- This topic has 5 voices and 7 replies.
-
Posts
-
http://www.freeafricanamericans.com/Joiner_Lee.htm
Many surnames we are lookin’ at are found here
http://www.freeafricanamericans.com/introduction.htm
Indian Reservations
It is also evident that most Indians living on Virginia reservations during the colonial and early national periods made little distinction between themselves and African Americans.
In 1811 Thomas Jefferson described the remaining members of the Mattopony tribe as being “three or four men only and they have more Negro than Indian blood [Johnston, Race Relations in Virginia, 281].
A number of free African American families had joined the Pamunkey reservation by 1836 when they signed a Pamunkey petition to the governor: Isaac Miles, Jr. (one of the “headmen”), Anderson Holt, William Holt, Ben Holt, Archia Miles, Sylvanus Miles, Pleasant Miles, William Sweat, Abram Sweat and Allen Sweat [Rountree, Pocahontas’s People, 344]. One hundred and forty-three whites in Prince William County, Virginia, petitioned the legislature in 1843 concerning the Pamunkey Tribe saying
Now the Pamunkys form only a small remnant of the population, having so largely mingled with the negro race as to have obliterated all striking features of Indian extraction. Their land is now inhabited by two unincorporated bands of free mulattoes in the midst of a large slave holding community.
The Pamunkey submitted a counter-petition in which they claimed that they were generally of at least half Indian extraction [LVA, Legislative Petitions, King William County, 1843, B-1207, B-1208, cited by Russell, Free Negro of Virginia, 129].
The Gingaskin Indians of Northampton County, Virginia, said to be as numerous as all other tribes in the county put together, numbered only thirty persons by 1769. In 1813 their descendants were described as a heterogeneous mixture of Indian, Negro, and white [Whitelaw, Virginia’s Eastern Shore, 30, 284]. Their land was divided among the heads of families, and in 1828 the clerk of Northampton County court stated that their descendants were respectable free Negro landowners [Johnston, Race Relations in Virginia, 280-1].
The nearest thing to a census of the reservations is provided by the deeds by which Indians living on tribal lands sold or leased their land. The deeds were signed by the “chief men” (and women) of the tribe.
The principal members of the Nottoway and Nansemond living in present-day Southampton County were:
King Edmunds, James Harrison, Ned, Peter, Robert Scoller, Sam, Wanoke Robin, William Hines, Frank, Wanoke Robin, Jr., Cockarons Tom, and Cockarons Will (in 1735).
Sam, Frank, Jack Will, John Turner, Wat Bailey, and George Skiper (in 1750).
John Turner, and Celia Rogers (a Nansemond Indian) and Suky Turner (in 1795) [Surry County DB 8:550; Southampton County DB 1:98; 7:714].
Between 1734 and 1756 the Nottoway had been so reduced by “the want of the common necessaries of life, sickness, and other casualties” that the Virginia Legislature allowed them to sell a total of 18,000 acres of their land in Southampton County [Hening, Statutes at Large, IV:459; V:170; VI:211; VMHB V:339]. They used land sales and leases to support themselves. There were only six adults and eleven children in the census taken in 1808:
adults: Littleton Scholar, Tom Turner, Jemmy Wineoak, Edy Turner, Nancy Turner, and Betsy Step
children: Tom Step, Henry Turner, Alexander Rogers, John Woodson, Winny Woodson, Anny Woodson, Polly Woodson, Fanny Bartlett, Solomon Bartlett, Billy Woodson, and Jenny Woodson [Executive Papers June 21- July 22, 1808, Gov. William H. Cabell, Box 154a, LVA].
No adult Indian was married to or sharing a household with any other adult Indian [Roundtree, The Termination and Dispersal of the Nottoway Indians of Virginia, VMHB 95:193-214].
A legislative petition from Southampton County in 1818 reported that
Their husbands and wives are chiefly free negroes [Legislative Petition, Southampton County, December 16, 1818, LVA].
Some of the names of the Chowan Tribe were recorded in Chowan County deeds by which they sold their land on Bennett’s Creek in 1734 in what was later Gates County. They were
Charles Beasley, James Bennett, Thos Hoyter, Jeremiah Pushin, John Reading, John Robins, & Nuce Will [Chowan DB W-1, 215-216, 237-239, 247-253].
When the surviving members of the tribe sold the last 400 acres of their 11,360 acre patent in 1790, they were described as
a parcel of Indian women, which has mixed with Negroes, and now there is several freemen and women of Mixed blood as aforesaid which has descended from the sd Indians[General Asembly Session Records, Nov-Dec 1790, Box 2; Gates County DB 2:273, 274; A-2:33].
About 300 Tuscarora men, women, and children were living on 40,000 acres in Bertie County between 1752 and 1761 [Saunders, Colonial Records, V:161-2, 320-1]. The tribe never gave up its Indian customs. Their numbers had been reduced to 260 in 1766 when they leased part of their land. 155 members of the tribe moved to the state of New York after the 1766 lease, and the remainder joined them in 1802 [Swanton, Indian Tribes of North America, 87].
Since they left the Southeast, it is difficult to determine the extent to which they mixed with the free African American population of Bertie County. Many of their names were recorded in the deeds of 1766 and 1777 by which they leased over 8,000 acres of the land in the southwest corner of Bertie County between the Roanoke River and Roquist Pocosin to the Attorney General:
James Allen, Sarah Basket, Thomas Basket, William Basket, Betty Blount, Billy Blount, Sr., Billy Blount, Jr., Edward Blount, George Blount, Sarah Blount, Thomas Blount, Bille Blunt, Jr, Samuel Bridgers, William Cain, John Cain, Molly Cain, Wineoak Charles, Jr., Wineoak Charles, Sr., Bille Cornelius, Charles Cornelius, Isaac Cornelius, Billy Denis, Sarah Dennis, Billy George, Snipnose George, Watt Gibson, James Hicks, John Hicks, Sarah Hicks, Senicar Thomas Howell, Tom Jack, Capt. Joe, John Litewood, Isaac Miller, James Mitchell, Bille Mitchell, Bille Netof, Bille Owens, John Owens, Nane Owens, William Pugh, John Randel, Billy Roberts, Tom Roberts, Jr., John Rogers, Harry Samuel, John Senicar, Thomas Senicar, Ben Smith, John Smith, Molly Smith, Thomas Smith, Bille Sockey, William Taylor, Bridgers Thomas, Tom Thomas, Lewis Tuffdick, West Whitmel Tufdick, Whitmel Tuffdick, Isaac Whealer, James Wiggians, John Wiggins, Molly Wineoak and Bette Yollone [DB L-2:56; M:314-9].
The names of the Piscataway Indians living in Richmond County, Virginia were mentioned in a court case in September 1704:
Young Toby, Long Tom, Jack the Fidler, Old Mr. Thomas, Bearded Jack, Jemmy, Harry Capoos, and Bearded Jack [Orders 1702-1704, 361].
Members of the Sapony in Orange County, Virginia, were mentioned in a court case in 1742-1743 in which they were charged with stealing a hog and burning the woods:
Alex Machartion, John Bowling, Manissa, Caft Tom, Isaac Harry, Blind Tom, Foolish Jack, Charles Gibb, John Collins, and Little Jack [VMHB III:190].
The Cherokee lived in the mountainous regions of North Carolina and East Tennessee and had little contact with the colonists.
I will simply point out, however, that these sources need to be examined for accuracy and possible bias. For example, there is no evidence that Jefferson ever visited the Mattaponi, so his account is open to question.
The “Free African Americans” website, altho less so now than formerly, still generally assumes than any reference to “free negro” or mulatto should be interpreted as a strict Black/White mixture.
It is also clear that economically, it was historically advantageous for the various governing bodies for Indians to be defined as “colored people” Indians might have a claim to previously lost land; colored people did not. The Pamunkey Petitions came about as the result of local non-Indians wanting the Pamunkey reservation lands.
Having said that, historically there were clearly many cases of intermarriage or cohabitation between Indians and Blacks, and whites and Blacks. “Free colored/mulatto” sometimes (but not always) means just that, Black and White with no Indian ancestry whatsoever, despite what some today would argue.
. ]
Vance,
Paul Heinegg has done a wonderful job of scouring the records and then providing a lot of information that can be useful in developing leads. I would be careful, however, in assuming that he is an unchallenged authority in how he connects the dots. For example, when he references Helen Rountree, p. 344— these are her notes to pages 193-197 in her chapter PEOPLE WHO REFUSED TO VANISH, from her very important work POCAHONTAS’S PEOPLE: THE POWHATAN INDIANS OF VIRGINIA THROUGH FOUR CENTURIES, 1990, The University of Oaklahoma Press. You can tell from the title, I believe, that she and Heinegg have very different views on the question of Indianness!!!You would also be surprised to read that chapter and then compare it with Heinegg’s introduction at the above link. I am not sure that it is fair at all to reference a scholar and then not deal with that person’s major thesis or all the evidence presented…. She accomplished much more, I think, than establishing that Powhatans have, contrary to opinion or indifference, survived into the present day, established a bedrock of data for further study, and chronicled Powhatan history. I think she has provided an important model for examining the experience of Eastern Indians and race relations in American history. It is especially illuminating to view the change in attitudes and popular myths about the Powhatens as the slavery question heats up on the American scene. I think her book is a CLASSIC in historical scholarship, personally.
Heinegg’s thesis seems to be:
“Free Indians blended into the free African American communities. They did not form their own separate communities. ”
AND
“Indian Reservations
It is also evident that most Indians living on Virginia reservations during the colonial and early national periods made little distinction between themselves and African Americans.
In 1811 Thomas Jefferson described the remaining members of the Mattopony tribe as being “three or four men only and they have more Negro than Indian blood [Johnston, Race Relations in Virginia, 281].
A number of free African American families had joined the Pamunkey reservation by 1836 when they signed a Pamunkey petition to the governor: Isaac Miles, Jr. (one of the “headmen”), Anderson Holt, William Holt, Ben Holt, Archia Miles, Sylvanus Miles, Pleasant Miles, William Sweat, Abram Sweat and Allen Sweat [Rountree, Pocahontas’s People, 344]. One hundred and forty-three whites in Prince William County, Virginia, petitioned the legislature in 1843 concerning the Pamunkey Tribe saying….”
In contrast, Rountree presents ample evidence that many Powhatens did maintain a distinct identity. Her arguments and illustrations of this are compelling.
I highly recommend her book, and especially reading this chapter in light of Heinegg’s position. This chapter also contains some info about the Pamunky relationship with the Catawba that maybe helpful to us in an illustrative way.
Brenda
Well, I’d like to throw my two cents into the Heinegg discussion.
Now, meaning no disrespect to Mr. Heinegg, for I still stand in awe of “FREE AFFRICAN-AMERICANS OF VIRGINIA…,” it’s a seminal work, I nevertheless have come to the conclusion that Mr. Heinegg subscribes to the old “One Drop” theory of racial classification as regards African-Americans (and only African- Americans. Curiously, it nevers applies to any other racial mixture category, such as Spaniards and Lithuanians or Italians and Japanese, or Irish and Nepalese). And what boils my water is the absolute stupidity of the concept. The issue of ANY two different races is a priori, a BLEND!! of the two races… NOT 100% of either the father or the mother. Tiger Woods knows this. Most Tri-racial people know this. Why doesn’t Mr. Heinegg? Mr. Heinegg could have recognized mestizo, mustee, creole or tri-racial categories as well as his Free African-American category and chose not to. Why? I believe he’s tied (for whatever reason) to the clearly outdated concept of the “One Drop” rule that says if you have one drop of African-American blood, you are solely black and nothing else. Personally, I consider that to be a racist concept and one that should be tossed into the trash can of history.
Hope I have’t offended anybody.
I too agree with Coharie Roy because people who consider themselves Latino, for instance, most do not even recognize their Native American Ancestry at all. They have adapted to the European Spanish way of life and some would get offended if you point that fact out. Most Latino/as do feel comfortable claiming their European Spanish Ancestry.
Personally, whoever created the Census was probably a racist.
Erica:mad:
Well, Roy, that is what I think, too, but I was trying to be polite! All this one drop stuff is an effect/attitude that comes from not only political colonialism, but mental colonialism. An old cognitive map that needs to be challenged. I think Rountree takes things further, though, than even this blood thing. She shows that the Powhatans survived as a distinct cultural entity, ie, they didn’t all blend into Afro American communities, or die or disappear, or even blend into white communities, but some groups QUIETLY persisted over four centuries.
I always admire a straight shooter!
Brenda
Roy thank you.
I thought I was the only one who felt that way about what people call the “one drop rule”. I am MIXED! I have some Cheroke, and I can’t talk to some people on some of those Cherokee boards cause they always bring that One drop rule up. They follow my saying I’m mixed up with “well which part is the Cherokee part?” Well I wasn’t there to teach them the fundamentals of cross-breeding — I oughta tell them to take an ag course or go & talk to a farmer — never have tho.
I have seen a picture of my great grandpa Richey, and it is possible he might have had some Negro blood — not a lot, maybe 1/4th or 1/8th. I have Cherokee, I think Eastern Siouan, also English, Scots-Irish, German, Dad always said he had some French but he didn’t have a clue as to where it came from (and I haven’t found a French surname either — yet), Mom’s Jonases might have been Jewish and God only knows what else we’ll filter out.
I have no intention of saying one drop of any of those negates all the rest, or makes them less important than the other parts. I’m not gonna do it. They say the best dogs for pets are not the show dogs with AKC papers — but the mutts anyhow . . . 🙂
vance
I was late for an appointment this morning when I posted my remarks, so I didn’t get to finish my thought(s).
Those of us with mixed racial ancestry, and the tribes/groups/communities are legion (they include my own people, the Coharie Indians, as well as the Lumbee, Person County Indians, Saponi, Occaneechi, Haliwa-Saponi, and Meherrin, in NC, the Pamunkey, Chickahominy, Mattaponi, Nottoway, Nansemond, and Monacan in VA, the Nanticoke in Delaware, and many, many others, all up and down the east coast of the United States), all hold one thing, if nothing else, in common: we all PERSISTED (I like Brenda’s word) as a group, lo these last 300 or so years. That’s not to say that some of our members, over the years, for whatever reason, chose to blend into the African-American race and some, the white race. The first black United States Senator, Hiram Revel (circa 1867, during Reconstruction following the Civil War), is probably a distant relative of mine through my Revell line. AND (coming at it from the other way), I’ve corresponded with several people in Illinois who descend from my GGG grandfather, Shade Emanuel. They now see themselves as entirely white. BUT, there’s always been a core group of Coharie who saw themselves as, and held themselves out to the world as, Indian. The same is true for all the groups I mentioned above. Now, I’m not going to stand here and say (like some knuckleheaded cousins of mine who continue to cling to the one drop theory) that we’re 100 % Indian, racially. First of all, that isn’t true; I’d be just as guilty of espousing the “one drop rule” as Mr. Heinegg is were I to insist on that. Secondly, I (and 90% of all my Coharie kin) don’t look like the stereo-typical “full-blood” western Indian. I have features of all three races in my appearance; although a vaguely pan-mediterranean look comes closest to describing me. (Since my teen years, I can’t tell you how many people (usually elderly ethnic people) have approached me in the supermarket and simply started speaking Italian, or Greek, or Egyptian, or Spanish to me. They’d assumed of course, I’d understand them since I was Italian/Greek/Egyptian/Spanish. BUT, if you asked me what I am, I would immediately say, “I’m an American Indian.” And I wouldn’t hesitate to say it. In fact, that’s what I’ve told people all my life. And it’s what my parents told people. And It’s what my grandparents told people. And so on, and so on, and so on. So, YES, we have PERSISTED as a cohesive group for close to 300 years.
And I wish Mr. Heinegg could see that. There are probably litterally over a hundred tri-racial groups east of the Mississippi who are like little square pegs that Mr. Heinegg keeps trying to pound into round holes; and they just… don’t… fit.
And I wish Dr. Rountree would come and study us as she has the Pamunkey. I know it would certainly be nice to find the answers to all my questions. Questions I’ve had since I was a boy. And if anyone can find answers, it’s her. She’s (in my opinion) the leading expert in this country on the eastern Indians of Virginia and Maryland.
Well, I guess that’s all I had to say. Thanks for listening.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
