Notes on the State of Virginia (1802)/Query 11
QUERY XI.
A DESCRIPTION of the Indians eſtabliſhed
in that ſtate?
When the firſt effectual ſettlement of our colony was made, which was in 1607, the country from the ſea-coaſt to the mountains, and from Potowmac to the moſt ſouthern waters of James' River, was occupied by upwards of forty different tribes of Indians. Of theſe the Powhatans, the Mannahoacs, and Monacans, were the moſt powerful. Thoſe between the ſea-coaſt and falls of the rivers, were in amity with one another, and attached to the Powhatans as their link of union. Thoſe between the falls of the rivers and the mountains, were divided into two confederacies; the tribes inhabiting the head waters of Potowmac and Rappahannoc being attached to the Mannahoacs; and thoſe on the upper parts of James' River to the Monacans. But the Monacans and their friends were in amity with the Mannahoacs and their friends and waged joint and perpetual war againſt the Powhatans. We are told that the Powhatans, Mannahoacs, and Monacans, ſpoke languages ſo radically different, that interpreters were neceſſary when they tranſacted buſineſs. Hence we may conjecture, that this was not the caſe between all the tribes, and probably that each ſpoke the language of the nation to which it was attached; which we know to have been the caſe in many particular inſtances. Very poſſibly there
may have been anciently three different ſtocks, each of which multiplying in a long courſe of time, had ſeparated into ſo many little ſocieties. This practice reſults from the circumſtance of their having never ſubmitted themſelves to any laws, any coercive power, any ſhadow of government. Their only controls are their manners, and that moral ſenſe of right and wrong, which, like the ſenſe of taſting and feeling, in every man makes a part of his nature. An offence againſt theſe is puniſhed by contempt, by excluſion from ſociety, or, where the caſe is ſerious, as that of murder, by the individuals whom it concerns. Imperfect as this ſpecies of coercion may ſeem, crimes are very rare among them; inſomuch that were it made a queſtion, whether no law as among the ſavage Americans, or too much law, as among the civilized Europeans, ſubmits man to the greateſt evil, one who has ſeen both conditions of exiſtence would pronounce it to be the laſt: and that the ſheep are happier of themſelves, than under the care of the wolves. It will be ſaid, that great ſocieties cannot exiſt without government. The ſavages therefore break them into ſmall ones.
The territories of the Powhatan confederacy,
ſouth of the Potowmac, comprehended about 8000
ſquare miles, 30 tribes, and 2400 warriors. Capt.
Smith tells us, that within 60 miles of James'
town were 5000 people, of whom 1500 were
warriors. From this we find the proportion of their
warriors to their whole inhabitants, was as 3 to 10.
The Powhatan confederacy then would conſiſt of
about 8000 inhnabitants, which was one for every
ſquare mile; being about the twentieth part of our
preſent population in the ſame territory, and the hundredth of that of the Britiſh iſlands.
Beſides theſe, were the Nottaways, living on Nottoway River, the Meherrins and Tuteloes on Meherrin River, who were connected with the Indians of Carolina, probably with the Chowanocs.
| NORTH. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| WEST. |
|
EAST. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SOUTH. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The preceding table contains a ſtate of theſe ſeveral tribes, according to their confederacies and geographical ſituation, with their numbers when we firſt became acquainted with them, where theſe numbers are known. The numbers of them are again ſtated as they were in the year 1669, when an attempt was made by the aſſembly to enumerate them. Probably the enumeration is imperfect, and in ſome meaſure conjectural, and that a further ſearch into the records would furniſh many more particulars. What would be the melancholy ſequel of their hiſtory, may however be argued from the cenſus of 1669; by which we diſcover that the tribes therein enumerated were, in the ſpace of 62 years, reduced to above one-third of their former numbers. Spirituous liquors, the ſmall-pox, war and an abridgement of territory, to a people who lived principally on the ſpontaneous productions of nature, had committed terrible havock among them, which generation, under the obſtacles oppoſed to it among them, was not likely to make good. That the lands of this country were taken from them by conqueſt, iſ not ſo general a truth as is ſuppoſed. I find in our hiſtorians, and records, repeated proofs of purchaſe, which cover a conſiderable part of the lower country; and many more would doubtleſs be found on further ſearch. The upper country we know has been acquired altogether by purchaſes made in the moſt unexceptionable form.
Weſtward of all theſe tribes, beyond the mountains, and extending to the great lakes, were the Maſſawomees, a moſt powerful confederacy, who harraſſed unremittingly the Powhatans and Manahoacs. Theſe were probably the anceſtors of tribes known at preſent by the name of the Six Nations.
Very little can now be diſcovered of the ſubſequent hiſtory of theſe tribes ſeverally. The Chickahominies removed about the year 1661, to Mattapony River. , Their chief, with one from each of the tribes of the Pamunkies and Mattaponies, attended the treaty of Albany in 1685. This ſeems to have been the laſt chapter in their hiſtory. They retained however their ſeparate name ſo late as 1705, and were at length blended with the Pamunkies and Mattaponies, and exiſt at preſent only under their names. There remain of the Mattaponies three or four men only, and they have more negro than Indian blood in them. They have loſt their language, have reduced themſelves, by voluntary ſales, to about fifty acres of land, which lie on the river of their own name, and have from time to time been joining the Pamunkies, from whom they are diſtant but 10 miles. The Pamunkies are reduced to about 10 or 12 men, tolerably pure from mixture with other colors. The older ones among them preſerve their language in a ſmall degree, which are the laſt veſtiges on earth, as far as we know, of the Powhatan language. They have about 300 acres of very fertile land, on Pamunkey River, ſo encompaſſed by water that a gate ſhuts in the whole. Of the Nottaways, not a male is left. A few women conſtitute the remains of that tribe. They are ſeated on the Nottaway River, in Southampton county, on very fertile lands. At a very early period, certain lands were marked out and appropriated to theſe tribes, and were kept from encroachment by the authority of the laws. They have uſually had truſtees appointed, whoſe duty was to watch over their intereſts, and guard them from inſult and injury.
The Minacans and their friends, better known latterly by the name of the Tuſcaroras, were probably connected with the Maſſawomees, or Five Nations. For though we are[1] told their languages were ſo different that the intervention of interpreters was neceſſary between them, yet do we alſo[2] learn that the Erigas, a nation formerly inhabiting on the Ohio, were of the ſame original ſtock with the Five Nations, and that they partook alſo of the Tuſcarora Language. Their dialects might, by long ſeparation, have become ſo unlike as to be unintelligible to one another. We know that in 1712, the Five Nations received the Tuſcaroras into their confederacy, and made them the Sixth Nation. They received the Meherrins and Tuteloes alſo into their protection: and it is moſt probable, that the remains of many other of the tribes, of whom we find no particular account, retired weſtwardly in like manner, and were incorporated with one or other of the weſtern tribes. (5)
I know of no ſuch thing exiſting as an Indian
monument: for I would not honor with that name
arrow points, ſtone hatchets, ſtone pipes, and
half-ſhapen images. Of labor on the large ſcale, I
think there is no remain as reſpectable as would be
a common ditch for the draining of lands, unleſs indeed it would be the Barrows, of which many
are to be found all over in this country. Theſe
are of different ſizes, ſome of them conſtructed of
earth, and ſome of looſe ſtones. That they were
repoſitories of the dead, has been obvious to all:
but on what particular occaſion conſtructed, was
a matter of doubt. Some have thought they
covered the bones of thoſe who have fallen in
battles fought on the ſpot cf interment. Some
aſcribed them to the cuſtom, ſaid to prevail among
the Indians, of collecting, at certain periods the
bones of all their dead, whereſoever depoſited at
the time of death. Others again ſuppoſed them
the general ſepulchres for towns, conjectured to
have beedn on or near theſe grounds; and this
opinion was ſupported by the quality of the lands
in which they are found, (thoſe conſtructed of
earth being generally in the ſofteſt and moſt
fertile meadow-grounds on river ſides) and by a
tradition, ſaid to be handed down from the aboriginal
Indians, that, when they ſettled in a town, the
firſt perſon who died was placed erect, and earth put
about him, ſo as to cover and ſupport him; that
when another died, a narrow paſſage was dug to
the firſt, the ſecond reclined againſt him, and the
cover of earth replaced, and ſo on. There being
one of theſe in my neighborhood, I wiſhed to
ſatisfy myſelf whether any, and which of theſe opinions
were juſt. For this purpoſe I determined to
open and examine it thoroughly. It was ſituated
on the low grounds of the Rivanna, about two
miles above its principal fork, and oppoſite to ſome
hills, on which had been an Indian town. It was
of a ſpheriodical form, of about 40 feet diameter
at the baſe, and had been of about twelve feet altitude, though now reduced by the plough to
ſeven and a half, having been under cultivation
about a dozen years. Before this it was covered
with trees of twelve inches diameter, and round
the baſe was an evacuation of five feet depth and
width, from whence the earth had been taken of
which the hillock was formed, I firſt dug ſuperficially
in ſeveral parts of it, and came to collections
of human bones, at different depths, from ſix inches
to three feet below the ſurface. Theſe were
lying in the utmoſt confuſion, ſome vertical, ſome
oblique, ſome horizontal, and directed to every
point of the compaſs, entangled, and held toghether
in cluſters by the earth. Bones of the moſt
diſtant parts were found together, as, for inſtance,
the ſmall bones of the foot in the hollow of the
ſcull; many ſculls would ſometimes be in contact,
lying on the face, on the ſide, on the back, top or
bottom, ſo as, on the whole, to give the idea of
bones emptied promiſcuouſly from a bag or baſket,
and covered over with earth, without any attention
to their order. The bones of which the greateſt
numbers remained, were ſculls, jaw-bones, teeth,
the bones of the arms, thighs, legs, feet, and hands.
A few ribs remained, ſome vertebrae of the neck
and ſpine, without their proceſſes, and one inſtance
only of the[3] bones which ſerves as a baſe to the
vertebral column. The ſculls were ſo tender, that
they generally fell to pieces on being touched.
The other bones were ſtronger. There were ſome
teeth which were judged to be ſmaller than thoſe
of an adult; a ſcull which on a ſlight view, appeared
to be that of an infant, but it fell to pieces on
being taken out, ſo as to prevent ſatisfactory examination; a rib, and a fragment of the under
jaw of a perſon about half grown; another rib of
an infant, and part of the jaw of a child, which
had not cut its teeth. This laſt furniſhing the
moſt deciſive proof of the burial of children here,
I was particular in my attention to it. It was
part of the right half of the under jaw. The
proceſſes, by which it was articulated to the temporal
bones, were entire, and the bone itſelf firm to
where it had been broken off, which, as nearly as
I could judge, was about the place of the eye-tooth.
Its upper edge, wherein would have been the ſockets
of the teeth, was perfectly ſmooth. Meaſuring
it with that of an adult, by placing their hinder
proceſſes together, its broken end extended to the
penultimate grinder of the adult. This bone was
white, all the others of a ſand color. The bones
of infants being ſoft, they probably decay ſooner,
which might be the cauſe ſo few were found here.
I proceeded then to make a perpendicular cut
through the body of the barrow, that I might
examine its internal ſtructure. This paſſed about
three feet from its center, was opened to the former
ſurface of the earth, and was wide enough for
a man to walk through and examine its ſides. At
the bottom, that is, on the level of the circumjacent
plain, I found bones; above theſe a few
ſtones, brought from a cliff a quarter of a mile off,
and from the river one-eighth of a mile off; then
a large interval of earth, then a ſtrantum of bones,
and ſo on. At one end of the ſection were four
ſtrata of bones plainly diſtinguiſhable; at the other,
three; the ſtrata in one part not ranging with
thoſe in another. The bones neared the ſurface
were leaſt decayed. No holes were diſcovered in any of them, as if made with bullets, arrows, or
other weapons. I conjectured that in this barrow
might have been a thouſand ſkeletons. Every one
will readily ſeize the circumſtances above related,
which militate againſt the opinion, that it covered
the bones only of perſons fallen in battle; and
againſt the tradition alſo, which would make it the
common ſepulchre of a town, in which the bodies
were placed upright, and touching each other.
Appearances certainly indicate that it has derived
both origin and growth from the accuſtomary
collection of bones, and depoſition of them together;
that the firſt collection had been depoſited on
the common ſurface of the earth, a few ſtones put
over it, and then a covering of earth, that the ſecond
had been laid on this, had covered more or
leſs of it in proportion to the number of bones,
and was then alſo covered with earth; and ſo on.
The following are the particular circumſtances
which give it this aſpect. 1. The number of bones.
2. Their confuſed poſition. 3. Their being in
different ſtrata. 4. The ſtrata in one part having
no correſpondence with thoſe in another. 5. The
deifferent ſtates of decay in theſe ſtrata, which ſeem
to indicate a difference in the time of inhumation.
6. The exiſtence of infant bones among them.
But on whatever occaſion they may have been made, they are of conſiderable notoriety among the Indians: for a party paſſing, about thirty years ago, through the part of the country where this barrow is, went through the woods directly to it, without any inſtructions or enquiry, and having ſtaid about it ſome time, with expreſſions which were conſtrued to be thoſe of ſorrow, they returned to the high road, which they had left about half a dozen miles to pay this viſit, and purſued their journey. There is another barrow much reſembling this, in the low grounds of the ſouth branch of Shenandoah where it is croſſed by the road leading from the Rockfiſh gap to Staunton, both of theſe have within theſe dozen years, been cleared of their trees and put under cultivation, are much reduced in their height, and ſpread in width by the plough, and will probably diſappear in time. There is another on a hill in the Blue ridge of mountains, a few miles north of Wood's gap, which is made up of ſmall ſtones thrown together. This has been opened and found to contain human bones, as the others do. There are alſo many others in other parts of the country.
Great queſtion has ariſen from whence came thoſe aboriginals of America? Diſcoveries, long ago made, were ſufficient to ſhow that a paſſage from Europe to America was always practicable, even to the imperfect navigation of ancient times. In going from Norway to Ireland, from Ireland to Groenland, from Groenland to Labrador, the firſt traject is the wideſt: and this having been practiſed from the earlieſt times of which we have any account of that part of the earth, it is not difficult to ſuppoſe that the ſubſequent trajects may have been ſometimes paſſed. Again, the late diſcoveries of Captain Cook, coaſting from Kamſchatka to California, have proved that if the two continents of Aſia and America be ſeparated at all, it is only by a narrow ſtraight. So that from this ſide alſo, inhabitants may have paſſed into America: and the reſemblance between the Indians of America and the eaſtern inhabitants of Aſia, would induce us to conjecture, that the former are the deſcendants of the latter, or the latter of the former: excepting indeed the Eſkimaux, who, from the ſame circumſtances of reſemblance, and from indentity of language, muſt be derived from the Groenlanders, and theſe probably from ſome of the northern parts of the old continent. A knowledge of their ſeveral languages would be the moſt certain evidence of their derivation which could be produced. In fact, it is the beſt proof of the affinity of nations which ever can be referred to. How many ages have elapſed ſince the Engliſh, the Dutch, the Germans, the Swiſs, the Norwegians, Danes and Swedes have ſeparated from their common ſtock? Yet how many more muſt elapſe before the proofs of their common origin, which exiſt in their ſeveral languages, will diſappear? It is to be lamented then, very much to be lamented, that we have ſuffered ſo many of the Indian tribes already to extinguiſh, without our having previouſly collected and depoſited in the records of literature, the general rudiments at leaſt of the languages they ſpoke. Were vocabularies formed of all the languages ſpoken in North and South America, preſerving their appellations of the moſt common objects in nature, of thoſe which muſt be preſent to every nation barbarous or civilized, with the inflections of their nouns and verbs, their principles of regimen and concord, and theſe depoſited in all the public libraries, it would furniſh opportunities to thoſe ſkilled in the languages of the old world to compare them with theſe, now, or at any future time, and hence to conſtruct the beſt evidence of the derivation of this part of the human race.
But imperfect as is our knowledge of the tongues ſpoken in America, it ſuffices to diſcover the following remarkable fact. Arranging them under the radical ones to which they may be palpably traced and doing the ſame by thoſe of the red men of Aſia, there will be found probably twenty in America, for one in Aſia, of thoſe radical languages, ſo called becauſe, if they were ever the ſame they have loſt all reſemblance to one another. A ſeparation into dialects may be the work of a few ages only, but for two dialects to recede from one another till they have loſt all veſtiges of their common origin, muſt require an immenſe courſe of time; perhaps not leſs than many people give to the age of the earth. A greater number of thoſe radical changes of language having taken place among the red men of America, proves them of greater antiquity than thoſe of Aſia.
I will now proceed to ſtate the nations and numbers of the Aborigines which ſtill exiſt in a reſpectable and Independent form. And as their undefined boundaries would render it difficult to ſpecify thoſe only which may be within any certain limits, and it may not be unacceptable to preſent a more general view of them, I will reduce within the form of a catalogue all thoſe within, and circumjacent to, the United States, whoſe names and numbers have come to my notice. Theſe are taken from four different liſts, the firſt of which was given in the year 1759 to general Stanwix by George Croghan, deputy agent for Indian affairs under Sir William Johnſon; the ſecond was drawn up by a French trader of conſiderable note, reſident among the Indians many years, and annexed to colonel Bouquet's printed account of his expedition in 1764. The third was made out by Captain Hutchins, who viſited moſt of the tribes, by order, for the purpoſe of learning their numbers in 1768. And the fourth by John Dodge, an Indian trader, in 1779, except the numbers marked,* which are from other information.
| TRIBES. | Croghan. 1759. |
Bouquet. 1764. |
Hutchins. 1768. |
Where they reſide. | ||||||||||||||||
| Northward and Weſtward of the United States. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Oſwegatchies | —— | —— | 100 | At Swagatchy, on the river St. Laurence. | ||||||||||||||||
| Connaſedagoes | —— |
|
300 | Near Montreal. | ||||||||||||||||
| Cohunnewagoes | —— | |||||||||||||||||||
| Orandocs | —— | —— | 100 | Near Trois Rivieres. | ||||||||||||||||
| Abenakies | —— | 350 | 150 | Near Trois Rivieres. | ||||||||||||||||
| Little Algonkins | —— | —— | 100 | Near Trois Rivieres. | ||||||||||||||||
| Michmacs | —— | 700 | —— | River St. Laurence. | ||||||||||||||||
| Ameliſtes | —— | 550 | —— | River St. Laurence. | ||||||||||||||||
| Chalas | —— | 130 | —— | River St. Laurence. | ||||||||||||||||
| Nipiſſins | —— | 400 | —— | Towards the heads of the Ottawas river. | ||||||||||||||||
| Algonquins | —— | 300 | —— | Towards the heads of the Ottawas river. | ||||||||||||||||
| Round heads | —— | 2500 | —— | Riviere aux Tetes boules on the E. ſide of Lake Superior. | ||||||||||||||||
| Meſſaſagues | —— | 2000 | —— | Lakes Huron & Superior. | ||||||||||||||||
| Chriſtinaux; Kris | —— | 3000 | —— | Lake Chriſtinaux. | ||||||||||||||||
| Aſſinaboes | —— | 1500 | —— | Lake Aſſinaboes. | ||||||||||||||||
| Blancs, or Barbus | —— | 1500 | —— | |||||||||||||||||
|
10,000 |
|
10,000 |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Ajoues | —— | 1100 | —— | North of the Padoucas. | ||||||||||||||||
| Panis. White | —— | 2000 | —— | South of the Miſſouri. | ||||||||||||||||
| Panis. Freckled | —— | 1700 | —— | South of the Miſſouri. | ||||||||||||||||
| Padoucas | —— | 500 | —— | South of the Miſſouri. | ||||||||||||||||
| Grandes eaux | —— | 1000 | —— | |||||||||||||||||
| Canſes | —— | 1600 | —— | South of the Miſſouri. | ||||||||||||||||
| Osages | —— | 600 | —— | South of the Miſſouri. | ||||||||||||||||
| Miſſouris | 400 | 3000 | —— | On the river Miſſouri. | ||||||||||||||||
| Arkanzas | —— | 2000 | —— | On the river Arkanzas. | ||||||||||||||||
| Caouitas | —— | 700 | —— | Eaſt of the Alibamous. | ||||||||||||||||
| Dodge. 1779. |
Within the Limits of the United States. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|
—— | 160 | 100 | Mohocks river. | |||||||||||||||
| —— |
|
400 | Eaſt side Oneida L. and head branches of Suſquehanna. | |||||||||||||||||
| —— | Between the Oneidas and Onondagoes. | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1550 | 260 | 230 | Near Onondago L. | |||||||||||||||||
| —— | 200 | 220 | On the Cayuga Lake near the N. branch of Suſquehanna. | |||||||||||||||||
| —— | 1000 | 650 | On the waters of Suſquehanna, of Ontario, and the heads of the Ohio. | |||||||||||||||||
| Aughquàgahs | —— | —— | 150 | —— | Eaſt branch of Suſquehanna, and on Aughquagah. | |||||||||||||||
| Nanticoes | —— | —— | 100 | —— | Utſanango, Chaghtnet, and Owegy, on the Eaſt branch of Suſquehanna. | |||||||||||||||
| Mohìccons | —— | —— | 100 | —— | In the ſame parts. | |||||||||||||||
| Conòies | —— | —— | 30 | —— | In the ſame parts. | |||||||||||||||
| Sapòonies | —— | —— | 30 | —— | At Diahago and other villages up the North branch of Suſquehanna. | |||||||||||||||
| Mùnſies | —— | —— | 150 | *150 | At Diahago and other villages up the North branch of Suſquehanna. | |||||||||||||||
| Delawares, or Linnelinopies | —— | —— |
|
*500 | At Diahago and other villages up the North branch of Suſquehanna. | |||||||||||||||
| Delawares, or Linnelinopies | 600 | 600 | Between Ohio and Lake Erie and the branches of Beaver creek, Cuyahoga and Muſkingham. | |||||||||||||||||
| Shàwnees | 500 | 400 | 300 | 300 | Sioto and the branches of Muſkingham. | |||||||||||||||
| Mingoes | —— | —— | —— | 60 | On a branch of Sioto. | |||||||||||||||
| Ouiſconſings | —— | 500 | —— | — | Ouiſconſing River. | |||||||||||||||
| Kickapous | 600 |
|
—— |
|
On lake Michigan, and between that and the Miſſiſipi. | |||||||||||||||
| Otogamies. Foxes | —— | —— | ||||||||||||||||||
| Màſcoutens | —— | 4000 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Miſcòthins | —— | |||||||||||||||||||
| Outimacs | —— | —— | ||||||||||||||||||
| Muſquakies | 200 | —— | ||||||||||||||||||
| Sio |
—— | —— | —— | 500 | On the eaſtern heads of Miſſiſipi, and the iſlands of lake Superior. | |||||||||||||||
| Galphin. 1768. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Cherokees | 1500 | 2500 | 3000 | —— | Weſtern parts of North-Carolina. | |||||||||||||||
| Chickaſaws | —— | 750 | 500 | —— | Weſtern parts of Georgia. | |||||||||||||||
| Catawbas | —— | 150 | —— | —— | On the Catawba River in South-Carolina. | |||||||||||||||
| Chacktaws | 2000 | 4500 | 6000 | —— | Weſtern parts of Georgia. | |||||||||||||||
| Upper Creeks | —— |
|
3000 | —— | Weſtern parts of Georgia. | |||||||||||||||
| Lower Creeks | —— | |||||||||||||||||||
| Natches | —— | 150 | —— | —— | ||||||||||||||||
| Alibamous | —— | 600 | —— | —— | Alibama River, in the weſtern parts of Georgia | |||||||||||||||
| Mohìccons | —— |
|
*60 | |||||||||||||||||
| Cohunnewagos | —— | 300 | —— | Near Sanduſky. | ||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
180 | |||||||||||||||||
| Near fort St. Joseph's and Detroit. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Twightwees | 300 | —— | 250 | —— | Miami River, near fort Miami. | |||||||||||||||
| Miamis | —— | 350 | —— | 300 | Miami River, about fort St. Joseph. | |||||||||||||||
| Ouiàtonons | 200 | 400 | 300 | *300 | On the banks of the Wabaſh, near fort Ouiatonon. | |||||||||||||||
| Piànkiſhas | 300 | 250 | 300 | *400 | On the banks of the Wabaſh, near fort Ouiatonon. | |||||||||||||||
| Shákies | —— | —— | 200 | —— | On the banks of the Wabaſh, near fort Ouiatonon. | |||||||||||||||
| Kaſkaſkias |
|
600 | 300 | —— | Near Kaſkaſkia. | |||||||||||||||
| Illinois | 300 | —— | Near Cahokia. Query, If not the same with the Mitchigamis? | |||||||||||||||||
| Piorias | —— | 800 | —— | —— | On the Illinois River, called Pianrias, but supposed to mean Piorias. | |||||||||||||||
|
—— | 350 | 300 | 450 | Near St. Joseph's and fort Detroit. | |||||||||||||||
| —— | —— |
|
*300 | Near St. Joseph's and fort Detroit. | ||||||||||||||||
| —— |
|
—— | On Saguinam bay of lake Huron. | |||||||||||||||||
| —— | —— | On Saguinam Bay of lake Huron. | ||||||||||||||||||
| —— | —— | —— | Near Michillimakinac. | |||||||||||||||||
| 2000 | 5900 | 5450 | Near Michillimakinac. | |||||||||||||||||
| Near Fort St. Mary’s, on lake Superior. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| —— | —— | —— | Several other villages along the banks of lake Superior. Numbers unknown. | |||||||||||||||||
| —— |
|
—— | Near Puans Bay, on lake Michigan. | |||||||||||||||||
| 200 | 550 | —— | Near Puans Bay, on lake Michigan. | |||||||||||||||||
| Mynonàmies | —— | —— | —— | Near Puans Bay, on lake Michigan. | ||||||||||||||||
The following tribes are also mentioned:
| Croghan's Catal. |
Lezar | 400 | From the mouth of Ohio to the mouth of Wabaſh. | |||
| Webings | 200 | On the Miſſiſipi, below the Shakies. | ||||
| Ouſaſoys | 4000 | On white creek, a branch of the Miſſiſipi. | ||||
| Grand T. | ||||||
| Linways | 1000 | On the Miſſiſipi. | ||||
| Bouquet's. | Les Puans | 700 | Near Puans Bay. | |||
| Folle avoine | 350 | Near Puans Bay. | ||||
| Ouanakina | 300 |
| ||||
| Chickaneſſou | 350 | |||||
| Machecous | 800 | |||||
| Souikilas | 200 | |||||
| Dodge's. | Mineamis | 2000 | North-weſt of L. Michigan, to the heads of Miſſiſipi, and up to L. Superior. | |||
|
800 | On and near the Wabaſh towards the Illinois. |
But apprehending theſe might be different appellations for some of the tribes already enumerated, I have not inserted them in the table, but ſtate them separately, as worthy of further enquiry. The variations obſervable in numbering the ſame tribe may ſometimes be aſcribed to imperfect information, and ſometimes to a greater or less comprehenſion of ſettlements under the ſame name. (7)