174 BUKEAX T OP AMERICAN KTHNOL.OGY |mi.i..T:; 
The first appearance of the Hitchiti tribe in written history is in the 
De Soto chronicles, under the name Ocute 1 or Ocuti. 2 That the Ocute 
were identical with the later Hitchiti is strongly indicated, if not 
proved, by the following line of argument. The name Ocute appears 
in a few of the earlier Spanish authorities only, but much later there 
is mention of a Lower Creek tribe, called on the De Crenay map 
Aequite, 3 and in the French census of 1760, Aeykite. 4 There is every 
reason to believe that we have here the Ocute of De Soto; certainly 
no name recorded from the region approximates it as closely. Now, 
the De Crenay map was drawn in 1733, shortly after the Yamasee 
war, and the data it contains would apply to the period immediately 
following that war. Although apparently located on the Flint, the 
position of Aequite is farther downstream than any of the other 
Creek towns on the map. Turning to the English maps of the same 
epoch we find that, with the exception of the Apalachicola, who 
were for a time at the junction of the Chattahoochee and Flint, 
Hitchiti was at that period the southernmost town of all. This b}' 
itself is not conclusive, because the arrangement of towns on this 
particular part of the De Crenay map (pi. 5) seems unreliable. Turn- 
ing to the census of 1760, however, we find the Lower Creek towns 
laid out in regular order from north to south, the distance of each 
from Fort Toulouse being marked in leagues. Now, when we com- 
pare this list with the later arrangement of towns exhibited by the 
Early map of 1818 5 (pi. 9) we obtain the following result: 
CENSUS OF 1760 EARLY MAP 
Kaouitas Cowetau. 
Cowetau Tal-la-kas-see. 
Chaouakle 
Kachetas Kus^etan. 
Ouyoutchis Uchee. 
Ouchoutchis Osachees. 
Tchiahas Che-au-choo-chee. 
Aeykite Hitch-e-tee. 
Apalatchikolis Pal-la-choo-chee. 
Okonis Oconee. 
Omolquet 
Choothlo Sau-woo-ga-loo-chee. 
Choothlotchy Sau-woo-ga-loo-chee. 
Youfalas Eu-ta-lau (properly Eu-fa-lau). 
Tchoualas 
Oeyakbe Oke-te-yo-con-ne. 
The correspondences between the two, it will be noted, are very 
marked. They become still closer when we supplement the Early 
1 Bourne, Narr. of De Soto, I, p. 56; n, p. 90. & i n this I have omitted the Okfuskee settlements 
2 Ibid., n, p. 11. higher up the stream, which are not considered by 
3 Plate 5; Hamilton, Col. Mobile, p. 190. the French enumerators. 
< Miss. Prov. Arch., I, p. 96. 
