The Jesus Road and the Trail of Tears

LeRoy Koopman, author of Taking the Jesus Road recognizes, as I do, that the Christian church has had a mixed record in regards to Indians. Usually I like to make an effort to point out the positives because they seem to get less ink.

The short description of Taking the Jesus Road in Google Books sums up the negative side of the church in Native history very well. First, the church often cooperated with the government "in implementing shifting policies that allowed the native peoples little or no voice in their own destiny." The other negative was the tendancy to equate "the Christian faith with white culture."

An internet search about the removal of New York Indians led me to Koopman's book. Pages eight through ten tell us something about the "complex and...strange career" of Reverend John F. Schermerhorn, an Indian agent who was appointed to the level of Commissioner by President Andrew Jackson. Tragically, Jackson's Indian removal policy called for all Indians east of the Mississippi to be pushed west. Koopman tells us that Schermerhorn participated in treaty negotiations with twenty tribes between 1832 and 1837, "paving the way for the removal of thousands of Indians" (page 9).

So Schermerhorn's work caused great hardship for many Indians, but oddly, one of his biographers described him as a "minister of the gospel who believed that the Indians' racial and eternal salvation required their removal west of the Mississippi River"(page 9).



Of the tribes that Schermerhorn negotiated with, the Cherokees are the most famous - you've probably heard of their Trail of Tears. The lesser-known tribes he negotiated with include the Stockbridge Mohicans, and the Brothertown Indians. More on that in future posts.

For Further Reading:
Taking the Jesus Road: The Ministry of the Reformed Church in America Among Native Americans By LeRoy Koopman
Published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005
ISBN 0802831257, 9780802831255
512 pages

Divide and Conquer

Above: Chief Tecumseh and his brother, the Shawnee Prophet.







Right:
William Henry Harrison,
Governor of the Territory of Indiana







The policy of the United States was to make treaties on a "nation to nation" basis. The British liked to do it the same way. That explains why they liked to refer to the Indian chiefs as "kings." For example, when Etowaukaum and three Iroquois chiefs went to London to meet with Queen Anne, they became known as "The Four Indian Kings." Another "king" was "King Ben" Kokhkewenaunaunt who is believed to have moved to Stockbridge, Massachusetts in the 1740's (as a result, the town of Stockbridge became the main council fire, or capital city of the Mohicans). And of course, around that same period of time, the British had given Konkapot the title of Captain and Umpachenee the title of Lieutenant.

The difference between white governments and Indian governments was that the Indian chiefs had no coercive power over their people. So white leaders gave the chiefs prestigious political or military titles, hoping that the chiefs would be willing to speak for all of their people. The white leaders didn't want to have to get every Indian's permission before making something official, they wanted to negotiate with one leader, so they gave him a fancy title.

Maybe that is also why even the smallest of tribes became known as nations. Would a community of 200 or 300 white people ever be considered a nation? Probably not, but the Stockbridges were no bigger than that in the 1800's.

Anyway, the United States deliberately chose to fight many Indian nations of various sizes - that was their "divide and conquer" strategy. Tecumseh - and other leaders before him - tried to give Indians a better chance by getting as many tribes as possible to form a confederation. But white Indian fighters like William Henry Harrison succeeded in getting the small "nations" to sign treaties, exchanging their good land for annuities or poorer land in the west.

Want to know more?
Read about the Treaty of St. Mary's.
Read about the Treaty of Greenville.
Read about the Battle of Tippecanoe.
Read "Indian Removals in Indiana."
The United States employed a Native diplomat who was opposed to Tecumseh's confederacy.

New Article About the Brothertown (not Brotherton) Indians

The caption reads: "The Methodist Episcopal Church was the focal point of the Tribal community for almost 125 years. Church services were held there along with weddings, baptisms and burials. It also served as a meeting place where the Brothertown Indians transacted their town affairs."

The current (Winter 2008-2009) issue of the Wisconsin Magazine of History features an article about the Brothertown Indians. "To Procure a Residence Amongst Their Brethren to the West," (pages 28-41) by Alanna Rice will help to fill a void - there isn't much awareness of the Brothertown Indians or knowledge of their history. Nevertheless, the article gave me a bad feeling - maybe it is because I'm a stickler: a stickler for accurate names.

In her third footnote, Ms. Rice asserts: "The author will refer to both the Native community and tribe discussed in this article by the name 'Brotherton.'" Why? Because that was the name first used by Samson Occom. Reverend Samson Occom is a hero of mine, but his original name didn't really catch on like the name "Brothertown" did. [According to Caroline Andler (see her comment below), the two names were used "interchangeably."]

But it is about more than that. For me there is already plenty of confusion knowing that there was another community of Christian Algonkians that was known as the "Brotherton Indians." Because they were a small band that joined the Stockbridge Mohicans unofficially in about 1803 and made it legal in an 1823 treaty, there is even less awareness of the Brotherton Delaware Indians than there is of the Brothertown Indians.

As Ms. Rice admits, the people and the community she writes about were known by the name "Brothertown" throughout almost their entire existence. Brothertown, Wisconsin was never known as "Brotherton" and I don't think that historians should take poetic license with place names.

Smithsonian "Error" Corrected: Etowaukaum not an Iroquois

The headline in the 1/15/2009 issue of Mohican News which I received today is "Descendant Finds Error in National Historical Exhibit - Seeks Correction." The item in question: a variation of the portrait you see on the right. Depicted is Etowaukaum (or "Etow oh Koam" if you prefer the Smithsonian's spelling), Chief Sachem of the Mohican Nation in 1710. That year he joined three Iroquois Chief Sachems on a trip across the Atlantic where they appealed to England's "Queen Anne to send a force against the French and Indians there"(see Frazier, 1992, page 9).

The Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery appears to have erred by referring to Etowaukaum as being one of the four Indian "Kings" leading the Iroquois Confederacy. The question of whether they should have been referred to as "Kings" is something that I'll save for another post, the error the Mohican News is referring to, of course, is that as a Mohican, Etowaukaum belonged to the Algonkian or Algonquin language/cultural group, not the Iroquois language/cultural group.

The Mohican News tells how Terry Shepard (whose father was Rev. Gordon Shepard, an enrolled member of the Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohican Indians), alerted the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery of their alleged error via e-mail and copied the Canadian National Portrait Gallery in on the message. Here the plot thickens. According to Mohican News, Madeleine Trudeau, the Acting Curator at the Canadian National Portrait Gallery, sent Shepard a reply which explains added complexity: in 1710 the Mohicans were politically in alliance with their former enemies, the Mohawks. As a result, referring to Etowaukaum as a leader of the Iroquois Confederacy can be regarded as accurate, at least from a political or military standpoint. (Trudeau's claim is backed up by Patrick Frazier, who, on page 7 says that the "two tribes now spoke of each other in kinship terms. The Mohicans called the Mohawks uncle and they showed deference to their uncle.")

Mohican News reported that Shepard returned to the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery for a follow-up visit on January 4th and observed that the portrait in question now identifies Etowaukaum as a Mohican but he continues to have other "issues with the overall exhibit" and up to that point, he didn't find any changes on their website.

(The screencapture below is from that website on January 15th, 2009)
Mohican News relates that another bone of contention brought up by Shepard is that Etowaukaum is referred to as Chief of "the River Nation," which Shepard complained about - not for being inaccurate - but for being "an Anglicization." Of course, the word "Mohican," is also an Anglicization of "Muhheconnuck," but may I point out that - according to Patrick Frazier - "Mohicans" and "River Indians" aren't exactly the same. On page 6, Frazier says that the "Mohicans and the Indians at Schaticoke were collectively called 'River Indians' by their allies" (emphasis added). If Frazier is correct, then it likely is more accurate to say that Etowaukaum was representing the River Indians than the Mohicans.

The past can be so complex that we have to split hairs to understand where other people are coming from...but in the end, pride matters and too many people have only read the word "Mohican" as a reference to an old novel. So...

Let it be known that Etowaukaum was a Mohican!

Sac & Fox Mission Trip, Part III

I've been reading Cutting Marsh's journal of the Sac and Fox Expedition. As you can see above, his hand-writing isn't the easiest to make out, but the journal is a worth-while read for anybody who is interested in what it was like to travel the Midwest in the 1830's. One disappointment is that, so far, Marsh has said very little about his traveling companions, four Stockbridge Mohicans, all devout Christians. On the positive side, Marsh relates a remarkable trip. Along the Mississippi River, and into what is now Iowa, Marsh runs into "Winnebagoes" (we now call them Ho-Chunk Indians), observes young Sioux men dancing, and meets quite a few whites. He describes most of the whites as being either "professors of Methodism" or "Universalists," and laments that the Indians are "in darkness" (meaning that they weren't Christians).

It seems there are between two to four men named Davenport that Marsh comes in contact with during the trip. In Part II of this series of posts, I told you about a trader named George Davenport. It seems that in Marsh's entries of June 28-29, 1834 he is dealing with a different Davenport, this one being a United States Indian Agent. Although Marsh said he found Agent Davenport to be "quite an agreeable man," he was the one to tell Marsh that Sac and Fox Chief Keokuck (see photo) had already declined the offer to have a mission school for his people. Davenport told Marsh that Keokuck "said the Great Spirit had given them mouths to speak with and they did not wish to learn to talk on paper."

Like the good Calvinist that he was, Marsh remarked in his journal, "perhaps it is on account of the pride in my heart that God seems to thwart my designs."

Brief Abenaki History

The State of Vermont is commemorating the 400th Anniversary of French explorer Samuel de Champlain's visit to the lake that was named after him. They have put out a website that features an article about Abenaki history by Frederick Wiseman. [See comments below for a significant criticism of Wiseman's article.]

You may also want to read Lee Sultzman's compact history of the Abenaki.

Or use this link to visit the Abenaki Tribal Museum.

The picture above of two Abenaki women is from Maggiemac's History of American Women blog.

Fowler Family Genealogy

If you're interested in Brothertown genealogy, this website might be a good resource for you. It contains data (more than just the basic essentials) on members of the Fowler family, including ancestors such as Mary Occom, George Pharaoh, Wyandanch and Wuchikittaubut.



Wyandanch is shown here holding a war club. You may recognize the background as a map of Long Island, New York, and southern Connecticut.
Read about Wyandanch

Last Sermon in Stockbridge, Wisconsin

A white congregation had taken the place of one that was once almost exclusively Indian. But they continued to worship in the "old Mission House" until December 19th, 1869. On that day Rev. L. P. Norcross attempted to give his congregation the church history of the Stockbridge Mohicans. (So his sermon was about history, instead of religion.)

The Oshkosh Times had the foresight to print Norcross' sermon (referring to it also as a "MEMORIAL DISCOURSE") in their December 29th, 1869 issue. Of course Norcross didn't have a lot of good resources to work with, so it wouldn't be fair to have high expectations of his sermon. Nevertheless, we can call it a good faith attempt at recounting the past.

Norcross tells us how church attendance was enforced when the tribe still lived in Massachusetts:

"These Indians were very strict, very moral and pure in their habits, especially observant were they of the Sabbath, and the whipping master applied the benefits of his office to all strolling pleasure-seekers with whom he came in contact."

While I'm inclined to think that the term "whipping" is not the most appropriate, Norcross is in the right vein because the old Indian church for many years did have an officer known as a "beadle" who at least wielded some kind of a stick (Calvin Colton observed this in 1830).

Norcross reported something that I have seen nowhere else, something about what he called "the Hendricks and Quinney trouble." Certain political documents (which Norcross was unaware of) will tell us more about this conflict, but Norcross has an anecdote of how the conflict may have started. "It was about a single cow, which Austin E. Quinney claimed was stolen from him by one Hendricks, and, I believe proved on him."

Sac & Fox Mission Trip, Part II

Use this link to read Part I of this series of posts.



Maps in this post are from Roger Nichols' thesis, Cutting Marsh: Missionary to the Stockbridges, 1830-1848.


In 1834, John Metoxen, John N. Chicks, two other Stockbridge Mohicans, and Rev. Cutting Marsh traveled by birchbark canoe up the Fox River, and then portaged to the Wisconsin and paddled down to the Mississippi. From there they continued south, spending time in what is now Iowa.

This was their mission trip to the Sac and Fox Indians. Unlike the Stockbridges, the Sac and Fox didn't speak an Algonquin language. From the Stockbridges' point of view, it was also significant that the Sac and Fox weren't "civilized" Indians.

When the delegation arrived in what would become the city of Davenport the next year, Cutting Marsh had a long talk with one of the city's founders, George Davenport, a trader. Marsh, of course, was trying to talk Davenport into getting a Calvinist mission established there. Davenport was noncommittal. He told Marsh that the Sac and Fox were "happy...in their present state."

Meanwhile, John Metoxen was fortunate to speak with Chief Blackhawk through a good interpreter. Unfortunately, we only have a second-hand account of the conversation written down by Cutting Marsh. However, the conversation must have started out well with Blackhawk telling Metoxen how he appreciated the level of sobriety he'd seen among the Stockbridge Mohicans during his visit to Statesburg a year earlier. This was probably the opening that Metoxen wanted. Marsh's reconstruction of the discussion from there is not quite believable, but it is all we have:

Blackhawk: "Now what do you think is best about receiving missionaries &c?"
Metoxen: "By all means, receive them...for they will do you good."
Blackhawk: But the trader, Mr. D, told me not to have anything to do with them..."

As contrived as that dialog seems, it likely reflects the larger truth that George Davenport's livelihood as a trader would have been threatened by a mission that would teach the local Indians to become "civilized farmers."

Sources:
*Letter from Marsh of Sept. 5th 1834 letter in the ABCFM Papers.
*Marsh's 1834 Report to the Society in Scotland for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SSPCK).

This series will continue.

New York Indians in Wisconsin and Elsewhere

Every federally recognized Indian nation has an enrollment officer, a tribal employee who uses census records and various other historical and genealogical sources to determine who has a sufficient blood quantum to be enrolled in that particular tribe. The situation has brought on controversy throughout Indian country for a number of reasons. Possibly the most controversial aspect of the blood quantum issue is that it doesn't really matter how much "Indian blood" you have, but rather what percentage of your ancestry belonged to the particular tribe that you want to be enrolled in.

The enrollment issue is further complicated by tribes such as the Stockbridge Mohicans who base their 1/4 blood quantum not on having 1/4 "Mohican" blood, but rather it is based on having 1/4 of your blood traceable back to the Stockbridge-Munsee Census of 1906 (or was it the census of 1895?, I'll have to check on that). Anyway, I already addressed the question of how "Mohican" the Stockbridge Indians are, so right now I want to share a genealogical resource that applies to all the New York Indians that came to Wisconsin.

Indians From New York in Wisconsin and Elsewhere: A Genealogy Reference compiled or edited by Toni Jollay Prevost is a book that I can only recommend with reservations (no pun intended). I looked at this book a couple years ago and remembered it as being "homemade," because of the "classic typewriter font" that is used. However, when I located the book today in my public library I found that it was published by Heritage Books in 1995. I had to wonder if the typewriter font was some kind of a marketing tool to get families to purchase a corporate project. Well, I know what they say about not judging a book by its cover (or its font), but I believe this is a book that has its share of errors. For example, if you wanted to know the chief sachem of the Stockbridge Mohicans in the 1820's where would you look? Ms. Prevost used a book about the Oneidas to get that information and as a result she claims that a Samuel W. Hendricks was the chief. (The author of the book on the Oneidas must have been referring to Solomon U. Hendricks, a chief for a few years before his early death.)

Anyway, I do recommend New York Indians in Wisconsin and Elsewhere for its duplication of census records and other lists. Included are census records from Brown, Shawano, and Calumet Counties in Wisconsin and Bucks County in Pennsylvania, census records of the Oneidas and Stockbridges, and a list of Iroquois Indians at boarding schools in Virginia, Kansas (Haskell) and Pennsylvania (Carlisle).

Cutting Marsh: Missionary to the Stockbridges

In 1959 a young graduate student at the University of Wisconsin(at Madison) completed his Masters' Thesis: Cutting Marsh Missionary to the Stockbridges 1830-1848.

What Roger Nichols wrote back then, like most Masters theses, was saved but largely forgotten about. But, nevertheless, unlike many other graduate students, Roger Nichols went on to become a nationally recognized expert on Native American Studies. He's written some rather well-known books, including American Indians in U.S. History.

I think I can make the claim that I'm one of only a few people to have read Nichols' thesis on Cutting Marsh in recent decades. I believe that because I read things in it that seemed to have gone unnoticed by other authors. But the original or primary sources that Nichols used have been used by others, myself included. They include the ABCFM Papers, Marsh's reports to the Scottish Missionary Society as reprinted in the Wisconsin Historical Collections, and the Cutting Marsh Papers (I doubt that the John C. Adams Papers had been discovered yet at that time). Anyway, a lot of the credit for what I know about Cutting Marsh, goes to Roger Nichols. He was the first person to refer to Rev. Marsh as being "stern and stubborn," and that is a description that I find hard to improve on.

Mission Trip to the Sac & Fox, Part I

In 1833, one year after being defeated by the United States in a war that was named after him, Chief Blackhawk (pictured here) visited the Stockbridge Mohicans at their Statesburg settlement (located in present-day Kaukauna, Wisconsin). Blackhawk invited the Stockbridges to visit him and other Sac and Fox Indians in what is now Iowa. The trip that came out of this invitation was at least to some extent a scouting trip since the small Native nation expected to have to move again. But they also thought of the trip they were preparing to make as a mission to spread Christianity and "civilization" among members of their own race. This is how they presented the trip in an October 14, 1833 letter to the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM):

Fathers, we ask if there is not some way we can make our visit subserve, in some degree at least, the great object of your society? Cannot we tell them that your society is ready to send teachers if they are willing to receive them?

The letter, signed by Jacob Cheekthaucon, John Metoxen, Austin E. Quinney, Thomas Hendrick, Andrew Miller, Timothy Jordan, Cornelius Charles, John W. Quinney, Samuel Miller, and Josiah W. Miller asked if a missionary could accompany them. The commissioners in Boston decided to support the trip and gave Rev. Cutting Marsh permission to travel with the delegation.

The letter described is part of the ABCFM Papers.