Talk:George Croghan

Croghan disappeared during Pontiac's Rebellion? Nonsense!
Croghan is mentioned numerous times in the letters of Jeffery Amherst and Colonel Henry Bouquet between April 1763 and September 1763. In May or June, Croghan raised 25 men to garrison Fort Littleton. On July 3, Bouquet writes in a letter to Amherst that he has enclosed a letter from Croghan. On August 7, Amherst mentions receiving a letter from Croghan. On Sept 25, Amherst writes to Bouquet, mentioning that "Mr. Croghan is just now arrived here...Mr. Croghan has desired leave to go to England, on account of his private affairs, but I have absolutely refused to comply with his request, as I think, if his presence ever was of any consequence in the Department he filled, it certainly is so at this present time." Hattrick (talk) 08:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

More on the above
On September 26, 1763, Croghan wrote to Amherst asking for permission to go to England to solicit for redress for the many expenses he had incurred in his work with the Indians. Amherst, in his reply of the same day, points out that many of Croghan's expenses were paid, even though Croghan had not yet produced "vouchers" for them. Amherst refuses to give him permission to go to England, saying, "I must confess I am not a little surprised that you should think of leaving your Department at a time when your presence must certainly be necessary there if it ever was so." On Sept 27, 1763, Croghan wrote again to Amherst (I don't have his letters), apparently complaining that he had indeed submitted his vouchers and had not been paid, and so is tendering his resignation. Amherst replied that he had searched all of his papers and could find no vouchers from Croghan and that he simply could not reimburse him without the vouchers. Amherst does not approve of Croghan's resigning at this time, but since Croghan reports to Sir William Johnson, he does not have the "power to refuse [him] leave to quit the service." Croghan also apparently complained that he had been of no use in his department for the last 18 months because the commanding officer (Colonel Bouquet) at Fort Pitt "has the direction of the service." Amherst agrees that he had given Bouquet the power to approve of expenses, but believes this did not encroach upon Croghan's ability to treat with the Indians. Presumably, therefore, Croghan did indeed quit his job, which may have caused problems, but he was nevertheless there from the moment the rebellion started in May until he left the service. Amherst himself was recalled to England in mid October, and departed thereto in November, with command left in the hands of General Gage. The rebellion continued. Hattrick (talk) 04:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Born in Ireland?
I don't know how to make footnotes or clever linkies, and anyway this comment has no place in an encyclopedia entry. For those interested, the dubious archival citation that Albert Volwiler (and no doubt earlier biographical notices) use to place George Croghan's early years in Ireland is now available at http://www.footnote.com/image/#1180566 24.85.229.208 (talk) 06:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've gone ahead and edited the article. The evidence cited only shows that George Croghan was "educated" in Dublin. It is very hard to understand how a 20 year-old immigrant could be an interpreter of multiple Indian languages. The obvious conclusion is that he was Metis. At the very least, the article shouldn't exclude the possibility on the basis of nonexistent evidence.


 * That's an interesting theory, but per our guideline on reliable sources, we must report what the historians say, and apparently all of them say that he was born in Ireland. I don't know of any historian who has questioned that Croghan was Irish, since he apparently claimed to be Irish and was regarded as Irish by contemporaries like Christopher Gist. That he became proficient in a couple of Indian languages is not especially remarkable; some other Europeans picked up one or two native languages. Croghan knew only Delaware and probably Mohawk, and relied on translators at other times. (That may not have been the extent of his languages: Fintan O'Toole has speculated that Croghan's first language was Gaelic rather than English.)


 * So, the simplest explanation appears to be that Croghan was an Irish immigrant to Pennsylvania who learned a couple of Indian languages to gain an advantage over other traders. But your theory is still interesting, since historians do indeed sometimes pass along unexamined assumptions as established facts. The next question would be: Are there any documents, other than the one linked above, that Wainwright and Volwiler cite for Croghan's background? —Kevin Myers 04:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

No, this is the only document ever cited by Volwiler. I am premature in not citing Wainwright, because I cannot get hold of a copy, but we seem to have a bucket brigade situation, where the same, faulty citation is passed forward. If Wainwright has something more, I guess I'll find out eventually. And it's not just that Croghan spoke at least two Indian languages, and even raised a daughter (Catherine Adonwentishon Croghan Brant) who apparently spoke no English. He himself spoke Mohawk and Delaware well, and English very poorly. Moreover, he appears to have been wealthy, well-connected, and free of the debts normally assumed by immigrants by his early 20s. And, of course, an Irish interest (the Warrens-Johnsons) were very active in producing Metis at Canajoharie, the community to which Croghan is closely associated. Now, you want speculation? What's the link between Croghan and Judge William Cooper? James Fenimore implies, to my mind, that Croghan is the real-life counterpart to Natty Bumppo, and I take that as pointing to a grandfather-grandson relationship along the lines of Bumppo being the "ancestral patriarch" of the Coopers. (They both occupy the first cabin built in Templeton/Cooperstown, the "real" cabin becomes a smokehouse, while Croghan's is burned down.. And there's shenigans over graves, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.5.117 (talk) 22:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Put this speculation about Cooper's ancestry to rest. William Cooper was from Burlington, New Jersey, an early Quaker city. He founded Cooperstown in NY after the Revolution. Read the Pulitzer Prize-winning "William Cooper's Town" (1995) by Alan Taylor. Secondly, Croghan likely did not much "raise" his daughter Catherine Adonwentishon. Her mother was Mohawk, so she would have been considered Mohawk, and likely was raised more in their culture. Canajoharie was a Mohawk village, the Upper Castle.Parkwells (talk) 15:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I checked Wainwright and Volwiler: the claim that Croghan was a native of Ireland is based in part on the deposition that Croghan gave to the Board of Trade while he was in London in 1764 (see Volwiler, p. 23, note 12). Apparently, Croghan told the Board that he migrated from Ireland to America in 1741. His deposition has evidently been published in volume 2 of The Susquehannah Company Papers. Wainwright says that while Croghan was abroad, he intended to go to Dublin to settle the estate of his grandfather, Edmund Croghan. Delays in dealing with the Board of Trade prevented a trip to Dublin, and so he instead hired a lawyer to collect his inheritance (see Wainwright, p. 207).


 * So there appears to be no reason to doubt that Croghan was Irish, as he and some of his contemporaries stated. His obscure birth, poor spelling, and Indian offspring were common enough traits of traders of his time. If Croghan was a bit vague about his background in official records, perhaps he was concealing a Catholic upbringing, which could be a handicap for ambitious men in the British Empire. Some of his contemporaries did indeed whisper that he was a Catholic; Quaker trader James Kenny even claimed that Croghan got drunk one St Patrick's Day and raised a toast to the Old Pretender. Whether Catholic or Protestant, perhaps the names of Croghan's parents and his year of birth are still tucked away in some Irish archive. —Kevin Myers 14:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

“Deposition of George Croghan Concerning the Susquehannah Company, 292—300 in The Susquehannah Papers (Wilkes-Barre: Wyoming Historical & Geological Society, 1930, 2: 292—300.

George Croghan of Cumberland County in Pennsylvania in North America Esqr. (Deputy Agent for Indian Affairs under Sir Wm. Johnston, Bart. his Majestys Superintendant of Indian Affairs for the Northern District of North America) now residing in the parish of St. Martin in the fields in the County of Middlesex maketh Oath that he hath been resident in North America for the Space of 23 years next before his Arrival in England wch was in the Month of Febry last and this Dept saith that upon his first Arrival in North America he traded with the 6 Nations & the other Indian Tribes dependant upon & tributary to them and was in such Favour & Confidence with the Council of the 6 Nations that he was in the year 1746 (before he was appointed Deputr to Sir Wm. Johnson wch was not ‘till the year 1756) admitted by them to sit as a Councillor in the Onondaga Council then sitting in Philadelphia wch is the supreme Council of the 6 Nations & the sevl. Tribes depend. thereon And this Dept furr. saith Deponent further saith that he hath frequently attended at the Council of the 6 Nations as a Councillr & hath given when they have Meett In Pennsylvania and on the ohio and hath given when asked his opion [follows Croghan's version of the Six Nations brief on the Wyoming matter].... So, given that Croghan was educated in Ireland and at some point thereafter either emigrated or returned to North America, does this quote actually establish which? It's certainly weaker on the latter side, but hardly decisive. And now we have the vision of this 26 (31) year old newcomer to the country being inducted as a councillor of the Six Nations. I wouldn't stand too hard on the question of whether "Whites" could sit on Six Nations councils in the 1740s. But I say again that anyone interested in researching Croghan needs to dig for family connections that will explain his extraordinary early-life success, and on the balance of probabilities, they will be found on the American side of the Atlantic. (Erik Lund)--24.80.233.181 (talk) 20:00, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * That's very interesting. Thank you very much for looking that up and sharing it.


 * My view has long been that biographers have been too trusting of some of Croghan's claims. Many historians comment on Croghan's various land schemes and apparent flexibility about telling the truth, and yet they report as fact various claims for which Croghan is the only witness. Croghan claimed to have been appointed a Six Nations councillor in 1746 and to have been granted 200,000 acres by the Six Nations in 1749. Unlike the historians, I've been skeptical of these claims, although I certainly haven't seen all of the documents. Lately I've been wondering if these statements by Croghan are fictions invented to claim some land before the Ohio Company and Vandalia big shots got all of the prime real estate.


 * But I'm certainly taking your idea seriously. Here's more support for your theory: on at least one occasion, Croghan reportedly claimed that he was an Indian! During the 1758 Treaty of Easton, a Quaker (perhaps Charles Thomson) said that Croghan "gives out that he himself is an Indian". (Thomson's complete pamphlet is online from the Internet Archive.) Historians haven't paid any attention to this claim, I think, seeing it as another one of Croghan's schemes to get Indian land. But your theory puts this in another light, of course.


 * And finally, Croghan biographers bemoan that they could never find the name of Croghan's mother, even though she was in Pennsylvania and living with him. But if she were an Indian, the historians wouldn't have connected a Native name with Croghan's mother. Hmmm. —Kevin Myers 22:21, 5 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Those are interesting speculations but I suspect part of Croghan's early success was from operating on the frontier, where there was opportunity. William Johnson also built a huge career out of his learning Iroquois languages and building strong relationships through trading with them, and Jesuit missionaries regularly learned languages of the people they served. Maybe that was one of Croghan's gifts. He may have been overstating his role on the Iroquois council - sounds like an honorary one. Given the different conceptions of real estate as property, I would wonder about the Native American understanding of their "sale" of 200,000 acres to him, although William Johnson had also amassed a quantity of land where he established Johnstown in NY. Even if the Board of Trade upheld the deed, that did not mean the Indians intended what Croghan did. Also, with a grandfather named Edmund, Croghan may have been Anglo-Irish or Scots-Irish. People did not bother to differentiate at that point. Parkwells (talk) 15:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Croghan's new grave marker
After the original marker weathered away, Croghan's grave was unmarked for many years. I've found a 2008 newsletter saying that a ceremony to place a new marker was planned by the Sons of the American Revolution, and Croghan's Findagrave entry reveals that it is indeed in place. But it would be nice to find something like a newspaper article about the new marker, for citation purposes. Can anyone find a source about this? —Kevin Myers 16:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, more is needed. WP does not consider Find-a-Grave a Reliable Source, per Wiki MOS.Parkwells (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Use updated sources
Numerous late 20th-century and early 21st-century sources are listed, but the article seems to rely most on Volwiler and Wainwright, meaning it does not incorporate later historical thinking about events on the frontier, Native American alliances and culture, and other issues. Other sources need to be used to strengthen the article, especially as it appears editors want Croghan's reputation upgraded. Parkwells (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Croghan and the Paxton Boys
Deleted this paragraph because Croghan was not in Pennsylvania when the Paxton Boys marched on Philadelphia. Nor was he the author of "Narrative of the Late Massacres." According to the Library and Congress and other reliable sources, including the source cited, the author was Benjamin Franklin. Griffin&#39;s Sword (talk) 21:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)