Should the 2nd Creek War be combined with the 2nd Seminole War

+5 votes
68 views
Samuel Allston was a 2nd Lieut. located at Fort Mitchell in 1836. In our military categorization, it shows the 2nd Seminole War. It looks like in history that the 2nd Creek War was going on at the same time and the Seminoles and Creek tried to link up. Fort Mitchell was the starting point of the Trail of Tears in late 1836. Now my history knowledge is not necessarily the best so I am asking if this is the same and people at Fort Mitchell should be categorized under the 2nd Seminole War. Both wars involved the 4 th Infantry.
WikiTree profile: Samuel Allston
in Genealogy Help by Gurney Thompson G2G6 Pilot (198k points)
I wouldn't think deciding how to designate wars would depend on the Military units that served there...... my Dad served in the 101st Airborne in Vietnam...... that same unit served in WWII.

But a good question Gurney.
I have reconciled that they should be separate wars. But with regards to your comment, I was looking at more like wars in Vietnam and Laos with the same unit split for both conflicts. We consider Vietnam and Laos the same war because the combatants were the same. Creek and Seminole were different combatants fighting at the same time in neighboring territories. I also agree that It is more likely that Creek descendants would want it separate. That is an assumption since I’m not American Indian.
The Vietnam/Laos example is a great one.

3 Answers

+4 votes
 
Best answer
Well out of respect to the "other side" I would suggest no - but I do not know much about it either really.  Seems to me though that we would want differentiation between the two from their point of view and the soldiers of that time must have known which was which, now I understand it would be harder for us to figure that out unless the military records are clear on that information- which I bet some are and some are not - I have tried and not had much luck with that military categorization - It seems fairly complicated
by Navarro Mariott G2G6 Pilot (147k points)
selected by Gurney Thompson
Your comments match the reasons why I posted this question.  I hope the project people who do the different categories will answer.  Their task in coordinating all the wars and skirmishes is difficult and I respect what they have accomplished so far.  I also know that they have a lot of work ahead of them and this just may not be the right time so sort out the Creek Wars and the Trail of Tears.
Good idea, Gurney.
+5 votes

The Second Seminole War was considered a Florida War.  (Though I believe Creeks were involved.) from 1835-1842

The Second Creek War was considered an Alabama War in 1836,  on a much smaller scale than the Florida War..... and it WikiPedia implies it only involved the Muskogee Creek.

I would think they should remain separate..... but I'll admit I haven't been involved in establishing these military categorizations.   

by Peggy McReynolds G2G6 Pilot (442k points)
+1 vote
They are two separate wars. You are looking at it from  one viewpoint and not from purpose, participants or time  of the war. There is always an "other side" to every war.  or there would not have been a war. For example the French and Indian War is a separate war, according to the United States but England considers this to be a continuation of the Seven Year War. It's a matter of purpose, participants and time as to whether the war, conflict etc is considered a separate event. In this case, I believe them to be separate events.
by

And the French Canadians call the 7 year war the war of conquest.  wink  The 7 year war was actually about control of North American territory between England and France, with England being highly influenced by its colonies.

Related questions

+5 votes
2 answers

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...