The Origins of the Buckeye Nickname Raymond D. Irwin (bio) Others have called Ohioans—and Ohioans have called themselves—"buckeyes" for nearly two centuries, but the origins of that appellation have been the subject of limited thoughtful debate, unfounded assertions, and uncritically accepted assumptions. Three related issues frequently appear in the literature regarding the buckeye nickname: the length of time the title has been in use, where it comes from, and how it became affixed to human beings. Although many have asserted that the moniker has been commonly applied to persons since the 1780s, that it was derived only tangentially from the tree of the same name, and that it owes its existence to a quaint tale involving friendly indigenous persons, the evidence suggests otherwise. The real story involves the changing image of the buckeye tree, and thus, the altered status and broad acceptability of the word "buckeye," which only occurred in the early nineteenth century. One of the most common explanations for Ohioans' bearing the nickname "buckeye" comes from antiquarian and physician Samuel Prescott Hildreth in his 1852 description of the opening of the first judicial body in the Northwest Territory on September 2, 1788, in Marietta. There, the leader of the ceremonial procession for the local court of common pleas was the community's sheriff, Col. Ebenezer Sproat, "a man six feet and four inches high, and large in proportion," who carried "a drawn sword in his right hand, and wand of office in the left." His "imposing appearance" elicited "the admiration of the friendly savages, a number of whom were loitering about the new city." The "tall, commanding" Sproat, having attracted rapt attention, earned from natives "the name of Hetuck, or Big [End Page 9] Buckeye." "From this," Hildreth confidently asserted, "originated the name of Buckeye, now applied to the natives of Ohio, as the phrase was familiar to all the early settlers of Marietta."1 In relatively short order, Hildreth's account became a standard origin story for the buckeye sobriquet. The 1857 edition of The American Biographical Dictionary repeated the tale in the conclusion of its entry for Sproat,2 and a decade and a half later, the hetuck narrative appeared nearly verbatim in the editorial notes for the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio edition of the journal and letters of early Marietta settler Col. John May.3 The 1881 History of Washington County speculated that the byname "buckeye" came from one of three possibilities, all related to the founding of Marietta: a woodcutting contest among those who had landed at the mouth of the Muskingum and who had felled several buckeye trees; from the flowers of the tree that would have been in bloom in the spring of 1788; or from the Sproat story. The authors cited unnamed pioneers' explanations that "agree with, rather than contradict, Dr. Hildreth's statement," which put Sproat and the indigenous observers at the center of the narrative.4 Four years later Harper's Magazine repeated both the woodchopping and "hetuck" stories, adding the detail that Delaware tribesmen compared Sproat "with the stately, symmetrical tree which grows by the Western water-courses."5 As the nineteenth century came to a close, Hildreth's narrative flourished, bolstered by often inexplicable and usually uncited details. In his centennial history of the Marietta settlement, William H. Venable offered a brief version, noting that Sproat's nickname "was extended to other white men, and finally to Ohioans in general," but that "it is certain that the term Buckeye became attached to Ohio and its citizens at a very early period in the history of the [End Page 10] Northwestern Territory."6 In his centennial address before the Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society, William Farrar repeated the Hildreth story, declaring that the use of "buckeye" to describe Colonel Sproat "was certainly its first known application to an individual in the sense now used," but Farrar immediately conceded that "there is no evidence that the name continued to be so used and applied from that time forward, or that it became a fixed and accepted sobriquet of the State and people until more than a half a century afterwards."7 Others were less critical...
Read full abstract