northeast Texas, southeast Oklahoma, northwest Louisiana, and southwest ..... development during the Mississippian period, the Pawnee maintain they .... So to and the Souths Ancient Chiefdoms, (The University of Georgia. Press, 1997), p.
Chickasaw/Wichita Interactions During the Early Historic Period By Timothy G. Baugh, PhD Few scholars, lay historians, or Chickasaw tribal members today for that matter, know that the Chickasaw and Wichita Nations possess a long history of friendship and peaceful interaction. The focus of this article is to explore the connections fostered between the two tribes and the significance of those connections. As a new area of inquiry, there are limitations in amounts of documentation available and a demih of prior academic analysis on the subject. These limitations call for expanded scholarly interpretations in order to formulate a better understanding of this quarter of Chickasaw history. After arriving in Indian Territory, the Chickasaws were placed on lands associated with the Choctaw Nation. The territory granted to the Choctaws by the United States government was appropriated by the · federal government from the Quapaw Indians, though the area's traditional inhabitants were the "Kirikir'i·s" (kidee-kid-ish) or Wichita peoples. 1 Today, the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes hold allotments in Caddo County, Oklahoma, along Sugar Creek, a tributary to the Washita River. Recognition of the Kirikir'i·s nominally occurred in 1850 when the Choctaws created four counties within the Chickasaw District. The southwestern-most area was named Wichita . County (Wichita Kaunti) based on the presence offormer Kirikir'i·s villages within this region south of the Washita River (see Figure 1). 2 Upon reorganization several years later, the name of this county was changed to Pickens.
32
The Journal of Ch ickasaw HistOIJ' and Culture- Volume XII, Number One, Series 45, Fall 2009
North of the Washita River was Caddo County (Kvlolachi Kaunti). 3 "Kvlolachi" is the Choctaw name for the Caddo confederacy known as the Kadohadocho. In the 18th century, these people lived along the Red River in northeast Texas, southeast Oklahoma, northwest Louisiana, and southwest Arkansas, and were frequently raided by the Chickasaws. 4 Today, the Caddo are found in and around Binger, Oklahoma, which is also in Caddo County. In 1855, the Chickasaws formally separated from the Choctaws, and the "Leased District" was established west of the 98 111 Meridian. In this area, most of the Plains tribes (Wichita, Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache) resided. In the fall of 1856, the Chickasaws ratified their new Constitution but even as late as 1858, the Kirikir'i·s continued to establisl~ their villages within the boundaries of Chickasaw lands. 5
Figure 1. Map of Chickasaw District within the Choctaw Nation in 1850.
The naming of a Chickasaw county after the Wichitas or Kirikir'i·s is of interest because, as we shall see, the Chickasaw and Wichita people had an ancient alliance extending perhaps as far back as the 13th century A.D. Chickasaw/Wichita Interactio ns During the Early Hi sto ri c Period
However, this close friendship had been forgotten by the beginning of the 19th century. Once in Indian Territory, Chickasaw ranchers, such as Montford Johnson, interacted with Plains Indians, including the Wichita, to maintain amicable relationships between themselves and the equestrian hunters. 6 During this period in the mid-1800s, these Chickasaw cattlemen had little concept about the age-old ties between their ancestors and the Kirikir'i·s. The questions explored in this article include how this ancient alliance was fonned and why this relationship between the Chickasaw and Kirikir'i·s was lost. To introduce this study, we will begin with ancient European maps that depict the Chickasaw Nation and its homeland.
Although these two expeditions came within about 400 miles of each other, members of the different parties were unaware of the others. Both de Soto and Coronado found disappointment instead of the riches and glory they sought. Unbeknownst to the indigenous peoples of North America, both groups of Spaniards claimed these lands and their inhabitants as the domains and subjects of the Spanish Empire.
In 1540, members of Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto's pmiy embarked on their long trek through the southeastern forests. They were the first Europeans to enter the Chickasaw villages in northem Mississippi, where they received a less-than-hospitable welcome. In the winter of 1540-41, de So to and his army stayed in the village of "Chicaya," whose warriors attacked the Spaniards one spring morning in 1541 .7 After this nanow escape, de So to and his army moved westward toward the Mississippi River and into what is now Arkansas. To the west, similar events were occurring on the Plains, where in the same year of 1541, Coronado met the Kirikir'i·s, now refened to as the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes. 8 Guided by el Turco ("the Turk," a Kirikir'i·s trader living at Cuicuyu or Pecos Pueblo near present-day Santa Fe, New Mexico), 9 Coronado first crossed the Llano Estacado (the high Plains ofthe Texas panhandle) where he and his army met the Teya, a Kirikir'i·s group. Their goal, however, was Quivira in central Kansas where the great settlement of Wichitas resided. Upon aniving at Quivira, Coronado found multiethnic towns so large that he needed four days to ride through them. 10 34
The Journal of Chickasaw His101y and Culture - Volume XII, Number One. Series 45. Fa/1 2009
Figure 2. Ortelius and Chaves I 584 Map of Ia Florida. (Cour tesy of Map Collection, Yale University Library.)
Upon the return of these entradas to New Spain (Mexico), journals were soon provided to Iberian cosmographers, and by 1544, a quill-and-ink sketch map of "la Florida" (southern North America) was completed probably by Alonso de Santa Cruz. 11 Santa Cruz's final sketch was used as a base map and revised by Abraham Ortelius and Alonso de Chaves (sometimes spelled Chickasaw/Wichita Interactions Durin g the Ea rl y Hi storic Period
Illinois Indian village, perhaps near the Des Moines River, the Illinois people taught these two travelers and their five companions the complexities of the calumet ceremony. In Marquette's words:
Chiaves), in 1584 at a scale of 1: 14.5 million, indicating a lack of detail in this work (see Figure 2). 12 While deSoto's chroniclers identified 52 coastal and 75 interior names, the Ortelius and Chaves' map provides only 34 rivers, capes, and bays, as well as 22 indigenous settlements. 13 Because of this map of la Florida, Ortelius was considered one of the greatest geographers of the 16th century. i
A number of similarities existed between the de Soto and Coronado expeditions. Neither had maps prior to the beginning of their expeditions, nor did they have instruments for determining their exact location on the North American landscape. Instead, both de Soto and Coronado depended on native guides and mapmakers, who often had other agendas and their own world views. For example, while in the lands of the Caddo, Moscoso (who had become the expedition's leader upon the death of deSoto) was given two guides bythe Naguatex. These Caddo guides intentionally misled Moscoso, hoping to confuse he and his men, thus opening them to attack. Upon discovering this deception, the two guides were hanged from a tree. 14 A later Indian guide, who also attempted to deceive the Spaniards, was devoured by Spanish dogs. 15 Similarly, Coronado had his guide from the Pueblos, El Turco, gaiToted after discovering his attempts to lead the Iberians away from Pecos Pueblo and lose them within the vast grasslands of the Llano Estacado. 16 Also of importance to our discussion is the 1673 canoe trip of Jacques Marquette and Louis Jolliet, who followed the Mississippi River downstream. After stopping at an
I .
"(The calumet) has but to be carried upon one's person, and displayed, to enable one to walk safely through the midst of enemies, who, in the hottest of the fight, lay down their arms when it is shown. For that reason, the Ilinois [sic] gave me one, to serve as a safeguard among all the nations through whom I had to pass during my voyage." 17 Continuing their journey, and possibly encountering the Chickasaw people along the Mississippi bluffs near present-day Memphis, these French adventurers reached the confluence of the Arkansas and Mississippi rivers, where French traders later established Arkansas post and where Marquette and Jolliet met the "Down Stream People" or Quapaw. 18 Using the calumet ceremony as a means of establishing friendship with these Siouan speakers, the Quapaw told the Frenchmen of the sea to the south (the Gulf of Mexico). Upon receiving this news, the voyagers turned their canoes northward and returned home because of the unfriendly nature of the people further downriver as reported to them by the Quapaw. As the Quapaw and other nations demonstrated, the calumet ceremony provided a mechanism for the French to establish ties of friendship with various tribes and villages, "to secure safe passage, establish trade, and to form alliances. " 19
Later, this ceremony successfully served the French in establishing the "Middle Ground" of the Ohio Valley and northward, known to them as the pays d'en haut. 20 Indeed, the Indians of the Middle Ground "smoked the calumet with Frenchmen, established intimate relations that in tum drew the French into kinship circles, fought with them, competed for their trade, and contracted their diseases ." 21 As a result, the word "calumet" quickly became established within the Mississippi Valley French vocabulary. 22 Upon his retum to the north country, Marquette spent the winter of 1673 -74 constructing a map of the Mississippi and its major tributaries, as well as the nations living along them. Although most ofJolliet's notes and journals were lost when his canoe capsized on his way home, he too produced a map based on his memory and more extensive travels. One of the groups he identified on this map is the Paniassa, a Wichita-speaking people of the Plains. The Chickasaws, however, are not mentioned. For the purposes of national security, the French government suppressed references to this chart, but this information soon found its way onto a later map as French cartographers developed more precise methods of mapping. Although the "Chiacha" appear on the Ortelius and Chaves map of la Florida of 1584, only a general location is indicated. In 1684, a manuscript map by the Italian cartographer Vincenzo Coronelli provides the first identification of Chickasaw town names (see Figure 4). This highly stylized map depicts men subduing and roasting an alligator, while other men are felling a tree and making a canoe using fire. In addition, there are various indigenous The Journal of Chickasaw HistOIJ' and Culture - Volume XII. Number One. Series 45. Fal/2009
structures, including fortifications and houses, as well as rivers (the Mississippi River is clearly indicated, but its tributaries are not labeled). Several names oflndian nations, including "Kappaha" (Quapaw) , " Tounika" (Tunica), and "Chikacha," also appear on this map.
Figure 3. The eight Chickasaw village names appearing on the 1684 Coronelli map of North America.
The Chickasaws differ from the other nations in that eight of their towns are identified on this map (near the right center margin ofFigure 4) indicating the importance of these people to French govemment officials (see the enlargement in Figure 3). This is the first time such names appear on any European chart. The original eight town names, along with modem Chickasaw and English translations, are included in Table 1. The 17th century names are not easily recognized in modern Chickasaw because Frenchmen, working with their Choctaw allies, translated these town names and errors certainly occurred. Chickasaw/Wich ita In teractions D uring the Ea rly Historic Period
3S
Figure 4. (Previous) Coronelli Manuscript Map of 1684. (Courtesy of Map Collection, Yale University Library.)
While Coronelli's map contains a wealth ofinfonnation, their cartographic methods by no means meet modern standards. More accurate practices of mapping were needed and French cartographers responded by improving their techniques. The earliest of these reform-minded French cartographers was Claude Delisle. He published his first map of North America in 1700, but there was a certain degree of confusion represented on this chart because the Mississippi and Ohio rivers were not clearly separated from one another.
During his 1699-1700 and 1701-1702 trips to the Mississippi Valley, Iberville regularly consulted with indigenous peoples concerning the locations of Indian nations and stream courses, and he engaged several Indians to craft maps for him. 23 Iberville collected additional facts about the Indians of the area, and before returning to France, had 18 Chickasaw village names. 24 This information was provided to Delisle and his son, Guillaume, who made corrections to the 1700 map with the publication of their 1703 chart, and later, even more improvements in the 1718 version (see Figure 5). 25
French officials continued to obtain new information about the Southeast, and the people who lived there. One of these individuals was Pierre LeMoyne d'Iberville, a soldier of fortune who was sent to Louisiana to explore the Mississippi River and surrounding areas.
Coronelli 1684
Modern Chickasaw
Fabatchoux
Foli' Cha'a'
Chopped off switches
Malata
Aamalahta
Where lightning struck
Aehebophoni
Jssoba' Foni'
Horse bones
Totchinaske
Totchinaske
There are three of them
Chichafalava
Chokka' Falaa'
It is long or long town
Ontcha patafa
Onchaba Hachoshi'
Mountain laid open
Pakaha
Pakaha
A far place
Chikouali ka
Chokkilissa
Quiet or abandoned town
English Translation
Figure 5. Delisle map of North America published in 1718. Table I. Chickasaw villages listed in the 1684 Coronelli map.
The Journal of Chickasmv Hist01y and Culture- Volume X !I, Number One. Series 45, Fa/12009
Chickasaw/Wichita Interac ti ons Durin g the Early Hi storic Period
43
By 1699, Iberville was well aware of the calumet ceremony, for he ". . . made pictures on trees, of a man carrying a calumet of peace and having three ships" representing his voyage from France. 26 By 1702, Iberville had sent much of the information he had gathered about the Southeast tribes, including the Chickasaws, to French diplomats and cartographers. Table 2 presents a list of 18 Chickasaw towns with an estimated 588 cabins or a population of 2,000 waiTiors. ConcuiTently, Iberville knew of the Carolina English and their alliance with the Chickasaws. Furthermore, he was aware of English claims to the Mississippi River Valley and adjoining lands. 27 As early as 1702, Thomas Nairne, a Carolina trader, had dreamed of an English commercial empire extending from the Atlantic Coast to beyond the Mississippi River. With the conclusion of the Yamasee War (1715-1716), 28 the Carolinians became more aggressive and began making concerted efforts to trade with the Indians of the Mississippi Valley and beyond onto the Plains. The English too needed geographical and cultural information about the Southeast. As part of this endeavor, a Chickasaw diplomatic envoy, Fanni Mingo, presented the Governor of South Carolina with a deerskin map depicting his people's geographical knowledge of the eastern part of North America in 1723 .29 This important map, while not following European cartographic standards, provides information on the extent of the Chickasaw world, which covered an area from New York to Florida and South Carolina to Kansas (see Figure 6). In addition, political alliances and enemy nations may be distinguished on this map. 31 4
The Journal of Chickasmv Histmy and Culwre- Volume XII. Number One, Series 45, Fa/12009
Fra ncoph one
Chickasaw
Mode rn Chickasaw
English Transa ltion Personal n ame m ean ing: " chief who conjures h elp for him/ for someone"
1
Ap il e faplimengo
Apilifappoli ' minko
2
Ayarraca
Aa);aniki'or Ayanaca
Yaneka; place of twists and turns Chopped off switches or p lace with the chopped canes
3
Tolatchao
Foli'Cha'a '
4
Tascaou ilo
5
C hatata
Jtti' okaahilowa' Chisha' Tal/a'a Kowi'at ala Tanchaachilokka' Aahikki'ya Chokka 'fa loa Onchaba hachoshi' Champoli' l ssoba'.foni' Chokkilissa' Aayopishto' Aamalaata or Aamalahta Oka' hata' o r Okhata Oka' champo/i' Aayaniki'
6
Gouytola
7
Tanyachi lea
8 9
Ayeheguiya Thouquoa fola
10
Onthaba atchosa
II
Than bolo
12
Sebafone
13
Thoucaliga
14
Ayebisto
15
Alaoute
16
Oucahata
17
Oucthambolo
18
C hinica
Place of the ravine or gully tree Pl ace of the post oak grove P lace wh ere the panther s in gs P lace w here the corn is s hel led
Ackia; standing place or lookout Long to wn Hill stream Pl ace of sweet water Place of horse bon es Pl ace of quietness Place of the big wa llow P lace wh ere lightning had struck P lace of w hite water Place of sweet water
Yaneka; place of twi sts and turns
Table 2. Chickasaw villages known to French cartographers in 1702. 30
To understand, at least in part, the western extent of this cultural landscape, we move back about five years as Jean-Baptiste Benard de !a Harpe made his journey to the Kirikir'i·s along the Arkansas River in modern-day Oklahoma. After leaving Natchitoches, Harpe stopped at several villages along the Red River. There, he and the members of his party recruited two Kichai guides to lead the Frenchmen to the Wichita villages on the Arkansas River. Upon Harpe's arrival to this area in 1719, a Tawakoni warrior, whose purpose was to conduct diplomatic negotiations with outsiders and strangers, greeted Harpe. Most historians tend to equate the Kirikir'i·s village on C hickasaw/Wichita Interact ions Duri ng th e Early Histori c Period
the other side of the river with the Tawakoni, but careful reading of Harpe's account indicates this was a composite or multiethnic settlement consisting of members from several Kirikir'i·s groups, including the Tawakoni, Wichita proper, Taovaya, Iscani, and others .
or if he was the leader of a trading party. Nor are we told why this Chickasaw trader decided to visit the Kirikir'i ·s at this time and why he supposedly left the settlement. It is probable that the Chickasaw trader was part of a larger trading group because various hardships, like an Illinois or Osage raiding party, existed in reaching the Wichita settlement. Once discovered by Harpe, the Chickasaw party may well have moved to another location to continue their trade with the Kirikir'i·s. The Chickasaws had been aligned with the Carolina traders since about 1685 , and this alliance created a great deal of concern for French officials who did not want this alliance to spread to the Plains nations . Initially, the Chickasaws participated in the English slaving and trading system, but with the conclusion of the Yamasee War in 1716, the Carolinians realized that indigenous slaving was not the most profitable commerce and was a threat in terms of maintaining alliances with the indigenous people of the Southeast. 32
Figure 6. Deer-hide map presented to the governor of South Carolina by Panni Mingo in 1723.
After determining that Harpe's intentions were peaceful, the Tawakoni emissaries allowed Harpe and his party to enter the settlement. At this time, the Europeans were welcomed with a calumet ceremony. After being in this settlement for several days, Harpe recorded his surprise at the arrival of a Chickasaw trader with a variety of trade goods. Few details are given about this individual. We are not told the purpose of this trip, if he was alone, 46
The Journal of Chickasaw History cmd Culture - Volume XII, Number One. Series 45. Fal/2009
As the Chickasaws became less concerned with obtaining slaves and more involved in the deer-hide trade, they slipped further into the European world of commerce and began to expand the boundaries of their own economic empire. The Kirikir'i·s could be a profitable source of bison hides, meat, and tallow. Still, they were under the constant threat of attack from their traditional enemies such as the Osage, Plains Apache, and the recently arrived Padouca or Comanche, who entered the historical record in New Mexico around 1705. One of the biggest concerns to the Kirikir'i·s, however, was the Osage, who raided the Wichitas for slaves and sold them to the Illinois French.
Chickasaw/Wichita Interaction s Durin g the Early Historic Peri od
The Osage were a common enemy for both the Chickasaw and Wichita tribes, and this may have been another reason to establish and maintain close ties between the two. The Osage were well armed by the French, and even though the Kirikir'i·s constructed fortifications, they still needed guns to protect themselves.33 One source of weapons for the Wichitas was Chickasaw traders, one of whom was noted by Harpe in 1718. Such trade implies close ties between the two peoples. Concerning the political situation in the late 1730s, Mildred Wedel states that, "Dufresne, the former head of the concession at Arkansas Post, wrote in a memoir dated January 30, 1737 (Archives Nationales, Section Outre-Mer, G 1 465, General Correspondence) that in the past, Chickasaw Indians had sought refuge among both the Osage and pani ouassas [Wichita]."34 Because the Chickasaws were allied with the British, French officials were probably not too happy about the Osage housing and giving aid to their foe . Still, from this statement, an interesting q1;1estion surfaces. Did individuals or small groups of Chickasaws live in Wichita villages? Currently, the evidence for such incorporations cannot be verified through the archaeological or historical record, but the possibility remains, and the likelihood of connectivity is strong. Furthennore, Wedel continues with, "The Osage, nonnally French allies, were probably threatened with disciplinary action after such a misstep. The French could not exert similar influence on the Wichitas. Therefore, might they (French traders and officers) have urged the Osage to drive the Wichitas farther away where they would not be as accessible to the British Indians?"35 48
The Joumal of Chickasml' Hist01y and Culture - Volume Xlf, Number One, Series 45, Fa/12009
In reply to her rhetorical question, Wedel concludes: "It must have been a combination of the hostile pressures exerted by the Osage and their allies and the beckoning hand of the French from Natchitoches that caused the (Wichita) move to the Canadian (River) and then to the Red." 36 The interaction between the Chickasaws and Kirikir'i·s can by no means be considered intensive because only a few English gun parts have been recovered from Wichita sites. These objects include a single butt plate from the Deer Creek (34KA3) site on the Arkansas River in north-central Oklahoma, a few English affiliated gunflints, and five rear gun sights from the Longest (34JF1) site on the Red River in south-central Oklahoma. 37 From another perspective, not all guns utilized by the Chickasaws were manufactured by the British-French and Spanish gun parts also have been recovered from Chickasaw sites in the Tupelo, Mississippi, area. The Chickasaws may have traded some of these to their Wichita allies while retaining the better English firearms for themselves. Despite this probable low intensity of trade between the Chickasaw and Wichita tribes, the French were indeed worried, for if a strong alliance could be forged between these Southeast Indians and the Plains groups, a significant threat could have been mounted against their North American empire. Still, we do not understand the history of the Chickasaw/Kirikir'i·s relationship. Is it possible that this alliance extends back into the Mississippian (A.D. 1100-1450)/Plains Village (A.D. 1200-1450) periods? If this were the case, what were the ties that bound these two peoples together?
Chickasaw/Wichita Interactions During the Early Historic Period
Mississippian potter in Tennessee and was either acquired directly or traded to the people at the McLemore site. A second, locally made, human effigy (along with an animal effigy) bowl also occurs at McLemore. Although the exact provenance of the Tennessee bowl from this western Oklahoma site is not known, similar vessels have been recovered from Cheatham County, Tennessee, northwest of Nashville and Davidson County in which Nashville occurs.39 In exchange for these goods, the Wichitas may have provided obsidian, shells from the Gulf of California, and other items.
Figure 7. Human Effigy Bowl from the M~Lemore (34WA5) site. (Image provided courtesy of Dr. Don G Wyckoff, University of Oklahoma, Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History; drawing courtesy of Amber Underwood, Division of History and Culture, Chickasaw Nation).
There is little doubt that the ancestral Chickasaws participated in the remarkable cultures of the Mississippian period, including the great city of Cahokia, but what of the Kirikir'i·s? Some of the better evidence comes from the McLemore (34WA5) site found in western Oklahoma. 38 One artifact in particular stands out in this site's assemblage. This artifact is a human effigy bowl that has a flat base. Extending from either side of this bowl is a head and a pair of legs with the arms wrapping around the bowl itself (see Figure 7). Based on its temper, this bowl was made by a 50
The Jounwl of Chickasaw History and Culture - Volume XII. Number One, Series 45, Fo/12009
If this vessel was traded to the people in western Oklahoma, what route did it take? The most probable path would be through the most western Mississippian site of Spiro Mounds or associated sites along the Arkansas River in eastern Oklahoma. 40 These people certainly traded with the inhabitants of Cahokia Mounds in Illinois (east of St. Louis), and possibly through them they learned of the ancient Chickasaw presence in Tennessee. Other human effigy bowls have been found in southeast Missouri, but their links to Spiro are currently unknown. 41 Overall, however, the evidence for the movement of Tennessee goods through the Spiro area is thin at best. Perhaps, the best clue for Chickasaw/Wichita interaction occurs from the population study of the people at the McLemore site. Anthropologists have determined that the McLemore people consisted ofPlains and Pueblo residents, as well as individuals from the eastern margins of the Plains and perhaps even the Ohio Valley. Is this the tie to the Chickasaws? In other words, did a small contingent of Mississippian people (i.e., Chickasaws) move to Tennessee to join with people at Spiro and other localities in western Oklahoma? While the potential exists, only further study can determine this answer. Chickasaw/Wichita Interactions During the Early Historic Period
Despite the advocates for Caddo and Tunica people inhabiting Spiro Mounds in east-central Oklahoma, several scholars believe the occupants of Spiro and related sites to be the Kichai, who were allied with the Wichitas. 42 Indeed, such an explanation would account for interaction between the Kirikir'i·s and Chickasaws, for the people at Spiro interacted with those at the urban complex of Cahokia. With the decline of Mississippian structures, new integrative mechanisms (such as the calumet)43 were created. While many indigenous people credit the Pawnee with this new development during the Mississippian period, the Pawnee maintain they received this ceremony, along with the Deer Dance, from the Kirikir'i·s. This new social mechanism for creating alliances and partnerships swept through the Plains and eastern Woodlands, and served the efforts of trade, peace, and social interaction.
Summary Chickasaws are known to have interacted with distant peoples during the Mississippian period, perhaps even earlier. The Chickasaw people residing at Moundville were well aware of the Cahokian urban center and through this connection they may well have become familiar with members of the various Kirikir'i·s nations. Indeed, there is a strong likelihood that both Chickasaw and Kirikir'i·s individuals lived at Cahokia at some point. At the very least, this familiarity resulted in trade, either directly or indirectly, if not actual population movements. Through trade, people may have established social, political, and economic alliances.
52
The Journal of Chickasaw Histary and Culture - Volume XII. Number One. Series 45. Fal/2009
Evidence is strong for this trade during the 18th century when Chickasaw traders appeared at a Wichita settlement on the Arkansas River. Other support for this position occurs in French documents from the Arkansas post. During the mid-1700s, French officials were extremely worried about a Chickasaw/Wichita alliance. Such a compact would have threatened the ability of the French to communicate between the southern portions of their domains in Louisiana and the northern regions around the Great Lakes and Canada. With the upheaval of the French and Indian War that ended in 1763 and the later turmoil of the American Revolution against British rule, life in the Southeast and Plains took a dramatic turn as indigenous peoples became more separated from one another through the ever-growing procession of colonization. This separation appears to have impacted Chickasaw/Wichita relations as well. While this paper touches on just the highlights of this story, there is obviously more of this historical narrative to be told. To do so requires more archival and archaeological research to determine if additional documents on dusty shelves and archaeological material culhlre within the context of an ancient site exist for more intensive studies. Such information would shed even more light on this fascinating aspect of Chickasaw history and culture.
Ch ickasaw/Wich ita Interaction s Durin g the Early Hi sto ric Period
End Notes
Acknowledgements An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2007 Society of American Ethnohistory meetings in Tulsa, Oklahoma. At that time, Dr. Patricia Galloway, University of Texas, provided valuable comments and pointed out the list of Chickasaw town names on the Coronelli map. Dr. Amanda Cobb-Greetham and Michelle Cooke encouraged and supported the research and writing of this miicle. John Dyson, Rose Jefferson, Joshua Hinson, and Stanley Smith assisted with a number of translations of both Chickasaw and Choctaw terms, and along with LaDonna Brown, provided information on cultural concerns. Kirk Perry read an early version of this paper and provided infonnation on a variety of topics, including Tennessee archaeology and associated ceramic assemblages. Robert Perry also provided valuable comments on an earlier version of this paper. Dr. Don Wyckoff, Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, provided a digital image of the McLemore human effigy bowl, and Amber Underwood took this image and skillfully drew this vessel, as well as provided comments on a draft version of this paper. I am deeply indebted to all of these individuals; however, any errors or other problems with this article are the sole responsibility ofthe author.
54
The Journal of Chickasau• HisLOIJ' and Culture- Volume XII. N umber One. Series 45, Fa/12009
I.
Today, the term "Wichita" refers to the Wichita and Affi li ated Tribes established in and around Anadarko, Oklahoma. Histori call y, however, because only one village or band group was known by thi s name, I chose to use their more encompassing name for themselves (Kirikir'i·s, meaning raccoon eyes). The "r" sound in Wichita is similar to a "d" phoneme in English. Hence, Kirikir'i·s sounds like "kiddiekid-ish" in English (the actual phonetic spelling uses a question mark without the dot below where I have used a vertical diacritic mark for the glottal stop). Referring to their historic practice of tattooing, the term "raccoon eyes" is derived from several lines radiating fi·om a man 's eyes toward his temple. The Plains sign for the Kirikir'i·s was a circle drawn around the eyes with an extended forefinger indicating tattooing. At the time of contact, th ere were perhaps as many as I 0- I 2 divisions of the Kirikir'i ·s, composed of an estimated 50,000 to l 00,000 people.
2.
Muriel H. Wright, "Organi zation of Counties in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations," Chronicles of Oklahoma 8(3):3 I 5-3 34, (September, 1930), p. 325.
3.
Ibid. , p. 326.
4.
Timothy K. Perttula, The Caddo Nation: Archaeological and Ethnohistoric Perspectives, (University of Texas Press, 1992), p. I 8.
5.
Arrell M. Gibson, The Chickasaws, (University of Oklahoma Press, 1971) p. 266; Grant Foreman, "A Journal Kept by Douglas Cooper of an Expedition by a Company of Chickasaw in Quest of Comanche Indians," Chronicles of Oklahoma 5(4):381 -390, (I 927), p. 389 .
6.
Neil R. Johnson, The Chickasaw Rancher, Revised edition, (University of Colorado Press, 200 1), p. 42.
7.
Lawrence A. Clayton , Vernon James Knight, Jr. , and Edward C. Moore, The de Soto Chronicles: The Expedition of Hernando de So to to North America in 1539-1543, Two vo lumes, (The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, 1993); Jay K. Johnson, "From Chiefdom to Tribe in Northeast Mississippi: The Soto Exped ition as a Window on a Culture in Transition," In The Hernando de So to Expedition: History, Historiography, and "Discovery" in the Southeast, edited by Patricia Galloway, p. 295-312, (University of Nebraska Press, 1997), p. 302.
Chickasaw/Wichita Interactions During the Early Histo ric Period
8.
Timothy G. Baugh, "The Anthropologies of Trade and Exchange: An Essay on Kirikir'i·s and Southem Plains Political Economy," In
Land o.fOur Ancestors: Studies in Protohistoric and Historic Wichita Cultures, edited by Timothy G. Baugh and Stephen M. Perkins, (Plains Anthropologist 53 [208]:415-430), pp. 426-427 (2008 ). 9.
George P. Hammond and Agapito Rey, Narratives of the Coronado Expedition, Coronado Cuarto Centennial Publications, Vol. 2, (University of New Mexico, A lbuquerque, 1940); George P. Winship, The Coronado Expedition, 1540-1542. Bureau of American Ethnology, 14'" Annual Report for the years 1892-1893 , part 1, pp. 329-613, (Wash ingto n, D.C., 1896).
10.
Baugh, Op. cit., p. 4 16 .
II.
David Woodward, "The Renaissance Geograph ic and Cartographi c Background to the First Century of Greater Southwest Discovery and Cartography," In The Mapping of the Entradas into the Greater Southwest, edited by Dennis Reinhartz and Gerald D. Saxon , pp. 3-29, (University of Oklahoma Press, 1998), p. 9; William P. Cummin g, The Southeast in Early Maps, Third ed ition, revised and enl arged by Lou is de Vorsey, Jr., (The Un ivers ity of North Carolina Press, 1998), p. 108.
12.
56
Idem ., Cum ming, p. 11 6; Rob ertS. Weddle, "deSoto's Problems of Orientation: Maps, Nav igation, and Instruments in the Florida Expediti on," In Th e Hernando de Soto Expedition: History, H istoriography, and "Discovery" in the Southeast, ed ited by Patricia Galloway, pp. 219-233, (University of Nebraska Press, 1997), pp. 229-230.
13.
Idem., Cumming, p. 116.
14.
C harles Hudson, Knights of Spain, Warriors of the Sun: Hernando de So to and the Souths Ancient Chiefdoms, (The University of Georgi a Press, 1997), p. 363.
18.
Lou is De Vorsey, Jr. , "The Impact ofthe La Sall e Exped ition of 1682 on European Ca rtography," In LaSalle and His Legacy: Frenchmen and Indians in the Lower Mississippi Valley, edited by Patricia K. Galloway, pp. 60-78, (University Press of Mississippi, 1982), p. 64.
19.
Colin G. Calloway, One Vast Winter Count: The Native American West before Lewis and Clark, (University of Nebraska Press, 2003), p. 286 .
20.
Richard White, The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires. and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650-1815, (Cambridge Uni versity Press, 1991), pp. x-xiv.
21.
Op. cit., Calloway, p. 263.
22 .
John Francis McDermott, A Glossary of Mississippi Valley French 1673-I 850, Washington Univers ity Studi es, New Series, no. 12, (St. Lo uis, 194 1), p. 41.
23.
Richebourg Gaillard McWilliams (translator and ed itor), Iberville s Gulf Journals, (The Univers ity of A labama Press, 1981 ), pp. 60, 71.
24.
Daniel H. Usner, Jr. , Indians, Settlers, & Slaves in a Frontier Exchange Economy: The Lower Mississippi Valley Before 1783, (The Uni versity ofNorth Carol in a Press, 1992), pp. 18.
25.
Op. cit., Cu mmin g, p. 82. Plates 43 and 47 .
26.
Op. cit., McWilliams, p. 109.
27.
Op. cit., McWilliams, p. 39.
28.
William L. Ramsey, The Yamasee War: A Study of Culture, Economy, and Conflict in the Colonial South. (Uni vers ity of Nebraska Press, 2008).
29.
Gregory A . Wase lkov, " Indian Maps ofthe Co lon ial Southeast," In
Powhatan s Mantle: Indians in the Colonial Southeast, edited by Waselkov, Gregory A., Peter H. Wood, and Tom Hatley, pp. 435-502 , (Univers ity ofNebraska Press, 2006).
15.
Ibid.
30.
Op. cit. , Usner, p. 21, Table I.
16.
Herbert E. Bolton , Coronado: Knight of Pueblos and Plains, (Whittlesey House and The University of New Mexico Press, 1949), pp. 299-303.
31.
John P. Dyson, "Through Native Eyes : An Early Chickasaw Map of North America," The Journal of Chickasaw History and Culture 11 ( 1):6-35 (2007).
17.
Louise P. Ke llogg (editor), "The Mississippi Voyage of Jolliet and Marquette, 1673," In Early Narratives of the Northwest, 1634-1699, (Charles Scribner's and Sons, 19 17), p. 245.
32.
William L. Ramsey, "Somethin g Cloudy in Their Looks: The Origins of the Yamasee War Reconsidered," The Journal of American HistOIJ' 90(1 ):44-75, (2003).
The Joumal ~(' Chickasmi' Hist01y and Culture - Volume XII. Number One, Series 45, Fal/2009
Chickasaw/Wich ita In teractions During the Early Historic Period
58
33.
Timothy G. Baugh, "Warfare Among the Kiriki r'i-s: Archeology, Ethnography, and Ethnohist01y," The Kansas Anthropologist 28:1 -22, (2007).
34.
Mildred Mott Wedel, The Deer Creek Site, Oklahoma: A Wichita Village Sometime Called Ferdinandina, An Ethnohistorians View, (Oklahoma Historical Society, Series in Anthropology no. 5, 1981 ), p. 41.
35.
Op. cit. , Wedel, p. 41.
36.
Op. cit., Wedel, p. 41.
37.
Byron Sudbury, KA-3, "The Deer Creek Site: An Eighteenth Century French Contact Site in Kay County, Oklahoma." Bulletin of the Oklahoma Anthropological Society 24:1-135 (1976); Jay Blaine, personal communication, 2009.
38.
E. Elizabeth Pillaert, "The McLemore Site of the Washita River Focus," Bulletin of the Oklahoma Anthropological Society, pp. 1-113 , (1963).
39.
Ibid., p. 30; Gates P. Thruston, The Antiquities of Tennessee and the Adjacent States (Robert Clarke, 1890), p. 151.
40.
Op. cit., Pillaert. P. 30.
41.
Op. cit., Thruston, p. 151.
42.
James A. Brown, "Arkansas Valley Caddoan: The Spiro Phase," In The Prehistory of Oklahoma, edited by Robe1i E. Bell, pp. 24 1285 , (Academic Press, 1984); J. Daniel Rogers, "Chronology and the Demise of Chiefdoms: Eastern Oklahoma in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries," Southeastern Archaeology 25( I ):20-28; Charles L. Rohrbaugh, "An Hypothesis for the Origin of the Ki chai," In Pathways to Plains Prehistory, edited by Don G. Wyckoff and Jack L. Hofman, pp. 5 1-63, Oklahoma Anthropological Society, Memoir no. 3, (1982); Frank F. Schaum bach, The "Northern Caddoan Area" was not Caddoan, Caddoan Archeology 1(4):4-9, (1990); Frank F. Schaumbach, "Spiro and the Tunica: A New Interpretation of the Role of the Tunica in the Culture History of the Southeast and Southern Plains, A.D. I 100-1750," In Arkansas Archaeology: Essays in Honor ofDan and Phyllis Morse, edited by Robe1i C. Main fort, Jr. and Marvin D. Jeter, pp. 169-224, (University of Arkansas Press, 1999).
The Journal of Chickasaw H istory and Culture - Volume XII. Number One, Series 45, Fa/12009
43.
Timothy G. Baugh, "The Anthropologies of Trad e and Exchange: An Essay on Kirikir' i·s and Southern Plains Political Economy," In Land of Our Ancestors: Studies in Protohistoric and Historic Wichita Cultures , ed ited by Timothy G. Baugh and Stephen M. Perkins, Plains Anthropologist 53(208):415-430, (2008).
Chickasaw/Wichita Interactions During the Early Historic Period
