The Georgia Indian frontier, 1773-1783

TheGeorgia Indian Frontier 17731783
JAMES H. O'DONNELL

TheGeorgia Indian Frontier 1773-1783
James H. O'Donnell
BA, Lambuth College MA, Duke University Ph.D, Duke University Professor of History, Marietta College

Editors' Note: One of the early concerns of the Georgia Commission
for the National Bicentennial Celebration was the lack of material on Revolutionary Georgia available for use in the state's public schools during the bicentennial years. As a result, one of the first projects of the Commission was the preparation of a series of pamphlets on the American Revolution in Georgia aimed specifically at public school use. With the cooperation of the Georgia Department of Education, this project has become a reality. Thirteen pamphlets are scheduled to be published between 1974 and 1978.
Our purpose in publishing these pamphlets is to present a clear, concise picture of Georgia's history during these important days. We hope that our efforts will encourage students' interest and add to their knowledge of Georgia's activities during the American Revolution.
Kenneth Coleman Milton Ready
All illustrations, except the maps, are from The Indians of the Southeastern United States, by John R. Swanton. Washington, D. C., 1946, Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137.
Copyright 1975 Georgia Commission for the National Bicentennial Celebration
and Georgia Department of Education

Torno Chachi Mico (Tornochichi), or King of Yarnacraw, and his nephew, Tonahowi
In 1773 the colony of Georgia celebrated her fortieth birthday. Four decades earlier a band of settlers led by J ames Oglethorpe had sailed up the Savannah River to begin a new English colony. At that time Georgia was created to be a buffer-a protective zone of settlement to absorb the blows of the Spanish, French and Indians who pressed against the southern and western frontiers of England's mainland colonies. From the beginning, Oglethorpe had assumed that the colony's future would be more secure if he dealt fairly and justly with the Indians to whom the area belonged. As Oglethorpe and his band stepped ashore, they set foot on territory claimed by Indians known to the English as the Creeks. From the shores of the

sea islands, such as Ossabaw and Sapelo, past the waters of the Chattahoochee to the banks of the Tombigbee and southward along the Gulf into Florida lay the Creek villages. The Creeks were a confederation - a loose grouping of peoples with similar language and culture.
All these native Americans, whether they called themselves Yuchees or Cowetas, Upper Creeks or Lower Creeks, or even Seminoles (a corruption of the Spanish word cimmarrones meaning wild ones) were basically farmers. They were not wandering nomads. Their primary foodstuff was corn and their crops were grown in the rich bottom lands of the rivers along which the Indians lived.
The most important religious and social occasion of the year was called the green corn festival. It was really a celebration of life or a new fire festival. To the Creeks and other southeastern corn-growers this occasion signified the bounty of nature in supplying them with food. The green corn dance was perhaps the most significant and colorful dance of those performed by the southern tribes and the green corn festival was so important that the year started and ended with it, life revolved around it, and no one began any great undertaking in the summertime until the festival was completed. After this event, new fires could be laid in every lodge and life could begin again. The green corn could be roasted while the later corn would be gathered and stored for use during the winter.
In addition to corn, the Southern Indians grew beans, squash, pumpkins and potatoes. To their produce they added meat in the form of deer, fish and fowls such as turkeys and ducks. While they did not have cattle or horses before 1500, they quickly adopted the use of the horse and at least one tribe, the Chickasaws, became quite skilled at breeding and raising sturdy "Indian ponies." The Seminole Creeks on the other hand became cattle raisers, a profession which they continue to practice in the twentieth century.
By the time of the American Revolution the houses
3

of the Creeks and their southern neighbors were of wooden construction. These ranged from the single family log cabin of the Cherokee to the larger lodges of the Creeks and the open sided lofts of the Seminole Creeks.
White Settlers Arrive

to New York, were ever clamoring for more land. No matter how much the Indians ceded, there were always whites demanding more. In many cases settlers moved onto Indian lands before they were opened for settlement. To the native Americans the colonials seemed monsters with an appetite for land which could not be satisfied.

In established villages by their corn fields, the native Americans had known the coming of the

Trade is to Settlers' Advantage

Europeans. At least some early white Georgians attempted to be fair in their dealings with the Indians. This is more than could be said for the majority of the white intruders. Most simply came and took the land without considering Indian claims at all.

The Indians not only were taken advantage of by whites who took their lands and gave them rum, but also the native Americans had their entire economic lifestyle changed through trade with colonials. Europeans, like the modern day advertiser, created a demand for their goods. Upon their

first arrival, Europeans brought gifts for the native

The settlement started by the English under Ogle-

Americans. But what were trinkets to the Euro-

thorpe was established on ground legally purchased. peans were far more than that to the North Ameri-

Also the early leaders attempted to eliminate one

can Indians. Woven cloth was easier to work with

major source of friction in their forest diplomacy.

than furs and skins. As an example of this compare

They forbade the importation of rum into the

the fur garments of Tomachichi to the obviously

colony. Rum, or alcohol in any form, was used by

manufactured clothes of the Handsome Fellow. But

unscrupulous traders or land grabbers to influence

there was more than clothing involved. Blankets

the tribesmen unfairly. For reasons still not com-

and boots were in demand, as were knives and axes,

pletely understood, the native American could not

glass beads for wampum, iron or brass kettles for

cope with intoxicating beverages. Perhaps one

cooking and vermilion (what a contemporary artist

reason was that none of the eastern Indians pos-

would call "hot red") for use as body paint. Also

sessed any form of intoxicant. Consequently when

the Indians wanted mirrors for admiring themselves,

the Europeans introduced alcohol to the tribes in a

guns, bullets and powder for hunting, and even

spirit of celebration, the Indians almost always

jew's harps for musical accompaniment to dancing

drank too much. Thus, if the traders wanted to

and celebrations.

drive harder bargains or, if land speculators wished

a few more acres, they simply poured out more

In exchange for these commodities the natives

rum. So great was the problem by the time of the

offered dressed skins of deer and other animals. The

American Revolution, that entire villages sometimes deerskins or "leather" could be turned into aprons,

became intoxicated to the point of passing out.

clothing, gloves and other finished products for

both Americans and Europeans. By the middle of

By careful negotiations aimed at controlling west-

the eighteenth century much of the trade was in

ward expansion, the early leaders of Georgia set a

"green" or untreated skins. The tanning of a hide

pattern of harmonious relations with their Indian

was time consuming and uncertain. The Indian

neighbors on the western frontier. Once the trustee- hunter preferred to pay more green skins for his

ship period ended in 1752, however, much of this

goods because he could obtain them faster than if

.. sensitivity seems to have been lost. Georgia fron-
tiersmen, like their counterparts all the way north 4

he had to await the steps in the tanning procedure. It is not too surprising that by 1750 the deerskin

' . " 1>4

,,"-

trade was at a point of decline. In part the reason was that the colonials found growing rice and indigo more profitable and less troublesome than trading with the Indians.
But there was also the almost certain decline of the deer population. Before the arrival of the European traders, hunting had been primarily to obtain food, with the skins an incidental but useful by-product. Then, the hunter was equipped with a bow and arrow, a weapon which required much more skill and patience in hunting than the trade musket the whites sold the Indians. But as more and more Indians acquired guns, more and more deer could be killed to satisfy the demands of the trade. Thus, over a period of time the deer population declined. Certainly the introduction of European manufactured goods and the consequent increased demand for them upset the basic ecology of life in the southeastern forests. Rising prices for trade goods also would mean a demand for more and more skins. As the naturalist Mark Catesby pointed out before 1730
Before the introduction of fire-arms amongst the American Indians, (though hunting was their principal employment) they made no other use of the skins of deer, and other beasts, than to cloath themselves, their carcasses for food, probably, then being of as much value to them as the skins; but as they now barter the skins to Europeans, for other cloathing and utensils they were before unacquainted with, so the use of guns has enabled them to slaughter far greater number of deer and other animals than they did with their primitive bows and arrows. This destruction of deer and other animals being chiefly for the sake of their skins, a small part of the venison they kill suffices them; the remainder is left to rot; or becomes a prey to the wolves, panthers, and other voracious beasts. With these skins they purchase of the English; guns, powder, and shot, woollen cloth, hatchets, kettles, porridgepots, knives, vermilion, beads, rum, etc.

Land Cessions - A Complex Problem
Through the first two decades of Georgia's history, an effort had been made to legalize land acquisition, to prohibit rum and to make the trade fair. Even after the colony passed under crown control in 1752 there was still great concern with the legality of land acquisition and reasonable negotiations with the Indians. But the colony was caught between two opposing forces. One was the concern for fairness to the Indians and the other was the need for expansion to satisfy new settlers. The two seemed irreconcilable.
Georgia needed people, people wanted land, and the only way to obtain land was by cession from the Indians. Through the years Georgia had obtained grants which had allowed her to expand up the Savannah River and at the same time in a southwesterly direction away from the river into the interior. By 1773 two of the groups traditionally eager for land, the traders and the speculators, were demanding again that more land be obtained from the Indians. The two officials to whom they went with their requests were James Wright, the royal governor, and John Stuart, the British Indian superintendent for the tribes south of the Ohio River.
The last Indian land cession in Georgia had been in 1763 after the defeat of the French and Spanish in the French and Indian War. Most of the good land in this cession had been granted to settlers by 1770. Hence the demand for more lands. Between 1763 and 1770 several of the men who traded with the Creeks and with the Cherokee had extended too much credit to the Indians. The amounts were so great that the tribesmen could never hope to repay them. One way out of this dilemma was to obtain a grant of land which could be sold in order to raise money to pay the debt. When Governor Wright went to England on furlough in 1771, he approached the authorities in London seeking approval for a land cession. The request was granted.

Thus the native American was losing his birthrights.

Even if Wright did have the approval of the royal

, " ~~p '\l~ ,,

5

I'.... ~ "'~\

officials in London, he could not hope for a successful negotiation without the aid of Indian Superintendent John Stuart. Stuart had come to South Carolina in the 1740s and had engaged in business as a merchant and a planter. Although he had not had spectacular success as a merchant he had managed to stay on. At the outbreak of the French and Indian war, he had joined the troops being sent into the wilderness post at Fort Loudoun (south of Knoxville, Tennessee). The British had built this fort to stop the French from using the Tennessee River as a back road into South Carolina.
While on garrison duty in the heartland of the Cherokee, Stuart made a number of friends among the tribe, including two chiefs, one the English commonly called Attakullakulla, or, the Little Carpenter, and the other, Oconostotah, or, the Great Warrior. When French agents aroused the Cherokee against the English outpost, the gunmen of the tribe surrounded the fort and forced it to surrender. Among the survivors was Captain John Stuart. With the aid of the Little Carpenter he was able to return safely to Charleston. Through his contacts with the royal officials and because of his experiences in the Indian country, Stuart acquired the post of superintendent of the Indian tribes south of the Ohio in 1760.
Stuart and Wright seemed to work together harmoniously, never experiencing the difficulty which John Stuart would later have in getting along with Patrick Tonyn, the governor of East Florida. Stuart seemed to have preferred the cooperative, conservative, rather direct James Wright to the more excitable Governor Tonyn. Thus when Wright approached Stuart about the possibility of another Indian land cession, the superintendent was not suspicious of Wright's motives. He regarded it as part of the governor's attempts to keep peace on the frontier.
Wright had to develop the plans for any new cession quite carefully. The crown policy after 1768 had been directed toward marking a boundary between

the whites and several Indian tribes along the western frontier. Much time, talent and money had been spent in the years between 1763 and 1768 surveying that Indian boundary line. Neither the governor nor the superintendent wished to do anything which might threaten that line and alarm the Indians.
The "New Purchase"
With careful planning then, the governor, the superintendent, the traders and the representatives of the Cherokees and the Creeks worked out a land transfer at Augusta in 1773 which would come to be known in Georgia frontier history as the "New Purchase." By this acquisition Governor Wright and the superintendent were able to satisfy, at least temporarily, the majority of concerned parties ~ Indians, traders, land speculators, settlers and royal officials. To be sure, no such agreement was ever completely satisfactory. But like most good compromises, there was a little something for everyone.
Prerevolutionary Pressures Mount
Unfortunately, neither Governor Wright, Superintendent Stuart, nor anyone living in the southern colonies had the leisure to sit back at that time and enjoy their accomplishments. Tension between Great Britain and 13 of her mainland colonies in North America was building toward an explosion.
Although no Georgians seized or dumped any tea, as did some colonials in Boston late in 1773, news of the northern events soon reached Savannah and the rest of the colony. The Georgians had kept up with the development of prerevolutionary events since 1763. Any newspapers which were brought south on ships were read and the items in them were reprinted in the Georgia Gazette. So, by the fall of 1774, there were some Georgians anxious to join the other colonials assembling at Philadelphia for the First Continental Congress.
When the Second Continental Congress assembled in May of 1775 there were Georgians present. Since

6

~'\7 -~

~
'''4

~

""~~

/..,.1::. " ..."-

GEORGIA INDIAN LAND CESSIONS 1733-1773
1. 1733
2. 1763 3.1773

Based on U. B. Phillips' Georgia and States Rights.

1 j. ./ ' 0
,,

7

, 0;

Sketches of three Indians, by John Trumbull, 1790. (I-r) Good Humor, of the Cosades Creeks; John, a Creek; The Woman's Man, a Creek Indian 4, ~,

~~~~.,. ~ ~~ Z!/rptuv,:'.i 1hn
k.Y:lrYl, .1t:,lt),?i. -I'

shooting near Boston had raised the possibility of war, the burden of organizing an army seemed the first order of business. Then the delegates would have to organize a government. Among the governmental responsibilities was Indian affairs, which was no minor task when one considered the fact that 10 of the 13 colonies had two frontiers, one facing the sea and one the forests. No one could afford to ignore the native Americans, least of all Georgia, whose frontiers lay exposed on three sides, two of them to the Indian country. As one contemporary observer pointed out, "to the west and almost down upon the Georgia line are the most numberous tribes of Indians now in North America, viz: the Creeks, Cherokee, Choctaws and a number of small tribes in the whole at least 15,000 gunmen."
Throughout much of her life as a colony before the Revolution, Georgia's white population was out-
8

numbered by the Indians and her militia outmanned, While one might argue that the Indians would never attack all at one time, no one ever took it for granted that they would not attack or make their presence felt in some way during a war.
Continental Congress Established Indian Departments
The Georgia delegates to the Continental Congress were thus glad when the congress established several Indian departments in the summer of 1775. Congress also laid plans for entering into agreements with the Indians which would keep them from attacking the western frontiers. It should also be pointed out that despite the obvious political differences between Governor Wright and the Georgians who opposed him, he did not want an Indian war. The royal governor wished to preserve Georgia for the day when the colony could be restored and he could

resume his job as the chief executive.
In their planning for Indian affairs, the Continental Congress established three departments - northern, middle and southern. Recognizing the importance of Indian diplomacy in the South, the Congress made the southern department larger than the others by providing appointments for five commissioners rather than three. Congress appointed two of these men, Dr. Thomas Walker of Virginia and Willie Jones of North Carolina, leaving it to South Carolina to fill the other three. Accordingly, the officials of South Carolina appointed George Galphin, Robert Rae and Edward Wilkinson, three experienced Indian traders, to these jobs.
Perhaps the best known of the three was George Galphin, a man with long experience as an Indian trader whose home was located at Silver Bluff on the Savannah River, a few miles below the present day Augusta, Georgia. From this location Galphin carried on an extensive business with the Creek Indians, sending traders out into the Indian towns to exchange British manufactured goods for deerskins. Although he lived on the South Carolina side of the river and was by place of residence a Carolinian, his trading connections reached into Georgia. One of his business associates at the time of the Revolution was Robert Rae of Georgia, another of the Indian commissioners for the Continental Congress.
It might be argued that these men were the worst to appoint as commissioners of Indian affairs, since they stood to profit from trade with the natives. In another sense, however, they would be wise choices because they were not anxious for war with Indians. War would interrupt the trade and cost them money. Too often some leaders of the frontier community welcomed any opportunity for conflict with the tribes because war gave the Americans another excuse to destroy the Indian villages and demand that more land be given up.
Many Georgians applauded the appointment of these commissioners since it meant some effort might be

made to keep peace on the Indian frontier. One of the primary concerns was supplies for the Indian trade. The basis for this worry (which was shared by the South Carolinians) was not so much fear of falling profits, as it was apprehension that a break in the trade might mean Indian hostilities. It should be remembered that the tribespeople had become heavily dependent on this trade. Any interruption meant no cloth, coats, knives, axes or guns and ammunition with which to pursue their livelihood of hunting. An attack on the white settlements was the one certain way to signify the Indians displeasure. If the trade was restored quickly, then the native raiders would go home. Officials in the coastal seats of government would not listen long to frontier complaints before they began to seek means to end the war and restore the trade.
Indian Trade and Peace Related
Georgia's concern in 1775 brought her to seek powder and lead for the use of the trade as well as for her troops. Since regular shipments from England to the merchants had been stopped, the Georgians laid plans to seize whatever was sent out for the use of royal officials. Success came in the fall of 1775 when Georgians intercepted a vessel carrying powder. This gave them at least a few hundred pounds for distribution to the Indians.
As previously suggested, Georgia had perhaps the greatest reason of any of the colonies to be fearful of Indian attack and to be careful in her diplomacy with the tribes. Beginning on the south at the Altamaha River and then following a sweeping line upward toward Augusta, Georgia's Indian frontier ran for hundreds of miles. In addition to the three groups within the Creek confederacy - Seminoles, Lower Creeks and Upper Creeks - Georgia's extreme northwestern frontier bordered the territory of the Cherokee.
While Georgia struggled to maintain a delicately balanced peace with the Creeks, the officials of South Carolina worked toward a similar end with the Cherokees. In both colonies, however, there

, , , ,,~ '" <:l p7..,

9

"/~~ ~,.':"\,

were difficulties to overcome. The civilian populations were divided into those who supported the emerging American cause, who called themselves Patriots or Whigs, and those who remained loyal to the King, calling themselves Loyalists or Tories. If frontier Whigs and Tories went to war it was possible they might join forces with the Indians.

permit Brown to enter the Indian country on a limited fact-finding mission. The eager Loyalist soon found that the Creeks were unhappy about the idea of armed parties of whites passing through their country.
Brown Organizes Guerilla Band

Thomas Brown, Loyalist
One of the people who became involved in these disputes was a recent immigrant to Georgia named Thomas Brown. After coming to Georgia, Brown had taken out a number of land grants and had begun establishing extensive farms in the area near Augusta. When the arguments over treatment of the colonies by Parliament were discussed in the Georgia back country, Brown was an outspoken defender of royal rule. His manner angered the Patriots in nearby South Carolina, who feared his influence among the people of the Carolina frontier and tradition has it that the Patriots gave him a suit of tar and feathers. He became an undying foe of the American cause.

Eventually giving up his original idea, Brown returned to Florida. There he recruited a number of men into a unit which Governor Tonyn called the East Florida Rangers. These men, best described as irregulars, partisans or perhaps even guerillas, were led by Brown in a series of raids against Georgia's frontier. The Rangers ransacked homesteads in South Georgia and stole cattle for the use of the people and garrison at St. Augustine. Throughout the years 1777-1779, Brown and his Rangers, along with occasional Lower Creeks and Seminoles, kept a steady pressure on Georgia's southern frontier. There is some question about whether the British regular army in St. Augustine approved of Brown's activities, but he certainly enjoyed the unqualified support of Governor Patrick Tonyn.

In the summer of 1775 Brown crossed the river into South Carolina, joined in the Loyalist activities there, and then secretly traveled through South Carolina and boarded a British warship on the coast. Like most Loyalists he believed sincerely that the majority of colonials were actually faithful to the King but were afraid to express themselves out of fear of reprisal. From South Carolina he went to East Florida, where he contacted the governor, Patrick Tonyn, and the Indian superintendent, John Stuart. Brown proposed traveling through the Indian country to reach the Georgia-South Carolina frontier and rally the Loyalists. Although Tonyn approved of the idea, the Indian superintendent feared any plan that might result in unrestricted Indian raiding against the frontiers. Like many others on both sides early in the war, Superintendent Stuart hoped for a reconciliation between the two sides. Any reconciliation would be rendered far more difficult if there had been unnecessary fighting and bloodshed on the frontier. Stuart did

Colony Fears Indian Attacks
Tonyn and Brown only gave the Georgians one set of their worries. They were provided another by the occurrences on the western and northwestern frontiers in the spring and summer of 1776. The most immediate threat to the western frontiers came from the Creek warriors or bands of Creeks and Loyalists. There was also a fear that if the Cherokees attacked the Carolinas and Virginia they might also raid the Georgia frontier. Worse yet, the Creeks might be persuaded to join the Cherokees. Still more alarming was a fear arising from John Stuart's northward trip in the spring of 1776 to confer with the British general, Henry Clinton. Rumors circulated afterward of British plans to launch a double attack against the southern colonies from Virginia to Georgia. Troops under Clinton and a naval force under Sir Peter Parker would assault the coast at some point while the native warriors attacked the frontier. Although there was

10

Po~ &>':o SJ.f'~~ l:,,' ~~"'<l'-~",,1
/'A..~ "_~,,

A Creek house of the late eighteenth or early nineteenth century
I~
~

no such plan in the offing, the actions of the Cherokees in the summer of 1776 made most Americans in the South believe in this conspiracy.
At the outbreak of the American Revolution, the Cherokees were the southern tribe most threatened by white westward expansion. While the Creeks steadily lost lands to the Georgians, settlers cabins had not yet sprung up in the very heartland of the Creek Nation, but this was not true of the Cherokees. In western South Carolina and North Carolina a string of settlements stretched westward into the mountain foothills. Whites moved ever closer to the more easterly Cherokee settlements. An even more direct threat came from settlers who had crossed the mountains into what is today

eastern Tennessee. Their cabins and clearings were nearing the very center of Cherokee lands and every day the Americans claimed and cleared more. By the spring of 1776, Cherokee patience had worn thin. Consequently they planned and carried out a series of raids against the frontiers of the Carolinas. The combination of these attacks in late June and early July alarmed the American frontier from Darien in Georgia to Pittsburgh in present day Pennsylvania.
Tribal Feuds Aid Georgia
Georgia officials shared these concerns since it was feared that the Cherokees would call upon the Creeks for assistance. Fortunately for the Geor-
11

gians, other factors kept the Creeks at home. Basically there was the matter of jealousy felt toward the Cherokees for the ammunition which they had received from the British. In addition there was the longtime feud between the Creeks and the Choctaws. Just before the Revolution began, one of the most outspoken of the Upper Creek leaders, the Mortar, was ambushed and killed by Choctaw raiders. Thus, the Creeks were reluctant to leave their villages to assist the Cherokees, aid the British or attack the Americans because in their absence their homes, families and crops would be at the mercy of Choctaw raiders. Another factor in keeping the Creeks at home was the accidentally similar policies of both the British Indian department and the American Indian commissioners. John Stuart, it must be remembered, did not order the Cherokees to attack the Americans in the summer of 1776. Rather he was trying to keep the Cherokees and the Creeks away from the settlements until some organized assault could be arranged. The American commissioners under George Galphin were saying the same thing. While there may have been a few Creeks who would have gone off to war in 1776, the combination of internal pressure and external persuasion kept the Creeks at home.
Cherokees Suffer for Attacks
By the late fall of 1776 the Creeks could rejoice at their inactivity. Toward the end of the summer the first groups of Cherokee refugees began to drift into the Creek towns. They brought with them stories of suffering at the hands of the Americans. As the Creeks began to unravel the tales, it appeared that after the Cherokee attacks of mid-l 776, Virginia and the two Carolinas, with the moral support of Georgia, and the backing of the central government, had organized a series of expeditions designed to punish the Cherokees. In all, a total of 6000 American troops had trampled through the Cherokee country, leaving destruction in their path. Thousands of bushels of com and potatoes were burned and villages were levelled, leaving the Che-

rokees to face a winter of homeless starvation. The Creeks had no desire to invite identical treatment by untimely action in support of the British cause. Any doubters were convinced when the long time British deputy for the Cherokees, Alexander Cameron, left the Cherokee towns in late 1776 and took up residence with his friend David Taitt, who was the principal British agent for the Creeks.
These stories of course were known in the villages of both the pro-American and the pro-British Creeks. George Galphin, the American Indian commissioner, never let any of the Creeks forget about the plight of the Cherokees. Whenever he sought to make a point in future negotiation, he always drove it home with a reminder about the Cherokees in 1776.
In order to capitalize on the situation, Galphin held a meeting with some pro-American Lower Creeks in the summer of 1777. From their accounts Galphin learned that the Creeks were still restless and that the Cherokee deputy, Alexander Cameron, was still living with David Taitt in the Creek country. Galphin pointed out that the Creeks would be a great deal better off if the two British officials were removed from the Indian country. The actual agreements reached between Galphin and the proAmerican Lower Creeks cannot be known. Nevertheless, a group of these natives organized a raiding party and struck the Upper Creek village where Cameron and Taitt were staying. The attackers missed Taitt and Cameron because they had been warned, and those two officials along with the majority of the traders in the nation took up temporary residence in Pensacola under the protection of the British garrison.
Alexander McGillivray Arrives in Georgia
Cameron and Taitt had been warned of the impending attack by a young man named Alexander McGillivray, a person who soon would become a central figure on the Georgia frontier and remain so until his death in the early l790s. Only three years before, McGillivray was a familiar sight on the

12

~

~r::e~"'.

streets of Savannah. His father, Lachlan McGillivray, was a prosperous member of the merchant class in Georgia. Like many other Scots, Lachlan had come to America to escape unrest a home. During his early years in America he had been in the Indian trade as a business partner of George Ga1phin and Robert Rae. Both father and son were well known to the Indian commissioners for the Continental Congress. Another partnership into which Lachlan McGillivray entered was a personal one with a young woman of the Upper Creeks. She was not actually a full-blooded Creek since her father had been a French soldier from the French post in the Alabama country, Fort Toulouse, and her mother a Creek. From the union of Lachlan McGillivray and Sehoy Marchand had come Alexander McGillivray, born sometime in the late 1740s. Much of his youth seems to have been spent in Savannah and at some point in his childhood he had received at least a basic education, as is shown by his flowing signature and carefully shaped handwriting.
With the outbreak of the American Revolution, Lachlan McGillivray chose the side of the King, and rather than stay in the colonies to suffer at the hands of the colonials, he returned to Scotland, leaving behind his son Alexander. Since his father had chosen to be a Loyalist, Alexander was suspect by association. In addition, because he was a mixed blood and thus regarded as inferior by the Americans, Alexander McGillivray found that he was no longer welcome in Savannah. Consequently he returned to live among the people of his mother and grandmother. Since Creek culture was matrilineal, which means descent is traced through one's mother, Alexander McGillivray was welcome in the Upper Creek towns. Because of his father's business associations he was known to many people in the Indian trade and the British Indian department, because of his mother he had a place within the triba11eadership structure, and because of his abilities, particularly his skills at writing and reading, he quickly became a member of the British Indian Department's substructure. By 1777 he had been appointed to be an assistant commissary (or store)

keeper for the Upper Creeks at the village of Little Tallassee. It was in this capacity that he learned of the plot against Taitt and Cameron in the summer of 1777. After warning the two men of the threat to their lives, he stayed on as the British representative in the Upper Creek towns and kept Superintendent Stuart informed of affairs there through the remainder of 1777.
British-Indian Cooperation Flounders
Those pro-American raiders who chased Taitt and Cameron out of the Upper Creek towns also wrecked some carefully laid plans of John Stuart. The superintendent had been led to believe that there would be a British invasion of the South in late 1777. He was preparing for this by readying the Creeks to attack the Georgia frontiers. The raid thus not only spoiled Stuart's plans, but also reminded the pro-British Creeks that it was not safe to leave their villages for long at a time for any reason.
Georgians had long anticipated an attack on several of their frontiers at once, but fortunately for them there was little more than raiding during the early years of the war. In addition to the danger from the Indians living along the borders of the state, there was the British province of east Florida, to which many southern Loyalists had fled and whose governor was eager to prove his military abilities by a successful invasion of Georgia.
To the actual surprise of few and to the satisfaction of the British officials and the Loyalists in east Florida, British military planners decided in the winter of 1777-1778 that conditions in the South favored a major British operation there. According to the British plans, Georgia was to be invaded and attacked by three forces at the same time. These simultaneous strikes would include an advance from the South by the garrison from St. Augustine, an attack by a naval force sent out from England and an assault on the frontiers by the legions of forest warriors and partisans under Superintendent John Stuart.
13

British Invasion of Georgia
In December of 1778 the invasion began and by early January of 1779, Savannah was in British hands. In an effort to aid the movement against the frontier, a British force was sent inland to Augusta. When the troops reached that post on January 31, their commander found that there were few Loyalists and no Indians rallying to the King's standard. These invading forces would have been assisted greatly if they had been operating on the basis of a realistic assessment of the situation in Georgia. But, in the first place there were never

quite as many Loyalists as those in exile liked to believe. Even if there had been a majority of loyal population early in the war, four years of civil war had forced many into silence or a different opinion by early 1779.
And, there was as simple reason for the absence of native warriors. They were still at home awaiting instructions from the Indian department. At best communications in war are uncertain, and particularly so in a situation like the one existing in Georgia in late 1778 and early 1779. Information might

Three Cherokee chiefs sent to England in 1762

14

pass between Savannah and St. Augustine with reasonable speed by boat, but getting instructions to John Stuart in Pensacola was much more uncertain. By forest path it was about 600 miles on foot or horseback. By sail it was supposedly a matter of only a few days, but with poor conditions it might stretch out to six weeks. The message from the military officials at Savannah sent out soon after Christmas of 1778 did not reach Pensacola until February 1, 1779. It was not distributed to all the war party leaders in the Creek nation until midFebruary.
Within about 14 days the warriors, partisans and leaders assembled and advanced eastward from the Creek towns in the general direction of Augusta. They had no way of knowing that the British troops had on February 14 returned to Savannah from their overextended and exposed thrust inland. When the band of about 400 reached the Ocmulgee River, the Indians insisted that they await the protective escort and cooperation of the British troops, as had been promised.
After a few days in camp the scouts discovered a large number of mounted troops moving in their direction. In anticipation the Indians and their leaders prepared for the arrival of the soldiers. Much to their horror the force turned out to be Americans. The detachment was a band of light horse under the command of General Andrew Pickens of South Carolina. At the request of the Georgia government, Pickens had been sent by his state to defend the frontier against just such an invasion as the Creeks were preparing to make.
Creeks Retreat
Immediately the Creeks called a council and decided that since they were outnumbered they would retreat. There was no cowardice in their decision. It was a matter of practical warfare, since a band unaccustomed to fighting from horseback was at a distinct disadvantage against seasoned troops who knew how to use the short sword and rifle while

mounted. The majority of the party simply withdrew. A few led by David Taitt and Alexander McGillivray were able to avoid Pickens' men, slip through the Patriot territory, and reach the British army in Savannah with whom they served as scouts for some weeks.
Once again the Americans had spoiled a British plan to attack the Georgia frontier. The Creeks on the other hand had believed that discretion was the better part of valor and had chosen to withdraw rather than risk their precious and limited manpower in an uneven fight. Not again during the Revolution would they advance toward the frontier in such numbers. Occasional raiding parties and a futile attempt to break through the American lines to reach the British in Savannah would be the extent of their operations against the Patriots in Georgia. Of course it should be pointed out that by the late spring of 1779 most of Georgia as far inland as Augusta was in British hands.
British Government Restored in Georgia
It was now believed possible, at least by the majority of royal officials, to return civil government to Georgia. Sir James Wright took up his post as Governor of the colony in July as did a number of other royal officials. But in March of 1779, John Stuart had died and for a few months after that his former deputies, Henry Stuart and Alexander Cameron, ran the office of Indian affairs. Then a new arrangement was announced by the officials in London. The territory over which John Stuart had presided for 17 years was to be divided, one half to be called the Atlantic Division and the other the Mississippi Division. Appointed superintendent of the latter was Alexander Cameron, who would now assume responsibility for the Choctaws and the Chickasaws. Thomas Brown, commander of the partisan corps known as the East Florida Rangers and a former resident of Georgia, was named superintendent for the Cherokees and Creeks.
Brown chose to locate his headquarters at Augusta
15

because of its relative ease of communication with the coast by river, its traditional location as an Indian trading center and its closeness to the frontier. Since Brown had served in Florida as a military leader he was called upon to do the same in Georgia. He would serve at Augusta in a dual capacity, both as Indian superintendent and as commander of the British outpost there.
Thus, from late 1779 to early 1781, most of the Indians who visited Georgia, came in connection with the business of the superintendent's office. In the spring of 1780, Superintendent Brown had great need of his Indian supporters, since his post was being attacked by the Americans. Georgians under Elijah Clarke laid siege to Augusta, hoping to cut communication with the Indians, seize Brown and capture the supplies which had been stored there. A few Cherokees had slipped in, and Brown sent out calls for more Cherokee and Creek warriors. Fortunately for Colonel Brown, he was rescued by a relief force from the British outpost at NinetySix, South Carolina.
Had Brown been forced to wait for the Creeks, his predicament might have become bleak indeed. For in the spring of 1780, many of the Creek warriors were not in their villages just a few hundred miles from Augusta, but were several hundred miles away at Pensacola. That British outpost was being attacked by Spanish forces under Bernardo de Galvez, the governor and commandant at New Orleans. The British commander at Pensacola, General John Campbell, had sent frantic cries for help to the Indian officials in the Creek towns. Several hundred Creek warriors responded, most of them recruited through the efforts of Alexander McGillivray. Their presence helped,in defeating the Spanish attackers. Again and again in late 1780 the British commandant would thank the Creeks for saving his garrison and the town.

really do much for the British at either Pensacola or Augusta. American military success in the South Carolina backcountry had begun to turn the tide of war in favor of the Americans. In the spring of 1781, American attackers once again had besieged Colonel Brown and his men inside Augusta. Brown's pleas for help went unheard. A few Cherokee slipped in, but the Creeks would not come at all because of their fear that the Americans might punish them as they had the Cherokee in 1776. Moreover there was also the possibility that proAmerican Lower Creeks might raid the pro-British villages. On the other hand the Anglophiles would not go to Pensacola because they had become disenchanted with the policies of the British General John Campbell. Time and time again during late 1780 and early 1781 Campbell had sent messages to the Creeks asking for reinforcements. Then he would cancel them at a moment's notice if the Spanish did not appear as he expected. Like the proverbial shepherd whose cries of "wolf" had so disgusted his neighbors that they would not come when there really was a wolf, the Creeks had stopped responding by the time the Spanish actually came. Thus in the spring and summer of 1781 the two British posts of Pensacola and Augusta fell, giving the Georgia frontier a sense of freedom that had not been felt in many months.
American Control Restored in Georgia
With the restoration of American control to the Georgia upcountry, American attempts to negotiate with the Creeks could be resumed. There was the possibility of new raids against the frontier by proBritish Creek warriors. Of course there were those on the frontier who hoped for a conflict with the native Americans. Unfortunately for the Creeks, the attitude in Georgia drifted more and more toward the position taken by the frontiersman, that the Indians were wasting good land, and should be driven off or better yet exterminated.

American Successes Begin to Turn the Tide
By early 1781, however, the Creeks could not 16

During the second half of 1781 and the first six months of 1782, the restoration of American military control over Georgia and the Spanish possession
~~~,~,p~./~
~..1.i: .l.~

Sketches of two Indians, by John Trumbull, 1790. (I-r) Talasee, King of the Creeks, and Birdtail, King of the Cusitahs

of Pensacola put the Southern Indians in an increasingly difficult predicament. It must be remembered that the native American, both South and North, was dependent on trade for many of his material possessions. Now there were fewer opportunities for him to obtain goods. While the Spanish would have welcomed the establishment of trade with the tribes, the quality of Spanish goods was inferior and the prices were high. American supplies were insufficient and the British were restricted to the immediate vicinity of Charleston and Savannah. Parties of desperate southern Indians attempted to move cross country, some driving empty packhorses with them in hopes of obtaining goods. Again and again these bands were turned back by American patrols. In May of 1782 a band led by the respected Upper Creek chief Emistisiguo encountered American troops blocking the path into Savannah. The brave Emistisiguo led his gunmen in an assault on the American lines. Only after

heavy fighting were the Americans able to keep the forest soldiers from cutting through their lines. Unfortunately for the Creeks, their leader was killed, tradition has it while in combat with General Anthony Wayne.
Indian Leadership in Transition
The death of Emistisiguo was certain to bring changes, perhaps dramatic ones, in the leadership structure of the Upper Creeks. First it should be remembered that this was the second major Upper Creek leader slain in less than eight years. Just on the eve of the Revolution the Mortar had been killed. Now, hardly a decade later, which was not long in the lifetime of a tribe's leadership, yet another chieftain had been killed.
From the point of view of the Georgians the leadership vacuum left by Emistisiguo may have seemed

-, . ",0<::.:.-0:
OJ " ,

17

/.;o,; ",':.....:

fortunate at first; soon, however, they would have reason for second thoughts. Shortly after the death of the Mortar in 1774, and while Emistisiguo was trying to expand and solidify his leadership position, Alexander McGillivray had returned to live in the Upper Creek towns. As the months passed, McGillivray's role as Indian agent broadened. The first instance of his expanding responsibility was the way in which he prevented the plotted assassinations of David Taitt and Alexander Cameron. Since he could stay in the towns when the other whites had to leave, it was obvious that the Creeks looked upon him in a rather unique way, as one able to communicate with both the white and Indian worlds. Then he emerged in 1779 and 1780 as a war leader when he took a party past the Americans under Pickens to join the British army in Savannah, and when he led bands of warriors to assist the British at Pensacola.

In this case the spoils were the Indian lands. Georgia's firm determination to acquire territory was met by the equally stiff resistance of McGillivray and his followers. Persistent Georgia demands finally resulted in the treaty of Augusta in 1783. Fifteen Creek leaders, at least half of whom were pro-American Lower Creeks, ratified the treaty. These chiefs promised peace and agreed to give up all their lands between the upper Savannah and the upper Oconee Rivers. It should be pointed out, however, that the majority of the nation did not accept this treaty. Since Alexander McGillivray and his followers were not present, they denounced the agreement. Indeed McGillivray refused to sign any treaty for another seven years. In a way then, the Georgia frontier felt the aftermath of the Revolution long after the last British troops had left the state.
American-Indian Relations Unsettled

McGillivray Becomes Creek Leader
At the death of Emistisiguo in the spring of 1782, Alexander McGillivray emerged as a leader of the Upper Creeks. In reporting his new role to Thomas Brown, McGillivray described himself as having been elected "principal chief of all the Creeks." While there may be an exaggeration in the proposal that he was the principal chief of all the Creeks, he was an elected leader in the Upper Creek towns. Thereafter, he assumed and acted the role of spokesman for all the Upper and Lower Creeks.
However Alexander McGillivray came to power, and whatever his proper role, it was a bit of bad luck for the Georgians. Dispossessed of his father's lands and a perpetual exile in the Indian country, he would seek every ounce of satisfaction from his American opponents. While McGillivray was no more or less cunning than either the Mortar or Emistisiguo, he certainly had as many reasons to dislike the Georgians.
The Georgians on the other hand assumed the attitude of victors to whom belonged the spoils of war.

In 1783 relations between native Americans and the Georgians were as unsettled as they had been for the past 10 years. Certainly the New Purchase of 1773 had not brought peace to the frontier. All through the war Georgia frontiersmen pushed out onto the Indian lands. Only the efforts of the American Indian commissioners prevented an Indian war.
Indeed some have wondered why there was not more unrest on the Georgia frontier during the years from 1774 to 1783. If the Georgia-Florida border is excluded for the moment, the following observations may be helpful. Perhaps the basic reason was factionalism within the Creek nation. Throughout the colonial period the confederacy had been divided into pro-French and pro-English groups. After the French left in 1763, personal rivalries between Indian leaders kept the divisions alive. Then the Americans fostered factionalism by courting and winning some of the Lower Creeks. In addition to factionalism there was fear. One of the fears came from the long time Choctaw-Creek feud. Any Creek warrior who left his village knew he might come back to destruction left by Choctaw

18

~~p ~~.

~..~~.,~

/~<::. " ....'.

raiders. Moreover, this warfare had been encouraged by the British on the basis of the ancient principle of divide and conquer.
Cherokees Attack in 1776
But there was a much larger fear after 1776. In the summer of 1776 the Cherokees went to war against the Patriots. They asked the Creeks for their assistance but the Creeks refused. Jealous of ammunition given the Cherokees by the British, reluctant to expose their towns to Choctaw raiders and uncertain of Superintendent John Stuart's opinion, the Creeks kept their warriors at home. By the end of the year they could rejoice over that decision. American armies had destroyed many Cherokee towns and all the supplies they had stored for the winter. Cherokee refugees came into the Creek towns with stories of great suffering. Even after the Cherokee had gone back to rebuild, George Galphin never let the Creeks forget what had

happened to the Cherokees.
On the Georgia-Florida frontier the scene was more complicated. From early in the war there was military activity by Loyalist troops and a few Indians. But these attacks were regarded by the Georgians as the work of Loyalist raiders. By taking this practical attitude the leaders of the state could avoid declaring war on the Creek nation as a whole. The state thus saved itself untold expense and bloodshed.
The story of the Indian frontier in Revolutionary Georgia is not an easy one to follow. It is difficult to sort out the parties and difficult to predict the turn of events. It is not difficult, however, to identify the losers and the winners. The native Americans were the losers for they had lands which the white men wanted. The whites were the winners since they seemed to have victory, force and time on their side.

19

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adair, James, History of the American Indians. London, 1775; reprinted in New York, 1973.
Alden, John Richard, John Stuart and the Southern Colonial Frontier, 1754-1775. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1944.
Bartram, William, The Travels of William Bartram. Reprinted in Savannah, 1973.
Coleman, Kenneth, The American Revolution in Georgia, 1763-1789. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1958.
Corkran, David, The Creek Frontier, 1540-1783. Norman, 1967.
Crane, Verner W., The Southern Frontier, 1670-1732. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1956.
DeVorsey, Louis, The Indian Boundary in the Southern Colonies, 1763-1775. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966.
Mi1fort, Louis L., Memoirs of My Sojourn in the Creek Nation. Reprinted in Savannah, 1973.
O'Donnell, James H., "Alexander McGillivray: Training for Leadership, 1777-1783," Georgia Historical Quarterly, 49:172-186.
O'Donnell, James H., Southern Indians in the American Revolution. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1973.
Olson, Gary D., "Thomas Brown, Loyalist Partisan, and the Revolutionary War in Georgia, 1777-1782," Part I, Georgia Historical Quarterly, 54: 1-19.
Smith, Paul, Loyalists and Redcoats: A Study in British Revolutionary Policy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1964.

20

. ~,>,\4~~

,

'l!

~ .. ,l:~

Teacher's Guide
Thelma D. Davis Frances J. McKibben
Teachers Ridgeview High School Fulton County Schools

Focus
The main emphasis of this unit is Indian-Colonial relationship in pre-revolutionary Georgia. The main thrust is political and military rather than social or economic. The Loyalists and Patriots are portrayed in their dealings with the Indian tribes.

General Objectives for the Student

Recognize how the Indian culture was changed by the introduction of European customs and values.

Organize in chronological order the major events in the Georgia Indian Frontier 1773-1783.

Recognize the Indian contributions to Georgia's culture.

Evaluate the role of the Indian in pre-revolutionary military action in Georgia.

Recognize possible conflict in defending a minority opinion.

Identify the major personalities who played a prominent role in Indian-Colonial relations.

Evaluate the reason for the change in the Indian attitude toward the settler.

Skill Objectives for the Student

Develop map skills by mapping the Indians' territory.

Develop a concept of time by organizing major events in chronological order.

Develop vocabulary skills by defining terms given in the reading.

Research and collect biographical data.

Develop writing skills by gathering information and publishing a short newspaper about Colonial life.

Suggested Schedule

This unit will take a minimum of two weeks although student interest and varied activities may extend this time. Some suggested topics are

I. Introduction to Indian culture

A. Green Corn Festival B. Laws

II.
n

Changes in Indian culture as the European influence increases
~ ~i:~~

III. Changes in Indian territory
IV. The role of the Indian in pre-revolutionary military action in Georgia
V. Individuals who were involved in Georgia Indian frontier
Activities
I. Write a script for a radio program interviewing several Creek Indians on the upcoming "Green Corn Festival," then tape the program (or act out the interview) and present to the class.
2. Do a collage of pictures of foodstuffs, domesticated animals and shelters which were common to Indian life.
3. Write a code of laws for the class. Discuss the conditions and reasons for them.
4. Read the Laws of the Creek Nation (see supplementary material). Discuss.
5. Do a mural depicting a trading session. Show the setting, goods for exchange, Indian dress, traders and the items most in demand.
6. A good exercise activity which could bring out student values is to list 12 adjectives for each group which best describes it.

Settlers

Indians

7. Develop a book written by the students in the class. It will be made up of biographical sketches of each of the major characters in the Georgia Indian Frontier reading. The teacher should select several other historical personalities and assign the students to gather information and pictures or sketches, if possible. Library time should be scheduled. The material should be compiled and duplicated so that each student has a copy of the class biographical book. The class should also select a title for its project.

8. Select a date such as 1778 or 1783 and have the students develop a newspaper from that year. The newspaper should include stories based on historical evidence. The students should write the articles to cover social, economic and political climates of the selected date. Editorial cartoons and pictures should be used. The newspaper should be printed and distributed to the class.

9. The students should use the map of the Southeast (included in this supplement) to map the general area inhabited by each of the Indian tribes and the colonists. The teacher may want to select 1773 for a first map and 1783 for a second map to compare land holdings.

. ~,,4'"'

..

% ,

23

;', .. "'\

~l4P ~=<

I~"<: ."

" ~....~/

0
0 M

17(:
0 Vl
N
0
0
~

,



-'

0
0
~

," ," "

"o'"

.,
\ \.,. '1 '- 0
. Vl ~

,I
......................

~ --_ ......,i-::::r.:':::.,._-..,~;;::l~r-------_-4-;:,!;.JI~~-------_.J_0~\

o

,,

-o ----r----------:.:.:.:-:,:.1fF-~::::::1f::.:,J,:,.l-t-:-.-.'-,-.-..-,----"-..-+~~,, __-------L ~~
Vl

0\.

-r--tT:+------+---~ oo

o

~:

___ ____


,

00

0
00

~~
~CZl


,
,

~ o o n ' ', :,,

~l~ -H:~JL ~ v

!

M

00

Q

~z

~~~z~ 0on

0on 0

MOO

o

o
Vl

M

N

Discussion Questions 1. What was Oglethorpe's Indian policy? How did this policy change when Georgia became a Crown
Colony? What do you think were the reasons for this change? 2. How did the introduction of European goods in trade change the lifestyle of the Indian people? 3. How was the Indian's relationship with the land changed by contact with the settlers? What kinds
of problems resulted from the change? What comparisons can you draw with our present day relationship to the land?
4. What is a birthright? Do we have a birthright? What are the things we consider our birthrights and why do we feel that way?
5. Explain why each of these groups-traders, speculators, settlers-would be interested in Indian cessions of land.
6. Discuss the ways in which Governor James Wright was unlike other colonial governors. 7. Wha t were the main characteristics of the men who acted as Indian agents? How well do you think they performed their jobs? 8. Who was Thomas Brown? Why was he persecuted? Can you think of groups or individuals today who might face persecution because of their beliefs? 9. What did the Loyalists and Patriots want from the Indians? What did the Indians want from each of these groups? Which group, in your opinion, came the closest to gaining its objectives? Vocabulary Buffer Nomads Land speculators Birthright Reprisal Reconciliation
25

Timeline: The Georgia Indian Frontier, 1773-1783

1752

Georgia becomes a Crown Colony.

1760

John Stuart becomes superintendent of Indian tribes in the South.

1763

Last Indian land cession is made in Georgia.

1768

Crown attempts to set boundary between settlers and Indian tribes.

1771

Governor Wright seeks approval from the crown for additional land cession.

1773

Cherokees and Creeks transfer land at Augusta to settlers.

1774

First Continental Congress assembles in Philadelphia; no Georgians are present.

1775

Second Continental Congress assembles in Philadelphia; representatives from Georgia attend.

Second Continental Congress establishes Indian Departments to handle Indian problems.

Thomas Brown goes to South Carolina to rally support for the king among the Loyalists and Indians.

In the fall, Georgia intercepts a British vessel carrying gunpowder and lead.

1776

Cherokees begin attacks on white settlements to stop further movement into their lands.

The frontier is alarmed by Indian and British attacks under Clinton and Parker.

By summer most Americans believe a conspiracy exists between the British and Indians to launch attacks against Southern colonies.

In latter part of the year Alexander Cameron, British deputy for the Cherokees, takes up residence with the principal British agent for the Creeks, David Taitt.

Creeks do not join Cherokees in attacks on white settlements.

1777

George Galphin holds a meeting with pro-American Lower Creeks to urge removal of Alexander Cameron and David Taitt. Taitt and Cameron are forewarned by Alexander McGillivray and escape.

Alexander McGillivray is appointed to be assistant commissary for the Creeks at Little Tallahassee.

1777-1778 Decision is made for a major British operation in the South.

26

~~ .. ~~~

,,

~q ~~

1777-1779 British invasion begins and the British take Savannah in January.

Thomas Brown and a group of men called Rangers begin raids on South Georgia for supplies for the British Army at S1. Augustine.

1779

In March, John Stuart dies and Thomas Brown is named superintendent of Cherokees and Creeks.

1780

Superintendent Brown's post is attacked by Americans and he is seized. He is later rescued by the British.

In the spring, Creeks go to the aid of General John Campbell, commander at Pensacola, who is under attack by Spanish forces under Bernardo de Galvez.

1781

The British posts of Pensacola and Augusta fall.

1782

American military control of Georgia is restored.

1783

In May, Upper Creek Chief Emistisiguo is killed in an attempt to open supply lines.

At the Treaty of Augusta, Creek Chiefs promise peace and agree to give up all their lands between the Upper Savannah and Oconee Rivers with the signing of the treaty.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

Laws of the Creek Nation

Law 8

If a man should kill another in a rum drinking and it can be proven to the satisfaction of the chiefs that when he committed the act he was out of his senses, and that he and all his people were friendly to the person killed previous to his death, then he shall not be punished but forgiven -

Law 11 When a man dies and has children, they shall have the property and his other relatives shall not take the property to the injury of his children -

Law 14 Friendly Indians must pay all debt due to each other -

Law 14

Should two persons swap horses, the bargain shall be considered good unless one of the parties

proves that he was drunk at the time he swapped, and in case he makes these facts known in

five days after the swap, his horse shall be returned to him, but if he does not claim within five

days the bargain shall be considered good, and he cannot get his horse back -

. b,,~t'

~~
,

27

.t,,~ .....\:

Law 16 Should any person set fire to the woods where he knew that there were sows or pigs or calfs and any of them should be injured thereby he shall pay all damages to the owner, but if he can prove that he did not know of such stock being there, he shall not pay damages -

Law 18 If a man has a dog and the dog should run away and kill property belonging to another person, the owner shall not pay, but if it can be proven that the owner set the dog on in the case he shall pay -

Law 19 Should a white man take an Indian woman as a wife and have children by her and he goes out of the Nation he shall leave all his property with his children for their support -

Law 32

No person belonging to the Creek Nation shall go into any of the United States territories or Cherokee Nation and procure goods or anything else upon a credit, and should any citizens of the United States territories or Cherokee Nation sell goods on a credit to any person residing in the Nation they do it upon their own responsibility, as the chief and warriors will not interfere between the parties, when any claim is brought before them -

Law 45 If any person or persons should blow for rain or poison they shall not be interrupted -

Law 53 If a person should get drunk and want to fight he shall be roped until he gets sober -

Note

From Laws of the Creek Nation, edited by Antonio J. Waring, Published by University of Georgia Press, Athens. 1960, pgs. 17-27.

Green Corn Dance

The best known ceremony of the present-day Indian is the so-called Green Corn Dance. This is an annual affair. The day is set by the medicine man and his assistant. The Corn Dance lasts at least four days, sometimes longer. It varies in certain details, from group to group and from year to year. The usual procedure is about as follows.

The Indians begin to gather several days before the ceremony. Some help clean the dance grounds and repair the huts, while others go hunting. At one time a grand hunt was staged just before the dance; but today, game being scarce, the medicine man and his assistants buy most of the food with the help of contributions from the participants.

On the first day of the dance, early in the morning, the medicine man undergoes a ceremonial bath and then directs the preparations of the grounds. Men and boys gather wood for a dance fire; and in the afternoon there is a ball game in which the girls and young women play against the boys and young men. At night the fire is lit and several dances are staged.

28

.~: ~~

~ p~~

The second day is marked by feasting, and usually there is a barbecue. The men eat alone in a ceremonial hut called the "big house," while the women and children eat in clan camps nearby. On this day some man may go out to kill a white heron, the feathers of which will be used later on. In the afternoon another ball game may be held, and at night there are more dances. At midnight the men begin to fast.
Early on the third day the medicine man and his assistants bathe ritually and bring out the sacred medicine bundles. Two "black drinks" are prepared and taken by the men. Feathers of the white heron may be hung from the poles, which are carried in the Feather Dance. This dance is staged twice in the morning and twice in the afternoon. About noon, court is held; medicine men and councilmen from other groups may be present at this time. These elders hear cases involving the breaking of tribal laws, morals and customs; and they pass judgment. Little is known of the punishments meted out; this aspect of Indian culture is kept hidden from the white man. According to some Christianized Indians, Indian justice is swift and certain.
In the afternoon there is another ball game, followed by dancing. At dusk the medicine man lights a fire, using a flint-and-steel which is kept in the medicine bundle. The contents of the bundle are displayed. Four ears of corn are placed by the medicine fire, one to each point of the compass. On the fire, the third "black drink" is prepared. While the mixture boils, dances are staged. The brew boils until midnight, when the ears of corn are placed in the pot. Then the drink is taken by the men. The medicine man, his assistants and a few others talk and tell stories until dawn, while all the other Indians continue dancing. Some years, a naming ceremony is held shortly after midnight; boys around 13 and 15 years old receive a new name, chosen by elders of their clan or by the medicine man.
At dawn of the fourth day, the medicine man hides the sacred bundle, and then scratches the men and boys, using a small implement in which needles have been inserted. This ritual scratching is not severe; it is thought to insure future healthiness. In the morning the remains of the "black drink" are poured on heated stones in the sweat-house, and the men take something like a "Turkish bath. " Then everyone bathes in cold water, and the long fast is broken. For the first time, the Indians eat of the new corn crop; for them a new year has begun.
29

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Bonner, James, The Georgia Story. Oklahoma City: Harlow Publishing Co., 1958. Changing Culture: Georgia History. Atlanta and Fulton County Public Schools, 1971. Coulter, E. Merton, Georgia: A Short History. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1960. Evans, Lawton B., History of Georgia. Spartanburg: The Reprint Company, 1898. Harris, Joel Chandler, Stories of Georgia. Atlanta: Cherokee Publishing Company, 1971.
Jones, Charles c., History of Georgia. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1883.
Reece, Trevor R., Colonial Georgia. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1963. Saye, Albert B., New Viewpoints in Georgia History. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1943. Smith, George G., Story of Georgia. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company, 1968. Suddeth, Ruth, et. al., Empire Builders of Georgia. Austin, Texas: The Steck Company, 1966. Swanton, John R., The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Washington: Smithsonian Institution,
Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 157, 1946. Temple, Sarah and Coleman, Kenneth, Georgia Journey. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1961. Waring, Antonio J., Laws of the Creek Nation. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1960.

30

, ....'" <:l'/'

~,,~

p... ~

~'1~ d.~

EVALUATION FORM

1. Name of publication

2. In what way do you use this publication and others in the Bicentennial series?

classroom instruction lesson planning - classroom preparation reference material _ _ _ other (please specify)

3. What audience or group do you think this publication serves? Check as many as seem appropriate.

____ classroom teachers ____ curriculum directors
school administrators parents/students general public other (please specify)

4. Is the information contained in this publication available to you from any other source?

____ yes no

If yes, what source?

_

5. Is the language used in this publication clear and easy to understand?
yes no uncertain
6. How could this publication have been made more effective?

7. What is your job title?

_

8. D a t e - - - - - - - - - - - _ ' \ t - - -

(FOLD ON DOTTED LINE)
BUSINESS REPLY MAIL
NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN UNITED STATES POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY _
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PUBLICATIONS AND INFORMATION SERVICES 103 STATE OFFICE BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30334
(FOLD ON DOTTED LINE)

FIRST CLASS PERMIT NO. 6146 ATLANTA, GA.

(STAPLE OR SEAL WITH TAPE)

BOOKLETS IN THIS SERIES

1974* Revolutionary Background, 1763-1775 Charles Downs, Tidewater Community College, Frederick, Virginia

The Stamp Act in Georgia, 1765-1766 James Cook, Floyd Junior College, Rome, Georgia

Military History, 1776-1782 C. Stephen Gurr, Georgia Southwestern College, Americus, Georgia

1975

Governor James Wright in Georgia, 1765-1782 Kenneth Coleman, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia

Economic Change in Revolutionary Georgia, 1775-1789 Milton Ready, University of North Carolina, Asheville, North Carolina

The Frontier and the Indians in the Revolution in Georgia James H. O'Donnell, Marietta College, Ohio

1976

The Negro in Revolutionary Georgia Alton Hornsby, Morehouse College, Atlanta, Georgia

Loyalism in Revolutionary Georgia Heard Robertson, Attorney-at-law, Augusta, Georgia

Political Changes in Revolutionary Georgia, 1775-1785 Charles Rischer, Dalton Junior College, Dalton, Georgia

1977

Architecture in Revolutionary Georgia William R. Mitchell Jr., Historic Augusta, Augusta, Georgia

Social Change in Revolutionary Georgia, 1775-1789 Fred Mills, LaGrange College, LaGrange, Georgia

Georgia and the United States Constitution, 1787-1789 J. David Griffin, West Georgia College, Carrollton, Georgia

1978

Results of the Revolution and Independence in Georgia Milton Ready, University of North Carolina, Asheville, North Carolina and Kenneth Coleman, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia

*Year of anticipat{!d publication