Frontier Life: Long Rifles and Trade Muskets

Firearms were the premier item of trade, introduced to North American in the 17th century.  For Natives, they made hunting for both personal provisions and trade much more efficient.  Tribes guarded their contacts with traders and expected that among the trade goods provided to them for treaties, use of hunting range, or their services as auxiliaries would be a generous supply of weapons.  When colonial officials tried to curtail trade in firearms, rebellions could erupt, as with Pontiac's Rebellion in 1764, one of the issues being the less generous trade goods distribution by British officials, most notably firearms and ammunition, as well as alcohol.  Smoothbore muskets known as trade muskets were mass produced in England and France and shipped to North America as part of the firearms trade. 

For settlers, too, life in a new country meant adapting to different environments.  firearms that might be efficient in war, such as the musket, were not as effective for hunting.  Guns ran the gamut from muskets to fowling pieces, meant to shoot birds and smaller game, to rifles.  The advantage of a rifle over a musket was obvious.  Groves in the barrel and a longer barrel put a stabilizing spin on the projectile and allowed it to travel over longer distances to reach the target animal.  A hunter could stay concealed and hope to bring down an animal several yards away.  He could use the same tactics when pursuing, or being pursued by, a human enemy.  We'll take a look at two of the most famous types of weapons used on the frontier.

Trade guns went by a variety of names, fusil, fuse, Carolina musket, London fusil, Northwest gun or Mackinaw gun, depending on the time period and area of the country.  Trading companies requisitioned large numbers of these basic smoothbore muskets and trade them to Natives for beaver pelts in the fur trade.  They established a table of pelts per item, so many pelts for shot and powder, so many for a pistol and more for a rifle.  Like many mass produced items then and now, these guns could be shoddy.  There were reports of explosions from improperly made weapons.  Although some of these traders offered rifles, the preferred weapon of choice for Natives were the muskets, readily available, efficient to load and use, and not hard to replace if needed.

On the other hand, settlers preferred rifles, particularly those known as Kentucky or Pennsylvania Rifles, or simply Long Rifles.  These weapons were initially developed in the 18th century by German gunsmiths and may have been inspired by a similar rifle, the Jaeger rifle, used for mountain hunting in Germany.  In contrast to the trade muskets, the Long Rifles were custom made by gunsmiths and some could feature fine woods and elaborate scrolling or other artwork on the works of the gun.  An experienced smith hand to know woodworking, metalworking and other skills to produce one of these weapons.  They were prized by their owners, who sometimes gave them names.  Daniel Boone is reported to have called one of his rifles Tick Licker, owing to the supposed ability to shoot a tick off a target animal.  Davy Crockett referred to his weapon as Old Betsy.  These guns were the staple of American frontiersmen and militias through the Seven Years War (1755-1763), the American Revolution (1775-1783), the Northwest Indian War (1785-1795), and the War of 1812 (1812-1814).  Their most prized feature was accuracy at long distances, up to 250 yards from an intended target.  However, an American marksman at Saratoga, Timothy Murphy, shot a Redcoat general, Simon Fraser, at Saratoga at about 300 yards away.  He also shot an aide from Fraser's superior, General Burgoyne, bringing a message about a change in plans for that wing of the army.  Murphy's kills seriously disrupted British operations on that portion of the battlefield.

The popularity of the Long Rifle declined in the early 20th century as newer weapons came into use and the old ways of making them died out.  They are now a staple of reenactors and hobbyists who enjoy recreating and using them. 

Settlers versus Natives: the Siege of Fort Sackville/Battle of Vincennes, February 23-25, 1779

We're calling this Settlers versus Natives for a reason.  Although the Siege of Fort Sackville/Battle of Vincennes was a Revolutionary War battle in the frontier theatre of the war, and both Americans and British fought, the real object of the contest was to cut off British support for Native raids on American settlements.  At least that was true in the minds of the two men most concerned, George Rogers Clark and Henry Hamilton.

Fort Vincennes, now in present-day Vincennes, Indiana, was a French military outpost and trading post for local Native tribes.  Even after the French gave up their rights to what is now Indiana in 1763, a large part of the population was French-Canadian and generally sympathetic to both the French and the Native population.  Following their victory in the Seven Years' War (1755-1763), the British rebuilt and garrisoned the French fort, renaming it Fort Sackville, after a commander in the European theatre of the war.  The outpost was miles from any viable supply routes and soon fell into disrepair.  When the Revolution broke out, the local inhabitants ousted the flimsy British garrison and asked George Rogers Clark to send men for it.  He sent a militia officer, Leonard Helm and a small garrison, but soon the British retook the fort (in 1779) and local residents warned Clark that the Lieutenant-Governor of Quebec, General Henry Hamilton, was in personal command of the garrison there.

Rogers wanted Hamilton.  Washington wanted Hamilton.  American public opinion at the time wanted Hamilton, at the end of a rope.  Rumors abounded that Hamilton paid his Native auxiliaries scalp bounties, which was the reason that raiding on the frontier kept increasing.  In fact, no evidence has been found that he, or any other Redcoat officer, ever paid for scalps, but facts seldom stand in the way of popular opinion.  Clark decided that he would go to Vincennes and retake the town and Fort Sackville, and keep it this time.  On February 5, 1779, Clark set out for Vincennes with about 170 men, over half of whom were French from the area of what is now Kaskaskia, Illinois.  They had no sympathy for the British and neither did the townspeople of Vincennes, who welcomed Clark's force, provided food, ammunition and other supplies and also intelligence of what was going on at Fort Sackville. 

Clark demanded a formal surrender, which Hamilton scoffed off.  Clark's men then began digging siege works around the Fort.  The British fired their cannon, damaging houses in the village and further angering the residents.  On the way to Vincennes, some of Clark's canoes had overturned, wetting a large store of gunpowder.  Clark thought of taking the Fort by storm, but was about to dismiss the idea because of lack of gunpowder when eager residents of Vincennes came forward with stores of gunpowder they'd hidden from the British.  Clark decided to take the Fort, refusing an offer from a local Piankeshaw leader, Young Tobacco, on the grounds that, during the night attack, he didn't want his men mistakenly firing on Natives loyal to the Americans.  Clark was aware that a large body of Canadians and Native auxiliaries was on the way to enforce Hamilton and they were running out of time.

Clark again sent a demand for surrender and Hamilton sent out Helm, who'd been a prisoner of the British, to inquire for terms.  Clark demanded unconditional surrender or he'd storm the fort.  As these parley's were going on, the force of Canadian militia and Natives showed up.  They skirmished with Clark's men, but were easily beaten off.  Clark's men captured two Canadians and four Natives.  The Canadians were released as a gesture to the citizens of Vincennes, but the four Natives were ordered to kneel in full view of the fort and then tomahawked.  Although Hamilton did not witness the executions, he spread the story that Clark had murdered these prisoners with his own hand.   Likely, Clark ordered the execution (reprehensible enough), but did not actually kill anyone.  As terrible as this was, it was his message to any Native who would support the British. 

Hamilton and Clark met and the garrison of Sackville marched out with the honors of war.  For Hamilton, this should have meant an honorable captivity as a prisoner of war, an officer and a gentleman.  Instead, he was arrested as a war criminal, though never tried.  Clark believed that the capture of Hamilton and Vincennes would help put an early end to war in the western theatre.  He soon came to realize that there were other officers in Fort Detroit who would gladly take Hamilton's place in inciting Native raids on American settlements.  That would not stop until Fort Detroit was out of business and in American hands, which didn't happen until 1813, years after Clark had retired a lonely, broken and almost forgotten old man. 

Special Edition: Chief Osceola versus the Unconquered

On December 30, Florida State University will take on Michigan State in the Orange Bowl and, to the delight of fans and of Michigan's coach, will perform the Tradition of Tribute.  A student rider in full Seminole regalia on an Appaloosa gelding will gallop to the fifty yard line and throw down a flaming spear.  He's called Chief Osceola and the tradition is meant to honor Osceola and his people, one of the few tribes to remain unconquered by United States forces, but how do tradition and legend blend with reality?  And how does Chief Osceola stack up to the Tallassee Warrior himself.

First, let's dispense with the issue of Native symbols and mascots.  I'll leave that to each reader to decide.  The Seminole Tribe of  Florida has given approval to the use of its symbols and the name of its arguably most famous war leader.  And, it's a moving and quite intimidating way to start a ball game.  Watching the ritual go down, it's clear where the regalia, the horse and the whole idea of a flaming spear came from. 

As we've said time out of mind, Osceola (aka William "Billy" Powell) was not a chief.  He was Tustenugge or leading warrior, of Micanopy's band of Seminole.  Both of his biographers make a case that he ranked as a Tustenugge Thlocco, or Great Warrior, based on his skill and renown.  Osceola himself preferred the title he'd been given during his first Green Corn Ceremony, the Black Drink Crier, someone who performed the ritual songs used during the passing of the sacred beverage made of the Yaupon Holly.  He never referred to himself as Tustenugge, or used any of the other honorifics of Seminole warriors, such as Harjo or Fixico and the like.  Maybe he chose not to.  Maybe they weren't his to use yet, who knows.  What comes through in his portraits, though, was a love of fancy dress.  Nor was he alone.  Coacoochee and Billy Bowlegs also loved fine regalia. 

So, how close is the tribute rider's regalia to that worn by Osceola.  The full-length engraving by Catlin shows it's pretty close to what Osceola wore, the turban with plumes, three-decker gorget breast-piece, necklaces, a Calico hunting shirt, beaded hand-woven sash and garters, leather leggings and moccasins.  The tribute rider wears boots, something adopted by later Seminole leaders and definitely more practical than mocs while riding a horse or anywhere near a football field.  Pictures of two men who used the name Billy Bowlegs show the overall look. 

The Seminole were known to possess horses, though the Appaloosa appeared during the 19th century with the Nez Perce, a Plains tribe.  Further, Patricia Wickman, in her biography which interviewed people who had received stories of Osceola passed down orally through the generations indicated that he did not own horses and was not known for riding them.  In fact, the one single life event that connects Osceola with a horse was after his capture in October 1837, where he was given a horse to ride back to St. Augustine.  Likewise, the spear, more properly a lance, is a Plains weapon.  But the antecedent to the flaming spear tradition is obvious, the one legend of Osceola that almost anyone knows, the knife-through-the-treaty.  That episode has now been writ large as a nearly 25-lb flaming spear through the fifty yard line. 

The Chief Osceola tradition began in 1978, as FSU sought a more respectful rendition of the Seminole mascot.  The school has sought the continued approval of the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the NCAA to use the symbols.  So be it.  If the Tradition of Tribute does anything, it keeps the knowledge of Osceola, the Seminoles and their fight to survive in public view.  FSU offers classes in Seminole history which are reportedly well-attended each semester, students of all ethnic backgrounds taking pride in being Seminoles by extension.  A little tradition and respect for the past goes a long way.   

The Separate People: the Piankeshaw

Members of this tribe were present at many historical events.  They were among the signatories to the Great Peace of Montreal of 1702, and in 1799, during the Siege of Fort Sackville (Vincennes), a Piankeshaw leader named Young Tobacco offered to fight with his men alongside George Rogers Clarke.  Clarke politely turned him down, saying that he didn't want the Piankeshaw to be mistaken for British auxiliaries and killed during the battle.  Perhaps this was a good thing, considering the allegations against Clark regarding his treatment of Native captives, but we'll get to that later.

The word Payangitchaki comes from a Miami word meaning "those who are separate".  Modern ethnographers have tried to find a connection between the Piankeshaw and the Miami, but Piankeshaw oral tradition indicates no such connection.  When the French first encountered them in the early 17th century they were located near the Vermillion and Wabash Rivers in present-day Indiana.  Earlier tradition places them on the Kankakee River and even earlier, the Mississippi.  Likely they were one of those tribes frequently displaced during the Beaver Wars.  Incessant war had driven them from river to river until they finally found a home in what is now Illinois, and from there Indiana.  There, they allied with the Miami, the Wea and other tribes and were close partners to the French in the fur trade.  

The Natchez and Chickasaw Wars took their toll on the Piankashaw people, who maintained their alliance with the French.  Disease was another factor in reducing their population.  In 1770, they allowed the Delaware to use part of their land.  1775, they ceded a large tract of land on either side of the Wabash River in what is now Indiana and Illinois to the Wabash Land Company for a supply of trade goods.   By 1854, they had removed to Kansas and consolidated with other Illini tribes such as the Peoria.  By 1857, they ceded their last remaining lands in Kansas and removed to Oklahoma.  Today, they are represented by the Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma. 

Treaty: The Great Peace of Montreal, 1701

This treaty put a temporary end to one of the bloodiest periods of history on the frontier, the Beaver Wars between the French, with their Native allies the Huron and Algonquian people, and the English, with their allies, consisting of other Iroquoian tribes.  Though the English were not signatories to the treaty, they and their Native allies, and the fur trade, benefited from it in many ways.

The Beaver Wars began in earnest around 1648, and continued almost unabated for several decades.  Although the Iroquois and other tribes tried to make peace with the French in Montreal and Quebec City, misunderstandings, distrust of each other's motivations, and intrigue by the English always stymied the process, leading to more fighting.  The Beaver Wars were devastating to Native tribes, causing severe loss in population and displacement from ancient homelands and hunting ranges.  The Iroquois, in particular, also suffered from epidemics that threatened their entire population.  The French soon learned that they would have to deal with the Iroquois Five Nations directly, instead of through English mediation, if they wanted peace.  The Iroquois, tired of war and decimated by disease, were amenable to the French proposals.

Over 1300 Natives representing 40 tribes agreed to meet in Montreal to determine the terms of a peace accord.  Among the key provisions of the treaty was that the Iroquois would remain neutral in conflicts between the French and British, and that signatory tribes would submit their differences to the French for arbitration, rather than revert to war.  Among the signatories were the Iroquois/Haudenosaunee or Five Nations (Mohawk, Seneca, Onandaga, Oneida and Cayuga), other Mohawk bands, including the Kahnawake, the Montagnais, Anikwa, Odawa, Cree, Sac and Fox (Meskwaki), Huron, Illini, Kickapoo, Mescouten, Menominee, Miami, Piankeshaw, Wea, Missassauga, Nippissing, Ojibwe, Potawatomi, Winnebago, Algonquian, and Abenaki.  With peace restored among the tribes, French exploration of the Ohio, Missouri, and Mississippi River Valleys.  The peace established by this treaty would continue until the following year, when Queen Anne's War brought the British and French to arms again (1702-1713). 

Great Leader: Tarhe of the Wyandot

Tarhe (1742-1818) was one of several Native leaders who tried to maintain peace with Settlers, only to see little but hardship and betrayal for all his hard work.

Tarhe was born in the Ohio Valley, but little is known of his early life or how he came to be a leader among the Wyandot.  Settlers nicknamed him "The Crane" because he was tall and slender, described as handsome in appearance.  He does not appear in the record for the Seven Years War (1756-1763) but became active after that time, opposing encroachment on Indian Land.  He, like Cornstalk of the Shawnee, first fought against the Settlers in Lord Dunmore's War, though he later adopted a position of neutrality, keeping his people out of the American Revolution and the early part of the Northwest Indian War.  He was among the members of the Native command team at Fallen Timbers (1794), though he later signed the Treaty of Greenville (1795) and reverted once more to a position of neutrality and co-existence with settlers.

He was not in favor of Tecumseh's Confederacy and again worked to keep his people out of the conflict, although other Wyandot leaders, including some of his own relatives, joined Tecumseh.  Tarhe was present at the Battle of the Thames, among the Native auxiliaries assisting Harrison.  He later died near the present-day town of Upper Sandusky, Ohio.

Places: the Wabash River

This river, which arises in Ohio, flows across Indiana to form part of the border between Indian and Illinois before draining into the Ohio River, is packed along most of its 503 miles with history.  Wabash is an English corruption of the French Ouabache, which itself is a corruption of a Miami word meaning White River or River of White Stones, referring to the clarity of the water in certain areas.  The French considered the Ohio a tributary of the Wabash before realizing it that it was the other way round.  The Wabash is the main northern tributary of the Ohio.

Several Battles have been fought along or near this River, including some we've already touched on.  In date order, they are: Battle of Vincennes, 1779; Harmer's Defeat, 1790, St. Clair's Defeat, 1791; Attack on Fort Recovery, 1794, Battle of Tippecanoe, 1811, Siege of Fort Harrison, 1812; and Siege of Fort Wayne, 1812. 

Places: The Falls of the Ohio

We've already run across this important natural landmark a few times in posts.  It was the lair of George Rogers Clark.  Meriwether Lewis and William Clark met there to plan their forthcoming expedition in 1804.  It was also a strategically vital area on the frontier theater of the American Revolution.

The falls are a series of waterfalls on the Ohio River near Clarksville, Indiana and across the river from Louisville, Kentucky.  It was an important hunting area for Natives, the plentiful water making a convenient place for game animals to gather.  It was also a portage site.  It is now an Indiana State Park. 

Did It Happen: Who Killed Tecumseh?

One of the more enduring mysteries of the Battle of the Thames/Battle of Moraviantown on October 5, 1813 is, who killed Tecumseh and what became of his body?  Stories have morphed into fact and names became legendary, but the truth of what happened that day is elusive.

During his revolt and afterwards, Tecumseh achieved a celebrity status that only Osceola would approach during the pre-Removal era, and that it would take the likes of Sitting Bull and Geronimo to reach again.  People in America and Canada during and after the War of 1812 were fascinated with Tecumseh.  That he could speak some English, was known to be generous to captives, and could conduct himself like a gentleman in the presence of Whites helped spread a legend of which he was probably unaware.  In the years after his death, babies were named for him (see Sherman, William Tecumseh), as were warships (HMS Tecumseh), a Naval Base in Canada, a courtyard at the Naval Academy in America, towns, buildings, geography were named for him.  There were coins, memorial plaques, paintings, poems and plays.  Tecumseh's Revolt was more famous in its time than the War of 1812, as though he had posed a bigger threat than the British.  William Henry Harrison held political rallies on Tippecanoe Battlefield, billing himself as Tippecanoe and Tyler too, riding that all the way into the White House. 

But, one election cycle earlier, another political candidate had risen to fame claiming even better (in the eyes of public opinion at the time).  Van Buren's running mate, Col. Richard Mentor Johnson boasted that he had actually killed Tecumseh.  A jingle during his campaign ran, "Rumpsey-dumpsey, Col. Johnson killed Tee-cum-see!"  By that time, Johnson wasn't the only man boasting of having killed Tecumseh, and some men even had relics to "prove" their story in the form of scalps, fingers, pieces of dried skin or other items taken from or on dead warriors at the Battle of the Thames.  Then as now, fact-checking was beside the point and probably impossible anyway.

So, who killed Tecumseh?  When?  And where did he die/get buried?

Let's go back to October 5, 1813.  In the aftermath of the battle, Harrison and his senior commanders toured the battlefield.  This was custom in those days, even Wellington and Napoleon often toured scenes of their victories.  But there was no doubt that they had heard Tecumseh had been killed and were looking for that particular body.  According to tradition, Harrison asked frontiersman Simon Kenton to make the identification.  Kenton picked out another body, possibly the body of Wyandot leader Roundhead and stated that he was Tecumseh.  Souvenir hunters took out their grim satisfaction on that body, even though Tecumseh's body was nearby.  They left it alone.  There's a problem with this story.  While Simon Kenton was adopted by the Shawnee (and nearly killed by them several times, earning the name Cutahota, or Condemned Man), and would have possibly known Tecumseh on sight, Harrison was had also had two close encounters with him.  If Kenton deliberately lied and chose another body to be Tecumseh, would Harrison have gone along with it?  Probably.  Harrison had an ego and wouldn't like to have been shown up by another man telling him he was wrong.  If he saw Tecumseh's body there, it would've been enough to satisfy him.  The souvenir hunters could get their penny's worth elsewhere, for all he cared. 

Johnson's account, as witnessed by others, indicated that, as his troops became enmeshed in the swamp where the Native battle positions were at the Thames, he became tangled up with an impressive warrior whom he took to be Tecumseh.  It's doubtful Johnson and Tecumseh ever met.  Johnson would naturally assume that the most flashy-dressed Native on the battlefield, drawing the most attention to himself, would be the Shawnee leader.  Others who knew Tecumseh better indicated that he, like Osceola, tended to dress for practicality during a battle, saving his finer regalia for meetings and ceremonial events.  Some accounts indicate that the warrior Johnson tangled up with was a Potawatomi.  No matter.  Johnson survived a one-on-one combat with a Native warrior showing great skill and bravery on both sides.  He killed the Potawatomi, who couldn't argue that he wasn't Tecumseh.  At that point, would Johnson really care if he had killed the right man?  By that time, rumors were rife that Tecumseh had been killed by somebody.  As long as Johnson said he was the man, who would argue? 

Col. William Whitley might have been one, but he also died during the battle and his account was preserved by others.  William Whitley was a Revolutionary War veteran and a bona fide friend of Daniel Boone, George Rogers Clark and other Kentucky luminaries.  His family was one of the first to use Boone's wilderness road.  He was also a horse racing pioneer in Kentucky.  The leader of a mounted militia unit and riding an early prototype of a walking horse, he cut a fine figure.  He was one of those who followed Johnson into the swamp from which the rest of Harrison's army had to extricate them even after the Natives had left the fight.  According to witnesses, and later embellished by his granddaughter, Whitley found himself face to face with another Native in full battle regalia.  Each shot and killed the other.  Whitley's horse, rifle, pistol and other personal effects were sent home to his family while he was buried on the battlefield.  With him dead, nobody else could steal Johnson's thunder and, for some reason, Whitley's family didn't make the story public until decades later.

Both of these accounts seem to suggest that Tecumseh, or someone like him, was killed during the battle and thus would've been lying on the battlefield for anyone to view.  But did he die during the battle, or shortly thereafter?

There are other accounts, one provided by Billy Caldwell/Sauganash, a Potawatomi leader whom we've already run across and who would become a local legend in Chicago.  According to him, he came across Tecumseh leaving the battlefield after the fight was over.  He had a gunshot wound in his chest but was still ambulatory.  "What happened?" Billy asked.  "I'm shot," Tecumseh replied in English and moved on.  Billy had grown up among the Mohawk and spoke Mohawk as well as his Native Potawatomi.  He supported Tecumseh's Confederacy and even became a trusted lieutenant of Tecumseh.  He would know Tecumseh if he saw him.  Possibly, they were speaking in English either because Billy did not know Shawnee, or to keep their conversation away from the ears of any Natives who might be listening and who didn't need to know right then how badly their leader was hurt.  Billy Caldwell, a mixed-race Native, was not someone whose word would have counted for much in a 19th century Presidential race.  He died of cholera in 1841, having been removed with his people to Iowa. 

Other Native accounts also indicate that Tecumseh survived the battle somewhat ambulatory.  One describes him as still trying to direct his men and fend off attackers with a lance stuck in his shoulder or run through his body.  A lance, not a gunshot wound, suggests that he was attacked by another Native.  Was it a disgruntled member of his own command?  Was it one of Harrison's auxiliaries.  The Chickasaw and Choctaw who came with Harrison were not in sympathy with Tecumseh's movement.  Could one of them have seen his chance to off a troublemaker? 

Over 203 years later, we'll never know the real answers to these mysteries.  If Johnson didn't kill Tecumseh, and Whitley might have, or someone else, he died in the battle.  If not, and if Caldwell's account and other Native accounts are correct, he walked away after the battle on his own power and died later.  The main takeaway is that people who claimed to have taken relics from or desecrated his body are most likely stretching the truth, as Johnson himself later stated.  Most likely, Tecumseh's body was not desecrated and was either off the battlefield by the time Harrison and the other brass toured, or shortly thereafter.  Either Tecumseh walked away, was helped away, and later died.  Or, his body was later removed and buried in an undisclosed location.  At least, in death, he wasn't disrespected. 

Natives versus Settlers: Battle of the Thames, October 5, 1813

This battle, although part of the larger War of 1812, was at its heart a Natives versus Settlers encounter because the stakes were highest for the Natives (Tecumseh's Confederacy) and William Henry Harrison's men (and his future military career and political reputation).  The British were just there to defend Canada.

As the war of 1812 spread into 1813, the need to shatter Tecumseh's revolt and drive the British out of Detroit forever grew more imperative.  The Americans knew that the British had never given up their plans for the American frontier following the Revolution and, with things heating up in the South with the Red Stick Creeks, and continued diplomatic machinations between Britain and Spain, the time for a final decisive victory was now or never.  In the summer of 1813, the famous battles on Lake Erie between Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry and Richard Heriot Barclay left the Americans in position of Lake Erie and able to choke off supplies to Fort Detroit.  General Henry Proctor saw no feasible means of holding onto Detroit and decided to evacuate the town and fort.  Tecumseh, knowing his options were fading fast, implored him not to abandon the Natives.  Proctor ignored the entreaties and left, letting Tecumseh and his warriors follow if they would.

While Isaac Brock had been a beloved commander who inspired leadership and respected his Native auxiliaries, Henry Proctor was a strictly by-the-book commander unwilling to hazard any battle he couldn't win.  Not only was Tecumseh angry with him, so were Proctor's own subordinates in the British Army.  Facing them was William Henry Harrison, still a hero after his triumph at Tippecanoe in 1811 and wanting to steal back some laurels from the Navy after Lake Erie.  Proctor had about 800 British regulars and anywhere from 500-1,000 Native auxiliaries.  His force was infantry, with only one light six-pounder gun to speak of.  On the other hand, Harrison was bringing 2,381 militia and 1,000 mounted volunteers, with only a few regulars 120, and 260 Native auxiliaries, mostly Chickasaw and Choctaw warriors.  These warriors did not sympathize with Tecumseh.  Further, riding with Harrison force was a group of men from the Raisin River area under Col. Richard Mentor Johnson, bent on revenge and one man.  Meanwhile, compounding Proctor's problem were the large number of refugees crowding into Amherstburg, just across the Detroit River from Fort Detroit.  The pressure on him to give battle, if at least to keep Tecumseh's Natives from deserting to find more willing allies, was increasing. 

On October 5, 1813, with Harrison's force mounted and coming on fast, Proctor ordered his men to draw up in battle on the bank of the Thames River the mission at Moraviantown, hence the other name for this battle, the Battle of Moraviantown.  He planned to trap Harrison against the river, though how he intended to do this with one artillery piece and no cavalry no one knows.   He did not dig his men in or try to fortify the area, such as was usually done with cavalry.  Proctor's half-hearted preparation suggested he did not believe in this battle.  Tecumseh formed his men in a swamp area alongside the British lines.  Oral history indicates Tecumseh was certain this was his last battle.  Prior to the fight, either out of gratitude or respect, he visited the British lines, shaking hands with several officers before departing to join his own men. 

When Harrison arrived on scene, he saw that no preparations had been made for a cavalry attack and ordered the mounted volunteers forward.  Before Proctor could fire his cannon, the American broke through his line and the British regulars fell back.  Proctor and about 250 men fled the battlefield, while others dropped their weapons and gave themselves up.  Johnson focused his attention on the Natives in the swamp area and his forces became bogged down.  Johnson pressed forward, looking for Tecumseh.  There were other men looking for him, too, including a Kentuckian named William Whitley.  During the fight, both Johnson and Whitley engaged with warriors who appeared to be in command of the Native contingent and each believed they were facing Tecumseh.  Johnson would go on to make his killing of Tecumseh a talking point in his successful Vice-Presidential campaign.  Whitley died attacking whoever was attacking him.  His horse, rifle, powder horn and other belongings were returned to his family, who preserved their claims of him killing Tecumseh. 

When the smoke cleared, Harrison's losses totaled 10-27 killed and 17-57 wounded.  The British lost 12-18 killed, 22-35 wounded and captured, and 579 captured otherwise.  Among Tecumseh's contingent, 16-33 killed, unknown wounded or captured.  As Harrison and other commanders toured the battlefield after the fight, Harrison is supposed to have spotted a dead Shawnee warrior and asked frontiersman Simon Kenton if this was Tecumseh.  He was told no.  Other men, too, were looking for the Shawnee leader as word spread that he had been killed.  But he was not to be found.

So, who killed Tecumseh and what happened to his body? 

Natives versus Settlers: Battle(s) of the River Raisin, January 18-23, 1813

As we've seen throughout this blog, one person's battle or victory is another person's massacre.  The same could be said for the differing approaches to battle, and to what happens afterwards.  Another example of this is the Battles of Frenchtown, sometimes known collectively as the Battle of River Raisin or the River Raisin Massacre, the windup to the later Battle of the Thames and an ultimate expression of White revenge.  We'll cover that later.

The Raisin River, or Riviere aux Raisins as it is known in French, flows in southeastern Michigan.  It was named by early French explorers for the wild grapes in the area, raisin being the French word for grape, with raisin sec (dried grape) being what we now consider a raisin.  Local Potawatomi and Wyandot people would portage from this river to the Grand and Kalamazoo Rivers flowing into Lake Michigan.  The town of Monroe is now built near the site of the battle that took place here.  Because of its use as a portage point, both the British and Americans were keen to keep possession of this area during the War of 1812, particularly after the Americans surrendered Fort Detroit, which briefly returned to its status as a British garrison.  At the time, the area where the battle would be fought was known as Frenchtown Township. 

On January 18, 1813, Canadian militia and Potawatomi auxiliaries met up with a group of Kentucky militiamen who had crossed frozen rivers to reach the portage area.  They surprised the Canadians and Potawatomis, who were not expecting an attack in this weather and had made camp.  Despite the lack of preparation, the Canadians and Potawatomis fought back, contesting every inch of the battlefield.  After bloody fighting on both sides, Canadians had 1 man killed or wounded, with 3-15 Potawatomi warriors killed and two militia with a warrior captured, with thirteen killed and 54 wounded, the Canadians and their auxiliaries withdrew and left the area to the Americans.

Neither side could afford to lose this ground, so a rematch had to occur and soon.  On January 22, 1813, General Henry Proctor, who had replaced Isaac Brock, along with two Native leaders, Roundhead of the Wyandot and Walks in Water of the Huron, arrived with 800 warriors and 597 militiamen, opposing a force lead by General James Winchester returned to the area to supplement the militia forces already there.  The Kentucky militia on scene had strengthened the settlement with a palisade and warned Winchester that enemy troops were still in the area and likely to attack soon.  What they didn't know was the size of the force Proctor had brought with him, augmented with artillery, which the Americans did not have.  This encounter lasted less than half an hour before the American forces broke apart.  The British lost 24 killed and 191 wounded, with losses unknown for the Natives.  The American suffered 397 killed, 40 wounded and 547 captured.  It was worse than a disaster, it was a disgrace.  Walks in Water captured Winchester and made him strip out of his uniform and march in his underwear. 

The next day would be far worse.  British forces left the field with the most mobile of the American prisoners, leaving the wounded and the less ambulatory to the Natives.  Whether there were instructions given on how to treat prisoners has never been known for certain.  Left in possession of the battlefield, the Natives reverted to standard operating procedure and killed over 100 prisoners in what became known as the Raisin River Massacre.  As we have seen time and again, killing prisoners and/or non-ambulatory captives and wounded was standard operating procedure for most Natives, who did not operate according to Rules of War.  However, news of the massacre inflamed American sentiment against the British in general and the Natives in particular.

Repercussions were coming, but as always they fell in an unlikely place.  Tecumseh of the Shawnee was known to be in the area at the time of the battles, though he was not present and no Shawnee took part in the events.  However, in subsequent battles, particularly the Battle of the Thames, fought on October 5, 1813, the cry of "remember the River Raisin" served as a rallying point for American forces, who directed their ire at one Native in particular.  The desire to be the man who killed Tecumseh overrode the fact that he hadn't been around, and was known for more generous treatment of captives.  It may have also led to the stories about the desecration of Tecumseh's body after the battle.

Despite being responsible for the lack of preparation and lack of discipline among his men during the second battle, Winchester was released and later returned to military duty.  Several counties in Kentucky were named after officers killed at River Raisin.  Streets in Monroe, Michigan also bear the names of those killed in battle.  A monument to the battle stands in downtown Monroe.  The place where the battles took place is a state historic site and a National Battlefield Park as of 2009. 

 

Ethnography: Thomas L. McKenny and his Encyclopedia

The portraits of many early Native leaders, including Menawa of the Creek, Major Ridge of the Cherokee, William McIntosh of the Creek, Red Jacket of the Seneca and several others owe their preservation to the work of several men, but most notably painter Charles Bird King and the first Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Thomas Lorraine McKenny (1785-1859). 

McKenny was born in Hopewell, Maryland to a Quaker family.  His religious beliefs would later shape his attitude toward Natives.  He believed that Natives were the intellectual and moral equal of Whites because they, too, possessed souls.  This was radical thinking for its day.  He was appointed to head the then-United States Department of Indian Trade, which was abolished in 1824 and recreated as the Bureau of Indian Affairs.  In these positions, McKinney was able to see first hand how American policy toward the Native people was leading to the destruction of their society and, he believed, perhaps their extinction as well.  He was one of many government officials, artists, scientists and others who believed that the incursion of Whites on Native land would ultimately lead to Natives becoming extinct.  Others who held to these "last of a dying breed" ideas included both King and Catlin. 

McKinney decided that, before Natives became extinct, he would compile as much information about them, their leaders, their tribes and customs into one place, his encyclopedia entitled History of the Indian Tribes of North America.  Whenever Native leaders came to Washington to negotiate treaties or present their requests to the federal government, they would often set for portraits with Charles Bird King.  With McKinney's oversight, colored lithographs were made of Bird's paintings and James Hall wrote detail autobiographies of the various leaders.  The three-volume set was finally published in 1844 and became the standard reference work on Native life throughout the 19th century.  It remains an important repository of knowledge about some Native leaders who would otherwise have been forgotten, and a preservation aid for much of King's work, which was destroyed in a fire at the Smithsonian in 1865.

Although McKinney believed in Indian Removal, he was dismissed under the Jackson administration because of his beliefs about the racial equality of Natives.  He spent the rest of his life trying to publish and promote his encyclopedia and died in New York in 1859. 

Places: Tippecanoe Battle Site

As the saying goes, to the victor belong the spoils.  Victors also write the history and receive the lion's share of the credit and commemoration.  Nowhere is that more true that at the Tippecanoe Battlefield Park near Lafayette, Indiana.

In 1811, Tecumseh had left his brother, Tenskwatawa, in charge at Prophetstown, where Natives from several tribes had gathered in support of his opposition to further White encroachment into Indiana territory.  While Tecumseh traveled to forge alliance with other tribes, he had left Tenskwatawa with orders to evacuate Prophetstown should William Henry Harrison, the military governor of Indiana, advance toward it with his army.  This Harrison did in early November 1811.  For reasons known only to himself, Tenskwatawa defied those orders and convinced the assembled warriors to fight under his command.  The result was disaster.  After a four-hour battle, Tenskwatawa's forces retreated.  That night, as the Shawnee Prophet was stripped of his powers and authority, people began to flee the doomed village.  Harrison's men burned what was left the following day.  Tecumseh's followers would flee to Canada, hoping to find refuge there.

In the years following the battle, the land was claimed by a Settler, John Tipton, who had been present at the site.  He later gave the land to the state of Indiana in 1836, in time to celebrate the twenty-fifth year anniversary of the battle.  It was used a rallying place during Harrison's campaign for the White House in 1840.  The site became so popular that a refreshment stand was operated there and it later became a church youth camp.  It was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1960.  A large white obelisk commemorates the battle.  Before it is a statue of the victor, William Henry Harrison.  Neither Tecumseh nor Tenskwatawa have a statue there.   

Did It Happen: Moncacht-Ape of the Yazoo and His Epic Journey

To Americans, the first explorers to traverse the North American Continent were Lewis and Clark in 1804-1806.  Canadians accord that honor to Alexander MacKenzie in 1793.  But could a Native person have done so decades before any of them?

One of the most intriguing details in Antoine-Simon le Page du Pratz tells of his friendship with a Yazoo Native named Moncacht-Ape.  Moncacht-Ape, whose name means "Killer of Pain" in his own language, was well-known to the French in Louisiana, nicknamed The Interpreter because of his ability with several Native languages.  He apparently also picked up enough French to enable him to communicate effectively with settlers, as he is known to have told his story to du Pratz, as well as to another army officer, Jean-Francois-Benjamin Dumont de Montigny, who translates his name as Moncachtabbe.  Dumont de Montigny also took careful notes while in Louisiana, and later published his Memoires Historiques sur la Louisiana upon his return to France.

According to both Frenchmen, they were drawn to Moncacht-Ape because of a desire to learn more about the origin of the various tribes in Louisiana Territory.  According to him, a need to learn more about the origin of his own people had led him on an epic journey many years before the French came to Louisiana.  He was an old man when he met du Pratz and de Montigny, who knew each other though they both wrote independently of each other.  No other details of Moncachtabbe's life are known, such as when he was born or died, or exactly when he made his journey.  He told the Frenchmen that he had set out from near what is now Natchez Mississippi, up the Mississippi River to the Ohio Valley, and eventually to Niagara Falls in what is now New York.  He retraced his steps to the junction of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers near present-day St. Louis.  He then followed the Missouri into what is now Montana, crossed a great chain of mountains, and followed a river to the Pacific Coast, possibly a tributary of the Columbia River, before returning home.  According to him, the people he had met along the Pacific Coast told stories of a land bridge over which their ancestors had walked from what is now Asia.

Du Pratz and de Montigny left Louisiana and returned to France, each later publishing their memoirs.  Both were later translated to English and used at least by Lewis and Clark in planning their route west.  But some sources cast doubt on the Moncacht-Abe story, saying that there exists no proof of his journey other than the memoirs of two men who knew him.  Unlike MacKenzie and Lewis and Clark, who journeyed at the request of their governments, with planned expeditions, and brought back careful notes, maps and specimens, the only evidence of Moncachtabbe's journey is his own word and amazing stories.  Such doubt fails to take into account the power of oral tradition among Native peoples.  Historical events and personal accounts were transmitted word-of-mouth.  Further, what seemed to settlers to be trackless wilderness filled with individual tribes was actually a network of trading routes and connections between various peoples.  Using these systems, and the waterways which would have guided his journey, it's entirely possible that one man pulled off an epic feat of adventuring and lived to tell the tale. 

Where there's a will, there's a way.

Early Ethnographer: Antoine-Simon le Page du Pratz

When Lewis and Clark were preparing their expedition to examine the vast tract of land that was the Louisiana Purchase, they prepared by gathering as much information about the peoples and places they would see.  One source was a Franco-Dutch ethnographer named Antoine-Simon le Page du Pratz (c 1695-1775).

Du Pratz was either born in Holland and raised in France, or born in France and raised in Holland, depending on which source tells the story.  He studied mathematics and was a professional engineer and architect, also serving as a in the French army as a dragoon during the War of the Spanish Succession/Queen Anne's War (1702-1715).  After the war, in 1718, du Pratz left France and headed for La Louisiane, as the colony was then known.  He lived in Louisiana from 1718-1734.  For part of that time he lived near Fort Rosalie, now Natchez, Mississippi, and owned a tobacco plantation.  He had a Native companion, a Chitimacha woman who bore him children and lived with him as his wife.  He also learned the Natchez language and befriended several Natchez leaders.  During his stay in Louisiana, he took extensive notes, focusing particularly on the Natchez culture.  He also met a Yazoo Native, Moncacht-Apee, who had traveled extensively, perhaps even reaching the West Coast of the United States.  According to Moncacht-Apee, oral histories along the Pacific Northwest coast told of an ancient land bridge to Asia.  More on this explorer later.

While in Louisiana, du Pratz also managed land for the French Company of the Indies.  He wrote in detail about the various Chickasaw uprisings, the Natchez Revolt, and a slave uprising.  After the Natchez Revolt (1729), the King seized the lands owned by the Indies Company and du Pratz to Louisiana.  Only fifteen years later did he publish his Histoire de la Louisiane, first as a serial in the French Journal Economique, and later as a three volume set.  After the British seized the territory in 1763, they translated and published a partial version of du Pratz's work.  It was this partial version which British authorities and later Lewis and Clark studied as they worked their way through the Louisiana Territory.  Through du Pratz, we get the most extensive description of the Natchez civilization, the last remnants of the Mississippian Culture, before it was almost completely wiped out. 

Natives versus Settlers: the Natchez Revolt of 1729

As we've often seen, settlers were rarely satisfied with the land, food or other provisions made for them by Native people.  They inevitably demanded more and, when that happened, trouble always followed. 

The Natchez had been an ally of the French in the fur trade since La Salle's expedition of 1682.  They settled in villages nearby French forts and outposts, which unfortunately had the consequence of exposing them to communicable diseases to which they were not immune, decreasing their numbers.  They allowed the French land to build outposts and welcomed missionaries to their villages.  Nevertheless, there had been three clashes between the French and the Natchez, 1716, 1722 and 1724, respectively, which should have warned the French not to do what they eventually did.  However, with Natchez numbers reduced by sickness, the death of their last heredity leader or Great Sun, and the effects of "Christianization", the French believed they could treat these people lightly.

In 1728 a new commandant was appointed at Fort Rosalie, in present-day Natchez, Mississippi.  This man, named Chepart, had been put on trial before for his treatment of the Natchez and other Natives in the area but had been saved from conviction and punishment by influential friends.  These friends also secured for him the command at Fort Rosalie, but rather than count his blessings and behave better, he decided to build a plantation nearby.  And, he demanded that the Natchez supply him more land for his African slaves to work.  The land Chepart chose was sacred land, containing grave sites and a temple center used by the Natchez for generations.  No matter, Chepart planted a cross near the temple and threatened to burn it and destroy the graves if the Natchez protested.

While the Natchez gathered arms and ammunition and made their plans, a female leader among them warned some French women whom she could trust that an attack was on the way.  These women attempted to warn Chepart, but he had them imprisoned.  The next day, November 29, 1729, a delegation of Natchez approached Chepart with trade goods and carrying a peace pipe.  It was a decoy and he walked right into it.  Natchez warriors began firing.  Chepart tried to rally his men, but it was too late.  By that time, most of his soldiers and militia in outlying areas were already under attack.  They also seized a ship on the river belonging to the French East India Company to prevent escape and had captured or killed personnel at nearby trading posts, preventing them from helping or spreading the word.  The Natchez killed 150 men at Fort Rosalie.  Only 20 escaped, along with the women, children and African slaves, who had been left alone for the most part.  Only women who resisted or attempted to defend or assist their husbands or other men were killed.  Only 12 Natchez warriors were killed.

Chepart was captured and later given to a common warrior to kill.  Other Frenchmen were spared for a grim duty, to carry the loot back to the Natchez main village and/or to carry the heads of comrades there as well. 

Meanwhile, in New Orleans, settlers began hearing the news and started panicking.  Repercussions fell, but not on the Natchez.  A delegation of Choctaw were forbidden to enter the city, for fear they were in on the revolt with the Natchez.  And members of another tribe altogether, the Chaouacha, had their village destroyed and its inhabitants slaughtered in retaliation, though they'd had nothing to do with the Revolt.  The King ordered the then-Governor back to France and replaced him with Jean-Baptiste le Moyne de Bienville, whom, as we saw in a previous post, would soon be embroiled in his own war with another tribe who'd had nothing to do with the revolt, the Chickasaw.  Natchez warriors had kept up sporadic attacks on the French but, as their numbers dwindled, they had sought refuge with the Chickasaw, which caused de Bienville to retaliate against them, too.  With the aid of Choctaw warriors, the French began systematic raids against the Chickasaw, mostly seeking Natchez survivors and refugees.  He killed several Natchez people, selling the women and children into slavery in what is now Haiti, further inflaming the situation with the Chickasaw, who were allies of the Natchez.  Only after several stinging defeats at the hands of the Chickasaw would de Bienville learn his lesson.

Places: Fort Tombecbe Monument, Epes, Alabama

The area comprising the states of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama passed from one colonial power to another prior to being acquired during the Louisiana Purchase of 1802.  Beginning as French possessions, they also were under British and later Spanish control.  One site that exemplifies this is Fort Tombecbe, now just a historical marker near Epes, Sumter County, Alabama.

Fort Tombecbe was built in 1736-37 under the direction of Jean-Baptiste le Moyne de Bienville, then Governor of the Louisiana territory.  As covered in the last post, this was at the height of the French/Choctaw war with the Chickasaw British.  Built on a limestone bluff 270 miles upriver from Mobile on the Tombigbee River, de Bienville intended it as a fort to protect the Choctaw from the Chickasaw and facilitate trade between the French and their allies.  Actually, it was a staging area for his disastrous raids on the Chickasaw and intended to deter the British from further incursion into French Territory.

The British acquired the Fort in 1763 under the Treaty of Paris which ended the French and Indian/Seven Years War (1755-1763).  It was renamed Fort York.  They later abandoned the outpost and it was reacquired by the site's original custodians, the Choctaw.  The Spanish acquired the site from the Choctaw by a treaty and renamed it Fort Confederacion, but they took abandoned it in turn.  The outpost was too remote to make a permanent garrison feasible.  The United States acquired the land, but the old fort was used as a trading post, not a military garrison.  It fell into disuse and was abandoned in the 19th century and played no part in the Civil War.  It is now on land owned by the University of West Alabama and nothing remains of it but a marker overgrown by brush. 

Settlers versus Natives: The Chickasaw War, 1721-1763

Colonial powers constantly bickered over their respective possessions in North America, irrespective of the rights and alliances of the people on the ground.  And, almost invariably, this exploded into war.

The French possessions in North America stretched from Quebec City all the way to New Orleans.  It was a vast territory to rule, so it was eventually split up into two provinces, Louisiana and Quebec, the border being roughly the modern southern border of the state of Illinois.  They spent much of their time guarding the network of waterways that led from the Great Lakes, throughout the Missouri and Mississippi drainage and through to the Gulf of Mexico.  Many Native tribes were allied with the French to facilitate the trade, most notably the tribes of the Illini Confederacy and the Choctaw.  Meanwhile, English traders wanted in on the lucrative trade.  Operating primarily from Charleston, South Carolina, they worked in conjunction with friendly tribes such as the Chickasaw.  Add to this mix that some tribes in French controlled territory did not particularly like the French.  They were in constant conflict with the Natchez people and, in 1729-1731, French attacks almost wiped out the Natchez tribe.  Refugees sought shelter with the Chickasaw, a traditional ally, which further angered the French. 

The French governor of Louisiana, Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne de Bienville, incited Choctaw allies to raid Chickasaw villages and English pack trains headed to South Carolina.  They were also looking for any Natchez survivors.  Tired of colonial interference, the Chickasaw took matters into their own hands, blockading the Mississippi River at Chickasaw Bluffs, near modern-day Memphis and later making a separate peace with the Choctaw.  The Chickasaw also relocated their villages closer together to aid in mutual defense.  However, constant raids from the Illini continued to eat at Chickasaw resources.  In 1736, the Governor of Louisiana led an army up the Tombigbee River to meet a northern French force under Pierre de Arteguiette and including Chief Chicagou of the Michigamea, whom we've met in the last post.  Near present-day Tupelo, Mississippi, the French and their Illini allies met with a large Chickasaw force and were defeated. Chicagou may even have been killed.  Ignorant of this, the Governor of Louisiana continued to press his attack.  On May 26, 1736, he and an army of 1200 French with Choctaw auxiliaries were crushed by a force of Chickasaw at the fortified village of Ackia, not far from Tupelo.  They retreated to Mobile and New Orleans to await a more convenient opportunity.

De Bienville tried again in 1739, assembling a large force including siege artillery at what is now Memphis, Tennessee.  Disease and overall disorganization hampered his efforts and he was forced to disassemble his army and return to New Orleans.  Another Governor of Lousiana, the Marquis de VAudreuil, tried again in 1752, but that campaign never got beyond the planning stages.  Eventually, the Chickasaw war was settled in 1763 by the Treaty of Paris which ended the French and Indian War (1756-1763).  The British took possession of all of France's North American land and most tribes transferred their allegiance to Britain.  The French were never able to defeat the Chickasaw in battle and the British and later Americans saw the need to treat this powerful tribe as an ally, rather than an enemy.   

The official Chickasaw Nation website has a two-part section on this conflict, with further details including the French ulterior motive in wanting to eliminate the Natchez people completely.

Place Names: Chicago, Illinois

America is full of place names of Native origin.  States, counties and towns, mountains, bodies of water and other locations more often then not owe their name to a Native place name or prominent Native person in the area.  So how about Chicago, Illinois?  Is the famous city named after a Native leader, or did they coincidentally share the same or similar name?

Chicagou, sometimes known as Agapit Chicagou was an 18th century leader of the Michigamea tribe.  Little is known about his life other than two prominent events in which he participated.  In 1725, he and several other leaders from the Illinois area were sponsored a trip to Paris by the Company of the Indies to see King Louis XV.  Their visit is mentioned in a news sheet of the time, the Mercure de Paris.  The leaders swore allegiance to Louis, who hosted them in a rabbit hunt the next day.  Like other prominent visitors to the Paris, they were feted at the theatre, where they performed a selection of traditional dances.  The composer Jean-Phillippe Rameau was inspired by this performance to write a piece for harpsichord entitled "Les Sauvages". 

The Michigamea were part of the Illini Confederacy, a point noted by a French missionary when he observed an Illini delegation come to swear allegiance again and noted the Chicagou was at the head of his warriors representing the Michigamea.  Later, Chicagou participated in the Chickasaw Wars in 1736.  Apparently, he was deceased soon after, as another French traveler recorded a meeting with the son of the late Chief Chicagou.

So, what about Chicago?  The word comes from a Miami word Shikaakwa, referring to ramps (an onion-like vegetable), or garlic.  As early as 1687, a French explorer noted that he had arrived at a place called Chicagou because of the large quantity of wild garlic growing in the area.  At the time, Chicago was on Potawatomi land, not Michigamea.  It would have been the Potawatomi's right to cede the land, as they did in the Treaty of Greenville of 1795.  There is no record of Chief Chicagou having ceded land to anyone, though he is known to have pledged allegiance to the King of France on two separate occasions.  Thus, the naming of the man and the city have separate origins and the city is not named after the Michigamea leader.

Great Leader: Keokuk of the Sauk

Time and again on this blog we've run across Native leaders who've tried to co-operate and co-exist with Whites, only to be bitterly disappointed later.  Keokuk of the Sauk, a rival and bitter enemy of Black Hawk, presents another case.

Keokuk (1767-1848) was already an old man when the Black Hawk War broke out in 1832.  There are few details known of his life, where he was born, or how he attained leadership in the Sauk tribe.  A Settler who met him described him as a principal warrior of the Sauk, a shrewd politic man as well as a brave one, who possessed great weight in tribal councils.  He also noted that Keokuk was high-minded, and honorable and noted an incident where Keokuk arrested two deserting soldiers and brought them back to the nearest US military fort for punishment. 

During the Black Hawk War, Keokuk tried to keep the Sauk out of the conflict and brought himself into conflict with Black Hawk.  Some Sauk joined Black Hawk's movement, though Keokuk cooperated with the US government in sending scouts and other members of his band to act as auxiliaries to American troops.  Eventually, the Jackson Administration decided to recognized Keokuk as leader of the Sauk and Fox tribes, a decision that further angered and embittered Black Hawk.  Keokuk's people were given land in return for their cooperation, but were late forced to remove to Kansas, where he died.

The town of Keokuk, Iowa is named for him.  His remains were returned from Kansas and reinterred there with a monument erected in 1913. 

Places: the Tallapoosa River

Few small rivers are as full of history as this one, which rises in what is now Paulding County, Georgia at the base of the Appalachian Mountains and flows 265 miles into Alabama for an eventual junction with the Coosa River.  The name of the River means Grandmother Town in Muscogee and the branch of the Creek Nation which settled here is deemed to be the oldest in the tribe. 

The Tallapoosa River was in the heart of Muscogee/Creek Country.  Earlier, during Mississippian times, it was under the jurisdiction of Tuscaloosa/Tuskaloosa.  De Soto visited the area in 1540, demanded supplies from the leader of the town of Talisi before proceeding to his meeting with Tuscaloosa and the ill-fated battle of Mabila.  Later, several important Creek towns were located along the river, including Tallisi/Tallassee, which was the hometown of many important Red Stick leaders such as Opothleyahola, Peter McQueen, and of course, Osceola, who was born Creek but became famous leading bands of Seminole, Miccosuke and Black warriors into battle to maintain their newfound home in Florida.

The Battle of Horseshoe Bend was fought on a bend in the Tallapoosa River in March, 1814, and the site is now preserved by the National Park Service.  After the Creeks were removed from the area in the 1830's, White settlers moved into the area.  Towns such as Tallassee became mill towns.  Eventually, several hydro-electric and water reclamation damns were placed on the River, one of them forming Lake Martin, not far from the Horseshoe Bend battle site.  The river provides a place for fishing, kayaking and other recreational activities today.

Treaty of Colerain, June 29, 1796

Tracking various treaties with Native tribes and what, or who, was covered by each is a confusing business.  This is so for several reasons.  Often major treaties between countries, such as the Treaty of Paris of 1783 or Jay's Treaty of 1794, did not cover Native claims, or covered them in a cursory manner.  Further, treaties with one tribe did not always apply to another unless leaders for that tribe had specifically signed off.  Sometimes, tribes were overlooked altogether, and often had to go to war and/or sign more treaties to receive some protection.

All of this happened in the lead-up to the treaty of Colerain between the Creek/Muscogee and the federal government.  The Washington Administration had already come to an agreement with the Creek people in the Treaty of Washington, in 1790.  However, they were still embroiled in the latter phase of the Cherokee War (1775-1794).  Matters with the Cherokee were partially resolved in the Treaty of the Holston in 1791, and treaties laying out the boundaries for the Choctaw and Chickasaw were clarified in the Treaty of Hopewell, also 1791.  However, the land allotted in each of these treaties overlapped with land promised the Creek in the original Treaty of Washington.  Boundaries among these four major Southeastern tribes had to be clearly delineated.  There was every indication that, if the Creek weren't satisfied, they could ally with those Cherokee bands still at war and create more conflict on the frontier.

Benjamin Hawkins, Indian Agent for the Creek, George Clymer, who had signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and Andrew Pickens, a partisan leader and Indian fighter from South Carolina who may have inspired Mel Gibson's character in The Patriot met at a trading station (then called a factory) founded by James Seagrove (more on him later).  By this treaty, the Creeks affirmed the Treaty of Washington and agreed to respect the boundaries set forth for the other tribes in the Hopewell and Holston treaties.  The treaty also officially informed Creek leaders that the United States was actively negotiating with Spain and Britain regarding the boundaries of Florida, something that wouldn't become official until decades later.  Incidentally, during this treaty, the Creek leaders signed on behalf of the Seminole, who weren't officially invited to the parley but whose rights were dealt with anyway, something that would be a source of contention later between the two tribes.

Of course, the treaty contained the usual provision about returning escaped slaves, something no one at the negotiations seriously believed the Creeks or Seminoles would do.  Later treaties for all the tribes involved would virtually undue the agreements reached at Colerain, and the Indian Removal Act of 1830 would mark the final abrogation of this treaty.  The site of the treaty signing is marked by an engraved post funded by the Daughters of the American Revolution.

Whose Portrait is it?

A few days ago I profiled Attakullakulla (Little Carpenter) of the Cherokee and included a picture said to be of him.  From a Facebook group I got a helpful hint that the portrait I'd posted, by Joshua Reynolds, might not have been of Attakullakulla, but of another leader, Ostenaco.  I had traced the picture through various sources and thought I had the right person.  The confusion lies in the fact that both of these men, well-known Native leaders of the period, had been to London and had portraits painted.

Attakullakulla, whom I profiled last week, visited London in 1730 and may also have had his portrait painted.  However that image, and the name of the artist who painted it, are now lost to history. 

Ostenaco (c 1703-1789), who preferred to be called by his warrior's name Usdihi or "Mankiller" was the war leader of the Cherokee town of Tomotley.  Like many war leaders, he also had a dual role in diplomacy and was one of those leaders who met with Henry Timberlake in 1761.  He later travelled with Timberlake to Williamsburg, Virginia and asked to go and see the King of England himself to raise concerns of settlers encroaching on Cherokee land.  Henry Timberlake arranged for Ostenaco and several other leaders to go to London in 1762.  There, they had their portraits painted by Joshua Reynolds, one of the leading painters of the day.  Ostenaco later returned to America and tried to keep his people at peace with the Americans, though he came to ally with the British in an effort to stem further encroachments on Cherokee land.  For his efforts in both war and peace, he deserves a full post, which he will get soon.

Sir Joshua Reynolds (1723-1792) was the leading portraitist of his day.  Everyone who was anyone in London, whether royalty, aristocracy or otherwise visiting, had their portraits done by Reynolds.   He would have not have been in business in 1730, when Attakullakulla visited, but was definitely a painter of renown in 1762, when Ostenaco came to London.  Thus, if the portrait is by Reynolds, then the subject would have to be Ostenaco. 

Spartans of the Lower Mississippi: the Chickasaw

The Chickasaw Nation website states that that early Chickasaw people were called after the Classical Greek warriors because of their readiness to go to battle to protect their rights.  Like other Muskogean-speaking Natives, the Chickasaw were noted warriors who didn't take disrespect from anyone.

Chickasaw creation stories tell of their emerging from the earth.  There is  some indication that, at an early date in their history, they migrated from west of the Mississippi to lands in Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky and Tennessee.  Anthropologists and archaeologists believe the Chickasaw and Choctaw are closely related remnants of a Mississippian culture in the lower Mississippi Valley.  The name Chickasaw comes from that of an early leader of their people and may mean either rebel or someone from the town/location of Chicsa.  Hernando de Soto's expedition referred to them as the Chicaza, meaning that the tribal designation predates that of European contact.  The website indicates that de Soto's men treated the Chickasaw with disrespect, provoking conflict.  He was known to demand foodstuffs, bearers and other obligations of Native peoples whom he met.  The precursors of the Choctaw, under Tuskaloosa, had trouble with de Soto and fought the Spaniards off.  It would come as no surprise that their near neighbors, the Chickasaw, had to do the like.

The Chickasaw maintained peaceful relationships with the French, the British and, initially, the Americans and were valued trading partners.  Like other Southeastern tribes, they were willing to adopt elements of European culture such as farming in an effort to coexist with White settlers.  Washington's Administration actively encouraged this and Chickasaw auxiliaries under George Colbert fought with both Anthony Wayne and Andrew Jackson.  In fact, there isn't any evidence of conflict between the Chickasaw and Americans until the time of Indian Removal after the passage of the Indian Removal Act of 1830.  The Chickasaw held out for many years, making piecemeal concessions of land and hoping for the monetary compensation called for in various treaties, but it never came.  Instead, in 1837, the remaining Chickasaw east of the Mississippi gathered in Memphis, Tennessee and left for Oklahoma, enduring their own Trail of Tears. 

 

Settlers v. Natives: The Battle of Fallen Timbers, August 20, 1794

The Northwest Indian War saw some of the finest Native commanders in the history of warfare in North American.  We've already met Little Turtle, Buckongahelas and Blue Jacket in other posts and seen some of their work in other battles.  At this battle, which ended the Northwest Indian War (1785-1795), they would meet their match.

Mad Anthony Wayne (1745-1796) was born in Easttown Township in what is now Chester County, Pennsylvania.  A tanner and surveyor by trade, he became a soldier during the American Revolutionary War when, in 1775, he raised a regiment of militia that became the 4th Pennsylvania Regiment.  A quick learner with a natural knack for all things military, he was a stern disciplinarian, a hard marcher who didn't back down to anybody in battle.  Hence his well-known nom de guerre of mad.  After the Revolution, he retired a wealthy man and married the widow of Nathanael Greene.  He tried politics but when the Northwest Indian War broke out Washington knew who to call back into service.  Wayne was named commander of the Legion of the United States, as the reorganized Army was then known.

During the Northwest Indian War, Native leaders had scored impressive victories against American commanders who were less than skilled in fighting on the frontier.  Men like Arthur St. Clair, Josiah Harmer and James Wilkinson, all trained officers with impressive Revolutionary service, lost careers and reputations fighting in against men who could and did run circles around them every time they met up.  The frontier was the place where reputations went to die.  They would discover a different opponent in Mad Anthony (great-grandfather of Bruce Wayne, aka Batman if you're into superheroes).  Rather than lunge at the Natives, Wayne spent two years drilling his force of militia into an army.  These men may have heard of a mutiny on the Pennsylvania Line during the final months of the Revolution where Mad Anthony had not been afraid to shoot men of his own county for insubordination. 

When he felt he was ready, Wayne marched his force from Fort Washington in what is now Cincinnati, with 2,000 men.  Choctaw and Chickasaw auxiliaries served as scouts and forward skirmishers.  Blue Jacket selected his ground on the Maumee River near present-day Toledo.  A recent storm had blown down a stand of trees that would serve as a defense position, hence the name of this battle, Fallen Timbers.  The Native command team consisted of he most feared triumvirate on the frontier, Blue Jacket, Little Turtle, and Buckongahelas composed of Shawnee, Miami, Delaware, Wyandot, Potawatomi, Mingos and many others.  They were supported by a band of Canadian militia led by Captain Alexander McKillip. 

On August 20, 1794, Mad Anthony opened the battle quickly enough.  He ordered his cavalry to flank the Native positions and attack from the rear, while his infantry conducted a bayonet charge straight at the improvised breastworks.  The Natives finally broken and headed for the safety of a nearby British fort, Fort Campbell, where the British commander decided he waned nothing to do with Anthony Wayne and closed the gates against them.  Wayne finished his decimation of the Native force within sight of the British fort.  Casualties for the Americans included 33 killed and 100 wounded, the Natives lost 25-40 killed and unknown numbers of wounded. 

The American victory prompted the British to speed up their evacuation of the Ohio River Valley, depriving the Natives of a crucial ally.  With a new general in the field who could match them in skill and ability, many native leaders saw the wisdom of signing the Treaty of Greenville in 1795, ceding most Native land in Ohio to the United States.  Among the few Natives who refused to sign the Treaty of Greenville was a young Shawnee named Tecumseh whose brother Cheeseekau had been killed in other fighting in 1794.  He would be back to fight another day.  Mad Anthony decided after this battle to hang up his gear again and return, this time to Pennsylvania where he died he following year.  The site of the Battle is now a National Historic Site with federal and state monuments to Wayne, his men, the Native commanders and their men.  Fort Wayne, once a military garrison and now the city in Indiana, is named for Mad Anthony.

Places: Fort Prince Goerge, South Carolina

Forts and fortified blockhouses served an important dual purpose on the frontier.  They were supposed to provide protection for local inhabitants during conflict with the Natives.  And they were also meant to impress the local Natives into not attacking in the first place.  Sometimes, the forts failed on both counts.  Such was the case of Fort Prince George.

As we've seen with Fort Loudoun, built across from the key Cherokee town of Tellico, the British often chose sites for their forts both along Native trails and often adjacent to important Native towns.  Such was the same for Fort Prince George, built on the Cherokee Trail across the river from the important Lower Cherokee town of Keeowee in 1753.  The Fort was named for then-Prince of Wales, later George III.  It and the town site of Keeowee are submerged by Lake Keeowee in Pickens County, not far from the college town of Clemson.  The fort was a wooden stockade that took only two months to build, complete with bastions for cannons trained on the Cherokee town. 

The site is most important for an incident that occurred in 1759, during the Anglo-Cherokee War.  A Cherokee delegation arrived in Charleston for peace talks with the royal governor, and was promptly taken hostage.  They were escorted to Fort Prince George for safekeeping.  A few months later, in 1760, while Attakullakulla worked with the British to secure their release, a war party lead by Oconostata killed a British officer outside the walls of Fort Prince George.  All the Native hostages inside were killed in retaliation, which set off attacks on Fort Prince George, Fort Loudoun, Fort Dobbs and the town of Ninety-Six.  Although the town and most of the forts held out, Oconostata took Fort Loudoun by siege, not an easy thing to do and almost unheard of for a Native commander.  Hostilities between the Cherokee and British ended by 1761 and the Fort was abandoned by 1768.  It was not used by either side during the Revolution and moldered into ruin.  Archaeologists excavated it prior to it being submerged under the lake, finding Native skeletons, cannon and musket balls, rum bottles, cooking utensils and glass fragments, among other things.  The local museum houses a replica model of the fort, shown below.