Talk:Chaloklowa Chickasaw

Trail of Tears

...the forced 1838 Indian removal to what is now Oklahoma. The event, in which the Five Civilized Tribes were forced on foot, in winter, with few provisions, to migrate with great suffering has come to be known as the Trail of Tears.

Not to suggest the other removals were not tearful, but the term "Trail of Tears" refers only to the Cherokee removal. Also, the Chickasaw removal did not take place at the same time (winter, 1838, on foot, etc) as the Cherokee removal. It would be useful to have more info here on the Chickasaw removal and how some managed to evade it, and how they ended up in South Carolina of all places. Thanks. Pfly 04:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: Trail of Tears

You're correct that the Chickasaws were not removed at the same time as the Cherokees. Each tribe had their own removal. Many tribes had already started moving to Oklahoma and other locales, including the Chickasaw, decades before the Indian Removal Act. The Chickasaw faced a lot of division going back to long before the French and Indian War. There were Pro-French factions, Pro-Bitish factions, a group that completely adopted French or Anglo culture, and another contingent that was dead set against any involvement with whites. Therefore, the Chickasaw faced lots of internal strife. The Chaloklowa Chickasaw had left the main Chickasaw homeland and gone east to the SC coastal plains long before European contact. They were essentially already independent. The Choloklowa Chickasaw living today in the eastern section of SC were completely assimilated into the local population. However, there are descendants of the Savannah River band that were invited by the British to the Savannah River Valley after the Yemassee War to provide a buffer for the hostile Muskogee, Spanish, and French alliance. These Chickasaw patrolled the Savannah River Valley, but remained based at Savano Town near Fort Moore, both near modern day Beech Island, SC. The Savannah River Chickasaw were not closely related to the Chaloklowa, but the Chaloklowa recognize their descendants and they are eligible to seek inclusion into the group because they are Chickasaw. This policy is probably the root of the SC Minority Affairs Commission labeling them as a group rather then a tribe because they are not related by blood post-contact era.

Strong-Oak — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.254.111 (talk) 18:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chaloklowa Chickasaw. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130111134058/http://southcarolinaindianaffairs.com:80/members.html to http://southcarolinaindianaffairs.com/members.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)