Important Notice: This is a draft of an article that was published in 2001 as "A Portrait of Cherokee Chief Attakullakulla from the 1730s? A Discussion of William Verelst's 'Trustees of Georgia' Painting'," Journal of Cherokee Studies 22 (2001) 4-20.Your comments are welcome. Please note, however, that the illustrations are taken from published sources and the Internet under "fair use" agreements for study and instruction purposes, pending permission from the copyright owners(applied for by the author). You may link to this site or print this page but DO NOT COPY.

A standard event staged by European landing parties in the New World featured the firing of guns, preferably a cannon, unfurling of a flag and reading of a proclamation. Indians rightly understood these maneuvers as displays of power and propagated them in stories of the white man's "magic."  British statesmen soon recognized the desirability of transporting natives to England to overawe them with their numbers, wealth and military might. As early as the reign of Elizabeth, Sir Francis Bacon advised rulers to treat savages "justly and graciously…and send oft of them over to the Countrey that plant, that they may see a better Condition than their own, and commend it when they return." (1) That was certainly one reason for Pocahontas’ trip to England, though she died before returning to Virginia, and her ambiguous position as the wife of a commoner and daughter of a "king" caused problems for the priggish and pedantic James I.

When Oglethorpe was planning the colony of Georgia in the 1730s, among the steps he took was to secure the friendship of "Tomochichi," described as "king" of the "Yamacraw Indians." The promotional tract A New and Accurate Account of the Provinces of South-Carolina and Georgia (1732) makes it clear that the fathers of the new colony would have to court the indigenous people with presents and favors, including what we might today call diplomatic junkets:

And here I can’t omit saying, that it is a Policy of considerable Benefit to our Colonies, and an Expence well laid out, at proper Distances of Time to persuade some of the chiefest Savages, both for Authority and Understanding, to visit Great Britain. That awed with the high Idea which our Metropolis gives them of the Grandeur of this Empire, and propagating that Idea among their Tribes, our Planters in their several Neighbourhoods may enjoy uninterrupted Peace and Commerce with them, and even Assistance from them, for at least one Generation. Such as the Journey of the Irroquois  Chiefs in the Reign of Queen Anne, and such was lately the Visit from our Indian  neighbors of Carolina. The good Effects of these Visits are well known to the Planters of those Colonies respectively, and probably will be felt with Pleasure for an Age to come (p. 129). (2)

The most successful precedent for bringing Indian chiefs to meet the English sovereign in London was the visit by five sachems of the Iroquois Confederacy in 1710. Accompanied by Col. Peter Schuyler of Albany, the delegation was treated as ambassadors. They were entertained at the expense of the crown, received in the throne room of the British monarch and addressed by the Commissioners for Trade and Plantations at Whitehall, the seat of government. They became a public sensation and, in fact, a kind of royal side-show. The upshot was a treaty to which they affixed their totems and English names. To commemorate the event, full-length official portraits were painted for the Queen by Jan Verelst. (3)  It was a new chapter in the history of diplomacy. (4)

The "visit from our Indian neighbors of Carolina" occurred in 1730 when the Scottish baronet and adventurer Sir Alexander Cumming (ca. 1690-1775) brought over seven Cherokee men of the leading Overhill town, Tellico, to present the "crown of Tennessee" from "Emperor Moytoy" to King George II. These Indians were given the customary treatment. They went to the theater, dined with bishops, gaped at the crown jewels in the Tower of London, received an audience with the royal family and were made to sign a treaty with the Lord Commissioners. They, too, had their portraits painted, and a popular engraving was made of the seven chiefs in English suits taking a walk in St. James Gardens (Fig. 1, above).

An eighteenth-century oil painting owned by the Winterthur Museum (Fig. 2, below) claims to depict "James Oglethorpe presenting the Yamacraw Indians to the Georgia Trustees" on July 3, 1734, one year after Oglethorpe landed to start the new colony. (5) The 25 bewigged and befrocked Englishmen have been identified. Oglethorpe is standing in the center, receiving an Indian boy by the hand. This seems intended to portray the Christianization of Indians, one of the chartered purposes of the philanthropic Georgia colony. The boy is dressed in white man’s clothes while all the other Indians are in their native dress. The Savannah trader John Musgrove (d. 1735) intermediates as interpreter. Oglethorpe had boasted that the Lower Creek Nation "is within half a mile of us and has concluded a peace with us giving up their right to all this part of the country… The king comes regularly to church and is desirous to be instructed in the Christian religion and has given to me his nephew, a boy who is his next heir, to educate." (6) The one Indian woman in the picture, also in English dress, represents Tomochichi’s wife, Senawchi. The other Indians are usually identified simply as "Indians," though sometimes they are called Creek or "Yamacraw."
 

FIGURE 2. Eight Indians meet with the Trustees of Georgia at the Palace Court, Westminster, summer 1734. Detail from William Verelst, "Trustees of Georgia," oil painting in The Winterthur Museum, Delaware.

One of the last such delegations was the Cherokee visitation arranged by the Virginian Henry Timberlake in 1762. Its purpose was to cement the recent peace concluded between England and the Cherokees. Again, official portraits were made, including one of Ostenaco by Sir Joshua Reynolds.  We are told that the Indians had a chilly reception, since they were not expected.(7)

The Trustees of Georgia painting thus forms part of a series of court portraits of Indians associated with key diplomatic events in eighteenth-century British Colonial history. The protocol and arrangements for each visit were carefully adapted from previous experience, but the program was the same—to impress the Indians, mark trade treaties and glorify the crown and its colonial ministry. Members of the Verelst family painted three out of four of these episodes-- from life--much as official photographers today capture contemporary events such as summit meetings and corporate mergers. Said to have taken several years to complete, the Georgia painting by Willem Verelst is probably the most important and interesting, as well as being the best known. Not only is it a fascinating record from the history of diplomacy and public relations; it is also a rare ethnological document, a witness to many lost Indian lifeways such as tattooing and moccasin manufacture. However, we must be sure what Indian tribal cultures are represented. I will argue we are looking not just at Yamacraw or Creek Indians but at Upper and Lower Cherokee as well as Algonquian and suggest that the "Yamacraws" were actually Yuchi. In fact, it is doubtful that any of the portraits are of Creek (Muskogee) Indians, the supposed subjects.

Let us start with the small-framed, adolescent Indian in traditional dress with a  mohawk hair-do in the foreground on the right (Figure 3). His features resemble the mature warrior’s to his right, placed in the center of the scene. None of the other male Indians exhibit the same muscular build, broad heads, full lips, sharp eyes and short stature. They could be cousins.
 

Four years before, when Cumming was on his way back to Charleston with the Crown of Tennessee, the first Indian to volunteer to go with him to England was "a young warrior of Tannassy" brought by the trader Eleazer Wiggan (Old Rabbit).  Called Ukwaneequa (Uk-uk-u-ne-ka, White Owl), this was none other than Attakullakulla (Ata’gul’kalu, "leaning wood"), the Little Carpenter, Supreme Peace Chief of the Cherokee, 1760-1775. Attakullakulla became something of a "character" on the trip. The London newspapers recorded some of his youthful antics. (Did he manage to obtain a pet bear from one of his outings to a theater?) In later life, he often mentioned his trip to England and offered to go back and see "the Great King George." The Quaker naturalist described Attakullakulla as "a man of remarkably small stature, slender and of a delicate frame, the only instance I saw in the [Cherokee] Nation; but he is a man of superior abilities." (9)

There is no mention of a youth in the delegation of 1734, other than the boy Tooanahawi, shown in English dress in the Trustees painting (extreme left of group). This was supposed to be a delegation of chiefs. Could the painter have drawn on a previous portrait of Attakullakulla? Did Verelst borrow other characters to people his documentary painting after the Georgia Indians had already sailed home to America? That he accurately painted Tomochichi and his nephew Tooanahawi is shown by the similarity of their representations to a live session he painted of the two, now in the British Museum, Tomochichi is wearing the same fur kerchief, skin scarifications and robe. (10)

Certainly, Verelst would have been hard put to paint a good likeness of the figure represented as the war chief in the Georgia painting (front and center of group). The brother of Scenawki was sick with smallpox and did not appear before the Trustees or King George. He died at his lodgings in Little Ambrey, Westminster, and was buried in the churchyard of St. John the Evangelist with his regalia and possessions, in a traditional Indian ceremony. (11)

Verelst could have taken his war chief from the popular engraving of a painting made of the 1730 Cherokee delegation (Figure 1) or now lost portraits of the principals. The figure in question is identified as "Kollannah" in the 1730 contemporary engravings and records of the Commissioners of the Board of Trade. Note the similar warlike stance, partly shaved heads and stocky builds. Who was he?

Most of the seven Cherokees in the 1730 delegation are hard to identify because the English only recorded their titles. Even Cumming, whose main ploy was to write down the names of Indians in his journal to give them immortal fame, usually failed to perpetuate their true names. And of course, Indians are wary of giving their names to strangers. Kollannah, often rendered Colonna, Corani and Corane, is a traditional Cherokee title for War Chief, meaning the Raven (ka-la-nu). A descendant of these Cherokee chiefs, Narcissa Owen, remarked in her Memoirs  that Scayagusta (another of the seven) "was not the name of a man, as mentioned in the treaty, but a title of some one present, perhaps Caulunna, who was the first chief of the Cherokees…. The other names mentioned in that report are not spelled so as to show them to be the names of any Cherokees."  (12) In fact, Skayagunsta and its variations designates "Great Warrior" or "headman." The British of the time translated it as "prince."

Of the several War Chiefs of the Cherokee in the 1730 timeframe, I believe the most likely candidate for our Kollannah was the brother of Quatsi, Quatsis or Quatie, the mother of the Great Warrior, Oconostota (Groundhog Sausage), Supreme Chief of the Cherokee, 1775-1780. Like Quatsi, he was probably from the Overhill Town of Settico, near Tellico and Chota, like all but one of the 1730 embassaries. Her second child may be identified with the "Shallelockee Kettagusta" of the delegation, whose name (title) means "speaker." Shallelockee spoke for his countrymen at Whitehall and signified their agreement to the treaty, not the "King" (Oukah Oulah, from uku, "principal headman of the nation"). It is striking that Verelst in the 1734 painting places the principal or supreme chief (Tomochichi) with a speaker chief on one side (Shallelocke) and a war chief on the other (Kollannah). This was the traditional triumvirate of power shown to the public at council houses, tribal talks and ceremonies among both the Creek and Cherokee (13). The English interpreted these three roles of native government as king, prime minister (or medicine man, conjuror) and army commander.

Quatsi was supposed to be the wife of Moytoy, the English-designated "emperor" of the Overhill Towns who begged out of going with Cumming at the last minute. Instead, the principal family of Tellico sent Quatsi’s brother (Kollannah), Shallelockee Kettagusta (a son), Seayagusta Oukah Ulah (a son), Clogoittah (a son) and Tathtowie (Tistoe, another son). By "son" the Cherokees understood any younger male clan relative of the mother:  Quatsi’s clan was Wolf, one of the four main clans of the Algonquian Indians. The only Cherokee in the 1730 delegation not of the Tellico ruling family was the last joiner of the party, Ounakannowie (possibly meaning "White Path"), the leader of a large group of volunteers from the Lower Towns who caught up with Cummings returning from Catawba country just outside Charleston. When it came to treaty signing, Ounakannowie declined to participate, saying he had no authority from Moytoy.

Attakullakulla was an adopted grandson of Moytoy and Quatsi. According to his son Turtle-at-Home, the Little Carpenter was originally a Mishawaka Nippising captive from the Great Lakes, adopted into the Moytoy family by Nancy Moytoy, Old Hop’s sister, and her husband, White Raven, another Algonquian Indian. (14) His portrait in the Georgia painting may be compared with a picture of the famous Plains Cree actor Michael Greyeyes (Figure 4). As for the name, Attakullakulla ("wood leaning without support, may fall one way or the other"), an explanation may be offered in the fact that he was an adoptee, a captive taken into the tribe with no family of his own to support him. Traditional ancient Indian peoples referred to elders in the community as "big trees," and to the young as "sprouts" and "leaves." (15) We find numerous names among the Cherokee like Leaf, Bark, Tassel and Blossom, indications of the holder’s standing in the tribal hierarchy.  Attakullakulla’s name thus refers to his having been uprooted or cut off from his original people and leaning for support on his adoptive community. He behaved accordingly, and is remembered for his uncanny decision making, sometimes falling one way, sometimes another. "Little Carpenter" does not do his name justice.

The name Quatsi or Quatie may be a Cherokee attempt at an Algonquian word starting with "p," similar to the word Qualla, a rendering of "Polly." Cherokee had few words starting with the "qua" sound and possessed no "p" sound. Algonquian languages (such as that of the Virginia Powhatans, Delaware Indians, Shawnee and Potawatomi) are full of words starting with the "p" sound. There was a good deal of dynastic intermarriage at this time between Overhill Cherokee families and the Algonquians to the north. Thus, one of the 1730 party was demonstrably of the Algonquian stock (Nippising) and most of them were probably mixed. Kollannah may have been a Powhatan Indian. Since the Algonquian tribes were solidly allied to the French, the British may have accomplished a greater coup with their new puppet emperor than they realized.

What of the remaining unidentified Indians in the Georgia painting? I propose that Verelst modeled them on two further portraits available to him from the 1730 Cherokee delegation—that of Clogoitta (second from left, Figure 1) and Tathtowie (third from left). The Indian in the "Creek" party on the far left holds a spear, as does Clogoittah in the Cherokee scene; both are round-faced with a forelock. The tall Indian behind Attakullakulla in the "Creek" picture resembles Tathtowie in the Cherokee delegation, down to the braided scalplock hanging down over his left ear and exceptional height. A proposed key to the new identities is shown in the cartouche in Figure 5.

It remains to identify Tomochichi, his wife Senawka and "grand nephew" Tooanahawi. The traditional account runs as follows. Tomochichi was a Lower Creek chief who established a small town on Yamacraw Bluffs, less than a mile up river from Savannah. He had been expelled by the Lower Creek leadership in the interior. He chose the Savannah River near John Musgrove’s trading post because that whole section of the coast had turned into a sort of no man’s land. The Carolinians had driven the Yamasee from the area about 1715, and slave raids and imperial rivalry between the Spanish, French and English had turned the whole area into a desert. The foremost authority on the subject, Charles M. Hudson, speaks of Tomochichi as a "trader Indian." He was not a "paramount chief" like Chief Brims or the headmen of Coosa and Ichisi. Nevertheless, he was selected for the diplomatic trip to England and returned to Georgia with a shipload of presents. After distributing these trade goods, Tomochichi was reconciled with the Lower Creeks. He was 91 years old at the time of his visit to London in 1734 and died in 1738. Hudson says, "…we can forgive him [Oglethorpe] for making a band of trading Indians appear to be more than they really were" because of the circumstances. (16)

I would like to suggest that Tomochichi was actually Yuchi. By all traditional Indian accounts, this large and powerful tribe were the rightful inhabitants of the lower Savannah River. Related to the ancient Moundbuilders and not to the Muscogeans or Cherokee, they served as a buffer zone between the Creeks (Muscogean-speaking Indians) and the Cherokee to the north, who had always taken care to have an outlet to the sea from their stronghold in the mountains. Yuchi towns were intersettled with the Cherokee in Tennessee and Creeks in Alabama and Georgia, but this area was their last, large uncontested center of population. Tomochichi is identified in contemporary records as coming from the town of "Apalachee." In a talk of June 11, 1735 at Savannah, he is called a descendant of the Apalachee who befriended the warlike Cusseta (Lower Creeks). (17) Many historians identify the Apalachee with the Florida tribe of that name, but I believe the reference here is to Pallachucolla, a Muscogee name for "(allied) people or town on the other side of the river." In context, it refers to the settlement of Tomochichi and his people at a place called Pallachucolla on the north bank of the Savannah river (South Carolina side), where Fort St. George was later constructed by the British, about 15 miles above Ebenezer. Tomochichi’s wife, "an ugly old creature," according to Lord Egmont, was also Yuchi, and has typical Yuchi looks. (18) Tomochichi’s name (more of a title) may be interpreted as "house of Tama" (the Spaniards’ name for the entire province around Savannah + chiki, "house(s)," "town"). If Tooanahawi was Tomochichi’s "nephew," he was probably a son of Senawki’s sister, niece or other female clan relative, possibly the son of the war chief who died in England. He was also Yuchi.

The Trustees of Georgia painting hung in the offices of the Trustees until their dissolution in 1752. It was then given to the fourth Earl of Shaftesbury, Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, from whose descendants Henry Francis du Pont purchased it in 1956. Throughout its history, it has served as a superb contemporary record of the encounter of white European and Indian governments, being reproduced in museums and books as an important witness to the Christianization and civilization of Indians by whites.

The same political themes can be traced in the treaties that were signed by the four delegations mentioned in this article. For instance, the Cherokee Speaker in the 1730 delegation was made to say, "We are come hither from a dark mountainous place, where nothing but darkness is to be found; but are now in a place where there is light…We look upon the Great King George as the Sun, and as our Father, and upon ourselves as his children…We came hither naked and poor, as the worm out of the earth, but you have everything; and we that have nothing must love you, and can never break the chain of friendship that is between us." (19) Of course, no Indian would say such things.  On the contrary, we know that the Cherokee at this time felt rather sorry for the English. They called the settlers at Charleston the "Nothings," because they had no good food, shelter, or health, no family, and had deserted the bones of their ancestors across the sea. (20)

The purpose of the 1730 engraving (Fig. 1) was to emphasize the munificence of King George in bestowing fine clothing on the naked savages. By the time of the 1734 delegation, the program and approach had changed, for it was known that the returning Cherokee had disavowed their treaty and become ingrates. A council held at Great Tellico revoked the treaty and reproved Wiggan and the six signers. (21)  A hundred Cherokee then plundered a trader’s store in Keowee. Someone at Charleston wrote to the new colonists at Savannah the following warning:

The Principal actors in this Affair was those Indians that Sr. Alexander Cummings carried over lately to England; we find notwithstanding the good Treatment they met with there that they are more insolent than the others and say that we are all Slaves to the Great George, and all the Goods carried to their Nation are his and he sends them over as Presents to them… [I] am sure it will be for the Service of this Province never to Suffer any more of them to go there; the Treaty of Alliance Settled between them and the Lords of Trade they now despise. (22)

When the "Creek" Indians arrived in London there was considerable discussion on how to dress them for official audiences with the court and the Trustees. Foreman writes, "…suitable garments were ordered for them so they might make a proper appearance at court. They wished to wear their native dress, but Oglethorpe insisted on a combination of civilized and savage costume (p. 58)." Thus in Verelst’s painting, Senawki and Tooanahawi wear complete English dress and some of the other Indians have vestiges of white man’s adornments like Tomochichi’s fur necklace. The contrast between naked savage and civilized Englishmen is further emphasized. It is probable, however, that in the actual audience, the Georgia Indians wore the "shirts we gave them over their covering, which is only a skin that leaves their breasts and thighs and arms open." (23) They would not put on breeches or boots. Since this would hardly have made a dignified picture, Verelst painted the delegation in native dress. I suggest he used Cherokees from the previous visit for models for all but Tomochichi, Senawka and Tooanahawi.

To sum up, the Trustees of Georgia painting is not a historical snapshot of an event in 1734 but a masterful political statement carefully prepared after the fact by members of the Verelst family of painters and colonial civil servants. In the absence of authentic sketches of five out of the eight Indians, the painter drew on pictures from the 1730 Cherokee treaty, which, by this time, had become politically incorrect. By a strange process, we have a good contemporary portrait by a Dutch master of one the most famous Cherokees, Attakullakulla, together with others of his delegation to King George. Interpreters and historians should understand, however, that the Indian cultures depicted in this justly celebrated painting are Algonquian, Cherokee and Yuchi, not Muskogee Creek. As a political statement, it fails, upon analysis, to authenticate any treaty making between the new colony of Georgia and the sovereign Creek Indian Confederacy.

The English were not above putting words into Indians’ mouths at treaties, and when it came to recording these events in pictures, just about any Indian would do! What would have been the effect of tipping in a portrait of William Penn for James Oglethorpe because they both wore the same hats?

Donald Panther-Yates
Copyright 2000. Not to be reproduced without permission.

Notes
 (1) "An Essay on Plantations by Sir Francis Bacon Ld. Verulam.," in:  The Most Delightful Country of the Universe. Promotional Literature of The Colony of Georgia 1717-1734, introduction by Trevor R. Reese (Savannah, Ga.:  The Beehive Press, 1972), p. 82.

(2) The tract is attributed variously to James Edward Oglethorpe or Benjamin Martyn, the secretary of the Trustees of Georgia. It is reprinted in Reese, pp. 115-156.

 (3) Carolyn Thomas Foreman, Indians Abroad 1493-1938  (Norman:  University of Oklahoma Press, 1943), 34-39. The five Indians were: (1) Sa Ga Yean Qua Prah Ton, chief of the Maquas (Mohawks), (2) Te Yee Neen Ho Ga Prow (Mohawk), (3) Etow Oh Koam and (4) Oh Nee Yeath Ton No Prow (river sachem), and the unnamed Ganojahhore sachem. Their English names were Hendrick, or Henrick, John, Joseph Brant and Etawa Causne. One of the chiefs died and was buried in England. Two of their portraits became part of the collection of the National Archives of Canada:  Etow Oh Koam (c92421) and Sa Ga Yeath Qua Pieth Tow (c92419).

(4)  Foreman, pp. 44-55. See also William O. Steele. The Cherokee Crown of Tannassy (Winston-Salem, N.C.:  John F. Blair, 1977); Samuel G. Drake, Early History of Georgia, embracing the Embassy of Sir Alexander Cuming to the Country of the Cherokees, in the Year 1730, with a Map of the Cherokee Country, from a Draft Made by the Indians (=New-England Historical and Genealogical Register, July 1872) (Boston:  David Clapp & Son, 1872).

(5)  The Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum, Winterthur, Delaware, "Trustees of Georgia," ID 1956.0567A, dated between 1734 and 1735 and ascribed to William Verelst (d. after 1756). See Edgar P. Richardson, American Paintings and Related Pictures in The Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum  (University of Virginia Press, 1986), pp.124-125. The painting’s provenance is:  Trustees of Georgia; by descent in the family of the earl of Shaftesbury; H. F. du Pont. It measures about four feet high by five feet wide. An old copy by Edmund Dyer hangs in Atlanta (Georgia Department of Archives and History, LRV# 213), and there are other, more recent copies in Savannah and elsewhere.

(6)  Setting Out to Begin a New World. Colonial Georgia. A Documentary History ed. By Edward J. Cashin (Savannah, Ga.:  Library of Georgia, 1995), p. 23.

(7)  On the Yamacraw visit, see Foreman, pp. 56-64; on the Timberlake delegation, pp. 65-81.

(8)  Steele, p. 77.

(9)  William Bartram, Travels, ed. Francis Harper (New Haven:  Yale University Press, 1958).

(10) See Foreman, p. 57; reproduced in John R. Swanton, The Indians of the Southeastern United States (Washington, D.C.:  United States Government Printing Office, 1946), pl. 29 (=Smithsonian Institute Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137).

(11)  Foreman, p. 58.

(12)  Narcissa Owen, Memoirs of Narcissa Owen, 1831-1907 (Washington, D.C.:  Library of Congress, 1907). Owen also claimed Oconostota, a twenty-year-old child of Quatsi, was part of the delegation; he may have been "Oukah Ulah," called "the king to be." Oukah Ulah (center, Fig. 2) was quite tall, like the "giant" Great Warrior Oconostota.

(13)  See, for instance, the illustration in Thomas E. Mails, The Cherokee People. The Story of the Cherokees from Earliest Origins to Contemporary Times (Tulsa, Okla.:  Council Oak Books, 1992),  p. 94.

(14)  John P. Brown, Old Frontiers (Kingsport, Tenn.:  Southern Publishers, Inc., 1938); see also Brent Alan Yanusdi Cox, Heart of the Eagle. Dragging Canoe and the Emergence of the Chickamauga Confederacy (Milan, Tenn.:  Chenanee Publishers, 1999), p. 52.

(15)  See, for instance, a foreign Indian’s adoption experience among the Maya in Martin Prechtel, Secrets of the Talking Jaguar. Memoirs from the Living Heart of a Mayan Village (New York:  Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin Putnam, 1998), esp. p. 253.

(16)  Charles M. Hudson, "The Genesis of Georgia’s Indians," at p. 42, in:  Forty Years of Diversity. Essays on Colonial Georgia, ed. Harvey H. Jackson & Phinizy Spaulding (Athens, Ga.:  The University of Georgia Press, 1984), pp. 25-45.

(17)  Swanton, p. 386.

(18)  Foreman, 62; compare illustrations of Yuchi in Thomas M. N. Lewis and Madeline Kneberg, Tribes That Slumber. Indians of the Tennessee Region, illustrated by Madeline Kneberg (Knoxville, Tenn.:  The University of tennessee Press, 1958), p. 138.

(19)  Answer of the Indian Chiefs of the Cherokee Nation, 9th Sept., 1730, to the Propositions made to them in behalf of H.M. by the Board of Trade, 7th Sept, in:  Calendar of State Papers. Colonial Series. America and West Indies 1730, Preserved in the Public Record Office, ed. Cecil Headlam (Vaduz, Lichtenstein:  Kraus Reprint Ltd., 1964), no. 464, p. 295. The Commissioners hired a slick Pennsylvania lawyer, Sir William Keith, to draft the unusual language of the original proposal and the Indians’ answers, later boasting to the Duke of Newcastle that "the small expence H.M. has been at, upon this occasion, is well laid out for His service (no. 464, p. 294)…."

(20)  James Adair, The History of the American Indians, ed. Samuel Cole Williams (Johnson City, Tenn.:  The Watauga Press, 1930), p. 464.

(21)  Steele, p. 136.

(22)  The Colonial Records of Georgia. Original Papers, Correspondence to the Trustees, James Oglethorpe, and others 1732-1735. Volume 20, ed. Kenneth Coleman & Milton Ready (Athens:  The University of Georgia Press, 1982), pp. 49-50.

(23)  Lord Egmont in Foreman, p. 62.
 

Copyright 2000 Donald N. Panther-Yates