Part 3: The Red Stick Crusade

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of our 3-part Historical Overview of the Southeastern Creek Tribes and Creek Nation.

In the fall of 1811 the Upper Creeks held their annual meeting Tuckabatchee near Montgomery, Alabama area. Anger and resentment against the Americans was at a peak among the 5,000 Creeks present. The Great Shawnee war Chief Tecumseh traveled from his homeland above the Ohio River in the hope of enlisting the southeastern tribes in a great pan-Indian confederacy. The Shawnee gained a following among a group of young Creek medicine men. They claimed to possess a special understanding of the good and evil spirits occupying the traditional Creek three-tiered universe of the earth, sky, and underworld. They were called “prophets” by the whites and were strong advocates for a return to traditional Creek ways. When Tecumseh departed for the North, some of the prophets accompanied him and spent the winter absorbing his doctrine. On their way home in the spring of 1812, they encountered a group of white settlers in western Tennessee and murdered them. These killings and others in the Ohio country and within Creek lands to the south triggered a chain of events that led to war, and, ultimately devastation for the Creek.

First, under orders from the U.S. government, Hawkins demanded the arrest of the warriors responsible for the settlers’ death. Creek leaders were permitted to send in their own lawmen to bring in the culprits, but, instead of taking the culprits into custody, the Creek officers   executed them. Militant factions within the Tribe swore vengeance and set out to eliminate from the confederacy every last shred of white civilization. By the end of 1813 one observer noted, “The whole of towns has taken up the war club.” Since these war clubs were painted red, those who wielded them became known as the Red Sticks.

The Red Stick crusade spread rapidly. By July the Red Sticks had slain nine Creeks who backed accommodation with white Americans, burned several villages, and destroyed livestock, fences, plows, and most everything non-traditional they came across. Most of the opposition came from the Lower Creek towns, led by William McIntosh of Coweta. 

In the summer of 1813, a band of Red Sticks traveled to Pensacola where they purchased gunpowder from the Spaniards. On their way home, they were attacked by a combined force of whites and Creeks. Some Red Sticks died in the skirmish and they vowed to retaliate in kind. They attacked Fort Mims, a well-protected plantation in southern Alabama where the warriors who had attacked them had taken refuge. About 750 warriors led by Red Eagle, also known as William Weatherford, slaughtered some 250 men, women and children.

The Fort Mims massacre was the incentive the Americans needed to launch an all-out campaign against the Creek Indians. General Andrew Jackson of Tennessee was at the head of the largest force – which included a band of Creeks under McIntosh and Big Warrior as well as 600 Cherokees. Twice Jackson had led his troops into the heart of Creek territory and twice his advance was checked, first by problems with his troops, next by fierce Creek resistance. Then, in March 1814, Jackson encountered the Creeks at a neck of land on the Tallapoosa River known a Horseshoe Bend. Some 1,000 Red Sticks had barricaded themselves there but Jackson’s force was well armed and perhaps two to three times greater in number. While Jackson’s hidden allies swam the river to steal the canoes and block any escape, Jackson launched a frontal assault. The fighting lasted all day. When it ended, approximately 800 Red Sticks lay dead. Many of Jackson’s men stripped the skin from the bodies as gruesome souvenirs of the battle. Most of the 800 Red Stick bodies were thrown or dragged into the river. Weatherford, who had miraculously escaped a few months earlier by jumping his horse off a bluff into a river, was not among the dead. He had purportedly been off inspecting other fortifications on the day of the attack.

The wars shattered the Creek nation claiming over 3,000 lives – nearly 15 percent of the total Creek population. Jackson’s campaign had swept most of Upper Creek country clean and driven as many as 2,500 Creeks into Florida where many had sought refuge among the Seminoles.  Others escaped to establish new homes in the Florida Panhandle area. Jackson continued his advance down the Tallopoosa River and built Fort Jackson on the ruins of the old French redoubt, Fort Toulouse. In April 1814, the Creek leaders assembled there to have a treaty dictated to them. They were shocked by the terms, spelled out by Jackson himself. The Creek Confederacy would be forced to give to the U.S. government more than 23 million acres, representing half their domain. In an ironic note, it was the pro-government William McIntosh and his lieutenants who had to do the signing. Most of the Red Stick leaders were either dead or in Florida, waiting for the next round of fighting.

Sources:  Tribes of the Southern Woodlands, Time-Life books; Creek Country, The Creek Indians and their World by Robbie Ethridge; Native Americans of the Southeast by Christina M. Girod; The Southeastern Indians by Charles Hudson; and numerous web sites including Wikipedia.

Part 2: Expansion and Removal of the Creeks Begins

Read Part 1 and Part 3 of our 3-part Historical Overview of the Southeastern Creek Tribes and Creek Nation. 

The political state of the new Union

The American Revolutionary War began when the North American Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain as “The independent Unified States of America” in 1775 and lasted until 1783. In 1778 France was eager for revenge following its defeat in the Seven Year War and signed an alliance with the new American nation. The conflict then escalated to a European-American war with Great Britain combating France, Spain and the Netherlands in a global conflict.

In 1783, the Treaty of Paris ended the Revolutionary War and recognized the sovereignty of the United States over the territory bounded roughly by what is now Canada to the north, Florida to the south, and the Mississippi River to the west. France gained its revenge, retained its North American land west of the Mississippi, while Spain acquired Britain’s Florida Colonies.  In 1789 the new nation became the United States of America.

The goal of the United States government of expansion began. In the 1790s the United States began to formulate plans for keeping the British out of the United States and removing the French and Spanish from ownership or control of land in North America. It was also the time when plans would begin for the elimination, extermination or removal of Indians from the eastern United States.

Nearly all native groups had allied with the British and served as Loyalists during the American Revolutionary War. But when the British negotiators agreed upon the terms of the 1783 peace treaty, Great Britain offered no protection to their former Indian allies. In addition, most whites in the new American republic saw no reason to treat the Native Americans well after the war.  White settlers claimed ownership of all Indian lands west of the Appalachians by rights of the 1783 Peace Treaty and the U.S. government did little or nothing to stop them. The Indians quite rightly rejected these claims.   

Removal Begins

In 1798 the U.S. government formed the Mississippi Territory. This land was an organized incorporated territory of the United States which included most of the land in what are the present day states of Mississippi and Alabama. The State of Georgia had maintained a claim over most of the area until it surrendered its claim following the Yazoo land scandal. Thomas Jefferson was elected President in 1800 and by 1803 he had initiated a plan for removal of the Indians east of the Mississippi to the newly acquired land of the Louisiana Purchase, land west of the Mississippi River. In 1805 the Treaty of Mount Dexter between the U. S. government and the Choctaw tribe, the Choctaw ceded 4,142,700 acres of fertile Mississippi area land in exchange for cancellation of $48,000 trading debt, a scheme set up by Jefferson. The removal of Indians east of the Mississippi had begun.

The greatest challenge was ahead for the U.S. government:  How to remove or eliminate the Creek Indian Nation. The Creek Nation encompassed much of the present States of Georgia and Alabama, lands very attractive to new white settlers.

During the deerskin trade era the southeastern Indians had been a necessary and integral part of the global economy. After the American Revolution the Creeks and all of the southeastern interior area Indian societies found themselves not only unnecessary to the American economy, but, in fact, they became impediments to the system. Ensuing wars, battles and worthless treaties would drive the southeastern Indians from their homelands. The favorable position held by the Creek Tribes at the turn of the century eroded for a number of reasons – decline in the population of white-tailed deer in the southeast, disruption of southeastern Indian trade during the American Revolution and the fact that the southeastern Indians were no longer needed for maintaining claimed frontier borders, and finally the introduction of the cotton gin in 1793 led to a worldwide boom in cotton; cotton farming became a very profitable enterprise and land in Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi was coveted for cotton plantations. 

During this time the Creeks were struggling to come to terms with the changing politics. The Creek proved to be the most stubborn when confronted with the prospect of change. The United States sent an agent, Benjamin Hawkins, to live among the Creek and attempt to educate them in the ways of the white people. Hawkins had some success in achieving a unified Creek government. But when he suggested that Creek men take up farming – traditionally a female task – he met resistance.  Some towns, largely among the Lower Creeks in Georgia, complied. Most of the Upper Creeks bitterly resented Hawkins and the U.S. government dictating their lives.   

The Southeastern Indian Tribes, Creek Nation and Creek Tribes - A Historical Overview

In our series on the 10 Native American Tribes of the Southeast, 4 of the 7 remaining federally recognized Indian Tribes are of Creek Indian origin: the Seminole Tribe of Florida, the Miccosukee Indian Tribe of Florida, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, and the Poarch Creek Tribe of Alabama.
(Read Part 2 and Part 3 of our 3-part Historical Overview of the Southeastern Creek Tribes and Creek Nation)

The Creek Confederacy

In the late 18^th Century the territory of the Creek Confederacy was from the Oconee River near present day Macon, Georgia to the Tombigbee River in Alabama near present-day Mobile, Alabama. At this time 73 towns ranging in size from as few as 10 to 20 families to more than 200 families occupied the Creek Confederacy. There were 48 Upper Creek towns and 25 Lower Creek towns with around 20,000 people in total.

By the end of the 18^th Century, Indians still occupied and claimed much of the interior south, and the Creeks in particular owned most of this including  what later became known as the “cotton belt.” With the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, the United States now owned what became known as the Mississippi Territory which included most of the Creeks’ western lands, along with the major port cities of New Orleans, Mobile and Pensacola. This area was originally recognized as Indian Lands but the U.S. government hoped and planned to eventually acquire these lands from the Indians and open them to American settlement.

Throughout the 18^th Century southeastern Indians were deeply involved in the deerskin trade, one of the main economic activities in the interior south until the late 18^th Century. Indian men were no longer subsistence hunters, they had become commercial hunters, selling their pelts to European traders in exchange for European manufactured items. Hundreds of thousands of deerskins were shipped out of Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, Pensacola and New Orleans.

An important historical factor played into the deerskin trade that brought a favorable position to the southeastern Indians, especially the Creeks. At this time the three European rivals, Spain, Great Britain and France had claims on eastern and southeastern North American lands. But none of the three had a sufficient military to maintain and fortify their borders. In reality the three European nations only controlled small toeholds on the coasts; Indian groups lived in and controlled most of the interior lands. Therefore the Europeans spent much of their time and efforts courting Indian alliances through trade agreements.  In this way, the southeastern Indians negotiated their place in the modern, end of the 18^th Century world economic system. What would come next would bring drastic changes. 

Millennials: The Disruptive Generation?

According the Pew Research Center, “The Millennial generation is forging a distinctive path into adulthood. Now ranging in age from 18 to 33, they are relatively unattached to organized politics and religion, linked by social media, burdened by debt, distrustful of people, in no rush to marry—and optimistic about the future.”

Casinos seem to know what Baby Boomers like, they’re familiar patrons and have been inhabiting the gaming floor for decades now. They know what Generation X likes, but aren’t too concerned about them because they’ve got families to support and bills to pay. The Millennials, though, have been much discussed but remain an alluring mystery.

The Millennials represent a bigger generation than the baby boomers. The largest wealth transfer ever, from Boomers to Millennials, will take place in the future. Millennials already will account for 1/3 of retail spending in the next 5 years. However, a Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority survey found that only 63 percent of millennials born after 1980 gambled while visiting Vegas last year, compared with 87 percent of visitors 70 to 90 years old, 78 percent of baby boomers (ages 51 to 69) and 68 percent of Generation X members (ages 35 to 50). So casinos are now placing tremendous focus on the Millennials – what they want and how to attract them to the gaming floor.

Millennials been called game changers and disruptors – indicating a cataclysmic paradigm shift in gaming tendencies that will force casinos to radically restructure. Is it true? Well, we say yes and no…

When you take a closer look at the numbers, it’s less a disruption and more simply a continuation of trends. In each category – politics, religion, marriage – it’s a continuation of a trend across generations.

What we do see, though, is rapid adaption of new technology that changes habits and expectations. We believe that, rather than a generational disruption, we should view it as more of a technological disruption with Millennials at the forefront. 

So rather than tearing down a gaming floor and starting from scratch, we see the need to introduce new elements to address these changes. And adding elements to meet these needs can be done gradually.

How specifically can we address these needs? We’ll delve into that in our next blog.