Jump to content

Talk:Muscogee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chaya?

[edit]

In the Culture section of the article it states "Muscogee people continue to preserve chaya"... by this do you mean they continue to cultivate the chaya plant? "Chaya" has several meanings. If it is the plant, then It should instead say "Muscogee people continue to cultivate chaya", and the word chaya should be linked to the article about the plant, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaya_(plant) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.37.245.252 (talk) 05:24, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"explorers"?

[edit]

I can't even figure out what the quotes are insinuating, but an insinuation seems inappropriate. If there is a point worth making, please make it.

family —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.171.31.195 (talk • contribs) at 16:55 on 27 December 2004

Flag

[edit]

Isn't the flag featured in this article purely fictional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.50.222 (talk • contribs) at 03:14 on 4 November 2005

Not at all, like many other Native American nations, the Muscogee Nation has a flag. *Exeunt* Ganymead Dialogue? 16:18, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Flag shown is not the official flag of the Muscogee Nation, that flag is a white background with the Great Seal of the Muscogee Nation showing on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadowcatX (talk • contribs) at 14:07 on 16 August 2006

The flag shown is in fact that of the historical State of Muskogee, a short-lived Creek-Seminole state in Florida. See for example [1]. -- Himasaram 15:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The flag seems like a poor choice for this article. Can we get the current Mvskoke (Creek) Nation flag instead? -- Rob C (Alarob) 22:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll go a step further: The flag is historically inappropriate and fails the reliable source test. Does it exist anywhere except on the Web? It's been challenged since November 2005 and I think it's time to remove it. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 16:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no official flag of the Muscogee Nation. The one shown is a historical flag, and was registered by William Augustus Bowles at Freeport, Bahamas, in 1793 as the flag of the Muscogee Navy. I've lost the precise reference to it. Five different versions of that flag stand in the east entrance to the Mound Building at the tribal capitol in Okmulgee, OK. One of them has an all-blue background, which is based upon an actual flag which was in the home of a veteran/citizen and was described by German Thomas before his death. Some believe the change to a blue background might reflect the antipathy of the Loyal Creeks to the Confederacy because of the loss of 5,000 lives during and following the third battle on their march to Kansas in the fall and winter of 1861. On the other hand, traditionally red is a color of war, and blue is a color of mystery, so the owner or maker may have had other reasons.

There is no tribal Ordinance adopting the white flag with the Great Seal of the Muscogee Nation in its center. I first saw that flag at the second inauguration of Claude Cox in 1975. It is in wide-spread use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Escaswvcvpko (talk • contribs) 15:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

[edit]

Shouldn't this be under "Muscogee" or "Muskogee"? I think most modern sources refer to them as such. Just a suggestion. *Exeunt* Ganymead Dialogue? 16:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I generally go by Creek; if I tell people I'm Mvskoke, they hear "Muscogee", and think of the town (and the song Okie from Muskogee). Like it or not, being in the English-based section of the encyclopedia, that's the perspective. Then again, there's a substantial minority that think I said "Greek" . . . . Hence, the reason the nation uses "Mvskoke (Creek) Nation" for it's name. Bruce H. McCosar 11:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indigenous to Tennessee?

[edit]

Is there good evidence that Muskogee-Creek were indigenous to Tennessee as the article states? User Tpkunesh made this addition, however, I have seen no source outside of his own testimony that this is the case. If this user is Tom Kunesh of Chattanooga, I have heard him speak. His stated aim is to see collections of Indian remains in academic research institutions returned under NAGPRA, and, according to him it is necessary to prove that the Muskogee-Creek were indigenous to Tennessee, and that the remains in custody of the University of Tennessee and other academic institutions are from people ancestral to the modern Muskogee Tribe, in order to accomplish this goal, which is of singular importance to him. With due respect to research which may exist and support these claims, I feel that this addition was not made from a neutral point of view. Unless strong evidence exists that the Creek's home territory included Tennessee, I feel that this section should be edited to reflect a better neutral POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.59.185.114 (talk) at 06:56, 26 July 2006

I can agree with this; I have seen nothing in the appx. 20 books on my tribe I have here to substantiate this, nor have I heard anything about it from my family (we were from the Eufaula, AL area originally--that is, before removal). Now, getting into the entire issue of the ancestors of the modern Mvskoke tribe is a big old ill-defined can of worms. I'd like to hear from someone else before I edit the page myself. -- Bruce H. McCosar 15:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC) P.S. If you're from the Chattanooga area, you may have seen my Dad's artwork (Bunnie McCosar) in some of the galleries around town (or I think at the Aquarium, unless that exhibit has moved on). opothleyhola has a hole[reply]

In this case, Tom is correct, for at least some of the Muskogee. The Chiaha, Yuchi, Koasati, Tuskeegee, Kaskinampo, Tali, and possibly more are known to have been orignally in the Tennessee Valley. Not the Hitchiti, Abika, Coosa, of Tuchabatchee, for sure, but those I mentioned, yes. Maps, or at least copies of maps, from the period clearly show them located along the Tennessee, in one case showing a town of Koasati at the head of Long Island on the Tennessee and a town of Kaskinampo at its foot. The name Nickajack in Marion County, Tennessee, is derived from the Cherokee "Ani-Kusati-yi", meaning "Old Koasati Place". Popular books may not show that, but anyone who's actually done research does know. It is also the judgement of every reputable archaelogist and ethnohistorian in the U.S. Chuck Hamilton (talk) 04:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to: Indigenous to Tennessee?

[edit]

Archaeologists and ethnohistorians are almost universal in agreement that the Chiaha (Chehaw), Koasati (Coste, Coushatta), Tuskegee (Tasquiqui), Tali, and Kaskinampo (Casqui) were the "tribes" living along the Tennessee Valley at the time of the expeditions of de Soto, de Luna, and Pardo. In fact, someone who knows the area can read the journals and sometimes know precisely where events took place. Not always, but sometimes. All those groups later made up part of the Upper Towns. Another group of whom some joined the Muskogee confederacy were the Yuchi, or Chisca, who likewise lived in the Tennessee Valley, some even in the early 1700's, where many were slaughtered by the encroaching Cherokee (at Chestowee, Euchee Old Fields, and Hiwassie Island, for example).

All of these "tribes", and I use "tribes" in quotations because they identified more by town, later made up significant parts of the later Upper Towns. Speaking of the Eufaula, they were originally from the area of Bartow County, Georgia, not far from the Itawa of the Etowah Mounds site. The original home of the Coosa was the now-underwater site known as Coosawatie. At the time of first contact with the traders of Carolina colony, the westermost settlements of the Cherokee were the twin towns of Tellico and Chatuga. Pressure from the European invasion pushed everyone west, decimated the towns and peoples, and caused the reduced native inhabitants to form confederacies, of which almost all the tribes today were in origin.

Most of the information I have comes from Raymond Evans and/or Nick Honercamp, two of the most highly respected in the field on matters regarding the pre-European Southeast. Other comes from colonial maps and Indians of the Southeastern United States by John R. Swanton. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.129.11.41 (talk) on 2 October 2006

Since this has appeared again, could I trouble you to include references in your next edit? I can see the sources above, but I can't turn them into actual, formal references without more info. I'm only putting in the citations flag since this has been debated above. -- Bruce H. McCosar 01:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reading this just now, I thought I remembered reading about the idea, and, looking through some books, found one that contains the idea that Creek people lived in east Tennessee in prehistoric and "protohistoric" times (protohistoric being the 150 years or so between the Spanish expeditions and later Europeans). In the book it is the origin of the Cherokees being discussed. The author writes about how some anthropologists hypothesize that the Cherokee had occupied the Tennessee Valley since Mississippian times, but others believe they were mainly living in western North Carolina at the time of the Spanish expeditions, and, "A few Cherokee speakers might have resided within the borders of Tennessee, these investigators say, but linguistic analysis and other data suggest that mid-sixteenth-century East Tennesseans were primarily non-Cherokees of Muskogean linguistic stock who were related to today's Creeks." It goes on a bit about the possible southward migration of Creeks / proto-Creeks. ..so I added this book as a source for the statement here: The early historic Creeks were probably descendants of the mound builders of the Mississippian culture along the Tennessee River in modern Tennessee and Alabama, and possibly related to the Utinahica of southern Georgia. I tried to reword this sentence to read better, because it seems a bit awkward and could be better put... but I can't quite think of how to do it right now. Pfly 05:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thank you Pfly! This is the thing that makes Wikipedia great. -- Bruce H. McCosar 11:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To Be Creek, or Not To Be Creek

[edit]

That is the question. There has been an ongoing chain of ins-and-outs on Carrie Underwood. Finally, User:Eqdoktor found a citation and posted it on the Carrie Underwood page. I'm puzzled why this particular item gets attention when none of the other Famous Creek require a citation. I get the strange feeling I've completely missed some point, that someone knows some bit of policy I don't. At any rate, I cross-posted the citation from the Carrie Underwood page. Am I right? What's the deal here? -- Bruce H. McCosar 23:08, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I shouldn't be too bothered - You are totally correct and your not missing anything. Assuming good faith, editors who question the entry can be pointed to the correct cites (and even check out the releveant discussion pages). Schoolyard vandalism on the other hand can just be speedily reverted and the editor warned with a simple user template warning.--Eqdoktor 17:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this list of "Famous Creek People", is Christopher Rolin a war hero or an expert at video games? Clarification would be great!Uyvsdi (talk) 04:55, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

"related groups" info removed from infobox

[edit]

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 20:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creek people?

[edit]

What criteria should be used in describing "Creek people" of the present? For instance, my father's south Georgia family has an undocumented tradition of Creek ancestry, but I don't feel entitled to call myself Creek. Where do we draw the line in this article? Is everyone who claims to be Creek admitted to be Creek? -- Rob C. alias Alarob 16:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am from jasper alabama. i have native american ansestory on my maternal side,by my grandparents..My granfaters mother was full blood creek indian,My grandmothers father was blackfoot indian.I claim my native american heritage just as i claim the other creoleand japanese and caucasian.But since the native american was more recent and i knew these great grandparents i would feel i am denying them if i just say i am white.I look white but i have features that are not white,most people ask if i am hispanic.So i know that i cannot deny my bloodline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.29.137 (talk) at 03:07, 16 July 2007

Flag, cont'd

[edit]

I'd like to see some documentation about the flag that is so prominently displayed in the info box. An unsigned comment referred to the flag, or similar ones, as standing in the entry to the Mound Building where the Creek national government has its offices. This video has a glimpse of red flags in the last scene (3:15). Can we do any better than this? And where did the evidence for these flags come from? Still waiting to learn. -- ℜob ℂ. alias ⒶⓁⒶⓇⓄⒷ 20:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to offer the following information from William Augustus Bowles, Director General of the Creek Nation, by J. Leitch Wright, Jr, (copyright 1967, University of Georgia Press, pp. 56-7) regarding a Native American flag dating from the late eighteenth century:


  • "A new flag was displayed here on Wednesday, that of the Creek nation, worn by the vessel carrying General Bowles and the Indian chiefs to the American continent."... Another reason Bowles lingered in Nassau was to procure a flag for his vessel. The local shops were quite out of Muskogee banners, and one had to be made to his description: he specified that a blue cross be superimposed on a red background; the blue background of the upper left hand corner had a sun with human features resembling both an American Indian and Bowles himself. Legally only vessels flying this banner or authorized by Panton's [of the British company Panton and Leslie, made famous in American history by their summary execution at the hands of U.S. General Andrew Jackson during the Creek War] concession could trade with the Florida Indians. I have no doubt that this source documents an authentic early flag of the Muskogee Nation. However, I wonder about the accuracy of the flag's description. Either it is accurate and the flag seems rather ungainly with a blue canton undifferentiated from an adjacent blue cross, or more likely, the author inadvertently reversed the red and blue in the first part of the description, or perhaps accidently substituted blue for red in the canton. None of the descriptions adhere to the rules of heraldry so closely followed by Great Britain at the time. This leads me to believe that the flag may have already been in use for some time by the Muskogee people. Jesse Sierke, 22 June 2000
  • Rob (talk) 15:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest move to Muscogee (Creek)

[edit]

Since that's what they call themselves, it would be at the very least polite to move this entire article to one with that title. Chuck Hamilton (talk) 04:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the page, fixed the redirects, and within the article changed "Creek" to "Muscogee". Chuck Hamilton (talk) 05:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muscogee "revamp"

[edit]

Revamping will continue later ... I will cease to see what other editors think of the contributions thus far. Rob (talk) 18:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I added back the 20th and 21st century famous Muscogee. Suzan Shown Harjo is hardly just an entertainer (she is entertaining, but...!). She wrote and helped pass the the 1978 American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, has personally helped recover over 1 millions acres of land back to tribes, and is advising the current administration on Indian policy. Several of the people mentioned are important educators. Joan Hill and Acee Blue Eagle are two of the most important Native American painters in the 20th century. I'm not sure why you want to separate warriors as "leaders," but most of the people listed are highly influential leaders. Anyone else have thoughts about how to present notable Muscogee Creeks? Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]
There is a significant distinction between leaders and entertainers (although there are few instants that they can be both). Usually leaders are engaged in some type of governmental or organizational relations (elected official, soldier, liaison, delegate). Mary Musgrove was certainly not a warrior and certainly not an entertainer. We can make a request for comments. Rob (talk) 15:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muscogee (Creek) Nation

[edit]

As this article was growing overly large, I went ahead and created an article specifically for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, leaving this article to cover the Muscogee people as an ethnic group. -Uyvsdi (talk) 03:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]

I propose that Muskhogean stock be merged into Muscogee people. The term "stock" to refer to peoples is out-dated and more than a little offensive. The Muscogee people article refers not simply to a homogeneous ethnic group, but a confederacy of tribes. -Uyvsdi (talk) 18:10, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Here's the talk page from Mushogean stock, as part of the merge -Uyvsdi (talk) 06:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

This kind of overlaps with the Five Civilized Tribes, but I don't think its quite the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chroniclev (talk • contribs) at 19:17, 31 December 2005

This article ought to be rewritten and moved, perhaps to Muskogean people. It uses the outmoded racialist concept of "stock," and takes an ahistorical approach in summarizing the past of this group of people. It's a product of its time (early 1900s) when mostly passive or reactionary non-white people were acted upon by white people — supposedly history's only really significant actors.

We could use an up-to-date article in this slot, because the Muskogean tribes (indigenous to the U.S. Southeast) are currently being categorized only as "Indian tribes in the state of Oklahoma," effectively erasing their history before the 1830s. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 17:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then how would this stub differ from Muscogee people, since Muscogee people are a confederacy of broad range of Southeastern tribes who are united by ancestral Muscogean languages? -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Grant-Lee Phillips is of Creek descent

[edit]

Can you add Grant-Lee Phillips (of Grant Lee Buffalo) as part of notable Creek peoples? source:(http://www.grantleephillips.com/site/index.html) --98.119.14.141 (talk) 07:12, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tennessee

[edit]

Tennessee is found 10 times in the article but not once in the lead.--Jacksoncw (talk) 01:36, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Images

[edit]

What's going on with the infobox image for this article? Obviously, it can't be left blank, especially for such a large tribe. Yuchitown (talk) 04:19, 16 February 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

I'm putting the image of the bandolier bag as a placeholder. Yuchitown (talk) 04:35, 16 February 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Misattributed Tecumseh quote…

[edit]

I've deleted the quote from Tecumseh stating "The Muscogee was once a mighty people. … Let the white race perish. …" This quote appeared in J. F H. Claiborne, Life and Times of Gen. Sam Dale, the Mississippi Partisan (Harper, New York, 1860). However, historian John Sugden writes, "Claiborne's description of Tecumseh at Tuckabatchie in the alleged autobiography of the Fontiersman, Samuel Dale, however, is fraudulent. … Although they adopt the style of the first person, as in conventional autobiography, the passages dealing with Tecumseh were largely based upon published sources, including McKenney, Pickett and Drake's Life of Tecumseh. The story is cast in the exaggerated and sensational language of the dime novelist, with embellishments more likely supplied by Claiborne than Dale, and the speech put into Tecumseh's mouth is not only unhistorical (it has the British in Detroit!) but similar to ones the author concocted for other Indians in different circumstances." Sugden also finds it "unreliable" and "bogus." Sugden, John. "Early Pan-Indianism; Tecumseh’s Tour of the Indian Country, 1811-1812." American Indian Quarterly 10, no. 4 (1986): 273–304. doi:10.2307/1183838.--Carwil (talk) 19:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Muscogee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:12, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Muscogee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:52, 8 February 2018 (UTC) Hensingham (talk) 05:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC) Sourcecheck Since a certain passage alleges to know facts about the people pre-contact, what is the source for the claims of no private property and consensus rule in this passage: "The pre-contact Muscogee did not have the concept of private property in their culture; land was considered communal, as were most resources, such as the game their hunters took. They ruled by consensus among elders of the band;"[reply]

Hensingham (talk) 05:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Cultures of Collecting

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2023 and 16 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Taylorwaterson (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Cole Kebea (talk) 02:43, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There were no "White Sticks"; use "national" or "allied"

[edit]

This and other Wikipedia articles claim that the Red Sticks of the war of 1813-14 were opposed by "White Sticks" who were allies of the United States. But the name "White Sticks" is a late-20th-century invention that is not attested in any source from the time of the war (or more than 150 years after).

Several of these "White Stick" passages cite an online article by historian Kathryn H. Braund as their source. They overlook a passage from that article, which reads: In recent times, some historians have adopted the name “White Sticks” for the national Creeks. This designation has no basis in fact or in Creek custom.

Instead of "White Sticks," editors can refer to the "national" or "allied" Creeks. They were the ones who supported the Creek national government, which was formed in the 1790s at the instigation of U.S. agent Benjamin Hawkins. -- ℜob C. alias ALAROB 18:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Muscogee&oldid=1223689025"