When Wm. Bartram traveled through the Seminole country, about 1773, he was informed that Cuscowilla, a town on a lake of the same name and a sort of Seminole capital, had been built by Indians from Okóni old town, settled upon the Alachua plains: "They abdicated the ancient Alachua town on the borders of the savanna, about fifty miles west from the river San Juan, and built here, calling the new town Cuscowilla. (About 1710) they had emigrated from Oconee town, on the Oconee river, on account of the proximity of the white people." They formerly waged war with the "Tomocos (Timucua), Utinas, Calloosas, Yamases" and other Florida tribes.[48]
The Seminoles were always regarded as a sort of outcasts by the Creek tribes from which they had seceded, and no doubt there were reasons for this. The emigration included many of the more turbulent elements of the population, and the mere fact that many of them spoke another dialect than the Maskoki proper (some belonging to the Hitchiti or southeastern division of the family) is likely to have cast a shadow upon them. The anecdote narrated by Milfort (Mémoire,p. 311-317) furnishes ample proof of the low esteem in which the Seminoles were held by the Creeks. But, on the other side, emigration was favored by the Creek communities themselves through the practice observed by some of their number to send away a part of their young men to form branch villages, whenever the number of the inhabitants began to exceed two hundred. Several towns will be found in our "List of Creek Settlements," in which the process of segmentation was going on upon a large scale in the eighteenth century.
The Seminoles first appear as a distinct politic body in American history under one of their chiefs, called King Payne, at the beginning of this century. This refers more particularly to the Seminoles of the northern parts of what is now Florida; these Indians showed, like the Creeks, hostile intentions towards the thirteen states during and after the Revolution, and conjointly with the Upper Creeks on Tallapoosa river concluded a treaty of friendship with the Spaniards at Pensacola in May, 1784. Although under Spanish control, the Seminoles entered into hostilities with the Americans in 1793 and in 1812. In the latter year Payne míko was killed in a battle at Alachua, and his brother, the influential Bowlegs, died soon after. These unruly tribes surprised and massacred American settlers on the Satilla river, Georgia, in 1817, and another conflict began, which terminated in the destruction of the Mikasuki and Suwanee river towns of the Seminoles by General Jackson, in April, 1818. After the cession of Florida, and its incorporation into the American Union (1819), the Seminoles gave up all their territory by the treaty of Fort Moultrie, September 18th, 1823, receiving in exchange goods and annuities. When the government concluded to move these Indians west of the Mississippi river, a treaty of a conditional character was concluded with them at Payne's Landing, in 1832. The larger portion were removed, but the more stubborn part dissented, andthus gave origin to one of the gravest conflicts which ever occurred between Indians and whites. The Seminole war began with the massacre of Major Dade's command near Wahoo swamp, December 28th, 1835, and continued with unabated fury for five years, entailing an immense expenditure of money and lives. A number of Creek warriors joined the hostile Seminoles in 1836.
A census of the Seminoles taken in 1822 gave a population of 3899, with 800 negroes belonging to them. The population of the Seminoles in the Indian Territory amounted to 2667 in 1881 (Ind. Affairs' Rep.), and that of the Florida Seminoles will be stated below. There are some Seminoles now in Mexico, who went there with their negro slaves.
The settlements of the Seminoles were partly erratic, comparable to hunters' camps, partly stationary. The stationary villages existed chiefly in the northern parts of the Seminole lands, corresponding to Southern Georgia and Northern Florida of our days. A very instructive table exists of some of their stationary villages, drawn up by Capt. Young, and printed in Rev. Morse's Report on the Indians of the United States (1822), p. 364. This table however includes, with a few exceptions, only places situated near Apalachicola river (east and west of it), in Alabama, Georgia and Florida; the list was probably made at a time when Florida was still under Spanish domination, which accounts for the fact that the county names are not added to the localities. Many of these towns were, in fact, Lower Creek towns and not belonging to the Seminole proper, all of whom lived east of Apalachicola river, mostly at some distance from it. Seminole and Lower Creek were, in earlier times, often regarded as identical appellations; cf. Milfort, Mém., p. 118.
The remarks included in parentheses were added by myself.
LIST OF SEMINOLE SETTLEMENTS.Micasukeys—(In eastern part of Leon county, Florida).Fowl Towns—Twelve miles east of Fort Scott (a place "Fowl Town" is now in Decatur county, Georgia, on eastern shore of Chatahuchi river).Oka-tiokinans—Near Fort Gaines (the Oki-tiyákni of ourList of Creek Settlements; Fort Gaines is on Chatahuchi river, Clay county, Georgia, 31° 38´ Lat.)Uchees—Near the Mikasukey.Ehawhokales—On Apalachicola (river).Ocheeses—At Ocheese Bluff (Ocheese in southeast corner of Jackson county, Florida, western shore of Apalachicola river; cf. List).Tamatles—Seven miles from the Ocheeses. (Cf. Tamá`li, inList of Creek Settlements.)Attapulgas—On Little river, a branch of Okalokina (now Oklokonee river, or "Yellow Water," from ókiwater, lákniyellow, in Hitchiti; the place is in Decatur county, Georgia. From ítu-púlga,boring holes into woodto make fire: púlgäsI bore, ítuwood).Telmocresses—West side of Chatahoochee river (is Tálua mútchasi, "Newtown").Cheskitalowas—West side of Chatahoochee river (Chiska talófa of the Lower Creeks, q. v.)Wekivas—Four miles above the Cheskitalowas.Emussas—Two miles above the Wekivas (Omussee creek runs into Chatahuchi river from the west, 31° 20´ Lat.; imússa signifies:tributary,branch,creek joining another water-course; from the verb im-ósäs).Ufallahs—Twelve miles above Fort Gaines (Yufála, now Eufaula, on west bank of Chatahuchi river, 31° 55´ Lat.)Red Grounds—Two miles above the line (or Georgia boundary; Ikan-tcháti in Creek).Etohussewakkes—Three miles above Fort Gaines (from ítulog, hássiold, wákäs,I lie on the ground).Tattowhehallys—Scattered among other towns (probably tálua hállui "upper town").Tallehassas—On the road from Okalokina (Oklokonee river) to Mikasukey (now Tallahassie, or "Old City," the capital of Florida State).Owassissas—On east waters of St. Mark's river (Wacissa, Basisa is a river with a Timucua name).Chehaws—On the Flint river (comprehends the villages planted there from Chiaha, on Chatahuchi river).Tallewheanas—East side of Flint river (is Hótali huyána; cf.List of Creek Settlements).Oakmulges—East of Flint river, near the Tallewheanas.
LIST OF SEMINOLE SETTLEMENTS.
Micasukeys—(In eastern part of Leon county, Florida).
Fowl Towns—Twelve miles east of Fort Scott (a place "Fowl Town" is now in Decatur county, Georgia, on eastern shore of Chatahuchi river).
Oka-tiokinans—Near Fort Gaines (the Oki-tiyákni of ourList of Creek Settlements; Fort Gaines is on Chatahuchi river, Clay county, Georgia, 31° 38´ Lat.)
Uchees—Near the Mikasukey.
Ehawhokales—On Apalachicola (river).
Ocheeses—At Ocheese Bluff (Ocheese in southeast corner of Jackson county, Florida, western shore of Apalachicola river; cf. List).
Tamatles—Seven miles from the Ocheeses. (Cf. Tamá`li, inList of Creek Settlements.)
Attapulgas—On Little river, a branch of Okalokina (now Oklokonee river, or "Yellow Water," from ókiwater, lákniyellow, in Hitchiti; the place is in Decatur county, Georgia. From ítu-púlga,boring holes into woodto make fire: púlgäsI bore, ítuwood).
Telmocresses—West side of Chatahoochee river (is Tálua mútchasi, "Newtown").
Cheskitalowas—West side of Chatahoochee river (Chiska talófa of the Lower Creeks, q. v.)
Wekivas—Four miles above the Cheskitalowas.
Emussas—Two miles above the Wekivas (Omussee creek runs into Chatahuchi river from the west, 31° 20´ Lat.; imússa signifies:tributary,branch,creek joining another water-course; from the verb im-ósäs).
Ufallahs—Twelve miles above Fort Gaines (Yufála, now Eufaula, on west bank of Chatahuchi river, 31° 55´ Lat.)
Red Grounds—Two miles above the line (or Georgia boundary; Ikan-tcháti in Creek).
Etohussewakkes—Three miles above Fort Gaines (from ítulog, hássiold, wákäs,I lie on the ground).
Tattowhehallys—Scattered among other towns (probably tálua hállui "upper town").
Tallehassas—On the road from Okalokina (Oklokonee river) to Mikasukey (now Tallahassie, or "Old City," the capital of Florida State).
Owassissas—On east waters of St. Mark's river (Wacissa, Basisa is a river with a Timucua name).
Chehaws—On the Flint river (comprehends the villages planted there from Chiaha, on Chatahuchi river).
Tallewheanas—East side of Flint river (is Hótali huyána; cf.List of Creek Settlements).
Oakmulges—East of Flint river, near the Tallewheanas.
From reports of the eighteenth century we learn that in the south of the Floridian peninsula the Seminoles were scattered in small bodies, in barren deserts, forests, etc., and that at intervals they assembled to take black drink or deliberate on tribal matters. It is also stated that in consequence of their separation the Seminole language had changed greatly from the original Creek; a statement which is not borne out by recent investigations, and probably refers only to the Seminole towns speaking Hitchiti dialects.
By order of the Bureau of Ethnology, Rev. Clay MacCauley in 1880 visited the Seminoles settled in the southern parts of the peninsula, to take their census and institute ethnologic researches. He found that their population amounted to 208 Indians, and that they lived in five settlements to which he gave the following names:
1. Miami settlement; this is the old name of Mayaimi Lake, and has nothing in common with the Miami-Algonkin tribe.2. Big Cypress, 26° 30´ Lat.3. Fish-eating Creek, 26° 37´; head-chief Tustenúggi.4. Cow Creek, fifteen miles north of Lake Okitchóbi.5. Catfish Lake, 28° Lat. The late Chipko was chief there, who had been present with Osceola at the Dade massacre in 1835.
1. Miami settlement; this is the old name of Mayaimi Lake, and has nothing in common with the Miami-Algonkin tribe.
2. Big Cypress, 26° 30´ Lat.
3. Fish-eating Creek, 26° 37´; head-chief Tustenúggi.
4. Cow Creek, fifteen miles north of Lake Okitchóbi.
5. Catfish Lake, 28° Lat. The late Chipko was chief there, who had been present with Osceola at the Dade massacre in 1835.
Traces of languages other than the Seminole were not discovered by him.
In December 1882 J. Francis Le Baron transmitted to the Smithsonian Institution a few ethnologic notices and a vocabulary obtained from the Seminole Indians of Chipko's (since deceased) band, which he had visited in March 1881 in their village near Lake Pierce. The dialect of the vocabulary does not differ from Creek in any appreciable degree. On marriage customs and the annual busk of these Indians he makes the following remarks: "They do not marry or intermix with the whites, and are very jealous of the virtue of their women, punishing with death any squaw that accepts the attentions of a white man. Some Seminoles exhibit a mixture of negro blood, but some are very tall, fine-looking savages. Their three tribes live at Chipko town, near Lake Oketchobee, and in the Everglades. They have a semi-religious annual festival in June or July, called the green corn dance, the new corn being then ripe enough to be eaten. Plurality of wives is forbidden by their laws. Tom Tiger, a fine-looking Indian, is said to have broken this rule by marrying two wives, for which misdemeanor he was banished from the tribe. He traveled about one hundred miles to the nearest tribe in the Everglades, and jumped unseen into the ring at the green corn dance. This procured him absolution, conformably to their laws."
We have deemed it appropriate to dwell at length on the history, topography and peculiar customs of the Seminoles on account of their identity with the Creek Indians, the main object of this research. We now pass over to the Southeastern or Apalachian group of Maskoki.
The Hitchiti, Mikasuki and Apalachi languages form a dialectic group distinct from Creek and the western dialects, and the people speaking them must once have had a common origin. The proper names Apalachi and Apalatchúkli are now extinct as tribal names, but are of very ancient date. The auriferous ledges of the Cheroki country were said to be within "the extreme confines of the Apalachi province" (Fontanedo, 1559), and the Apalachi found by Narvaez was fifteen days' march north of Aute,[49]a roadstead or harbor on the Gulf of Mexico, though the Indians had stated to him that it lay at a distance of nine days' travel only. The "province" of Apalachi probably included the upper part or the whole of the Chatahuchi river basin, and on account of the ending -okla in Apalatchúkla, its origin must be sought in the Cha'hta or Hitchiti dialect. Rev. Byington explains it byhelping people,allies, in the Cha'hta apălătchi ókla, but the original form of the name is Apalaχtchi ókli, not apálatchi; -χtchi is a Hitchiti suffix of adjectives, and apálui in that dialect means "on the other side of." Hence the adjective apálaχtchi: "those (peopleókli) on the other side, shore or river."
The town of Apalachi, on Apalache bay, must be kept clearly distinct from the town of Apalachicola, or Apalatchúkla, about fifty miles further west, on the river then called by the same name.
Apalachi town was north of Apalachi bay, the principal port of which is now St. Marks. This was probably the place after which "Apalache provincia" was named in de Soto's time; Biedma, one of his historians, states (in Smith, Docum. ined., I, 48. 49), that "this province was divided by a river from the country east of it, having Aguile as frontierstown. Apalachi has many towns and produces much food, and (the Indians) call this land visited by us Yustaga." This river was probably the St. Mark's river. Both names are alsodistinguished as belonging to separate communities in Margry IV, 96. 117 (1699) and IV, 309. The western "Palachees" are laid down on the map in Dan. Coxe, Carolana, on Chatahuchi river, the eastern "Palachees" on a river in the northeast angle of the Gulf of Mexico; north of the latter are the Tommachees (Timucua). At present, a northwestern affluent of Okoni river, in Upper Georgia, is called Apalache river.
Apalatchúkla, a name originally belonging to atribe, was in early times transferred to the river, now Chatahuchi, and from this to all the towns of the Lower Creeks. An instance of this is given by L. d'Iberville, who states (Margry IV, 594. 595) that in 1701 a difficulty arose between the Apalachicolys and the Apalachis on account of depredations committed; that the Spanish call those Indians Apalachicolys, the French Conchaques, and that they counted about 2000 families—an equal number of men being ascribed to the Apalachis, who were under Spanish rule.
The name of the tribe and town was Apalatchúkla, also written Pallachucla, Palachicola. This town was on the western bank of Chatahuchi river, 1½ miles below Chiaha. In early times its tribe was the most important among the Lower Creeks, adverse to warfare, a "peace or white town," and called by the people Tálua `láko,Great Town. Like the town Apalachi, the inhabitants of this town spoke a dialect resembling Hitchiti very closely. Apalachicola river is now the name of Chatahuchi river below its junction with the Flint river. More about this town in the:List of Creek Settlements.
Later in the sixteenth century the boundary between the Timucua and theApalachilands is stated to have been on or near the Vacissa river; Ibitachuco orBlack Lakebeing the eastern Apalachi boundary, the westernmost town of the Timucua being Asile (Ausile, Oxilla).
In 1638 the Indians of Apalachi made war against the Spanish colonists. Although the governor of Florida had but few troops to oppose, he marched against them anddaunted their aggressiveness (sobervia) by forcing them to a disastrous retreat and following them into their own country (Barcia, Ensayo, p. 203).
In 1688 a number of Apalachi chiefs (caciques) addressed a letter of complaint to Charles the Second, king of Spain (†1700), concerning the exactions to which their former governors had subjected them, and other topics relating to their actual condition. The towns mentioned in the letter are San Luis de Apalachi, Ibitachuco, Pattali, Santa Cruz, Talpatqui, Vasisa, San Marcos. The original, with its Spanish translation, was reproduced in a fac-simile edition in 1860 by Buckingham Smith (fol.), and other documents written in Apalachi are preserved in the archives of Havana, the seat of the archbishopric, to which Apalachi and all the other settlements comprised within the diocese of St. Helena belonged.
Christianized Apalachis, who had been frequently raided by Alibamu Indians, fled in 1705 to the French colony at Mobile, where Governor de Bienville gave them lands and grain-seed to settle between the Mobilian and Tohome tribe; cf. Pénicaut in Margry V, 461. 485, where their religious festivals and other customs are described. Like the Apalachis, the tribe of the heathen Taouachas had quitted the Spanish territory for being harassed by the Alibamu, and fled southwest to the French, who settled them on Mobile river, one league above the Apalachis (1710; in Margry V, 485-487). Some Cha'hta refugees had been settled at the "Anse des Chactas," on Mobile bay, the year preceding. In the nineteenth century the last remnants of the Apalachi tribe were living on the Bayou Rapide, in Louisiana, and about A. D. 1815 counted fourteen families.
"Miccosukee" is a town of Florida, near the northern border of the State, in Leon county, built on the western shore of the lake of the same name. The tribe established there speaks the Hitchiti language, and must hence haveseparated from some town or towns of the Lower Creeks speaking that language.
The tribe was reckoned among the Seminole Indians, but does not figure prominently in Indian history before the outbreak of the Seminole war of 1817. It then raised the "red pole" as a sign of war, and became conspicuous as a sort of political centre for these Southern "soreheads." The vocabularies of that dialect show it to be practically identical with that of Hitchiti town. Cf. the comparative table, p.56. More notices on this tribe will be found under: Seminole.
The Hitchiti tribe, of whose language we present an extensive specimen in this volume, also belongs to the southeastern group, which I have called Apalachian.
Hitchiti town was, in Hawkins' time, established on the eastern bank of Chatahuchi river, four miles below Chiaha. The natives possessed a narrow strip of good land bordering on the river, and had the reputation of being honest and industrious. They obtained their name from Hitchiti creek, so called at its junction with Chatahuchi river, [and in its upper course Ahíki (Ouhe-gee); cf. List] from Creek: ahítchita "to look up(the stream)." They had spread out into two branch settlements: Hitchitúdshi or Little Hitchiti, on both sides of Flint river, below the junction of Kitchofuni creek, which passes through a county named after it; and Tutalósi on Tutalosi creek, a branch of Kitchofuni creek, twenty miles west of Hitchitúdshi (Hawkins, p. 60. 65). The existence of several Hitchiti towns is mentioned by C. Swan in 1791; and Wm. Bartram states that they "speak the Stincard language." There is a popular saying among the Creeks, that the ancient name of the tribe was Atchík'hade, a Hitchiti word which signifieswhite heap(of ashes).
Some Hitchiti Indians trace their mythic origin to a fall from the sky, but my informants, Chicote and G. W. Stidham, gaveme the following tale: "Their ancestors first appeared in the country by coming out of a canebrake or reed thicket (útski in Hitchiti) near the sea coast. They sunned and dried their children during four days, then set out, arrived at a lake and stopped there. Some thought it was the sea, but it was a lake; they set out again, traveled up a stream and settled there for a permanency." Another tradition says that this people was the first to settle at the site of Okmulgi town, an ancient capital of the confederacy.
The tribe was a member of the Creek confederacy and does not figure prominently in history. The first mention I can find of it, is of the year 1733, when Gov. Oglethorpe met the Lower Creek chiefs at Savannah, Ga., to conciliate their tribes in his favor. The "Echetas" had sent their war-chiefs, Chutabeeche and Robin with four attendants (Ch. C. Jones, Tomochichi, p. 28). The Yutchitálgi of our legend, who were represented at the Savannah council of 1735 by "Tomehuichi, dog king of the Euchitaws," are probably the Hitchiti, not the Yuchi. Wm. Bartram calls them (1773) "Echetas" also.
The dialect spoken by the Hitchiti and Mikasuki once spread over an extensive area, for local names are worded in it from the Chatahuchi river in an eastern direction up to the Atlantic coast. To these belong those mentioned under "the name Maskoki," p.58.
According to Wm. Bartram, Travels, pp. 462-464, the following towns on Chatahuchi river spoke the "Stincard" language, that is a language differing from Creek or Muscogulge: Chíaha (Chehaw), Hitchiti (Echeta), Okóni (Occone), the two Sáwokli (Swaglaw, Great and Little). From this it becomes probable, though not certain, that the dialect known to us as Hitchiti was common to them all. The Sáwokli tribe, settled in the Indian Territory, have united there with the Hitchiti, a circumstance which seems to point to ancient relationship.
Like the Creeks, the Hitchiti have an ancientfemaledialect, still remembered and perhaps spoken by the older people, which was formerly the language of the males also. The woman language existing among the Creek Indians is called by them also theancientlanguage. A thorough study of these archaic remnants would certainly throw light on the early local distribution of the tribes and dialects of the Maskoki in the Gulf States.
HUNTER'S SONG.
The following ancient hunting song may serve as a specimen of the female dialect of Hitchiti; the ending-iof the verbs, standing instead of-isof the male dialect, proves it to be worded in that archaic form of speech. Obtained from Judge G. W. Stidham:
Hántun talánkawati ā′klig; éyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!aluktchabakliwáti ā′klig; éyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!aluktigonknawáti ā′klig; áyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!aluk'hadshá-aliwati ā′klig; éyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!hántun ayawáti ā′klig; áyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!Somewhere (the deer) lies on the ground, I think; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!It is raising up its head, I believe; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!It attempts to rise, I believe; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!Slowly it raises its body, I think; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!It has now risen on its feet, I presume; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!
Hántun talánkawati ā′klig; éyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!aluktchabakliwáti ā′klig; éyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!aluktigonknawáti ā′klig; áyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!aluk'hadshá-aliwati ā′klig; éyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!hántun ayawáti ā′klig; áyali.Sutá! kayá! kayap'hú!
Somewhere (the deer) lies on the ground, I think; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!It is raising up its head, I believe; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!It attempts to rise, I believe; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!Slowly it raises its body, I think; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!It has now risen on its feet, I presume; I walk about.Awake, arise, stand up!
At every second line of this song the singer kicks at a log, feigning to start up the deer by the noise from its recesses in the woods. The song-lines are repeated thrice, in a slow and plaintive tune, except the refrain, which is sung or rather spoken in a quicker measure, andonceonly. For the words of the text and of the refrain, cf. the Hitchiti Glossary.
of the Maskoki language-family is analogous, though by no means identical with the Creek dialect in its grammatic outlines. Many points of comparison will readily suggest themselves to our readers, and enable us to be comparatively short in the following sketch.
The female dialect is an archaic form of Hitchiti parallel to archaic Creek; both were formerly spoken by both sexes. Only the common form (or male language) of Hitchiti will be considered here.
Thephonetic systemis the same as in Creek, except that the sonant mutes, b, g, are more distinctly heard (d is quite rare). The processes of alternation are the same in both dialects. Many vowels of substantives are short in Creek, which appear long in Hitchiti: ă′pitree: H. ā′pi; hă′sisun,moon: H. hā′si; nĭ′taday: H. níta etc.
Noun.The case inflection of the substantive, adjective, of some pronouns and of the nominal forms of the verb is effected by the suffixes: -i for the absolute, -ut for the subjective, -un for the objective case: yátiperson, yátut, yátun; nákiwhat,which, nákut, nákun. A few verbals inflect in -a, -at, -an; for instance, those terminating in -hunga.
The diminutive ending is the same as in Creek: -odshi, -udshi.
To the Creek collective suffix -algi corresponds -a'li, which is, in fact, the third person of a verbal plural: míkichief, miká'lithe class of chiefsand: "they are chiefs." Maskóki: Maskoká'lithe Creek people; fápli'hitchi wind, fápli'htcha'liwind clan,wind gens.
Hitchiti has a greater power of verbifying substantives than Creek: míkichief, mikólisI am chief; tchóyipine-tree, tchóyusit is a pine tree.
There is no real substantive verb in the language, and adjectives, when becoming verbified, are turned into attributive verbs, as in Creek: wántistrong,hard; tsawántusI am strong; wántushe,it is strong,hard; wántatiknot strong; wántigushe is very strong; wántatis he is not strong; wanta'hlátishe is not strong at all.
The gradation of the adjective is expressed either by the attributive verb, to which isi-, is- is prefixed, or in some other ways syntactically:
Kúdsuni tchátu-kunáwun isínwantûsiron is harder than silver.ukitchúbi okilósi ihayuχkíki o'latíwats alake is deeper than a river; lit. "to river the lake in its depth does not come up." This may also be expressed: okilósi (u)kitchóbi isihayuχkúwats; lit. "a lake (than) a river more-deepens."yá hali'hlósăka lápkun uⁿweíkasthis boy is the tallest; lit. "this boy all surpasses in height."yát yákni tchäíh'-apiktchaχáyusthis is the highest mountain; lit. "this ground-high stands ahead."
Kúdsuni tchátu-kunáwun isínwantûsiron is harder than silver.
ukitchúbi okilósi ihayuχkíki o'latíwats alake is deeper than a river; lit. "to river the lake in its depth does not come up." This may also be expressed: okilósi (u)kitchóbi isihayuχkúwats; lit. "a lake (than) a river more-deepens."
yá hali'hlósăka lápkun uⁿweíkasthis boy is the tallest; lit. "this boy all surpasses in height."
yát yákni tchäíh'-apiktchaχáyusthis is the highest mountain; lit. "this ground-high stands ahead."
The numeral has two forms for the cardinal number: one used attributively, and another, abbreviated from it, used exclusively for counting; there are, outside of this, forms for the ordinal, for the distributive, and for the adverbial numeral. The list of the numerals is as follows:
Cardinals.Ordinals.Distributive.Adverbial.1`lámin`láhai'híndshuatki`láhamina`la'hmi"beginning."2túklantukā′satóklakatuklákansatúkla'h3tutchínantutchisatotchínakatutchinákanatutchína'h4sitákinsíta'hisítagikasitahákinasítagi5tchaχgípantchá'hgiistchaχgípakatchaχgipákanatsá'hgipi6ípaginípaisipágakaipahákanisípagi7kulapákinkúlapaiskulapákikakulapáhakaniskulapáki8tusnapákintusnapáistusnapákikatusnapáhakanistusnapáki9ustapákinustapáisustapákikaustapáhakanisustapáki10pokólinpukúispokólikapukúlakanispukúli20pokóli túklanispokol-túklakapokó-tukúlakanispukúli-túklan100tchúkpi `láministchukpi-`lámikatchukpi-`lámakanistchukpi-`láminFolded four timesis expressed by the cardinal: po`lótki sítaki;folded eight times: po`lótki tusnapákin.
Thepersonal pronounappears in different forms: subjective absolute; subjective prefixed to verbs and objective pronoun.
Subjective absolute:Subj. prefixed:Objective:Iā′nitcha-, am-, an-, a-tcha-thoutchí'hnitchi-tchi-he,she,ití'hniim-, in-, i-wepú'hnipu-, po-pu-yetchi'hnitákitchi-, inverted: ítch-tchi-, w. suffixtheyi'hnitákiim-, in-, i-
ánāli (usually ánalut)myself, 2 s. tchí'hnāli, 3 s. í'hnāli; pú'hnāliourselves, 2 pl. tchi'hnālitáki, 3 pl. i'hnalitáki.
The possessive pronoun.
myam-, an-, a-tcha-, inverted: atch-thytchi-,tchi-, inverted: itch-his,her,itsim-, in-, i-im-, in-, i-ourpú'hni, pu-pun-, pu-, po-yourtchíχtchi, tchi-tchi-, with suffixtheirim-, in-, i-i- etc., with suffix.
tchálbimy handorhands, tchílbi, ílbi; púlbiour handorhands, tchílbuχtchi, ílbi.ántchikimy houseorhouses; tchíntchiki, íntchiki; púntchiki, tchíntchigoχtchi, íntchigoχtchi.Demonstrative pronouns: ma, mût, mûn (Cr. ma); yá, yát, yán or yûn (Cr. hía); yákti, yáktut, yáktun (Cr. ása); má'hmalithe same.Demonstr.-relat. pronoun: náki, nákut, nákunwhich,what.Interrogative pronouns: nó`li? nó`lut or nó`lut i? nó`lun or nó`lun i?who? náki? nákut? nákun?which?what? nákon i?what is it?
tchálbimy handorhands, tchílbi, ílbi; púlbiour handorhands, tchílbuχtchi, ílbi.
ántchikimy houseorhouses; tchíntchiki, íntchiki; púntchiki, tchíntchigoχtchi, íntchigoχtchi.
Demonstrative pronouns: ma, mût, mûn (Cr. ma); yá, yát, yán or yûn (Cr. hía); yákti, yáktut, yáktun (Cr. ása); má'hmalithe same.
Demonstr.-relat. pronoun: náki, nákut, nákunwhich,what.
Interrogative pronouns: nó`li? nó`lut or nó`lut i? nó`lun or nó`lun i?who? náki? nákut? nákun?which?what? nákon i?what is it?
The Hitchiti verbequals the Creek verb in the abundance of inflectional forms. In order to show the inflection of a verb (or rather a part of it), going parallel to the one chosen as the Creek paradigm, we select ísikito take,to carry; áwiki being used when a plurality of objects is concerned; Creek: ísita, tcháwita.
ísilisI take, 2 s. ísitskas, 3 s. ísis; 1 pl. ísikas, 2 pl. isátchkas, 3 pl. ísa`li.áwalisI take, pl. of obj., 2 s. awitskas, 3 s. áwas; 1 pl. áwikas, 2 pl. áwatskas, 3 pl. áwa`lis.í'hsilisI tooka short time ago (Cr. ísayanks); á'hwalis.ísānisI tookseveral days ago (Cr. isāímatas); alsoI had taken; áwānis.ísiliktasI have takenmany years ago (Cr. īsáyantas); áwaliktas.ísilālisI shall take(Cr. isá`lis); áwalālis.ísis! pl. ísitis!take it! ā′wis! ā′witis! (or ā'watis!)ísiχtchihaving taken,holding in one's hands; áwiχtchi.í'hsik (object)taken, part. pass.; á′hwak.ísigi, ísikito take,the taking; áwigi, áwiki.ísi, ísut, ísunone who takes, carries; áwi, áwut, áwun.isihúnka, -at, -anone who took, has taken; awihúnka, -at, -an.isáhika, -at, -anone who is going to take; awáhika, -at, -an.
ísilisI take, 2 s. ísitskas, 3 s. ísis; 1 pl. ísikas, 2 pl. isátchkas, 3 pl. ísa`li.
áwalisI take, pl. of obj., 2 s. awitskas, 3 s. áwas; 1 pl. áwikas, 2 pl. áwatskas, 3 pl. áwa`lis.
í'hsilisI tooka short time ago (Cr. ísayanks); á'hwalis.
ísānisI tookseveral days ago (Cr. isāímatas); alsoI had taken; áwānis.
ísiliktasI have takenmany years ago (Cr. īsáyantas); áwaliktas.
ísilālisI shall take(Cr. isá`lis); áwalālis.
ísis! pl. ísitis!take it! ā′wis! ā′witis! (or ā'watis!)
ísiχtchihaving taken,holding in one's hands; áwiχtchi.
í'hsik (object)taken, part. pass.; á′hwak.
ísigi, ísikito take,the taking; áwigi, áwiki.
ísi, ísut, ísunone who takes, carries; áwi, áwut, áwun.
isihúnka, -at, -anone who took, has taken; awihúnka, -at, -an.
isáhika, -at, -anone who is going to take; awáhika, -at, -an.
From this verb ísiki, áwiki the language does not form any passive, reciprocal, reflective and causative voice, but employs verbs from other radices instead. The interrogative and negative inflection is as follows:
ísatasI do not take, 2 s. ísitskatis, 3 s. ísitis; 1 pl. isíkatis, 2 pl. isátskatis, 3 pl. (?); áwatasI do not take, pl. of obj., awítskatis etc.ísilus?do I take? 2 s. ísitskus? 3 s. ísus? 1 pl. ísigō? 2 pl. ísatskō? 3 pl. (?). áwalus?do I take? etc.isatä′sōs?do I not take? 2 s. isitskatibōs? 3 s. isitísōs? 1 pl. isikatíbōs? 2 pl. isatskatíbōs? 3 pl. (?). awatä′sōs?do I not take? etc.
ísatasI do not take, 2 s. ísitskatis, 3 s. ísitis; 1 pl. isíkatis, 2 pl. isátskatis, 3 pl. (?); áwatasI do not take, pl. of obj., awítskatis etc.
ísilus?do I take? 2 s. ísitskus? 3 s. ísus? 1 pl. ísigō? 2 pl. ísatskō? 3 pl. (?). áwalus?do I take? etc.
isatä′sōs?do I not take? 2 s. isitskatibōs? 3 s. isitísōs? 1 pl. isikatíbōs? 2 pl. isatskatíbōs? 3 pl. (?). awatä′sōs?do I not take? etc.
A form for the 3. pl. was remembered by none of my informants, who state that the Hitchiti render it by a circumscriptive sentence.
A specimen of the objective or compound conjugation of the verbI strike, batā′plilis, runs as follows:
I strike thee oncetchibatáplilis,repeatedlytchibátaspilisI strike him, her oncebatā′plilisbatáspilisyetchibatap'hólilistchibatas'hópilisthembatas'húpilisbatas'húpilisHe, she strikes me once:tchábataplis,repeatedly:tchabátaspistheetchíbataplistchibátaspishim, herbatáplisbatáspisuspúbataplispubátaspisyetchibatap'hólistchibatas'hópisthembatáspisbatas'hópis
The same verbto strikegives origin to the followinggenera verbi, each appearing under two different forms, and all being quoted in the present tense of the declarative mode, affirmative voice:
Active:batā′plilisI strike(now)by one blowbatā′spilisI strike(now)by several blowsPassive:tchabátapkasI am struck once, by one blowtchabátaspkasI am struck more than once(obsolete)Reciprocal:itibatáplikaswe strike each other onceitibatáspigaswe strike each other repeatedlyReflective:ilbatā′plilisI strike myself by one blowilbatáspilisI strike myself by several blowsCausative:bataplídshilisI cause to strike oncebataspídshilisI cause to strike repeatedly.
Postpositionsgovern the absolute case of the noun just as they do in Creek:
kónut tchígi í-aχnun i-aulídshisthe skunk stays under the house.sáwut áhi ígapun untchóχolisthe racoon sits on the top of the tree.ótaki labákinearoraround an island.ótagi apálu-unon the other side of the island.yántuntun hitchkátiganbeyond sight, is an instance of a postposition figuring as preposition, and is connected with the objective case of a noun. It is not a real postposition, but an adverb used in this function.
kónut tchígi í-aχnun i-aulídshisthe skunk stays under the house.
sáwut áhi ígapun untchóχolisthe racoon sits on the top of the tree.
ótaki labákinearoraround an island.
ótagi apálu-unon the other side of the island.
yántuntun hitchkátiganbeyond sight, is an instance of a postposition figuring as preposition, and is connected with the objective case of a noun. It is not a real postposition, but an adverb used in this function.
The disconnected remarks on the Alibamu Indians which we find in the documents and chronicles represent them as early settlers on Alabama river, at a moderate distance from the confluence of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers. In our legend they are introduced among the four tribes contending for the honor of being the most ancient and valorous.
D. Coxe, Carolana, p. 24 mentions their tribal name in the following connection: "On Coussa river[50]are the Ullibalies[51],Olibahalies, Allibamus; below them the Tallises." Allen Wright derives Alibamu (also written Allibamous, Alibami, Albámu, incorrectly Alibamon) from Cha'hta: álbathicketand áyalmu,place cleared(of trees, thickets): álba ayamúleI openorclear the thicket. If this derivation is correct, the name, with its generic definition, could apply to many localities simultaneously. Let us hear what Sekopechi or "Perseverance," an old man of that tribe, related to Agent Eakin concerning their early migrations and settlements. (Schoolcraft, Indians I, 266 sqq):
"The Great Spirit brought the Alabama Indians from the ground between the Cahawba and Alabama rivers, and they believe that they are of right possessors of this soil. The Muscogees formerly called themselves Alabamians ("thicket-clearers"?), but other tribes called them Oke-choy-atte, "life."[52]The earliest oral tradition of the Alibamu of a migration is, that they migrated from the Cahawba and Alabama rivers to the junction of the Tuscaloosa (?) and Coosa rivers, where they sojourned for two years. After this they dwelt at the junction of the Coosa and Alabama rivers, on the west side of what was subsequently the site of Fort Jackson. It is supposed that at this time they numbered fifty effective men. They claimed the country from Fort Jackson to New Orleans for their hunting grounds."
Whatever may be the real foundation of this confused narrative, it seems that the Alibamu reached their later seats from a country lying to the west or southwest, and that they showed a preference for river-junctions, for this enabled them to take fish in two rivers simultaneously. Another migration legend of this tribe, as related by Milfort, will be given and accounted for below.
Biedma relates that H. de Soto, when reaching the "Alibamo province," had to fight the natives entrenched within a palisaded fort (fuerte de Alibamo, Garc., de la Vega) and theFidalgo of Elvas: that the cacique of Chicaça came with the caciques of Alimamu and of Nicalasa,[53]whereupon a fight took place. But that Alibamo province laynorthwestof Chicaça town and province, and was reached only after passing the Chocchechuma village on Yazoo river; it was probably not the Alibamu tribe of the later centuries. In the report of Tristan de Luna's expedition no mention is made of the Alibamu Indians, though it speaks of "Rio Olibahali."
In 1702 five French traders started with ten Alibamu natives from Mobile, for the country where the tribe resided. They were killed by these guides when at a distance of ten leagues from the Alibamu village, and M. de Bienville, then governor of the French colony, resolved to make war on the tribe. He started with a force of seventy Frenchmen and eighteen hundred Indian auxiliaries; the latter deserted after a march of six days, and finally the party was compelled to return. A second expedition, consisting of Frenchmen only, was not more successful, and had to redescend Alabama river in canoes. Mr. de Boisbriand, the leader of a third expedition, finally succeeded in destroying a camp of Alibamu, sixty-five miles up the river, in killing the inmates and capturing their women and children, who were given to the Mobilians, their allies.[54]This action was only the first of a series of subsequent troubles.
An alliance concluded by the Alibamu with the Mobilians did not last long, for in 1708 they arrived with a host of Cheroki, Abika and Kataba Indians, in the vicinity of the French fort on Mobile Bay, where Naniabas, Tohomes and Mobilians had settled, but were foiled in their attack upon the Mobilians through the watchfulness of the tribe and of the French colonists. The whole force of their aggressors and their allies combined was estimated at four thousand warriors (id., Margry V, 477-478; cf. 427).
In 1713, after the Alibamu had made an inroad into the Carolinas with a host of Kataba and Abika Indians, their confederates, the head-chief of the first-named tribe besought the French commander at Mobile bay to erect a fort in his own country. The offer was accepted, and the tribe was helpful in erecting a spacious fort of about three hundred feet square, on a bluff overlooking the river, and close to their village (id., Margry V, 510-511). This fort, built near the junction of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers, was called Fort Toulouse, and by the British colonists Fort Albamu, or Alebama garrison.
When Fort Toulouse was abandoned in 1762, some Alibamu Indians followed the French, and established themselves about sixty miles above New Orleans, on Mississippi river, near the Huma village. Th. Hutchins (1784), p. 39. estimates the number of their warriors settled there at thirty. Subsequently they passed into the interior of Louisiana, where some are hunting and roving in the woods at the present time. The majority, however, settled in Polk county, in the southeastern corner of Texas, became agriculturists, and about 1862 numbered over two hundred persons. Some Alibamu reside in the Indian Territory. Cf. Buschmann, Spuren d. azt. Spr., p. 424.
The former seats of the tribe, near the site of the present capital, Montgomery, are described as follows:
Colonel Benj. Hawkins, United States Agent among the Creeks, saw four Alibamu towns on Alabama river, below Koassáti. "The inhabitants are probably the ancient Alabamas, and formerly had a regular town." (Sketch of the Creek Country, pp. 35-37, 1799.) The three first were surrounded by fertile lands, and lay on the eastern bank of Alabama river. Their names were as follows:
Ikan-tcháti or "Red Ground," a small village, with poor and indolent inhabitants.
Tawássa or Tawasa, three miles below Ikan-tcháti, a smallvillage on a high bluff. Called Taouacha by the French, cf. Tohome. The Koassáti word tabasa meanswidower,widow.
Pawókti, small town on a bluff; two miles below Tawássa.
A′tagi, a village four miles below the above, situated on the western bank, and spreading along it for two miles. Also written At-tau-gee, Autaugee, Autobi. Autauga county is named after it.
These Alibamu could raise in all about eighty warriors; they did not conform to Creek custom, nor did they apply the Creek law for the punishment of adultery. Although hospitable to white people, they had very little intercourse with them. Whenever a white person had eaten of a dish and left it, they threw the rest away, and washed everything handled by the guest immediately. The above towns, together with Oktchoyúdshi and Koassáti were, upon a decree of the national council at Tukabatchi, November 27th, 1799, united into one group or class under one "warrior of the nation." The dignitary elected to that post of honor was Hu`lipoyi of Oktchoyúdshi, who had the war titles of hádsho and tustĕnúggi. (Hawkins, pp. 51. 52.) Cf. Witumka.
The ancient seat of this tribe was in Hawkins' time (1799), on the right or northern bank of Alabama river, three miles below the confluence of Coosa and Tallapoosa rivers. Coosada, Elmore county, Alabama, is built on the same spot. "They are not Creeks," says Hawkins (p. 35), "although they conform to their ceremonies; a part of this town moved lately beyond the Mississippi, and have settled there." G. W. Stidham, who visited their settlement in Polk county, Texas, during the Secession war, states that they lived there east of the Alibamu, numbered about 200 persons, were pure-blooded and very superstitious. Some Creek Indians are with them, who formerly lived in Florida, between the Seminoles and the Lower Creeks.
Their tribal name is differently spelt: Coosadas, Koösati, Kosádi, Coushatees, etc. Milfort, Mém. p. 265, writes it Coussehaté. This tribe must not be confounded with the Conshacs, q. v.
From an Alibamu Indian, Sekopechi, we have a statement on the languages spoken by the people of the Creek confederacy (Schoolcraft, Indians, I, 266 sq.): "The Muskogees speak six different dialects: Muskogee, Hitchitee, Nauchee, Euchee, Alabama and Aquassawtee, but all of them generally understand the Muskogee language." This seems to indicate that the Alibamu dialect differs from Koassáti, for this is meant by Aquassawtee; but the vocabularies of General Albert Pike show that both forms of speech are practically one and the same language.
Historic notices of this tribe after its emigration to western parts were collected by Prof. Buschmann, Spuren d. aztek. Sprache, p. 430. Many Koassáti live scattered among the Creeks in the Creek Nation, Indian Territory, at Yufála, for instance.
Witumka, on Coosa river, spoke, according to Bartram, the "Stincard" language, and was a town of the Alibamu division. Cf.List of Creek Settlements.
The northern parts of Mississippi State contain the earliest homes of the warlike tribe of Chicasa Indians which historical documents enable us to trace. Pontotoc county was the centre of their habitations in the eighteenth century, and was so probably at the time of the Columbian discovery; settlements of the tribe scattered along the Mississippi river, in West Tennessee and in Kentucky up to Ohio river, are reported by the later chroniclers.
In the year 1540 the army of Hernando de Soto crossed a portion of their territory, called by its historians "Chicaça provincia," and also visited a town of this name, with asmaller settlement (alojamiento) in its vicinity named Chicaçilla.
Two rivers anciently bore the name of "Chicasa river," not because they were partially or exclusively inhabited by tribes of this nationality, but because their headwaters lay within the Chicasa boundaries. This gives us a clue to the topographic position of the Chicasa settlements. Jefferys (I, 153), states that "Chicasa river is the Maubile or Mobile river, running north and south (now called Lower Alibama river), and that it takes its rise in the country of the Chicasaws in three streams." When L. d'Iberville traveled up the Yazoo river, the villages on its banks were referred to him as lying on "la rivière des Chicachas."[55]
The most lucid and comprehensive account of the Chicasasettlementsis found in Adair's History.
James Adair, who was for several years a trader among the Chicasa, gives the following account of their country and settlements (History, p. 352, sq.): "The Chikkasah country lies in about thirty-five degrees N. Lat., at the distance of one hundred and sixty miles from the eastern side of the Mississippi ... about half way from Mobille to the Illinois, etc. The Chikkasah are now settled between the heads of two of the most western branches of Mobille river and within twelve miles of Tahre Hache (Tallahatchie).... In 1720 they had four contiguous settlements, which lay nearly in the form of three parts of a square, only that the eastern side was five miles shorter than the western, with the open part toward the Choktah. One was called Yaneka, about a mile wide and six miles long ...; another was ten miles long ... and from one to two miles broad. The towns were called Shatara, Chookheereso, Hykehah, Tuskawillao, and Phalacheho. The other square, Chookka Pharáah or "the long-house," was single and ran four miles in length and one mile in breadth. It was more populousthan their whole nation contains at present ... scarcely 450 warriors." From Adair's text it appears that the three towns were but a short distance from the fortified places held by them at the time when he composed his History (published 1775). They were about Pontotoc or Dallas counties, Mississippi.
The Chicasa settlements are referred to in detail by B. Romans, East and West Florida, p. 63: "They live in the centre of an uneven and large nitrous savannah; have in it one town, long one mile and a half, very narrow and irregular; this they divide into seven (towns), by the names of Melattaw 'hat and feather,' Chatelaw 'copper town,' Chukafalaya 'long town,' Tuckahaw 'a certain weed,' Ashuck hooma 'red grass.' Formerly the whole of them were enclosed in palisadoes." Unfortunately, this list gives only five towns instead of the seven referred to.
D. Coxe, Carolana (1741) says, when speaking of the Tennessee river (p. 13. 14): "River of the Cusates, Cheraquees or Kasqui river ...; a cataract is on it, also the tribe of the Chicazas." An early French report alludes to one of their villages, situated thirty leagues inward from a place forty leagues above the mouth of Arkansas river. "From Abeeka to the Chickasaw towns the distance is about one hundred and fifty-nine miles, crossing many savannahs;" B. Romans, E. and W. Florida, p. 313.
Through all the epochs of colonialhistorythe Chicasa people maintained their old reputation for independence and bravery. They were constantly engaged in quarrels and broils with all their Indian neighbors: sometimes with the cognate Cha'hta and with the Creeks, at other times with the Cheroki, Illinois, Kickapu, Sháwano, Tonica, Mobilians, Osage and Arkansas (Kapaha) Indians. In 1732 they cut to pieces a war party of the Iroquois invading their territory, but in 1748 coöperated against the French with that confederacy. J. Haywood, in his Natural and Aboriginal Historyof Tennessee (1823), p. 240, alludes to a tradition purporting that the Chicasa had formerly assisted the Cheroki in driving the Shawanese from the Cumberland river; the Cheroki desired war, and attacked the Chicasa shortly before 1769, but were utterly defeated by them at the "Chicasa Old Fields," and retreated by way of Cumberland river and the Cany Fork. On the authority of chief Chenubbee, the same author states (p. 290) that a part of the Chicasa established themselves on Savannah river, opposite Augusta, but that misunderstandings with the Creeks made them go west again. In 1795 the Chicasa claimed the land opposite Augusta, and sent a memorial to the United States Government to substantiate that claim. Another fraction of the tribe, called the Lightwood-Knots, went to war with the Creeks, but were reduced by them, and have lived with them in peace ever since. These facts seem to have some reference to the settlement of a Chicasa band near Kasíχta, and east of that town; cf. Kasí'hta.
Pénicaut mentions an intertribal war between them and the Cha'hta, and relates a case of treason committed by a Cha'hta chief in 1703.[56]A war with the Creeks occurred in 1793, in which the Americans stood on the Chicasa side.
The policy of the Chicasa in regard to the white colonists was that of a steady and protracted enmity against the French. This feeling was produced as well by the intrigues of the British traders residing among them as by their hatred of the Cha'hta, who had entered into friendly relations with the French colonists, though they could not, by any means, be called their trusty allies. By establishing fortified posts on the Yazoo and Little Tombigbee rivers,[57]the French threatened the independence of these Indians, who began hostilitiesagainst them in 1722, near the Yazoo post, and urged the Naktche to a stubborn resistance against French encroachments. They sheltered the retreating Naktche against the pursuing French,[58]besieged the commander Denys at Fort Natchitoches, though they were repulsed there with considerable loss, defeated the French invading their country at Amalahta (1736), at the Long House, or Tchúka faláya (Adair, p. 354), and other points, and in the second attack of 1739-40 also baffled their attempts at conquering portions of Chicasa territory.
The relations of these Indians with the United States were regulated by a treaty concluded at Hopewell, 1786, with Pio mico and other Chicasa chiefs. Their territory was then fixed at the Ohio river on the north side, and by a boundary line passing through Northern Mississippi on the south side. They began to emigrate to the west of Arkansas river early in this century, and in 1822 the population remaining in their old seats amounted to 3625. Treaties for the removal of the remainder were concluded at Pontotoc creek, October 20th, 1832, and at Washington, May 24th, 1834.
After their establishment in the Indian Territory the political connections still existing between them and the Cha'hta were severed by a treaty signed June 22d, 1855. The line of demarcation separating the two "nations," and following the meridian, is not, however, of a binding character, for individuals of both peoples settle east or west of it, wherever they please (G. W. Stidham).
No plausible analysis of thenameChicasa, which many western tribes, as well as the Chicasa themselves, pronounce Shikasa, Shíkasha, has yet been suggested. Near the Gulfcoast it occurs in many local names, and also in Chickasawhay river, Mississippi, the banks of which were inhabited by Cha'hta people.
In language and customs they differ but little from their southern neighbors, the Cha'hta, and must be considered as a northern branch of them. Both have two phratries only, each of which were (originally) subdivided, in an equal manner, into four gentes; but the thorough-going difference in the totems of the 8-12 gentes points to a very ancient separation of the two national bodies.
The Chicasalanguageserved as a medium of commercial and tribal intercourse to all the nations inhabiting the shores of the great Uk-'hina ("water road"), or Lower Mississippi river. Jefferys (I, 165), compares it to the "lingua franca in the Levant; they call it the vulgar tongue." A special mention of some tribes which spoke it is made by L. d'Iberville[59]: "Bayagoula, Ouma, Chicacha, Colapissa show little difference in their language;" and "The Oumas, Bayogoulas, Theloël, Taensas, the Coloas, the Chycacha, the Napissa, the Ouachas, Choutymachas, Yagenechito, speak the same language and understand the Bilochy, the Pascoboula." As we have seen before, three of the above tribes, the Naktche portion of the Théloël settlements, the Taensa and the Shetimasha had their own languages, but availed themselves of the Chicasa for the purposes of intertribal barter, exchange and communication. The most important passages on this medium of trade are contained in Le Page du Pratz,Histoire(II, 218. 219): "La langue Tchicacha est parlée aussi par les Chatkas (sic!) et (corrompue) par les Taensas; cette langue corrompue est appeléeMobiliennepar les Français," etc., and in Margry V, 442, where Pénicaut alleges to have studied the languages of the Louisiana savages pretty thoroughly for five years, "surtout le Mobilien, qui est le principal et qu'on entend par toutes les nations." Cf. the article Naktche.
A few terms in which Chicasa differs from main Cha'hta are as follows: