Among the various nationalities of the Gulf territories the Maskoki
family of tribes occupied a central and commanding position. Not only
the large extent of territory held by them, but also their numbers,
their prowess in war, and a certain degree of mental culture and
self-esteem made of the Maskoki one of the most important groups in
Indian history. From their ethnologic condition of later times, we
infer that these tribes have extended for many centuries back in time,
from the Atlantic to the Mississippi and beyond that river, and from
the Apalachian ridge to the Gulf of Mexico. With short intermissions
they kept up warfare with all the circumjacent Indian communities, and
also among each other. All the various dispositions of the human mind
are represented in the Maskoki tribes. We have the cruel and lurking
Chicasa, the powerful and ingenious but treacherous and corruptible
Cha'hta, the magnanimous and hospitable, proud and revengeful Creek,
the aggressive Alibamu, the quarrelsome Yámassi, and the self-willed,
independent Seminole, jealous of the enjoyment of his savage freedom
in the swamps and everglades of the semi-tropical peninsula.
The irresolute and egotistic policy of these tribes often caused
serious difficulties to the government of the English and French
colonies, and some of them constantly wavered in their adhesion
between the French and the English cause. The American government
overcame their opposition easily whenever a conflict presented itself
(the Seminole war forms an exception), because, like all the Indians,
they never knew how to unite against a common foe.
The two main branches of the stock, the Creek and the Cha'hta Indians,
were constantly at war, and the remembrance of their deadly conflicts
has now passed to their descendants in the form of folklore. The two
differ anthropologically in their exterior, the people of the western
or Cha'hta branch being thick-set and heavy, that of the eastern or
Creek connection more lithe and tall. Prognathism is not frequent
among them, and the complexion of both is a rather dark cinnamon, with
the southern olive tinge. The general intelligence of this gifted race
renders it susceptible for civilization, endows it with eloquence, but
does not always restrain it from the outbursts of the wildest passion.
Among the tribes of the Maskoki family, we notice the following
ethnographic practices: the use of the red and white colors as symbols
of war and peace, an extensive system of totemic gentes, the use of
the Ilex cassine for the manufacture of the black drink, the erection
of artificial mounds, the belief in a deity called "Master of Life,"
and original sun-worship. The eastern tribes all had an annual
festival in the town square, called a _fast_ (púskita in Creek), and
some traces of it may be found also among the western connection. In
the eastern and western branch (also among the Naktche people) the
children belong to the gens of the mother, a custom which differs from
that of the Yuchi and dates from high antiquity. No instances of
anthropophagy are recorded, but the custom of scalping seems to have
been indigenous among them. The early Timucua scalped their enemies
and dried the scalps over their camp-fires. The artificial flattening
of the foreheads of male infants seems to have prevailed in the
western branch only, but some kind of skull deformation could be
observed throughout the Gulf territories. The re-interment of dead
bodies, after cleaning their bones from the adhering muscles several
months after death, is recorded more especially for the western
branch, but was probably observed among all tribes in various
modifications.
None of the customs just enumerated was peculiar to the Maskoki
tribes, but common throughout the south, many of them being found in
the north also. They were mentioned here only, to give _in their
totality_ a fair ethnographic picture of the Maskoki nationality.
The genealogy of the Maskoki tribes cannot be established on
anthropological, that is racial, characteristics; these Indians
formerly incorporated so many alien elements into their towns, and
have become so largely mixed with half-castes in the nineteenth
century, that a division on racial grounds has become almost
impossible.
Hence, the only characteristic by which a subdivision of the family
can be attempted, is that of _language_. Following their ancient
topographic location from east to west, we obtain the following
synopsis:
_First branch, or Maskoki proper._ The Creek, Maskokálgi or Maskoki
proper, settled on Coosa, Tallapoosa, Upper and Middle Chatahuchi
rivers. From these branched off by segmentation the Creek portion of
the Seminoles, of the Yámassi and of the little Yamacraw community.
_Second, or Apalachian branch._ This southeastern division, which may
be called also _a parte potiori_ the Hitchiti connection, anciently
comprised the tribes on the Lower Chatahuchi river and, east from
there, the extinct Apalachi, the Mikasuki, and the Hitchiti portion of
the Seminoles, Yámassi and Yamacraws.
_Third, or Alibamu branch_ comprised the Alibamu villages on the river
of that name; to them belonged the Koassáti and Witumka on Coosa
river, its northern affluent.
_Fourth, Western or Cha'hta branch._ From the main people, the
Cha'hta, settled in the middle portions of the State of Mississippi,
the Chicasa, Pascagoula, Biloxi, Huma and other tribes once became
separated through segmentation.
* * * * *
The strongest evidence for a community of origin of the Maskoki tribes
is furnished by the fact that _their dialects belong to one linguistic
family_. The numerous incorporations of foreign elements have not been
able to alter the purity of their language; the number of intrusive
words is very small, and the grammar has repelled every foreign
intrusion. This is the inference we draw from their best studied
dialects, for with some of them, as with Ábika, we are not acquainted
at all, and with others very imperfectly. The principal dialects of
the family greatly differ from each other; Cha'hta, for instance, is
unintelligible to the Creek, Koassáti and Hitchiti people, and the
speech of each of these three tribes is not understood by the two
others. When Albert Gallatin published his vocabularies of Cha'hta and
Creek, he was uncertain at first whether they were related to each
other or not. On the other side, the difference between Cha'hta and
Chicasa, and between Creek and Seminole, is so insignificant that
these dialects may be considered as practically identical. The degree
of dialectic difference points approximately to the date of the
separation of the respective communities, and untold centuries must
have elapsed since the two main branches of the family were torn
asunder, for Cha'hta differs about as much from Creek as the literary
German does from Icelandic.