Talk:Chickasaw Campaign of 1736

Untitled

My ancestor, French marine aide Maj. Pierre Gabriel de Juzan, of Mobile, Alabama, was killed in combat against Chickasaws, First Battle of Ackia, Tupelo, Mississippi Military District. His kinsman, Canadian marines aide Maj. Charles Pierre de Liette and Capt. Antoine de Tontey (di Tonti) were killed Second Battle of Ackia. Maj. Juzan's son "Don Pedro", Pierre Francoise Gabriel de Juzan (born after his father's death), was his Spanish Majesty's Indian Commissioner to Alabama (DAR ally Patriot as he ran Spanish service agents against British agents amongst the Indians). Don Pedro's grandson, Chief Capt. Pierre de Juzan, inn keeper, Juzan's Lake, Mississippi, led 52 Choctaws from the swamp against the British right flank, Battle of New Orleans. In the removal, Pierre was Choctaw conductor, his brother William de Juzan, Chickasaw conductor. Maj. Juzan's (above) father Pierre de Juzan, was the intendent of the estates of the Count of Ponchartrain, intendent of marine. Juzan's brother Sauveur de Juzan, was Ponchartrain's courrier to the King. Brother Jacques Juzan was a marine supply officer. Maj. Juzan's mother was Michelle de Liette de Juzan of "the King's cabins", Versailles. Maj. Juzan (b 1697) was commissioned a Lt. 1714 of the Regt. de Bearn, and 1718 aide Maj. du Battaillon de Milice de Redone 1726, then charge de conduire un detachment de miliciens en Louisiane, aide Maj. de Mobile 1733, killed bravely in combat 05-26-1736. His son was Ens. 1752-1762. Francois Sauveur courrier du cabinet de roy b 1707, Jacques commissaire de la marine b ? Don Pedro's 3rd wife and young widow, Pelegia Lorriens de Juzan (Lorriens from Canada to New Orleans), returned to her parent's home, "The Old Spanish Customs House", St. John's Bayou, New Orleans; the oldest existing home in N.O. She died 1848 at her brother's Covington plantation. James A. Miller, Jr., Southport, North Carolina, USA. Juzan, Liette, and Tontey were recommended for French medal after their deaths. Question: Does the French government provide grave stones or memorial stones for it's citizen soldiers fallen bravely in combat in foreign fields?

Note to above: Thank you very much for the personal story, please sign it with four tildes ~. Hughespj 00:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Gayarre had access to official reports by Bienville, indeed quotes them, and seems to be the best available history. Dumont de Montigny participated, but he is said to have an axe to grind against Bienville, and his account in Memoires Historiques sur la Louisiane was recollected 10 years later. Not having any accounts of Chickasaw individual bravery, it did not seem proper to mention the French or their allies either. Hughespj 17:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Some early histories explicitly favor Dumont's Memoires over Gayarre since the Memoires are almost contemporary with the events described. I have come across more objections to the Memoires and as a result have removed reference to them. His manuscript is said to be prepared from recollection, without sources, years later in France. It has been suggested his manuscript was 'pumped up' for publication by the Abbé Le Mascrier (http://www.lewis-clark.org/content/content-article.asp?ArticleID=2373). Atkinson (p. 56) disbelieves that Dumont was at the Ackia battlefield at all. Since the manuscript is presently in translation at the Newberry Library (http://www.newberry.org/renaissance/current%20grants/montigny.html)we will soon be able to judge for ourselves. In the meantime any history preferring this source can be immediately identified by the chronology of d'Artaguette's attack. In the meantime the French were great communicators, and massive original correspondence is still available (here is a great page of just maps and drawings: http://rla.unc.edu/Natchez/index.html#sec_d). That with archeological examination of the Chickasaw homeland provided ample material for Atkinson to add some real meat to the story. Hughespj 00:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding recent corrections to 'factual errors', as hard as it is to pin down such a thing as a factual error for an event variously reported 250 years ago: Please provide your sources. Otherwise the corrections stand on the same ground as the original text. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability Hughespj 15:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hughes initially cited Atkinson (2004) and stated that it was "an excellent modern history." Yet, he had often ignored the extensive endnote documentations in that book in favor of secondary books written over a hundred years ago at a time when the documentation present today was not available. If the full documentation for the info in the Wikipedia article should be cited inside the text, there would be more citation words than text information words and would be more than difficult to read. Therefore, everything in the present text that constitutes factual error corrections of Hughes' primary composition in late 2006 and early 2007 can be found in Atkinson's book. Slsp2004jra 03:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The nature of Wikipedia is that each contributor does their best, leaving the way open for future improvement. Thank you for your corrections and your justification. Hughespj 16:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Chickasaw Campaign of 1736/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Hughes initially cited Atkinson (2004)and stated that it was "an excellent modern history." Yet, he had often ignored the extensive endnote documentations in that book in favor of secondary books written over a hundred years ago at a time when the documentation present today was not available. If the full documentation for the info in the Wikipedia article should be cited inside the text, there would be more citation words than text information words and would be more than difficult to read. Therefore, everything in the present text that constitutes factual error corrections of Hughes' primary compostion in late 2006 and early 2007 can be found in Atkinson's book. Slsp2004jra 05:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 05:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:28, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chickasaw Campaign of 1736. 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/20040510114635/http://www.cr.nps.gov:80/history/online_books/regional_review/vol1-5h.htm to http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/regional_review/vol1-5h.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121202232743/http://chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_5593.htm to http://www.chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_5593.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121202193722/http://chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_5594.htm to http://www.chickasaw.net/history_culture/index_5594.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 21:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Separate Articles

Shouldn't the Battle of Ogoula Tchetoka and the Battle of Ackia each have their own article pages? Much smaller engagements in other wars have separate individual articles, why don't these?174.70.83.194 (talk) 16:14, 1 November 2017 (UTC)