Proof that historians altered the early history of the Southeast
Much of what students in the United States read today as the “official early history of the Southeast” is really modified history created as propaganda to justify British claims to all of North America, Georgia’s claims to Native American territories or Cherokee claims that they had always lived in the southern Appalachians. In an earlier issues of the People of One Fire, we showed readers the 1701 Map of North America by De L’Isle, which shows western North Carolina occupied by the Shawnee and Creek villages and then, the first official map of the State of Georgia, published in 1785, which labeled all of North Georgia, except what is now Rabun, Towns and northern Habersham Counties as “Upper Creeks of the Muskhogee Creek Nation.” However, the fabrication of propagandized history began earlier in the 1700s, when Great Britain and France were competing for control of North America. Early French exploration of the Southeast was left out of textbooks from then onward. The presence of a French fort and two Cusate-Creek villages on an island at the confluence of the Little Tennessee and Tennessee Rivers were erased. This fort and the Creek villages were actually excavated by Smithsonian Institute archaeologists in 1885, but were first labeled “Cherokee” then within a couple of decades, forgotten. Construction of a TVA dam destroyed the proto-Creek mounds and ruins of the French fort.
It should be explained that Spain, France and Great Britain used different names and boundaries for defining their territories in Southeastern North America. Spain labeled all of the region south of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi River as “La Florida.” France labeled the region south of the St. Marys River as Spanish Florida and north of the St. Mary’s River as being French Florida. The St. Marys River today forms the boundary between the states of Florida and Georgia. France never, ever claimed the St. Johns River, where the National Park Service built an inaccurate 1/12th scale model of Fort Caroline in 1961. French Florida became known as Carolina – derived from Fort Caroline’s name. However, when Great Britain began plans to colonize this region, the official explanation became that Carolina was the feminized form of King Charles II’s name. Charles is the French form of the Swedish, English and German word, karl, which originally meant a man, who owned his land . . . as opposed to a serf, which was called a thrall in English and Swedish.
The original history of the Southeast
Settlement of the British Empire by John Oldmixon (1708) is a fascinating “eyewitness” account of the early years of the British colonies in North America. North and South Carolina were at that time one province, called Carolina. Georgia had not been founded. The Shawn Nowhere in the book are the Cherokee Indians mentioned. The words, “Creek Indians,” are not mentioned, but the individual provinces and major towns of the Creek Confederacy are. Apparently, the Creek Confederacy was a much looser alliance at that time.
This official history places Fort Caroline and the May River in Carolina . . . thus on the coast of Georgia. It states that French survivors of Fort Caroline converted many Apalache (Proto-Creeks) to Protestant Christianity. This explains why the residents of Palachicola on the Savannah River told the Reverend John Wesley, “We believe the same as you do,” when he gave them a sermon . . . assuming that they were non-believers. The text also states that English immigrants established a colony in Northeast Georgia in the 1620s. Here is a verbatim excerpt from the book’s first chapter.
“The Kings of Homoloa, Seravatri, Almacam, Malica, and Castri, waited upon Ribaut, to congratulate his Arrival, and promis’d to conduct him to the Apalataean Mountains, which part Carolina from Virginia. The French conceiv’d great Hopes of this Settlement, but all vanish’d on the Arrival of the Spaniards, who with a Squadron of Ships and Land Forces, drove the French out of their Forts, kill’d Ribaut, and 600 Men, after having given them Conditions of life, and oblig’d Laudoner, with a few of his Countrymen who remain’d alive, to return to France.”
The French King took no notice of this Act of Violence committed on his Subjects, because they were Protestants; and indeed ’tis thought Coligny intended by this Settlement, to secure a Retreat for himself, and his Brethren of the Reform’d Religion, in case they were conquer’d in France.
Peter Melanda (Menendez) commanded the Spaniards, who dislodg’d the French, and so provok’d the Indians by his Cruelty and Injustice, that they were very ready to revenge themselves when Opportunity offer’d, as it did not long after; for Capt. De Gorgues,” a French Gentleman, at his own cost, fitted out three stout Ships, and with 280 Men sail’d to Carolina, where he took the Fort, and put all the Spaniards within it to the Sword. They had built two other Forts, which he easily reduc’d, and serv’d the Garrisons as he did that of Fort Charles. He demolish’d them, and was assisted by the Kings of Homoloa, and Seravatri.
The French travell’d into the Dominions of the great King of Apalacha,” near the Mountains, where they converted many Indians to Christianity. These Indians were more civil than those to the Northward, their King’s Dominions larger, and their Manners, in a great measure, resembled the Mexicans.
We do not find that Monsieur de Gorgues made any Settlement here; or that the Spaniards attempted to recover the Country; which from the Year 1567, lay deserted by all.
In the Year 1622. Several English Families flying from the Massacre of the Indians in Virginia and New-England, were driven on these Coasts, and settled in the Province of Mallica, near the Head of the River of May, where they acted the Part of Missionaries among the Mallicans and Apalachites.
The King of the Country is said to have been baptiz’d; and in the Year 1653. Mr. Brigstock, an Englishman, went to Apalacha, where he was honourably entertain’d by his Countrymen, who were there before him; and from his Relation of the Country ours is taken.”
This version of the past will not be seen in history textbooks or Wikipedia . . . at least for now.
Latest posts by Richard Thornton (see all)
- Using words to explore the peopling of the Southeast – Part One - December 8, 2018
- Early Scottish immigrants . . . the joke is on me! - December 8, 2018
- Why Southeastern Creeks should study Teotihuacan - December 4, 2018
- The Red-Haired Giants . . . both kinds - December 2, 2018
- A Creek & Uchee Perspective on Unregulated Mass Immigration - November 28, 2018