Chiefs of Nation’s: First edition
The Cherokee Nation 1730 to 1839
 109 years of Dialogue and Treaties
 

By Paul T. Vickers ©2005
 

Home  Sources  Immigration  Treaty 1817-19  Eastern Cherokee  Chief Of Nations  Contact Us
 

A Critical analysis of Thurman Wilkins Cherokee Tragedy the Story of the Ridge Family and the Decimation of a People © 1970 Thruman Wilkins the Macmillan Company Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 73-92077 

As you will note in [Document, 1] this is a map of the historical Cherokee Nation east of the Mississippi. This map illustrates that the Cherokee Nations land base encompassed very large sections of the modern States of North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia and Alabama. The sections marked in blue provide a basis for the distinguishing of the different divisions, which also declared and signified the different councils that represented these divisions, at the National Councils. The Area in Tennessee was known as the Upper, the area from present Chattanooga, Tenn. down to the modern State of Alabama was designated as the Lower towns .In modern Central Georgia, this section of the Cherokee Nations was distinguished by what was deemed, the Central or ten towns division. The North Carolina section colored in blue was considered the valley and upper middle towns division. South Carolina’s Cherokee Towns, prior the treaty of Hopewell…were considered as part of the lower Valley or Lower Middle valley towns. 

Prior to the Revolution the, Cherokee Nations National Conventions were held at Chota, this changed to the middle towns at the Location of Ustanali along the Coosa River within the Central division. Around 1800, this changed again and the National Councils were held at both Turkey- town and Wills- town, in the most southern part of the Cherokee Nations geographical jurisdiction. As you can see, these divisions were spread 100’s of miles apart. The Cherokee populations as a matter of logistics were far separated and estranged from each other. This point is important, as portrayed in most books, the author gives the reader the feeling that these Chiefs were much closer in proximity¾thus eliminating a very important component when taking in consideration, imminent tribal unrest, including tribal and international political maneuvering’s, that all lead to the polarization of the National Council, separation by geographically, tactical treaties, and separation of divisions, as a result of all of the above mentioned.   

In Thurman Wilkin’s Cherokee Tragedy, though he implies that he has diligently researched his subject matter, he does not offer maps of the Cherokee Nation and in the same sense although he covers them, does not offer to illustrate the treaties in this treatment; thus electing to make statements that lead to his conclusions, without showing the evidence. Because of this the reader is left without two very important historical items. This in my opinion is intentional. Very importantly Wilkins when utilizing his cited research, in most cases he chooses to use second rate sources, to solidify his implications and conclusions; that are most always from outside of the actual documented evidence, located in the National Archives Records of the Cherokee Indian agency, within record group 75 and other legitimate National historical sources; thus he opts to negate them while referring to Drapers Manuscripts, Ramsey’s annals of Tennessee, Browns Old Frontiers and Mckenny and Halls Indian Nations; all of which fall short in the formation  of building factual accounts that can then form conclusions. This dissertation will provide an analysis to better explain the adverse affects this technique and the misrepresentation of the official records, has had on the actual history of the Cherokee Nation .To avoid a redundancy,I have chosen to begin this analysis following the 1780,and 90’s wars era: this is to further explain the method of putting the final touches on the discrediting of the true and ethnic Cherokee Chiefs of the Cherokee Nations National Council. This final step of discrediting is adamant for the purpose of methodically disparaging Cherokee culture and its genuine and ethnic leaders, to make way for the Constitutional Cherokee Government, that transpired in the mid 1820’s. All without disclosing any malicious and corrupt political practices from this insurgent party and the legitimate separation of the Upper and Lower towns division, whom immigrated into Arkansas from 1809, to the treaty of July 8th 1817. 

Beginning on page 38,39,40 and 41 of Thurman Wilkins Cherokee Tragedy [Document 5], cites 51,52, 53 54 and 55, concern the Killing of Chief Double-head in August of 1807, a land deal in 1807, another deal that is erroneously associated with the first deal and the altercation that insued following the Meigs and  Earle Deal in Dec. of 1807. 

On page 40 cite 51 the author uses an alleged letter from the Records of the Cherokee agency: Meigs to Sec. Eustis dated July 31st 1811, as he states that the Death of Double-head “ had a greater affect on the concerns of the white people than that of any other Indian51 which was not a fact. It caused much alarm to all of the Chiefs in the Upper and Lower towns. Double-head, prior to his murder was the victim of libelous, treacherous and false accusations, from the central divisions leaders; this was instigated by Charles Hicks… their federally appointed interpreter, as my book explains in detail.  

On page 40 [Document 5] cite 52 the author uses one line in a long and descriptive letter dated Sept 28th 1807 and attempts to imply that “principal Chief” Black Fox and several other Chiefs were “influenced” and engaged in a secret deal for 1,000.00 a new Rifle and 100.00 per year for Black Fox. This was at the Chickasaw Old Fields near Muscle Shoals. In reality as stated in [Document 8b] the land on the Elk River near Muscle Shoals was occupied by at least 200 white families, and Black Fox agreed to release claim for 2,000.00 that satisfied the 1,800.00 debt for the Cherokee Nation. In cite # 53, using the Records of the Cherokee Agency Record group 75, the author then states that The Cherokees were not long in learning that the treaty was a “cheat put upon the Chiefs” and “their suspicions extended to another plan that would have doubtless worked in their favor”. “Vann’s Faction, including the Ridge, was in the forefront of the objectors”. So in other words Thurman Wilkins uses the quote from the Feb.15th 1808 letter, for the Dec. 1807 treaty and Chickamauga lands ordeal [ Document 7], to substantiate the idea that this Elk River deal was a bad and an unscrupulous act, on the part of Black Fox and his party. The objective here is to damage the credibility of Black Fox and the other Chiefs while, attempting to portray,The Ridge and his party of the Central division, as crusaders for justice, for the Cherokee Nation. This however was not the case, as Hicks communicated to Black fox regarding the   interception and stoppage  of Colonial Earl’s party which was an altogether separate incident        [ 8 ], [8a].To its effect, this serves as a vehicle for the ultimate objective of writing the original Cherokee Councils Chiefs of the Upper and Lower towns¾out of the history¼ only to be replaced by the civilized constitutional party in the mid 1820’s. 

Beginning on page 43 of Thurman’s Cherokee Tragedy the author begins what is the final process of completely discrediting the Tennessee River Town Chiefs. The much pressured objective of beginning the process of Land Exchange for lands in present Arkansas are corrupted to an unparalleled level in this book. On page 43-second paragraph line 4 the author states: “ Meigs occupied himself with promoting the idea of removal to such chiefs such as Black Fox, The Glass, Tahlonteskee and John Jolly. He was successful in his sales campaign, employing his usual means of persuasion¾quiet bribery¾that at a clandestine council of those in favor of immigration Black Fox appointed a new delegation composed of river chiefs to visit Washington. There purpose¾to sign a treaty for exchange of land.” Using Mckenney and Halls book History of the Indian tribes of North America, he uses a bogus account of these proceedings: Tell our great father, The president, that our game has disappeared, and we wish to follow it to the west.”  And then proceeds to imply that Black Fox hoped to take the council by surprise! and The Ridge rose and spoke in objection ”My Friends you have heard the talk of the principal chief. He points to the region of the setting sun as the future habitation of his people. As a man he has the right to give his opinion; but the opinion the opinion he has given as chief of this nation is not binding; it was not formed in council in the light of day, but was made up in a corner¾to drag his people, without their consent, from their own country, to the dark land of the setting sun”. Continued: Black Fox had counted on no one’s raising an objection. Now he knew by the cheers that greeted the close of The Ridge’s speech that his efforts to stampede the council were doomed to failure¾ and not merely that. Three chiefs¾ The Glass, Taholunteskee, and Black Fox himself¾were broken on the spot and though Black Fox was reinstated at a later council he felt disgraced for the rest of his life.63  

These accounts on page 44 of this book [Document 9], allegedly discovered in the book by Thomas Mckenney, who was the head of the office of Indian affairs beginning 1824, are incorrect as you will discover in Documents [10] and [11]. This letter dated September 27, 1809, is months following the trip to Washington. The trip to Washington was attended by The seed, Skiuka ( Bloody-Fellow or General Clear sky, Touchalee or Toochalar, Quataquskee, John Walker, Ridge and Samuel Riley as the Interpreter. The author, instead of listing the other representatives, mentions only the Ridge. Interestingly the author quotes the entire letter of this delegation to President Thomas Jefferson, December 1808, and again the National Councils letter of September 27th but in a very flagrant act of misrepresentation, Wilkins, fails to transcribe the letter fully, [Document 10]as the second page would have discredited his character assassination of Black Fox and Chief Glass, on page 44 of his book. As this portion of the letter reads: “Black Fox did not attend on account of his sickness, but sent a man to deliver his talk to the council, which we thought well of”. You will also receive a letter from Black Fox in a few Day’s.”  [Document 11]. Additionally with the exception of remarking that The Ridge was third on the list… he fails to state the signatories as this would further frustrate both his implications and over-all scope. In this very important letter to Agent Meigs. The Chiefs are Path-Killer, Glass (who he claimed was Broken as a Chief), Sour Mush, Big Half-Breed (The leader above Ridge of his division) Dick Justice, Toochalah or Toochalar, and Knichintenasky. The Ridge’s attendance at this council is not in dispute, he was chosen by Glass and Black Fox and Dick Justice to be one of the National Committee,  importantly, the author on page 44, used an alleged speech by The Ridge, taken from Mckenney and halls book, which contradicts the actual records as these chiefs were still the highest chiefs of the Cherokee Nation. This book mirrors others written during the 1970’s as illustrated in this critical analysis and has been the vehicle for the total demoralization of these chiefs, in the eye’s of nearly all Cherokee people and the millions who have followed this story. On the same page 49 of his book [Document 12], prior to this transcribed letter, the author takes another shot at Chief Tahlonteskee. Thurman Wilkins states that the lower towns suddenly developed a sudden love for their present homes and voted against migration to the wilderness of Arkansas. This was rooted in the fact that this initiative did not reach a full national consensus, at this time. As for Tahlonteskee and Hummingbird; their designated area was now surrounded by whites. The Cherokee National Council did not remove him nor the others from their position nor did they lose stature. Other chiefs in this area such as Taka-Toka ( Rising Fawn of Highwassee ) would soon follow Tahlonteskee to Arkansas and begin corresponding with Meigs and the Eastern Cherokee National Council in 1813. To better understand how the author managed to use second class sources to corrupt the history of the Cherokee Nation, you can compare this research [Documents [2] and [3] with the Chiefs of Nations research in documents [4],[4a] and [4b]. This bibliography covers this same period from 1800 to 1809.  

[Document 13] represents page 91 of Thurman Wilkins Cherokee Tragedy. In this page he begins to build the credibility of what was to become the Constitutional party in 1825 and 1827. In this Chapter “Cherokee Diplomacy” This delegation of commissioners were not granted authority to engage in a treaty for lands in South Carolina, as Thurman implies… stating that “Path-killer had indicated in his instructions”. While referring to the papers of John Ross for his source (page 16-5) and allegedly, the National Archives Records for cites 47 and 48 (Cherokee delegation to the Sec. Of War March 12 and Sec. Of War to commissioners March 14th 1816), the author in all these cites, on this particular page, states that this Cherokee delegation was vested with powers to engage in the treaty for the lands in South Carolina. As demonstrated in [Document 14] the (Papers of John Ross page 27) the Ross, Ridge, Richard Taylor delegation, despite the fact that they did engage in this treaty¾they had no authority to sell this tract of land. This delegation was there to have the southern boundary of the Cherokee Nation ratified by Congress. This was to safeguard it for the Lower Towns, whose lands were in serious jeopardy from being ceded away by both the Creeks and Chickasaws. 

Putting the final touches on the discrediting of many important Chiefs Thurman Wilkins uses the first official removal as his vehicle. This segment in Cherokee history has never been covered in any degree of accuracy, as if it was so would greatly undermine the actions of the forthcoming government that has been so protected, from any degree of scrutiny by historians. As illustrated in [Document 15] page 97 of Cherokee tragedy, Wilkins attempts to discredit the exchange for land and immigration treaty by stating that sixty seven chiefs including Ridge protested the treaty. He states that Jackson concluded a pact solely with the Arkansas delegation.  In cites 68,69 and 70 of page 97 of this book, Wilkins uses a source named “Jackson’s correspondences 11” that allegedly contains letters from Jackson to Calhoun, Jackson to Coffee, and Jackson to Monroe and then allegedly a letter signed by sixty seven chiefs on July 2, 1817 who remonstrated against the treaty. This last source, allegedly located within the Indian affairs papers, page 142, is non-existent. As you will note in [Document 16] Charles Hicks, and 31 of the chiefs from the central and valley towns signed this treaty, along with Glass and Dick Justice, Toochlar and Spring Frog and many others. There was a strong anti-treaty and immigration movement during this period…led on by the central division’s leaders Charles Hicks, Going Snake, Richard Taylor and many others. But this was approached with a great deal of deceit, towards their people of their division. This fact is better explained in Chiefs synopsis and our website at www.arkansascherokees.com and of course My book Chiefs of Nations first edition: The Cherokee Nation 1730 to 1839 109 Years of Political Dialogue and Treaties www.iuniverse.com © 2005   

In proceeding on in this book Cherokee Tragedy, Wilkins does a very good job in covering up the extremely corrupt actions of his main subjects. In this book the author mentions the very unscrupulous treaty of Feb. 1819 some 50 pages later on page 140. Here he vaguely describes this by stating” In 1819 the Cherokees had sent a delegation to Washington City led by Charles Hicks, and a fringe of land along their entire northern boarder was ceded to the United States as payment for past and future emigration to Arkansas”.  Without any detail regarding the other treaty signers and the great difference between the land exchange policy and reservations policy written into the 1817 treaty, and the discontinuance of this agreement, in this treaty, including the discontinuance of funding for immigration to Arkansas thus trapping many more who did not accept Hicks or Ross or any of their counterparts. This treaty was without consent from the Arkansas Cherokee Council¾ a re-negotiation of the 1817 treaty. All reservations in fee simple were exonerated with the exception of John Ross, Eliza Ross, Charles Hicks, John Walker ,Cabin Smith, James Riley, James Lowery, George Harlin, Margaret Morgan, and Nicholas Byers. As far as the land ceded away to the various states, as Thurman Wilkins puts it, as a fringe of land, this is another understatement as shown in [Document 16a].These so-called Cherokee Chiefs gave this  land away without stipulating exact boundaries for the Arkansas lands. This led to the land acreage dilemma for the Arkansas Cherokee of which was part of the plan; as it instigated the Arkansas Cherokee to send four deputation’s to Washington, in as many years, which eventually ended up culminating into the very questionable treaty of 1828.This treaty was against tribal laws and only acted on by Jolly’s band; the others either remained in Arkansas or migrated to Texas. There has been an attempt to associate George Guess or Seqouyah with Hicks and Ross, yet he was an opponent of their government, prior to his and the Creek-paths party’s migration to Arkansas. This move was political, as was his invention of the Cherokee Alphabet. As it was to be used as a written national language. There is no question that he would have disapproved of the Constitutional party using his invention for their ruse propaganda. Please carefully read [Documents 17], [18.], and [Document [ 19] they are the source of my inspiration. I visited Chota to ask for guidance in 1997,following my departure everything has come to pass. The paintings illustrate a few of the Arkansas Cherokee and Eastern constitutionalist Cherokee who engaged in the final treaty, that most of the Cherokee of this area disagreed with¾many ¾sticking to their principals, remained in the true lands of the Cherokee people.