Cherokee Ancestry: Fact or Fiction?

[BlackWolf]

I came across this recently.  It comes from a reputable Genealogy Website.  Everyone can come to their own conclusions on this one.



"My great-grandmother was a Cherokee Indian princess. How many of you have heard that statement made by one of your relatives? As soon as you hear that "princess" label, the red warning flags should be going up! Even stories of Native American ancestry in the family tree are often more fiction than fact.
The Story Goes:

Family stories of Native American ancestry often seem to refer to a Cherokee princess. What's interesting about this particular legend is that it almost always seems to be a Cherokee princess, rather than Apache, Seminole, Navajo or Sioux - almost as if the phrase "Cherokee princess" has become a cliché. Keep in mind, however, that almost any story of Native American ancestry may be a myth, whether it involves the Cherokee or some other tribe.
How it Began:

During the 20th century it was common for Cherokee men to use an endearing term to refer to their wives that roughly translated as "princess." Many people believe this is how princess and Cherokee were joined in the popular Cherokee ancestry myth. Thus, the Cherokee princess may have really existed - not as royalty, but as a beloved and cherished wife. Some people also speculate that the myth was born in an attempt to overcome prejudice. For a white male marrying an Indian woman, a "Cherokee princess" may have been a little easier to swallow for the rest of the family.
Proving or Disproving the Cherokee Princess Myth:

If you discover a "Cherokee Princess" story in your family tree, begin by losing any assumptions that the Native American ancestry, if it exists, has to be Cherokee. Instead, focus your questions and search on the more general goal of determining whether there is any Native American ancestry in the family, something that is actually untrue in the majority of such cases.

Begin by asking questions about which specific family member was the one with Native American ancestry (if no one knows, this should throw up another red flag!). If nothing else, at least try to narrow down the branch of the family, because the next step is to locate family records such as census records, death records, military records and records of land ownership looking for any clues to racial background. Learn about the area in which your ancestor lived as well, including what Native American tribes may have been there and during what time period.

Native American census rolls and membership lists, as well as DNA tests can also potentially help you prove or disprove Native American ancestry in your family tree.

Nearly every family has a cherished story or two regarding their distant ancestors - one that has been handed down from generation to generation. While some of these stories probably have a lot of truth in them, others are actually more myth than reality. Perhaps it's a story that you're connected to Jesse James or a Cherokee princess, or that a town in the "old country" is named after your ancestors. How can you prove or disprove these family stories?
Write Them Down

Hidden in the embellishments of your family's story are probably at least a few grains of truth. Ask all of your relatives about the famous legend, and write down everything they tell you - no matter how insignificant it may seem. Compare the different versions, looking for inconsistencies, as they may indicate those parts are less likely to be rooted in fact.
Ask for Backup

Ask your relatives if they know of any items or records which may help document the family story. It doesn't often happen, but sometimes if the story has been carefully handed down from generation to generation, then other items may have been preserved as well.
Consider the Source

Is the person telling the story someone who was in a position to have experienced the event first-hand? If not, ask them who they got the story from and attempt to work your way back to the original source. Is this relative known as the storyteller in the family? Often "good" storytellers are more likely to embellish a story so as to elicit a favorable response.
Bone Up on History

Spend some time reading about the history of the time, place or person which relates to your family's story or legend. Background historical knowledge may help you prove or disprove the legend. It's unlikely that your great, great Grandfather was a Cherokee, for example, if he lived in Michigan in 1850."

[BlackWolf]

Tuesday, December 29, 2009
The Dawes Roll is Not the Only Proof
 

http://pollysgranddaughter.blogspot.com/search/label/Cherokee%20Genealogy

Often times, people will claim they are Cherokee, but they can never prove it because their ancestors are not on the Dawes Roll. They claim their ancestors hid from the Dawes Commission and refused to be enrolled. Or, they claim their family escaped the Trail of Tears and hid out or passed as white. To some, these stories may seem logical or realistic, but to those knowledgeable in Cherokee history, those stories seem absurd. There is so much documentation on the Cherokee people throughout history, it would be nearly impossible for one not to have been recorded as Cherokee on some document or roll. Recently, my friend, David Cornsilk, responded on a message board to a person (CR) who seems to think the Dawes Roll is the only document containing any information about Cherokee ancestry and also believes (his words, not mine) "those who ... ... followed the Dawes commission around like a dog hoping to get some land have descendants who get to claim to be Cherokee."

To this, David responded with, "There were many full bloods, some of my ancestors included, who refused to enroll on the Dawes Roll. They followed Redbird Smith's orders and avoided enrollment; at least until their neighbors testified for them. I think the point that CR is trying to make, which is only partially correct, is that some Cherokees did not get on the Dawes Roll. This we know is factual. However, just because something happened in the past does not mean it happened to his ancestors.

There are many tragedies and triumphs of the Cherokee people. The names of our ancestors do not just appear on the Dawes Roll. They appear on the 1896, 1894, 1890, 1880, 1876, 1851 (3 rolls in that year alone), 1835 and 1817 rolls. There are a number of other documents created inbetween that list the names of Cherokees living at those times. There are documents from the early 1800s including missionary records that mention the names of Cherokees whose descendants are among those enrolled in subsequent years. My ancestors are nobody special. Just your average Cherokees. Yet their names appear on EVERY roll and in every document. My blood kin through collateral lineages are listed throughout the Cherokee records. That is how it is for real Cherokees.

On the other hand, the fakes, not naming any names, find absolutely no ancestors or kin of any kind among our people no matter what record we look at or how far back in time we go. The bottom line here is proof. And whether CR or anyone else dislikes the Dawes Roll because their ancestors names do not appear there is not important. That Roll, despite whatever flaws it may have is OUR history, our record, the names of OUR ancestors appear there. And the same can be said for every Cherokee record that predates it. Those records belong to us because the Cherokee tribe of Indians belongs to us and none other.

Fakes and wannabes claim their ancestors were hiding from the Dawes Commission, then I ask where are the names of your ancestors in any record that would have alerted the Dawes Commission to search for them? They claim their ancestors remained east of the Mississippi after the Trail of Tears. Yet my ancestor Collins McDonald, his in-laws (who were Cherokees), his Cherokee wife and his Cherokee children actually did remain in Georgia. They appear in numerous records, not passing themselves as whites, although they could have. They were living as Cherokees and their names appear in the 1848 and 1851 Rolls of Eastern Cherokees, just the same as all the other Cherokees who remained. Yet the fakers and wannabes have no ancestors on those rolls. Why? Because their ancestors were not Cherokees!

Before the Trail of Tears a roll was made that lists 16,000 Cherokees who were destined to be removed. Again, my ancestors names are there, the fakers who claim their ancestors jumped off the Trail of Tears are nowhere to be found. In the early 1800s missionaries came among our people to educate our ancestors and convert them to Christianity. They made copious notes in journals of the children they taught and the families they met. My ancestors are mentioned throughout those journals. My ancestors are listed as students in the mission schools in Georgia in 1820. Are the fakers and wannabes listed? No, their ancestors cannot be found there.

Logic does not reign supreme in the mind of the wannabe. They twist our history and torture the names of our ancestors to fit their own family scenarios. They invent parents for Cherokees long since dead who cannot protest this bastardization of their family names. The fakes call out names such as Moytoy the first through the fifth, Great Eagle, Tamedoe, Cornblossom and other blasphemous corruptions of our ancestral heritage to make themselves appear to be Cherokees, and all of this without so much as a shred of evidence to connect themselves to a Cherokee, let alone a Cherokee to the fabricated names they force upon us.

If any part of our heritage belongs to the fakers and wannabes it is the heritage of theft that has left the Cherokee Indian landless and poverty stricken. Ethnic Identity Theft is the ultimate form of genocide. The white people and their descendants who invaded and colonized our homeland in the Southeast are no longer happy with just owning the land we once called home. Now they must rise up and steal our name."

So my fellow genealogists, the next time you hear someone give a reason as to why they cannot prove they are Cherokee, think about the information David shared with us. If a person cannot find one iota of evidence to support their family story, then it is highly unlikely they have any Cherokee ancestry at all. It is just that plain and simple.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thank you for reading.

CC
The Granddaughter

**A very special thank you to David Cornsilk for allowing me to use his writing.

copyright 2009, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB


Read more: http://pollysgranddaughter.blogspot.com/search/label/Cherokee%20Genealogy#ixzz0gJeMlseh

[Rattlebone]

 I do believe that Cherokee demographer Russell Thornton wrote a nice piece on this topic as well. In his book "The Cherokees," he has a section called "The Cherokee Grandmother Phenomenon."

 Haven't went over it in a long time, but I do remember it having some pretty information in it as well.

[BlackWolf]

I found this article online by David Cornsilk.  He really explains things well.




"The core of Cherokee lineal ancestry resided in the Southeastern United States. Their names appear in the records created in their homeland by missionaries, government official and the Cherokees themselves beginning as early as 1711.

It is an interesting phenomenon that EVERY authentic Cherokee descendant, whether eligible for citizenship or not, can trace his/her direct lineal ancestry to someone named in those records.

An equally interesting phenomenon is the the fact that EVERY wannabe, regardless of how authentic their story may sound, cannot trace his/her direct or collateral ancestry to anyone named in those records.

The logical question one must ask is: How is it possible that the Cherokees enrolled in the CNO, UKB and EBC have ancestors appearing upon every roll, in the letters and diaries of the missionaries and among the government papers from the beginning of our recorded history and the wannabe has no documented connection?

The answer is so simple as to often vex the thinking of the most logical thinker. They, simply put, are not Cherokees or Cherokee descendants, never were, never will be. No one likes to have veracity of their statements questioned. It is particularly disturbing to have someone question the claims of one's ancestors. Many of the wannabes living today have long-standing claims of Indian/Cherokee heritage dating back to the first payments made to the Cherokees in the 1820s. Therein lies the truth behind the claims of those seeking to have themselves identified as Cherokees.

Nothing against our white brethren, because its culture, not race, but they tend to have a view of aquisition and accumulation of wealth at the expense of others. Now I would never say some Cherokees don't hold those same views, Chad Smith is a good example. However, a careful study of the history of the Cherokees, particularly at the time of payments to the tribe for loss of lands, large numbers of whites came forward attempting to lay claim to the funds by saying their ancestors were Cherokees. Every payroll and citizenship roll of the Cherokees was bogged down by those claimants. Even today, the claimants to Cherokee heritage create a burden for the CNO and EBC enrollment offices.

The Dawes Commission filed annual reports to Congress regarding its work among the Five Civilized Tribes. Congress asked every year why the work among the Cherokees was taking so long. The Dawes Commission answered every year that the process of enrolling the Cherokees was bogged down, slowed to a snails pace, by the thousands of FRAUDULANT claimants to Cherokee heritage and citizenship.

In 1909, the Cherokees (not the nations, but the individual Cherokees including descendants) was awarded a several millions of dollars judgment to equalize the payments for the Trail of Tears. There were about 44,000 applications made for this fund from every corner of the U.S. and some foreign countries! Yet, the actual number of eligible Cherokees was around 20,000. A review of the thousands of denied applications shows some of the most rediculous family histories claiming to be Cherokees. There is no doubt that of the thousands who claimed Cherokee heritage for this payment, but were denied, have descendants living today who are convinced they have Cherokee blood ancestry, even though it has been proven time and again they don't.

One of the most interesting facts taken from the 1909 Payment is the number of Cherokee descendants who actually can prove they have Cherokee blood ancestry, but who were not eligible for enrollment in the EBC or the CN because they or their ancestors had abandoned the tribe. These bonefide descendants were paid a share of the funds because they could PROVE their ancestors had crossed the Trail of Tears or they or their ancestors were named on the Henderson Roll of 1835, Chapman Roll of 1851 or Drennen Roll of 1851. Applicants did not have to be a CN citizens to get the payment. The only qualifier is proof of descent.

Today, many clamor for some recognition from the CNO, EBC or UKB to verify their claim of Cherokee blood ancestry. Yet, these claimants offer nothing but family oral history (often made up), genealogy papers to individuals who show no connection whatsoever to the Cherokee people or nothing, just asking that we take their word for it. There is far too much documentation of authentic Cherokees for us to give any credence or succor to those who are whites or blacks trying to steal our identity.

The Cherokee people do nothing for the descendants who CAN PROVE, so whatever would make a wannabe think we would do anything for them. And interestingly enough, the true Cherokee descendants who cannot get citizenship have NEVER organized, never sought recognition from a state and never demanded any rights from the Cherokee Nation. They respect our right to self-governance and their own ancestors choice to abandone the tribe."

[BlackWolf]

Why do so many people want to claim Native American ancestry (making the Cherokee the most prolific ethnic group in the world)?

By Mary Annette Pember

Although the groundhog saw his shadow hereabouts, winter continues to have a strong hold on the Ohio Valley. Folks have sort of hunkered down, waiting for the cold to break. It’s time for a little controversial discussion to get our blood heated up so I am offering up the topic of American Indian identity, a real tinderbox of emotion.

Folks I would not consider Indian seem to love to claim American Indian ancestry. The tribe of choice is usually Cherokee and the alleged ancestor, inevitably, a great grandmother who had “coal black hair.” (I like to joke that every third person here has a Cherokee great grandmother.)

It has gotten so that when strangers ask me if I’m Indian I am sorely tempted to answer, “Que?” and shake my head in misunderstanding.

It doesn’t matter that I explain I’m not Cherokee, that Ojibwe speak an entirely different language and have our own unique culture and spirituality. I can’t count the number of times I have been cornered by well meaning folk who seem hell bent on telling me everything they know about Cherokee -- the universal Indians, in their minds. Breathlessly, they pour out their knowledge to me, knowledge that has usually been gleaned from history books written by non-Indians, New Age books, the Internet and similar sources. I work hard to keep a non-judgmental expression on my face because these folks are excited; they are driven and emotional, often working themselves up into tears. They’ve been to a powwow. They tell me they are, “Indian in their hearts,” and want a hug. I’ve gotten pretty good at making slick getaways from such situations, but continue to be mystified and amazed by  “The Cherokee Syndrome.”

Some people are desperate to prove their Cherokee ancestry, and in the entrepreneurial spirit of America, businesses are emerging that cater to this demand. A recent story in the Tahlequah Daily Press describes a new Cherokee DNA service.
Why do people want to claim Indian ancestry over, say, African-American ancestry? Given the history of this region that straddles the Mason-Dixon line, I imagine it’s far more likely that white folks hereabouts have African ancestry. But I guess there’s not as much cachet in claiming that a white slave owner raped your great grandma.
Given the wide-ranging and large numbers of claims to Cherokee ancestry, this  would certainly have to be the most prolific ethnic group in the history of the world.


Why are people are so anxious to claim Indian ancestry? I’ve asked this of myself and many others. Dr. Venida Chenault, a member of the Prairie Band Pottawatomie who works at Haskell Indian Nations University, gave my favorite response. “Well, we are pretty cool people,” she said.

The romanticized Hollywood image of the noble savage, in tune with nature and righteously defending his people against the onslaught of greedy Europeans has fed the desire to claim connection. For most “claimers,” the bond is with a safely distant past, unaware of the contemporary state of Indian Country and its continuing struggles with the U.S. government. Jack Hitt describes this trend as “ethnic shopping” in his excellent piece in the New York Times; he observes “The Newest Indians” are simply people who don alternative identities that they find more interesting or personally comfortable.

In the ultimate embodiment of American consumerism, one can simply purchase a new self.
There is also a sort of rural myth that American Indians get money and scholarships. A non-Indian woman I interviewed near the Rosebud Sioux reservation in South Dakota, said, “They all get checks you know.”
 
“All people who are a ¼ Indian or more receive checks from the government," Bertie told me, nodding sagely.??Dang, I missed out again!
I explained that although I am half Ojibwe I have never received any check from the federal government for being Indian. “Oh, well you Ojibwe are so much more industrious,” she said, flustered.  

A few years ago, I wrote a story about those in higher education who may be falsely claiming Indian identity.  Dr. Grayson Noley, (Choctaw), department chair of the College of Education at the University of Oklahoma said, “If you have to search for proof of your heritage, it probably isn’t there.”

I noted a couple of famous cases of professors whose heritage has been called into question including Ward Churchill and Terry Tafoya. ?University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill’s ethnicity has been questioned by the news media and many Indian leaders. The ethnic studies professor came under intense public scrutiny after he called some victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks “little Eichmanns.” ??The Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News did extensive research into his genealogy and concluded that his claims of Native ancestry are based on family lore and unsupported by fact. He has claimed at various times to be of Creek, Cherokee, Metis and Muscogee heritage.

An investigation by the Seattle Post Intelligencer found that Terry Tafoya, a nationally known psychologist who made his Native heritage a large part of his public persona, was neither a member of the Warm Springs Tribe of Oregon nor an enrolled member of the Taos Pueblo as he claimed. Tafoya formerly was a psychology professor at The Evergreen State College and sat on the board of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction at Indiana University. The Seattle paper also reported that Tafoya admitted in a legal deposition that he never earned a doctorate from the University of Washington, credentials that helped propel his career. The newspaper report prompted a criminal investigation to determine if Tafoya had violated a Washington law banning the use of false academic credentials.

Comparing the number of American Indians reported by the U. S. Census versus reports of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, an interesting disparity emerges.

According to the Census, which records those who self-identify as American Indians, there are 4.9 million Indians in the U. S.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs, which records the number of people who are enrolled in federally recognized tribes, reports that there are 1.9 million American Indians in the U.S.

So who is an Indian? I predict that this question will light up our message board here at the Yonder. Some say being Indian means being recognized by the tribal community as a member. Some say it means being enrolled in a tribe -- essentially the same thing since all tribes determine their own rules for enrollment. (Some tribes accept proof of descendency from those on the original rolls created when the U.S. government began taking our land, while others require proof of at least 1.4 blood quantum; there is a wide spectrum.) Some will say it means knowing your tribal language, culture, relatives and place in the universe and doing so with humility. Many would say that those who advertise themselves as “healers,” “medicine people,” “prophets” or “teachers of Indian ways, ‘’ are surely not Indian.
I know what my old Mom would say. She would say you’re not Indian unless white people have treated you like shit for being Indian.
I have my own theories about why people want to claim to be Indian. I think people are desperately looking for a sense of place and connection. As human beings, we need to have a connection to the earth, to place and ultimately to each other.  Unfortunately, the only way some folks know how to find or get something is to buy it and own it as quickly as possible. Since Indians are widely believed to have an almost magical connection with nature, why not just claim to be Indian and legitimize the claim by purchasing a DNA test? It’s silly and kind of sad.

All in all, being Indian doesn’t really get you very much in this country. There are neither fat monthly checks nor assurances of quality healthcare, education or jobs. For me, however, being Indian has given me a roadmap for my life. My culture has helped me navigate the pitfalls of an American consumer society that judges folks on what they own and what they do for a living versus how they live and treat each other. My culture has also helped instill me with gratitude for the gift of an ordinary day of life on this magnificent earth. I think those are philosophies that anyone, Indian or not, can embrace.

[LittleOldMan]

Please note! My security monitor  "Trend Micro" shows a warning on this linc malicious software.  "LOM"

[critter - a white non-ndn person]

Hmm.. I have Norton and no warning came up for me. Although I didn't click on it from here, I posted the link to facebook and just now went to check it, and nothing came up.