Talk:Atakapa

I think the Atakapa contributed heavily to the modern foundation of Zydeco music, I'll put this information in when I confirm it.--68.14.108.243 21:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

There is a good discussion of this in a book that should be cited in this article, viz., Barnes & Breunlin's Le Kèr Creole: Creole Compositions and Stories from Louisiana. New Orleans: University of New Orleans Press, 2019. ISBN 9781608011728. Hoktiwe (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Gatschet and Swanton documented people in Southeastern Texas and Southwestern Louisiana in the 1880s through the first decade or so of the twentieth century who could speak the Atakapa language. So is it appropriate to say that they were "decimated" in the 1850s?

Correct. They weren't decimated in the 1850s. There is no citation to that either. Apparently, their descendants still exist. An entire article in the The Times of Acadiana (July 25, 2007 Vol 27 No 48) approaches this topic in depth and this is why the tribe is still fighting for recognition. Falcanary 23:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Incorrect. Documenting some survivors doesn't imply they were numerous, and fighting for recognition (and now rather than earlier) suggests the opposite, that they were decimated into insignificance or at least obscurity. It doesn't necessarily mean that the article is correct, but those two arguments alone are poor. -LlywelynII (talk) 19:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

There are currently at least three organized groups of Ishak, which suggests they still exist. Either way, the tone of this article violates the neutrality of Wikipedia by attempting to deny their claim of existence. Hoktiwe (talk) 19:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Interesting link which might be useful for future expansion [1]. Heironymous Rowe (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Article is sourced but contradicts TSHA Handbook of Texas article, which suggests it was the Karankawa on Galveston Island who succored and enslaved the Spaniard. I'm thinking the HoT is better researched, documented, and sourced here, but perhaps they are wrong: any more sources to corroborate that it was the Attacapa? -LlywelynII (talk) 19:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hm... well, the TSHA article on Attacapas contradicts the one on Karankawas: I guess it's just unclear who the "Han" where (although presumably not Chinese) and academic partisans are backing whomever they're studying. (Too cynical?) Regardless, article does say the Attacapans were down to 9 people by 1908. -LlywelynII (talk) 19:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Atakapa. 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/20070928071224/http://www.carencrohighschool.org/LA_Studies/ParishSeries/IberiaParish/AttakapasDistrict.htm to http://www.carencrohighschool.org/LA_Studies/ParishSeries/IberiaParish/AttakapasDistrict.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070625030514/http://www.enlou.com/people/lepinay-bio.htm to http://enlou.com/people/lepinay-bio.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070703003816/http://www.lutheransonline.com/servlet/lo_ProcServ/dbpage%3Dpage%26mode%3Ddisplay%26gid%3D20061635345409848401111555 to http://www.lutheransonline.com/servlet/lo_ProcServ/dbpage%3Dpage%26mode%3Ddisplay%26gid%3D20061635345409848401111555
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070703003816/http://www.lutheransonline.com/servlet/lo_ProcServ/dbpage%3Dpage%26mode%3Ddisplay%26gid%3D20061635345409848401111555 to http://www.lutheransonline.com/servlet/lo_ProcServ/dbpage%3Dpage%26mode%3Ddisplay%26gid%3D20061635345409848401111555
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120516015805/http://mpo.lafayettela.gov/projects/Atakapa-IshakTrail/Atakapa-IshakTrail.asp to http://mpo.lafayettela.gov/projects/Atakapa-IshakTrail/Atakapa-IshakTrail.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 07:09, 30 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Given that the tribe's internal name is Ishak, it seems that should be the title of the article. There is at least one article online that lists it that way, and it is from the 64 Parishes Encyclopedia, published by the Louisiana Endowment for the humanities. I've put a link to it in the links section. Hoktiwe (talk) 19:58, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Given that there are multiple organized groups, there is no need to have the tribe listed as extinct. I note also that almost all references in the article are rather dated, regardless of topic. There have been several more recent academic publications about the group in university press books and peer-reviewed journals that are missing. There is no discussion of complications of African-Native American identity, no references to the vast literature on that topic, no citations of the many recent sources about the language, and even some of the images are mislabeled. In short, this article has multiple issues.

Hoktiwe (talk) 20:18, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, countless groups identify as being descendants of historic tribes. The Atakapa Ishak Nation has its own page. If other contemporary Atakapa heritage groups are notable, we can make articles for them as well. Native American tribe involved political power, continuity, and validation of claims by others outside the group itself. There is discussion of African-Native American identity at Black Indians in the United States. A common misconception that having African ancestry bars groups from federal recognition; however, Shinnecock, the two Wampanoag tribes, Pequot, Moncan, Narragansett, Muscogee, Seminole, and many more recognized tribes have substantial African ancestry. Yuchitown (talk) 20:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)YuchitownReply

Thank you for your response, @Yuchitown. Unrecognized, though, does not mean extinct.

The issue of African ancestry and recognition in Louisiana is a significant one, and it led to paper genocide of Louisiana tribes through deliberate ethnic misclassification. There is a large literature on this. It is mentioned in many academic writings on Louisiana Natives. Among those are Elizabeth Ellis' The Great Power of Small Nations ISBN 9781512823097

and Brian Klopotek's Recognition Odysseys ISBN 978-0-8223-4984-6. There is one federal tribe in Louisiana that has significant numbers of African Americans, viz., the Tunica-Biloxi. The Chitimacha got recognition in part by kicking African Americans out of the tribe. An article about research regarding this was published in Indian Country Today: https://ictnews.org/archive/are-louisiana-tribes-turning-a-blind-eye-to-racism While African ancestry does not explicitly bar tribes from recognition, it is an obstacle, and there is a peer-reviewed literature about that regarding Louisiana.

Importantly, though, it is an issue with the Ishak, and rather than listing them as "extinct," unrecognized is a more neutral designation suitable for Wikipedia. Hoktiwe (talk) 03:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Atakapa Ishak Nation is the unrecognized tribe and discussions about that organization should take place on its article's talk page. Conflating Atakapa Ishak Nation and Atakapa would be original research and pushing a point of view. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A Native American tribe is a collective political entity; a tribe can become extinct (perhaps there is a better term) while since potentially having individual living descendants. The DOI office of acknowledgment does not recognize the continuity of any Atakapa tribes, neither do the states of Louisiana or Texas. Nor do intertribal organizations such as the National Congress of the American Indians (which includes innumerable state-recognized tribes) or the Native American Rights Fund. Yuchitown (talk) 14:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)YuchitownReply

Again, thank you for your thoughtful comments, @Yuchitown.

As you mention, perhaps there should be a better term than extinct. If there are Ishak people, then they are not extinct. They might be extinct as a political entity. A group of people do not have to be a political entity as a tribe to exist. African Americans exist. There is a population of African Americans. The fact that African Americans are not a political entity such as a tribe in no way means they do not exist.

The Ishak as a people can exist without being a tribe, the same way as any other ethnic group. As such, perhaps the Ishak should be listed as "unclear" rather than "extinct." To say the Ishak are extinct when there are many people claiming to be the Ishak across multiple organized groups is itself to make an original judgement, and I do not here wish to make that judgement either way. Neutrality is the aim.

I think the interests of neutrality are best met by changing from "extinct" to a more neutral term.

With best wishes, Hoktiwe (talk) 04:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Yuchitown, I must also mention that not all people who identify as Ishak are part of the Atakapa Ishak Nation. Some are in other groups, or unaffiliated at all. Some of the groups are mentioned in this encyclopedia article from the 64 Parishes Encyclopedia from the Louisiana Endowment for the Humanities: https://64parishes.org/entry/ishak-indigenous-people Hoktiwe (talk) 04:51, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

User:MiniYaCh made an undiscussed move from the stable, wp:commonname of Atakapa to Atakapa-Ishak. This should have been proposed and discussed since its not a technical move. The Atakapa Ishak Nation has its own separate article. Yuchitown (talk) 17:39, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply