PATROLLING THE BORDER: THEFT AND VIOLENCE ON THE CREEK-GEORGIA FRONTIER, 1770-1796 by JOSHUA SPANN HAYNES Under the Direction of Claudio Saunt ABSTRACT At a critical moment in the late eighteenth century, Muskogee Creek Indians faced the prospect of dispensing with their indigenous form of government based on the political autonomy of each Creek town. Ultimately, however, they chose to retain their indigenous government in altered form. Georgia continually encroached on Creek borders forcing Muskogees into a conversation about the nature of political leadership that hinged on what kind of government could best protect Muskogee liberty, territory, and sovereignty. Some favored a powerful central government, but most preferred the autonomy of every Creek town, or talwa. Under assault from multiple quarters, Creeks experimented with state-like political solutions such as the diplomacy of elite headmen and skilled figurehead executives. Most importantly, Creek warriors launched over a thousand raids along their contested border, actions best understood as robust border patrol. Such innovations drew on indigenous political ideals, and, for a time, effectively stalled American expansion. Neither Creek nor Georgia leaders, however, exercised state control over their people and their territory. White Georgians exaggerated the ferocity of Creek raids and crafted a political narrative they used to justify their own violence and land taking. When Creeks and Georgians raided each other’s communities, they challenged higher political authorities, causing long-lasting internal political conflict in both societies and pushing both reluctant polities closer to statehood. INDEX WORDS: Muskogee Creeks, Creek Nation, Creek Indians, Creek Indian Government, Southern States, American Expansion, Borders, Indian War, Georgia, Violence, Talwa Autonomy PATROLLING THE BORDER: THEFT AND VIOLENCE ON THE CREEK-GEORGIA FRONTIER, 1770-1796 by JOSHUA SPANN HAYNES B.A., Tulane University, 1998 M.A., The University of Mississippi, 2001 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ATHENS, GEORGIA 2013 © 2013 Joshua Spann Haynes All Rights Reserved PATROLLING THE BORDER: THEFT AND VIOLENCE ON THE CREEK-GEORGIA FRONTIER, 1770-1796 by JOSHUA SPANN HAYNES Major Professor: Claudio Saunt Committee: John Inscoe Stephen Mihm Jace Weaver Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia August 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 1 NATIVE RIGHTS AND BORDER DEFENSE, 1770-1773................................20 2 THE WHITE-SHERRILL AFFAIR: COMMITMENT TO TALWA AUTONOMY AND ITS PITFALLS, 1774-1775.................................................56 3 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION IN CREEK COUNTRY, 1775-1783..........89 4 TREATIES, RESISTANCE, AND INTERNAL CREEK POLITICAL CONFLICT, 1783-1785.......................................................................................123 5 A PAUCITY OF VIOLENCE, GEORGIA’S NARRATIVE OF THE MUSKOGEE THREAT, AND THE 1786 TREATY OF SHOULDERBONE CREEK: THE TURNING POINT.......................................................................161 6 AN UNCOMMON DEGREE OF FEROCITY: BORDER PATROLS AND PEAK VIOLENCE, 1787-1790………………………………...……………..191 7 THE DECLINE AND REVITALIZATION OF BORDER PATROLS, 1790- 1793……………………………………………………......................................230 8 STATE CONTROL OF VIOLENCE, 1793-1796...............................................266 BIBLIOGRAPHY............……………..………………………………………299 iv LIST OF MAPS Page MAP 1……………………………………………………………………………………11 MAP 2………………………………………………………………………………........92 MAP 3…………………………………………………………………………………..133 MAP 4…………………………………………………………………………………..163 MAP 5…………………………………………………………………………………..200 MAP 6…………………………………………………………………………………..237 MAP 7…………………………………………………………………………………..249 MAP 8…………………………………………………………………………………..293 v LIST OF TABLES Page TABLE 1…………………………………………………………………………………11 TABLE 2………………………………………………………………………………....91 TABLE 3………………………………………………………………………………..192 TABLE 4………………………………………………………………………………..201 TABLE 5………………………………………………………………………………..236 TABLE 6………………………………………………………………………………..236 TABLE 7………………………………………………………………………………..241 TABLE 8………………………………………………………………………………..296 vi INTRODUCTION In March 1822, Creek Depredations Claims Commissioner James P. Preston wrote the following lines to Secretary of War John C. Calhoun from his office in Athens, Georgia: The period under consideration [1786-1790], undoubtedly, was one of great suffering and privation to the border settler on the frontier adjoining the territory of the Creeks, whose frequent irrptions into the white settlements, appear to have been marked with an uncommon degree of ferocity.1 Americans broadly shared and often repeated Preston’s assessment of Creek relations with Georgia from the 1770s through the 1790s. By contrast, Creek leader Alexander McGillivray described a particular violent incident in 1786 in milder terms: “…only six persons lost their lives on the part of the Georgians, and these fell victims to their own temerity.” In phrasing that likely captured most Muskogee peoples’ perspective on Creek-Georgia relations from the 1770s through the 1790s, he wrote, “This affair, which their iniquitous proceedings had drawn upon them, has been held forth by the Georgians as the most violent unprovoked outrage that was ever committed.”2 In 1789, Secretary of War Henry Knox reported to President George Washington that “The State of Georgia is engaged in a serious war with the Creeks.”3 Indeed, matters grew increasingly grave over 1 James P. Preston to John C. Calhoun, 15 March 1822, Louise F. [Mrs. J. E.] Hays, ed., Indian Depredations, 1787-1825, vol. 2, pt. 1:4, Georgia Archives (hereinafter cited as DEPS). 2 Georgia Gazette, 26 April 1787. 3 Walter Lowrie and Matthew St. Clair Clarke, eds., American State Papers, Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States, from the First Session of the First to the Third Session of 1 the ensuing decades until Georgia settler Thomas Wilder despaired in 1812, “May it please your Honor if we don’t get some assistance we shall have to move off of this frontier or our familys will be kiled and skulpt by the Indians. We are too weak to Stand in our own defence.”4 Almost a century later, Georgians’ held Creeks in their historical memory as “by far the most numerous, powerful and warlike of all the Indian tribes in North America, and their name had gotten during the Revolutionary war, to strike terror around every hearthstone in Georgia.”5 In what early Georgia historians called the “Oconee War” from 1783 to 1796, Creeks “In the irregular, desultory manner of savage warfare…kept up for many years a struggle,” because they were inspired by “a supreme chief [Alexander McGillivray] of consummate abilities, ambition and influence, and especially animated by hatred of Georgia.”6 This late eighteenth century conflict between Creeks and Georgians should be viewed as a long running boundary dispute between two societies struggling to establish themselves as autonomous nation states. For both societies, establishing statehood hinged on monopoly control of violence and maintaining borders. Creeks innovated a variety of state-like defense strategies including diplomacy conducted by groups of talwa leaders, the machinations of figurehead executives, and, most importantly, forms of theft and violence best understood as border patrol. Throughout the period, however, Muskogee people preserved the political independence of individual talwas, social units comprising the Thirteenth Congress, Inclusive: Commencing March 3, 1789, and Ending March 3, 1815, Indian Affairs, vol. 1 (Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1832), 15. (hereafter cited as ASPIA). 4 Deposition of Thomas Wilder, 12 June 1812, DEPS, vol. 2, pt. 1:102-e. 5 Absalom H. Chappell, Miscellanies of Georgia, Historical, Biographical, Descriptive, etc. (Atlanta, GA: James F. Meegan, 1874), 7. 6 Chappell, Miscellanies of Georgia, 7; Louise Frederick Hays, Hero of the Hornet’s Nest: A Biography of Elijah Clark, 1733 to 1799 (New York: Stratford House, Inc., 1946), 147-216. 2 a town and its associated villages.7 As intrusions from Georgia became more severe, Muskogees reluctantly accepted the idea that they must assert monopoly control of violence like a state to remain autonomous, but they did so in ways that emphasized talwa autonomy. White Georgians focused on the occasional violence of border patrols to craft a lasting political narrative that exaggerated Creek ferocity, justifying overwhelming violence of their own and punitive land taking. Georgia’s militias frequently breached Creek boundaries, and each intrusion provoked a Muskogee response until Georgians’ rhetoric about Creek ferocity became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Georgians’ actions also challenged U.S. authority over Indian affairs and ultimately provoked federal intervention.8 For these reasons, Muskogee border patrols determined the course of Creek-Georgia relations and caused internal political crises in both Creek country and the United States. 7 Michael D. Green, The Politics of Indian Removal: Creek Government and Society in Crisis (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1982), 4-15, 33-43, 149-152; Kathryn E. Holland Braund, Deerskins and Duffels: The Creek Indian Trade with Anglo-America, 1685-1815,