^
Update this timeline entry
What became of miscellaneous Creek Indian populations
Source: Early History of the Creek Indians and Their Neighbors #121
Project ID
Chapter
No chapter
Timeline title
Start date
End date
Filename received
Filename assigned
Content
Enable editor
Use plain text
Code entry
The census of 1760 gives about 40 Tawasa men and 50 Mugulasha, while a town which perhaps corresponds to Okchaiutci contained 100 men.14 The census of 1761 gives 30 hunters for Muklasa, 20 for Okchaiutci, and 70 for Wetumpka and 'Red Ground," the second of which was probably also an Alabama settlement, but there is no reference to Pawokti, Tawasa, or Autauga, though at this time they must have been among the Upper Creeks.1 Henry Bouquet in 1764 gives 6,000 warriors[!],2 and Marbury in 1792 has 60 Alabama Indians, 40 Okchaiutci, 30 Muklasa, and apparently 60 Tawasa (including Red Ground), though his spelling renders this uncertain. Hawkins in 1799 estimated the Alabama proper—Tawasa, Pawokti, and Autauga—to comprise about 80 gun men, but he does not give the number of those in Okchaiutci or Muklasa.3 Stiggins places the number of Alabama in 1814 at 2,000, which is excessive.4 In 1832 the Alabama are represented only by Tawasa and Autauga with a combined population of 321 and 21 slaves.5 This was after the separation of those Alabama who went to Louisiana and Texas. In 1806 Sibley states that there were two Alabama villages in Louisiana, one containing about 30, the other about 40 men.8 According to Morse, in 1817, there were 160 Alabama, all told, in Texas, but he probably overlooked some bands.7 In 1882 the United States Indian Office reported, or rather estimated, 290 "Alabama, Kushatta, and Muskogee" in the State of Texas,8 and the same figure is repeated without variation in every subsequent report until 1901, when 470 are given on the authority of the census of 1900.9 This figure is repeated until 1911. In 1910 a special agent was sent to these people from the Indian Office to inquire into their condition and make an enumeration of them, but his instructions did not cover the Koasati Indians, who were consequently ignored. The number of Alabama was found to be 192; the Koasati were estimated along with some Seminole, Isleta, and other Indians in different parts of the State.10 These figures were repeated in the Indian Office Reports for 1912, 1913, and 1914. The census of 1910 returned 187 Alabama in Texas and 111 in Louisiana—a total of 298.1! The number of those in Oklahoma is small, but there are enough to maintain a square ground. No separate enumeration of them has been made, so far as I am aware. By the earliest writers the Koasati were probably included among the Alabama. The first independent enumeration of them is in the estimate of 1750, which gives 50 men. That of 1760 gives 150 men.12 In the census of 1761 they and the Tamahita together are reported as having had 125 hunters.1 At least 100 of these wene undoubtedly Koasati. Taitt, writing in 1772, reports 40 "Alibamons" here.2 He probably means 40 gunmen. In 1792 Marbury credits them with 130 men (see p. 437). About 1793 some of them began to move to Louisiana and others followed from time to time. "Those that were left in 1832 numbered 82 according to the census of that year.3 In 1806 Sibley states that the Koasati in Louisiana supposed the number of men in all their settlements there to reach 200. 4 Schermerhorn estimates their number on the Sabine in 1814 at 600.5 Morse, in 1817, gives 350 on Red River, 50 on the Neches 40 miles above its mouth, and 240 on the Trinity, a total of 640 men, women, and children.8 In 1829 Porter gives 180 Koasati.7 Bollaert in 1850 estimated the number of warriors among the Koasati on the lower Trinity alone at 500 in two villages.8 After 1882 they were enumerated by the Indian Office along with the Alabama as given above. In 1910 11 were with the Alabama in Texas, 85 in Louisiana, and 2 in Nebraska—a total of 98. 9 A few more are in Oklahoma. There were two branches of the Tuskegee, one of which united with the Cherokee. The latter was probably small and I have no data regarding it. The other is set down in the census of 1750 as containing 10 men, in that of 1760 as containing 50 men,10 and in that of 1761 as containing, along with "Coosaw old town," 40 hunters.11 Taitt, in 1772, gives about 25 gunmen,12 as does Marbury in 1792 (p. 437). In 1799 Hawkins says they had 35 gunmen.13 The census of 1832 returned 216 Indians and 35 slaves.14 (Swanton)
Replace existing data with this data
