their remnants reside\neven nowadays.\n\n\nCHA'HTA TRIBES OF THE GULF COAST.\n\nIn the southern part of the Cha'hta territory several tribes,\nrepresented to be of Cha'hta lineage, appear as distinct from the main\nbody, and are always mentioned separately. The French colonists, in\nwhose annals they figure extensively, call them Mobilians, Tohomes,\nPascogoulas, Biloxis, Mougoulachas, Bayogoulas and Humas (Oumas). They\nhave all disappeared in our epoch, with the exception of the Biloxi,\nof whom scattered remnants live in the forests of Louisiana, south of\nthe Red river.\n\n_The Mobilians_ seem to be the descendants of the inhabitants of\nMauvila, a walled town, at some distance from the seat of the\nTuscalusa chief, and dependent on him. These Indians are well known\nfor their stubborn resistance offered in 1540 to the invading troops\nof Hernando de Soto.\n\nSubsequently they must have removed several hundred miles south of\nTuscalusa river, perhaps on account of intertribal broils with the\nAlibamu; for in the year 1708 we find them settled on Mobile Bay,\nwhere the French had allowed them, the Naniaba and Tohome, to erect\nlodges around their fort. Cf. Alibamu. On a place of worship visited\nby this tribe (1702), Margry IV, 513.\n\n_The Tohome_, Thomes, Tomez Indians, settled north of Mobile City,\nstood in the service of the French colony, and adopted the Roman\nCatholic faith. Besides the Naniaba[77] and Mobilian Indians, the\nFrench had settled in their vicinity a pagan Cha'hta tribe from the\nnorthwest and an adventitious band of Apalaches, who had fled the\nSpanish domination in Florida. We are informed that the language and\nbarbarous customs of the Tohomes differed considerably from those of\nthe neighboring Indians. Their name is the Cha'hta adjective toh\u00f3bi,\ncontr. t\u00f3bi _white_.\n\n    [Footnote 77: \"Fish-eaters,\" from Cha'hta n\u00e1ni, n\u00e1nni _fish_,\n    \u00e1pa _to eat_. On Turner's map (1827), Nanihaba Island lies at\n    the junction of Alabama with Tombigbee river, and Nanihaba Bluff\n    lies west of the junction.]\n\nIn 1702 they were at war with the Chicasa. Their cabins stood eight\nleagues from the French settlement at Mobile, on Mobile river, and the\nnumber of their men is given as three hundred. They spoke a dialect of\nthe Bayogoula. Cf. Margry IV, 427. 429. 504. 512-14. 531. The\nMobilians and the Tohomes combined counted three hundred and fifty\nfamilies: Margry IV, 594. 602.\n\nThe _Touachas_ settled by the French upon Mobile bay in 1705, were a\npart of the Tawasa, an Alibamu tribe mentioned above.[78]\n\n    [Footnote 78: Margry V, 457.]\n\n_The Pascogoula_, incorrectly termed Pascoboula Indians, were a small\ntribe settled upon Pascogoula river, three days' travel southwest of\nFort Mobile. Six different nations were said to inhabit the banks of\nthe river, probably all of Cha'hta lineage; among them are mentioned\nthe Pascogoulas, Chozettas, Bilocchi, Moctoby, all insignificant in\nnumbers. The name signifies \"bread-people,\" and is composed of the\nCha'hta p\u00e1ska _bread_, \u00f3kla _people_, the Nahuatl tribal name of the\nTlascaltecs being of the same signification: tlaxcalli _tortilla_,\nfrom ixca _to bake_. Cf. Margry IV, 154-157. 193. 195. 425-427. 451.\n454. 602.\n\nA portion of these Indians may have been identical with the\nChicasawhay Indians, and with the inhabitants of Yauana.\n\n_The Biloxi Indians_ became first known to the whites by the erection\nof a French settlement, in 1699, on a bay called after this tribe,\nwhich is styled B'l\u00faksi by the Cha'hta, and has some reference to the\ncatch of turtles (l\u00faktchi _turtle_).\n\n\"We thought it most convenient to found a settlement in the Bilocchy\nbay; ... it is distant only three leagues from the Pascoboula river,\nupon which are built the three villages of the Bilocchy, Pascoboula\nand Moctoby.\" Margry IV, 195; cf. 311. 451. We also find the statement\nthat the Bayogoulas call the Annocchy: Bilocchy (pronounced:\nBilokshi), Margry IV, 172. P\u00e9nicaut refers to their place of\nsettlement on Biloxi bay in 1704 in Margry V, 442. On their language\ncf. Margry IV, 184; quoted under Chicasa, q. v.\n\nLater on they crossed the Mississippi to its western side, and are\nmentioned as wanderers on Bayou Crocodile and its environs (1806),\nwhich they frequent even now, and on the Lake of Avoyelles.\n\n_The Mugulashas_ (pron.: Moogoolashas) were neighbors of the French\ncolonists at Biloxi bay, and a people of the same name lived in the\nvillage occupied by the Bayogoulas. Mougoulachas is the French\northography of the name. Their name is identical with Imukl\u00e1sha or\nthe \"opposite phratry\" in the Cha'hta nation, from which Mukl\u00e1sha, a\nCreek town, also received its name. In consequence of this generic\nmeaning of the term this appellation is met with in several portions\nof the Cha'hta country.\n\nPrevious to March 1700, there had been a conflict between them and the\nBayogoulas, in which the latter had killed all of the Mugulashas who\nwere within their reach, and called in families of the Colapissas and\nTioux to occupy their deserted fields and lodges. Cf. Margry IV, 429.,\nBoguechito Indians, Bayogoula and Acolapissa.\n\n_The Acolapissa Indians_ appear under various names in the country\nnorthwest to northeast of New Orleans. They are also called Colapissa,\nQuinipissa, Quiripissa, Querepisa, forms which all flow from Cha'hta\n\u00f3kla-p\u00edsa \"those who look out for people,\" _guardians, spies,\nsentinels, watching men_. This term refers to their position upon the\nin- and out-flow of Lake Pontchartrain and other coast lagoons,\ncombined with their watchfulness for hostile parties passing these\nplaces. It is therefore a generic term and not a specific tribal name;\nhence it was applied to several tribes simultaneously, and they were\nreported to have seven towns, Tangibao among them, which were distant\neight days' travel by land E. N. E. from their settlement on\nMississippi river. Cf. Margry IV, 120. 167. 168. Their village on\nMississippi river was seen by L. d'Iberville, 1699-1700, twenty-five\nleagues from its mouth (IV, 101). Their language is spoken of, _ibid._\nIV, 412. At the time of Tonti's visit, 1685, they lived twenty leagues\nfurther down the Mississippi than in 1699-1700. They suffered terribly\nfrom epidemics, and joined the Mugulashas, q. v., whose chief became\nthe chief of both tribes; Margry IV, 453. 602. On \"Colapissas\"\nresiding on Talcatcha or Pearl river, see Pani, p. 44. The Bayogoulas\ninformed d'Iberville in 1699, that the \"Quinipissas\" lived fifty\nleagues east of them, and thirty or forty leagues distant from the\nsea, in six villages: Margry IV, 119. 120. Are they the Sixtown\nIndians?\n\n_The Bayogoula Indians_ inhabited a village on the Mississippi river,\nwestern shore (Margry IV, 119. 155), conjointly with the Mugulashas,\nsixty-four leagues distant from the sea, thirty-five leagues from the\nHumas, and eight days' canoe travel from Biloxi bay.\n\nCommander Lemoyne d'Iberville graphically describes (Margry IV,\n170-172) the village of the Bayogoula with its two temples and 107\ncabins. The number of the males was rather large (200 to 250) compared\nto the paucity of women inhabiting it. A fire was burning in the\ncentre of the temples, and near the door were figures of animals, the\n\"chouco\u00fcacha\" or opossum being one of them. This word shukuasha is the\ndiminutive of Cha'hta: shukata _opossum_, and contains the diminutive\nterminal -ushi. Shishikushi or \"_tambours faits de calebasses_,\"\ngourd-drums, is another Indian term occurring in his description,[79]\nprobably borrowed from an Algonkin language of the north. A curious\ninstance of sign language displayed by one of the Bayogoula chiefs\nwill be found in Margry IV, 154. 155.\n\n    [Footnote 79: Margry IV, 175: \"des tambours chychycouchy, qui\n    sont des calebasses.\"]\n\nThe full form of the tribal name is Bayuk-\u00f3kla or _river-tribe,\ncreek-_ or _bayou-people_; the Cha'hta word for a smaller river, or\nriver forming part of a delta is b\u00e1yuk, contr. b\u014dk, and occurs in\nBoguechito, Bok'h\u00famma, etc.\n\n_The H\u00fama_, Ouma, Houma or Omma tribe lived, in the earlier periods of\nFrench colonization, seven leagues above the junction of Red river, on\nthe eastern bank of Mississippi river. L. d'Iberville describes their\nsettlement, 1699, as placed on a hill-ridge, 2-1/2 leagues inland, and\ncontaining 140 cabins, with about 350 heads of families. Their village\nis described in Margry IV, 177. 179. 265-271. 452, located by degrees\nof latitude: 32\u00b0 15\u00b4, of longitude: 281\u00b0 25\u00b4. The limit between the\nlands occupied by the Huma and the Bayogoula was marked by a high pole\npainted red, in Cha'hta Istr-ouma (?), which stood on the high shores\nof Mississippi river at Baton Rouge, La.[80] Their hostilities with\nthe Tangipahoa are referred to by the French annalists, and ended in\nthe destroying of the Tangipahoa town by the Huma; Margry IV, 168. 169.\nCf. Taensa. A tribe mentioned in 1682 in connection with the Huma is\nthat of the Chigilousa; Margry I, 563.\n\n    [Footnote 80: Thomas Hutchins, French America, Phila., 1784, p.\n    40.]\n\nTheir language is distinctly stated to have differed from that of the\nTaensa, IV, 412. 448, and the tribal name, a Cha'hta term for _red_,\nprobably refers to red leggings, as Opel\u00fasa is said to refer to black\nleggings or moccasins.\n\nThey once claimed the ground on which New Orleans stands, and after\nthe Revolution lived on Bayou Lafourche.[81] A coast parish, with\nHouma as parish seat, is now called after them.\n\n    [Footnote 81: P\u00e9nicaut in Margry V, 395.]\n\n_The country south_ of the Upper Creek settlements, lying between\nLower Alabama and Lower Chatahuchi river, must have been sparsely\nsettled in colonial times, for there is but one Indian tribe, the\nPensacola (p\u00e1\u207fsha-\u00f3kla or \"hair-people\") mentioned there. This name\nis of Cha'hta origin, and there is a tradition that the old homes, or\na part of them, of the Cha'hta nation lay in these tracts. On Escambia\nriver there are Cha'hta at the present time, who keep up the custom of\nfamily vendetta or blood revenge, and that river is also mentioned as\na constant battle-field between the Creeks and Cha'hta tribes by W.\nBartram.[82] When the Cha'hta concluded treaties with the United\nStates Government involving cessions of land, they claimed ownership\nof the lands in question, even of some lands lying on the east side of\nChatahuchi river, where they had probably been hunting from an early\nperiod. A list of the way-stations and fords on the post-road between\nLower Tallapoosa river and the Bay of Mobile is appended to Hawkins'\nSketch, p. 85, and was probably written after 1813; cf. p. 83. This\npost-road was quite probably an old Indian war-trail traveled over by\nCreek warriors to meet the Cha'hta.\n\n    [Footnote 82: _Travels_, p. 436: \"the bloody field of Schambe\";\n    cf. 400. 414.]\n\nThe _Conshac tribe_, the topographic and ethnographic position\nof which is difficult to trace, has been located in these\nthinly-inhabited portions of the Gulf coast. La Harpe, whose annals\nare printed in B. F. French, Histor. Coll. of Louisiana, Vol. III,\nstates (p. 44) that \"two villages of Conshaques, who had always been\nfaithful to the French and resided near Mobile Fort, had been driven\nout of their country because they would not receive the English among\nthem (about 1720).\" The Conshacs and Alibamu were at war with the\nTohome before 1702; cf. Margry IV, 512. 518. L. d'Iberville, in 1702,\ngives their number at 2000 families, probably including the Alibamu,\nstating that both tribes have their first settlements 35 to 40 leagues\nto the northeast, on an eastern affluent of Mobile river, joining it\nfive leagues above the fort. From these first villages to the E. N. E.\nthere are other Conshac villages, known to the Spaniards as\nApalachicolys, with many English settled among them, and 60 to 65\nleagues distant from Mobile.[83] Du Pratz, who speaks of them from\nhearsay only, places them north of the Alibamu, and states that they\nspoke a language almost the same as the Chicasa (Hist. p. 208). \"A\nsmall party of Coussac Indians is settled on Chacta-hatcha or Pea\nriver, running into St. Rose's bay, 25 leagues above its mouth.\"[84]\nOn the headwaters of Ikanfina river, H. Tanner's map (1827) has a\nlocality called: Pokanaweethly Cootsa O. F.\n\n    [Footnote 83: Margry IV, 594. 595. 602.]\n\n    [Footnote 84: Thom. Hutchins, French America, p. 83 (1784). B.\n    Romans, Florida, p. 90.]\n\nThe origin of these different acceptations can only be accounted for\nby the generic meaning of the appellation Conshac. It is the Cha'hta\nword k\u00e1nshak: (1) a species of _cane_, of extremely hard texture, and\n(2) _knife made from it_. These knives were used throughout the Gulf\nterritories, and thus d'Iberville and du Pratz call by this name the\nCreek Indians or Maskoki proper, while to others the Conchaques are\nthe Cusha, K\u00fasha, a Cha'hta tribe near Mobile bay, which is called by\nRev. Byington in his manuscript dictionary Konshas, Konshaws. That the\nCreeks once manufactured knives of this kind is stated in our Kas\u00ed'hta\nmigration legend.\n\n\nTHE CHA'HTA LANGUAGE,\n\nthe representative of the western group of Maskoki dialects, differs\nin its _phonetics_ from the eastern dialects chiefly by the more\ngeneral vocalic nasalization previously alluded to. Words cannot begin\nwith two consonants; the Creek _st_ is replaced by _sht_, and\ncombinations like _tl, bt, nt_ do not occur (Byington's Grammar,\np. 9). In short words the accent is laid upon the penultima.\n\nThe cases of the noun are not so distinctly marked as they are in the\neastern dialects by the case-suffixes in _-t_ and _-n_, but have often\nto be determined by the hearer from the position of the words in the\nsentence. But in other respects, case and many other relations are\npointed out by an extensive series of suffixed or enclitic syllables,\nmostly monosyllabic, which Byington calls article-pronouns, and writes\nas separate words. They are simply suffixes of pronominal origin, and\ncorrespond to our articles _the, a_, to our relative and\ndemonstrative pronouns, partly also to our adverbs, prepositions and\nconjunctions. They form combinations among themselves, and supply\nverbal inflection with its modal suffixes or exponents. Adjectives\npossess a distinct plural form, which points to their origin from\nverbs, but in substantives number is not expressed except by the verb\nconnected with them, or by means of separate words.\n\nThere are two classes of personal pronouns, the relative and the\nabsolute (the former referring to something said previously), but the\npersonal inflection of the verb is effected by prefixes, the\npredicative suffix _'h_ being added to the end of each form in the\naffirmative conjugation. Only the first person of the singular is\nmarked by a suffix: _-li_ (increased by _'h_: _-li'h_). The lack of a\ntrue substantive verb _to be_ is to some extent supplied by this\nsuffix _-'h_. Verbal inflection is rich in tenses and other forms, and\nlargely modifies the radix to express changes in voice, mode and\ntense. The sway of phonetic laws is all-powerful here, and they\noperate whenever a slight conflict of syllables disagreeing with the\ndelicate ear of the Cha'hta Indian takes place.\n\nOf abstract terms there exists a larger supply than in many other\nAmerican languages.\n\nSeveral dialects of Cha'hta were and are still in existence, as the\nSixtown dialect, the ones spoken from Mobile bay to New Orleans, those\nheard on the Lower Mississippi river, and that of the Chicasa. The\ndialect now embodied in the literary language of the present Cha'hta\nis that of the central parts of Mississippi State, where the American\nProtestant missionaries had selected a field of operation.\n\nRev. Cyrus Byington (born 1793, died 1867) worked as a missionary\namong this people before and after the removal to the Indian\nterritory. He completed the first draft of his \"Choctaw Grammar\" in\n1834, and an extract of it was published by Dr. D. G. Brinton.[85] His\nmanuscript \"Choctaw Dictionary,\" now in the library of the U. S.\nBureau of Ethnology, fills five folio volumes, contains about 17,000\nitems (words, phrases and sentences), and was completed about 1833.\nThe missionary alphabet used by him, which is also the alphabet of\nCha'hta literature, is very imperfect, as it fails to express _all_\nsounds of the language by _signs for each_, and entirely neglects\naccentuation. The pronunciation of Cha'hta is so delicate and pliant\nthat only a superior scientific alphabet can approximately express its\npeculiar sounds and intonations.\n\n    [Footnote 85: Published in Proceedings of American Philosoph.\n    Society, 1870 (56 pages), 8vo.]\n\nCha'hta has been made the subject of linguistic inquiry by Fr. M\u00fcller,\nGrundz\u00fcge d. Sprachwissenschaft, II, 232-238, and by Forchhammer in\nthe Transactions of the Congr\u00e8s des Am\u00e9ricanistes, 2d session, 1877,\n8vo.; also by L. Adam.\n\n\nIII. THE CREEK INDIANS.\n\nThe Creek Indians or Maskoki proper occupy, in historic times, a\ncentral position among the other tribes of their affiliation, and\nthrough their influence and physical power, which they attained by\nforming a comparatively strong and permanent national union, have\nbecome the most noteworthy of all the Southern tribes of the United\nStates territories. They still form a compact body of Indians for\nthemselves, and their history, customs and antiquities can be studied\nat the present time almost as well as they could at the beginning of\nthe nineteenth century. But personal presence among the Creeks in the\nIndian Territory is necessary to obtain from them all the information\nwhich is needed for the purposes of ethnologic science.\n\nThere is a tradition that when the Creek people incorporated tribes of\nother nations into their confederacy, these tribes never kept up their\nown customs and peculiarities for any length of time, but were subdued\nin such a manner as to conform with the dominant race. As a\nconfirmation of this, it is asserted that the Creeks annihilated the\nY\u00e1massi Indians completely, so that they disappeared entirely among\ntheir number; that the Tukabatchi, Task\u00edgi and other tribes of foreign\ndescent abandoned their paternal language to adopt that of the\ndominant Creeks.\n\nBut there are facts which tend to attenuate or disprove this\ntradition. The Yuchi, as well as the Naktche tribe and the tribes of\nAlibamu descent[86] have retained their language and peculiar habits\nup to the present time, notwithstanding their long incorporation into\nthe Creek community. The Hitchiti, Apalatch\u00fakla and Sawokli tribes,\nwith their branch villages, have also retained their language to this\nday, notwithstanding their membership in the extensive confederacy, a\nmembership which must have lasted for centuries; and in fact we cannot\nsee how the retention of vernacular speech could hurt the interests of\nthe community even in the slightest way. There were tribes among the\nMaskoki proper, which were said to have given up not only their own\nlanguage, but also their customs, at a time which fell within the\nremembrance of the living generation. Among their number was the\nTask\u00edgi tribe,[87] on the confluence of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers,\nwhose earlier language was probably Cheroki. But, on the other side, a\nbody of Chicasa Indians lived near Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta in historic times, which\nduring their stay certainly preserved their language as well as their\ntraditional customs. From Em. Bowen's map it appears that Chicasa\nIndians also lived on Savannah river (above the Yuchi) for some time,\nand many Cheroki must have lived within the boundaries of the\nconsolidated Creek confederacy. The more there were of them, and the\nnearer they were to their own country, the more it becomes probable\nthat they preserved their own language and paternal customs. The\nexistence of Cheroki local names amid the Creek settlements strongly\nmilitates in favor of this; we have Etowa, Ok\u00f3ni, Chiaha, Tam\u00e1`li,\n\u00c1tasi, Task\u00edgi, Amakalli.\n\n    [Footnote 86: W\u00edtumka (Great), Mukl\u00e1si, and the four Alibamu\n    villages named by Hawkins. To these we may add Koass\u00e1ti.]\n\n    [Footnote 87: Hawkins, p. 39.]\n\nIn the minds of many of our readers it will ever remain doubtful that\nthe Creek tribes immigrated into the territories of the Eastern Gulf\nStates by crossing the Lower Mississippi river. But there is at least\none fact which goes to show that the settling of the Creeks proceeded\nfrom west to east and southeast. The oldest immigration to Chatahuchi\nriver is that of the Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta and Kaw\u00edta tribes, both of whom, as our\nlegend shows, found the K\u00fasa and the Apalatch\u00fakla with their\nconnections, _in situ_, probably the \u00c1bi\u03c7ka also. If there is any\ntruth in the Hitchiti tradition, the tribes of this division _came\nfrom the seashore_, an indication which seems to point to the coast\ntracts afterwards claimed by the Cha'hta. All the other settlements on\nChatahuchi river seem younger than Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta and Kaw\u00edta, and therefore\nthe Creek immigration to those parts came from Coosa and Tallapoosa\nrivers. At one time the northern or Cheroki-Creek boundary of the\nCoosa river settlements was Talat\u00edgi, now written Talladega, for the\nname of this town has to be interpreted by \"Village at the End,\"\nit\u00e1lua at\u00edgi. If the name of Tallapoosa river, in Hitchiti Talep\u00fasi,\ncan be derived from Creek talep\u00fa`la _stranger_, this would furnish\nanother indication for a former allophylic population in that valley;\nbut `l rarely, if ever, changes into s. The Cheroki local names in\nthese parts, and east from there, show conclusively who these\n\"strangers\" may have been.\n\nIt appears from old charts, that Creek towns, or at least towns having\nCreek names, also existed west of Coosa river, as on Canoe creek:\nLitafatcha, and on Cahawba river: T\u00e1lua h\u00e1dsho, \"Crazy Town,\" together\nwith ruins of other villages above this.\n\n\nTHE CREEK SETTLEMENTS.\n\nThe towns and villages of the Creeks were in the eighteenth century\nbuilt along the banks of rivers and their smaller tributaries, often\nin places subject to inundation during large freshets, which occurred\nonce in about fifteen years. The smallest of them contained from\ntwenty to thirty cabins, some of the larger ones up to two hundred,\nand in 1832 Tukabatchi, then the largest of all the Creek settlements,\nharbored 386 families. Many towns appeared rather compactly built,\nalthough they were composed of irregular clusters of four to eight\nhouses standing together; each of these clusters contained a gens\n(\"clan or family of relations,\" C. Swan), eating and living in common.\nThe huts and cabins of the Lower Creeks resembled, from a distance,\nclusters of newly-burned brick kilns, from the high color of the\nclay.[88]\n\n    [Footnote 88: Cf. Yuchi, p. 22. At the time of the conquest of\n    Mexico by Cortez, many of the interior towns of that country\n    were whitewashed in the same manner, by means of a shining white\n    clay coating.]\n\nIt will be found appropriate to distinguish between Creek towns and\nvillages. By _towns_ is indicated the settlements which had a public\nsquare, by _villages_ those which had none. The square occupied the\ncentral part of the town, and was reserved for the celebration of\nfestivals, especially the annual busk or _fast_ (p\u00faskita), for the\nmeetings of chiefs, headmen and \"beloved men,\" and for the performance\nof daily dances. Upon this central area stood the \"great house,\"\ntch\u00faka `l\u00e1ko, the council-house, and attached to it was a play-ground,\ncalled by traders the \"chunkey-yard.\" Descriptions of these places\nwill be given below.\n\nAnother thoroughgoing distinction in the settlements of the Creek\nnation was that of the _red_ or _war towns_ and the _white_ or _peace\ntowns_.\n\nThe _red_ or _kip\u00e1ya towns_, to which C. Swan in 1791 refers as being\nalready a thing of the past, were governed by _warriors only_. The\nterm _red_ refers to the warlike disposition of these towns, but does\nnot correspond to our adjective _bloody_; it depicts the wrath or\nanger animating the warriors when out on the war-path. The posts of\ntheir cabin in the public square were painted red on one side.\n\nThe present Creeks still keep up _formally_ this ancient distinction\nbetween the towns, and count the following among the kip\u00e1ya towns:\n\nKaw\u00edta, Tukab\u00e1tchi, `L\u00e1-`l\u00e1ko, \u00c1tasi, Ka-il\u00e4\u00eddshi, Chi\u00e1ha, \u00dasudshi,\nH\u00fatali-huy\u00e1na, Alibamu, Yufala, Yufala hup\u00e1yi, H\u00edlapi, Kitcha-pat\u00e1ki.\n\n_The white towns_, also called peace towns, conservative towns, were\ngoverned by _civil officers_ or m\u00edkalgi, and, as some of the earlier\nauthors allege, were considered as places of refuge and safety to\nindividuals who had left their tribes in dread of punishment or\nrevenge at the hand of their pursuers. The modern Creeks count among\nthe peace towns, called t\u00e1lua-m\u00edkagi towns, the following settlements:\n\nHitchiti, Okf\u00faski, Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta, \u00c1bi'hka, Abi\u03c7k\u00fadshi, T\u00e1lisi, Oktch\u00e1yi,\nOdshi-ap\u00f3fa, Lutchap\u00f3ka, Task\u00edgi, Assi-l\u00e1napi or Green-Leaf,\nWiw\u00fa\u03c7ka.\n\nQuite different from the above list is the one of the white towns\ngiven by Col. Benj. Hawkins in 1799, which refers to the Upper Creeks\nonly: Okf\u00faski and its branch villages (viz: Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a, Tukab\u00e1tchi\nTalah\u00e1ssi, Im\u00fakfa, Tutok\u00e1gi, Atchin\u00e1lgi, Okfusk\u016b\u2032dshi, Sukap\u00f3ga,\nIpis\u00f3gi); then T\u00e1lisi, \u00c1tasi, Fus'-h\u00e1tchi, Kul\u00fami. For this list and\nthat of the kip\u00e1ya towns, cf. his \"Sketch,\" p. 51. 52.\n\nThe ancient distinction between red and white towns began to fall into\ndisuse with the approach of the white colonists, which entailed the\nspread of agricultural pursuits among these Indians; nevertheless\nfrequent reference is made to it by the modern Creeks.\n\nSegmentation of villages is frequently observed in Indian tribes, and\nthe list below will give many striking instances. It was brought about\nby over-population, as in the case of Okf\u00faski; and it is probable that\nthen only certain gentes, not a promiscuous lot of citizens, emigrated\nfrom a town. Other causes for emigration were the exhaustion of the\ncultivated lands by many successive crops, as well as the need of new\nand extensive hunting grounds. These they could not obtain in their\nnearest neighborhood without warring with their proprietors, and\ntherefore often repaired to distant countries to seek new homes\n(Bartram, Travels, p. 389). The frequent removals of towns to new\nsites, lying at _short_ distances only, may be easily explained by the\nunhealthiness of the old site, produced by the constant accumulation\nof refuse and filth around the towns, which never had anything like\nsewers or efficient regulations of sanitary police.\n\nThe distinction between Muscogulge and _Stincard_ towns, explicitly\nspoken of in Wm. Bartram's Travels (see Appendices), refers merely to\nthe form of speech used by the tribes of the confederacy. This epithet\n(_Puants_ in French) may have had an opprobrious meaning in the\nbeginning, but not in later times, when it simply served to\ndistinguish the principal people from the accessory tribes. We find it\nalso used as a current term in the Naktche villages.\n\nBartram does not designate as Stincards the tribes speaking languages\nof another stock than Maskoki, the Yuchi, for instance; not even all\nof those that speak dialects of Maskoki other than the Creek. He calls\nby this savorous name the Mukl\u00e1sa, Wit\u00famka, Koass\u00e1ti, Ch\u00edaha,\nHitchiti, Ok\u00f3ni, both S\u00e1wokli and a part of the Seminoles. He mentions\nthe _towns_ only, and omits all the _villages_ which have branched off\nfrom the towns.\n\nThe present Creeks know nothing of such a distinction. Although I do\nnot know the Creek term which corresponded to it in the eighteenth\ncentury, it is not improbable that such a designation was in vogue;\nfor we find many similar opprobrious epithets among other Indians, as\nCuitlateca or \"excrementers\" in Mexico; Puants or Metsmetskop among\nthe Naktche[89]; Inkalik, \"sons of louse-eggs\" among the Eskimo;\nK\u0101\u2032katilsh or \"arm-pit-stinkers\" among the Klamaths of\nSouthwestern Oregon; M\u00f3ki or M\u00faki, \"cadaverous, stinking,\" an epithet\noriginally given to _one_ of the Sh\u00ednumo or M\u00f3ki towns for lack of\nbravery, and belonging to the Sh\u00ednumo language: m\u00faki _dead_.\n\n    [Footnote 89: Dumont, M\u00e9m. histor. de la Louisiane, I, 181.]\n\nThe plural forms: tchilok\u00f3ga and tchilokog\u00e1lgi designate in Creek\npersons speaking another than the Creek language; tchil\u00f3k\u00e4s _I speak\nan alien language_. \"Stincards\" would be expressed in Creek by \u00edsti\nf\u00e1mbagi. Of all the gentes of the Chicasa that of the _skunk_ or\nhushkoni was held in the lowest esteem, some of the lowest officials,\nas runners, etc., being appointed from it; therefore it can be\nconjectured that from the Chicasa tribe a term like \"skunks,\"\n\"stinkards,\" may have been transferred and applied to the less\nesteemed gentes of other nations.\n\n\nALPHABETIC LIST OF TOWNS AND VILLAGES.\n\nIn this alphabetic list of ancient Creek towns and villages I have\nincluded all the names of inhabited places which I have found recorded\nbefore the emigration of the people to the Indian Territory. The\ndescription of their sites is chiefly taken from Hawkins' \"_Sketch_,\"\none of the most instructive books which we possess on the Creeks in\ntheir earlier homes. Some of these town names are still existing in\nAlabama and Georgia, although the site has not unfrequently changed. I\nhave interspersed into the list a few names of the larger rivers. The\netymologies added to the names contain the opinions of the Creek\ndelegates visiting Washington every year, and they seldom differed\namong each other on any name. The local names are written according to\nmy scientific system of phonetics, the only change introduced being\nthat of the palatal _tch_ for _ch_.\n\n     LIST OF CREEK SETTLEMENTS.\n\n     _\u00c1bi'hka_, one of the oldest among the Upper Creek towns; the\n        oldest chiefs were in the habit of naming the Creek nation\n        after it. Hawkins speaks of Abik\u00fadshi only, not of Abi'hka.\n        It certainly lay somewhere near the Upper Coosa river, where\n        some old maps have it. Emanuel Bowen, \"A new map of\n        Georgia,\" has only \"Abacouse,\" and this in the wrong place,\n        below K\u00fasa and above Great Talasse, on the western side of\n        Coosa river. A town Abi'hka now exists in the Indian\n        Territory. The name of the ancient town was pronounced\n        \u00c1bi'hka, Ap\u00ed\u03c7ka and written Obika, Abeka, Abeicas, Abecka,\n        Beicas, Becaes, etc.; its people are called Api\u03c7kan\u00e1gi.\n        Some writers have identified them with the K\u00fasa and also\n        with the Conshacs, e. g. du Pratz.[90] D. Coxe, Carolana, p.\n        25, states that \"the Becaes or Abecaes have thirteen towns,\n        and the Ewemalas, between the Becaes and the Chattas, can\n        raise five hundred fighting men\" (1741). A part of the most\n        ancient Creek customs originated here, as, for instance, the\n        law for regulating marriages and for punishing adultery. The\n        Creek term \u00e1bi'hka signifies \"pile at the base, heap at the\n        root\" (\u00e1bi _stem, pole_), and was imparted to this tribe,\n        \"because in the contest for supremacy its warriors heaped up\n        a pile of scalps, covering the base of the war-pole only.\n        Before this achievement the tribe was called sak'h\u00fatga\n        _door, shutter_, or simat'h\u00fatga it\u00e1lua _shutter, door of\n        the towns_ or _tribes_.\" Cf. ak'h\u00fat\u00e4s _I close a door_,\n        sak'h\u00fatga haw\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I open a door_.\n\n    [Footnote 90: The map appended to the French edition of Bartram\n    identifies them with the K\u00fasa: \"Abikas ou Coussas.\"]\n\n     _Abik\u016b\u2032dshi_, an Upper Creek town on the right bank of\n        Natche (now Tallahatchi) creek, five miles east of Coosa\n        river, on a small plain. Settled from \u00c1bika, and by some\n        Indians from Natche, q. v. Bartram (1775) states, that they\n        spoke a dialect of Chicasa; which can be true of a part of\n        the inhabitants only. A spacious cave exists in the\n        neighborhood.\n\n     _Ah\u00edki creek_, Hitchiti name of the upper course of Hitchiti\n        creek, an eastern tributary of Chatahuchi river. Hawkins (p.\n        60) writes it Ouhe-gee creek. The name signifies \"sweet\n        potato-mother\" (\u00e1hi, \u00edki), from the circumstance that when\n        planting sweet potatoes (\u00e1hi), the fruit sown _remains in\n        the ground_ until the new crop comes to maturity.\n\n     _Alabama river_ is formed by the junction of Coosa and\n        Tallapoosa rivers; pursues a winding course between banks\n        about fifty feet high, and joins Tombigbee river about\n        thirty miles above Mobile bay, when it assumes the name of\n        Mobile river. Its waters are pure, its current gentle; it\n        runs about two miles an hour, and has 15-18 feet depth in\n        the driest season of the year. Boats travel from the\n        junction to Mobile bay in about nine days, through a fertile\n        country, with high, cleared fields and romantic landscapes\n        (Hawkins). The hunting grounds of the Creeks extended to the\n        water-shed between the Tombigbee and the Coosa and Alabama\n        rivers.\n\n     _Amakalli_, Lower Creek town, planted by Chiaha Indians on a\n        creek of that name, which is the main water-course of\n        Kitchofuni creek, a northern affluent of Flint river,\n        Georgia. Inhabited by sixty men in 1799. The name is not\n        Creek; it seems identical with Amacalola, the Cheroki name\n        of a picturesque cascade on Amacalola creek, a northern\n        affluent of Etowa river, Dawson county, Georgia. The\n        derivation given for it is: ama _water_, kalola _sliding_,\n        _tumbling_.\n\n     _An\u00e1ti tch\u00e1pko_ or \"Long Swamp,\" a Hillabi village, ten miles\n        above that town, on a northern tributary of Hillabi creek. A\n        battle occurred there during the Creek or Red Stick war,\n        January 24th, 1814. Usually written Enotochopko. The Creek\n        term an\u00e1ti means a _brushy, swampy place_, where persons can\n        secrete themselves.\n\n     _Apalatch\u00fakla_, a Lower Creek town on the west bank of\n        Chatahuchi river, 1-1/2 miles below Ch\u00edaha. In Hawkins' time\n        it was in a state of decay, but in former times had been a\n        _white_ or _peace_ town, called (even now) It\u00e1lua `l\u00e1ko\n        \"large town,\" and the principal community among the Lower\n        Creek settlements. The name was abbreviated into\n        Palatch\u00fakla, and has also been transferred to the Chatahuchi\n        river; that river is now called Apalachicola below its\n        confluence with the Flint river. Cf. Sawokli-\u00fadshi. Bartram\n        (Travels, p. 522) states: The Indians have a tradition that\n        the vast four-square terraces, chunk yards, etc., at\n        Apalachucla, old town, were \"the ruins of an ancient Indian\n        town and fortress.\" This \"old town\" lay one mile and a half\n        down the river from the new town, and was abandoned about\n        1750 on account of unhealthy location. Bartram viewed the\n        \"terraces, on which formerly stood their town-house or\n        rotunda and square or areopagus,\" and gives a lucid\n        description of them. About fifty years before his visit a\n        general killing of the white traders occurred in this town,\n        though these had placed themselves under the protection of\n        the chiefs (Travels, pp. 388-390). Concerning the former\n        importance of this \"white\" town, W. Bartram (Travels, p.\n        387) states, that \"this town is esteemed the mother town or\n        capital of the Creek confederacy; sacred to peace; no\n        captives are put to death or human blood spilt there;\n        deputies from all Creek towns assemble there when a general\n        peace is proposed.\" He refers to the town existing at the\n        time of his visit, but implicitly also to the \"old\n        Apalachucla town.\" The ancient and correct form of this name\n        is Apala\u03c7tch\u00fakla, and of the extinct tribe east of it, on\n        Apalache bay, Apal\u00e1\u03c7tchi. Judge G. W. Stidham heard of the\n        following etymology of the name: In cleaning the ground for\n        the town square and making it even, the ground and sweeping\n        finally formed a ridge on the outside of the chunk-yard or\n        play-ground; from this ridge the town was called\n        ap\u00e1la\u03c7tch'-ukla. More upon this subject, cf. Apalachi. An\n        Apalachicola Fort on Savannah river is mentioned on p.\n        20.\n\n     _Apat\u00e1-i_, a village of the Lower Creeks, settled by Kas\u00ed'hta\n        people on Big creek or H\u00e1tchi `l\u00e1ko, twenty miles east of\n        Chatahuchi river, in Georgia. The name refers to a\n        sheet-like covering, from apat\u00e1y\u00e4s _I cover_; cf. pat\u00e1k\u00e4s _I\n        spread out_; the Creek word apat\u00e1-i signifies any _covering_\n        comparable to wall-papers, carpets, etc. The town of Upotoy\n        now lies on Upotoy creek, Muscogee county, Alabama, in 32\u00b0\n        38\u00b4 Lat.\n\n     _\u00c1ssi-l\u00e1napi_, an Upper Creek town, called Oselanopy in the\n        Census list of 1832. It probably lay on Yellow Leaf creek,\n        which joins Coosa river from the west about five miles below\n        Talladega creek. From it sprang Green-leaf Town in the\n        Indian Territory, since l\u00e1ni means yellow _and_ green at the\n        same time. Green is now more frequently expressed by\n        p\u00e1hi-l\u00e1ni.\n\n     _\u00c1tasi, or \u00c1tassi_, an Upper Creek town on the east side of\n        Tallapoosa river, below and adjoining Kalibi h\u00e1tchi creek.\n        It was a miserable-looking place in Hawkins' time, with\n        about 43 warriors in 1766. Like that of all the other towns\n        built on Tallapoosa river, below its falls, the site is low\n        and unhealthy. The name is derived from the war-club\n        (\u0103\u2032t\u0103ssa), and was written Autossee, Ottossee,\n        Otasse, Ot-tis-se, etc. Battle on November 29th, 1813. A\n        town in the Indian Territory is called after it A\u2032t\u0115si,\n        its inhabitants At\u0115s\u00e1lgi. \"A post or column of pine,\n        forty feet high, stood in the town of Autassee, on a low,\n        circular, artificial hill.\" Bartram, Travels, p. 456. Cf.\n        Hu`li-W\u00e1'hli.\n\n     _Atchina-\u00e1lgi_, or \"Cedar Grove,\" the northernmost of all the\n        Creek settlements, near the Hillabi-Etowa trail, on a side\n        creek of Tallapoosa river and forty miles above Niuya'\u00e1\u03c7a.\n        Settled from Lutchap\u00f3ga.\n\n     _Atchina H\u00e1tchi_, or \"Cedar Creek,\" a village settled by\n        Indians from Ka-il\u00e4\u00eddshi, q. v. on a creek of the same name.\n\n     _Chatahuchi_, a former town of the Lower Creeks, on the\n        headwaters of Chatahuchi river. Probably abandoned in\n        Hawkins' time; he calls it \"old town Chatahutchi;\" cf.\n        Chatahuchi river. Called Chata Uche by Bartram (1775),\n        Chatahoosie by Swan (1791).\n\n     _Chatahuchi river_ is the water-course dividing, in its lower\n        portion, the State of Alabama from that of Georgia. On its\n        banks were settled the towns and villages of the Lower\n        Creeks. Its name is composed of tch\u00e1tu _rock, stone_ and\n        h\u00fatchi _marked, provided with signs_, and hence means:\n        \"Pictured Rocks.\" Rocks of this description are in the bed\n        of the river, at the \"old town Chatahuchi,\" above\n        H\u00fa`li-t\u00e4\u00edka (Hawkins, p. 52). Other names for this river\n        were: Apalachukla river (Wm. Bartram), Cahouita or\n        Apalachoocoly river (Jefferys' map in John Bartram's\n        report).\n\n     _Che`l\u00e1ko Nini_, or \"Horse-Trail,\" a Lower Creek town on the\n        headwaters of Chatahuchi river, settled by Okfuski Indians.\n        Mentioned in 1832 as Chelucconinny. Probably identical with\n        Okfuski Nini; see Okfusk\u00fadshi, and: Indian Pathways.\n\n     _Ch\u00edaha_, or Tch\u00edaha, Chehaw, a Lower Creek town just below\n        \u00d3sotchi town and contiguous to it, on western bank of\n        Chatahuchi river. The Ch\u00edaha Indians had in 1799 spread out\n        in villages on the Flint river, of which Hawkins names\n        Amakalli, H\u00f3tali-huy\u00e1na; and at Chiah\u00fadshi. Here a trail\n        crossed the Chatahuchi river (Swan, 1791). A town of the\n        same name, \"where otters live,\" existed among the Cheroki.\n        An Upper Creek town of this name, with twenty-nine heads of\n        families, is mentioned in the Census list of 1832\n        (Schoolcraft IV, 578).\n\n     _Chiah\u016b\u2032dshi_, or \"Little Ch\u00edaha,\" a Lower Creek town\n        planted by Ch\u00edaha Indians in a pine forest one mile and a\n        half west of Hitchiti town. Cf. Hitchiti, pp. 77. sqq.\n\n     _Ch\u00edska tal\u00f3fa_, a Lower Creek town on the west side of\n        Chatahuchi river. Morse, Report, p. 364, refers to it under\n        the name of \"Cheskitalowas\" as belonging to the Seminole\n        villages. Is it Chisca, or \"Chisi provincia\", visited by the\n        army of H. de Soto in 1540? Hawkins states that Chiske\n        tal\u00f3fa hatche was the name given to Savannah river (from\n        tch\u00edska _base of tree_).\n\n     _Coosa River_, (1) an affluent of Alabama river in Eastern\n        Alabama, in Creek Kusa-h\u00e1tchi, runs through the roughest and\n        most hilly district formerly held by the Creek Indians. \"It\n        is rapid, and so full of rocks and shoals that it is hardly\n        navigable even for canoes\": Swan, in Schoolcraft V, 257.\n        Cusawati is an affluent of Upper Coosa river, in\n        northwestern Georgia, a tract where Cheroki local names may\n        be expected.\n\n     (2) A water-course of the same name, Coosawhatchie, passes\n        southeast of Savannah City, South Carolina, into the\n        Atlantic ocean. For the etymology, see K\u00fasa.\n\n     _Fin'-h\u00e1lui_, a town of the Lower Creeks or Seminoles. The name\n        signifies a high bridge, or a high foot-log, and the\n        traders' name was \"High Log\" (1832).\n\n     A swamp having the same name, Finholoway Swamp, lies in Wayne\n        county, between the lower Altamaha and Satilla rivers,\n        Georgia.\n\n     _Fish-Ponds, or Fish-Pond Town_; cf. `L\u00e1`lo-k\u00e1lka.\n\n     _Flint River_, in Creek `Lonot\u00edska h\u00e1tchi, an eastern Georgian\n        affluent of Chatahuchi river, and almost of the same length.\n        Creeks, Yuchi and Seminole Indians were settled on it and on\n        its numerous tributaries, one of which is `L\u00f3noto creek,\n        also called Indian creek, Dooley county, Georgia. From\n        `l\u00f3noto _flint_.\n\n     _Fort Toulouse_; cf. Task\u00edgi. This fort was also called, from\n        the tribe settled around it, Fort Alibamu, Fort Albamo, Fort\n        Alebahmah, Forteresse des Alibamons. Abandoned by the French\n        in 1762.\n\n     _Fusi-h\u00e1tchi, Fus'-h\u00e1tchi_, or \"Birdcreek,\" a town of the\n        Upper Creeks, built on the right or northern bank of\n        Tallapoosa river, two miles below Hu`li-W\u00e1li. Remains of a\n        walled town on the opposite shore.\n\n     _H\u00e1tchi tch\u00e1pa_, or \"Half-way Creek,\" a small village settled\n        in a pine forest by Ka-il\u00e4\u00eddshi Indians, q. v.\n\n     _Hickory Ground_; cf. Odshi-ap\u00f3fa.\n\n     _Hillabi_, pronounced H\u00ee\u2032lapi, an Upper Creek town on\n        Ko-ufadi creek, which runs into Hillabi creek one mile from\n        the village. Hillabi creek is a western tributary of\n        Tallapoosa river, and joins it eight miles below Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a.\n        The majority of the Hillabi people had settled in four\n        villages of the vicinity in 1799, which were: `L\u00e1nudshi\n        ap\u00e1la, An\u00e1ti tch\u00e1pko, \u00cdstudshi-l\u00e4\u00edka, \u00daktaha `l\u00e1si.\n\n     A battle took place in the vicinity on November 18th, 1813.\n        Though the name is of difficult analysis, it is said to\n        refer to quickness, velocity (of the water-course?)\n\n     _Hitchiti_, a Lower Creek town with branch villages; cf.\n        Hitchiti, p. 77 sqq.\n\n     _Hitchit\u016b\u2032dshi_; cf. Hitchiti, p. 77.\n\n     _H\u00f3tali-huy\u00e1na_, a Lower Creek town, planted by Chiaha Indians\n        on the eastern bank of Flint river, six miles below the\n        Kitchofuni creek junction. \u00d3sotchi settlers had mingled with\n        the twenty families of the village. The name means:\n        \"Hurricane Town,\" for h\u00fatali in Creek is _wind_, huy\u00e1na\n        _passing_; it therefore marks a locality once devastated by\n        a passing hurricane. Called Tallewheanas, in Seminole list,\n        p. 72.\n\n     _Hu`li-t\u00e4\u00edga_, a Lower Creek village on Chatahuchi river,\n        planted by Okfuski Indians. Bartram calls it Hothtetoga, C.\n        Swan: Hohtatoga (Schoolcraft, Indians V, 262); the name\n        signifies \"war-ford,\" military river-passage.\n\n     _Hul\u2032i-W\u00e1'hli_, an Upper Creek town on the right bank of\n        Tallapoosa river, five miles below \u00c1tasi. This town obtained\n        its name from the privilege of declaring war (h\u00fa`li _war_,\n        aw\u00e1'hlita _to share out, divide_); the declaration was first\n        sent to Tukabatchi, and from there among the other tribes.\n        The town bordered west on Atas'-h\u00e1tchi creek. The name is\n        written Clewauley (1791), Ho-ithle-Wau-lee (Hawkins),\n        Cleu-wath-ta (1832), Cluale, Clewulla, etc.\n\n     _Ikanatch\u00e1ka_, or Holy Ground, a town on the southern side of\n        Alabama river, built on holy ground, and therefore said to\n        be exempt from any possible inroads of the white people.\n        Weatherford, the leader of the insurgent Creeks, and their\n        prophet Hilis'-h\u00e1ko resided there; the forces gathered at\n        this place by them were defeated December 23d, 1813. From\n        \u00edkana _ground_, atch\u00e1ka _beloved, sacred_.\n\n     _Ikan'-h\u00e1tki_, or \"white ground,\" a Sh\u00e1wano town just below\n        Kulumi, and on the same side of Tallapoosa river. \"Cunhutki\n        speaks the Muscogulge tongue\"; W. Bartram (1775).\n\n     _Im\u00fakfa_, an Upper Creek town on Imukfa creek, west of\n        Tallapoosa river. Near this place, in a bend or peninsula\n        formed by the Tallapoosa river, called Horse Shoe by the\n        whites, the American troops achieved a decisive victory over\n        the Red Stick party of the Creek Indians on March 25th,\n        1814, which resulted in the surrender of Weatherford, their\n        leader, and put an end to this bloody campaign. Not less\n        than five hundred and fifty-seven Creek warriors lost their\n        lives in this battle. The term im\u00fakfa is Hitchiti, for (1)\n        shell; (2) metallic ornament of concave shape; Hawkins\n        interprets the name by \"gorget made of a conch.\" In\n        Hitchiti, _bend of river_ is h\u00e1tchi pa\u03c7\u00fatchki;\n        ha'htchaf\u00e1shki, hatsaf\u00e1ski is _river-bend_ in Creek.\n        Tohopeka is another name for this battle-field, but does not\n        belong to the Creek language.\n\n     _Intatchk\u00e1lgi_, or \"collection of beaver dams,\" a Yuchi town of\n        Georgia settled twenty-eight miles up Opil-`l\u00e1ko creek, a\n        tributary of Flint river. A square was built by the fourteen\n        families of this town in 1798. T\u00e1tchki means anything\n        _straight_, as a dam, beaver dam, line, boundary line, etc.,\n        \u00edkan'-t\u00e1tchka _survey-line_; the above creek was probably\n        Beaver-dam creek, an eastern tributary of Flint river,\n        joining it about 32\u00b0 15\u00b4 Lat.\n\n     _Ipis\u00f3gi_, an Upper Creek town upon Ipis\u00f3gi creek, a large\n        eastern tributary of Tallapoosa river, joining it opposite\n        Okfuski. Forty settlers in 1799. Cf. Pin-h\u00f3ti.\n\n     _Istap\u00f3ga_, an Upper Creek settlement not recorded in the\n        earlier documents; a place of this name exists now east of\n        Coosa river, Talladega county, Alabama. The name, usually\n        written Eastaboga, signifies: \"where people reside\" (\u00edsti\n        _people_; ap\u00f3kita _to reside_).\n\n     _\u00cdstudshi-l\u00e4\u00edka_, or \"child lying there,\" a Hillabi village, on\n        Hillabi creek, four miles below Hillabi town. It owes its\n        name to the circumstance that a child was found on its site.\n\n     _Ka-il\u00e4\u00eddshi_, an Upper Creek town, on a creek of the same\n        name, which joins Oktch\u00f3yi creek, a western tributary of\n        Tallapoosa river, joining it fifteen miles above Tukabatchi.\n        The two villages, Atchina H\u00e1tchi and H\u00e1tchi tch\u00e1pa, branched\n        off from this town. The name was variously written\n        Ki-a-li-ge, Kiliga, Killeegko, Kiolege, and probably\n        referred to a warrior's head dress: \u00edka _his head_;\n        il\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I kill_.\n\n     _Kan'-tch\u00e1ti_, Kansh\u00e1de, \"Red dirt,\" \"Red earth,\" an Upper\n        Creek town, mentioned in 1835 as \"Conchant-ti.\" Conchardee\n        is a place a few miles northwest of Talladega.\n\n     _Kas\u00ed'hta_, a Lower Creek town on the eastern bank of\n        Chatahuchi river, two and a half miles below Kaw\u00edta\n        Talah\u00e1ssi; Kas\u00ed'hta once claimed the lands above the falls\n        of the Chatahuchi river on its eastern bank. In this town\n        and tribe our migration legend has taken its origin. Its\n        branch settlements spread out on the right side of the\n        river, the number of the warriors of the town and branches\n        being estimated at 180 in 1799; it was considered the\n        largest among the Lower Creeks. The natives were friendly to\n        the whites and fond of visiting them; the old chiefs were\n        orderly men, desirous and active in restraining the young\n        \"braves\" from the licentiousness which they had contracted\n        through their intercourse with the scum of the white\n        colonists. Hawkins makes some strictures at their\n        incompetency for farming; \"they do not know the season for\n        planting, or, if they do, they never avail themselves of\n        what they know, as they always plant one month too late\" (p.\n        59). A large conical mound is described by him as standing\n        on the Kas\u00ed'hta fields, forty-five yards in diameter at its\n        base, and flat on the top. Below the town was the \"old\n        Cussetuh town,\" on a high flat, and afterwards \"a Chicasaw\n        town\" occupied this site (p. 58). A branch village of\n        Kas\u00ed'hta is Apat\u00e1-i, q. v. The name Kas\u00ed'hta, Kasi\u03c7ta, is\n        popularly explained as \"coming from the sun\" (h\u0103\u2032si)\n        and being identical with has\u00ed'hta. The Creeks infer, from\n        the parallel Creek form has\u00f3ti, \"sunshine,\" that Kas\u00ed'hta\n        really meant \"light,\" or \"bright splendor of the sun;\"\n        anciently, this term was used for the sun himself, \"as the\n        old people say.\" The inhabitants of the town believed that\n        they came from the sun. Cf. Yuchi. A place Cusseta is now in\n        Chatahuchi county, Georgia, 32\u00b0 20\u00b4 Lat.\n\n     _Kaw\u00e4\u00edki_, a town of the Lower Creeks, having forty-five heads\n        of families in 1832. Kaw\u00e4\u00edki Creek is named after _quails_.\n\n     _Kaw\u00edta_, a Lower Creek town on the high western bank of\n        Chatahuchi river, three miles below its falls. The fishery\n        in the western channel of the river, below the falls,\n        belonged to Kaw\u00edta, that in the eastern channel to\n        Kas\u00ed'hta. In Hawkins' time (1799) many Indians had settled\n        on streams in the vicinity, as at H\u00e1tchi \u00edka, \"Creek-Head.\"\n        Probably a colony of Kaw\u00edta Talah\u00e1ssi.\n\n     _Kaw\u00edta Talah\u00e1ssi_, \"old Kaw\u00edta Town,\" a Lower Creek town two\n        miles and a half below Kaw\u00edta, on the western side of the\n        river, and half a mile from it. Old Kaw\u00edta town was the\n        \"public establishment\" of the Lower Creeks, and in 1799\n        could raise sixty-five warriors; it was also the seat of the\n        United States agent. Kaw\u00edta Talah\u00e1ssi had branched off by\n        segmentation from Kas\u00ed'hta, as shown in the migration\n        legend, and itself has given origin to a village called\n        Wit\u00famka, on Big Yuchi creek. The town was a political centre\n        for the nation, and is referred to by the traveler Wm.\n        Bartram (1775), p. 389. 463, in the following terms: \"The\n        great Coweta town, on Chatahuchi or Apalachucly river,\n        twelve miles above Apalachucla town, is called the bloody\n        town, where the micos, chiefs and warriors assemble, when a\n        general war is proposed, and here captives and state\n        malefactors are put to death. Coweta speaks the Muscogulgee\n        tongue.\" Colden, Five Nations, p. 5, mentions an alliance\n        concluded between the Iroquois of New York and the Cowetas;\n        but here the name Cowetas is used in the wider sense of\n        Creek Indians or Lower Creek Indians. The Creek form is\n        Kaw\u00edtalgi, or \u00edsti Kaw\u00edtalgi. Written Caouita by French\n        authors. Cf. Apalatch\u00fakla.\n\n     _Kitcho-pat\u00e1ki_, an Upper Creek town, now name of a Creek\n        settlement in the Indian Territory. From k\u00edtchu\n        \"maize-pounding _block of wood_\"; pat\u00e1ki \"_spreading out_.\"\n        Kitchopat\u00e1ki creek joins Tallapoosa river from the west a\n        few miles below Okfuskee, in Randolph county, Alabama.\n\n     _Koass\u00e1ti_, an Upper Creek town. Cf. special article on this\n        tribe, pp. 89. 90.\n\n     _Kulumi_, Upper Creek town on right side of Tallapoosa river,\n        small and compact, below Fusi-h\u00e1tchi and contiguous to it. A\n        conical mound, thirty feet in diameter, was seen by Hawkins,\n        opposite the \"town-house.\" A part of the inhabitants had\n        settled on Likasa creek. The signification of the name is\n        unknown, but it may have connection with a'hkol\u00fam\u00e4s _I\n        clinch_ (prefix a- for \u00e1ni _I_). Of the \"old Coolome town,\"\n        which stood on the opposite shore of Tallapoosa river, a few\n        houses were left at the time of Bartram's visit, c. 1775\n        (Travels, p. 395).\n\n     _K\u00fasa_, (1) an old capital of the Creek people, referred to as\n        Co\u00e7a by the historians of de Soto's expedition, on the\n        eastern bank of Coosa river, between Yuf\u00e1la and Natche\n        creeks, which join Coosa river from the east, a quarter of a\n        mile apart.[91] The town stood on a high hill in the midst\n        of a rich limestone country, forty miles above\n        Pakan-Talah\u00e1ssi and sixty above Task\u00edgi, q. v. Bartram saw\n        it (1775), half deserted and in ruins. \"The great and old\n        beloved town of refuge, Koosah, which stands high on the\n        eastern side of a bold river, about two hundred and fifty\n        yards broad, that runs by the late dangerous Alebahma fort,\n        down to the black poisoning Mobille, and so into the gulph\n        of Mexico:\" Adair, History, p. 395. This town, which was\n        also, as it seems, the sojourning place of Tristan de Luna's\n        expedition (1559), must have been one of the earliest\n        centres of the Maskoki people, though it does not appear\n        among its \"four leading towns\". Its inhabitants may at one\n        time have been comprised under the people of the neighboring\n        Abi'hka town, q. v. K\u00f3sa is the name of a small forest-bird,\n        resembling a sparrow; but the name of the town and river\n        could possibly be an ancient form of \u014d\u2032sa, \u014ds\u00e1, 'os\u00e1\n        _poke_ or _pokeweed_, a plant with red berries, which grows\n        plentifully and to an enormous height throughout the South.\n        Cf. Coosa river. It is more probable, however, that the name\n        is of Cha'hta origin; cf. (3).\n\n    [Footnote 91: Now called Talladega and Tallahatchi creeks.]\n\n     (2) A town, \"Old K\u00fasa\" or \"Coussas old village,\" is reported a\n        short distance below Fort Toulouse, on the northern shore of\n        Alabama river, between Task\u00edgi and Koass\u00e1ti. It was,\n        perhaps, from this place that the Alabama river was, in\n        earlier times, called Coosa or Coussa river, but since\n        Hawkins and others make no mention of this town, I surmise\n        that it was identical with Koass\u00e1ti, the name being an\n        abbreviation from the latter.\n\n     (3) The K\u00fasa, Cusha or Coosa towns, on the K\u00fasa Creeks, formed\n        a group of the eastern Cha'hta settlements. From Cha'hta\n        kush _reed, cane_ which corresponds to the k\u00f3a, k\u00f3e of\n        Creek. Cf. p. 108.\n\n     _`L\u00e1`lo-k\u00e1lka_, \"_Fish-Pond Town_,\" or \"Fish-Ponds,\" an Upper\n        Creek town on a small creek forming ponds, fourteen miles\n        above its junction with Alkoh\u00e1tchi, a stream running into\n        Tallapoosa river from the west, four miles above Okfuski.\n        The name is abbreviated from `l\u00e1`lo-ak\u00e1lka _fish separated,\n        placed apart_; from `l\u00e1`lo _fish_, ak\u00e1lg\u00e4s _I am separated\n        from_. This was a colony planted by Oktch\u00e1yi Indians, q. v.\n\n     _`L\u00e1nudshi ap\u00e1la_, or \"beyond a little mountain,\" a Hillabi\n        place fifteen miles from that town and on the northwest\n        branch of Hillabi creek; had a \"town-house\" or public square.\n\n     _`L\u00e1p`l\u00e1ko_, or \"Tall Cane,\" \"Big Reed,\" the name of two\n        villages of the Upper Creeks, mentioned in 1832. `L\u00e1p is a\n        tall cane, from which sarbacanes or blow-guns are made.\n\n     _`L\u00e8-k\u00e1tchka, `Li-i-k\u00e1tchka_, or \"Broken Arrow,\" a Lower\n        Creek town on a ford of the southern trail, which crossed\n        Chatahuchi river at this point, twelve miles below Kasi'hta\n        and Kaw\u00edta (Swan, 1791). Bartram calls it Tukauska, Swan:\n        Chalagatsca. Called so because reeds were obtained there for\n        manufacturing arrow shafts.\n\n     _Lutchap\u00f3ga_, or \"Terrapin-Resort,\" an Upper Creek town,\n        probably near Tallapoosa river. The village Atchina-\u00e1lgi was\n        settled by natives of this town (Hawkins, p. 47), but\n        afterwards incorporated with Okfuski. Also mentioned in the\n        Census list of 1832. A place called Loachapoka is now in Lee\n        county, Alabama, about half-way between Montgomery and West\n        Point. From l\u00fatcha _terrapin_, p\u00f3ka _killing-place_; p\u00f3y\u00e4s\n        _I destroy, kill_; p\u00f3ka occurs only in compound words.\n\n     H. S. Tanner's map (1827) marks an Indian town Luchepoga on\n        west bank of Tallapoosa river, about ten miles above\n        Tukab\u00e1tchi Talah\u00e1ssi; also Luchanpogan creek, as a western\n        tributary of Chatahuchi river, in 33\u00b0 8\u00b4 Lat., just below\n        Chatahuchi town.\n\n     _Mukl\u00e1sa_, a small Upper Creek town one mile below Sawan\u00f3gi and\n        on the same side of Tallapoosa river. In times of freshet\n        the river spreads here nearly eight miles from bank to bank.\n        Bartram states, that Mucclasse speaks the \"Stincard tongue,\"\n        and the list of 1832 writes \"Muckeleses.\" They are Alibamu,\n        and a town of that name is in the Indian Territory. \"The\n        Wolf-king, our old, steady friend of the Amooklasah Town,\n        near the late Alebahma\" (Adair, History, p. 277). The name\n        points to the Imukl\u00e1sha, a division of the Cha'hta people;\n        im\u00fakla is the \"opposite people,\" referring to the two iksa,\n        Kash\u00e1p-ukla and \u00dakla i\u207fhul\u00e1'hta. Cf. Cha'hta, p.\n        104, and Mugulasha, p. 111. 112.\n\n     _Natche_ (better N\u00e1ktche), on \"Natche creek, five miles above\n        Abik\u016b\u2032dshi, scattering for two miles on a rich flat\n        below the fork of the creek, which is an eastern tributary\n        of Upper Coosa river.\"[92] Peopled by the remainder of the\n        Naktche tribe on Mississippi river, and containing from\n        fifty to one hundred warriors in 1799. The root t\u00e1lua was\n        dug by them in this vicinity. Bartram states, that \"Natchez\n        speak Muscogee and Chicasaw\" (1775).\n\n    [Footnote 92: Now called Tallahatchi creek.]\n\n     _Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a_, village of the Upper Creeks, settled by Tukp\u00e1fka\n        Indians in 1777, twenty miles above Okfuski, on the east\n        bank of Tallapoosa river. It was called so after the Treaty\n        of New York, concluded between the United States Government\n        and the Creek confederacy, at a date posterior to the\n        settlement of this town, August 7th, 1790.\n\n     _Nof\u00e1pi creek_, an affluent of Yuf\u00e1bi creek. Cf. Yuf\u00e1bi, and\n        Annotations to the Legend.\n\n     _Odshi-ap\u00f3fa_, or \"Hickory-Ground,\" an Upper Creek town on the\n        eastern bank of Coosa river, two miles above the fork of the\n        river; from \u014d\u2032dshi _hickory_, \u00e1pi _tree, stem, trunk_, -\u00f3fa,\n        -\u00f3fan, a suffix pointing to _locality_. The falls of Coosa\n        river, one mile above the town, can be easily passed in\n        canoes, either up or down. The town had forty warriors at the\n        time of Hawkins' visit (1799). Identical with Little T\u00e1lisi;\n        Milfort, p. 27: \"le petit Talessy ou village des Noyers.\" A\n        map of this section will be found in Schoolcraft, Indians, V,\n        255. Literally: \"in the hickory grove.\"\n\n     _Okfuski_ (better Akf\u00e1ski), an Upper Creek town, erected on\n        both sides of Tallapoosa river, about thirty-five miles\n        above Tukabatchi. The Indians settled on the eastern side\n        came from Chatahuchi river, and had founded on it three\n        villages, Che`l\u00e1ko-Ni\u2032ni, Hul\u2032i-t\u00e4\u00edga, Tch\u00faka l\u2032\u00e1ko,\n        q. v. In 1799 Okfuski (one hundred and eighty warriors)\n        _with_ its seven branch villages on Tallapoosa river (two\n        hundred and seventy warriors) was considered the largest\n        community of the confederacy. The shrub _Ilex cassine_ was\n        growing there in clumps. These seven villages were:\n        Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a, Tukab\u00e1tchi Talah\u00e1ssi, Im\u00fakfa, Tu\u03c7tuk\u00e1gi,\n        Atchina-\u00e1lgi, Ipis\u00f3gi, Suka-isp\u00f3ka. The Creek term akf\u00e1ski,\n        akf\u00faski signifies _point, tongue_ of a confluence,\n        _promontory_, from ak-_down in_, f\u00e1ski _sharp, pointed_.\n        Tallapoosa river was also called Okfuski river.\n\n     _Okfusk\u016b\u2032dshi_, or \"Little Okfuski,\" a part of a small\n        village four miles above Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a. Some of these people\n        formerly inhabited Okfuski-N\u00edni, on Chatahuchi river, but\n        were driven from there by Georgian volunteers in 1793. Cf.\n        Che`l\u00e1ko-N\u00edni.\n\n     _Oki-tiy\u00e1kni_, a lower Creek village on the eastern bank of\n        Chatahuchi river, eight miles below Yuf\u00e1la. Hawkins writes\n        it O-ke-teyoc-en-ni, and Morse, Report, p. 364, mentions\n        among the Seminole settlements, \"Oka-tiokinans, near Fort\n        Gaines.\" Oki-tiyakni, a Hitchiti term, means either\n        _whirlpool_, or _river-bend_.\n\n     _Okm\u00falgi_ (1), a Lower Creek town on the east side of Flint\n        river, near H\u00f3tali-huy\u00e1na. The name signifies \"bubbling,\n        boiling water,\" from H. \u00f3ki _water_; m\u00falgis _it is boiling_,\n        in Creek and Hitchiti.\n\n     (2) East of Flint river is Okm\u00falgi river, which, after joining\n        Little Okm\u00falgi and Ok\u00f3ni rivers, forms Altamaha river.\n\n     _Ok\u00f3ni_, a small Lower Creek town, six miles below Apalach\u00fakla,\n        on the western bank of Chatahuchi river; settled by\n        immigrants from a locality below the Rock Landing on Ok\u00f3ni\n        river, Georgia. They spoke the \"Stincard tongue,\" and\n        probably were Apalachians of the Hitchiti-Mikasuki dialect.\n        Cf. Cuscowilla, under the head of: Seminole. The name is the\n        Cheroki term eku\u00f3ni _river_, from \u00e9kua _great, large_,\n        viz.: \"great water.\" Bartram, who encamped on the site of\n        the old Ok\u00f3ni town on Ok\u00f3ni river, states (Travels, p. 378),\n        that the Indians abandoned that place about 1710, on account\n        of the vicinity of the white colonists, and built a town\n        among the Upper Creeks. Their roving disposition impelled\n        them to leave this settlement also, and to migrate to the\n        fertile Alachua plains, where they built Cuscowilla on the\n        banks of a lake, and had to defend it against the attacks of\n        the Tomocos, Utinas, Calloosas (?), Yamases and other\n        remnant tribes of Florida, and the more northern refugees\n        from Carolina, all of whom were helped by the Spaniards.\n        Being reinforced by other Indians from the Upper Creek\n        towns, \"their uncles,\" they repulsed the aggressors and\n        destroyed their villages, as well as those of the Spaniards.\n        This notice probably refers to the Indian troubles with the\n        Y\u00e1massi, which occurred long before 1710, since inroads are\n        recorded as early as 1687. Hawkins, p. 65, states that the\n        town they formerly occupied on Ok\u00f3ni river stood just below\n        the Rock Landing, once the site of a British post about four\n        miles below Milledgeville, Georgia.\n\n     _Oktch\u00e1yi_, an Upper Creek town built along Oktchayi creek, a\n        western tributary of Tallapoosa river. The town, mentioned\n        as Oak-tchoy in 1791, lay three miles below Ka-il\u00e4\u00eddshi, in\n        the central district. Cf. `La`lo-k\u00e1lka. Milfort, M\u00e9moire, p.\n        266. 267, calls the tribe: les Oxiailles.\n\n     _Oktchay\u016b\u2032dshi_, a \"little compact town\" of the Upper\n        Creek Indians, on the eastern bank of Coosa river, between\n        Otchi-ap\u00f3fa and Task\u00edgi, its cabins joining those of the\n        latter town. Their maize fields lay on the same side of the\n        river, on the Sambelo grounds, below Sambelo creek. They\n        removed their village to the eastern side of Tallapoosa\n        river on account of former Chicasa raids. The name of the\n        town, \"Little Oktch\u00e1yi,\" proves it to be a colony or branch\n        of Oktch\u00e1yi, q. v.; Pl. Porter says it is a branch of\n        Okf\u00faski.\n\n     _Op\u00edl'-`l\u00e1ko_, or \"Big Swamp,\" from op\u00edlua _swamp_, `l\u00e1ko\n        _large_. (1) An Upper Creek town on a stream of the same\n        name, which joins P\u00e1kan'-Talah\u00e1ssi creek on its left side.\n        The town was twenty miles from Coosa river; its tribe is\n        called Pinclatchas by C. Swan (1791).\n\n     (2) A locality west of Kasi\u2032hta; cf. T\u00e1lisi.\n\n     (3) A stream running into Flint river, Georgia. Cf.\n        Intatchk\u00e1lgi.\n\n     _\u00d3sotchi, \u00d3sutchi, \u00d3sudshi,_ or _\u00dasutchi_, a Lower Creek\n        town about two miles below Yuchi town, on the western bank\n        of Chatahuchi river, whose inhabitants migrated to this\n        place in 1794 from Flint river. The town adjoins that of\n        Chiaha; Bartram calls it Hoositchi. The descendants of it\n        and of Ch\u00edaha have consolidated into one town in the Creek\n        Nation, Indian Territory. Cf. Hawkins, p. 63.\n\n     _Padshil\u00e4\u00edka_, or \"Pigeon Roost;\" (1) a Yuchi town on the\n        junction of Padshil\u00e4\u00edka creek with Flint river, Macon\n        county, Georgia, about 32\u00b0 38\u00b4 Lat. The village suffered\n        heavily by the loss of sixteen warriors, who were murdered\n        by Benjamin Harrison and his associates; cf. Hawkins, p. 62\n        sq.\n\n     (2) Patsil\u00e4\u00edka river was the name of the western branch of\n        Conecuh river, in Southern Alabama, Covington county, which\n        runs into Escambia river and Pensacola bay. From p\u00e1dshi\n        _pigeon_, and l\u00e4\u00edk\u00e4s _I sit down, am sitting_.\n\n     _P\u00e1kan'-Talah\u00e1ssi_, Upper Creek town on a creek of the same\n        name, which joins Coosa river from the east, forty miles\n        below K\u00fasa town. From ip\u00e1kana, _mayapple_, it\u00e1lua _town_,\n        h\u00e1ssi _ancient_, in the sense of _waste_. G. W. Stidham\n        interprets the name: \"Old Peach Orchard Town.\"\n\n     _Pin'-h\u00f3ti_, or \"Turkey-Home,\" an Upper Creek town on the right\n        side of a small tributary of Ipis\u00f3gi creek; cf. Ipis\u00f3gi. The\n        trail from Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a to Kaw\u00edta Talah\u00e1ssi passed through this\n        settlement. From p\u00ednua _turkey_, h\u00fati, h\u00f3ti _home_.\n\n     _P\u00f3tchus'-h\u00e1tchi_, Upper Creek town in the central district, on\n        a stream of the same name, which joins Coosa river from the\n        northeast, four miles below P\u00e1kan'-Talah\u00e1ssi. The town was\n        in Coosa or Talladega county, Alabama, forty miles above the\n        junction; the name signifies \"Hatchet-Stream\": potch\u00fasua\n        _hatchet, ax_; h\u00e1tchi _water-course_.\n\n     _Sakapat\u00e1yi_, Upper Creek town in the central district, now\n        Socopatoy, on a small eastern tributary of P\u00f3tchus'-h\u00e1tchi,\n        or Hatchet creek, Coosa county, Alabama; pronounced also\n        Sakapat\u00f3-i by Creek Indians. Probably refers to water-lilies\n        covering the surface of a pond, the seeds of them being\n        eaten by the natives; from sakpat\u00e1g\u00e4s _I lie inside_ (a\n        covering, blanket, etc.) A legend, which evidently\n        originated from the name already existing, relates that\n        wayfarers passing there had left a large provision-basket\n        (s\u00e1ka) at this locality, which was upset and left rotting,\n        so that finally it became flattened out: from pat\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I\n        spread out something_; pat\u00e1yi, partic. pass., _shaken out_.\n\n     _Sauga H\u00e1tchi_, Upper Creek town on a stream of the same name,\n        which runs into Tallapoosa river from the east, ten miles\n        below Yuf\u00e1la. In 1799 the thirty young men of this place had\n        joined T\u00e1lisi town. Hawkins, p. 49, renders the name by\n        \"cymbal creek.\" Sauga is a hard-shelled fruit or gourd,\n        similar to a cocoa-nut, used for making rattles; sa\u00fak\u00e4s _I\n        am rattling_.\n\n     _Sawan\u00f3gi_, or \"Sh\u00e1wanos,\" a town settled by Sh\u00e1wano-Algonkins,\n        but belonging to the Creek confederacy. It stood on the left\n        or southern side of Tallapoosa river, three miles below\n        Likasa creek. The inhabitants (in 1799) retained the customs\n        and language of their countrymen in the northwest, and had\n        joined them in their late war against the United States.\n        Some Yuchi Indians lived among them. The \"town-house\" was an\n        oblong square cabin, roof \"eight feet pitch,\" sides and\n        roof covered with pine-bark. Cf. Ikan'-h\u00e1tki.\n\n     _S\u00e1wokli_, or Great S\u00e1wokli, S\u00e1-ukli, a Lower Creek town, six\n        miles below Ok\u00f3ni, on the west bank of Chatahuchi river, and\n        four miles and a half above Wil\u00e1ni (\"Yellow Water\") Creek\n        junction. The Hitchiti word s\u00e1wi means _racoon_, \u00fakli\n        _town_; and both S\u00e1wokli towns spoke the \"Stincard tongue\"\n        (Bartram). Called Chewakala in 1791; Swaglaw, etc. Among the\n        Hitchiti the m\u00edkalgi were appointed from the racoon gens\n        only.\n\n     _Sawokli-\u016b\u2032dshi_, or \"Little S\u00e1wokli,\" a Lower Creek town\n        on the eastern bank of Chatahuchi river, four miles below\n        Ok\u00f3ni town; contained about twenty families in 1799. About\n        1865 both S\u00e1wokli towns in the Indian Territory have\n        disbanded into the T\u00e1lua `l\u00e1ko; cf. Apalatch\u00fakla.\n\n     _Suka-isp\u00f3ka_, or Suka-ishp\u00f3gi, called \"Hog Range\" by the\n        traders, a small Upper Creek village situated on the western\n        bank of Upper Tallapoosa river, twelve miles above Okfuski;\n        its inhabitants had in 1799 moved, for the larger part, to\n        Im\u00fakfa. It is the place called elsewhere Soguspogus,\n        Sokaspoge, Hog Resort, the name meaning literally:\n        \"hog-killing place.\" Cf. Lutchap\u00f3ga.\n\n     _Talat\u00edgi_, now Talladega, an Upper Creek settlement in the\n        central district east of Coosa river. A battle was fought\n        there November 7th, 1813. The name signifies \"border town,\"\n        from it\u00e1lua _town_ and at\u00edgi _at the end, on the border_;\n        cf. at\u00edgis \"it is the last one, it forms the extremity.\" Cf.\n        K\u00fasa (1).\n\n     _T\u00e1lisi_, abbrev. T\u00e1lsi, or: \"Old Town,\" a contraction of the\n        term it\u00e1lua h\u00e1ssi; a town of the Upper Creeks on the eastern\n        bank of Tallapoosa river, opposite Tukabatchi, in the fork\n        of Yuf\u00e1bi creek. In Hawkins' time the natives of this place\n        had for the larger part left the town and settled up Yuf\u00e1bi\n        creek, and the chief, Hobo-\u00ed`li m\u00edko, was at variance with\n        the United States and Spanish colonial authorities. The\n        traders' trail from Kas\u00ed'hta to the Upper Creek settlements\n        crossed Yuf\u00e1bi creek twice at the \"Big Swamp,\" Opil'-`l\u00e1ko.\n        The Census of 1832 calls T\u00e1lisi: \"Big Tallassie or the\n        Halfway House.\"\n\n     _T\u00e1lisi, Little_, a town of the Upper Creeks, identical with\n        Odshi-ap\u00f3fa, q. v.\n\n     _Tallapoosa river_, a considerable tributary of Alabama river,\n        full of rocks, shoals and falls down to Tukabatchi town; for\n        thirty miles from here to its junction with the Coosa, it\n        becomes deep and quiet. The Hitchiti form of the name is\n        Talap\u00fasi; cf. Okfuski. A little village named Tallapoosa\n        lies on the headwaters of Tallapoosa river, from which the\n        river perhaps received its name; cf. talep\u00fa`li _stranger_\n        (in Creek).\n\n     _T\u00e1lua `l\u00e1ko_, properly It\u00e1lua `l\u00e1ko, \"the Great Town,\" the\n        popular name of Apalatch\u00fakla, q. v., the latter being no\n        longer heard at the present time.\n\n     _T\u00e1lua mutch\u00e1si_, (1) The new name for Tukab\u00e1tchi Talah\u00e1ssi, q.\n        v. It is commonly abbreviated into Talmodsh\u00e1si \"Newtown.\"\n        From it\u00e1lua _town_, mutch\u00e1si _new_.\n\n     (2) A Lower Creek town, on west shore of Chatahuchi river,\n        mentioned by Morse (1822) as: Telmocresses, among the\n        Seminole towns.\n\n     _T\u00e1m\u00e1`li_, a Lower Creek town on Chatahuchi river, seven miles\n        from Odsh\u00edsi (Morse, Report, p. 364). Hawkins writes it\n        Tum-mult-lau, and makes it a Seminole town. Probably a\n        Cheroki name; there was on the southern shore of Tennessee\n        river, between Ballplay creek and Toskegee, a settlement\n        called Tommotley town in early maps; cf. Jefferys' Atlas of\n        N. America (map of 1762).\n\n     _Task\u00edgi_ or Tusk\u00edki, a little, ancient Upper Creek town, built\n        near the site of the former French Fort Toulouse, at the\n        confluence of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers. It stood on the\n        high shore of Coosa river, forty-six feet above its waters,\n        where the two rivers approach each other within a quarter of\n        a mile, to curve out again. On this bluff are also five\n        conic mounds, the largest thirty yards in diameter at the\n        base. The town, of 35 warriors, _had lost its ancient\n        language_ and spoke the Creek (1799). The noted A.\n        MacGillivray, head chief of the Creeks in the latter part of\n        the eighteenth century, or as he was styled, \"Emperor of the\n        Creek Nation,\" lived at Task\u00edgi, where he owned a house and\n        property along Coosa river, half a league from Fort\n        Toulouse; Milfort, M\u00e9moire, p. 27. On the immigration of the\n        tribe, cf. Milfort, pp. 266. 267.\n\n     The name of the town may be explained as: \"jumping men,\n        _jumpers_,\" from Cr. t\u0101sk\u00e1-is, t\u0101\u2032sk\u00e4s _I jump_\n        (tul\u00fap-kalis in Hitchiti); or be considered an abbreviated\n        form of t\u00e1skialgi _warriors_; cf. task\u00e1ya _citizen_ (Creek),\n        and Hawkins, Sketch, p. 70. But since the town formerly\n        spoke another language, it is, in view of the frequency of\n        Cheroki names in the Creek country, appropriate to regard\n        Task\u00edgi as linguistically identical with \"Toskegee,\" a\n        Cheroki town on Great Tennessee river, southern shore,\n        mentioned by several authors, and appearing on Lieutenant H.\n        Timberlake's map in his Memoir, reproduced in Jefferys'\n        Topography (Atlas) of North America, dated March, 1762.\n\n     _Tch\u00faka `l\u00e1ko_, or \"Great Cabin\" of the public square, (1) A\n        Lower Creek town on Chatahuchi river, settled by Okfuski\n        Indians.\n\n     (2) A place of the same name is mentioned in the Census of 1832\n        as an _Upper_ Creek town.\n\n     _Tokog\u00e1lgi_, or \"tadpole place,\" a small Yuchi settlement on\n        Kitchofuni creek, a northern affluent of Flint river,\n        Georgia, which joins it about 31\u00b0 40\u00b4 Lat. Beaver dams\n        existed on branches of Kitchofuni creek; cf. Hawkins, p.\n        63. The present Creeks call a _tadpole_ toki\u00falga.\n\n     _Tukab\u00e1tchi_, an Upper Creek town built upon the western bank\n        of Tallapoosa river, and two miles and a half below its\n        falls, which are forty feet in fifty yards. Opposite was\n        T\u00e1lisi town, q. v. Tukabatchi was an ancient capital,\n        decreasing in population in Hawkins' time, but still able to\n        raise one hundred and sixteen warriors. The town suffered\n        much in its later wars with the Chicasa. Cf. H\u00fa`li-W\u00e1li. The\n        traders' trail crossed the Tallapoosa river at this place.\n        Bartram (1775) states that Tuccabatche spoke Muscogulge, and\n        the Census of 1832 considers it the largest town among the\n        Creeks, with three hundred and eighty-six houses. Here, as\n        at a national centre, the Sh\u00e1wano leader, Tecumseh, held his\n        exciting orations against the United States Government,\n        which prompted the Upper Creeks to rise in arms (1813).\n        Tugib\u00e1\u03c7tchi, Tukip\u00e1'htchi, and Tukip\u00e1\u03c7tchi are the\n        ancient forms of the name (Stidham), which is of foreign\n        origin. The inhabitants believe that their ancestors fell\n        from the sky, or according to others, came from the sun.\n        Another tale is, that they did not originate on this\n        continent; that when they arrived from their country they\n        landed at the \"Jagged Rock,\" tch\u00e1to tcha\u03c7\u00e0\u03c7a `l\u00e1ko, and\n        brought the metallic plates with them, which they preserve\n        to the present day with anxious care. In Adair's time (cf.\n        Adair, History, pp. 178. 179, in Note) they consisted of\n        five copper and two brass plates, and were, according to Old\n        Bracket's account, preserved under the \"beloved cabbin in\n        Tuccabatchey Square\" (A. D. 1759). Bracket's forefathers\n        told him that they were given to the tribe \"by the man we\n        call God,\" and that the Tukabatchi were a people different\n        from the Creeks. The plates are mentioned in Schoolcraft's\n        Indians, V, 283 (C. Swan's account), and rough sketches of\n        them are given in Adair, 1.1. They appear to be of Spanish\n        origin, and are produced at the busk. The town anciently was\n        known under two other names: Ispok\u00f3gi, or It\u00e1lua ispok\u00f3gi,\n        said to mean \"town of survivors,\" or \"surviving town,\n        remnant of a town\"; and It\u00e1lua f\u00e1tcha-s\u00edgo, \"incorrect town,\n        town deviating from strictness.\" With this last appellation\n        we may compare the Spanish village-name _Villa Viciosa_.\n\n     On national councils held there, cf. Hawkins, Sketch, p. 51 (in\n        the year 1799) and Milfort, p. 40 (in the year 1780) and p.\n        266.\n\n     _Tukab\u00e1tchi Talah\u00e1ssi_, or \"old town of Tukabatchi,\" an Upper\n        Creek town on west side of Tallapoosa river, four miles\n        above Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a. Since 1797 it received a second name, that\n        of T\u00e1lua mutch\u00e1si or \"new town.\" The Census list of 1832\n        calls it Talmachussa, Swan in 1791: Tuckabatchee Teehassa.\n\n     _Tukp\u00e1fka_, \"Spunk-knot,\" a village on Chatahuchi river,\n        Toap\u00e1fki in 1832, from which was settled the town of\n        Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a, q. v. A creek of the same name is a tributary of\n        Potchus'-H\u00e1tchi, q. v. Tukp\u00e1fka, not Tutp\u00e1fka, is the\n        correct form; it means _punky wood, spunk, rotten wood,\n        tinder_.\n\n     _Tu\u03c7tu-k\u00e1gi_, or \"Corn cribs set up\" by the Okfuski natives\n        to support themselves during the hunting season, was an\n        Upper Creek town on the western bank of Tallapoosa River,\n        twenty miles above Niuy\u00e1\u03c7a. The trail from Hillabi to\n        Etowa in the Cheroki country passed this town, which is near\n        a spur of mountains. Mentioned as \"Corn House\" in the Census\n        list of 1832, as Totokaga in 1791. T\u00fa\u03c7tu means a _crib_;\n        k\u00e1gi is the past participle of k\u00e1k\u012bs, q. v.\n\n     _Tutal\u00f3si_, a branch village of Hitchiti town. Cf. Hitchiti, p.\n        77. The Creek word tutal\u00f3si means _chicken_, in\n        Hitchiti tatay\u00e1hi; its inhabitants, who had no town-square,\n        are called by the people speaking Hitchiti: Tatay\u00e1hukli.\n\n     _\u00daktaha-s\u00e0si'_, or \"Sand-Heap,\" two miles from Hillabi town, of\n        which it was a branch or colony. Cf. Hillabi. If the name\n        was pronounced \u00daktaha l\u00e1si, it is \"sand-lick.\"\n\n     _U-i-uk\u00fafki_, Uyuk\u00fafki, an Upper Creek town, on a creek of the\n        same name, a tributary of Hatchet creek (Hawkins, p. 42);\n        Wiog\u00fafka (1832). The name points to muddy water: o-\u00edwa\n        _water_, uk\u00fafki _muddy_; and is also the Creek name for the\n        Mississippi river. Exists now in Indian Territory. Cf.\n        Potchus'-h\u00e1tchi.\n\n     _Wako-k\u00e1yi, Wa\u03c7ok\u00e1-i_, or \"Blow-horn Nest,\" an Upper Creek\n        town on Tukp\u00e1fka creek, a branch of Potchus'-H\u00e1tchi, a\n        water-course which joins Coosa river from the east. Also\n        written Wolkukay by cartographers; Wacacoys, in Census List\n        of 1832; Wiccakaw by Bartram (1775). W\u00e1ko is a species of\n        _heron_, bluish-grey, 2' high; k\u00e1yi _breeding-place_.\n        Another \"Wacacoys\" is mentioned, in 1832, as situated on\n        Lower Coosa river, below Wit\u00famka.\n\n     _Wat\u00fala H\u00f3ka h\u00e1tchi._ The location of this stream is marked by\n        Watoola village, which is situated on a run joining Big\n        Yuchi creek in a southern course, about eighteen miles west\n        of Chatahuchi river, on the road between Columbus, Ga., and\n        Montgomery, Ala.\n\n     _W\u00ed-kai `l\u00e1ko_, or \"Large Spring,\" a Lower Creek or Seminole\n        town, referred to by Morse under the name Wekivas. From u-\u00edwa,\n        abbrev. \u00fa-i _water_, k\u00e1ya _rising_, `l\u00e1ko _great, large_.\n        A Creek town in the Indian Territory bears the same name.\n\n     _Witumka_, (1) Upper Creek town on the rapids of Coosa river,\n        east side, near its junction with Tallapoosa. Hawkins does\n        not mention this old settlement, but Bartram, who traveled\n        from 1773 to 1778, quotes Whittumke among the Upper Creek\n        towns speaking the \"Stincard tongue,\" which in this instance\n        was the Koass\u00e1ti dialect.\n\n     (2) A branch town of Kaw\u00edta Talah\u00e1ssi, and twelve miles from\n        it, on Witumka creek, the main fork of Yuchi creek. The\n        place had a town-house, and extended for three miles up the\n        creek. The name signifies \"rumbling water;\" from \u00fa-i,\n        abbrev. from u-\u00edwa \"water,\" and t\u00famk\u012bs \"it rumbles, makes\n        noise.\"\n\n     _Witumka Creek_, called Owatunka river in the migration legend,\n        is the northern and main branch of Yuchi creek, which runs\n        into the Chatahuchi river from the northwest, and joins it\n        about 32\u00b0 18\u00b4 Lat. The other branch was Little Yuchi creek\n        or Hosapo-l\u00e4\u00edki; cf. Note to Hawkins, p. 61.\n\n     _Wiw\u00fa\u03c7ka_, or Wiw\u00f3ka, Upper Creek town on Wiw\u00f3ka creek, an\n        eastern tributary of Coosa river, joining it about ten miles\n        above Witumka. The town was fifteen miles above Odshi-ap\u00f3fa,\n        and in 1799 numbered forty warriors. Called Weeokee in 1791;\n        it means: \"water roaring,\": \u00fa-i _water_, w\u00f3\u03c7k\u012bs _it is\n        roaring_.\n\n     _Woksoy\u016b\u2032dshi_, an Upper Creek town, mentioned in the\n        Census List of 1832 as \"Waksoyochees, on Lower Coosa river,\n        below Wetumka.\"\n\n     _Yuchi_, a town of foreign extraction belonging to the Lower\n        Creeks; has branched out into three other villages. Cf.\n        Yuchi, p. 21.\n\n     _Yuf\u00e1bi creek_, an eastern tributary of Tallapoosa river,\n        joining it a short distance from Tukabatchi. Nof\u00e1pi creek,\n        mentioned in the legend, is now Nauf\u00e1ba creek, an upper\n        branch of \"Ufaupee creek,\" joining it in a southwestern\n        direction.\n\n     _Yuf\u00e1la_, (1) Y. or Yuf\u00e1la H\u00e1tchi, Upper Creek town on Yuf\u00e1la\n        creek, fifteen miles above its confluence with Coosa river.\n        Called Upper Ufala in 1791.\n\n     (2) Upper Creek town on the west bank of Tallapoosa river, two\n        miles below Okfuski in the air line.\n\n     (3) town of the Lower Creeks, fifteen miles below S\u00e1wokli, on\n        the eastern bank of Chatahuchi river. In 1799 the natives\n        had spread out down to the forks of the river in several\n        villages, and many had negro slaves, taken during the\n        Revolutionary war. The Census of 1832 counted 229 heads of\n        families. This name, of unknown signification, is written\n        Eufaula.\n\n\nTHE INDIAN PATHWAYS.\n\nA correct and detailed knowledge of the Indian trails leading through\ntheir country, and called by them warpaths, horse trails, and by the\nwhite traders \"trading roads,\" forms an important part of Indian\ntopography and history. Their general direction is determined by\nmountain ranges and gaps (passes), valleys, springs, water-courses,\nfordable places in rivers, etc. The early explorers of North American\ncountries all followed these Indian trails: Narvaez, Hernando de Soto,\nTristan de Luna, Juan del Pardo, Lederer and Lawson, because they were\nled along these tracks by their Indian guides. If we knew with\naccuracy the old Indian paths of the West, we would have little\ndifficulty in rediscovering the routes traveled by Coronado's and\nPe\u00f1alossa's troops in New Mexico and in the great wastes of the\nMississippi plains. In hilly lands these trails are, of course, easier\nto trace than in level portions of the country.\n\nThe best-known trails leading from the east to the Creek towns were as\nfollows:\n\n1. The _upper_ trail or \"warpath\" crossed Chatahuchi river at\nChe`l\u00e1ko-Nini by a horse ford, about sixty miles above Kasi\u03c7ta; cf.\nSchoolcraft, Indians, V, 255, and Adair, History, pp. 258. 368.\n\n2. The \"High Tower path\" started from High Shoals on Apalachi river,\nwhich is the southern branch of Ok\u00f3ni river, and went almost due west\nto \"Shallow Ford\" of Chatahuchi river, about twelve miles right north\nof Atlanta, Georgia, in the river bend.\n\n3. The _southern_ trail crossed the Chatahuchi river, coming from the\nOk\u00f3ni and Okm\u00falgi rivers,[93] at the \"Broken Arrow,\" `L\u00e9-k\u00e1tchka,\nwhile other travelers crossed it at the Yuchi towns, which cannot have\nbeen distant from the \"Broken Arrow.\" The Tallapoosa river was passed\nat Tukabatchi; cf. Schoolcraft, Indians, V, 254.\n\n    [Footnote 93: Bartram, Travels, p. 54, gives the following\n    particulars: \"On the east bank of the Okmulgee this trading road\n    runs nearly two miles through ancient Indian fields, the\n    Okmulgee fields ... with artificial mounds or terraces, squares,\n    etc.\" This horsepath began at the Rock Landing on Ok\u00f3ni river, a\n    British post just below Wilkinson and about four miles below\n    Milledgeville, Georgia, passed Fort Hawkins built upon the\n    Okm\u00falgi old fields, then the site of Macon, on the shore\n    opposite, then Knoxville, then the old Creek agency on Flint\n    river, then crossed Patsil\u0101\u00edka creek, the usual ford on\n    Chatahuchi river lying between Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta and Apat\u00e1-i Creek.]\n\nFrom Tukabatchi it crossed over almost due west, as represented in Em.\nBowen's map, to Coosa river, which was passed by a horse-ford, then\nfollowed the Coosa river up to Coosa old town. This is the trail\npartly traveled over by the Kasi\u03c7ta tribe, as described in the\nmigration legend.\n\n4. The _trail_ leading from St. Mary's river, Georgia, to the Creek\ntowns went into disuse since 1783, and at the time of Swan's visit\n(1791) was difficult to trace. Cf. Schoolcraft, V, 256. If correctly\nrepresented in Tanner's map of 1827, a road then running from St.\nMary's river to the Hitchiti ford of the Chatahuchi river crossed that\nriver at Hitchit\u016b\u2032dshi.\n\n\nTHE CREEK GOVERNMENT.\n\nThe social organization of all the Indian nations of America is based\nupon the existence of the _tribe_. The tribe itself is based upon\nsmaller units of individuals which are joined together by a common\ntie; this tie is either the archaic maternal descent, or the more\nmodern tie of paternal descent, or a combination of both. Among the\nIndians of North America east of the Rocky mountains, and also among\nmany tribes west of them, the single groups descending from the same\nmale or female ancestor form each a _gens_ provided with a proper name\nor _totem_ generally recalling the name of an animal.\n\nAmong the Creeks, Seminoles and all the other Maskoki tribes descent\nwas in the female line. Every child born belonged to the gens of its\nmother, and not to that of its father, for no man could marry into his\nown gens. In case of the father's death or incapacity the children\nwere cared for by the nearest relatives of the mother. Some public\nofficers could be selected only from certain gentes, among which such\na privilege had become hereditary. Regulations like these also\ncontrolled the warrior class and exercised a profound influence upon\nthe government and history of the single tribes, and it often gave a\ntoo prominent position to some gentes in certain tribes, to the\ndetriment or exclusion of others. The Hitchiti and Creek totems were\nthe same.\n\nThe administration of public affairs in the Creek nation can be\nstudied to best advantage by dividing the dates on hand into three\nsections: the civil government of the Creek tribe; the warrior class;\nthe confederacy and its government. What we give below will at least\nsuffice to give readers a better understanding of some points in the\nmigration legend. But before we enter upon these points, let us\nconsider the basis of Indian social life, the _gens_.\n\n\nTRIBAL DIVISIONS AND GENTES.\n\nParallel to the two \u00edksa of the Cha'hta the Creeks are divided into\ntwo _fires_ (t\u00fatka), a civil fire and a military fire. The term _fire_\nevidently refers to council fires, which had to be kindled\nceremonially by the friction of two pieces of wood. The term _fire_\nwas also applied by Sh\u00e1wanos and other Northern Indians to the States\nformed by the early colonists, and is still used of the States now\nconstituting the American Union: the thirteen fires, the seventeen\nfires, etc.\n\nConcerning the gentes (al\u00e4\u00edkita) of the Creek people, it is important\nto notice that in their towns each group of houses contained people of\none gens only,[94] and these gentes are often mentioned in their local\nannals; and that the gens of each individual was determined by that of\nhis mother. Some of the towns had separate gentes for themselves, all\nof which had privileges of their own.\n\n    [Footnote 94: A similar distribution is observed in the\n    villages, hunting and war camps of the Pani and Southern Dakotan\n    tribes, and was very strictly enforced by them.]\n\nMarriage between individuals of the same gens was prohibited; the\noffice of the m\u00edko and the succession to property of deceased persons\nwas and is still hereditary in the gens. In the Tukabatchi town the\ncivil rulers or m\u00edkalgi were selected from the _eagle_ gens; those of\nHitchiti town from the _racoon_ gens only; of Kasi\u03c7ta from the\n_bear_ gens; those of Task\u00edgi probably from the _wind_ gens. The\nbeloved men or \u00edstitchak\u00e1lgi of Kasi\u03c7ta were of the _beaver gens_.\n\nIn adultery and murder cases the relatives of the gens of the injured\nparty alone had the right of judging and of taking satisfaction; the\nm\u00edko and his council were debarred from any interference. This custom\nexplains why treaty stipulations made with the colonists or the\nFederal Government concerning murders committed have never been\nexecuted.[95]\n\n    [Footnote 95: Cf. Hawkins, p. 75.]\n\nThere is probably no Indian tribe or nation in North America having a\nlarger number of gentes than the Maskoki proper. This fact seems to\npoint either to a long historic development of the tribe, through\nwhich so large a segmentation was brought about, or to internal\ndissensions, which could produce the same result. About twenty gentes\nare now in existence, and the memory of some extinct ones is not lost\nin the present generation.\n\nThe _list_ of Creek gentes, as obtained from Judge G. W. Stidham, runs\nas follows:\n\n    Nok\u00f3salgi bear gens; from nok\u00f3si bear.\n\n    Itch\u00faalgi deer gens, from \u00edtchu deer.\n\n    K\u00e1tsalgi panther gens; k\u00e1tsa panther, cougar.\n\n    Ko\u00e1kotsalgi wild-cat gens; k\u00f3a-k\u00f3tchi wild-cat.\n\n    Kunip\u00e1lgi skunk gens; k\u00fano, k\u00f3no skunk.\n\n    W\u00f3tkalgi racoon gens; w\u014d\u2032tko racoon.\n\n    Yah\u00e1lgi wolf gens; y\u00e1ha wolf.\n\n    Ts\u00falalgi fox gens; ts\u00fala fox.\n\n    Itch'h\u00e1sualgi beaver gens; itch'h\u00e1sua beaver.\n\n    Os\u00e1nalgi otter gens; os\u00e1na otter.\n\n    H\u00e1lpadalgi alligator gens; h\u00e1lpada alligator.\n\n    F\u00fasualgi bird gens; f\u00faswa forest bird.\n\n    \u00cdtamalgi, T\u00e1malgi, (?) cf. t\u00e1mkita to fly.\n\n    Sop\u00e1ktalgi toad gens; sop\u00e1ktu toad.\n\n    T\u00e1kusalgi mole gens; t\u00e1ku mole.\n\n    Atch\u00edalgi maize gens; \u00e1tchi maize.\n\n    Ahala\u03c7\u00e1lgi sweet potato gens; \u00e1ha sweet potato, long\n    marsh-potato.\n\n    H\u00fatalgalgi wind gens; h\u00fatali wind.\n\n    Akt\u00e4yats\u00e1lgi (signification unknown).\n\n    (-algi is the sign of collective plurality--the \u00f3kla of\n    Cha'hta.)\n\nThe following gentes are _now extinct_, but still occur in war names:\n\n    Pah\u00f3salgi; occurs in names like Pah\u00f3s'-h\u00e1dsho.\n\n    Ok\u00edlisa; cf. Killis-tamaha, p. 109.\n\n    `L\u00e1`lo-algi fish gens; `l\u00e1`lo fish, occurs in war names like\n    `L\u00e1`lo yah\u00f3la, etc.\n\n    Tchuk\u00f3talgi, perhaps consolidated with another gens; it stood in\n    a close connection with the Sop\u00e1ktalgi. Also pronounced Tsu\u03c7\u00f3di;\n    Chief Chicote is named after it.\n\n    Odsh\u00edsalgi hickory nut gens; \u014d\u2032dshi hickory nut. Some believe\n    this gens represented the people of Otch\u00edsi town, p. 71.\n\n    Oktch\u00fanualgi salt gens; oktch\u00fanua salt.\n\n    Isf\u00e1nalgi; seems analogous to the Isp\u00e1ni phratry and gens of the\n    Chicasa.\n\n    W\u00e1'hlakalgi; cf. H\u00fa`li-w\u00e1'hli, town name.\n\n    Mu\u03c7l\u00e1salgi; said to mean \"people of Mukl\u00e1sa town\"; cf.\n    Imukl\u00e1sha, under Cha'hta.\n\nThe Creek _phratries_ and their names were not fully remembered by my\ninformants. The only points which could be gathered were, that\nindividuals belonging to the panther and the wildcat gentes could not\nintermarry, nor could the Tchuk\u00f3talgi with the individuals of the toad\ngens or Sop\u00e1ktalgi. This proves that the two groups formed each a\nphratry, which perhaps comprised other gentes besides. It is possible\nthat among the above totemic gentes some are in fact phratries and not\ngentes; and the two _fires_ (or t\u00fatka) of the Creeks are not real\nphratries, but formal divisions only.\n\n\nCIVIL GOVERNMENT OF THE TRIBE.\n\nSeveral gentes, with their families, united into _one_ town or\nsettlement, live under one chief, and thus constitute a _tribe_. The\ntribe, as far as constituting a politic body governing itself, is\ncalled in Creek it\u00e1lua, which could also be rendered by: community or\ncivil district. Amit\u00e1luadshi is \"my own town, where I belong,\"\namit\u00e1lua \"my own country.\" It\u00e1lua also signifies _nation_. Another\nterm, tal\u00f3fa, means _town_ or _village, city_ as a collection of\nhouses without any reference to its inhabitants.\n\nThe executive officer of each town is the _m\u00edko_ or _chief_, formerly\ncalled \"king\" by the whites. His duty is to superintend all public and\ndomestic concerns, to receive public characters, to listen to their\nspeeches, the contents of which were referred to the town, and to\n\"deliver the talks\" of his community. The town elects him for life\nfrom a certain gens. When he becomes sick or old he chooses an\nassistant, who is subject to the approval of the counsellors and head\nmen. When the m\u00edko dies the next of kin in the maternal line succeeds\nhim, usually his nephew, if he is fit for office.\n\nNext in authority after the m\u00edko are the m\u00edkalgi and the counsellors,\nboth of whom form the _council_ of the town. The council appoints the\nGreat Warrior, approves or rejects the nominations for a m\u00edko's\nassistant, and gives advice in law, war or peace questions.\n\nNext in authority after the council is the body of the _hinih\u00e1lgi_,\nold men and advisers, presided over by the h\u00edniha `l\u00e1ko. They are in\ncharge of public buildings, supervise the erection of houses for new\nsettlers, direct the agricultural pursuits and prepare the black\ndrink. They are the \"masters of ceremonies,\" and the name h\u00edniha,\n\u00edniha, which is no longer understood by the present generation, is\nsaid to signify \"self-adorner,\" in the sense of \"warrior embellished\nwith body paint.\" Hiniha `l\u00e1ko, abbreviated into Nia`l\u00e1ko, is now in\nuse as a personal name, and recalls the name of the celebrated\nSeminole chief Neam\u00e1thla (h\u00edniha im\u00e1`la). In the Hitchiti towns they\nwere comprised among the class of the beloved men. Before the broken\ndays, n\u00edta \u03c7\u00e1tska, they consulted about the time of the busk, and\nduring the busk directed the performances.\n\n_Beloved men_ or _isti-tch\u00e1kalgi_ follow next in rank after the above.\nThey are the men who have distinguished themselves by long public\nservice, especially as war leaders, and the majority of them were\nadvanced in age. C. Swan states that the beloved men were formerly\ncalled m\u00edkalgi in white towns.\n\nThen follows the common people. For the tust\u0115n\u00faggi `l\u00e1ko or Great\nWarrior, cf. \"Warrior Class\" and \"Creek Confederacy.\"\n\nSince Indian character expresses itself in the most pronounced,\nself-willed independence, the power of the authorities was more of a\npersuasive than of a constraining or commanding nature. This will\nappear still better when we speak of the warrior class; and it may be\nappropriate to remember that no man felt himself bound by decrees of a\npopular assembly, by edicts of chiefs and their counsellors, or by\ntreaties concluded by these with alien tribes or governments. The law\nexercised by the gens was more powerful than all these temporary\nrulings, and, in fact, was the real motive power in the Indian\ncommunity.\n\nThe distinction between red and white towns is not clearly remembered\nnow, and there are very few Creeks living who are able to tell whether\nsuch or such a town was red or white. As soon as the agricultural\ninterests began to prevail over the military, through the approach of\nthe colonial settlements, this feature had to disappear, and the\nsocial order also changed from the _gens_ or \u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7 into that\nof _civitas_. Adair, Hist., p. 159, seems inclined to identify the\nwhite (or \"ancient, holy, old beloved, peaceable towns\") with the\n\"towns of refuge,\" one of which was K\u00fasa.\n\n\nTHE WARRIOR CLASS.\n\nThe geographic position of the Creeks in the midst of warlike and\naggressive nations was a powerful stimulant for making \"invincibles\"\nof their male offspring. The ruling passion was that of war; second to\nit was that of hunting. A peculiar incentive was the possession of\nwar-titles, and the rage for these was as strong among the younger men\nas that for plunder among the older. The surest means of ascending the\nladder of honor was the capture of scalps from the enemy, and the\npolicy of the red or bloody towns was that of fostering the warlike\nspirit by frequent raids and expeditions. In some towns young men were\ntreated as menials before they had performed some daring deeds on the\nbattle-field or acquired a war title.[96] To become a warrior every\nyoung man had to pass through a severe ordeal of privations called\n_fast_, p\u00faskita, from the fifteenth to the seventeenth year of his\nage. This _initiation_ into manhood usually lasted from four to eight\nmonths, but in certain rare instances could be abridged to twelve\ndays.\n\n    [Footnote 96: Milfort, M\u00e9moire, p. 251.]\n\nA distinction of a material, not only honorific character was the\nelection of a warrior to actual command as pak\u0101\u2032dsha or\ntust\u0115n\u00faggi `l\u00e1ko.\n\n\nTHE CHARGES OF COMMANDERS.\n\nAfter the young man had passed through the hardships of his\ninitiation, the career of distinction stood open before him, for he\nwas now a tassik\u00e1ya or _brave_.[97] According to Hawkins' Sketch, the\nthree degrees of advancement in command were as follows:\n\n    [Footnote 97: Tassik\u00e1ya, contr. task\u00e1ya, pl. taski\u00e1lgi--in\n    Cha'hta t\u00e1ska, in Apalache task\u00e1ya, etc.]\n\nThe tassik\u00e1ya, who after initiation appears qualified for actual\nservice in the field, and is promising, is appointed _leader_ (isti\npak\u0101\u2032dsha, or pak\u0101\u2032dsha) by the m\u00edko or chief of his town.\nWhen he distinguishes himself, he obtains a seat in the central cabin\nof the public square. When out on the warpath the leader was called\nim\u00edsi, imm\u00edssi, q. v., and when initiated to the faculty of charming\nthe approaching enemy by physic and songs, ahop\u00e1ya, q. v.\n\nWarriors of the pak\u0101\u2032dsha class, who had repeatedly distinguished\nthemselves on expeditions, could be promoted, when a general war was\ndeclared, to the charge of _upper leader_, isti pak\u0101\u2032dsha `l\u00e1ko,\nor tust\u0115n\u00faggi.\n\nThe highest distinction was that of the _great warrior_, tust\u0115n\u00faggi\n`l\u00e1ko, of whom there was one in every town. This dignitary was\nappointed by the m\u00edko and his counsellors, and selected by them among\nthe best qualified warriors. His seat was at the western end of the\nm\u00edkalgi cabin in the public square. In Milfort's time this dignitary\nhad become a civil _and_ military officer,[98] and nowadays his\nfunctions are those of a civil functionary only.\n\n    [Footnote 98: Milfort, M\u00e9moire, p. 237: \"Aujourd'hui il est le\n    premier chef de la nation pour le civil et pour le militaire.\"]\n\nIn cases when the towns had resolved upon a general war, a leader for\nall the town-tust\u0115n\u00faggis was appointed in the person of a\n\"generalissimo,\" called also pak\u0101\u2032dsha, tust\u0115n\u00faggi, or\ntust\u0115n\u00faggi `l\u00e1ko.\n\nAmong the Creeks now inhabiting the Indian Territory the nomenclature\nhas been altered from the above. A young man is called tassik\u00e1ya after\nreceiving the war-title and having some employment during the busk; he\nbecomes tust\u0115n\u00faggi after being declared as such by a vote of his\ntown; but in aboriginal times a young man was not called tust\u0115n\u00faggi\nbefore he had shown his bravery by the taking of at least one scalp.\n\n\nWAR-TITLES.\n\nWar-titles are important distinctions bestowed in almost every part of\nthe world, for military achievements; but, to preserve their\ndistinctive value, are usually conferred only on a small portion of\nthe warriors. Among the Creeks war-names are, however, so common that\nat present one is conferred upon every young man of the people.\nAccording to the old reports, a Creek warrior of the eighteenth\ncentury could obtain a war-title only after taking one or several\nscalps, but the traditions current among the modern Creeks are silent\non this point. In earlier days many warriors had several, even four or\nfive of these titles (tassik\u00e1ya inhotch\u00edfka), and when participants of\na war party were present in numbers at the taking of a scalp, each of\nthem obtained a war-title according to the report of the fight made by\nthe pak\u0101\u2032dsha on his return home. The war-titles were not always,\nthough most frequently, conferred upon the warriors during the busk,\nor within the square.\n\nChief Chicote informs me, that the names in question were distributed\nby the \"beloved men\" or ist'-ats\u00e1kalgi while sitting in their cabins\nor arbors on two opposite sides of the square. The ist'-ats\u00e1kalgi\ncalled out young men from the side opposite to them, and imparted one\nof the five titles to be mentioned below, according to their free\nchoice, and simultaneously intrusted each with some office connected\nwith the busk. These offices consisted either in sweeping the area or\nin carrying water, in building and keeping up the fire in the centre,\nin setting up the medicine-pots or in helping to prepare black drink.\nWar-titles and busk-offices were formerly given also to such who had\nnever joined a war party. The use of the other name, which every man\nhad obtained during childhood, was prohibited within the square.\n\nTo the five war-titles below, the totem of the gens was often added,\nso that, for instance, one of the yah\u00f3lalgi, who offered the black\ndrink, could be called \u00edtcho yah\u00f3la h\u00e1dsho, or y. m\u00edko, y. f\u00edksiko,\netc. It is said, that anciently some titles were limited to certain\nclans only. The idea that advancement by degree was connected with\nthese titles is an erroneous inference from our own military\ninstitutions. Although regarded as war-names at the present time, they\nseem to have been mere busk-titles from the beginning, and are such\neven now. In connection with \u00edtcho _deer_, a gens name, they are as\nfollows:\n\n     \u00edtcho tassik\u00e1ya _deer warrior_.\n\n     \u00edtcho h\u00e1dsho tassik\u00e1ya _deer crazy_ (foolish, mad, drunken)\n        _warrior_.\n\n     \u00edtcho f\u00edksiko tassik\u00e1ya _deer heartless warrior_.\n\n     \u00edtcho yah\u00f3la tassik\u00e1ya _deer hallooing warrior_.\n\n     \u00edtcho ima\u2032`la tassik\u00e1ya _deer (leading?) warrior_.\n\nOther war-titles were: hol\u00e1'hta tust\u0115n\u00faggi, m\u00edko tust\u0115n\u00faggi,\nh\u00edniha, h\u00edniha `l\u00e1ko. Inhol\u00e1'hti, plur. inhol\u00e1\u03c7tagi figures in\nwar-titles, but stands in no connection with the busk. The appellation\nof imm\u00edkagi comprehends all the men of _that_ gens from which the m\u00edko\nin the town ceremonies, not the m\u00edko as a political office-holder, is\nselected. The pronoun im-, in-, i- in all these names (ihinih\u00e1lgi,\nintast\u0115na\u03c7\u00e1lgi, etc.), signifies that they \"belong to the m\u00edko\"\nof the tribal ceremonies.\n\nWar-titles should be clearly distinguished from war-names and other\nnames. Any of the nine appellations contained in the item above, and\nany name composed with one of them, is a war-title; all others, as\n_Old Red Shoe_, are simply names or war-names. Women and boys never\nhad but one name, and whenever a warrior had, by successive campaigns,\nfive or six honorific titles conferred upon him, he became generally\nknown by one or two of these only.\n\nThese names and war-titles are highly important for the study of Creek\nethnography, and have been already referred to in the chapter on\n_gentes_. A brief list of war-names of influential men is contained in\nMajor C. Swan's Report, as follows:[99]\n\n    [Footnote 99: 1791--Schoolcraft, Indians, V, 263.]\n\n\"Hallowing King (Kaw\u00edta); White Lieutenant (Okfuski); Mad Dog\n(Tukabatchi m\u00edko); Opilth m\u00edko (Big Talah\u00e1ssi); Dog Warrior (N\u00e1ktche);\nOld Red Shoe (Alibamu and Koass\u00e1ti). To these may be added the \"dog\nking,\" Tamhu\u00eddshi, of the Hitchiti, mentioned in the prooemium of the\nlegend, and \"a war-leader, the son of the dog-king of the Huphale\ntown.\"[100] The Cha'hta war-titles frequently end in -\u00e1bi, -\u00e1pi:\n_killer_; cf. the Creek term p\u00f3y\u00e4s, tip\u00f3y\u00e4s _I kill_.\"\n\n    [Footnote 100: Adair, History, p. 278.]\n\nThe Creeks often conferred war-titles on white men of note, and made\nMilfort, who became a relative of the chief McGillivray by marriage,\nthe chief warrior of the nation. The ceremonies performed on that\noccasion are described at length by himself.[101]\n\n    [Footnote 101: Milfort, M\u00e9moire, p. 41 sqq., 220 sqq. The\n    council of the nation, assembled at Tukabatchi, conferred this\n    charge on him in May 1780.]\n\nWe give a few instances of historical and recent Creek war-names and\nwar-titles:--\n\n     Abi\u03c7k\u00fadshi m\u00edko, H\u00fatalg'-im\u00e1`la, Kaw\u00edta tust\u0115n\u00faggi, all\n        members of the Creek \"House of Kings.\"\n\n     \u00c1ssi yah\u00f3la \"the black drink hallooer;\" Osceola, chief.\n\n     H\u00edniha `l\u00e1ko hup\u00e1yi \"great h\u00edniha charmer,\" a Creek leader in\n        the battle at \u00c1tasi and other engagements.\n\n     Hop\u00fa-i h\u00ed`l'-m\u00edko \"good child-chief.\"\n\n     Hop\u00fa-i h\u00ed`li yah\u00f3la \"handsome child yah\u00f3la\"; a Creek chief.\n\n     H\u00fa`li 'm\u00e1'hti \"war-leader,\" a frequently occurring war-name;\n        'm\u00e1'hti is abbreviated from hom\u00e1\u03c7ti.\n\n     Hut\u00e1lgi m\u00edku \"chief from wind gens;\" is chief of Task\u00edgi town.\n\n     Ifa h\u00e1dsho, or \"dog warrior\"; cf. Hawkins, p. 80.\n\n     Ispah\u00eddshi, name of a headman, and usually spelt Spiechee:\n        \"whooping, brawling\" while taking off the scalp.\n\n     K\u00e1tsa h\u00e1dsho \"tiger-h\u00e1dsho,\" a Seminole chief, erroneously\n        called Tigertail.\n\n     K\u00f3sisti, abbr. K\u00f3sti; occurs in K\u00f3sti f\u00edksiko, etc. The\n        signification is lost, but we may compare the town Acostehe,\n        visited by de Soto's army in coming south from the Cheroki\n        country.\n\n     `Lawa\u03c7a\u00edki \"lying in ambush; creeping up clandestinely.\"\n\n     M\u00edko im\u00e1`la \"chief leader.\"\n\n     N\u00fakusi \u00edli tch\u00e1pko \"long-footed bear,\" war-name of S. B.\n        Callahan, Creek delegate to the United States Government.\n\n     Sutak'h\u00e1\u03c7ki \"men fighting in a line.\"\n\n     T\u00e1lua f\u00edksiko \"heartless town;\" presently judge of the\n        Wiw\u00fa\u03c7ka district, I. T.\n\n     Tassik\u00e1ya m\u00edku \"chief warrior;\" president House of Kings.\n\n     U\u03c7t\u00e1ha-sasi h\u00e1dsho \"sandy-place h\u00e1dsho;\" chief.\n\n     W\u00e1ksi, Cha'hta term referring to the drawing up of the prepuce.\n        Occurs in W\u00e1ksi hol\u00e1'hta and other Creek titles, perhaps\n        also in the tribal name of the Waxsaws on Santee river, S.\n        C., and in Waxahatchi, town in Alabama. The name conveyed\n        the idea of a low, unmanly behavior, but had no obscene\n        meaning. Other nations regard epithets like these (\u1f70\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9,\n        _verpi_) as highly injurious, and load their enemies with\n        them, as the Tchiglit-Inuit do the Tinn\u00e9 Indians of the\n        interior: taordshioit, ortcho-todsho-eitut.[102]\n\n    [Footnote 102: E. Petitot, Tchiglit, preface p. xi.]\n\n\nWAR-CUSTOMS AND TACTICS.\n\nA few notes on the war-customs of the Creeks, which resembled those of\nmost Southern tribes, may be useful for shedding light on the early\nmigrations of the people and upon the tactics observed in their\ncampaigns.\n\nThe principal motive for Indian wars being the conquest of scalps,\nslaves, plunder and hunting grounds, the Creeks, conscious of their\ngreat power, were not very particular in finding causes for warfare,\nand did not even advance specious reasons for declaring war. Thus,\nAdair gives as the true cause of a long war between the Creeks and\nCheroki, the killing and scalping of two Chicasa hunters by a Shawano\n\"brave.\" This man took refuge among the Cheroki people, and war was\ndeclared to them by the Creeks, because they then had concluded a war\nalliance with the Chicasa (History, p. 278).\n\nIt is rather improbable that a declaration of war always preceded the\nattack, for the advance into the hostile territory was made\nclandestinely[103]; but the resolution of starting upon the warpath\nwas heralded in the towns with great ceremonies. Of these we shall\nspeak under the heading: Confederacy.\n\n    [Footnote 103: The Timucua of Florida declared war by sticking\n    up arrows in the ground around the town or camp of the enemy on\n    the evening before the attack (Ren\u00e9 de Laudonni\u00e8re, \"Histoire\n    Notable\").]\n\nThe Creeks of old were in the habit of carrying on their warfare\nchiefly in small bodies, like other Indian tribes. Small commands are\nbetter enabled to surprise the enemy or his camps in clandestine or\nnight attacks, or to cut off hostile warriors, than large ones. There\nare instances that the Creeks formed war-parties of four men only.\nTheir leader was then styled im\u00edsi, imm\u00edssi or \"the one carrying it\nfor them,\" this term referring to the battle-charm or war-physic.\nWar-parties of forty to sixty men are mentioned also.\n\nWhen warriors started for the \"field of honor\" in larger or smaller\nbodies, they were led by a commander (pak\u0101\u2032dsha) who\nsimultaneously was an ahop\u00e1ya or hop\u00e1ya, \"_charmer at a distance_.\"\nMen of this order had, like other warriors, to undergo, while quite\nyoung, a severe course of initiation into manhood, which also\ncomprised instructions in herb-physicking. To become initiated they\ncamped away from other people, and had for their only companion the\nold conjuror, who for four months initiated them and taught them the\nincantations intended to act as charms upon the enemy. To begin with,\na fast of either four or eight days and the eating of certain bitter\nweeds was prescribed, to purify the system and to prepare the youth\nfor a ready comprehension of the objects of tuition. The whole process\nwas sometimes repeated for another four months, in the spring of the\nyear following, and differed in every town. The knowledge thus\nacquired, it was believed, imparted to the person a full conjuring\npower and charmer's influence over the antagonist, and enabled him to\nconquer the hostile warriors at a distance (hup\u00e1-i) and before\nreaching them, or to make them come near enough for easy capture.\n\nWhen the Great Warrior started on the warpath he gave notice to the\nparticipants where he would strike camp that night, and then set out,\nsometimes with one or two men only. A war-whoop and the discharge of\nhis gun were the signals of his departure, and were responded to by\nhis followers by acting in the same manner. The other warriors took\ntheir time, and went to rejoin him one or two days after. A man taking\npart in a war-expedition was called h\u00fa`li-\u00e1`la.\n\nA war party always proceeded in Indian file, each man stepping into\nthe footprints of the foregoing, to prevent the enemy from knowing\ntheir number. This explains also the episode of the legend referring\nto the tracks lost in the bottom of the river, q. v.[104] The tracks,\nfootprints, strokes of hatchets visible on the bark of trees, etc.,\ndiffered in every American tribe. Among the Creeks the last man in the\nfile often sought to cover the tracks by placing grass upon them. A\nconsiderable force of scouts hovered around the marching file, to\nprevent surprises; the leader marched at the head of the file.\n\n    [Footnote 104: Milfort, M\u00e9m., p. 217. 218. Walking through\n    watercourses necessarily destroyed all vestiges of a marching\n    body of warriors.]\n\nThe attack was made in true Indian and savage fashion, before\ndaybreak. The warriors crept up as silently as possible, tried to dart\ntheir missiles from secret spots, and never exposed their bodies to\nthe enemy when they could cover them by some eminence or rock, tree or\nbush. The leader took a position in the rear. The Chicasa Indians\ncontinually taunted the colonial troops upon the fearless but useless\nexposure of their men to the battle-fire of the wary Indian braves.\nMilfort relates that his men fought nude, because they had noticed\nthat the fragments of clothing entering the body with the point of the\nmissile rendered the wound much more dangerous than the missile\nitself.\n\nWhen making prisoners the Creeks habitually spared only the lives of\nchildren, killing mercilessly the adult males and females. They even\nburnt many of them at the stake, and Milfort claims that this barbaric\ncustom was abandoned only through his influence (M\u00e9m., pp. 219-220).\n\nThe food on which they subsisted, on their expeditions, was pounded\nmaize, contained in a small bag, which they carried upon their bodies.\n\nThe encampments for the night (h\u00e1pu) were round-shaped, every man\nlying in contiguity to another in a circle, and leaving only a small\nissue, which was guarded by the commander. After the commander's\nsignal no one was allowed to move from his place. The same order was\nobserved when the army halted during the day, and the same arrangement\nis conspicuous in the campings of the Southern Dakota tribes, as Iowa,\nPonka, Ug\u00e1\u03c7pa, etc.\n\nA graphic description of southern war-camps is found in B. Romans,\nFlorida, p. 65: \"A Choctaw war-camp is circular, with a fire in the\ncentre, and each man has a crutched branch at his head to hang his\npowder and shot upon and to set his gun against, and the feet of all\nto the fire; a Cherokee war-camp is a long line of fire, against which\nthey also lay their feet. A Choctaw makes his camp, in traveling, in\nform of a sugar loaf; a Chicasa makes it in form of our arbours; a\nCreek like to our sheds or piazzas, to a timber-house.\" The Creek\nwar-camps in the woods were constructed in such a manner that the\nexact number of the party could at once be ascertained.[105]\n\n    [Footnote 105: Swan, in Schoolcraft V, 280.]\n\nAfter their return the warriors placed the scalps in the public\nsquare, or divided them among their acquaintances. Anciently the\nprivilege of raising the scalp-pole (itu tch\u00e1ti) belonged to two\ntribes only, the Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta and the Kaw\u00edta.[106] The cause for this is\nshown in our half-mythic migration legend. The tradition that the\ncustom of scalping was but recently imported among the Creeks from the\nNorthern Indians was manufactured for a purpose, and invented by many\nother tribes also, to appear more human in the eyes of the white\nsettlers. Scalping and the drying of scalps had been observed in\nFlorida as early as 1564 by Ren\u00e9 de Laudonni\u00e8re.\n\n    [Footnote 106: Cf. Hu`li-W\u00e1'hli, and the _name_ of this town.]\n\n\nORGANIZATION OF THE CONFEDERACY.\n\nThe Creek confederacy, or \"league of the Muscogulgee\" was a purely\npolitical organization connecting the various and disparate elements,\nwhich composed it, for common action against external aggression. It\nhad no direct influence on the _social_ organization of the tribes,\nand the most appropriate term for this, and other Indian confederacies\nas well, is that of war-confederacy, war-league or symmachy. In Creek\nthe Maskoki confederacy is called \u00edsti Mask\u00f3ki imitihal\u00e1tka.\n\nTo call this _loose assemblage_ of towns and tribes a military\ndemocracy, in the sense that the majority of the votes decided a\nquestion brought before the people in a manner that was binding for\nthe citizens, is entirely wrong and misleading, for Indians regard\ntheir actions subject to their own decisions only, or, at the utmost,\nto those of their individual _gens_. Every Creek town or individual\ncould go on the warpath or stay at home, in spite of any wish or\ndecree issued by the chiefs or assembled warriors. The young warriors,\nanxious to obtain fame and war-titles, joined the war-parties on the\ncall of a leader. In questions of war unanimity was seldom attained in\nthe council of a town, much less in the whole nation; \"it is not\nrecollected by the oldest man, that more than one-half of the nation\nwent to war at the same time or 'took the war-talk.'\"\n\n\"When the m\u00edko and his councillors are of opinion that the town has\nbeen injured, the Great Warrior lifts the war-hatchet, \u00e1t\u0103si,\nagainst the offending nation. But as soon as it is taken up, the m\u00edko\nand his council may interpose, and by their prudent counsels stop it,\nand proceed to adjust the misunderstanding by negotiation. If the\nGreat Warrior persists and 'goes out,' he is followed by all who are\nfor war.\"\n\nThese words, quoted from the \"Sketch\" of the United States agent, B.\nHawkins, plainly show, that the _initiative_ for war rested with the\ncivil authority, and not with the military. But it is possible that\nHawkins speaks of white or peace-towns only, and not of the red towns\n(p. 72). He continues as follows:\n\n\"Peace is always determined on and concluded by the m\u00edko and\ncouncillors, and peace-talks are always addressed to the cabin of the\nm\u00edko. In some cases, where the resentment of the warriors has run\nhigh, the m\u00edko and council have been much embarrassed.\"\n\nAll this proves that every town had the privilege to begin warfare for\nitself, independent of the confederacy, provided that the civil\ngovernment consented to the undertaking. This fact plainly shows the\nperfect independence of the Indian tribe from the war-confederacy, and\nforms a striking contrast to our ideas of a centralized state power.\nIn some instances the Creek towns left their defensive position to act\non the offensive principle, but they were not sustained then by the\nMaskoki confederacy.\n\nThe chief of the confederacy had to advise only, and not to command;\nhe was of influence only when endowed with superior talent and\npolitical ability. The chief and principal warriors had annual\nmeetings in the public square of some central town, on public affairs;\nthey drank \u00e1ssi, exchanged tobacco, and then proceeded to debate. Time\nand place of these conventions were fixed by a chief, and the space of\ntime between warning and that of assembly was called \"broken days.\"\nMajor C. Swan, after whose report this passage is quoted (Schoolcraft\nV, 279) states that the title of the chief of the confederacy was the\n_great beloved man_, while Milfort, who was himself invested with the\ncharge of great warrior of the nation, styles him \"Le Tastan\u00e9gy ou\ngrand chef de guerre,\" adding, however, that in his time he was the\nhighest authority in _civil and military_ affairs (M\u00e9moire, Note to p.\n237). The English, French and Spaniards frequently called him the\n_Emperor_ of the Upper and Lower Creeks, a term which is not entirely\nmisapplied when taken in its original sense of \"military commander,\"\nthe _imperator_ of the Romans.\n\nAt a later period the meeting of the confederacy usually took place at\nTukabatchi, which had become the largest community. From the above it\nresults, however, that the Creeks had no _capital_ town in the sense\nas we use this term. Col. B. Hawkins, who attempted to introduce some\nunity among the towns for the purpose of facilitating the transaction\nof business of the nation, and their intercourse with the United\nStates Government, proposed various measures, as the classing of the\ntowns into nine districts; these were adopted at Tukabatchi by the\nchiefs of the nation, on November 27th, 1799.[107]\n\n    [Footnote 107: Cf. his Sketch, pp. 51. 52. 67. 68.]\n\nThe small degree of respect which the Creek towns paid to\ninternational treaties (sitimf\u00e1tchita) or other solemn engagements\nmade with the whites, as sales of territory, etc., is another proof\nfor the looseness of the \"powerful Creek confederacy.\" After giving a\nlist of six influential headmen of different towns, Major C. Swan\ndeclares that a treaty made with these chiefs would probably be\ncommunicated to all the people of the country, and be believed and\nrelied upon (Schoolcraft V, 263). Subsequent events have shown this to\nbe founded on a misapprehension of the Indian character, which is that\nof the most outspoken individuality.\n\nMajor C. Swan, who only traveled through the country to leave it\nagain, makes the following interesting statement concerning the\npolitical and social status of the disparate tribes composing the\nCreek confederacy (1791; in Schoolcraft V, 259. 260):\n\n\"Their numbers have increased faster by the acquisition of foreign\nsubjects than by the increase of the original stock. It appears long\nto have been a maxim of their policy to give equal liberty and\nprotection to tribes conquered by themselves, as well as to those\nvanquished by others, although many individuals taken in war are\nslaves among them, and their children are called of the slave race,\nand cannot arrive to much honorary distinction in the country, on that\naccount.\"\n\n\nTHE PUBLIC SQUARE.\n\nAll the Creek _towns_, viz., the more populous settlements, had laid\nout a square-shaped piece of ground in or near their central part. It\ncontained the only public buildings of the town, the great house and\nthe council-house, and, as an appurtenance, the play-ground. The\nsquare was the focus of the public and social life of the town; its\npresent Creek name, intch\u00faka `l\u00e1ko, is taken from the \"great house\" as\nits principal portion.\n\nFrom the eighteenth century we possess three descriptions of the\nsquare and the ceremonies enacted in it, which are entering into\ncopious details; that of W. Bartram, describing the square of \u00c1tasi\ntown (about 1775); that of C. Swan, describing that of Odshi-ap\u00f3fa, or\nthe Hickory Ground (1791), and last, but not least, the description of\nthe square at Kaw\u00edta, by B. Hawkins (1799). All the towns differed\nsomewhat in the structure of the great house and of the council-house,\nbut in the subsequent sketch we shall chiefly dwell upon those points\nin which they all seem to agree. Public squares still exist at the\npresent time in some of the pure-blood towns of the Creek nation,\nIndian Territory, and the busk, in its ancient, though slightly\nmodified form, is annually celebrated in them. The ground-plan of the\nsquare at the Hickory Ground is represented in Schoolcraft's Indians\nV, 264.\n\nOf other buildings destined for public use I have found no mention,\nexcept of granaries or corn-cribs, which were under the supervision of\nthe m\u00edko.\n\nThe _great house_, tch\u00faku `l\u00e1ko, also called \"town-house,\" \"public\nsquare,\" like the square in the midst of which it was placed, was\nformed by four one-story buildings of equal size, facing inward, and\nenclosing a square area of about thirty feet on each side.[108] They\nwere generally made to face the east, west, north and south.\n\n    [Footnote 108: Hawkins says: Forty by sixteen feet, eight feet\n    pitch, the entrance at each corner (p. 68).]\n\nThese buildings, which had the appearance of sheds, consisted of a\nwooden frame, supported on posts set in the ground and covered with\nslabs. They were made of the same material as their dwelling houses,\nbut differed by having the front facing the square open, and the walls\nof the back sides had an open space of two feet or more next to the\neaves, to admit a circulation of air. Each house was divided into\nthree apartments, separated by low partitions of clay, making a total\nof twelve partitions. These apartments, called cabins (t\u00f3pa) had\nthree[109] seats, or rather platforms, being broad enough to sleep\nupon; the first of them was about two feet from the ground, the second\neight feet above the first, and the third or back seat eight feet\nabove the second. Over the whole of these seats was spread a covering\nof cane-mats, as large as carpets. They were provided with new\ncoverings every year, just before the busk; and since the old covers\nwere not removed, they had in the majority of the squares eight to\ntwelve coverings, laid one above the other. Milfort states that each\ncabin could seat from forty to sixty persons (M\u00e9moire, p. 203).\n\n    [Footnote 109: Hawkins: two seats.]\n\nCaleb Swan, who, in his above description of the cabins in the square,\ncopied the original seen at Odshi-ap\u00f3fa or Little Talassie, where he\nstopped, differs in several particulars, especially in the allotment\nof the cabins to the authorities, from Hawkins, who resided in Kaw\u00edta.\nSwan assigns the eastern building to the beloved men, the southern to\nthe warriors, the northern to the second men, etc., while the western\nbuilding served for keeping the apparatus for cooking black drink, war\nphysic, and to store lumber. According to Hawkins, the western\nbuilding, fronting east, contained the m\u00edkos and high-ranked people;\nthe northern building was the warriors'; the southern that of the\nbeloved men, and the eastern that of the young people and their\nassociates. \"The cabin of the great chief faces east,\" says Milfort,\np. 203, \"to indicate that he has to watch the interests of his nation\ncontinually.\" The three cabins of the m\u00edkalgi or old men, facing west,\nare the only ones painted white, and are always ornamented with\nguirlands (at Kaw\u00edta). On the post, or on a plank over each cabin, are\npainted the emblems of the gens to which it is allotted; thus the\nbuffalo gens have the buffalo painted on it.\n\nFrom the roofs were dangling on the inside heterogeneous emblems of\npeace and trophies of war, as eagles' feathers, swans' wings, wooden\nscalping knives, war clubs, red-painted wands, bunches of hoops on\nwhich to dry their scalps, bundles of a war-physic called snake-root\n(_s\u00ednika_ in Cheroki), baskets, etc. Rude paintings of warriors' heads\nwith horns, horned rattlesnakes, horned alligators, etc., were visible\nupon the smooth posts and timbers supporting the great house. In the\n\"painted squares\" of some of the red or war-towns the posts and smooth\ntimber were painted red, with white or black edges, this being\nconsidered as a mark of high distinction. Other privileged towns\npossessed a covered square, by which term is meant a bridging over of\nthe entrance spaces left between the four buildings by means of canes\nlaid on poles.\n\nIn the centre of the area of the \"great house\" a perpetual fire was\nburning, fed by four logs, and kept up by public ministrants\nespecially appointed for the purpose. The inside area is called\nimpask\u00f3fa, \"dedicated ground.\"\n\nThe \"square\" was hung over with green boughs, in sign of mourning,\nwhen a man died in the town; no black drink was then taken for four\ndays. When an Indian was killed who belonged to a town which had a\nsquare, black drink had to be taken on the outside of the square, and\nevery ceremony was suspended until the outrage was atoned for. To each\ngreat house belonged a black drink cook, and from the young warriors\ntwo or three men were appointed to attend to those who took this\nliquid every morning; they called the townspeople to this ceremony by\nbeating drums (C. Swan).\n\nAfter the close of their council-meeting in the council-house, the\nm\u00edko, his councillors and warriors repaired to the chief's cabin in\nthe \"great house.\" They met there every day, drank the \u00e1ssi or black\ndrink, continued deliberations on public and domestic affairs,\nattended to complaints and redressed them; then conversed about news\nwhile smoking, or amused themselves at playing \"roll the bullet\" in a\nsort of ten-pin alley. The name of this game is `li-i tchall\u00edtchka.\nBartram, p. 453, states that the chief's cabin at \u00c1tasi was of a\ndifferent construction from the three other buildings.\n\nBut besides being the central point of the town for all meetings of a\npublic character, the great house was the festive place for the annual\nbusk and the daily dance; it occasionally served as a sleeping place\nfor Indians passing through the town on their travels. The special\nlocations allotted to the persons in authority and the gentes on the\ncabin-sheds are described under the heading: The annual busk.\n\nThe _council-house_ or tchuk\u00f3fa `l\u00e1ko stood on a circular mound or\neminence, in close contiguity to the northeast corner of the \"great\nhouse.\" It is variously called by travelers: hot-house, sudatory,\nassembly-room, winter council-house, mountain-house,[110] or, from its\ncircular shape, rotunda. Its appearance is generally described as that\nof a huge cone placed on an octagonal frame about twelve feet high,\nand covered with tufts of bark. Its diameter was from twenty-five to\nthirty feet, and in the larger towns the building could accommodate\nmany hundred persons.[111] Its perpendicular walls were made of thick\nposts, daubed with clay on the outside. Contiguous to the walls, one\nbroad circular seat, made of cane-mats, was going around the structure\non the inside, and in the centre the fire was burning on a small\nelevation of the ground. The fuel consisted of dry cane or dry pine\nslabs split fine; and, as if it were to give a concrete image of the\nwarming rays of the sun, these split canes were disposed in a spiral\nline which exhibited several revolutions around the centre. No opening\nwas provided for the escape of the smoke or the admission of fresh\nair, and the building soon became intolerably hot; but at dance-feasts\nthe natives danced around the fire in the terrible heat and dust,\nwithout the least apparent inconvenience.[112]\n\n    [Footnote 110: Adair, History, p. 421.]\n\n    [Footnote 111: Hawkins, Sketch, p. 71, Bartram, Travels, p. 448\n    sqq.]\n\n    [Footnote 112: Bartram states that the Creek rotundas were of\n    the same architecture as those of the Cheroki, but of much\n    larger dimensions: Travels, p. 449.]\n\nThe council-house served, to some extent, the same purposes as the\n\"great house,\" but was more resorted to in the inclement season than\nin summer. Every night during winter the old and young visited it for\nconversation or dance, and in very cold weather the old and destitute\nwent there to sleep. In all seasons it was the assembly-room of the\nm\u00edko and his counsellors for deliberations of a private character;\nthere they decided upon punishments to be inflicted, as whipping etc.,\nand entrusted the Great Warrior with the execution of the sentences.\nPrevious to a war-expedition the young men visited the hot-house for\nfour days, prepared and drank their war-physic, and sang their war-\nand charm-songs under the leadership of conjurers.[113] Milfort was\ninstalled into the charge of \"Great Warrior of the Nation\" in the\nKaw\u00edta council-house by solemn orations, the smoking of the pipe, the\ndrinking of the \u00e1ssi-decoct and other ceremonies,[114] and then\nconducted to the \"great house.\"\n\n    [Footnote 113: Hawkins, Sketch, p. 79.]\n\n    [Footnote 114: Milfort, M\u00e9moire, p. 211.]\n\nWhen the natives gathered in this structure for sweating, either for\npromoting their health or as a religious ceremony, they developed\nsteam by throwing water on heated stones, then danced around the fire,\nand went to plunge into the chilling waves of the river flowing past\ntheir town.\n\nThe _play-ground_ occupied the northwestern angle of the public\nsquare, and formed an oblong segment of it, of rather irregular shape.\nIt was made distinct from the rest of the square by one or two low\nembankments or terraces; in its centre stood, on a low circular mound,\na four-sided pole or pillar, sometimes forty feet high. A mark\nfastened on its top served at appointed times as a target to shoot at\nwith rifles or arrows. Around the pole the floor of the yard was\nbeaten solid.\n\nThe play-ground, t\u0103\u2032dshu in Creek, was called by the white\ntraders chunkey-yard, chunk-yard, from the principal game played in\nit. This game, the chunkey- or tchungke-game, consisted in throwing a\npole after the _chunke_, a rounded stone which was set rolling upon\nits edge. Cf. Adair, Hist., p. 401. 402. There was also a sort of ball\nplay in use among the Creeks and many other Indian tribes, by which a\nball (p\u00faku) was aimed at an object suspended on the top of a high\npole, or, as it is played now, at the top of two twin poles (puk-\u00e1bi),\ncalled sometimes \"maypoles.\" In summer time dances were also performed\nin this yard, and Bartram saw \"at the corner of each farther end a\nslave-post or strong stake, where the captives that are burnt alive\nare bound.\"[115]\n\n    [Footnote 115: Travels, p. 518.]\n\n\nTHE ANNUAL BUSK.\n\nThe solemn annual festival held by the Creek people of ancient and\nmodern days is the p\u00faskita, a word now passed into provincial English\n(busk); its real meaning is that of _a fast_. In the more important\ntowns it lasted eight days; in towns of minor note four days only, and\nits celebration differed in each town in some particulars. The day on\nwhich to begin it was fixed by the m\u00edko and his council, and depended\non the maturity of the maize crop and on various other circumstances.\nIts celebration took place mainly in the \"great house\" of the public\nsquare, and from Hawkins' description, who saw it celebrated in\nKasi\u03c7ta,[116] we extract the following particulars:\n\n    [Footnote 116: Remember well that Kasi\u03c7ta is a _white_ or\n    _peace town_.]\n\nIn the morning of the _first day_ the warriors clean the area of the\ngreat house and sprinkle it with _white_ sand, at the time when the\nblack drink is being prepared. The fire in the centre is made by\nfriction, very early in the day, by a ministrant especially appointed\nfor the purpose, called the fire-maker. Four logs, as long as the span\nof both arms, are brought to the centre of the area by the warriors,\nand laid down end to end, so as to form a cross. Each end of this\ncross points to one of the cardinal points of the compass. At the spot\nwhere the logs converge, the new fire is kindled and the logs are\nconsumed during the first four days of the p\u00faskita. The women of the\nturkey gens dance the turkey-dance, p\u00ednua op\u00e1nga, while the powerful\nemetic p\u0101\u2032ssa is being brewed. It is drank from noon to\nmid-afternoon, after which the tadpole-dance, toki\u00falka op\u00e1nga, is\ndanced by four males and four females, who are called the toki\u00falka or\n_tadpoles_. In the evening the men dance the dance of the h\u00edniha:\nh\u00edniha op\u00e1nga, and continue it till daylight.\n\nThe _second day_ begins with the performance of the gun-dance, \u00edtch'ha\nop\u00e1nga, danced by females about ten o'clock in the forenoon.[117] At\nnoon the men approach the new fire, rub some of its ashes on the chin,\nneck and belly, jump head foremost into the river, and then return to\nthe great house. Meanwhile the females prepare the new maize for the\nfeast, and the men on arriving rub some of it between their hands,\nthen on their face and breast, after which feasting begins.\n\n    [Footnote 117: The dance is called so, because the men fire off\n    guns during its performance; another name for this dance is\n    tap\u00fatska op\u00e1nga; cf. tapodsh\u00eddsh\u0101s _I am shooting_.]\n\nThe _third day_ the men pass by sitting in the square.\n\nOn the _fourth day_ the women rise early to obtain a spark of the new\nfire; they bring it to their own hearths, which were previously\ncleaned and sprinkled with sand, and then kindle their fires on them.\nWhen the first four logs are consumed, the men repeat the ceremony of\nrubbing the ashes on their chin, neck and belly, and then plunge into\nwater. Subsequently they taste salt and dance the long dance, op\u00e1nga\ntch\u00e1pko.\n\nThe _fifth day_ is devoted to the bringing in of four other logs,\nwhich are disposed and kindled as aforementioned, and then the men\ndrink \u00e1ssi.\n\nOn the _sixth_ and _seventh day_ the men remain in the \"great house.\"\n\nThe ceremonies of the _eighth_ or _last day_ in the square and outside\nof it are of a peculiarly impressive character. Fourteen species of\nphysic plants are placed in two pots containing water, then stirred\nand beaten up in it. After the aliktch\u00e1lgi or conjurers have blown\ninto the mixture through a small reed, the men drink of the liquid and\nrub it over their joints till afternoon. The names of the medical\nplants were as follows:\n\n     1. m\u00edko huyan\u012b\u2032tcha.\n\n     2. t\u00f3la or sweet bay.\n\n     3. atch\u00edna or cedar (the leaves of it).\n\n     4. kapap\u00e1ska, a shrub with red berries.\n\n     5. tchul'-\u00edssa; signifies: \"pine-leaves.\"\n\n     6. at\u00e1k`la l\u00e1sti, a shrub with black berries.\n\n     7. t\u00fatka h\u00edlissua, the \"fire-physic.\"\n\n     8. tch\u00fafi ins\u00e1kka \u00e1faga, \"rabbit-basket-string,\" a vine-like\n        plant resembling the strawberry plant.\n\n     9. tch\u00fafi m\u00e1si, a species of cane.\n\n     10. h\u00edlissua h\u00e1tki, the \"white physic\"; abbrev. h\u00edlis'-h\u00e1tki.\n\n     11. t\u00fatka tch\u00f3kishi, a moss species.\n\n     12. u-i l\u00e1ni, \"yellow water\": the Jerusalem oak.\n\n     13. oktchan\u00e1tchku, a rock-moss.\n\n     14. k\u00f3ha low\u00e1gi \"switch cane, limber cane.\"\n\nTo these plants the modern Creeks add, as a fifteenth one, the\np\u0101\u2032ssa; cf. below.\n\nThen another singular mixture is prepared, of which the ingredients\nmust have been of symbolic significance: Old maize cobs and pine burs\nare placed in a pot and burned to ashes. Four girls below the age of\npuberty bring ashes from home, put them in the pot, and stir up all\ntogether, after which the men mix white clay with water in two pans.\nOne pan of the wet clay and another of the ashes are brought to the\nm\u00edko's cabin, the other two to that of the warriors, who rub\nthemselves with the contents of both. Two men appointed to that office\nthen bring flowers of \"old man's tobacco,\" \u00edsti atch\u00fali p\u00e1kpagi,\nprepared on the first day of the busk, in a pan to the m\u00edko's cabin,\nand a particle of it is given to every person present. Upon this the\nm\u00edko and his councillors walk four times around the burning logs,\nthrowing some of the \"old man's tobacco\" into the fire each time they\nface the east, and then stop while facing the west. The warriors then\nrepeat the same ceremony.\n\nAt the m\u00edko's cabin a cane having two white feathers on its end is\nstuck out. At the moment when the sun sets, a man of the fish gens\ntakes it down, and walks, followed by all spectators, toward the\nriver. Having gone half way, he utters the death-whoop, and repeats it\nfour times before he reaches the water's edge. After the crowd has\nthickly congregated at the bank, each person places a grain of \"old\nman's tobacco\" on the head and others in each ear. Then, at a signal\nrepeated four times, they throw some of it into the river, and every\nman, at a like signal, plunges into the water, to pick up four stones\nfrom the bottom. With these they cross themselves on their breasts\nfour times, each time throwing one of the stones back into the river\nand uttering the death-whoop. Then they wash themselves, take up the\ncane with the feathers, return to the great house, where they stick it\nup, then walk through the town visiting.\n\nThe mad dance, op\u00e1nga h\u00e1dsho, is performed after night-fall, and this\nterminates the long ceremony.\n\nThe celebration of the p\u00faskita had a favorable influence upon the\nminds of the people, for it was a signal of amnesty, absolving the\nIndian of all crimes, murder excepted, and seemed to bury guilt itself\nin oblivion. All former quarrels and hatred were forgotten and man\nrestored to himself and to the community. Indians renewing past\nquarrels after this solemn festival, were severely reprimanded by\nothers. This change of mind was symbolized by the custom of the women\nof breaking to pieces all the household utensils of the past year, and\nreplacing them by new ones; the men refitted all their property so as\nto look new, and it was considered extremely disgraceful, even for the\nmost indigent, to eat any of the new maize before the annual busk\n(Sketch, pp. 75-78).[118]\n\n    [Footnote 118: For further particulars of the medicine-plants,\n    see the items in the Notes and in the Creek Glossary.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe foregoing sketch would be incomplete without the addition of\nanother account of a four days' puskita, which C. Swan witnessed at\nOdshi-ap\u00f3fa, near the confluence of the Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers;\nit explains and amplifies many of the incidents related by Hawkins.\n\nThe account inserted in Swan's article (Schoolcraft, Indians V, 267.\n268) is signed \"Anthony Alex. M'Gillivray,\" who was then a chief of\nthe nation, and related by marriage to Milfort. We gather from his\nstatements, that at Odshi-ap\u00f3fa or \"Hickory Ground,\" which is a\n_white_ town also, the \"priest, or fire-maker of the town\" had the\nprivilege of determining the days of the busk, and that in doing so he\nwas led by the ripening of the maize-crop and by the growth of the\ncassine-shrub. At the break of the _first_ day he went to the square,\nunattended by others, dressed in _white_ leather moccasins and\nstockings, with a _white_ dressed deer-skin over his shoulders, and\nproduced there the new fire, by the friction of two dry pieces of\nwood. When the spark was blazing up, four young men entered the area\nat the openings of its four corners, each holding a stick of wood;\nthey approached the new fire with high reverence, and placed the ends\nof their sticks to it \"in a very formal manner.\" Then four other young\nmen came forward in the same manner, each holding an ear of the\nnewly-ripened Indian corn, which the conjurer took from them and with\nformalities threw into the fire. Then four other men entered the\nsquare in the same manner, carrying branches of the new cassine, some\nof which the priest threw into the fire, the rest being immediately\nparched and cooked for ceremonial use. The mysterious jargon which he\nmuttered during this ceremonial act was supposed to form a\nconversation with the great \"master of breath.\"\n\nThe male population having in the meantime gathered in the cabins, the\nprepared black drink is served to them, and sparks of the new fire are\ncarried and left outside the buildings for public use. The women bring\nit to their homes, which they have cleaned and decorated the day\nbefore for the occasion by extinguishing the old fires and removing\ntheir ashes throughout the town. They are forbidden to step into the\nsquare, but dance with the children on its outside. On the _second_\nday the men take their war-physic, a decoction of the button-snake\nroot, in such quantities as would produce strong spasmodic effects.\nThe _third_ day is spent by the older men in the square, in taking\nblack drink, etc., by the young men in hunting or fishing for the last\nday of the festival. The females pass the first three days in bathing,\nand it is unlawful for the males to touch any of them even with the\ntip of the finger. Both sexes are compelled to abstain rigidly from\nany food, especially from _salt_. The _fourth_ day all classes\ncongregate in the \"great house\" promiscuously; the game killed on the\nprevious day is given to the public, and the women are cooking the\nprovisions brought in from all sides, over the new fire. After this\nconvivial day the evening dances conclude the annual festivity. Any\nprovisions left over are given to the \"fire-maker.\"\n\nLess circumstantial descriptions of this curious ceremony, which is\nfrequently called from analogy the \"green corn dance,\" are contained\nin Adair's History, Argument VIII, in Bartram, Travels, pp. 507. 508,\nin Milfort and many other writers. It appears from all that the busk\nis not a solstitial celebration, but a rejoicing over the first fruits\nof the year. The new year begins with the busk, which is celebrated in\nAugust or late in July. Every town celebrated its busk at a period\nindependent from that of the other towns, whenever their crops had\ncome to maturity.\n\nReligious ideas were connected with the festival, for the benefits\nimparted to mankind by the new fruits were the gifts of the sun, which\nwas symbolized by the fire burning in the centre of the square. The\nnew fire meant the new life, physical and moral, which had to begin\nwith the new year. Everything had to be new or renewed; even the\ngarments worn heretofore were given to the flames. The pardon granted\nto offenders gave them a chance to begin a new and better course of\nlife. It was unlawful to pass between the fire in the area and the\nrising sun, for this would have interrupted the mystic communication\nexisting between the two. The rigorous fasting observed also fitted\nthe people to prepare for a new moral life, and made them more\nreceptive for the supernatural; the convivial scene which closed the\nbusk typified the idea that all men, whether low or high, are born\nbrethren. The black drink was the symbol of purification from\nwickedness, of prowess in war and of friendship and hospitality.\n\nAlthough the ritual of the busk differed in every Creek tribe, many\nanalogies can be traced with well-known customs among the Aztec and\nMaya nations, whose \"unlucky five days\" at the year's close equally\nterminated with rejoicings, as the precursors of a new life.\n\n\nFURTHER ETHNOGRAPHIC NOTES.\n\nAbundant material for the study of ethnography is on hand for the\nearlier and later periods of the Creek nation; but here we have to\nrestrict ourselves to some points which are especially adapted to the\nillustration of the migration legends. The relation of husband to wife\nand family being the foundation of all tribal, social and political\nlife, should certainly be treated as fully as it deserves, but in this\ncontext only incident notes can be given on this subject.\n\n_Condition of Females._--Although succession among all Maskoki tribes\nwas in the female line, the females occupied a subordinate condition\namong the Creeks, and in their households were subjected, like those\nof other Indians, to a life of drudgery. Divorces were of frequent\noccurrence.\n\nOn the first days of the busk females were not permitted to enter the\narea of the square, nor were they admitted to the council-house\nwhenever the men were sitting in council or attending to the\nconjurer's performances. The women were assigned a bathing place in\nthe river-currents at some distance below the men. It is also stated\nthat a woman had the privilege of killing her offspring during the\nfirst lunation after the birth, but when she did so after that term\nshe was put to death herself.[119] This may have been the practice in\na few Creek tribes, but it is doubtful that such was the general law\nin all, except in regard to illegitimate offspring.\n\n    [Footnote 119: Milfort, M\u00e9m., p. 251.]\n\nThe occupations of Creek women are described by Cpt. B. Romans, p. 96\n(1775), in the following succinct form:\n\n\"The women are employed, besides the cultivation of the earth, in\ndressing the victuals, preparing, scraping, braining, rubbing and\nsmoaking the Roe-skins, making macksens of them, spinning buffaloe\nwool, making salt, preparing cassine drink, drying the _cham\u00e6rops_ and\n_passiflora_, making cold flour for traveling, gathering nuts and\nmaking their milk; likewise in making baskets, brooms, pots, bowls and\nother earthen and wooden vessels.\"\n\n_Initiation._--Indian parents bring up their children in a manner\nwhich better deserves the name of training than that of education.\nThey think children become best fitted for future life when they can,\nfor a certain period of their ages, roam around at will and act at\ntheir own pleasure. They do not reprobate or punish them for any\nwanton act they may commit; hence the licentiousness of both sexes up\nto the time of marriage, and the comparative want of discipline among\nwarriors on their expeditions. But the boys were taught to harden\ntheir constitutions against the inclemencies of the seasons and the\nprivations in war, and this result they most successfully attained by\nthe so-called _initiation_, and also by continued bodily exercise\nbefore and after that solemn period of their lives. B. Romans (1775)\nsketches the training of the Creek youths in the following words (p.\n96): \"Creeks make the boys swim in the coldest weather; make them\nfrequently undergo scratching from head to foot, through the skin,\nwith broken glass or gar-fish teeth[120], so as to make them all in a\ngore of blood, and then wash them with cold water; this is with them\nthe _arcanum_ against all diseases; but when they design it as a\npunishment to the boys, they dry-scratch them, _i. e._, they apply no\nwater after the operation, which renders it very painful. They\nendeavor ... to teach them all manner of cruelty toward brutes,\" etc.\n\n    [Footnote 120: Also practiced once a year upon the Shetimasha\n    warriors, on their knee-joints, by men expressly appointed to\n    this manipulation.]\n\nThis sort of treatment must have been abundantly productive of\nrheumatism and other affections, though we have many instances of\nCreek Indians reaching a high age. Of the _initiation_ which the Creek\nboys underwent before attaining their seventeenth year, B. Hawkins\ngives a full and circumstantial account, which shows that\nsuperstitions had entered into the customs of private life of the\nCreeks as deeply as they had into those of other Indian tribes.\n\nThe ceremony of initiating youth into manhood, says B. Hawkins[121],\nis usually performed at the age from fifteen to seventeen, and is\ncalled puskita (_fasting_), like the busk of the nation. A youth of\nthe proper age gathers two handfuls of the sow\u00e1tchko plant, which\nintoxicates and maddens, and eats this very bitter root for a whole\nday, after which he steeps the leaves in water and drinks from this.\nAfter sunset he eats two or three spoonfuls of boiled grits.[122] He\nremains in a house for four days, during which the above performances\nare repeated. Putting on a new pair of moccasins (stillipa\u00ed\u03c7a), he\nleaves the cabin, and during twelve moons abstains from eating the\nmeat of young bucks, of turkey-cocks, fowls, peas and salt, and is\nalso forbidden to pick his ears and to scratch his head with his\nfingers, but must use a small splinter to perform these operations.\nBoiled grits--the only food allowed to him during the first four\nmoons--may be cooked for him by a little girl, but on a fire kindled\nespecially for his own use. From the fifth month any person may cook\nfor him, but he has to serve himself first, using one pan and spoon\nonly. Every new moon he drinks the p\u0101\u2032ssa or button-snake root,\nan emetic, for four days, and takes no food except some boiled grits,\nh\u00fampita h\u00e1tki, in the evening. At the commencement of the twelfth\nlunation he performs for four days the same rites as he did at the\nbeginning of the initiation, but on the fifth he leaves the cabin,\ngathers maize-cobs, burns them to ashes, and with these rubs his whole\nbody. At the end of the moon he elicits transpiration by sleeping\nunder blankets, then goes into cold water, an act which ends the\nceremony. The herb medicines are administered to him by the \u00edsti\npak\u0101\u2032dsha `l\u00e1ko or \"great leader,\" who, when speaking of him,\nsays: pusidshedsh\u0113\u2032yi sanatchumitch\u00e4\u2032tch\u00e4-is,[123] \"I am\npassing him through the physicking process repeatedly,\" or: n\u00e1ki\nom\u00e1lga imaki`l\u00e4\u2032dsh\u00e4yi s\u00e1`lit \u00f3m\u00e4s, tch\u00ed, \"I am teaching him all the\nmatters proper for him to think of.\" If he has a dream during this\ncourse of initiation, he has to drink from the p\u0101\u2032ssa, and dares\nnot touch any persons, save boys who are under a like course. This\ncourse is sometimes shortened to a few months, even to twelve days\nonly, but the performances are the same.\n\n    [Footnote 121: Sketch of the Creek Country, pp. 78. 79.]\n\n    [Footnote 122: Maize pounded into grits.]\n\n    [Footnote 123: Slightly altered from the words given by Hawkins.]\n\nThe purpose of the initiation of boys, corresponding to the\nfirst-menstruation rites of females, was the spiritual as well as the\nphysical strengthening of the individual. While the physical exposures\nand privations were thought to render him strong in body and fearless\nin battle, the dreams coming upon him, in consequence of the\nexhaustion by hunger and maddening by all sorts of physic, were\nsupposed to furnish him visions, which would reveal to him enchanting\nviews for future life, material riches and the ways to acquire them,\nthe principles of bravery and persistence, the modes of charming\nenemies and game at a distance, of obtaining scalps, and prospects of\ngeneral happiness and of a respected position in his tribe.[124]\n\n    [Footnote 124: Cf. what is said of the initiation of the ahop\u00e1yi\n    and im\u00edsi, pp. 159. 165.]\n\n_Commemorative Beads._--To perpetuate the memory of historical facts,\nas epidemics, tribal wars, migrations, the Creeks possessed the\npictorial or ideographic writing, the material generally used for it\nbeing tanned skins. Besides this, which was common to the majority of\nIndian tribes of North America, Milfort (pp. 47-49) mentions another\nmode of transmitting facts to posterity, which shows a certain analogy\nwith the wampum-belts of the Iroquois and Algonkin tribes.\n\nIt consisted of strings of small beads, in shape of a narrow ribbon\n(_banderole_) or rosary (_chapelet_). The beads are described as being\nsimilar to those called _Cayenne pearls_ in Milfort's time, varying in\ncolor, the grains being strung up one after the other. The\nsignification of each bead was determined by its shape and the\nposition it occupied in its order of sequence. Only the principal\nevents were recorded by these beads, and without any historic detail;\nhence a single string often sufficed to recall the history of twenty\nor twenty-five years. The events of each year were kept strictly\ndistinct from the events of any subsequent year by a certain\narrangement of the grains, and thus the strings proved reliable\ndocuments as to the chronology of tribal events. The oldest of the\nm\u00edkalgi (_les chefs des vieillards_) often recounted to Milfort, who\nhad risen to the dignity of \"chief warrior\" in the nation, episodes of\nearly Creek history, suggested to them by these \"national archives.\"\n\nMany old traditions of historic importance must have been embodied in\nthese records; but the only one given by Milfort, referring to the\nemigration of the Creeks from their ancient cave-homes along Red\nriver, is so mixed up with incredible matter, that the fixation of the\nevents, as far as then remembered, must have taken place many\ngenerations after the arrival of the Creeks in their Alabama homes.\nMilfort himself, at the head of two hundred Creek men, undertook an\nexpedition to that renowned spot, to gratify himself and his\ncompanions with the sight of the place itself from which the nation\nhad sprung forth, and all this solely on the strength of the belief\nwhich these bead-strings had inspired in his companions.\n\nFurther notices on Creek ethnology may be found in _B. F. French_,\nHist. Collect. of Louisiana, III, 128-139, in the \"Notes;\" also in\nUrlsperger's \"Nachricht,\" Vol. I, chapter 5, 859-868, a passage\ndescribing especially Y\u00e1massi customs.\n\n\nNOTES ON CREEK HISTORY.\n\nTo offer a history of the Creek tribe from its discovery down to our\nepoch to the readers does not lie within the scope of this volume, and\nfor want of sufficient documents illustrating the earlier periods it\ncould be presented in a fragmentary manner only. But a few notes on\nthe subject, especially on the Oglethorpe treaties, will be of\ninterest to the reader.\n\nIn the year following their departure from the West Indies (1540), the\ntroops led by H. de Soto traversed a portion of the Creek territory,\ntaken in its extent as known to us from the end of the eighteenth\ncentury. De Soto's presence is proved by the mention of Creek tribes\nbearing Creek names in the reports of his three chroniclers. The most\ncircumstantial report in topography is that of the Knight of Elvas. He\nstates that de Soto's army usually marched five to six leagues a day\nin peopled countries, but when passing through deserted lands\nproceeded faster. From Chiaha H. de Soto reached Coste in seven days.\nFrom Tali, probably contiguous to Coste, he marched for six days,\nthrough many towns, to Co\u00e7a, arriving there July 26th, 1540. Leaving\nthis town after a stay of twenty-five days, he reached Tallimuchase on\nthe same day, Ytava on the next, and had to remain there six days, on\naccount of a freshet in the river. Having crossed the river he reached\nUllibahali town, fortified by a wooden wall, and on the next day\nstopped at a town subject to the lord of Ullibahali, to reach Toasi\nthe day after. Then he traversed the Tallise \"province,\" peopled with\nmany towns, and entered the great pueblo of Tallise on September 18th,\nto stay there twenty days. Many other towns were visible on the\nopposite side of the \"maine river,\" on which Tallisi[125] stood. On\nleaving this pueblo he reached Casiste on the same day, and Tuscalusa,\nwhose chief was lord of many territories, after another march of two\ndays. From there Piache, on a great river, was reached in two days,\nand Mavila in three days from Piache. De Soto arrived in Mavila on\nOctober 18th, and the whole distance from Co\u00e7a to Tuscalusa is\ncomputed by the Knight of Elvas at sixty leagues, the direction of the\nroute being from north to south. In this particular Biedma differs\nfrom him.\n\n    [Footnote 125: Italis\u00ed, var. lect.]\n\nThe villages of Chiaha (Chisca, Ychiaha, China, var. lect.) and of\nCoste (Costehe, Acostehe) provinces were fortified and stood on\nriver-islands. This latter circumstance makes it probable that they\nlay on Tennessee river, and hence were held by Cheroki Indians. Tali\nis either the Creek term tali _dry, exsiccated_, or the Cha'hta tali\n_rock_. Co\u00e7a, then in a flourishing condition, is the town of K\u00fasa.\nTalli-muchasi, or \"Newtown,\" near Co\u00e7a, is clearly a Creek term, and\nso is Ytava, It\u00e1wa, which I take for the imperfectly articulated\nit\u00e1lua, _tribe_. Toasi is, I think, the town of Tawasa, which was one\nof the Alibamu villages, q. v., and lay on the southern shore of the\nAlabama river.\n\nTallisi is undoubtedly Talua-h\u00e1ssi, \"old town,\" but which one of the\nnumerous settlements of this name it may have been is now impossible\nto determine. Casiste resembles Kas\u00ed'hta, but cannot have been\nKas\u00ed\u03c7ta on Chatahuchi river, for de Soto reached Tuskalusa or \"Black\nWarrior,\" which I take to be a town on the river of that name, within\ntwo days from Casiste, traveling west.[126] Piache, if Creek, could\nbe api-\u00fadshi _little pole, small tree_. Garcilaso de la Vega states\nthat Tascalusa was on the same river (?) as Tallisi and below it. The\ndocuments of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries frequently give\nnames of localities and tribes to the local chiefs, as was done here\nin the case of Tascalusa, Mavila, Alimamu and others. Ch\u00edaha is a\nCheroki name, and is explained elsewhere as \"place of otters.\" Some\nmodern critics believe that de Soto's army did not cross the mountains\ninto what is now North Carolina and Tennessee, the \"over-hill\" seats\nof the Cheroki people, but only skirted the southern slope of the\nApalachian ridge by passing through Northern Georgia west into\nNorthern Alabama, and then descending Coosa river. In order to\ndetermine de Soto's route in these parts, we have to decide first,\nwhether the days and directions of the compass noted by his\nchroniclers deserve more credence than the local names transmitted in\ncases when both form conflicting statements. The names of localities\ncould not be pure inventions; they prove by themselves, that tribes\nspeaking Creek or Maskoki proper were encountered by the adventurous\nleader in the same tracts where we find them at the beginning of this\nnineteenth century. It follows from this that the Creek immigration\nfrom the west or northwest, if such an event ever occurred within the\nlast two thousand years, must have preceded the time of de Soto's\nvisit by a long lapse of time. Thus the terms it\u00e1lua, tal\u00f3fa, tal\u00e1ssi\nbelong to the Creek dialect only; had H. de Soto been in a country\nspeaking a Hitchiti dialect, he would have heard, instead of these,\nthe term \u00f3kli, and instead of t\u00e1lua m\u00fatchasi: \u00f3kli him\u00e1shi.[127]\n\n    [Footnote 126: For Casiste compare K\u00f3sisti, a term appearing in\n    Creek war-titles; its signification is unknown.]\n\n    [Footnote 127: When stopping at Ullibahali, he was in the\n    country of the Alibamu, for \u00f3la, \u00fala is the term for _town_ in\n    their dialect. Cf. p. 85 (Note).]\n\nIn 1559 another Spanish leader, Tristan de Luna, disembarked in or\nnear Mobile bay, then went north in quest of gold and treasure,\nreached Nanipacna, or \"pueblo Santa Cruz de Nanipacna,\" and from there\narrived, after experiencing many privations and trials, among the\nCo\u00e7as, who were then engaged in warfare with the Napochies\n(na\u207fpissa? cf. Chicasa). He made a treaty of alliance with the\nCo\u00e7as, and deemed it prudent to return. The distance from Co\u00e7a to\nNanipacna was twelve days, from there to the harbor three days'\nmarch.[128]\n\n    [Footnote 128: Cf. Barcia, Ensayo, p. 37. The report is almost\n    entirely devoid of local names, which alone could give\n    indications upon the route traveled over.]\n\nIn 1567 Captain Juan del Pardo set out from St. Helena, near\nCharleston Harbor, S. C., on an exploration tour with a small\ndetachment, following partly the same aboriginal trail which had\nguided de Soto through the wastes of Georgia and the Cheroki country.\nOn leaving the banks of the Tennessee river, he turned south, touching\nKossa, a sort of a capital (evidently K\u00fasa), then Tasqui, Tasquiqui\nand Olitifar. These are the only names of places mentioned by his\nchronicler, Juan de la Vandera (1569), which refer to the Creek\ncountry. Tasquiqui cannot be anything else but Task\u00edgi, near the\njunction of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers.\n\nFrom the beginning of the eighteenth century the French, Spanish and\nBritish _colonists_ endeavored to win over the tribes of the\nconfederacy to their interests. The Spaniards established in Northern\nFlorida paid honors to the \"emperor of the Cowetas,\" therewith hoping\nto influence all the Lower and Upper Creeks, and in 1710 received\nKaw\u00edta delegates with distinction at St. Augustine. After the conflict\nwith the Spaniards the British established Fort Moore for trading\npurposes among the Lower Creeks. In 1713 chiefs of the Alibamu,\nKoass\u00e1ti and other tribes visited the French colony at Mobile, entered\ninto friendly relations, invited them to construct Fort Alibamu, also\ncalled Fort Toulouse, near Odshi-ap\u00f3fa, q. v., and were helpful in\nerecting it. The French entertained a small garrison and a trader's\npost there, and subsequently the fort was called Fort Jackson.\n\nThe first British _treaty_ with the Creeks was concluded by James\nOglethorpe, Governor of the Carolinas. He set out May 14th, 1733, from\nCharleston, his residence, and on May 18th met in council the\nrepresentatives of the Lower Creek tribes at Savannah. During the\nmeeting many facts of interest were elicited. The Creeks then claimed\nthe territory extending from the Savannah river to the Flint river,\nand south to St. Augustine, stating that their former number of ten\ntribes had been reduced to eight. Wikatch\u00e1mpa, the Ok\u00f3ni m\u00edko,\nproclaimed that his tribe would peaceably cede to the British all\nlands not needed by themselves. The Yamacraw chief Tomochichi, then\nbanished from one of the Lower Creek towns, spoke in favor of making a\ntreaty with the foreigners, and Yah\u00f3la `l\u00e1ko, m\u00edko of Kaw\u00edta, allowed\nTomochichi and his relatives \"to call the kindred, that love them, out\nof each of the Creek towns, that they may come together and make one\ntown. We must pray you to recall the Yamasees, that they may be buried\nin peace among their ancestors, and that they may see their graves\nbefore they die; and our own nation (of the Lower Creeks) shall be\nrestored again to its ten towns.\" The treaty of land-cession, commerce\nand alliance was signed May 21st, and ratified by the trustees of the\ncolony of Georgia, October 18th, 1733. It stipulated a cession of the\nlands between the Savannah and Altamaha rivers, and of some islands on\nthe Atlantic coast, to the British; it further stipulated promises to\nenter into a commercial treaty at a later date, to place themselves\nunder the general government of Great Britain, to live in peace with\nthe colonies, to capture runaway slaves and deliver them at\nCharleston, Savannah or Palachukla garrison for a consideration. The\ntreaty was confirmed by pledges on the side of the Creeks, which\nconsisted in a bundle of buckskins for each town, whereas the English\nmade presents of arms, garments, etc., in return. The Indians\nexpressed a desire of receiving instruction through teachers, and the\nsuccess obtained in concluding this first treaty was mainly\nattributed to the influence of Tomochichi upon his fellow-countrymen.\nThe eight tribes represented were Kaw\u00edta, Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta, \u00d3sutchi, Ch\u00edaha,\nH\u00edtchiti, Apalatch\u00fakla, Ok\u00f3ni, Yuf\u00e1la. The \"two lost towns\" were\ncertainly not those of the S\u00e1wokli and Yuchi, although these do not\nfigure in the list. Only one of the headmen signing the treaty of 1733\nfigures in the prooemium of our legend (written in 1735): \"Tomaumi,\nhead warrior of Yuf\u00e1la, with three warriors;\" he is identical with\nTam\u00f3kmi, war captain of the Eufantees (in 1735). Chekilli is not\nmentioned.\n\nThe above treaty is printed in: Political State of Great Britain, vol.\n46, p. 237 sqq; extract in C. C. Jones, Tomochichi, pp. 27-37.\n\nAlthough encouraged by this first successful meeting with the Creeks,\nthe colonists knew so well the fickleness of the Indian character that\nthey were distrustful of the steadiness of their promises, and thus\nsought to renew the friendly relations with them as often as possible.\n\nA convention was arranged with the chiefs of the Lower Creeks at\nSavannah in 1735, during which the legend of the Kasi\u03c7ta migration\nwas delivered, but it does not appear whether any new treaty\nstipulations were mooted or not at that meeting.\n\nJust after his return from England, Governor Oglethorpe again came to\nSavannah on October 13th, 1738, to meet in council the m\u00edkos of\nCh\u00edaha, Okm\u00falgi, \u00d3tchisi and Apalatch\u00fakla, who were accompanied by\nthirty warriors and fifty-two attendants. They assured him of their\nfirm and continued attachment to the crown, and notified him that\ndeputies of the remaining towns would come down to see him, and that\none thousand warriors of theirs were at his disposal. They also\nrequested that brass weights and sealed measures should be deposited\nwith the m\u00edkos of each town, to preclude the traders settled among\nthem from cheating.\n\nOn the 17th of July, 1739, Oglethorpe with a large retinue started to\nmeet the Creeks in their own country, at Kaw\u00edta. He traveled up\nSavannah river to the Yuchi town, twenty-five miles above Ebenezer,\nthen followed the inland trail, for two hundred miles, without meeting\nany Indians. The council lasted from August 11th to 21st, and\nterminated in a treaty, by which the towns renewed their \"fealty\" to\nthe king of Great Britain, and confirmed their cessions of territory,\nwhile Oglethorpe engaged that the British should not encroach upon\ntheir reserved lands, and that their traders should deal fairly and\nhonestly with the Indians. The towns on Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers\nparticipated in the treaty.[129]\n\n    [Footnote 129: Cf. C. C. Jones, Tomochichi, pp. 113-119.]\n\nIt may be regarded as a consequence of this compact, that Creek\nwarriors joined the British as auxiliaries in the expedition against\nSt. Augustine in 1742.\n\nImportant and detailed information on the relations of the Creeks and\nall other Southern tribes with the British and French settlers of\ncolonial times may be found in the documents preserved at the State\nPaper Office, London. The contents of such papers as relate more\nespecially to South Carolina are hinted at in numerous abstracts of\nthem given in a catalogue in _Collections of South Carolina Historical\nSociety_, Vols. I, II, Charleston, 8vo (Vol. II published in 1858);\ncf. II, 272. 297-298. 315-317. 322, etc. Compare also W. de Brahm's\nwritings, mentioned in: Appendices.\n\nAn incomplete and unsatisfactory, though curious list of the elements\nthen (1771) composing the Maskoki confederacy and of its _western\nallies_ is contained in B. Romans, East and West Florida (p. 90). The\npassage first alludes to the Seminoles as allies, and then continues:\n\"They are a mixture of the remains of the Cawittas, Talepoosas,\nCoosas, Apalachias, Conshacs or Coosades, Oakmulgis, Oconis, Okchoys,\nAlibamons, Natchez, Weetumkus, Pakanas, Ta\u00ebnsas, Chacsihoomas, Ab\u00e9kas\nand some other tribes whose names I do not recollect.\"\n\nAn interesting point in early Creek history is the settlement of\n_Cheroki_ Indians in Georgia, and their removal from there through the\nirruption of the Creeks. W. Bartram, Travels, p. 518, in describing\nthe mounds of the country, states \"that the region lying between\nSavanna river and Oakmulge, east and west, and from the sea coast (of\nthe Atlantic) to the Cherokee or Apalachean mountains (filled with\nthese mounds) was possessed by the Cherokees since the arrival of the\nEuropeans; but they were afterwards dispossessed by the Muscogulges,\nand all that country was probably, many ages preceding the Cherokee\ninvasion, inhabited by one nation or confederacy (unknown to the\nCherokees, Creeks) ... etc.\" In another passage he gives a tradition\nof the Creeks, according to which an ancient town once built on the\neast bank of the Okm\u00falgi, near the old trading road, was their first\nsettlement in these parts after their emigration from the west.\n\nThe topographic names from the Cheroki language throughout Georgia\ntestify strongly to the presence of Cheroki Indians in these\ncountries. The tracts on the Ok\u00f3ni and Okm\u00falgi are nearer to the seats\nof the \u00c9lati Cheroki than the Creek settlements on Coosa and\nTallapoosa rivers, where Cheroki local names occur also.\n\nThe legend reported by C. Swan (Schoolcraft V, 259) that the Creeks\nmigrated from the northwest to the Seminole country, then back to\nOkm\u00falgi, Tallapoosa and Coosa rivers, deserves no credit, or applies\nto small bodies of Indians only.\n\nFrom an ancient tradition John Haywood[130] relates the fact (pp.\n237-241) that when the Cheroki Indians first settled in Tennessee,\nthey found no other red people living on Tennessee river, except a\nlarge body of Creeks near the influx of Hiwassee river (and some\nShawanese on Cumberland river). They had settled \"at the island on the\nCreek path,\" meaning a ford of the Great Tennessee river, also called\n\"the Creek crossing,\" near the Alabama State border. At first they\nlived at peace with them, but subsequently attacked them, to drive\nthem out of the country. By stratagem they drew them from their\nisland, with all the canoes in their possession, to a place where\nothers lay in ambush for them, engaged them in battle, took away their\ncanoes to pass over to the island, and destroyed there all the\nproperty of the tribe. The enfeebled Creeks then left the country and\nwent to the Coosa river.\n\n    [Footnote 130: John Haywood, the Natural and Aboriginal History\n    of Tennessee (up to 1768). Nashville, 1823.]\n\nThe Broad river, a western affluent of Savannah river, formed for many\nyears the boundary between the Cheroki and the eastern Creeks. It\nfigures as such in Mouson's map of 1773.\n\nThe Creeks remained under the influence of the British government\nuntil after the American Revolutionary war, and in many conflicts\nshowed their hostility to the thirteen states struggling for\nindependence. Thus they acted in the British interest when they made a\nnight attack on General Wayne's army, in 1782, led by Guristersigo,\nnear the Savannah river. An attack on Buchanan's station was made by\nCreek and Cheroki warriors near Nashville, Tenn., in 1792. Treaties\nwere concluded with them by the United States at New York, August 7th,\n1790, and at Coleraine, Georgia, June 29th, 1796. An article of these\nstipulated the return of captured whites, and of negro slaves and\nproperty to their owners in Georgia. Trading and military posts were\nestablished among them, and an agent of the Government began to reside\nin one of their towns. Further cessions of Creek lands are recorded\nfor 1802 and 1805.\n\nInstigated by the impassionate speeches of Tecumseh, the Sh\u00e1wano\nleader, the Upper Creeks, assisted by a few Yuchi and S\u00e1wokli Indians,\nrevolted in 1813 and massacred the American garrison at Fort Mimms,\nnear Mobile bay, Alabama, on August 30th of that year. General A.\nJackson's army subdued the revolt, after many bloody victories, in the\nbattle of the Horse-Shoe Bend, and by taking Pensacola, the seaport\nfrom which the Spaniards had supplied the insurrection with arms. A\npeace treaty was concluded on August 9th, 1814, embodying the cession\nof the Creek lands west of Coosa river. Surrounded as they were by\nwhite settlements on all sides, this revolt, known also as the Red\nStick War, was the last consequential sign of reaction of the\naboriginal Creek mind against civilizing influences.\n\nPrevious to the departure from their lands in the Gulf States to the\nIndian Territory (1836-1840), scattering bands of the Creeks joined\nthe Seminoles in 1836, while others took arms against the United\nStates to attack the border settlements and villages in Georgia and\nAlabama. These were soon annihilated by General Scott. The treaty of\ncession is dated April 4th, 1832, and the lands then granted to them\nin their new homes embraced an area of seven millions of acres. On\nOctober 11th, 1832, the Apalachicola tribe renewed a prior agreement\nto remove to the west of Mississippi river, and to surrender their\ninherited lands at the mouth of the Apalachicola river. Only 744\nCreeks remained east of the Mississippi river.\n\nAt the outbreak of the Secession war, in 1861, the Creeks separated\ninto two hostile parties. Chief Hop\u00f3`li yah\u00f3la with about 8000 Creeks\nadhered firmly to the Union cause, and at the head of about 800 of his\nwarriors, aided by auxiliary troops, he defeated the Confederate party\nin one engagement; but in a second action he was defeated, and with\nhis followers fled into Kansas. Both rencontres took place in the\nterritory of the Cheroki Indians, in November and December, 1861.\n\nThe statistic dates of the Creek population given before B. Hawkins'\ntime are mere estimates. In 1732 Governor Oglethorpe reported 1300\nwarriors in eight towns of the Lower Creeks (Schoolcraft V, 263. 278),\nand in 1791 all the Creek \"gun-men\" were estimated to number between\n5000 and 6000; the same number is given for these in the census of\n1832 (Schoolcraft V, 262 sqq.; VI, 333), living in fifty-two towns,\nthe whole population being between 25,000 and 30,000. In the same year\nthe Cha'hta population was conjectured to amount to 18,000\n(Schoolcraft VI, 479). The Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Indian\nAffairs for 1881 gives a Creek population of 15,000, settled upon\n3,215,495 acres of land; one half of these are tillable, but only\n80,000 acres were cultivated during that year by these Indians.\n\n\nTHE CREEK DIALECT\n\nof Maskoki is a harmonious, clearly vocalized form of speech, averse\nto nasalization. In forms it is exceedingly rich, but its syntax is\nvery simple and undeveloped. An archaic form, called the female\nlanguage, exists outside of the common Creek, and mainly differs from\nit in the endings of the verbs.\n\n\nPHONETICS.\n\nCreek possesses all sounds of the general Maskoki alphabet; but here\nand in Hitchiti the gutturals g, k, \u03c7 are often pronounced with the\ntongue resting upon the fore or alveolar part of the palate. The\nalternating processes observed here also occur in most other Indian\nand illiterate languages: tch, dsh alternate with ts, ds, h with k,\n\u03c7; g with the other gutturals, b with p, d with t, \u0101 with e, o\nwith u. The accent shifts for rhetoric and syntactic causes, and many\nunaccented syllables are pronounced long. In the pronunciation of the\nnatives there is a sort of singing modulation, which likes to lengthen\nthe last syllables of a sentence.[131] Syllables not final generally\nterminate in a vowel.\n\n    [Footnote 131: Thus the Creek verbal ending -is, though short by\n    itself, generally becomes -\u012bs, when concluding a sentence;\n    also the Hitchiti ending -w\u0101ts, -taw\u0101ts.]\n\n\nMORPHOLOGY.\n\n_The nominal inflection_ shows but three cases: The first in -i (or\n-a, -o, -u), which may be called absolute;[132] the subjective case in\n-t, -it (-at, -ut), and the objective in -n, -in (-an, -un). The\nabsolute case, when used as a vocative, often lengthens or strongly\naccentuates the last syllable. The suffix -n indicates the direct and\nindirect object, and also sometimes the locative case. Diminutives are\nformed by means of the suffix -odshi, -udshi.\n\n    [Footnote 132: Absolute case has to be regarded as a provisional\n    term only. I call it absolute, because the natives, when giving\n    vocables of the language not forming part of a sentence, mention\n    them in that case in Creek, in Hitchiti, in Koass\u00e1ti, etc. In\n    the sentence this case often corresponds, however, to the\n    _status constructus_ of the Hebrew.]\n\n_Substantive._ The substantive noun does not inflect for number except\nin a few terms designating persons which form a plural in -agi, -aki:\nm\u00edko _chief_, m\u00edkagi _chiefs_, to be distinguished from m\u00edkalgi _class\nfrom which chiefs are chosen_; h\u00fananwa _man_, h\u00f3kti _woman_;\nhunant\u00e1gi, h\u00f3ktagi. It is the archaic form of -ak\u012bs, the verbal\nending of third person plural of certain verbal inflections. Cf. -a`li\nin Hitchiti.\n\nThe suffix -algi, though sometimes used as a plural suffix, designates\ncollectivity: u-ika\u00edwa _spring of water_, u-ikaiw\u00e1lki _place with\nwater-springs_, and u-ikai\u207f\u00e1lki _people living at the springs_;\nal\u00edktcha _conjurer_, al\u00edktchalgi _conjurers as one body, taken in a\nbody_.\n\nThe parts of speech being but imperfectly differentiated, tenses can\nbe expressed in nouns by adding suffixes: m\u00edko _chief_, mikot\u00e1ti,\nm\u00edko-\u014d\u2032m\u0101 _one who was, has been chief_; m\u00edko-ta`l\u00e1ni _a future\nchief_; adsulagit\u00e1ti _the defunct forefathers_.\n\n_Adjectives_ form a real plural by appending the suffix -agi, -aki to\nthe base. This applies, however, only to a limited number of\nadjectives, like:\n\n  atch\u00fala _old_, pl. atch\u00falagi\n  h\u00ed`li   _good_,    h\u00ed`lagi\n  tch\u00e1ti  _red_,     tch\u00e1taki\n  y\u00edktchi _strong_,  y\u00edktchaki\n\nThe majority of the adjectives and of the attributive verbs derived\nfrom them form derivatives, which in some instances may be called\ndistributive, in others frequentative and iterative forms. They are\nformed by a partial reduplication of the radix, when the basis is\nmonosyllabic, or often of the last syllable of the basis, when the\nword is polysyllabic. Examples:\n\n     l\u00e1sti _black_, l\u00e1slati _black here and black there_; verbified:\n        l\u00e1nis, lasl\u00e1nis _it is black_.\n\n     h\u00e1llui _high_, h\u00e1lhawi _each of them high_.\n\n     s\u00fafki _deep_, s\u00fafsuki _deep each_, or _deep in spots_.\n\n     s\u00falgi _many_, s\u00falsugi _many of each_.\n\n     h\u00f3lwaki _bad_, holwah\u00f3ki _each bad_.\n\n     l\u00edkwi _rotten_; l\u00edk'howi (animals), l\u00edkliwi (vegetables).\n\n     kotch\u00fakni _short_, kotch\u00fantchoki _short in spots_.\n\n     s\u00edlkosi _narrow_, s\u00edlsikosi _narrow in places_, from s\u00edlki\n        _strip_.\n\nAdjectives are made negative by appending the privative particle -go,\n-gu, -ko, -ku: \u00edtskisusi _having a mother_, itskisusiko _motherless_;\nh\u00ed`li _good_, h\u00ed`ligo _not good, bad_.\n\nGradation of adjectives and of attributive verbs formed from these can\nbe effected in different ways, which are more perfect and expressive\nhere than in those Indian languages which can express gradation only\nby syntactic means.\n\nA comparative is formed by prefixing isim-, isin-, isi-, apheretically\nsim-, sin-, si- to the adjective or the attributive verb, the two\nobjects compared standing usually _before_ the adjective or verb. This\nprefix is composed of the particle isi-, is- and the possessive\npronoun im-, in-, i- of the third person (s. and pl.), and corresponds\nsomewhat to our _than, as_. The object compared stands in the\nabsolute case.\n\n     k\u00e1t'tcha yah\u00e1 isin`l\u00e1kit \u00f3mis _the panther_ (k\u00e1t'tcha) _is\n        larger_ (`lako _large_) _than the wolf_ (yah\u00e1; \u00f3mis _is so_).\n\n     tch\u00e1tu tch\u00e1tu-\u03c7un\u00e1p-hatki (i-)s\u00edntchalatuit \u00f3mis _iron_\n        (tch\u00e1tu) _is harder than silver_.\n\n     ma tch\u012b\u2032panat ma h\u00f3ktudshi (i-)simm\u00e1his _this boy is\n        taller than that girl_.\n\nA superlative is formed by placing i`li-, apheretically `li-, before\nthe comparative: m\u00e1hi _tall_, is\u00edmmahi _taller than_, i'lis\u00edmmahi,\n`lis\u00edmmahi, `lis\u00edmahi _tallest of_, lit. \"still taller than the taller\nones.\"\n\n     ma ts\u00faku halh\u00e1wat i`lisih\u00e1lluit \u00f3mis _this house is the\n        highest_; lit. \"higher than the high ones.\"\n\nA superlative may be expressed also by using the comparative instead:\nma tch\u00edpanat anhopuit\u00e1ki om\u00e1lgan is\u00edmmahis \"that boy is the tallest of\nall my children\"; lit. \"that boy is taller than all my children.\" Or\nthe superlative is expressed by the augmentative adverb m\u00e1hi: _very,\nquite, greatly, largely_ y\u00edktchi m\u00e1hi, _the strongest_, which at the\nsame time means: _very strong, quite strong_; `l\u00e1ko m\u00e1hi _largest_ and\n_very large_; m\u00e1himahi _tallest_ and _very tall_; the latter also\nbeing expressed by a lengthening of the vowel: m\u0101\u2032hi _very tall_.\n\nMinuitive gradation is effected by inversion of the sense in the\nsentence and the use of the comparative; they say: \"silver is costlier\nthan iron,\" instead of saying: \"iron is less costly than silver.\"\n\nWhat we call prepositions are generally nominal forms in Creek,\ninflected like nouns and placed _after_ their complements as\n_postpositions_, governing the absolute case:\n\n     \u00fanapa, subj. \u00fanapat, obj. \u00fanapan _above, on the top of_;\n        `l\u00e1ni \u00fanapa (or: `l\u00e1ni y\u00faksa) _on the top of the mountain_.\n\n     tchuku-\u00f3fan l\u00e4\u00edk\u00e4s _I stay within, in the house_; -\u00f3fan,\n        -ofa, -\u00fafa, -of is also temporal suffix: _when, while,\n        during_: y\u00e1 o`lolop\u00ed-\u00f3fan _in this year_.\n\n     in\u00fakua at\u00edgin ak'h\u00fai`l _he stands in the water up to_ (at\u00edgin)\n        _his neck_.\n\n     ts\u00e1`lki a`l\u00e1\u03c7kan _on account of my father_.\n\n     tchuk\u00fa il\u00eddshan, _under the house_.\n\n     \u00edtu il\u00eddshan, \u00edtu tch\u00edskan _under the tree_.\n\n_Numerals._ The cardinal numeral has a full form ending in -in, and\nanother abbreviated from it used in counting objects, and not\nextending beyond _ten_; an ordinal, with prefix -\u00edsa-, is-, apheret.\nsa-, s-; a distributive substituting -\u00e1kin to -in of the cardinal, and\nan adverbial form in -a.\n\n                _Cardinals._                    _Ordinals._\n\n    1 h\u00e1mgin               h\u00e1mmai         ihatitch\u00edska _first_\n    2 hok\u00f3lin              h\u014f\u2032ko          sahok\u00f3lat _second_\n    3 tut'tch\u00ednin          t\u00fat'tchi       satut'tch\u00ednat\n    4 \u014d\u2032stin, \u016b\u2032stin \u014d\u2032sti s\u014d\u2032stat\n    5 tcha'hg\u00edpin          tch\u00e1'hgi       satcha'hg\u00edbat\n    6 ip\u00e1kin               \u00edpa            (i)sip\u00e1kat\n    7 kolap\u00e1kin            k\u00f3lapa         iskolap\u00e1kat\n    8 tchinap\u00e1kin          tch\u00ednapa       istchinap\u00e1kat\n    9 \u014dstap\u00e1kin            \u00f3stapa         is\u016bstap\u00e1kat\n   10 p\u00e1lin                p\u00e1             isp\u00e1lat\n   20 p\u00e1li-hok\u00f3lin         p\u00e1li-hok\u00f3lin   ispali-hok\u00f3lat\n  100 tch\u00fakpi h\u00e1mgin       tch\u00fakpi h\u00e1mgin istch\u00fakpi h\u00e1mgat\n\n          _Distributives._                   _Adverbials._\n\n    1  hamg\u00e1kin and hamgah\u00e1kin             ah\u00e1mkutcha _once_\n         _one to each_\n    2  hokol\u00e1kin and hokolah\u00e1kin           ahok\u00f3la _twice_\n         _two to each_\n    3  tut'tchin\u00e1kin                       at\u00fat'tchina\n    4  \u016bst\u00e1kin                             \u014d'sta\n    5  tcha'hgip\u00e1kin                       tcha'hg\u00edba\n    6  ipak\u00e1kin and ipah\u00e1kin               \u00edpaka\n    7  kolapak\u00e1kin                         kolap\u00e1ka\n    8  tchinapah\u00e1kin and tchinapak\u00e1kin     tchinap\u00e1ka\n    9  \u014dstapah\u00e1kin and \u014dstapak\u00e1kin         \u016bstap\u00e1\u03c7a\n   10  pal\u00e1kin and palah\u00e1kin               p\u00e1la\n   20  pali-hokol\u00e1kin                      p\u00e1li-hok\u00f3la\n  100  tch\u00fakpi hamg\u00e1kin                    tch\u00fakpi h\u00e1mgat\n\n     tipa\u03c7\u00f3tchki \"folded once\"\n\n     tipa\u03c7\u00f3'hli \u014d\u2032stin \"folded four times\"\n\n     tipa\u03c7\u00f3'hli tchinap\u00e1kin \"folded eight times\"\n\n     hamh\u00e1\u03c7osi \"one here and one there, scattered.\"\n\nThe _personal pronoun_ is as follows:\n\n  _I_ \u00e1ni, subj. \u00e1nit, obj. \u00e1nin, abbr. am-, an-, a-\n\n  _thou_ tch\u00edmi, tch\u00edmit,               tch\u00edmin  tchim-, tchin-\n\n  _he, she, it_  \u00edmi, \u00edmit, \u00edmin        im-, in-, i-, m-\n\n  _we_ p\u00f3mi, p\u00fami; p\u00f3mit, pomin         pom-, pum-, pon-\n\n  _ye_  tchimit\u00e1ki, etc.                tchint\u00e1gi\n\n  _they_ imit\u00e1ki, etc.                  \u00edntaki\n\nCha'hta distinguishes between the inclusive and exclusive pronouns\n_we, our_, but Creek and Hitchiti do not.\n\nThe _possessive pronoun_ is as follows:\n\n  _my_ tcha-; am-, an-, a-                    tch\u00e1ka _my head_\n\n  _thy_ tchi-                                 tch\u00edka _thy head_\n\n  _his, her, its_ im-, in-, i-                \u00edka, _his, her, its head_\n\n  _our_ pun\u00e1gi, pu-t\u00e1gi, pu-, po-             pukat\u00e1ki, p\u00f3ka _our heads_\n\n  _your_ tchinakit\u00e1ki, tchimitaki, tchi-tagi  tchikat\u00e1gi _your heads_\n\n  _their_ inakit\u00e1ki, imit\u00e1gi, i-tagi          ikat\u00e1ki _their heads_\n\n_The possessive relation_ is usually expressed:\n\n     (1) by the possessive pronoun prefixed to the object possessed:\n        tch\u00e1ka _my head_, anhopuit\u00e1ki _my children_.\n\n     (2) when two nouns, especially substantives, stand in the\n        relation of possession, the possessor stands in the absolute\n        case before the object possessed, the pronoun im-, in-, i-\n        being prefixed to the latter.\n\n     isti Mashk\u00f3ki im\u00edkana _the land of the Creek men_.\n\n     \u00e1dshi int\u00e1lapi _ear of maize_; lit. \"maize its ear.\"\n\n     \u00e1dsh' im\u00e1pi _stalk of maize_.\n\n     \u00edngi \u00edtchki _his thumb_; lit. \"his hand its mother.\"\n\n_Other pronouns_:\n\n     isti _person_ is used as indefinite pron.: _somebody_; ist\u00edka\n        _somebody's head, a person's head_; stillipa\u00ed\u03c7a _boot_,\n        from isti, \u00edli, pa\u00ed\u03c7a; isti h\u00e1pu _somebody's camping place_.\n\n     ist\u00e4\u2032mat, pl. ist\u00e4mat\u00e1ki? _who_?\n\n     ist\u00f3mat? abbr. \u00edstat? (s. and pl.) _which? which one?_\n\n     h\u00eda, ya, \u00ed-a _this_ (close by); subj. h\u00edat, obj. h\u00edan (in\n        Cheroki: h\u00eda _this, this one_).\n\n     ma, mat, man _this_ (further off).\n\n     \u00e1sa, \u00e1sat, \u00e1san _that_ (far off).\n\n_Verb._ The Creek verb is of the polysynthetic type, and inflects by\nmeans of prefixes, infixes and (chiefly by) suffixes. It possesses an\naffirmative, negative, interrogative and distributive form, which\nlatter is used as a form for the plural of the subject in the\nintransitive verbs; it also has a large number of conversational forms\nusually derived by contraction, ellipses, etc., from the regular or\nstandard forms; and in some of its inflections also a reverential\nbesides the common form. It is rich in modes, verbals and voices and\nmay be called _extremely_ rich in tense-forms, when we compare to it\nthe poverty of many other American languages.\n\nThe verb incorporates the direct and indirect _pronominal object_ and\ninflects for person. In certain conjugational forms the personal affix\nis a prefix, in others a suffix. The historic tense, a sort of aorist,\nis formed by the _infix_ -h- and a change of the radical vowel occurs\nat times, though not so often as in Cha'hta. Intransitive verbs show\nspecial forms, according to the number of the subject (singular, dual,\nplural). Very frequently these latter forms are made from different\nroots, as will be seen from the instances given below. Many transitive\nverbs have, when their object stands in the plural, a (distributive)\nform differing entirely or partially from the one referring to an\nobject in the singular; a few others show this change, when their\nsubject passes from the singular to the plural number. Other\ntransitive verbs are combining the two inflections just described.\n\nAdjectives can be verbified and then appear in the shape of\nattributive verbs: ha\u00faki, pl. hauh\u00e1ki _hollow_; ha\u00fak\u00e4s _I am hollow_,\nha\u00fakis _it is hollow_, hauh\u00e1kis _they are hollow_. No real\nsubstantive verb being extant, its want is supplied by \u00f3m\u00e4s, m\u00f3m\u00e4s,\nt\u00f3y\u00e4s _I am so, I am such_; these are conjugated regularly, and when\nconnected with the verbals in -t (-at, -it, -ut) of any verb, compose\na periphrastic conjugation which displays itself in an almost infinite\nnumber of forms.\n\nFrom all this it becomes evident, that the Creek verb surpasses in its\nlarge power of polysynthesis the Algonkin, Dakota and Kalapuya verb,\nand in the richness of its forms approaches closely to the Iroquois\nverb, which is poorer in tenses, but has an impersonal conjugation and\nfourteen persons to each tense of the finite verb. Creek is likely to\nsurpass also the Basque verb, which has become proverbial for the\nalmost infinite number of its intricate verb forms.[133]\n\n    [Footnote 133: \"L'invincible vencido\" is the title of the first\n    conjugational system of Basque, as published by Larramendi.]\n\nI propose to give below the inflection of the Creek verb in its\ngeneral outlines only, as far as necessary to give an idea of the\nsubject. The Creek conjugation is regular throughout in its standard\nforms, though the conversational form has introduced modifications.\n\n_Inflection of_ \u00edsita _to take, carry, hold_ (one object) _and of_\ntch\u00e1wita _to take_ (more than one object). Only three tenses were\ngiven here as examples of tch\u00e1wita, although it has as many modes,\ntenses and other forms as \u00edsita.\n\n\nACTIVE VOICE.\n\n_Affirmative conjugation._\n\n_Declarative mode._\n\n     _Present_: \u00eds\u00e4-is, or \u00eds\u00e4s _I am taking_, 2 s. \u00edsitchkis, 3 s.\n        \u00edsis; 1 pl. \u00eds\u012bs, \u00edsis, 2 pl. is\u0101\u2032tchkis, 3 pl. is\u00e1kis.\n\n     tch\u00e1w\u00e4-is or tch\u00e1w\u00e4s _I am taking_ (more than one obj.), 2 s.\n        tch\u00e1witchkis, 3 s. tch\u00e1wis; 1 pl. tch\u00e1w\u012bs, 2 pl.\n        tchaw\u0101\u2032tchkis, 3 pl. tchaw\u0101\u2032kis.\n\n     _The preterit tenses_: \u00ed'hs\u00e4s _I took_, 2 s. \u00ed'hsitchkis, 3 s.\n        \u00ed'hsis; 1 pl. i'hsis, 2 pl. i'hs\u0101\u2032tchkis, 3 pl. i'hs\u0101\u2032\u03c7kis.\n\n     tch\u00e1'hw\u00e4s _I took_ (pl. of obj.), 2 s. tcha'hw\u00edtchkis, etc.\n\n     is\u00e4y\u00e1ngis, _I have taken_, 2 s. isitchk\u00e1ngis, 3 s.\n        \u00edsangis,-kis; 1 pl. \u00edsiyankis, 2 pl. \u00eds\u00e1katchkankis, 3 pl.\n        is\u00e1kankis.\n\n     tchaway\u00e1ngis _I have taken_ (pl. of obj.), 2 s.\n        tchawitchk\u00e1nkis, etc.\n\n     is\u00e1yatis _I took_ (indefinite, aorist or historic past tense),\n        2 s. is\u00edtchkatis, 3 s. \u00edsatis; 1 pl. is\u00edat\u012bs, 2 pl.\n        is\u00e1tchkatis, 3 pl. is\u00e1katis.\n\n     is\u00e4y\u00e1ntas _I took_ (long ago), 2 s. isitchk\u00e1ntas, 3 s. \u00edsantas,\n        etc.\n\n     is\u00e4im\u00e1tas _I had taken_, 2 s. isitchkim\u00e1tas, 3 s. isim\u00e1tas, etc.\n\n_The future tenses_: is\u00e1`lis _I shall take_, 2 s. is\u00edtchka`lis, etc.\n\n     isa`l\u00e1n\u00e4s _I am going to take_, 2 s. isa`l\u00e1nitchkis, 3 s.\n        isa`l\u00e1nis, etc.\n\n     isipayatit\u00e1`lis _I shall have taken_, 2 s. isipitchkatit\u00e1`lis,\n        3 s. isipatit\u00e1`lis, etc.\n\n_Conditional or subjunctive mode._\n\n(\u00f3mati, \u00f3mat _if, when_, connected with the verbal in -n.)\n\n     _Present_: \u00eds\u00e4n \u00f3mat(i) _if I take_, 2 s. is\u00edtchkin \u00f3mat, 3 s.\n        \u00edsin \u00f3mat, etc.\n\n     _Preterit_: is\u00e4\u2032yatin \u00f3mat _if I had taken_, 2 s. is\u00edtchkatin\n        \u00f3mat, etc.\n\n     _Future_: isa`l\u00e1n\u00e4n \u00f3mat\u00ee'h _if I am going to take_, 2 s.\n        isa`lan\u00edtchkin \u00f3mati'h, etc.\n\n_Potential mode._\n\n     \u00edsayis _I can take_, 2 s. \u00edsitchk\u012bs, 3 s. is\u012bs, isi-is, etc.\n\n     isa`lan\u00e1yat t\u00e1lkis _I must take, I have to take_, 2 s.\n        isa`l\u00e1nitcha t\u00e1lkis.\n\n     \u00edsa\u03c7ant \u00f3matin \u00f3m\u00e4s _I ought to have taken_, 2 s. \u00edsa\u03c7ant\n        \u00f3matin \u00f3mitchkis.\n\n     \u00edsi w\u00e4\u00edt\u00e4yis _I may take_, 2 s. \u00edsitchki w\u00e4\u00edt\u012bs, 3 s. \u00edsi w\u00e4\u00edt\u012bs.\n\n     isa`l\u00e1ni w\u00e4\u00edtayis _probably I shall take_ (at some future\n        time), 2 s. isa`l\u00e1nitchki w\u00e4\u00edt\u012bs, or w\u00e4\u00edtayis.\n\n     is\u00e1yi tit\u00e1y\u00efs (abbr. t\u00e1yis) _I am able to take_, 2 s. is\u00edtchki\n        tit\u00e1y\u012bs.\n\n_Imperative mode._\n\n     2 s. \u00edsas! _do thou take!_ (as a command). 2 pl. \u00edsakis! _do ye\n     take!_ 2 s. \u00edsipas! _take!_ (reverential or exhortative). 2 pl.\n     is\u00edpakis! _take ye! ye may take!_\n\n_Verbals, or nominal forms of verb._\n\n\u00edsita _to take, the taking_; tch\u00e1wita (pl. of obj.)\n\n  _Present_:  \u00eds\u00e4-i    subj. \u00eds\u00e4-it, \u00eds\u00e4t  obj. \u00eds\u00e4-in\n                                   _I taking, I a taker_.\n        2 s.  \u00edsitchki       \u00edsitchkit          \u00edsitchkin\n                                   _thou taking_.\n        3 s.  \u00edsi            \u00edsit               \u00edsin\n                                   _he, she taking_.\n       1 pl.  \u00eds\u012b            \u00eds\u012bt               \u00eds\u012bn\n                                   _we taking, we takers_.\n       2 pl.  is\u00e1tchk i      is\u00e1tchkit          is\u00e1tchkin\n                                   _ye taking_.\n       3 pl.  is\u00e1ki          is\u00e1kit             is\u00e1kin\n                                   _they taking_.\n\n  _Preterit_: is\u00e4\u2032yati       is\u00e4\u2032yatit          is\u00e4\u2032yatin\n                                   _I having taken_.\n        2 s.  is\u00edtchkati     is\u00edtchkatit        is\u00edtchkatin\n                                   _thou having taken_.\n        3 s.  \u00edsati          \u00edsatit             \u00edsatin\n                                   _he, she having taken_.\n       1 pl.  isak\u00edyati   2. isak\u00e1tchkati    3. \u00edsakati etc.\n\n  _Future_:   isa`l\u00e1n\u00e4-i     isa`l\u00e1n\u00e4n         _I going to take_.\n              isa`l\u00e1nitchki  isa`l\u00e1nitchkin _thou going to take_.\n              isa`l\u00e1ni       isa`l\u00e1nin   _he, she going to take_.\n          pl. isa`l\u00e1ni, isa`l\u00e1natchki, isaka`l\u00e1ni, etc.\n\n    is\u00e1kofan,     abbr. is\u00e1kof _while taking_.\n    is\u00edkofan,       \"   is\u00edkof _before he took_.\n    isig\u00e1\u03c7kan,      \"   \u00edsiga _because he takes or took_.\n    isa`l\u00e1ni\u03c7kan,   \"   isa`laniga _because he will take_.\n\n_Interrogative conjugation_ (specimen).\n\n     \u00eds\u00e4ya? _do I take?_ 2 s. \u00edsitska?, 3 s. \u00edsa? 1 pl. \u00edsiya? 2 pl.\n        \u00edsatska? 3 pl. is\u0101\u2032ka?\n\n     tch\u00e1w\u00e4ya? _do I take?_ (pl. of obj.), etc.\n\n_Negative conjugation_:\n\n     is\u00e1kus _I do not take_; 2 s. is\u00edtskigus, 3 s. is\u00edgus; 1 pl.\n        is\u00edgus, 2 pl. is\u00e1tskigus, 3 pl. is\u00e1gigus.\n\n     tchaw\u00e1kus _I do not take_ (pl. of obj.), etc.\n\n_Negative-interrogative conjugation:_\n\n     is\u0103'k\u014d? _do I not take?_ 2 s. is\u00edtskig\u014d? 3 s.\n        is\u012d\u2032g\u014d? 1 pl. is\u012b\u2032go? 2 pl. is\u00e1tskig\u014d? 3 pl.\n        is\u00e1gig\u014d? (suffix -g\u014d often nasalized into -g\u014d\u207f,\n        -k\u014d\u207f, -ku\u207f).\n\n     tchaw\u0103\u2032k\u014d? _do I not take?_ etc.\n\n_Conjugation with indirect object_:\n\n     im\u00eds\u00e4s _I take for somebody, I take from somebody_, 2 s.\n        im\u00edsitchkis, 3 s. im\u00edsis; 1 pl. imis\u012ds, 2 pl.\n        im\u00edsatchkis, 3 pl. imis\u0101\u2032kis.\n\n     intch\u00e1w\u00e4s _I take for somebody_ (pl. of obj.), etc.\n\n_Medial conjugation_:\n\n     is\u00edp\u00e4s _I take for myself_, 2 s. is\u00edpitchkis, 3 s. is\u00edpis; 1\n        pl. is\u00edp\u012bs, 2 pl. is\u00edpatskis, 3 pl. is\u00e1kipis.\n\n     tchaw\u00edp\u00e4s _I take for myself_ (pl. of obj.), etc.\n\n\nPASSIVE VOICE.\n\nIt is formed from the active voice by inserting ho-, hu- after the\nbasis of the verb. From \u00eds\u00e4s _I take_ is formed tchas'h\u00f3y\u00e4s (for\ntcha-is-h\u00f3y\u00e4s) _I am taken_; -s- being the only sound of the radix\nremaining.\n\n_Present_: tchas'h\u00f3y\u00e4s _I am taken, I am being taken_; 2 s.\ntchis'h\u00f3y\u00e4s, 3 s. is'h\u00f3y\u00e4s; 1 pl. putcha-uh\u00f3y\u00e4s, 2 pl.\ntchitcha-uhoy\u00e1k\u00e4s, 3 pl. tcha-uh\u00f3y\u00e4s.\n\n_Past_: tchas'h\u00f3hyis, _I was taken_.\n\n_Future_: tchas'hoya`l\u00e1nis, _I shall be taken_.\n\n_Part. pass. partic._ i'hsik; pl. of obj. \u00e1'hwak _taken_.\n\n\nOTHER VOICES.\n\n     _Reciprocal voice_: it\u00edtchaw\u012bs _we take each other_.\n\n     u'hl\u00e1tk\u00e4s _I fall on, upon_: itu'hl\u00e1tk\u00e4s _I attack, have a\n        scuffle_.\n\n     _Reflective voice_: i-\u00eds\u00e4s _I take_ or _carry myself_.\n\n     y\u00edkl\u00e4s _I pinch_; iy\u00edkl\u00e4s _I pinch myself_.\n\n_Causative voice._ This form had better be called a derivative form\nthan a voice, as will appear from the following instances:\n\n     isip\u00faidsh\u00e4s _I cause to take_.\n\n     p\u00fask\u00e4s _I fast_; puskip\u00faidsh\u00e4s _I make fast_, pusk\u00e4\u2032dsh\u00e4s _I\n        make, cause to fast_; puskidsh\u00e4\u2032dsh\u00e4s _I cause to fast\n        for initiation_.\n\n     h\u00e1tkis _it is white_, hat\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I whiten_.\n\n     k\u00ed`l\u00e4s _I know_, ki`l\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I inform, apprize_,\n        i-uki`lku\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I explain myself_.\n\n     hu\u00ed`l\u00e4s _I stand_, hui`l\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I set up, place, make stand_.\n\n_Impersonal voice._ A paradigm of an impersonal verb, inflected with\nits pronominal object, is as follows:\n\n     isanh\u00ed`lis _it is good for me_ (h\u00ed`li good), 2 s.\n        istchinh\u00ed`lis, 3 s. isinh\u00ed`lis; ispunh\u00ed`lis _it is good for\n        us_, 2 pl. istchinh\u00ed`lagis, 3 pl. isinh\u00ed`lagis.\n\n\nOTHER CONJUGATIONAL FORMS.\n\nParadigms of verbs inflected with the _subject-pronoun_ standing\neither separate or incorporated:\n\n  \u00e1nit \u00f3m\u00e4s _I do, am the cause of_ antalg\u00f3sis _I am alone_ (for \u00e1nit \u00e1lgosis)\n  tch\u00edmit \u00f3madshksh                 tchintalg\u00f3sis _thou art alone_\n  \u00edmit \u00f3mis                         intalg\u00f3sis\n  p\u00f3mit \u00f3m\u012bs _we do_                punt\u00e1lgosis _and_ puntalgos\u00e1kis\n  tchint\u00e1git \u00f3madshksh              tchintalgos\u00e1kis\n  (i)mit\u00e1git \u00f3m\u012bs                   intalgos\u00e1kis\n\n_Objective or compound conjugation._\n\nA transitive verb connected with its _direct_ pronominal object runs\nas follows:\n\n     y\u00edklita _to pinch, the pinching_.\n\n     tchiy\u00edkl\u00e4s _I pinch thee_.\n\n     y\u00edkl\u00e4s _I pinch him, her, it,_ or _I pinch_ one object.\n\n     tchiy\u00edkla\u03c7as _I pinch ye_.\n\n     y\u00edkla\u03c7\u00e4s _I pinch them_, or several objects.\n\n     tchay\u00edklitchkis _thou pinchest me_.\n\n     puy\u00edklitchkis _thou pinchest us_.\n\n     y\u00edklis _he, she pinches_ (another).\n\n     y\u00edklak\u014ds, contr. y\u00edklaks _I do not pinch him, her, it_.\n\n     y\u00edkla\u03c7ak\u014ds _I do not pinch them_.\n\n     tchiy\u00edklak\u014ds _I do not pinch thee_.\n\n     tchiy\u00edklay\u00e4? _do I pinch thee?_\n\n     y\u00edkl\u00e4ya? _do I pinch him, her, it?_\n\n     yiklakay\u00e1? _do I pinch them?_\n\nA transitive verb connected with its _indirect_ pronominal object\nconjugates in the same manner, unless there is in it the idea _for the\nbenefit of_, or _for the detriment of_, or _from, away from_ somebody\nor something connected with it. In this case the pronoun im-, in-, i-\nis prefixed; paradigm given above.\n\n     k\u00e4\u00eddshita _to say, the saying_, k\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I say_.\n\n     tchik\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e1s (for tchik\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e4-is) _I say to thee_.\n\n     k\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e4-is, k\u00e4\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I say to him, her, it_ (to one person).\n\n     tchik\u00e4\u00eddshak\u00e4\u2032-is _I say to ye_.\n\n     k\u00e4\u00eddshak\u00e4\u2032-is _I say to them_ (to several persons).\n\n     tchak\u00e4\u00eddshis _he, she says to me_.\n\n     tchik\u00e4\u00eddshis _he, she says to thee_.\n\n     k\u00e4\u00eddshis _he, she says to_ (to another).\n\n     puk\u00e4\u00eddshis _he says to us_.\n\n     tchik\u00e4\u00eddshagis _he says to ye_.\n\n     k\u00e4\u00eddshagis _he says to them_ (to several persons).\n\n     tchik\u00e4\u00eddshi-is _we say to thee_.\n\n     tchak\u00e4\u00edtchatchkis _ye say to me_.\n\n     tchik\u00e4\u00edtchakak\u012bs _they say to ye_.\n\n     k\u00e4idshak\u00e1k\u012bs _they say to them_.\n\n_Intransitive Verbs._\n\nSubject in the singular, dual and plural number:\n\n     al\u00e1\u03c7\u00e4s _I come_, alah\u00f3kis _we two come_, y\u0113\u2032dsh\u012bs _we come_.\n\n     \u00f3`l\u00e4s _I arrive_, o`lh\u00f3yis, o`l\u00e4\u2032-idshis.\n\n     homa\u03c7t\u00e1-is _I am ahead, I lead_, du. and pl. homa\u03c7'h\u00f3ti-is.\n\n     w\u00e1k\u00e4s _I am lying_, wak'h\u00f3gis, l\u00famh\u012bs.\n\n     h\u00fai`l\u00e4s _I stand_, sih\u00f3kis, sab\u00e1\u03c7lis.\n\n     \u00e1`l\u00e4s _I am about_, wil\u00e1gis, f\u00fallis.\n\n     tch\u00edy\u00e4s _I enter_, tchu\u03c7al\u00e1g\u012bs, sidsh\u00edyis.\n\nOn a special use made of the verbal _dual_, cf. _Ceremonial\nallocutions_.\n\n_Transitive Verbs._\n\nObject in the singular and plural number; the latter form also marking\na repetition of the act.\n\n     il\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I kill_, pas\u00e1t\u00e4s.\n\n     h\u00e1y\u00e4s _I make_, h\u00e1haidsh\u00e4s; pl. of subject hay\u00e4k\u012bs.\n\n     mutchas\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I make new_, mutchasak\u00faidsh\u00e4s.\n\n     ki`l\u00e4\u2032dsh\u00e4s _I cause to know, apprize_, ki`laku\u00eddsh\u00e4s.\n\n     t\u00fal\u00e4s _I fell_ (a tree etc.), tultu\u00eddsh\u00e4s _I fell repeatedly_,\n        or many objects.\n\n     fal\u00e1p\u00e4s _I split_; \u00edtun fal\u00e1'hlidsh\u00e4s _I split many sticks\n        separately_.\n\n     n\u00e1fk\u00e4s _I strike_, nafn\u00e1k\u00e4s.\n\n     hop\u00edl\u00e4s _I inhume_, hopilhu\u00eddsh\u00e4s and hopil\u00e1\u03c7\u00e4s.\n\n     t\u00e1dsh\u00e4s _I cut off, sever_, w\u00e1`l\u00e4s.\n\n\nSYNTAX.\n\nMany conjunctions are formed from the auxiliary verbs \u00f3m\u00e4s, m\u00f3m\u00e4s and\nthus are in fact verbs, not particles. In spite of the frequent use to\nwhich they are put they do not relieve the sentence of its heaviness\nto any perceptible extent; for what we call incident clauses and also\nmany co-ordinate principal sentences are uniformly expressed by\ngroups of words, the verb of which stands in the -t or -n verbal,\nwhich nearest corresponds to our participle in _-ing_, or to _having_\n(h. gone, carried), sometimes five or six of them, followed at the\nclose by a finite verb. Instances of this our Creek text affords\nalmost on every page. This sort of incapsulation greatly embarrasses\ninterpreters in the rendering of Creek texts in any of the modern\nEuropean languages, which have a tendency towards analytic and an\naversion to synthetic structure of the sentence, and therefore use\nconjunctions freely. A conjunction corresponding in every respect to\nour _and_ exists in none of the Maskoki dialects.\n\nThe syntax is remarkably simple and uniform; the multiplicity of\ngrammatic forms precludes the formation of many syntactic rules, just\nas in Sanscrit. The position of the words in the sentence is: subject,\nobject, verb. The adjective when used attributively stands after the\nnoun qualified.\n\n\nLEXICAL AFFINITIES.\n\nSeveral Creek words possess a striking resemblance with words of equal\nor related signification, pertaining to other languages. Some of them\nare undoubtedly borrowed, while others may rest on a fortuitous\nresemblance. A few of them were pointed out by H. Hale, in _Amer.\nAntiquarian_ V, 120. I consider as being borrowed from Cheroki:\n\n     Cr. \u00e1tasi _war-club_, in Cher. ats\u00e1, at's\u00e1; occurs in the Cher.\n        war-name: At's\u00e1 ut\u00e9gi _the one throwing away the war-club_.\n        It contains the idea of being bent, crooked; inat\u00e1 atass\u00edni\n        _the snake is crawling_.\n\n     Cr. tch\u016b\u2032ska, _post-oak_, H. tch\u00edski; Cher. _tchusk\u00f3_.\n\n     Cr. y\u0115n\u00e1sa, Cha'hta y\u00e1nash _bison, buffalo_; Cher. y\u00e1nasa.\n\nThe Creek sulit\u00e1wa _soldier_ and the Cha'hta shulush _shoe_ were\nborrowed from the French terms _soldat_ and _soulier_ (from Lat.\nsubtalare).\n\nAlike in Creek and Cheroki, but of uncertain provenience are ts\u00fala,\ntch\u00fala _fox_, in Yuchi s\u00e1tchoni; h\u00eda, i-a _this, this one_ (pron.\ndem.). Compare also Cr. n\u00edni _road, trail_ with Cher. na\u207fn\u00f3hi,\nn\u00e4-\u0115n\u00f3hi _road_. The Cr. words t\u00edwa _hair, scalp_, and w\u00e1hu _winged\nelm_ are said to be borrowed from foreign languages. It will be\nnoticed, that names of plants, and especially of animals hunted by man\noften spread over several contiguous linguistic areas.\n\nThe Maskoki dialects, it must be acknowledged, have remained\nremarkably free from foreign admixture.\n\n\n\n\nSECOND OR SPECIAL PART.\n\nTHE KASI'HTA MIGRATION LEGEND.\n\n\nINDIAN MIGRATION LEGENDS.\n\nThere are events in the history of a people, which are remembered with\ndifficulty or displeasure and therefore soon drop from the memory of\nmen. But there are other incidents which pass from father to son\nthrough many generations, and the remembrance of them, though altered\nin many particulars and variously recounted, seems to be undying.\nEvents of this kind are migrations, long warfare or decisive battles,\nwhich resulted either in defeat or victory, alliances with cognate or\nfriendly tribes, times of abundance, of famines and epidemics. To be\nof easy remembrance, there must be something connected with these\nevents which forcibly strikes the imagination and in later times\nstands out as the principal fact, while minor features of its\noccurrence disappear or become subject to alterations in the progress\nof time.\n\nThis also shows the process, how historic legends and traditions are\nforming among uncultured nations, which are possessed of imperfect\nmeans only for the transmission of ideas to posterity. Whenever this\ntraditionary lore is written down by a civilized people, then the\ngathering of these tales, half mythic and half historic, forms a\ncommencement of historiography, and by later generations is regarded\nas valued material for clearing up the dawn of history.\n\nThe historic legends of the different nations vary exceedingly in\ntheir contents, at least as much as do the nations themselves. There\nare some that speak of the chiefs only and not of the people, or fill\nthe tales with mythic heroes and impossible events, while the more\nsober and intelligent restrict the miraculous element to narrow\nlimits, though never excluding it entirely. There are peoples and\nindividuals who will not give credence to a legend which does not\ncontain miracles. Many of the North American tribes, especially on the\nPacific coast, have no knowledge of early events in their tribe,\nbecause a severe law prohibits them from calling their dead relatives\nby their names. This superstition alone suffices to destroy the\nhistoric sense in the population, but does not seem to have operated\namong the Aztecs, Mayas and Quichhuas to any noticeable degree.\n\nAll nations of the globe have migrated from earlier into more recent\nseats, but with many of them these migrations took place in epochs so\nfar distant that they have lost all recollections of them. These\nlatter we call autochthonic; the Kalapuya of Will\u00e1met Valley, Oregon,\nand the Washo around Carson, Nevada, who claim to have originated from\nbulrushes in the vicinity, belong to these. All tribes of the Maskoki\nstock possess migration legends, and so do the Dakota and Iroquois.\nTheir migration legends are intermingled with myths and mythic ideas;\nnevertheless, they prove that the migrations took place in\ncomparatively recent times, and that these accounts are not pure\nastronomical or other fictions.\n\nA full knowledge of Maskoki mythology would certainly help us in the\nunderstanding of their migration tales, but this subject has not been\ninvestigated as yet. Their principal mythic power is the \"Master of\nLife\" or \"Holder of Breath,\" in Creek Is\u00e1kita imm\u00edssi, a divine being,\nwhich is as thoroughly North American as Jahve, an ancient sun- and\nthunder-god, is of Semitic, and Dyaus, Zeus, Jupiter, the Sky-god, is\nof Aryan origin. The proper sense of the Creek name is \"the one who\ncarries, takes the life or breath for them;\" it is the embodiment of\nthe idea that a great, powerful spirit gives life, or what is\nsynonymous with it, breath to them (to persons, animals), and takes it\noff from them at will (is\u00e1kita _life, breath_; im-pron. poss. 3d\nperson, \u00eds\u00e4s _I take_, when the object stands in the singular); \u00edsi,\n\u00edssi _taker, holder_. The Master of Life, also called Suta-l\u00e4\u00edkati,\n\"resident in the sky,\" is not a pure abstraction, but has to be\nbrought into connection with the sun-worship of all Americans, which\nagain became associated with the cult of the fire-flame. The idea that\nthe Creeks knew anything of the _devil_ of the Christian religion is a\npure invention of the missionaries; being christianized, they call him\nnow: \u00edsti f\u00fatchig\u014d \"the man acting perversely,\" taso\u03c7l\u00e4\u2032ya, or: \u00edsti\nnikl\u00e9-idsha ats\u016b\u2032li \"the old person-burner\" (\u00e1ni nikl\u00e9-idsh\u00e4s _I burn\nsomebody, something_); the Yuchi call him \"the swinging man,\" just as\nthey call a ghost \"a hunting man.\" The Shetimasha name for the devil\nis n\u00e9ka, which properly means _conjurer, sorcerer_ and _witchcraft_.\n\nIn the eyes of the missionaries and Christian settlers, the paramount\nimportance and abstract character of the Master of Breath made him\nappear as the centre of an almost monotheistic religion; but on closer\ninvestigation it will be found that the Creeks believed in many genii\nand mythic animals besides, two of which were the isti-p\u00e1pa and the\nsnake, which furnished the snake horn as a war-talisman. It would be\nsingular indeed, if the Creeks were the only Indians of America who\nbelieved solely in the Great Spirit and not also in a number of lesser\nconceptions of imagination, as dwarfs, giants, ogres, fairies,\nhobgoblins and earth-spirits.\n\nThe myths referring to the origin of nations often stand in close\nconnection with myths accounting for the ages of the world or\nsuccessive creations, with migration legends, and with culture-myths,\nexplaining the origin of certain institutions, manufactures and arts.\n\nMany of these myths are etymological, as that of the Greeks, stating\nthat they originated from stones thrown by Deucalion behind himself\n(\u03bb\u03ac\u03b1\u03c2 _stone_, and \u03bb\u03b1\u03cc\u03c2 _people_); that of Adam, being created from\nearth; adam, in Hebrew, signifies _person_ and _mankind_, adom, adum,\nfem. adum\u00e1h _red, ruddy, bay-colored_, adam\u00e1h _earth, ground, land_,\nfrom its reddish color, admoni _red-haired_.\n\nAlthough the origin from the earth is certainly the most natural that\ncould suggest itself to primitive man, there are a number of nations\nclaiming provenience from the sky (the Tukabatchi were let down from\nthe sky in a gourd or calabash): from the sun (Yuchi), from the moon,\nfrom the sea, from the ashes of fire (Sh\u00e1wano), from eggs (Quichhua)\nor certain plants.\n\nThe Aht, on the western coast of Vancouver Island, allege that animals\nwere first produced at Cape Flattery, Washington Territory, and from\nthe union of some of these with a star, which fell from heaven, came\nthe first men, and from them sprang all the race of Nitin-aht,\nKlayok-aht and M\u00e1kah or Klass-aht Indians.[134]\n\n    [Footnote 134: J. G. Swan, the Makah Indians, p. 56, in\n    Smithsonian Contributions.]\n\nWherever a mythic origin from an animal, especially from a wild beast,\nis claimed for man, it is usually done to explain the totem of the\ngens to which the originators of the tale belong.\n\nAmong the nations tracing their mythic origin to the earth, or what\namounts to the same thing, to caves, deep holes, hills or mountains,\nare the Pomo of Northern California, who believe that their ancestors,\nthe coyote-men, were created directly from a knoll of red earth,[135]\nstill visible in their country; the Nahua, whose seven tribes issued\nfrom Chicomoztoc or the \"Seven Caves.\"\n\n    [Footnote 135: Stephen Powers, Tribes of California, p. 156.]\n\nA tribe of the Y\u00f3kat group, the Tinlu\u00ed in Southern California, claims\nthat their forefathers issued from badger-burrows, and they derive\ntheir tribal name from these holes, which are extremely frequent\nthrough their country.[136]\n\n    [Footnote 136: Communicated by Dr. Walter J. Hoffman. Powers\n    writes the name: Tin-lin-neh.]\n\nSix families representing the Six Nations of the Iroquois are called\nout to the upper world from a cave on the Oswego River by the \"Holder\nof the Heavens,\" Tarenyawagon.[137]\n\n    [Footnote 137: The myth is given below in full; taken from E.\n    Johnson, Legends, etc. pp. 43, sqq.]\n\nTraditions on early migrations, which have originated in the people to\nwhich they refer and bear the imprint of genuineness, not that of a\nlate fabrication by conjurers or mixed-bloods, usually contain\nindications of importance which are confirmed by arch\u00e6ologic and\nlinguistic researches. The tradition of the Hebrews, which tells of\ntheir immigration into Palestine from the countries of the north\nacross the Euphrates, is substantiated by their tribal name _ibri_\n\"one who has crossed.\" The Hellenic, especially Doric tradition of an\nimmigration from Thrace and Macedonia through Epirus and Thessalia\ninto Greece is confirmed by linguistic and historic facts, but the\nRoman legend concerning the descent of the founders of the \"Eternal\nCity\" from Troy was acknowledged to be a pious fraud by the ancients\nthemselves.\n\nThe Indians of the upper and middle part of the peninsula of\nCalifornia claim descent from the Yuma population north of them; the\nTinn\u00e9-Apache of New Mexico and the Gila river, Arizona, also point to\nan ancient home in the far north, and both traditions are confirmed by\nthe affinities of their dialects. In many instances, though by no\nmeans in all, the migrations are seen to follow the direction of the\nlongitudinal axis of the continent. In North America another line of\nmigration is observed besides, that from west to east; nevertheless,\nthe Yuchi and some Dakota and Iroquois tribes have moved in a\ndirection exactly opposite.\n\nIt is erroneous to believe that a people had but one migration legend,\nbecause only one has come to our knowledge.[138] This would be a\nthorough misapprehension of the various agencies which are at work in\nproducing folk-lore. Every tribe of a people or nation has its own\nmigration myth or legend, which in some points coincides, in others\nconflicts with those of the neighboring septs. Conflicting traditions\nwill be noticed below, not only among the Maskoki nations at large,\nbut also within the narrower limits of the Creek towns or tribes.\n\n    [Footnote 138: \"Quod non est in scriptis, non est in mundo.\"]\n\nTo the reproduction and critical examination of the different Creek\nmigration legends transmitted to us we premise a short chapter on the\nmythic and legendary tales referring to the migrations of the other\nMaskoki nations.\n\nThe account of the _Cha'hta_ migration, as given in the Missionary\nHerald, of Boston, Vol. XXIV (1828), p. 215, was referred to in a\nshort extract in this volume, under Cha'hta, pp. 106. 107.\n\nThe narrative of the interpreter, who seems to have been somewhat\nimbued with the spirit of rationalism, continues as follows:\n\n\"When they emigrated from a distant country in the west, the Creeks\nwere in front, the Cha'hta in the rear. They travelled to a 'good\ncountry' in the east; this was the inducement to go. On the way, they\nstopped to plant corn. Their great leader and prophet[139] directed\nall their movements, carried the _hobuna_ or sacred bag (containing\n'medicines') and a long white pole as the badge of his authority. When\nhe planted the white pole, it was a signal for their encampment. He\nwas always careful to set this pole perpendicularly and to suspend\nupon it the sacred bag. None were allowed to come near it and no one\nbut himself might touch it. When the pole inclined towards the east,\nthis was the signal for them to proceed on their journey; it steadily\ninclined east until they reached N\u00e1nni W\u00e1ya. There they settled.\"\n\n    [Footnote 139: _Prophet_, in Cha'hta, is hop\u00e1yi and corresponds\n    in his name to the ahop\u00e1ya, hop\u00e1ya of the Creeks, q. v.]\n\nThis story does not mention any crossing by the Cha'hta of the turbid\nwaters of the mighty Mississippi, but accounts quite satisfactorily\nfor the mysterious inclination of the pole, for the prophet must have\nbeen careful to suspend the satchel with the war-physic always on the\neastern side, so as to have the pole brought down in that direction by\nthe weight of the pouch. The tale contains a similar motive as that of\nthe foundation of the citadel at Thebes by Kadmus, who was ordered by\nan oracle to follow a wandering heifer until it would settle in the\ngrass, and then to found a city on the spot.\n\nFollows the account of the _Chicasa_ migration, as told by their old\nmen to the United States agent stationed among them, and printed in\nSchoolcraft, Indians, I, 309 sq:\n\n\"By tradition they say they came from the West; a part of their tribe\nremained in the West. When about to start eastward they were provided\nwith a large dog as a guard and a pole as guide; the dog would give\nthem notice whenever an enemy was near at hand, and thus enable them\nto make their arrangements to receive them. The pole they would plant\nin the ground every night, and the next morning they would look at it,\nand go in the direction it leaned. They continued their journey in\nthis way until they crossed the great Mississippi river, and on the\nwaters of the Alabama river arrived in the country about where\nHuntsville, Alabama, now is. There the pole was unsettled for several\ndays, but finally it settled and pointed in a southwest direction.\nThey then started on that course, planting the pole every night, until\nthey arrived at what is called the Chickasaw Old Fields,[140] where\nthe pole stood perfectly erect. All then came to the conclusion that\nthat was the Promised Land, and there they accordingly remained until\nthey emigrated west of the State of Arkansas, in the years 1837 and\n1838.\"\n\n    [Footnote 140: The Chicasa Old Fields were, as I am informed by\n    Mr. C. C. Royce, on the eastern bank of Tennessee river, at the\n    islands, Lat. 34\u00b0 35\u00b4 and Long. 86\u00b0 31\u00b4.]\n\n\"While the pole was in an unsettled condition, a part of their tribe\nmoved on east, and got with the Creek Indians, but so soon as the\nmajority of the tribe settled at the Old Fields, they sent for the\nparty that had gone east, who answered that they were very tired, and\nwould rest where they were awhile. This clan was called Cush-eh-tah.\nThey have never joined the parent tribe, but they always remained as\nfriends until they had intercourse with the whites; then they became a\nseparate nation.\"\n\n\"The great dog was lost in the Mississippi, and they always believed\nthat the dog had got into a large sink-hole and there remained; the\nChickasaws said they could hear the dog howl just before the evening\ncame. Whenever any of their warriors get scalps, they give them to the\nboys to go and throw them into the sink where the dog was. After\nthrowing the scalps, the boys would run off in great fright, and if\none should fall in running, the Chickasaws were certain he would be\nkilled or taken prisoner by their enemies. Some of the half-breeds,\nand nearly all of the full-bloods now believe it.\"\n\n\"In traveling from the West to the Promised Land in the East, they\nhave no recollection of crossing any large watercourse except the\nMississippi river; they had to fight their way through enemies on all\nsides, but cannot now remember the names of them. When they left the\nWest, they were informed that they might look for whites and that they\nwould come from the East; that they should be on their guard to avoid\nthem, lest they should bring all manner of vice among them.\"\n\nThe end of this relation looks rather suspicious for its antiquity, or\nmay be a later addition. The throwing of the scalps into the sink has\nto be considered as a sort of sacrifice, although it is difficult to\nsay which power of nature the dog represented. The howling of the dog\nbefore evening and the direction of the pole seem to indicate the\nstate of the weather and the moisture of the ground, which could give\norigin to fevers. That the passage: \"the dog was lost in the\nMississippi,\" should read: \"_the dog was lost in the State of\nMississippi_,\" is plainly shown by the sentences following the\nstatement.\n\nThe migration legends now current among the Alibamu and the Hitchiti\nare but short in form and have been referred to under the respective\nheadings.\n\n\nMIGRATION LEGENDS OF THE CREEK TRIBES.\n\nThe following legends of the Creek Indians are the only ones I have\nbeen able to obtain, although it may be taken for certain, that every\none of the larger centres of the Creek nation had its own story about\nthis. The legend in Urlsperger and in Hawkins are both from Kasi'hta.\nMilfort's was probably given to him at Odshi-ap\u00f3fa, and a fragment of\nthe Tukabatchi legend is inserted under Tukabatchi, p. 147.\n\n\n_Migration Legend as recounted to Col. Benj. Hawkins by Task\u00e1ya Miko,\nof Apat\u00e1-i, a branch village of Kasi'hta. \"Sketch\" of B. Hawkins, pp.\n81-83._\n\n\"There are in the forks (akf\u00e1ski) of Red River or U-i tch\u00e1ti, west of\nMississippi River, U-i uk\u00fafki, two mounds of earth. At this place the\nKasi\u03c7ta, Kawita and Chicasa found themselves, and were at a loss for\nfire. They were here visited by the hayoy\u00e1lgi, four men who came from\nthe corners of the world. One of them asked the Indians, where they\nwould have their fire (t\u00fatka). They pointed to a spot; it was made and\nthey sat down around it. The hayoy\u00e1lgi directed that they should pay\nparticular attention to the fire, that it would preserve them and let\nIs\u00e1kita im\u00edssi, the holder of breath, know their wants. One of the\nvisitors took them to show them the p\u0101\u2032ssa, another showed them\nthe m\u00edko huyan\u012b\u2032dsha, then the cedar or \u00e1tchina and the sweet-bay\nor t\u00f3la. (One or two plants were not recollected, and each of these\nseven plants was to belong to a particular tribe, imal\u00e4\u00edkita.[141])\nAfter this, the four visitors disappeared in a cloud, going in the\ndirection whence they came.\n\n    [Footnote 141: al\u00e4\u00edkita means _totemic gens_, imal\u00e4\u00edkita _one's\n    own gens_, or _its particular gens_.]\n\n\"The three towns then appointed their rulers. The Kasi\u03c7ta chose the\nbear gens or nukus\u00e1lgi to be their m\u00edkalgi, and the \u00edstanalgi[142] to\nbe their \u00edniha-`l\u00e1kalgi or men second in command. The Kawita chose the\n`l\u00e1`loalgi or fish gens to be their m\u00edkalgi.\n\n    [Footnote 142: No such gens or division exists among the Creeks\n    now.]\n\n\"After these arrangements, some other Indians came from the west, met\nthem, and had a great wrestle with the three towns; they made\nballsticks and played with them, with bows and arrows, and with the\n\u00e1tassa, the war club. They fell out, fought, and killed each other.\nAfter this warring, the three towns moved eastwardly, and met the\n\u00c1bika on Coosa river. There they agreed to go to war for four years\nagainst their first enemy; they made shields[143], tup\u0115l\u00fakso, of\nbuffalo hides and it was agreed, that the warriors of each town should\ndry and bring forward the \u00edka h\u00e1lbi or scalps of the enemy and pile\nthem; the \u00c1bika had a small pile, the Chicasa were above them, the\nKawita above them, and the Kasi\u03c7ta above all. The two last towns\nraised the \u00edtu tch\u00e1ti, _red_ or _scalp-pole_, and do not suffer any\nother town to raise it. Kasi\u03c7ta is first in rank.\n\n    [Footnote 143: The present Creek word for _shield_ is\n    masan\u00e1gita. The tup\u0115l\u00fakso consisted of a round frame, over\n    which hides were stretched.]\n\n\"After this, they settled the rank of the four towns among themselves.\nKasi\u03c7ta called \u00c1bika and Chicasa tchatch\u00fasi, _my younger brothers_.\nChicasa and \u00c1bika called Kasi\u03c7ta and Kawita tcha`l\u00e1ha, _my elder\nbrothers_. \u00c1bika called Chicasa ama'hm\u00e1ya or _my elders, my\nsuperiors_, and Chicasa sometimes uses the same term to \u00c1bika.\n\n\"This being done they commenced their settlements on Coosa and\nTallapoosa rivers, and crossing the falls of Tallapoosa, above\nTukab\u00e1\u03c7tchi, they visited the Chatahutchi river, and found a race of\npeople with flat heads in possession of the mounds in the Kasi\u03c7ta\nfields. These people used bows and arrows, with strings made of\nsinews. The al\u00edktchalgi or great physic makers sent some rats in the\nnight-time, which gnawed the strings, and in the morning they attacked\nand defeated the flat-heads. They crossed the river at the island,\nnear the mound, and took possession of the country. After this they\nspread out eastwardly to Otch\u00edsi-h\u00e1tchi or Okmulgi river, to Okoni\nriver, to Og\u012btchi or How-ge-chuh river, to Ch\u00edska t\u00e1lofa h\u00e1tchi or\nSavannah river, called sometimes Sawan\u00f3gi. They met the white people\non the seacoast, who drove them back to their present situation.\n\n\"Kasi\u03c7ta and Chicasa consider themselves as people of one fire,\nt\u00fatk-itka h\u00e1mkushi,[144] from the earliest account of their origin.\nKasi\u03c7ta appointed the first m\u00edko for the Chicasa, directed him to\nsettle in the large field (sit down in the big savanna), where they\nnow are, and govern them. Some of the Chicasa straggled off and\nsettled near Augusta, from whence they returned and settled near\nKasi\u03c7ta, and thence rejoined their own people. Kasi\u03c7ta and Chicasa\nhave remained friends ever since their first acquaintance.\"\n\n    [Footnote 144: T\u00fatk-itka h\u00e1mkushi: of one town, belonging to one\n    tribe; literally: \"of one burning _fire_:\" t\u00fatka _fire_, itkis\n    _it burns_, h\u00e1mkin _one_, -ushi, suffix: _belonging to, being\n    of_.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n_Extract from_: \"History of the Moskoquis, called to-day Creeks;\" a\nchapter in \"M\u00e9moire\" of Milfort, pp. 229-265:\n\nEverybody knows, that when the Spaniards conquered Mexico, they\nexperienced but little difficulty in subduing the peaceable nation\ninhabiting those southwestern countries by means of their firearms,\nwhich proved to be far superior to the bows and arrows of their\nopponents, and against which courage availed almost nothing. The ruler\nMontezuma saw the impossibility of resisting, and called to his aid\nthe neighboring tribes. At that epoch the Moskoquis formed a powerful\nseparate republic in the northwest of Mexico; they succored him with a\nnumerous body of warriors, but were frightfully decimated by the\nSpaniards, who dismembered Montezuma's domain, and almost completely\ndepopulated it. The conquerors also extended their sceptre over the\nterritory of the Moskoquis, who, disdaining abject slavery, preferred\nto leave their native country to regain their former independence.\n\nThey directed their steps to the north, and having marched about one\nhundred leagues reached the headwaters of Red river in fifteen days.\nFrom there they followed its course through immense plains, blooming\nwith flowers and verdure and stocked with game, for eight days.\nInnumerable flocks of aquatic and other birds congregated around the\nsalt ponds of the prairie and on the waters of Red River. Encountering\nclumps of trees upon their way, they stopped their march. Scouting\nparties were dispatched to explore the surroundings; they returned in\na month, having discovered a forest, the borders of which were\nsituated on Red river, and contained ample subterranean dwellings. The\nMoskoquis went on, and on reaching the spot, discovered that these\ndwellings were hollows made in the soft ground by buffaloes and other\nanimals, which had been attracted by the salty taste of the earth. The\ntribe concluded to settle at this quiet place and began to sow the\ngrains of maize which they had brought from their Mexican home. Being\nin want of other tools, they managed to cut and trim pieces of wood\nwith sharp-edged stones; these wooden sticks were then charred and\nhardened in the fire, to serve as agricultural implements. Thereupon\nthey fenced in the fields selected for planting by means of rails and\npickets, so as to prevent the wild animals from eating the maize-crop,\nand apportioned some of the land to each family[145] in the tribe.\nWhile the young people of both sexes were occupied at the agricultural\nwork, the old ones were smoking their calumets. Thus many years were\npassed in happy retirement and abundance of material riches.\n\n    [Footnote 145: Family is probably meant for _gens_, or\n    totem-clan.]\n\nBut soon their destinies took a downward turn, and forced them to\nexpatriate themselves for a second time. A number of their men were\nkilled by the Albamo or Alibamu, and the young men sent after them\nwere unable to meet the hostiles and to chastise them. The m\u00edkos\nattributed this to the want of unity in their military organization,\nand as a remedy for it instituted the charge of Great Warrior or\ntusten\u00faggi `l\u00e1ko. His authority lasted at first only during the\nwar-expedition commanded by him, but within that time his power was\nunlimited, and he could not be called to any account.\n\nLed by a tusten\u00faggi of their choice, they pursued the Alibamu, and\nfinally caught up with them near a forest on the banks of the Missouri\nriver. The war-chief ordered the wind gens, to which he belonged, to\ncross the river first, then followed the bear gens, then the tiger\ngens, and so forth. On their march the vanguard was formed by the\nyoung braves, the rear-guard by the old men, and the non-combatants\nwere placed in the centre. They surprised the Alibamu, who then\ninhabited subterranean dwellings (souterrains), and massacred a large\nnumber of them; then these retreated in haste along the Missouri\nriver, descending on its right or southern banks. When again closely\npressed by the pursuing Moskoquis, who had defeated them more than\nonce, the Alibamu crossed over to the left side of the river; but this\ndid not save them from pursuit, for the Moskoquis followed them to the\nopposite side, defeated them in a sharp encounter, and drove them in\nthe direction of Mississippi river, in which many found a watery grave\nin their hasty flight.\n\nThe two belligerent tribes now crossed Mississippi river, and the\nAlibamu, having an advance of eight days over their pursuers, fled\nbefore them into the interior parts to the east. The Moskoquis\ndiscovered their tracks and followed them to the Ohio river, north\nshore, thence to the influx of Wabash river, then crossed Ohio river\ninto what is now Kentucky, continued their march in a southern\ndirection, and finally arrived in the Yazoo country, where they stayed\nfor several years. The caves in which they lived exist to the present\nday; some of them were excavated by themselves, while others were\nfound ready for occupation.\n\nIn the meantime the Alibamu had remained in the fertile tracts along\nCoosa river. Their warriors cut off and scalped some of the Moskoqui\nscouts, who had come to ascertain their whereabouts. This deed so\nembittered the injured tribe, that their m\u00edkos resolved to dispossess\nthe enemy of their territory for the third time. They crossed\nCumberland and Tennessee rivers, followed Coosa river in marching\nalong its banks from south to north,[146] but were too late for the\nAlibamu, who had previously left the country, partly for Mobile,\npartly for the tracts held by Cha'hta Indians.\n\n    [Footnote 146: p. 262: \"_dans la direction du nord_.\" Perhaps we\n    have to add the words: \"_au sud_.\"]\n\nThe Moskoquis then quietly occupied the country which they had\nconquered and spread out along the rivers Coosa, Tallapoosa,\nChatahutchi, Flint, Okmulgi, Great and Little Okoni and Ogitchi, till\nthey reached Savannah river at the place where Augusta is now\nstanding.\n\nThe Moskoquis, after taking possession of this wide extent of\nterritory, sent their warriors down Mobile river in pursuit of the\nAlibamu, who had placed themselves under the protection of the French.\nThe French commander sought to prevent a war between the two bodies\nof Indians, and succeeded in arranging a truce of six months and in\ndetermining with accuracy the hunting grounds of both. Leaders and\nwarriors of the Moskoquis then descended the river and concluded a\nlasting peace with the hostile tribe in the presence of the French\ncommander. They even invited the Alibamu to join their confederacy by\noffering them a tract of land on what is now Alabama river, with the\nprivilege of preserving their own customs. The Alibamu accepted the\noffer, settled on the land, built a town on it, called Coussehat\u00e9, and\nsince then form an integral part of the Moskoqui people, which now\nassumed the name of Creeks.\n\nAs a sequel to his wonderful story of the pursuit of the Alibamu by\nthe Creeks and the final peaceable settling down of both, Milfort adds\nsome points on the early doings and warrings of the Creeks, which had\noccurred but a limited number of years before his stay in the tribe,\nand were recounted to him by one of the m\u00edkos from their memorial\nbeads, like the legendary migration:\n\nAbout the time of Coussehat\u00e9's foundation an Indian tribe dismembered\nby the Iroquois and Hurons, the Tukabatchi, fled to the Creeks, and\nasked for shelter. Lands were assigned and the fugitives built on it a\ntown, which they named after themselves, and where the general\nassemblies of the entire people are sometimes meeting. This kind\nreception encouraged the Task\u00edgi and the Oxiailles (Oktch\u00e1yi) who were\nalso annoyed by their warlike neighbors, to seek a place of safety\namong the Creeks. Their request was granted also. The former settled\nat the confluence of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers, the Oxiailles ten\nleagues to the north of them, in a beautiful prairie near a rivulet.\n\nShortly after this event, the small tribe of the Yuchi (_la petite\nnation des Udgis_), partly dismembered by the British, also fled to\nthe Creek towns and were given a territory on Chatahutchi river.\nLikewise did a part of the Chicasa apply for help; they were assigned\nseats on Yazoo river, \"at the head of Loup river,\"[147] and soon\nextended their habitations up to the Cheroki boundaries. A few years\nafter, the unhappy Naktche took refuge among the Chicasa, who by\nprotecting them underwent the displeasure of the French colonists.\nThey attacked the Chicasa and in spite of their superior artillery\nwere disastrously beaten near Loup river. A second attack of theirs\nwas warded off by the tribe, by acceding to the peace arrangements\nproposed by the French. The Naktche then passed over to the Creeks and\nobtained lands on Coosa river; they built there the towns of Natchez\nand of Abikudshi, near two high mountains having the appearance of\nsugar-loaves. The head men of the Creeks went to New Orleans in order\nto arrange matters amicably with the French and permitted them to\nerect a fort at Taskigi, subsequently called Fort Toulouse, and the\ntribes were helpful in erecting it.\n\n    [Footnote 147: Better known as Neshoba river, State of\n    Mississippi; nesh\u00f3ba, Cha'hta term for _gray wolf_.]\n\nJealous of the erection of this advanced trade-post by their\nhereditary enemy, the British asked for permission to build a fort on\nOg\u012btchi river, twenty miles west of Augusta, Georgia, but were\nroundly, and in unmistakable terms, refused by the Creek towns. After\nthe loss of the Canadian provinces, Fort Toulouse was evacuated by the\nFrench. The Creeks, much dismayed at the departure of their friends,\nand filled with aversion against the British and Spaniards, were\ncompelled to open their towns to the English traders, to obtain the\nneeded articles of European manufacture.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nFollows the recital of the incorporation of some families of\nApalachicola, Sh\u00e1wano and Cheroki Indians into the community of the\nCreeks (M\u00e9m., pp. 276-285). Unfortunately the statement concerning the\nimmigration of the Cheroki is without any details, and therefore is of\nno avail in localizing the Cheroki towns or colonies within the Creek\nterritory (p. 285). The author states that the immigration was caused\nby the pressure exercised upon the tribe by the English and Americans;\nit was therefore of a quite modern date, if Milfort can be trusted.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn 1781, on the 1st of February, Milfort, great war-chief of the\nCreeks, left his home at Little Talassi, half a league above the\nancient Fort Toulouse, at the head of two hundred young braves, to\nvisit the legendary caves on Red river, from which the nation had\nissued in bygone times. They crossed the territories held by the Upper\nCha'hta, passed through Mobile, the confluence of Iberville bayou with\nMississippi river, St. Bernard bay on the coast, and following a\nnorthern direction, finally reached a forest on Red river, about 150\nleagues above its junction with Mississippi river. They crossed these\nwoods, which were situated on an eminence on the river side, and stood\nin face of the caves (_cavernes_), the objective point of the\nexpedition.\n\nThe noise of a few gun-shots brought out of these spacious cavities a\nlarge number of bisons, wild oxen and wild horses, which ran,\nfrightened as they were by the unusual explosions, head over heels,\nover precipices of more than eighty feet of perpendicular height into\nthe slimy waters of Red river. The only description Milfort gives of\nthese caves goes to show that there were several or many of them,\nsituated in close vicinity to each other, and that those seen could\neasily contain fifteen to twenty thousand families. The party\nconcluded to pass the inclement season in these grottoes, which they\nhad reached about Christmas time. Here they hunted, fished and danced\nuntil the end of March, 1782, then started for the Missouri, and\nsubsequently for home, well supplied with the products of the chase.\n\n\n_Remarks on Task\u00e1ya M\u00edko's Kasi'hta Legend._\n\nA closer study of this legend reveals many points of importance for\nthe better understanding of Tchikilli's narrative, as both have\nevidently been derived from the same original report.\n\nThe locality where the tribes of the Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta, Kaw\u00edta and Chicasa\ncame from is placed here in the same point of the compass as in\nTchikilli's story, in the west. Whether the forks of the Red river\nwere supposed to coincide with the \"mouth of the earth\" in the legend\ncan be decided only when we shall have a better knowledge of Creek\nfolklore. If Hawkins' informant used the passive form of h\u00eddsh\u00e4s _to\nsee_, when speaking of the appearance of the Kas\u00ed\u03c7ta, it would be\nmore appropriate to say _originated, were born_ than the expression we\nfind in the text: \"found themselves.\" The subterranean dwellings,\nmentioned and visited by Milfort as being the legendary home of the\n\"Moskoquis,\" are not mentioned here; and in French colonial times the\n\"Forks of Red river\" designated the confluence of Washita and Red\nrivers.\n\nThe hayoy\u00e1lgi, coming from the four corners of the world to light the\nsacred fire, the symbol of the sun, are the winds fanning it to a\nhigher flame, and the purpose of the story is to make an oracular\npower of the sacred flame, by which the Holder of Breath, or Great\nSpirit, could be placed in communication with his Indian wards, and\nenabled to take care of them.\n\nThe notice that each of the seven plants distributed to the Indians\nbelonged, or was the emblem of a certain gens or division of people,\nis gathered from this passage only, and probably refers to the\ningredients of some war-physic, which only a limited number of the\ngentes may have been entitled to contribute to the annual p\u00faskita. The\nprecedence of some favored gentes before others in regard to offices\nof peace or war is frequently observed among Northern as well as\nSouthern tribes of Indians.[148] The number four is conspicuous here\nas well as in the legend related by Tchikilli; we have four hayoy\u00e1lgi,\nfour principal chieftaincies, four years of warfare, etc.\n\n    [Footnote 148: Cf. what is said of the _wind_ gens in Milfort's\n    migration legend.]\n\nThe cause of the warring, or the pretense for it, against \"some other\nIndians from the west\" is curiously similar to the rivalry in athletic\nsports, which took place between the western Iroquois and their\nsubdivisions, and finally led to the destruction of the Erie or\nK\u00e1'hkwa Indians (Cusick, Johnson). The names of \"brothers, cousins,\nelders,\" which occur here, are terms of intertribal courtesy, which we\nfind also, perhaps in a more pronounced manner, among the New York\nIroquois. The Creeks called the Delaware and Sh\u00e1wano Indians\ngrandfathers, because they regard their customs and practices as older\nand more venerable than their own; others state, because they occupied\ntheir countries further back in time than the Creeks did theirs.\n\nThe facts subsequently related are given without such chronological\ndates as we find with the previous ones, but the narrator evidently\ntried to condense into the space of a few years what it took\ngenerations to accomplish. This is very frequently observed in\nlegendary tales. The spreading out of the people from the Tallapoosa\nriver to the Chatahutchi and from there to the Savannah must have\ninvolved a warfare, struggling, migration and settling down of several\ncenturies, for the advance of the Maskoki proper in this direction was\ntantamount to the formation of the Maskoki confederacy by subduing or\nincorporating the tribes standing in their way, and to the still more\nlengthy process of settling among them. What nation the flat-heads or\naborigines of the country may have belonged to, will be discussed in\nthe remarks to Tchikillis' tale. That there were Creek-speaking\nIndians on the Atlantic coast as early as 1564, has been shown\nconclusively in the article Y\u00e1massi; but their expulsion from there by\nthe white colonists occurred but one hundred and fifty years later.\n\nA certain objective purpose is inherent in these legends, which is\nmore of a practical than of a historical character; it intends to\ntrace the tribal friendship existing between the Kasi\u03c7ta and the\nChicasa, or a portion of the latter, to remote ages. It must be\nremembered, that both speak different languages intelligible to each\nother only in a limited number of words. An alliance comparable to\nthis also exists between the Pima and Maricopa tribes of Arizona; the\nlanguages spoken by these even belong to different families.\n\nThe period when the Chicasa settlement near Kasi\u03c7ta was broken up by\nthe return of the inmates to the old Chicasa country is not definitely\nknown, but may be approximately set down in the beginning of the\neighteenth century. Later on, a war broke out between the Creeks and\nChicasa. Kasi\u03c7ta town refused to march against the old allies, and\n\"when the Creeks offered to make peace their offers were rejected,\ntill the Kasi\u03c7ta interposed their good offices. These had the\ndesired effect, and produced peace\" (Hawkins, p. 83).\n\n\n_Remarks to Milfort's Legend._\n\nMilfort's \"History of the Moskoquis,\" as given above in an extract, is\na singular mixture of recent fabrications and distortions of real\nhistoric events, with some points traceable to genuine aboriginal\nfolklore.\n\nNobody who has the slightest knowledge of the general history of\nAmerica will credit the statement that the Creeks ever lived in the\nnorthwestern part of Mexico at Montezuma's and Cortez' time, since H.\nde Soto found them, twenty years later, on the Coosa river; and much\nless the other statement, that they succored Montezuma against the\ninvader's army.[149] That they met the Alibamu on the west side of\nMississippi river is not impossible, but that they pursued them for\nnearly a thousand miles up that river to the Missouri, and then down\nagain on the other or eastern side of Mississippi, is incredible to\nanybody acquainted with Indian customs and warfare. The narrative of\nthe Alibamu tribal origin given under: Alibamu, p. 86, locates the\nplace where they issued from the ground between the Cahawba and the\nAlabama rivers. That the Creeks arrived in Northern Alabama in or\nafter the time of the French colonization of the Lower Mississippi\nlands, is another impossibility, and the erection of Fort Toulouse\npreceded the second French war against the Chicasa by more than twenty\nyears, whereas Milfort represents it as having been a consequence of\nthat war.\n\n    [Footnote 149: A Chicasa migration from Mexico to the Kappa or\n    Uga\u03c7a settlements, on Arkansas river, is mentioned by Adair,\n    History, p. 195.]\n\nIt is singular and puzzling that Maskoki legends make so frequent\nmention of _caves_ as the former abodes of their own or of cognate\ntribes. Milfort relates, that the Alibamu, when in the Yazoo country,\nlived in caves. This may refer to the Cha'hta country around \"Yazoo\nOld Village\" (p. 108), in Neshoba county, Mississippi; but if it\npoints to the Yazoo river, we may think of the chief Alimamu (whose\nname stands for the tribe itself), met with by H. de Soto, west of\nChica\u00e7a, and beyond Chocchechuma. A part of the Cheroki anciently\ndwelt in caves; and concerning the caverns from which the Creeks claim\nto have issued, James Adair gives the following interesting\ndisclosure: \"It is worthy of notice, that the Muskohgeh cave, out of\nwhich one of their politicians persuaded them their ancestors formerly\nascended to their present terrestrial abode, lies in the Nanne Hamgeh\nold town, inhabited by the Mississippi-Nachee Indians,[150] which is\none of the most western parts of their old-inhabited country.\" The\nidea that their forefathers issued from caves was so deeply engrafted\nin the minds of these Indians, that some of them took any conspicuous\ncave or any country rich in caves to be the primordial habitat of\ntheir race. This is also confirmed by a conjurer's tricky story\nalluded to by Adair, History, pp. 195. 196.\n\n    [Footnote 150: Cf. Abiku\u2032dshi, p. 125. Adair, History, p.\n    195.]\n\nA notion constantly recurring in the Maskoki migrations is that they\njourneyed _east_. This, of course, only points to the general\ndirection of their march in regard to their starting point. As they\nwere addicted to heliolatry, it may be suggested that their conjurers\nadvised them to travel, for luck, to the east only, because the east\nwas the rising place of the sun, their protector and benefactor.\nCosmologic ideas, like this, we find among the Aztecs, Mayas, Chibchas\nand many other American nations, but the direction of migrations is\ndetermined by physical causes and not by visionary schemes. Wealth and\nplunder prompted the German barbarians, at the beginning of the\nmedi\u00e6val epoch of history, to migrate to the south of Europe; here, in\nthe Gulf territories, the inducement lay more especially in the quest\nof a country more productive in grains, edible roots, fish and game.\nIt may be observed here, that from the moving of the heavenly bodies\nfrom east to west the Pani Indians deduced the superstition that they\nshould never move _directly_ east in their travels.[151] This,\nhowever, they rarely observed in actual life at the expense of\nconvenience.\n\n    [Footnote 151: John B. Dunbar, The Pawnees; in Mag. of Amer.\n    History, 1882, (3d article) \u00a7 10.]\n\n\nTCHIKILLI'S KASI'HTA LEGEND.\n\nThe Kasi'hta migration legend, in its detailed form as now before us,\nhas been transmitted in the following manner:\n\nAfter Tchikilli had delivered it in the year 1735 at Savannah, in the\npresence of Governor Oglethorpe, of the colonial authorities and\npeople, and of over sixty of his Indian followers (cf. p. 193), the\ninterpreter handed it over, written upon a buffalo skin, to the\nBritish, and in the same year it was brought to England. To these\nstatements, the _American Gazetteer_[152] adds the following\nparticulars, which seem to be founded on authentic information: \"This\nspeech was curiously written in red and black characters, on the skin\nof a young buffalo, and translated into English, as soon as delivered\nin the Indian language.... The said skin was set in a frame, and hung\nup in the Georgia Office, in Westminster. It contained the Indians'\ngrateful acknowledgments for the honors and civilities paid to\nTomochichi, etc.\"\n\n    [Footnote 152: London, 1762, vol. II, Art. Georgia; cf. Ch. C.\n    Jones, Tomochichi, p. 74. Brinton, Ch.-M. Legend, p. 5.]\n\nUpon the request of Dr. Brinton, Mr. Nicholas Tr\u00fcbner made researches\nin the London offices for this pictured skin, but did not succeed in\nfinding it. He discovered, however, a letter written by Tchikilli,\ndated March, 1734, which is deposited in the Public Record Office,\nChancery Lane.[153]\n\n    [Footnote 153: Brinton, Ch.-M. Legend, pp. 5. 6.]\n\nThe chances of rediscovering the English original of the legend are\ntherefore almost as slim as those of recovering the lost books of\nLivy's History. But a translation from the English has been preserved\nin a German book of the period, and the style of this piece shows it\nto be an authentic and comparatively accurate rendering of the\noriginal. The German book referred to is a collection of pamphlets\ntreating of colonial affairs, and published from 1735 to 1741; its\nfirst volume bears the title: _Ausfuehrliche Nachricht von den\nSaltzburgischen Emigranten, die sich in America niedergelassen haben.\nWorin, etc. etc., Herausgegeben von Samuel Urlsperger, Halle,\nMDCCXXXV_. The legend occupies pp. 869 to 876 of this _first volume_,\nand forms _chapter six_ of the \"_Journal_\" of von Reck, the title of\nwhich is as follows: _Herrn Philipp Georg Friederichs von Reck Diarium\nvon Seiner Reise nach Georgien im Jahr 1735_. F. von Reck was the\ncommissary of those German-Protestant emigrants whom religious\npersecution had expelled from Salzburg, in Styria, their native city.\n\n\nISTI MASK\u014cKI ADSH\u00daLAGI-T\u00c1TI INN\u0100\u03c7UN\u00c1\u03c7AT OS:\n\nN\u00e1ki Tchik\u00edlli \u00edsti Mask\u014d\u2032ki Hatchap\u00e1la'h Hatch\u00e1ta tip\u0101\u2032\u03c7ad \u00edmmikut\nhamm\u0101\u2032kit opun\u00e1yat\u012bs Saw\u00e4\u2032na tal\u00f3fan, o'h`lolop\u00ed 1735, m\u00f3men\ni-\u00e4tik\u00f3yatis m\u00f3h'men yanash\u00e1`lpin u\u03c7huts\u00e4\u2032hudsatis.\n\nTchik\u00edlli \u00edsti Mask\u014d\u2032ki Hatchap\u00e1la Hatch\u00e1ta t\u00edp\u0101kad \u00edmmikut; \u00c1ntitchi\nK\u00e1witalg\u00ee \u00ee\u2032mmiko m\u00e1\u03c7it; \u00cdll\u00eedsh\u00ee m\u00edkko; \u00d3sta Kas\u00ed\u03c7talgi \u00eemm\u00edkko;\nT\u00e1mmidsho h\u00fa`li m\u00edkko; W\u00e1li Apala'h`ltsukl\u00e1lgi h\u00fa`li kapit\u00e1ni;\nPuipa\u00e9dshi m\u00edkko; T\u00e1mhuitchi Yutchit\u00e1lgi im\u00edfa m\u00edkko; Mitik\u00e1yi\nOk\u016b\u2032nalgi inh\u00fa`li m\u00edkko; Tuwidsh\u00e9dshi m\u00edkko; Huy\u00e1ni Tchiy\u00e1halgin\nOkmulg\u00e1lgi tib\u00e1\u03c7ad \u00ednhu`li m\u00edkko; Stimalagu\u00e9'htchi Osots\u00e1lgi imm\u00edkko;\nHup\u00ed`li Sawokl\u00e1lgi \u00eemm\u00edkko; Iwan\u00e1g\u00ee m\u00edkko; Tam\u00f3kmi Yufant\u00e1lg\u00ee inh\u00fa`li\nkapit\u00e1ni t\u00fan, tustano\u03c7\u00e1lg\u00ee p\u00e1li-tut'tch\u00ednit ap\u00e1kin opun\u00e1yit \u00f3katis:\n\nM\u00f3mad n\u00edta \u014d\u2032dshin \u00edkana idsh\u00f3kuat h\u00e1s\u00ee-aklatg\u00e1tin \u014d\u2032dshit \u014d\u2032men\nhaw\u00e1\u03c7lad\u012bs; m\u00f3mof man Kas\u00ed'htalgi ikandsh\u00f3\u03c7uan \u0101\u2032sosa-id an\u00e1kuasin\nink\u00e1k\u00eeda h\u00e1yatis tch\u00e9. M\u00fa'mof \u00edkanat tchap\u00e1ka-ikit hopuit\u00e1kin\ninl\u00f3\u03c7adis; ma m\u014d\u2032man ak\u00fayi'htchit inha'-a\u03c7l\u00e1tkosin ap\u00f3\u03c7ad\u012bs; m\u00f3m\u00e4s\nap\u00e1lluat is\u00e1fuli'htchit m\u00e1t\u0103wan i-ap\u00f3kat\u012bs. M\u00f3m\u00e4s \u00edsti s\u00falgad \u00ed-upan\nfik'h\u00fannatis m\u00fama\u03c7an h\u00ed`lit-w\u0113\u2032tis k\u00f3m\u0101kika.\n\nM\u00famitu ist\u00f3m\u00e4s \u00ee\u2032kana hubuit\u00e1g\u00ee \u00eenl\u00f3\u03c7atid imomitch\u00e4\u2032dshin, inh\u00ed`l\u00eek\u00fbt\nh\u00e1si-\u00f3ss\u0101tif\u00e1tchan ap\u00edyat\u012bs. (---- up!)\n\nM\u00f3'hmit ap\u00edy\u00eet o\u00ed-ua ok\u00fb\u2032fki tch\u00edkfit lip\u00e1kfit w\u00e1ggin us\u00e9\u03c7tch\u00eet, h\u00e1p\u00fb\nh\u00e1yit f\u00edgabin uhhay\u00e1tgadis. \u00cdsin h\u00e1yatgi ap\u00edy\u00eet n\u012d\u2032ta h\u00e1mgad y\u00e1fgad\u00een\nu\u00edwa ts\u00e1-atid w\u00e1ggin u`l\u00e9'htchad\u012bs. M\u00f3h'm\u00eet man ap\u00f3g\u00eet u'h`lolop\u00ed\nhok\u00f3lin `l\u00e1`lot\u00e4s man pas\u00e1tit p\u00e1pit ap\u00f3katis. M\u00fam\u00e4s wi-k\u00e4\u2032wat\ninhi`l\u00e1gikun inhi`lagig\u00e1dis. \u00dayuwa tch\u00e1dad iy\u00faksa f\u00e1dsan ap\u00edyad\u012bs,\nm\u00f3mof tin\u012b\u2032tki \u014d\u2032kin imp\u00f3hatis n\u00e1kitoha k\u00f3'hmet u\u03c7'hap\u00edad\u012bs.\n\nM\u00famad \u00edkodshi tch\u00e1tit `l\u00e1nin \u00f3ss\u00eet \u00f3m\u0101tit \u00f3kin h\u00eddshatis; m\u00f3mad ma\n`lan\u00ed \u00fanapan yaha\u00edk\u00eeda \u00f3k\u012bd poh\u00e1kat\u012bs N\u00e1gitun \u00f3mad h\u00ed'htchag\u012bs\nk\u00e4\u2032\u03c7tchid \u00edsti u\u03c7t\u00fatatis; m\u00famatin t\u00f3tka s\u00e1kid h\u00e1lluin \u00e1l\u00eegapit \u00f3m\u0101tit\nmat yaha\u00edkida \u00f3kit \u00f3min hidsh\u00e1katis. \u00cd-a `l\u00e1ni `l\u00e1ni imm\u00edkkun ka\u00edtch\u00eed\nhodsh\u00edfat\u012bs. H\u00e1yum\u00e4s tin\u00edtki im\u00fang\u012bs m\u014d\u2032men \u00edsti impingalag\u00ed im\u00fangat\n\u014d\u2032mis.\n\nMan ist\u00ee it\u00e1loa ma`l\u00e1\u03c7`la\u03c7a tut'tch\u00ednin itih\u00eddshatis m\u00f3mad ma `l\u00e1ni\nt\u00fatka \u00f3ssi \u014d\u2032dshan ahit\u00eddshatit isf\u00fallin itih\u00eddshatis; m\u00f3'hmet man\nim\u00e1hilissua \u00f3m\u00e4s \u00ednh\u012btchkin n\u00e1ki \u00edta-u s\u00falkin ahupu`llin\u00e1kat\u012bs.\n\nH\u0103\u2032si-\u00f3ssati f\u00e1tsan \u00e1tit t\u00fatka h\u00e1tk\u00eed immal\u0101\u2032katis, m\u00f3m\u00e4s\nistomitchakig\u00e1tis. Wah\u00e1la f\u00e1tsan at\u00edt t\u00fatka okul\u00e1tid immal\u00e1katis,\nm\u00fam\u00e4s m\u00e1-o istomidshik\u00e1tis. Ak\u0115l\u00e1tka f\u00e1tchan at\u00edt t\u00fatka l\u00e1stid\nimmal\u00e1katis, m\u00e1-o istomidshik\u00e1dis. Isp\u00f3gi h\u00fanisa f\u00e1tchan at\u00edt t\u00fatka\ntch\u00e1atitut l\u00e1nit immal\u00e1katis. H\u00eda t\u00f3tka `l\u00e1ni ah\u00ee\u2032tki \u014d\u2032dshi ahit\u00eddshi\n\u00edsfullatid itu\u03c7k\u00e1lan; h\u00eda t\u00f3tkan h\u00e1yomi at\u00edk\u00e4s \u014d\u2032dshit \u014d\u2032s. M\u00e1-o\nyah\u00e1-iki \u00f3'm\u00e4s \u00f3dshid \u00f3m\u012bs. `Lan\u00ed \u00fanapan p\u00fakabit \u00fa\u03c7ui`lit \u00f3mat\u00eet\nfik'h\u00ed`lk\u00eeg\u00fbt istuk\u00e4\u2032idhi m\u00e1hid \u00f3matin ist\u00e4\u2032mat \u00edsto'hmit \u00f3matin\nf\u00edk'hunn\u012bs m\u00e1\u03c7\u00e4s s\u00eeg\u00e1tis. \u00cdst\u00fbdshi \u00ee\u2032tski-s\u00fasik\u014dn ma \u00edtun i`lanafa\u00edkit\nil\u00edhotchatis; m\u00f3'hmet ma p\u00fakab\u00ee \u00ed'hsit h\u00f3`li ap\u00edyat\u00e4s isf\u00fallatis.\nA\u2032tassa \u00f3mid \u00f3matis. H\u00e1yom\u00e4s \u00f3dsh\u012bs ma\u00f3mid, ito-\u00fa'h m\u00e1tawat \u00f3matis.\nHi\u00e1tawan n\u00e1k\u00ee i-al\u00fanga ma`l\u00e1\u03c7`la\u03c7\u0103 \u014d\u2032stid yaha\u00edgit \u00eestum\u00edtskatad\ni-u\u03c7ki`lku\u00eddshit \u00f3dsh\u00een inh\u00edtchkad\u012bs; ihatitch\u00edska: p\u00e1ssa; sahok\u00f3lad:\nm\u00edkko-huyan\u00eddsha; satot'tch\u00ednad: saw\u00e1tsku'h; is\u00fastad; h\u00edshi lop\u00fatski;\nhay\u00f3mit inh\u00edtchkad\u012bs.\n\nIm\u00e1hilissua inh\u00edtchkadi p\u014d\u2032skat p\u00e1ssa m\u00edkko-hoyan\u00eddsha tip\u00e1kan\nisiaf\u00e1stid \u00f3mants. H\u00eda p\u00faskita o'h`lolop\u00ed om\u00e1lgan i-ilaw\u00eddshit n\u00e1ki\nh\u00f3ma l\u00f3ktsat at\u00edgat man w\u00e9yit \u00f3mis. Ma im\u00e1hilissua inhitch\u00e9kadi \u00e1yat\nh\u00faktagid\u0113s \u00edpusk\u012bs, m\u00f3min \u00f3mad t\u00fatka \u00edt\u00e4man i`la-it\u00eddshit ap\u00f3kin n\u012dt\u00e1\ntsa\u03c7g\u00edp\u00e4s, \u00edpak\u00e4s, kulap\u00e1\u03c7\u00e4s \u00f3`lin inhuy\u00e1nad i`la-\u00e1w\u012bd \u00f3matis. H\u00edan\nm\u00famikun \u00fb\u2032mad imahil\u00edssuat\u00e4s imahop\u00e1nid \u00f3m\u012dka; m\u00f3min h\u00f3ktage-u'h\ntchaf\u00edndshagig\u014d hakit\u00e1yid \u00f3mika.\n\nMa-\u00f3mofa m\u00e1hin \u00edsta it\u00e1luat adsuleidsh\u00edt\u00fbt \u00f3mit hom\u00e1\u03c7'hotit innakm\u00e1git\nshih\u00f3ki-tit\u00e1yiha k\u00f3mitan itimayop\u00f3skit isih\u00f3\u03c7atis. It\u00e1luat \u014d\u2032st\u00eega\np\u00fakaben tchaktchah\u00ed'htchid: \"f\u00e1ki dsh\u00e1din istchaditchag\u00ed'hlis; l\u00e1nit\u00fbt\n\u00f3m\u00e4sim nik`l\u00fafat tch\u00e1tit \u00f3mika m\u00e1kakadis. Mum\u00edh'tchid p\u00f3nho`li\nil\u00ee\u2032tchkan ap\u00edagi`l m\u00fb\u2032men \u00edsta italuat-\u00e1tit istigah\u00e1`lpi yawe\u00edkit,\n\u00edtu tchaktchah\u00eddshati \u00fb'hl\u00e1nin \u00f3mat, mad atch\u00fall\u012bd \u00f3ma`lis\"\nitig\u00e4\u2032dshadis.\n\nOm\u00e1lgat mom\u00edtchita k\u00f3m\u00eet, \u00f3m\u00e4sim Kasi\u03c7t\u00e1lg\u00ee t\u00e1'htit yawa\u00edgit p\u00f3kabi\naksomidsh\u00e4\u2032\u03c7tchin h\u00edtchgig\u014d h\u00e1\u03c7ad\u012bs. M\u00f3miga mat it\u00e1llua ads\u00falli m\u00e1had\n\u00f3mis komhuyid\u00e1dis. Tchikas\u00e1lgit awa\u00edh\u00eegadis, m\u00f3men Atil\u00e1malgi\ni`la-aweih\u00edgadis; m\u00fam\u00e4s Abi\u03c7k\u00e1gitawat u'hl\u00e1ni ay\u00eddsh\u00e4dshad\nisti-t\u00f3`lkua at\u00edkusi-t\u00e1yin yawa\u00edgad\u012bs.\n\nMa-\u00f3mof f\u00fb\u2032su\u0103 ok'hol\u00e1tid `l\u00e1kid \u00e1`latis; ih\u00e1dsh\u00ee tch\u00e1pg\u012bd, \u00edmpafnita\nl\u00e1mhi im\u00e1ntalidshid. N\u00edta um\u00e1lgan al\u00e1g\u00eet \u00edstin pas\u00e1t\u00eet p\u00e1p\u00eet \u00e1`latis.\nH\u00f3kti ah\u00e1kin h\u00e1hit, h\u00eda f\u00fasu\u0103 \u00e1`latin ihuil\u00e4idsh\u00e1\u03c7adis. H\u00eda f\u00fasua ma\nn\u00e1k\u00ee inhah\u00f3yadi \u00ed'hsit isayipat\u00ed\u2032tut, hof\u00f3nen i`lisal\u00e1\u03c7at\u012bs. \u00d3dshipin\n\u00f3mad n\u00e1kit\u00e4s h\u00edtchkuidshi w\u00e4\u00edtis k\u00f3makatis. Hof\u00f3ni h\u00e1kin tch\u00edssi\ntch\u00e1tit h\u012b\u2032tchkatis m\u00f3men ma f\u00fasuat i`lkit\u00f3-aitis k\u00f3ma\u03c7atis.\n\nMa tch\u00edssin itimpunay\u00e1git istumidshak\u00e1tit \u00ed`lgi imilidshagit\u00e1yad\nitimpun\u00e4y\u00e1katis. Ma f\u00fasu\u0103 \u00edtcha-kuad\u00e1ksin \u00edn`li ap\u00e1k\u00edn \u014d\u2032dshid \u00f3matis.\n\nM\u00f3men ma tch\u00ee\u2032ssit \u00edtsa kuad\u00e1ksi \u00eef\u00e1kan kal\u00e1git int\u00e1dshatis ist\u00f3mit\nissi-iman\u00e4\u00edtchiko-tid\u00e1yin h\u00e1yatis; m\u00f3men man il\u00eddish\u00e1\u03c7atis. Ma f\u00fasu\u0103\nf\u00fasu\u0103 \u00f3mal imm\u00edkkun k\u00e4idsh\u00e1\u03c7atis. Lamhi-u m\u00edkko `l\u00e1kid \u014d\u2032m\u00eds k\u00f3magid\n\u00f3\u2032mis; m\u00f3miga h\u00fa`lid\u00e4s ap\u00edyis ad\u00e1m h\u00ed`lka h\u00e1kad\u00e4s f\u00fallis; m\u00f3mof\nl\u00e1mhi-h\u00e1dshi k\u00f3'htsaktsah\u00eddshid isf\u00fallid \u00f3mis. Tch\u00e1tad h\u00f3`lit \u00f3min\nh\u00e1tg\u0101t\u00eet h\u00ed`lka ahop\u00e1kat \u00f3mis. \u00cdhu`lit t\u00e1fa h\u00e1tkin isnih\u0101\u00eddshit\nidsh\u00fb\u2032kuan hat\u00eddshit awol\u00e4\u2032dshit l\u00e1mhi \u00f3kit h\u00e1kin \u00f3mat ist\u00f3fan\nil\u00ed'htchikos.\n\nH\u00eda n\u00e1gi m\u00fa'hm\u014df \u00edyupan ma ap\u00f3kati inkap\u00e1\u03c7kit ap\u00edyit n\u00edni h\u00e1tkid w\u00e1kin\no`l\u00e4\u00edtchatis; p\u00e1hit\u00e4s nak-om\u00e1lgat h\u00e1tkusi-\u00e1lgid \u00f3matis. M\u00f3men \u00edstit\nfulli-h\u00ed`lit \u00f3madin idsh\u00e1kadis. Ma n\u00edni itahualap\u00ed\u03c7tchit an\u00e1kuasin\nnodsh\u00e4\u2032dshadis. Isaful\u00ed\u03c7shit n\u00edn\u00ee ist\u00f3mid \u00f3mad yihidsh\u00e1\u03c7ad\u012bs m\u00f3mit\u00edsti\nist\u00f3mid f\u00fallit \u00f3mati, ma n\u00ee\u2032n\u00een at\u00ed\u03c7git atchakapiyak\u00e1tin is\u00e1mumides\n\u00f3'hmis k\u00f3mit \u00f3mad\u012bs. Man atih\u00e4\u00edgit ap\u00edyit Kol\u00f3s'hatchi m\u00e1gidan\nak'hadap\u00eddshatis; Kol\u00f3s'hatchi k\u00e9dshad tch\u00e1d\u00fb-\u00e1lgid \u00edkodshid \u00f3m\u0115ka.\n\nMa h\u00e1tsi tay\u00ed\u03c7tchit ap\u00edy\u00eet h\u00e1si-\u00f3ssati f\u00e1tchan K\u00f3sa m\u00e1gida it\u00e1lluat\nap\u00f3kin i`limu`l\u00e4\u00edtchatis; h\u00edan ap\u00f3kin o'h`lolop\u00ee\u2032 \u00f3stad \u00f3`lad\u012bs.\nK\u00f3salgit \u00f3k\u0101tit isti-p\u00e1pat tch\u00e1tu ha\u00fakin pa\u00edk\u012bd \u00edstin pumpas\u00e1tit\nom\u00edtutanks m\u00e1katis.\n\nKosi\u03c7t\u00e1lgit \u00f3k\u0101tit ill\u00eddshida k\u00f3mid h\u00eddshi-is m\u00e1\u03c7adis. \u00cdkanan ku`la-\u00edt\nudshi ha`lpin h\u00fayan h\u00e1hid is\u00fa\u03c7`lanatis. M\u00f3'hmit to-lop\u00f3tskin\no'htala\u00edtchatis ma isti-p\u00e1pa adshakayig\u014dtit\u00e1yin h\u00e1hit u'hap\u00edyadis,\nn\u00f3'hmit s\u00e1-okan ma tch\u00e1to ha\u00fakit isti-p\u00e1pa pa\u00edkan i`limuhuc\u00edkatis. Ma\nisti-p\u00e1pa tsabakih\u00ed`lit a-os\u0101\u2032-iyit \u00e1ssidshatis af\u00f3salgat it\u00ed`laputit.\nIsti h\u00e1mk\u00fbsit \u00edl\u0101tin ah\u00ed`lit \u00f3m\u012bs om\u00e1lgi mah\u00e1tin m\u00f3nks h\u00f3'hmit,\n\u00edstudshi \u00edtski-s\u00f3sik\u014dn imawaig\u00e1katis \u00edkan-ha\u00fakin awol\u00e4\u00eddshit \u00e1t \u00f3fan.\nMan isti-p\u00e1pa o'hlit\u00e4\u00edgit \u00edgan-ha\u00faki inhay\u00e1katin u'hlat\u00e4\u00edkin,\ntsul\u00edk\u00fbsua ah\u00edt'hukin isn\u00e1fkit ilidsh\u00e1\u03c7atis. If\u00fani hay\u00fam\u00e4s isf\u00f3lli\nim\u00fangat \u014d\u2032mis. Palh\u00e1mgad ts\u00e1titun palh\u00e1mgit ok'hol\u00e1tid \u00f3mis.\n\nIsti-p\u00e1pa n\u00edta iskulap\u00e1k' om\u00e1lgan i`la\u00e1git \u00edsti pas\u00e1tit \u00f3matis. M\u00fanga\nma il\u00ed'htchuf m\u00e1tawan f\u00edk'hunnin n\u00edta kolap\u00e1g\u00ed \u00f3`lin i`li\u00e9tchatis. Ma\nisagi`l\u00e9tchkan h\u00f3`lit\u00e4s apia`l\u00e1nit i-itit\u00e1kuitchat n\u012dta \u00edpagin\nimap\u00f3skit iskulap\u00e1katin ap\u00edyid \u00f3matis. If\u00f3nin i-ahu`lkas\u00edtchid\nisap\u00ed-in \u00f3mad ihitskih\u00ed`lin f\u00fallid \u014d\u2032mis.\n\nO'h`lop\u00ed \u014d\u2032stad \u00f3`lin K\u00f3sa tal\u00f3fa ap\u00f3kati ingap\u00e1\u03c7kit ap\u00edyat h\u00e1tch\u00ee\nN\u00f3f\u0101pi k\u00e1-etchid u`l\u00e4\u00edtchatis y\u00f3mad Kalasi-h\u00e1tchi k\u00e4\u2032hodshid h\u00e1kit\u014ds.\nMan u'h`lolop\u00ed hok\u00f3lin fik'h\u00fan-nad\u012bs. M\u00f3mid \u00e1dshid\u0101s \u00f3dshikoka n\u00e1ki\nyel\u00fangan `l\u00e1`lun y\u00f3men hump\u00e1\u03c7at\u00eds, m\u00f3m\u012dt itcha-kut\u00e1ksi h\u00e1heidshit\nin`li-tati itchh\u00e1sua \u00een\u00fatin `lon\u00f3tut\u00e4s, y\u00f3m\u0101n siyokfanfa-\u00e9dshit\nk\u00faha-tuk\u00e1h'lin isl\u00e1fka h\u00e1yatis.\n\nH\u00eda ap\u00f3kati inkap\u00e1\u03c7kit ap\u00edyad h\u00e1tch\u00ee Watulah\u00e1gi m\u00e1kitan o`l\u00e4\u00edtchatis.\nWatulah\u00e1ki H\u00e1tchi k\u00e4\u00eddshad w\u00e1tulat tidayit l\u00e1tkid \u00f3mit h\u00e1hokadin\nahudsh\u00edf\u00eet umh\u00f3yad\u012bs; m\u00e1n ni'hli h\u00e1mgin nodsh\u00e4\u2032dshatis Had\u00e1m ap\u00edyad\nh\u00e1tchi o\u00edwa u'hl\u00e1tkid odshin u`l\u00e4\u00eddshatis; o-it\u00famkan hotch\u00edfad\u012bs,\nI`l\u00edn hay\u00e1tki h\u00e1tchi h\u00e1mgin u`l\u00e4\u00edtchatis Afosaf\u00edska k\u0115\u2032dshid.\n\nI`l\u00edn hay\u00e1tki ma h\u00e1tchin tay\u00ed\u03c7tchit ap\u00edyad `l\u00e1ni h\u00e1lluit l\u00e4\u00edkin\nhu`l\u00e4\u00edtchadin-\u00edstit ap\u00f3kin h\u00ed\u2032dshatis, n\u00edn\u00ed h\u00e1tki h\u00e1yi f\u00fallangid \u014d\u2032mis\nk\u00f3matis. M\u00fb\u2032nga `li-h\u00e1bkin h\u00e1hi-it \u00edsitch'hatis \u00edsti hi`l\u00e1g\u012bt \u00f3min\n\u014d\u2032mad g\u00ed`lidan k\u00f3midut. M\u00f3m\u00e4s `l\u00ed h\u00e1tki tch\u00e1taku\u00e9'htchit\ni`l\u00e1sidsh'hatis m\u00fa'hmen \u00edmmik\u00fbn hidsh\u00e9\u2032dsha\u03c7adin hi`l\u00edku\u0115dos m\u00e1katis;\n`l\u00edt h\u00e1t'hagid i`laful\u00eddshin \u014d\u2032mad u'hap\u00edhi-id \u00edhaliwa \u00fbm\u00fbs\u00e4s,\nhupuit\u00e1gi ihitchku\u00eddshit i`lasawasa n\u00e1tchkatis, m\u00fam\u00e4s tch\u00e1tid\u00fbga\nu'hap\u00edhiatskas k\u00e4\u00eddshat\u012bs. M\u00f3mi ist\u00f3m\u00e4s \u00edsti ist\u00f3mid om\u00e1kat h\u00edtchitan\nk\u00f3mit u'hap\u00edyi s\u00e1satis; m\u00fb\u2032matin sumitch\u00edpin o`l\u00e4\u00edtchat\u012bs.\n\nN\u00ednit \u00f3-i s\u00e1kun akad\u00e1pgid \u014d\u2032min hidsh\u00e1\u03c7adis m\u00f3madit m\u00e1 nini tab\u00e1la\ni`l\u00fassig\u014dd \u00f3min h\u00eddshit m\u00e1 \u00edsti \u00fayuan is\u00e1ktchiyit \u00f3miga i`l\u00e1sosa-ig\u014ds\nk\u00f3madis.\n\nM\u00e1n `l\u00e1nit l\u00e4\u00edgid \u014d\u2032mis m\u014d\u2032terell m\u00e1git\u00e4t m\u00fb\u2032madit a`lkasat\u00falga\nnafh\u00fag\u012bs ma-\u00fakid h\u00e1kid \u00f3m\u012bs, m\u00f3min m\u00e1\u00edsti m\u00e1n ap\u00f3git \u00f3madsh\u014fks k\u00famhuid\n\u00f3m\u012bs. H\u00fa`lid\u00e4s ap\u00edyit f\u00fallin \u00f3mofa h\u00eda inh\u00e1gi istama\u00edt\u00e4s p\u014d\u2032\u03c7ki \u00e1lg\u012bn\npoh\u00e1g\u00eet f\u00fallid \u00f3mis.\n\nM\u00e1 \u00fayuan apa-idsh\u00eddshit ap\u00edyit \u00fa'hlatk\u012bd \u00f3dshin o`l\u00e4\u00edtchadin tch\u00e1tu\n`l\u2032\u0101k`lagid \u00f3dshin h\u00eddshatis man itcha-\u03c7\u00fbd\u00e1ksit o'hl\u00f3mhin h\u00eddshad\u012bs;\nm\u00f3mit m\u00e1 \u00edsti n\u00een\u00ee h\u00e1tki h\u00e1yi f\u00fallangid \u00f3madshuksh k\u00f3mat\u00eds.\n\nIst\u00f3f\u00e4s \u00edstan ap\u00edyit f\u00fall\u0101ti h\u00f3man \u00edsti hok\u00f3lin wil\u00e1ko-idshit f\u00fallid\n\u00f3m\u012bs. H\u00eda h\u00fama-wil\u00e1kad `l\u00e1ni h\u00e1lluin o'htchimh\u00f3kadin tal\u00f3fat \u00f3dshin\nh\u00eddshatis, `Li-h\u00e1tkin ma tal\u00f3fa is\u00edtch'hatis m\u00fb\u2032mas ma \u00edsti tal\u00f3fa\nat\u00ed\u03c7kad `l\u00ee-\u00ee tch\u00e1tin as\u00edtch'hatis.\n\nM\u00f3mof kas\u00edh'talgi tchap\u00e1k'ho\u03c7at\u012bs m\u00fa'hmit ma it\u00e1luan isapingal\u00eddshin\n\u00f3mof tch\u00f3k\u014f isiti \u0101ip\u00edalis k\u00f3matis. Tch\u00e1dun \u00fayuan akpal\u00e1t\u00eet t\u00e4\u00edgagi\ntit\u00e1yin h\u00e1hi-it u'ht\u00e4y\u00eddshatis m\u00f3h'mit tal\u00f3fa im\u00edsatis ma \u00edsti \u00edka\ntapikstag\u00efd om\u00e1\u03c7atis um\u00e1lgan pas\u00e1tit hok\u00f3l\u0115s\u0115n ahusitch\u00e4\u2032tchat\u012bs.\n\u00c1ssitchi is\u00e1piyad \u00ee'fa h\u00e1tkin is'h\u00edh'tchit ill\u00eddshatis. Hok\u00f3lusi\nah\u014d\u2032skadin ass\u00eddshit isap\u00edyad n\u00edni h\u00e1tkid w\u00e1ggin o`l\u00e4\u00edtch\u0101din tal\u00f3fat\nodsatch\u00fakit \u00edkodshin \u00edh'tchit, h\u00eda \u00edsti hidsh\u00edda k\u00f3mi hopo-iyit\u00e1ngid\n\u00f3madshoks k\u00f3mat\u012bs. H\u00edan Pala\u03c7tchukl\u00e1lgi ap\u00f3kitos m\u014d\u2032men ma\no\u03c7'huan\u00e1ps\u012bd Tamods\u00e4\u2032-idsi \u00f3m\u012bs.\n\nKasi'ht\u00e1lgi imagi`l\u00e4\u00edtska tch\u00e1ti-pal\u00e1tkan i-\u00e1dshid em\u00fankatis; m\u00f3m\u00e4s\nPala\u03c7tchukl\u00e1lgit \u00e1ss\u00een isku\u00eddshatis h\u00ee\u201b'lkida isahop\u00e1kan m\u00f3'hmit\nimpon\u00e1yatis: \"p\u00f3figi hat'h\u00e1gid\u014ds m\u00f3min tch\u00edme-u matap\u00f3ma`lis\npods\u00fb\u2032shu\u0103dshi tch\u00e1ti-alg\u00e1tin takuag\u00ed \u03c7tchit; istchig\u00ed`lga`li\ntchin\u00e1takin hat'h\u201b\u0113dshaksh!\" gedshatis-ka-\u00e9dshat\u012bs.\n\nM\u00f3mid\u00fb ist\u00f3m\u00e4s podsh\u00fb\u2032shuadshin ay\u00edktchi im\u00fankatis m\u00f3m\u00e4s\nP\u0101la\u03c7tchukl\u00e1lgit isaw\u00e4tch\u00edtchikut im\u00ee'hsit intub\u00e1 l\u00eddshan hop\u00edtaltis\nPala\u03c7tchukl\u00e1lgit t\u00e1fatkin \u00edmatis m\u00f3'hmit p\u00fammik\u00fbt h\u00e1mgushikas\nk\u00e4\u00eddshat\u012bs; m\u00fa'hmati at\u00edgad ist\u00f3f\u00e4s ito\u03c7k\u00e1lgit ap\u00f3ki im\u016b\u2032ngatat\u012bs.\n\n\u00da-i `l\u00e1ko palah\u00e1mgin ap\u00f3ki s\u00e1sin ap\u00e1luat tap\u00e1lan ap\u00f3ki s\u00e1satis. Ap\u00f3ki\nh\u00e1'mgad Kas\u00ed\u03c7talgin k\u00e4\u2032dshit; ap\u00e1wan Kowit\u00e1lgin k\u00e4h\u00f3dshid \u00f3m\u00eds; m\u00f3m\u00e4s\n\u00edsti h\u00e1mg\u00fbsid \u00f3mis m\u00f3mit Hatchap\u00e1la Hatch\u00e1ta tip\u00e1\u03c7ad \u00edsti Maskoki\nit\u00e1lua hom\u00e1\u03c7hotid \u00f3mis. M\u00f3midu ist\u00f3m\u00e4s Kas\u00ed\u03c7talgi ta\u03c7tit \u00edku\u0103dshi\ntch\u00e1ti t\u00fatka tch\u00e1ti h\u00eddshatit \u00f3mit it\u00e1lua tch\u00e1ti-u h\u00e1yatit \u00f3mika,\n\u00eef\u00eegi tch\u00e1tadi w\u00e4ika`l\u00fango im\u00fangat \u00f3mis munt\u00fam\u00e4s palah\u00e1mgad h\u00e1tkidun\npalah\u00e1mgit tch\u00e1tidut \u00e9m\u00e4sim.\n\nH\u00e4\u2032yomat n\u00een\u00ee h\u00e1tki m\u00e4\u00edmat isih\u00ed`lit \u00f3mati gi`lag\u00edd\u014ds. Tamodsh\u00e4\u201bdshi\ntalep\u00f3`lat om\u00eddatit\u00e4s ist\u00fangun inlop\u00e4\u2032-idshitad gi`l\u00e1git\u014ds. Squire\nOglethorpe adsh\u00e1kkahid m\u00edkko `l\u00e1kon i`l'h\u00ed\u03c7tchit opon\u00e1yat i`l\u00edmpo\u03c7it\ni`limun\u00e1hin poh\u00e1gidut akasam\u00e1gid \u00f3m\u0115ka.\n\n\n[THE LEGEND.]\n\n\"WHAT CHEKILLI, THE HEAD-CHIEF OF THE UPPER AND LOWER CREEKS SAID, IN\nA TALK HELD AT SAVANNAH, ANNO, 1735, AND WHICH WAS HANDED OVER BY THE\nINTERPRETER, WRITTEN UPON A BUFFALO-SKIN, WAS, WORD FOR WORD, AS\nFOLLOWS:--\n\n_\"'Speech, which, in the year 1735, was delivered at Savannah, in\nGeorgia, by Chekilli, Emperor of the Upper and Lower Creeks; Antiche,\nhighest Chief of the town of the Cowetas, Eliche, King; Ousta, Head\nChief of the Cussitaws, Tomechaw, War King; Wali, War Captain of the\nPalachucolas, Poepiche, King; Tomehuichi, Dog King of the Euchitaws;\nMittakawye, Head War Chief of the Okonees, Tuwechiche, King; Whoyauni,\nHead War Chief of the Chehaws and of the Hokmulge Nation;\nStimelacoweche, King of the Osoches; Opithli, King of the Jawocolos;\nEwenauki, King; Tahmokmi, War Captain of the Eusantees; and thirty\nother Warriors._\n\n\"'At a certain time, the Earth opened in the West, where its mouth is.\nThe earth opened and the Cussitaws came out of its mouth, and settled\nnear by. But the earth became angry and ate up their children;\ntherefore, they moved further West. A part of them, however, turned\nback, and came again to the same place where they had been, and\nsettled there. The greater number remained behind, because they\nthought it best to do so.\n\n\"'Their children, nevertheless, were eaten by the Earth, so that, full\nof dissatisfaction, they journeyed toward the sunrise.\n\n\"'They came to a thick, muddy, slimy river, came there, camped there,\nrested there, and stayed over night there.\n\n\"'The next day, they continued their journey and came, in one day, to\na red, bloody river. They lived by this river, and ate of its fishes\nfor two years; but there were low springs there; and it did not please\nthem to remain. They went toward the end of this bloody river, and\nheard a noise as of thunder. They approached to see whence the noise\ncame. At first, they perceived a red smoke, and then a mountain which\nthundered; and on the mountain, was a sound as of singing. They sent\nto see what this was; and it was a great fire which blazed upward, and\nmade this singing noise. This mountain they named the King of\nMountains. It thunders to this day; and men are very much afraid of\nit.\n\n\"'They here met a people of three different Nations. They had taken\nand saved some of the fire from the mountain; and, at this place, they\nalso obtained a knowledge of herbs and of many other things.\n\n\"'From the East, a white fire came to them; which, however, they would\nnot use.\n\n\"'From Wahalle, came a fire which was blue; neither did they use it.\n\n\"'From the West, came a fire which was black; nor would they use it.\n\n\"'At last, came a fire from the North, which was red and yellow. This\nthey mingled with the fire they had taken from the mountain; and this\nis the fire they use to-day; and this, too, sometimes sings.\n\n\"'On the mountain was a pole which was very restless and made a noise,\nnor could any one say how it could be quieted. At length, they took a\nmotherless child, and struck it against the pole; and thus killed the\nchild. They then took the pole, and carry it with them when they go to\nwar. It was like a wooden tomahawk, such as they now use, and of the\nsame wood. Here, they also found four herbs or roots, which sang and\ndisclosed their virtues: _First, Pasaw_, the rattle-snake root;\n_Second, Micoweanochaw_ red-root; _Third, Sowatchko_, which grows like\nwild fennel; and _Fourth, Eschalapootchke_, little tobacco.\n\n\"'These herbs, especially the first and third, they use as the best\nmedicine to purify themselves at their Busk.\n\n\"'At this Busk, which is held yearly, they fast, and make offerings of\nthe first-fruits.\n\n\"'Since they learned the virtues of these herbs, their women, at\ncertain times, have a separate fire, and remain apart from the men\nfive, six, and seven days, for the sake of purification. If they\nneglect this, the power of the herbs would depart; and the women would\nnot be healthy.\n\n\"'About that time a dispute arose, as to which was the oldest and\nwhich should rule; and they agreed, as they were four Nations, they\nwould set up four poles, and make them red with clay, which is yellow\nat first, but becomes red by burning. They would then go to war; and\nwhichever Nation should first cover its pole, from top to bottom, with\nthe scalps of their enemies, should be the oldest.\n\n\"'They all tried, but the Cussitaws covered their pole first, and so\nthickly that it was hidden from sight. Therefore, they were looked\nupon, by the whole Nation, as the oldest.\n\n\"'The Chickasaws covered their pole next; then the Atilamas; but the\nObikaws did not cover their pole higher than the knee.\n\n\"'At that time, there was a bird of large size, blue in color, with a\nlong tail, and swifter than an eagle, which came every day and killed\nand ate their people. They made an image, in the shape of a woman, and\nplaced it in the way of this bird. The bird carried it off, and kept\nit a long time, and then brought it back. They left it alone, hoping\nit would bring something forth. After a long time, a red rat came\nforth from it, and they believe the bird was the father of the rat.\n\n\"'They took council with the rat, how to destroy its father. Now the\nbird had a bow and arrows; and the rat gnawed the bow-string, so that\nthe bird could not defend itself; and the people killed it. They\ncalled this bird the King of Birds. They think the eagle is also a\ngreat King; and they carry its feathers when they go to War or make\nPeace: the red mean War, the white, Peace. If an enemy approaches with\nwhite feathers and a white mouth, and cries like an eagle, they dare\nnot kill him.\n\n\"'After this, they left that place, and came to a white foot-path. The\ngrass and everything around were white; and they plainly perceived\nthat people had been there. They crossed the path, and slept near\nthere. Afterward, they turned back to see what sort of path that was,\nand who the people were who had been there, in the belief that it\nmight be better for them to follow that path. They went along it, to a\ncreek, called _Coloosehutche_, that is Coloose-creek, because it was\nrocky there and smoked.\n\n\"'They crossed it, going toward the sunrise, and came to a people and\na town named Coosaw. Here they remained four years. The Coosaws\ncomplained that they were preyed upon by a wild beast, which they\ncalled man-eater or lion, which lived in a rock.\n\n\"'The Cussitaws said they would try to kill the beast. They digged a\npit and stretched over it a net made of hickory-bark. They then laid a\nnumber of branches, crosswise, so that the lion could not follow them,\nand going to the place where he lay, they threw a rattle into his den.\nThe lion rushed forth, in great anger, and pursued them through the\nbranches. Then they thought it better that one should die rather than\nall, so they took a motherless child, and threw it before the lion, as\nhe came near the pit. The lion rushed at it, and fell in the pit, over\nwhich they threw the net, and killed him with blazing pinewood. His\nbones, however, they keep to this day; on one side, they are red, on\nthe other, blue.\n\n\"'The lion used to come every seventh day to kill the people.\nTherefore, they remained there seven days after they had killed him.\nIn remembrance of him, when they prepare for War, they fast six days\nand start on the seventh. If they take his bones with them, they have\ngood fortune.\n\n\"'After four years, they left the Coosaws, and came to a River which\nthey called _Nowphawpe_, now _Callasihutche_. There, they tarried two\nyears; and as they had no corn, they lived on roots and fishes, and\nmade bows, pointing the arrows with beaver teeth and flint-stones, and\nfor knives they used split canes.\n\n\"'They left this place, and came to a creek, called _Wattoolahawka\nhutche_, Whooping-creek, so called from the whooping of cranes, a\ngreat many being there. They slept there one night.\n\n\"'They next came to a River, in which there was a waterfall; this they\nnamed the _Owatuaka-river_.\n\n\"'The next day, they reached another River, which they called the\n_Aphoosa pheeskaw_.\n\n\"'The following day, they crossed it, and came to a high mountain,\nwhere were people who, they believed, were the same who made the white\npath. They, therefore, made white arrows and shot them, to see if they\nwere good people. But the people took their white arrows, painted them\nred, and shot them back. When they showed these to their Chief, he\nsaid that was not a good sign; if the arrows returned had been white,\nthey could have gone there and brought food for their children, but as\nthey were red they must not go. Nevertheless, some of them went to see\nwhat sort of people they were; and found their houses deserted. They\nalso saw a trail which led into the River; and as they could not see\nthe trail on the opposite bank, they believed that the people had gone\ninto the River, and would not again come forth.\n\n\"'At that place, is a mountain, called _Moterell_, which makes a noise\nlike beating on a drum; and they think this people live there. They\nhear this noise on all sides, when they go to War.\n\n\"'They went along the River, till they came to a waterfall, where\nthey saw great rocks; and on the rocks were bows lying; and they\nbelieved the people who made the white path had been there.\n\n\"'They always have, on their journeys, two scouts who go before the\nmain body. These scouts ascended a high mountain and saw a town. They\nshot white arrows into the town; but the people of the town shot back\nred arrows.\n\n\"'Then the Cussitaws became angry, and determined to attack the town,\nand each one have a house when it was captured.\n\n\"'They threw stones into the River, until they could cross it, and\ntook the town (the people had flattened heads), and killed all but two\npersons. In pursuing these, they found a white dog, which they slew.\nThey followed the two who escaped, until they came again to the white\npath, and saw the smoke of a town, and thought that this must be the\npeople they had so long been seeking. This is the place where now the\ntribe of Palachucolas live, from whom Tomochichi is descended.\n\n\"'The Cussitaws continued bloody-minded; but the Palachucolas gave\nthem black drink, as a sign of friendship, and said to them: Our\nhearts are white, and yours must be white, and you must lay down the\nbloody tomahawk, and show your bodies, as a proof that they shall be\nwhite.\n\n\"'Nevertheless, they were for the tomahawk; but the Palachucolas got\nit by persuasion, and buried it under their beds. The Palachucolas\nlikewise gave them white feathers; and asked to have a Chief in\ncommon. Since then they have always lived together.\n\n\"'Some settled on one side of the River, some on the other. Those on\none side are called Cussetaws, those on the other, Cowetas; yet they\nare one people, and the principal towns of the Upper and Lower Creeks.\nNevertheless, as the Cussetaws first saw the red smoke and the red\nfire, and make bloody towns, they cannot yet leave their red hearts,\nwhich are, however, white on one side and red on the other.\n\n\"'They now know that the white path was the best for them. For,\nalthough Tomochichi was a stranger, they see he has done them good;\nbecause he went to see the great King with Esquire Oglethorpe, and\nhear him talk, and had related it to them, and they had listened to\nit, and believed it.'\"\n\n\nEND OF VOL. I.\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes:\n\n\nWords surrounded by _ are italicized.\n\nSmall capitals are presented as all capitals.\n\nObvious printer's errors have been repaired, other inconsistent\nspellings have been kept, including inconsistent use of diacritical\nmark (e.g. \"Kaw\u00edta\" and \"Kawita\") and hyphen (e.g. \"folk-lore\" and\n\"folklore\").\n\nOn page 114, word \"of\" added to sentence \"...the destroying of the\nTangipahoa town....\"","title":"A Migration Legend of the Creek Indians, vol. 1: With a Linguistic, Historic and Ethnographic Introduction","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":74659}