To my knowledge the use of this term amongst present day recognized Saponi doesnt exist simply put, because it did not exist in the literature or historical record. These groups reorganized after a serious hunkering down for 200yrs. they only remaining vestiges of culture and identity are known as cultural markers. this helps seperate cultural elements of “indian” from those that may be termed “african” or “european”. this of course is because in some cases, everyone has traits from other races. One example of a cultural marker would be a particular tradition of farming or prayer at church, that differed significantly from the populous abroad. Additional elements may be linked because of appearance, and self ID as determining ethnicity. A “black or white” family that has a tradition of being “blackfoot” where no blackfoot exists would be an example of a cultural marker. In many cases tribes here in the east did not know “who” they were in terms of tribal identification. many made these descisons within our lifetimes. these desiscions were based partially on consensus, partially on oral history, partially on records, and partially on the department of ethnography’s effort to identify and locate all eastern exant communities. Some were visiited like the Sappony, others only mentioned through word of mouth to find their way to the written record (such is the case with the Haterask or the Werwocomico). In short, the groups who are extant or missing from today, existed in history. the challenge is to link the two. Cultural markers and geographical patterning help this effort, as do census records, etc. Using Blackfoot as a cultural marker helps identify the possiblity of indian descent, but does not create an ancient Sioun blackfoot tribe that has escaped history. Blackfoot may be Sappony, maybe Delaware, maybe Shawnee, may be Chowanoke. It’s hard to say because its a cultural marker, not a source. I’d like to think of it as a nickname, butnot a designation. Additionally, the “popular” western blackfoot are Algonquian speakers, like the cheyenne. there is no coincidence at all.
The real question if we want to be really curious about the coincidence of sisipaha , is why only “blackfoot” survives and why not the translation of the other townships within the Saponi / Tutelo area. It is only one of many. Im so confused as to why so many peolpe feel challenged by this. It as if they dont want to know any reality, other than oral history. I believe most of these people who are part of the migration patterns, who have similiar family names, etc have some indian ancestory from the region occupied by a WIDE variety of Eastern Sioun peolpes, AS WELL AS Algonquians. Why there is such a mystery is baffaling considering how much research has already been done.
Eastern Sioun is much more appropriate, and tribal designations like Saponny, Eno, Occannechee, etc are as well. After all, the Monacan are Eastern Siouns who have no records indicating being Blackfoot per se – but they were known as the Cherokee of Amherst for most of the 20th century.
I think the reason distance has been created from this term amongst current recognized tribes IS because of its origin. I think the loud people DO know where it comes from, and recognize it shamefully as an indication of lack of cultural identity – THAT is plowing a little too close to the cotton for most of VA/NC indians, especially with such struggles to be acknowledged and the realization of so much cultural loss and misinformation within enrolled families.
Hence the great rush to powwow and adopt pan indian symbolisms as identified as “Indian” to all.