Redhawk
There has already been lots of discussions on this so I am just posting some links to what has already been written ...
The thread on Ward Churchill starting reply # 19
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1632.0;allPeople Of Distant Indian Ancestry
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1111.0questionable ndn idenities & tribes
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=846.0 DNA tests 4 Ndn ancestry & some statistics
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1375.0There's also this article from the CNO ... Although this is about Cherokee
tribes the issues are probably similar for similar groups in simillar circumstances .
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1011.0 I really disagree with the attitude of entitlement expressed below.
Re: What makes an NDN an NDN?
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2008,
Redhawk
I totally agree with you, but not being recognized even by Federal you have no access to no funds for helping to buy a home, helping me with college, nor can I even 'own' any bird of prey feathers and wear them proudly like any other NDN at powwows and gatherings - if ya do, you'll get busted by a ranger and be in jail.
If you are 15/16 of colonial descent why would you imagine you can just ignore the debts of the vast majority of you ancestors who arrived as colonists ? How is it that the debts of 15 out of 16 of your ancestors are outwieghed by what one of your 16 ancestors might be owed?
IMO if your small bit of Native blood entitles you to anything, all it would be is a bit of sensitivity which would motivate you stick up for the recognition and rights of existing communities of Native people.
From what you have said about yourself you are not " a community of Native people " . If you are anything you would be a distant descendant who's Mom had an interest in learning about a small part of her heritage. And your Mom didn't even know enough to avoid getting involved with a mostly non native exploiter.
As Superdog says, you sound like you have a lot to learn and the only place you can learn this is in a Native community that had enough members to survive and maintain the culture. While I agree recognition which comes from any group of mostly non native people - such as the federal government - is not a good point of reference , federally recognized tribes are a good refference point , because they were strong enough in numbers to remain viable and retain their culture.
In reply # 8 in the link below is an explaination why I think Native traditions need to be retained within th ontext provided by a strong and viable Native community.( see Reply #8 )
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=998.0Nighthawk...
I want to say that I really appreciate what you contribute here. I find you intellegent, a good researcher, and even when people disagree with you , I have never seen you resort to personal attacks, which is something I really respect .
However , I think we probably disagree on how to define who is Ndn and who isn't. Hopefully this might be an opprotunity to explore our different values and assumptions and I really hope you won't be offended by what I am going to say.. .
I am noticing you mention your partner Simons descent from the Cote family quite often and that you believe this family and the family of his wife Ann Martin were Native .
http://www.reclamationinfo.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=168&start=10 Nighthawk
All people with that name in North America who've been here longer than a couple of centuries are related, and all are descendant of one Indigenous person named Jehan/Jean Cote' dit Coste'. If the date of his birth (1604) is correctly given within about a decade, he would be Mi'kmaq and probably from Anticosti Island (kidnapped or a survivor of the "clearance" of the Island which is known as Natigostec to the Mi'kmaq). His wife was Anne Martin/Matchonon, known to be Huron. Those two are the ancestors of pretty much all the Cote'/Cota/Coty/Cody.
Anyway there are about 50,000 to 100,000 of his living descendants on Turtle Island
http://www.reclamationinfo.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=61 Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 Re: "Dit" Names - FN family, the Conspiracy against My People
SimonRaven
as one of those people, one of my ancestors was one of those kidnapped children,
some of the traditions may have disappeared in some cases, but not all of them. some were indeed kept underground, and will be kept underground, until the genocide stops
Posted: Mon Jun 16, Re: "Dit" Names - FN family, the Conspiracy against My People
Nighthawk
More than one... people have all heard of the "Plains of Abraham", right?
Well the full name of the person that plain is named for is "Abraham Martin" in french.
According to the Jesuit Relations, the name Martin replaced the Huron name Matchonon: "On the 3rd of November of the same year [1635-36?], Father Charles l'Allemant baptized a young Savage about twenty-five years old, called by the people of his nation Matchonon, surnamed by the French, Martin; at baptism he received the name of Joseph." (Reference, the Jesuit Relations)
Simon is a descendant of Anne Martin/Matchonon who was the sister of Abraham, and Huron-Wyandot.
So ... I am seeing the Cote and Martin families repeatedly brought up as being Simon's Native lines and I have not seen any other Native ancestors mentioned. I also see Simon say's he's descended from ONE of these children he believes were taken and educated by missionaries and you say there was 2 of these children. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something but I get the impression from these various comments, that it is on the basis of one or two ancestors who lived back in the 1600's that your partner Simon claims to be Mi'kmaq . Is this correct?
When your partner Simon Raven says he is Mi'kmaq , is he saying this based only on his descent from Jean Cote, or does he also have some much more recent Mi'kmaq descent? I guess I also have to say that in my only partially informed opinion , I think the genealogical information you have provided on these families is probaby incorrect .
I believe the links below give much more accurate information on the origins of this family;
http://www.geocities.com/weallcamefromsomewhere/the_french.htmlhttp://www.geocities.com/weallcamefromsomewhere/quebec_realfirst.htmlhttp://www.geocities.com/weallcamefromsomewhere/Kebec/anne_martin.htmlI understand some of the conclusions in the links above are just guesses based on the available evidence, and what you are claiming is possible -
----------------------
Edited to add the Y DNA results showing 3 French Canadians descended from Cote have European patrilineal DNA. Assuming these people descend from Jean Cote - and Nighthawk has claimed he is the patrilineal ancestor of all or most Cotes in North America , this probably proves beyond all doubt that Jean Cote was a European.
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/French-Canadian%20Heritage%20DNA%20Project/index.aspx?fixed_columns=onCote J2
Cote J2
Cote J2
--------------------
Doing accurate research on a family from that long ago is a huge undertaking and I don't think this is the place to get into debating this particular genealogy , except to say there is some different opinions on what the existing records might mean, and you own opinion seems to be quite different than the opinion of most mainstream genealogists ... It's certainly possible you are guessing right about this family being Mi'kmaq and Huron, and pretty much everyone else is guessing wrong that it is French , but I have to say some key points of what you are guessing about this family is based on evidence that doesn't appear to actually exist.
But if all that is being claimed is one or two native ancestors who lived back in the 1600's , assuming a substantial part of Simon's family has been in Quebec since 1621, like anyone who's family lived on this continent close to 400 years, he probably has a small percentage of Native descent from very distant indigenous ancestors.
In the link below is the mtDNA results of people with French Canadian ancestry ;
http://www.frenchdna.org/FCmtDNAResults.htm As you can see about one in 20 of the people who paid to get tested has an indigenous mtDNA.
--------------------------
Edited to correct bad math. I originally said 1/20 - below and then realized as mtDNA only represents matrilineal lines , the 1 in 20 mtDNA lines thas show a indigenous origin only represent 1/2 of the general populations heritage and Y DNA would represent the other 1/2 . So I changed this to 1/40
How i would intepret this is that AT MOST the average French Canadian is about 1/40 of Native descent.
---------------------------------
It is probably substantially less than that though, as i suspect the people who pay to get tested are more often people who were adopted or who have some reason to think they are of Native descent . So probably people who pay to get an mtDNA test are more likely to have a native background than the averge person in the general population .
But even if the true general percentage of indigenous mtDNA in the average French Canadian population was much less - like only one in 100 - if you count back to the 1600's most people have about 4000 ancestors , so even if it was on average only one in 500 that would still work out be that an average person with only one parent who was French Canadian would have about 4 Native ancestors way way back there.
So debating complex historical and genealogical facts and whether or not Jean Cote was Mi'kmaq isn't really necesary to guess that Simon, like most French Canadians, almost certainly has at least one or two distant Native ancstors back there somewhere .
Which leads to the next question ;
Do you really believe that someone who descends from one or two Native ancestors who lived 300- 400 years ago or even 200 years ago is a Native person and should have the right to claim and control resources which belong to federally recognized Native communities?Which leads to the next question.
Are you then saying that all French Canadians should be recognized as Ndn peoples?
And
If you don't believe this, at what point would you decide a person was too distantly descended to be considered an Ndn?
