Parsons and Abbott Roll – 1832 Creek Census

creek census image

By a treaty of March 24, 1832, the Creek Indians ceded to the United States all of their land east of the Mississippi River. Heads of families were entitled to tracts of land, which, if possible, were to include their improvements. In 1833 Benjamin S. Parsons and Thomas J. Abbott prepared a census of Creek Indian heads of families, which gave their names and the number of males, females, and slaves in each family. The entries were arranged by town and numbered; these numbers were used for identification in later records.

The census of 1832/1833 has come to be called the Parsons and Abbott Roll, and is the most comprehensive pre-removal document, as it was the result of a village-to-village trek on the part of the census-takers, and contains the names of all the heads of households arranged by Creek towns. The genealogical researcher who is able to locate an ancestor on this document is most fortunate, as it forms the basis for many other documents relating to Creek claims cases through the 1960’s.

While few and far between, there are some free blacks listed within this census – a total of 11 as heads of household one referred to by name as the husband of an Indian woman. Many slaves gained their freedom from their Creek Tribe; once their freedom was obtained, they often received citizenship within the tribe and several are listed by name.

You can see the rolls of the individual Creek towns at this link:

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/parsons-abbott-roll.htm

This roll is interesting for a variety of reasons.

First, it includes a total of 6279 households with 22,240 individuals, including 884 slaves, 10,265 males and 11,002 females.  Given the household breakdown, it appears to include children, but it doesn’t list anyone by name except the head of household.  Twenty seven households may have been duplicates, based on the same name, but I have included them in the totals because we don’t know if they are duplicates or not.

There are a total of 84 towns, as best I can tell, attempting to account for variant spellings. This equates on average to 264 people per town, although this is kind of deceptive because there were a few really large towns and then several smaller towns as well.  There were, on average, about 3.54 people per household, including slaves.  However, all of the slaves were held by only 160 households, so most of the families did not own slaves.  Only 31 families owned 10 slaves or more and 45 households owned only one slave.

Several slaveholding households owned quite a few slaves, the most being 35.  Of the top slaveholders, the third highest was a woman, Fanny Lovett who lived alone and had 30 slaves.  Twenty-one of the slaveholders were principal chiefs and at least 42 were women heads of households.  There may have been more women.  The only way I can discern a woman head of household is if she has an English name or there are no men in the household. If a Creek woman had a son and no English name, I would have no way of knowing if the household was a family headed by a woman or by the male in the household.   One woman is noted as a half negro and having a negro slave for a husband.

The most surprising aspect of this census, to me, is that by 1832 I expected that most or at least the majority of Native people had taken some sort of English name, even if just a one name nickname, but that is very clearly not the case.  The Creek were heavy traders, as were the Cherokee, and I would have expected more of the English language and culture would have crept in.  I did notice that an interpreter is also included, Benjamin Marshall, so many people obviously did not speak English.  Some of the chiefs have Native names, but not all.  In total, there are 82 principal chiefs listed of their various villages of which 17 have English or partially English names, or about 21%, twice that of the Creek population as a whole.

In addition to the Creeks, there is one Cherokee missionary, Robert Rogers, sixteen noted as “a Euchee” and eleven noted as a free negro heads of household.  One additional free negro is noted as a spouse.

In some cases, I was uncertain if a name was English or Native.  For example is An ne the same as Anne?  Same question for Fan ny, and what about if Fan ny is the wife of a white man?

Some names were found a lot in Creek names as part of a longer name string.  For example, the word Micco.  Did it become a Creek surname?  Are the words Tallissee Micco an English name or Creek words that have no English meaning – indicating that later, Tallissee Micco took an English name that did not include either name?  Is Tommy har jo and Tom my har jo the same?  And is Tom my the English name Tommy or a Creek word or words?  I don’t know.  The only example I have is one Micco Buiecar whose alias is given as Old King.

Other questions are equally as puzzling. Should Cooper Pack be shown under Cooper or Pack, or neither. Is Mike y the same as Mikey? Are Lotta and Low ey Native words or English names or nicknames? I don’t have the answers, but for the Native names project, I have included the questionable names. It’s easier to include too many and problematic to omit one that later turns out to be important. In the case of Cooper Pack and other similarly problematic names, I’ve indexed them under both words.

Out of the total 6279 households, about 580 have English or partly anglicized names, or about 9% of the total.

To understand more about the Creek villages, village names and history, click here to visit the University of Oklahoma Western History Collection and specifically, an interview by Thomas Meagher with the Creek Indians after their removal.

About these ads

About robertajestes

Scientist, author, genetic genealogist. Documenting Native Heritage through contemporaneous records and DNA.
This entry was posted in Cherokee, Creek, Uchee. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Parsons and Abbott Roll – 1832 Creek Census

  1. The Talasee (Tvlasi) were a branch of the Creeks that originated lived in extreme Western North Caroline. The word means “Offspring of Tula.” Tula was the Itza Maya and Itsate Creek word for town, but also was the original name of Etowah Mounds. Micco is the Muskogee Creek word for a Town Chief. The equivalent in Itsate Creek and Itza Maya is “mako.”

  2. CherokeeCloud says:

    The Roll provide a good summary of the information. I will need to look for an Creek to English translation. The Parsons and Abbot Roll is not one of the well-known Rolls so it is helpful.

  3. Maura Garcia says:

    Greetings. Micco means chief in Creek as you may already know? It is still used as a title for chiefs of different communities in Oklahoma. Also in some cases is used as a name. I was also curious what do the many Creek speakers in Oklahoma and/ Creek citizens who are tribal historians have to say about the names? Since in 1832 the foreign English language was fairly new to the area, it does not seem strange that people would not have English names. I am Cherokee and even in the early 1900s many of our people did not have English names.

    Thank you so much for another interesting article.

    Best Wishes,

    Maura

    On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Native Heritage Project wrote:

    > robertajestes posted: ” By a treaty of March 24, 1832, the Creek > Indians ceded to the United States all of their land east of the > Mississippi River. Heads of families were entitled to tracts of land, > which, if possible, were to include their improvements. In 1833 Benjamin > S.”

    • This is really interesting. The word Micco appears in the names of 13 of the principal chiefs. It appears a total of 180 times in all of the names, so therefore it appears 167 times in names of people not listed as a principal chief.

  4. Brad Pierce says:

    Your comment regarding problematic Creek names is interesting. This also applies in the case of distant cousins of mine who applied for Eastern Cherokee tribal claims and were rejected. They applied based on a supposed Cherokee relative named Ash Hopper who they said had lived on Peavine Creek in Walker Co. Georgia. There were several reasons for the rejection of the claim by the government, but the name did play a significant role. Here is a discussion of the name problem in the rejection:
    “While the claim is now made that Ash Hopper was the father of Annie Hopper Trout this seems highly improbable as Ash Hopper was evidently one compound Indian name and
    not the family name of Hopper with the given name of Ash. On the original
    Indian Office Index of the Roll of 1835 the name of Ash Hopper appears only
    under the letter “A” and not under “H”.”

    So his listing in the index of the rolls used at the time of the claim as Ashhopper and not Ash with a last name of Hopper, played a part in the rejection of the claim. I have found a current index that now lists him both ways.

    I have found another book source that corroborates the claim that a Cherokee named Ash Hopper did live on Peavine Creek and I’m still working to prove that he is indeed related to my family. I believe that their original claim may have been valid and rejected in part because of a technicality related to the name spelling.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s