Newspaper Page Text
ITS ALL ABOUT PLACE
‘Ta/fa/fu/ ti/jfpr/'afr Jjfewa Jjrvfvv/
T hree years ago this month, Flagpole published an extensive-
article in three parts by local historian Steven Scurry, culled
from his independent research of late-18th century Georgia
history (all available at www.flagpole.com). Scurry's research
focuses on the Creek Nation—a large and powerful confederacy
of Native Americans that formed in what would become the Deep
South in the late 17th and early 18th century—and on the Oconee
War, a conflict over territorial boundaries in the Oconee River basin
of present-day Georgia. (Among the many effects of that conflict.
Scurry has noted, was the nearly two-decade delay between the
chartering of the University of Georgia and its opening in Athens.)
If he's learned anything from his research, Scurry says, it's that
Georgia history and Creek history are not separate studies; they
are intimately linked. What drives his research? "For me, it's all
about place," Scurry says. His study of history begins with a desire
to know the place where he lives: Athens, Georgia, the South. Put
simply, "I want to know what's happening here, and I want to
know what happened here."
Flagpole sat down with Scurry recently to talk about his re
search into the history cf our area.
Flagpole: It's been three years since Flagpole
published your three-part brief history of the Oconee
War. I'm curious what more you've learned in your
research.
Steven Scurry: Weil, I did kind of a condensed
article for the New Georgia Encyclopedia [www.
georgiaencyclopedia.org] recently. I haven't
checked to see if they've published it yet. I com
pressed it as much as I was willing to, and just
gave what I'd done to them, which was pretty
daunting considering I'm trying to cover 10 years
of virtually unknown Georgia and Southern history.
But after that article, I realized that I needed a
lot more background on the [American] Revolution.
So that has really pushed my research horizon back
another 10 years. So right now, I'm looking at the
years just before—the pre-Revolutionary years,
where there was unrest in the colonies, and what
was going on with the Creek-Georgia relationship
at that time—because it really reached a crisis.
SS: At the UGA Library, at Emory... I found some great
Revolutionary documents over at the University of South Carolina
in Columbia last week that I'm pretty excited about.
FP: You've been to the state archives, too
SS: Been to the state archives, yeah. There's still a lot of ma
terial there I haven't accessed. But I, you know, definitely have
the outline, and again, a lot more detail than I ever would have
imagined possible. It's incredible how much detail I'm finding.
Names, dates, locations, people: all of that. I think it's just like
this wonderful secret in Southern history that has a huge bearing.
I've gotten to the point that I've realized that there is no Georgia
history without a Creek history. There's just not. I mean, even the
Creeks, in their oral traditions, talk about how they helped estab
lish Georgia, and protect Georgia from Spain and their conflicts
with Spain at that time.
FP: That's earlier in the 18th century?
SS: That's earlier, but that's what made a lot of them so frus
trated with the conflicts that started erupting along the border-
Steven Scurry
FP: Before the Revolution?
SS: Just before the Revolution. And that whole
conflict was conflated with the Revolution....
What seemed to be happening was that the
leather trade—the deerskin trade—was not going
well just before the Revolution, and traders were
accumulating heavy debts, and of course, those
debts were passed on to the Native Americans. The
Cherokees in particular had some pretty serious debt issues when
it came to the trade. The Creeks did as well. What happened in
1771 was that some Cherokee traders came up with a plan to clear
Cherokee debts by getting a cession of land from them. And when
the Creek traders found out about it, they wanted to be in on that,
too, so that is the origin of the "Ceded Lands" purchase just be
fore the Revolution.
FP: To clear the debts...
SS: To clear debts. Yep. "Ceded Lands" is what generally we
know as Wilkes County today, so it's that area of Georgia north
of the Little River, and the Cherokee cession was pretty easy to
get, because most of the land was dominated by Creek interests.
The Creek cession was a little more complicated, and that's when
the first serious outbreak of violence in the borderlands occurred.
That's right after the treaty, late 1773, '74.
So, you can see the Revolution is beginning to boil in the colo
nies; the liberty pole is being erected down in Savannah, and then
up in the Augusta area and in the new Ceded Lands area, there is
nearly an outbreak of war between the Creeks and Georgia.
FP: So, going back a decade, you're finding a lot of history
that's uncharted. I guess you found that before, with the Post-
Revolutionary period. You're going back to primary documents, put
ting the story together yourself. What's that like, in general?
SS: Just incredible. I mean, it's amazing how much material
I've been able to find. It's all easily available, relatively speaking.
I mean a lot of it is many, many hours in the microfilm collection.
FP: At the UGA Library?
•' ■ * ‘ \ -
•. •'** ' .
■a
»_ . ■» ■ . «<
■ •' ... V;'. i; . ' »
a ‘ - ' *
■ -V* * " •
mu - A
SS: No, no. Alright, so, it's kind of complicated, but if we go
back to the Revolution, see, on the other side—on the British
side—they realized that the Creeks could perform a great ser
vice for their interests. They were frustrated because they could
never quite get consensus with the Creeks. But the Creeks were
in an interesting position, because they were being courted by
both the British and the Revolutionary government. Congress.
And what happened during that time was—though the trade had
been considerably derailed because of the fallout from the war,
the privateering that was going on meant that a lot of ships that
were bringing trade goods for the Native Americans were being in
tercepted, so there were some serious shortages during that time,
particularly guns and powder, which impacted the deerskin trade,
etcetera, etcetera—but. you had these huge influxes of gift-giving
from both sides to try to win over the Creeks.
So, you know, to the British and to the rebel governments,
they were completely frustrated that they couldn't get the Creeks
to cooperate with their policies. But, it makes perfect sense if you
are a Creek leader, you know? Because you're trying to find this
middle ground, this middle way to negotiate what they called "the
great madness"—the Revolution—they're trying
to negotiate their way through it while protecting
their borderland territories. So their participation
in the war was always to protect their best inter
ests. And, if you look at how the Revolution played
out in most of the Native American country—the
Cherokees in particular—the Creeks came out very,
very well.
«.ir
a . +<%mw>x-
it • <r* «*, '
1 ■ .3
^7V35P
-W sts
lands, is they insisted that Georgia was not giving them enough
appreciation or gratitude for the services they had rendered and
help establishing and protecting the colony.
FP: Georgia had a short memory, or what?
SS: Well, part of that is where the Virginians come in. The
Creeks recognized that this was a new group of people coming into
the state. They started coming because Governor [James] Wright,
the last royal governor of Georgia, was trying to stimulate immi
gration to the state. He jumped in on the idea that the traders had
come up with for land cessions to clear debts, because he saw it as
a way of bringing more settlers into the state. He was trying to get
established planters, and you know, what he considered gentle
men. He wanted gentlemen. But that wasn't happening; it was
just people got word that there was land in Georgia—free land in
Georgia—and they started coming down there. And I don't think
they understood the delicate relationship that had developed be
tween the Creeks and Georgia. And they were very provocative, and
there were several encounters that resulted in some dead Creek
hunters in the Ceded Lands area. That spawned kind of a separate
war that continued throughout the Revolution.
FP: And if you're Creek, the term "Virginian" came to mean...
SS: It was a derogatory word. It became for them... it charac
terized a certain class of Georgians, and Southerners, because that
term was used in other areas. It just came to characterize certain
Anglos that were violently disposed, and hungry for land.
FP: Not a refined, gentlemanly planter from the Virginia
Piedmont...
FP: So, after the Revolution, things took a turn
for the worse for the Creeks, with expansion, es
sentially?
SS: Exactly. Georgia had no economy. I mean,
its economy was destroyed. You know, Georgia was
restored to the Crown during the Revolution, and
Governor Wright was back in Savannah for almost a
year. But things began to unravel again, and a lot
of that had to do with Georgia Whigs offering land
certificates to Virginians to come down here and
fight for Georgia's independence.
FP: You mentioned a "secret" history earlier.
What's at the heart of it? What are the pieces of the
secret history, in addition to what we've been talk
ing about? What is it that's not previously been o'ut
there for folks to know about our own place, and our
own history?
SS: I just think it was a pivotal period in
Georgia history. This relationship that had devel
oped between the Creeks and Georgians started
with Oglethorpe. And he managed that relationship very well.
Throughout those years (during the French and Indian War),
Georgia was able to keep on a fairly mutually beneficial relation
ship centered around the trade. It was central to Georgia's econo
my for many years.
FP: It's almost as though—from an historical perspective—once
the Creeks were gone, we just forgot that part of the story.
SS: Maybe so. I think a lot of it is state pride. Georgia's pride
was seriously injured during the Oconee War.
FP: The Creeks burned their settlements in the Oconee basin...
SS: Not only that, but the fact that Washington took a personal
interest in trying to end the conflict, sending his own men down
to the borderlands to try to make a settlement, and eventually
inviting the Creek principals up to New York to meet him in 1790.
And of course, the New York treaty: the fallout in Georgia was
pretty terrific. George Washington was not a very popular president
in the state after the treaty of 1790.
What happened was... they split a difference. In 1790, The
Creeks had come to a compromise on the Oconee cession. In New
York, the Oconee River was confirmed as the boundary. Another
cession had come out of the treaty of Galphinton, in 1785. It was
a treaty signed with a couple of principals from the Creek Nation,
but was never confirmed by the Creek Council. But at New York,
that cession was revoked, and so it returned to the Creek Nation.
And the treaty of New York guaranteed Creek territory west of the
Oconee River.
And, of course, in Georgia they said, "Washington has just
stolen our state." Because Georgians stilt, at that rime, pretended •
10 FLAGPOLE.COM • APRIL 18,2007
NEWS & FEATURES I ARTS & EVENTS I MOVIES I MUSIC I COMICS & ADVICE I CLASSIFIEDS