DOCSLIB.ORG

A Comparative Spatial Analysis of Two Communities from the Hickory Ground Site in Wetumpka, Alabama

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Comparative Spatial Analysis of Two Communities from the Hickory Ground Site in Wetumpka, Alabama A Comparative Spatial Analysis of Two Communities from the Hickory Ground Site in Wetumpka, Alabama by Kelly M. Ervin A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Science in Geography Auburn, Alabama December 13, 2014 Keywords: Creek Native American, Protohistoric, Community, GIS, Spatial Analysis, Culture Change Copyright by Kelly M. Ervin Approved by Philip L. Chaney, Chair, Associate Professor of Geography Yingru Li, Assistant Professor of Geography John W. Cottier, Associate Professor of Anthropology Abstract This thesis presents analyses on the intra-site spatial arrangement of two communities from the Hickory Ground site, 1EE89, in Elmore County, Alabama. Spatially referenced archaeological datasets of a Protohistoric community and a Historic Creek community are compared to investigate how the adaptive actions of community members structured the spatial patterning of the town. Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and field maps taken during the 2002-2007 archaeological excavations of the Hickory Ground site, I present an 18 acre map with over 9,000 features. Statistical tests suggest Protohistoric structures are randomly nucleated around the community center, and Historic Creek structures are clustered into groups scattered away from the community center. The research presented here utilizes the archaeological community as the fundamental unit of analysis to evaluate social meaning from spatial attributes and contributes to a wider understanding of the cultural changes encountered by Native Americans during the Historic Period. ii Acknowledgements Many years of hard work went into the excavations of the Hickory Ground site under the supervision of Dr. John Cottier and Dr. Craig Sheldon. This thesis would not be possible without their efforts, nor would it have been possible without the funding provided by the Poarch Band of Creek Indians. I thank Dr. Philip Chaney for accepting me into the Geology and Geography program as my thesis committee Chair. He taught me a skill no other professor has, and that was how to “tame the dragon.” I also thank Dr. Yingru Li for taking time away from her summer research to help with the spatial statistics presented in this thesis. I acknowledge Dr. Ashraf Uddin, GPO of the Geology and Geography Department, for playing a primary role of my acceptance into this graduate program. I will always think of him and his dove, Rodinia. Thank you to all Auburn University students and faculty members who either directly or indirectly influenced this work. I would also like to thank Craig Sheldon, Vincas Steponaitis, Kathryn Braund, Cameron Wesson, Jon Marcoux, and Chris Rodning for answering any question I had with great concern. I must show gratitude for my Grandpa, Vincent Paul Benedetti, who taught me how to canoe, fish, and grow dahlias. He was the first to teach me about Native American culture. The many years he spent working as an underwater physicist for the U.S. Navy in Orlando, Florida inspired me to write this thesis. iii Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... .iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................1 1.1 Hypotheses………………………..……………………………………………….3 Chapter 2 The Socio-geographic Structure ......................................................................................4 2.1 A Brief Summary of Spatial Analyses in Archaeological Studies………………..6 2.2 Making Room for an Intra-Site Perspective………………………………………7 2.3 Conceptualizing the Archaeological Community ……..………………………….8 2.4 Agency in Action at the Community Level…………..……..…………………….9 Chapter 3 Study Site: The Hickory Ground (1EE89) ....................................................................10 3.1 The Protohistoric Tradition……………..………………………………..………12 3.2 The Historic Creek Tradition…………………………………………………….13 3.3 Hickory Ground in the Ethnohistoric Record……………………………………15 iiii 3.4 The Creek Town Plan……….……………………………………………………17 Chapter 4 Methods .........................................................................................................................20 4.1 The Dataset: 1EE89 Field Maps Collection………………………………….......21 4.2 From the Ground to GIS: Digitizing the Hickory Ground site……………..........22 4.3 Projections and Transformation………………………………………………….27 4.4 Calculating the Geodetic Centroid for Archaeological Features………………...27 4.5 The Nearest Neighbor Statistic…………………………………………………..30 4.6 The Standard Distance Statistic………………………………………………….32 Chapter 5 Results and Discussion ..................................................................................................34 5.1 Test Results: Mean Center, Nearest Neighbor, and Standard Distance………….34 5.1.1 Mean Center Results……………………………………………………..34 5.1.2 The Nearest Neighbor Results…………………………………………...37 5.1.3 Standard Distance Results……………………………………………….40 5.2 Synthesizing the Sociospatial…………………...……………………………….44 5.3 The Protohistoric Community……...…………………………………………….49 5.4 The Historic Creek Community………………………………………………….50 5.5 Finding Common Ground: The Cherokee and Creek Community ………...…....54 Chapter 6 Summary and Conclusions ............................................................................................56 6.1 Future Research………………………………………………………………….57 References ......................................................................................................................................61 v List of Tables Table 1 Projected Feature Average Dimensions and Coordinates………………………..30 Table 2 Mean Center Results for Structures……………………………………………...35 Table 3 Mean Center Results for Structures and Features………………………………..35 Table 4 Protohistoric Standard Distance Results (1 Standard Deviation)……….……….40 Table 5 Historic Creek Standard Distance Results (1 Standard Deviation)……………...40 Table 6 Protohistoric Standard Distance Results (2 Standard Deviations)……….….…...41 Table 7 Historic Creek Standard Distance Results (2 Standard Deviations)……………..41 vi List of Figures Figure 1 The Socio-geographic Theoretical Diagram…………………………....................5 Figure 2 The Hickory Ground site shown on the Wetumpka SW Quadrangle……...…….11 Figure 3 William Bartram’s Drawing of the Apalachicola Headman’s House……………18 Figure 4 William Bartram’s Plan of the Muscogee or Upper Creek Town……………….19 Figure 5 Methodology Flow Chart………………………………………………………...21 Figure 6 60 x 60 cm 1EE89 Field Map Example………………………………………….22 Figure 7 A Series of Geo-Corrected Field Maps…………………………………………..23 Figure 8 The Geo-referencing Process in ArcMap………………..……………………...24 Figure 9 Map showing all Geo-referenced and Projected Features from 1EE89…..……...26 Figure 10 Map showing Spatially Adjusted Structures on the Surveyor’s Grid………...….28 Figure 11 Map of 1EE89 and Features on the Wetumpka SW 2006 aerial image……….....29 Figure 12 The Nearest Neighbor Statistic…………………………………………………..31 Figure 13 The Standard Distance Statistic………………………………………………….32 Figure 14 Mean Center Results……………………………………………………………..36 Figure 15 Protohistoric Average Nearest Neighbor Summary…………………….……….38 Figure 16 Historic Creek Average Nearest Neighbor Summary……………………………39 Figure 17 Standard Distance Results (1 Standard Deviation)………………………………42 vii Figure 18 Standard Distance Results (2 Standard Deviations)……………………………..43 Figure 19 The Protohistoric Occupation showing the Public Council House, Feat. 495…..48 Figure 20 The Historic Creek Occupation.............................................................................48 Figure 21 An Historic Creek House Compound……………………………………………52 viii Chapter 1 Introduction Aboriginal culture in the American Southeast encountered significant changes in response to Euro-American expansion and colonization during the eighteenth and early nineteenth-centuries (Ashley 1988; Ethridge 1997; Ethridge and Hudson 2002; Hudson 1976; Marcoux 2008, 2009, 2010; Marcoux et al. 2013; Martin 1994; Milner 1980; Rodning 2002, 2007; Smith 1987; Waselkov 1990; Waselkov et al. 1985; Wesson 2008). At the archaeological site 1EE89, or the Historic Creek Indian town known as the Hickory Ground, a reorganization coincided with European contact. These cultural changes are represented spatially in the way people constructed and organized their local communities. The research offered by this thesis diachronically considers the effect of culture change on a Protohistoric community and a Historic Creek community by sampling geographic distance in a theoretically social, political, and economic way to explain the internal distribution patterns of archaeological features and structures. The archaeological remains excavated from the Hickory Ground site are remnants not only of past social realities, but also of past spatial realities. Artifact and feature assemblages are indicators of human activities and demonstrate social organization within a spatially patterned manner.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EXHIBIT a to KING DECLARATION: Second Amended Complaint
    Case 2:12-cv-01079-MHT-CSC Document 159-2 Filed 06/05/19 Page 1 of 80 EXHIBIT A TO KING DECLARATION: Second Amended Complaint Case 2:12-cv-01079-MHT-CSC Document 159-2 Filed 06/05/19 Page 2 of 80 The Honorable Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION MUSCOGEE (CREEK) NATION, a federally recognized Indian tribe, HICKORY GROUND TRIBAL TOWN, and MEKKO GEORGE THOMPSON, individually and as traditional 2:12-cv-1079-MHT-CSC representative of the lineal descendants of those buried at Hickory Ground Tribal Town in Wetumpka, Alabama. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND Plaintiffs, SUPPLEMENTAL v. COMPLAINT POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS, a federally recognized tribe; STEPHANIE A. BRYAN, individually and in her official capacity as Chair of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians (“Poarch”) Tribal Council; ROBERT R. MCGHEE, individually and in his official capacity as Vice Chair of Poarch Tribal Council; EDDIE L. TULLIS, individually and in his official capacity as Treasurer of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; CHARLOTTE MECKEL, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; DEWITT CARTER, in his official capacity as At Large member of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; SANDY HOLLINGER, individually and in her official capacity as At Large member of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; KEITH MARTIN, individually and in his official capacity as At Large member of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; ARTHUR MOTHERSHED, individually and in his official capacity as At Large member of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; GARVIS SELLS, individually and in his official capacity as At Large member of the Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Council; BUFORD ROLIN, an individual; DAVID GEHMAN, an individual; LARRY HAIKEY, in his official capacity as Acting Poarch Band of Creek Indians Tribal Historic Preservation Officer; PCI GAMING AUTHORITY d/b/a WIND CREEK HOSPITALITY; WESTLY L.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of Casino Gaming by the Poarch Band Creek Indians In
    ABSTRACT POLITICAL SCIENCE ALSTON, THERESE A. B.A. UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, 1981 M.A. UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS, 1986 TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY: A CASE STUDY OF CASINO GAMING BY THE POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS IN ALABAMA Committee Chair: William Boone, Ph.D. Dissertation dated May 2018 This case study examined casino gaming by the Poarch Band of Creek Indians (PCI) in Alabama within the context of tribal sovereignty. It critiqued tribal developments over a five-year period beginning in 2009 with the opening of their first multi-million dollar casino and hotel. No previous studies on gaming or tribal sovereignty for this tribe existed. There were only a few studies on this dual topic for other Indian tribes but none of which utilized a political science theoretical approach. The study found that tribal sovereignty existed since American Indian tribes existed and sovereignty was strongest during the early treaty-making period. Thereafter, tribal authority and self-determination of Indian tribes became limited as it was redefined by federal policies, Congressional actions and Supreme Court decisions. i When treaty-making ended, the political history for Indian tribes became a narrative of termination, relocation and assimilation. The Poarch Band of Creeks Indians were a small group that remained poor and obscure after the Indian removal period. Casino gaming has given them an economic and political resurgence. The early legal interpretation of tribes’ political status was that of “domestic dependent nations” which continues to influence federal Indian policy today and thus the parameters of tribal sovereignty as well. While the level of federal dependency for some gaming tribes has been reduced, tribes are not fully self-sufficient.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenge Bowl 2020
    Notice: study guide will be updated after the December general election. Sponsored by the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Challenge Bowl 2020 High School Study Guide Sponsored by the Challenge Bowl 2020 Muscogee (Creek) Nation Table of Contents A Struggle To Survive ................................................................................................................................ 3-4 1. Muscogee History ......................................................................................................... 5-30 2. Muscogee Forced Removal ........................................................................................... 31-50 3. Muscogee Customs & Traditions .................................................................................. 51-62 4. Branches of Government .............................................................................................. 63-76 5. Muscogee Royalty ........................................................................................................ 77-79 6. Muscogee (Creek) Nation Seal ...................................................................................... 80-81 7. Belvin Hill Scholarship .................................................................................................. 82-83 8. Wilbur Chebon Gouge Honors Team ............................................................................. 84-85 9. Chronicles of Oklahoma ............................................................................................... 86-97 10. Legends & Stories ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • THE WAR of 1812 in CLAY COUNTY, ALABAMA by Don C. East
    THE WAR OF 1812 IN CLAY COUNTY, ALABAMA By Don C. East BACKGROUND The War of 1812 is often referred to as the “Forgotten War.” This conflict was overshadowed by the grand scale of the American Revolutionary War before it and the American Civil War afterwards. We Americans fought two wars with England: the American Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. Put simply, the first of these was a war for our political freedom, while the second was a war for our economic freedom. However, it was a bit more complex than that. In 1812, the British were still smarting from the defeat of their forces and the loss of their colonies to the upstart Americans. Beyond that, the major causes of the war of 1812 were the illegal impressments of our ships’ crewmen on the high seas by the British Navy, Great Britain’s interference with our trade and other trade issues, and the British incitement of the Native Americans to hostilities against the Americans along the western and southeast American frontiers. Another, often overlooked cause of this war was it provided America a timely excuse to eliminate American Indian tribes on their frontiers so that further westward expansion could occur. This was especially true in the case of the Creek Nation in Alabama so that expansion of the American colonies/states could move westward into the Mississippi Territories in the wake of the elimination of the French influence there with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, and the Spanish influence, with the Pinckney Treaty of 1796. Now the British and the Creek Nation were the only ones standing in the way of America’s destiny of moving the country westward into the Mississippi Territories.
    [Show full text]
  • The War of 1812 TEKS 5A, 5C, 5D, 5E, 13A, 14B, If YOU Were There
    DO NOT EDIT--Changes must be made through “File info” CorrectionKey=TX-A SECTION 4 The War of 1812 TEKS 5A, 5C, 5D, 5E, 13A, 14B, If YOU were there... 20C, 22B It’s 1812, and the United States and Great Britain are at war. What You Will Learn… You are a sailor on an American merchant ship that has been Main Ideas licensed as a privateer. Your ship’s mission will be to chase and 1. American forces held their capture ships of the mighty British navy. Even with the help of mer- own against the British in chant ships like yours, the American navy is badly outnumbered. the early battles of the war. 2. U.S. forces stopped British You know you face danger and may not survive. offensives in the East and South. 3. The effects of the war included Do you think your mission will succeed? prosperity and national pride. The Big Idea Great Britain and the United BUILDING BACKGROUND Anger against Great Britain’s actions States went to battle in the finally provoked the United States into the War of 1812. Britain’s great War of 1812. navy gave it a clear advantage at sea, but the war was also fought on several other fronts. Victories in major battles along the frontier gave Key Terms and People Americans a new sense of unity. Oliver Hazard Perry, p. 285 Battle of Lake Erie, p. 285 Andrew Jackson, p. 286 Treaty of Fort Jackson, p. 286 Early Battles Battle of New Orleans, p. 286 In the summer of 1812 the United States found itself in a war with Hartford Convention, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar No. 286
    Calendar No. 286 112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! 2d Session SENATE 112–125 LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE STUDY ACT JANUARY 13, 2012.—Ordered to be printed Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of December 17, 2011 Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, submitted the following R E P O R T [To accompany S. 1325] The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was referred the bill (S. 1325) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in the Lower Mississippi River Area in the State of Louisiana as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes, having con- sidered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. The amendment is as follows: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lower Mississippi River Area Study Act’’. SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Interior. (2) STUDY AREA.—The term ‘‘study area’’ includes Fort St. Philip, Fort Jack- son, the Head of Passes, and any related and supporting historical, cultural, and recreational resources located in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana. SEC. 3. STUDY. (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years after the date on which funds are made available to carry out this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with the State of Lou- isiana and other interested organizations, shall complete a special resource study that evaluates— (1) the national significance of the study area; and (2) the suitability and feasibility of designating the study area as a unit of the National Park System.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination
    0MB NO. 1024-0018 NPS Form 10-900 (7-81) EXP. 10/31/84 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections ___^______' 1. Name historic Fort Tou.lo.use/- Fort Jackson and/or common 2. Location street & number .5* * /< ^ tf L 3- not for publication city, town Wet.umpka A vicinity of Jird. state Alabama code 01 county Elmore code 95] 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use district X public X occupied agriculture museum ^Lrbuilding(s) private unoccupied commercial X nark structure both work in progress educational private residence X site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process y yes: restricted government scientific being considered yes: unrestricted industrial transportation no .. _ military other: 4. Owner of Property : name Alabama Historical Commission Corps of Engineers street & number 725 Honme Street Post Office Box -2288 , city, town Montgomery __vicinity of Mobile state Alabama 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Elmore County Courthouse street & number city, town Wetumpka state Alabama 6. Representation in Existing Surveys title has this property been determined eligible? yes no date federal state county local depository for survey records city, town state 7. Description Condition Check one Check one excellent deteriorated X unaltered X original site oood... _ --to- ruins ..... altered moved date *r It &I __ unexposed Describe the present and original (if known) physical appearance The Fort Toulouse - Fort Jackson site is located in the fork of the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers and is surrounded by the Aulluvial plain produced by these two river systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Administrative History
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Administrative History Keith S. Hébert and Kathryn H. Braund Auburn University July 2019 Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Administrative History July 2019 Keith S. Hébert and Kathryn H. Braund Auburn University Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Daviston, Alabama Administrative History Approved by: Superintendent, Horseshoe Bend National Military Park Date Recommended by: Chief, Cultural Resources, Partnerships and Science Division, Southeast Region Date Recommended by: Deputy Regional Director, Southeast Region Date Approved by: Regional Director, Southeast Region Date ii CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................xiii Introduction .............................................................................................................................xv Horseshoe Bend National Military Park .....................................................................................xvi Chapter One: Horseshoe Bend in the Nineteenth Century .................................................... 1 The Creek War of 1813–1814 .................................................................................................. 1 Creek Indian Land Cessions: 1814–1832 ................................................................................... 6 Horseshoe Bend Battlefield: 1832–1900 ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Removal of the Creek Indians from the Southeast, 1825-1838
    THE REMOVAL OF THE CREEK INDIANS FROM THE SOUTHEAST, 1825-1838 Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this dissertation is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisory committee. This dissertation does not include proprietary or classified information. ____________________________ Christopher D. Haveman Certificate of Approval: ____________________________ ____________________________ Kenneth W. Noe Kathryn E. Holland Braund, Chair Professor Professor History History ____________________________ ____________________________ David C. Carter John Saye Professor Professor History Education ____________________________ George T. Flowers Dean Graduate School THE REMOVAL OF THE CREEK INDIANS FROM THE SOUTHEAST, 1825-1838 Christopher D. Haveman A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Auburn, Alabama August 10, 2009 THE REMOVAL OF THE CREEK INDIANS FROM THE SOUTHEAST, 1825-1838 Christopher D. Haveman Permission is granted to Auburn University to make copies of this dissertation at its discretion, upon request of individuals or institutions and at their expense. The author reserves all publication rights. ________________________________ Signature of Author ________________________________ Date of Graduation iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT THE REMOVAL OF THE CREEK INDIANS FROM THE SOUTHEAST, 1825-1838 Christopher D. Haveman Doctor of Philosophy, August 10, 2009 (M.A. Auburn University, 2006) (M.A. Marquette University, 2001) (B.A. Western Washington University, 1998) 407 Typed Pages Directed by Kathryn E. Holland Braund This dissertation examines the removal of approximately twenty-three thousand Creek Indians from Alabama and Georgia to present-day Oklahoma between 1825 and 1838. At its height, the Creek Nation encompassed most of the present-day states of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes 2012-11 Meeting 47.Pdf
    MINUTES NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION AND REPATRIATION REVIEW COMMITTEE FORTY-SEVENTH MEETING NOVEMBER 28-29, 2012 _________________________________________________________ NAGPRA REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES November 28-29, 2012, page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS The 47th Meeting of the Review Committee 4 Comments by Designated Federal Officer 7 Report: National NAGPRA Program Report on the Implementation of NAGPRA in FY 2012 7 Notices 7 Training 8 Civil Penalties 8 Digitization and Archiving Project 9 Web News and Data Management 9 Grants 9 Regulations 9 Action Item: CUI Database Recommendation 9 Review Committee Questions and Discussion 10 Review Committee Motion 10 Presentations: Research Reports 10 Presentation: The Columbia Plateau Inter-Tribal Repatriation Group 11 Presentation 11 Review Committee Questions and Discussion 11 Action Item: CUI Disposition Request, University of Washington Anthropology Department, WA 12 Presentation 12 Review Committee Motion 13 Comments by Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks – Rachel Jacobson 13 Presentation: NAGPRA Update – Bureau of Indian Affairs 13 Presentation 13 Review Committee Questions and Discussion 14 Action Item: CUI Disposition Request, Central Washington University 14 Presentation 14 Review Committee Motion 14 Action Item: CUI Disposition Request, University of New Hampshire 15 Presentation 15 Review Committee Questions and Discussion 15 Review Committee Motion 15 Presentation: Hickory Ground 16 Presentation 16 Review Committee Questions and Discussion 16 Presentation: NPS Publication – American Indians in the Civil War 17 Public Comment – November 28, 2012 17 State University of New York – Oswego 17 Review Committee Questions and Discussion 17 Ms. Christine Landrum 17 Ms. Shannon Keller O’Loughlin 18 Ms. Bambi Kraus 18 Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • In the District Court of the United States for The
    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION MUSCOGEE (CREEK) NATION, ) a federally recognized ) Indian tribe, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:12cv1079-MHT ) (WO) POARCH BAND OF CREEK ) INDIANS, a federally ) recognized Indian tribe, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) OPINION This dispute concerns the use and ownership of a 34-acre tract of land south of Wetumpka, Alabama. The land sits at Hickory Ground, the last capital of the Creek Nation before the Tribe was forced from the eastern United States in the 1830s, an exodus known as the Trail of Tears. Burial sites and ceremonial grounds dot the area, which in 1980 was placed on the National Register of Historic Places as a site of national significance. Today the land is held by the United States Department of the Interior in trust for Poarch Band of Creek Indians (“PBCI”), and it is the location of PBCI’s Wind Creek Wetumpka casino and hotel. The excavation of the land and the construction and operation of the Wind Creek Wetumpka are the subject of this litigation. The three plaintiffs who bring this suit are the Muscogee (Creek) Nation; the Hickory Ground Tribal Town, which is now located in Oklahoma; and George Thompson, the chief, or “Mekko,” of the tribal town. They filed the original complaint in this suit in 2012. In the operative second amended complaint, filed in March 2020 after the case had been stayed pending unsuccessful settlement negotiations, the plaintiffs have named three groups of defendants. The “Federal Defendants” consist of the Interior Department, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the officials who head each of those entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Muscogee Constitutional Jurisprudence: Vhakv Em Pvtakv (The Ac Rpet Under the Law) Sarah Deer Mitchell Hamline School of Law, [email protected]
    Mitchell Hamline School of Law Mitchell Hamline Open Access Faculty Scholarship 2013 Muscogee Constitutional Jurisprudence: Vhakv Em Pvtakv (The aC rpet Under The Law) Sarah Deer Mitchell Hamline School of Law, [email protected] Cecilia Knapp [email protected] Publication Information 49 Tulsa Law Review 123 (2013) Repository Citation Deer, Sarah and Knapp, Cecilia, "Muscogee Constitutional Jurisprudence: Vhakv Em Pvtakv (The aC rpet Under The Law)" (2013). Faculty Scholarship. Paper 257. http://open.mitchellhamline.edu/facsch/257 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Mitchell Hamline Open Access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Mitchell Hamline Open Access. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Muscogee Constitutional Jurisprudence: Vhakv Em Pvtakv (The aC rpet Under The Law) Abstract In 1974, a group of Mvskoke citizens from Oklahoma sued the federal government in federal court. Hanging in the balance was the future of Mvskoke self-determination. The lp aintiffs insisted that their 1867 Constitution remained in full effect, and that they still governed themselves pursuant to it. The nitU ed States argued that the constitution had been nullified by federal law passed in the early 1900s. To find in favor of the plaintiffs, the court would have to rule that the United States had been ignoring the most basic civil rights of Mvskoke citizens and flouting the law for over seventy years. It would also have to find that a tribal government had been operating legitimately in the shadows—that the Mvskoke people had continued to operate under their constitution for most of the twentieth century despite official federal antagonism.
    [Show full text]