448 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 73 
United States Indian Office— Continued. Total population. 
1916 — Seminole freedmen 986 
Florida Seminole 574 
Alabama in Texas 192 
1917— Creeks by blood 11, 952 
Creek freedmen 6, 809 
Seminole by blood 2, 141 
Seminole freedmen 986 
Florida Seminole 586 
Alabama in Texas 192 
1918— Creeks by blood 11, 952 
Creek freedmen 6, 809 
Seminole by blood 2, 14 1 
Seminole freedmen 986 
Florida Seminole 585 
Alabama in Texas 192 
1919 — Creeks and Seminole (same as in 1918) 
Florida Seminole 573 
Alabama and Koasati in Polk County, Texas 206 
To the figures since 1910 must be added about 100 for the 
Koasati and 100 for the Alabama Indians in Louisiana. 
The earlier figures for the Chickasaw are so discordant that not 
much satisfaction can be obtained from them. Particularly it is hard 
to reconcile them with the size of the later figures. Either we must 
suppose that the earlier figures are too low or that there was a con- 
siderable increase in population during the latter part of the eight- 
eenth century and the first part of the nineteenth. For about 20 years 
after their removal west of the Mississippi the Chickasaw and Choc- 
taw were much mingled together, and some addition to the population 
may have come from the latter tribe. The slaves were also reckoned 
in and later as freedmen account for much of the increase shown, but 
they do not account for all of it in the period under consideration. 
Early in the eighteenth century we hear that the tribe had lost so 
heavily in its wars with the French and their Indian allies that it had 
become "reduced to 200-300 warriors," which would indicate a 
population of not much over 1,000 at the outside, 1 yet Morse's Report 
shows what appears to have been an exact enumeration of 3,625 in 
1821 f and 15 years later the United States Indian Office estimates 
5,400. 3 For the period from about 1800 to 1840 I think we must 
assume an actual increase, but it is probable that the earlier estimates 
of population were sometimes too low, and I venture to place the 
population in 1700 at from 3,000 to 3,500. 
« P. C Pub. Rec, xxm, p. 75. » Rept. Comm. Ind. Aff. for 1836, p. 402. 
s Morse, Rept. to See. of War, p. 364. 
