Best Practices

The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma has produced numerous resources for their tribal members that archaeologists working in the Choctaw ancestral homeland should find informative and beneficial (see links on the Chahta Sources page and the Chahta Item Set).

• In discussions with CNO THPO staff regarding compliance archaeology in Alabama, they too often find little,or no, acknowledgement of the presence, or even potential presence, of Chahta or ancestral Chahta in Alabama. This includes not only the Cultural Context sections of Section 106 reporting, but background reviews and interpretations.
  • As a reminder, CNO defines their ancestral homelands in Alabama as the following modern-day counties: Baldwin, Bibb, Choctaw, Clarke, Conecuh, Dallas, Escambia, Fayette, Greene, Hale, Lamar, Marengo, Mobile, Monroe, Perry, Pickens, Sumter, Tuscaloosa, Walker, Washington, and Wilcox. 
  • Examining the area around an APE for Chahta place names (e.g., GNIS), conducting more extensive historical map searches, as well as simply acknowledging the potential presence of the Chahta regardless of archaeological findings all serve as ways to address this issue.
• The CNO does not have access to the Alabama State Site File database or the Phase I Surveyed Space website, so they request that those conducting archaeological work in Alabama to provide copies of reports (previous work) as part of the submission deliverables.
  • There are many areas within Chahta ancestral homelands that lack archaeological survey, and therefore no previous work would appear within the standard one-mile search radius, so expanding the search area and providing anything available is greatly appreciated by the historic preservation staff.
• Recording the evidence of resources within an APE, a facet of researching the past often not addressed in archaeological compliance reporting, provides useful information to CNO review staff and benefits CRM work. Fieldwork and reporting would be better served if archaeologists examined the area for sources of toolstone or clays for producing ceramic vessels, noting remnant cane breaks, or the presence of mast producing groves. Often times gravel bars can be identified on topographic maps or by examining waterways in the field. Cherts and clay deposits can be identified through geological maps and reports available from the Alabama Geological Survey, or by examining cut banks and stream beds during fieldwork. Observations on the presence of potential source materials in the field may not come to bear on the current archaeological work/project, but do serve to build knowledge about the landscape and provide context for archaeological resources in the surrounding area.
• Archaeologists should be thinking at the scale of a village, rather than sites. See the examples from Carleton (1989) and CNO article, Choctaw Town of Hobvk Itopa.
• Collaboration with consulting Nations, such as the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, is the most direct path to gaining a better understanding of Chahta culture, lifeways, and heritage. Collaboration is different than consultation. Reaching out to the Chahta Historic Preservation staff, establishing relationships, and asking questions build relationships and will result in better compliance archaeology. 
• Words matter, and they certainly matter for CRM reporting.
  • Avoid amalgamations, use specific Indigenous nation's names or tribes when possible.
  • Use precontact rather than prehistory.
  • The CNO does not find Indian, Native American, or American Indian particularly offensive, but this can vary on a case-by-case basis, and from person to person.
  • Use of the terms "ancestral Chahta (Choctaw)" and "ancestral Muscogee."

• Chacta
• Chahta
• Chata
• Chatah
• Choctaw
• Choktah
• Conchaque
• Tchacta
• Tchakta
• Têtes Plates (Flat Heads)