Only In America?

[shoshone]

Dear Brothers and sisters,

In this great country of ours there are so many boundaries, classifications, and prejudices that it really sickens me. The bottom line is being a Native American has taken on a type of "Political Tokenism". Black indian/white indian whatever. Listen when being an Indian has it's benefits then everyone wants to jump on the band wagon, let's be real. In this society being black is viewed as something negative. Even amongst black people themselves. I am of African american and Native American decent with some European thrown in. This is common knowlege in America that many Native Americans and blacks for that matter have been mixed for quite some time, even some whites. So what's the problem? Denial. When the young Native American man massacred his fellow classmates and family members after engaging himself in "white supremacist" ideaology we know something is wrong with this society. The question is: has America made the "Black man/Native american peoples hate themselves? For all it's worth I believe to some extent, yes.

I was just looking over some records from the so called " early Croaton petitions for separate school" I cannot believe how hard these people tried to organize themselves just to stay separate and not have themselves classed as Black people even though it is evident in their ancestry!!! Unbelievable. I even saw in an excerpt in the petiion stating they loathed black people!!!! I will try to post it in this message.

Why can't we put all this hatred, ignorance and ugliness aside and sit down side by side and recognize our common ancestry and heritage??? Black/white/Inidan brothers and sisters. When people come to our country they will say " look this is what American really is like". These people have a common heritage in spite of all the slavery, massacres and racism. When will this happen brothers and sisters?

http://docsouth.unc.edu/nc/butler/butler.html

Shoshone

[Forest]

I have a copy of the book you are referring to, and my response would be:
(1) Remember when it was written. Some 90 years ago society in the South was a very different place to live as an Indian. It was basically a Bi-racial society, where Indian people existed in a sort of uncomfortable limbo.
(2) The white power structure in the Robeson Co. area (including the area the folks you refer to were from, Sampson and Harnett Counties) clearly saw an advantage in incouraging a split between Indians and Blacks, for political reasons.
(3) There was also an active effort in many areas, Virginia being probably the worst example, to force Indian people to identify as Black. This effort is still alive and well in some areas, Alamance County being one of them. Your statement sounds uncomfortably like the old "one drop rule", where if a person had any amount of Black ancestry, or was even thought to have any Black ancestry, he was considered legally Black. In 1913 there was no such thing as a "Black Indian" in the eyes of the law or society in the South; you were either one or the other. Contemporary society is a little more openminded today about such things.
(4) Why should Indian people be forced to identify themselves as Blacks. Or whites, or "Others" or anything else but Indian? Even if non-Indian ancestry is "evident in their ancestry", a statement which is certainly not universally true.

Personally, I am very thankful for those of our ancestors who fought to maintain their Indian communities, and to teach the children where their people came from. I am not ashamed of my non-Indian ancestry; but it doesn't define who I am.

If that's the only account you have read about NC Indians, you are getting a dated, narrow understanding of what was going on in those times. I'm not trying to be disagreeable here, but there's a lot about the history of Indian communities in the South that needs to be talked about before folks jump to conclusions about the mindsets our ancestors had.

[shoshone]

Dear Mebane,

Thanks for you reply to my post. I understand your defense of the attitudes that were prevalent back then. I myself am a victim of this type of Ideology. However did you read the final part of the post? Why can't we all just sit down and call ourselves brothers? No one is forcing anyone to be called anything nowadays, it's by choice as you said. I am also decendant of Africans, Natives and Mulatto peoples. No there is nothing wrong with wanting to Identify with our Native American heritage, or any other heritage we may chose. For me it's the Reasons we chose to. I do not think my way of thinking is narrow mined in anyway. What took place then (Racism) does profoundly have an effect on they way we think and with whom we want to identify with many times.

I know of a lady who is African American decent, was raise as one, only recently discovering her native Ancestry now says she is "not African American" She fill out American indian on her census form. We you say you are "not" that is denial. If she said Yes I am off African American decent but I am a Native American I don't feel theres anything wrong with that! That's who shes chose to identify with. Some people feel so strongly about being a Native American they will push out any idea about any other ethnicity they may have. Is this fair? If you have it in your mind you want to be a Indian then that's what you will be.

I think my way of thinking and the way the Croatons thought are in anyway similar as you said my thinking is narrow. To be honest some of them still think that way till this day. I have cousins who are part of the Lumbee nation and thier mentality needs review. Is leads me to ask a question? Shall too much pride bring a man low?

We we speak of Native american ancestry and other ancestries we have we don't need to get defensive or feel insulted. Brother, As I said we have come a longway and things have changed. Lets come together and recognize we have many things in Common and celebrate.

Blessings from our Ancestors

Shoshone

[Forest]

I would encourage everyone to sit down and talk as brothers and sisters. Ultimately, we have more in common, I believe, than we have that would separate us, and all of us can learn something from one another.

Each of us on this board has a different life experience that gives us a unique perspective on the issues discussed here. Certainly we can find common ground on many things. On others, we just have to agree to disagree, and respect that.

An interesting book on this topic, altho' a bit dated (early 60's), is "Almost White" by Brewton Berry. While I take issue on some of his conclusions, I think it gives an good view of the whole ethnic issue from the perspectives of Indians, Blacks, and Whites in the South, and shows the incredibly sensitive and complex issue race was(is).

[1_optimistic]

I am also an African American women who recently am trying to find out more about my Native American ancestors. And yes.....I classify myself as a BLACK INDIAN....BLACK first because I was raised as an African American and INDIAN second because I was not raised as a Native American.

I was always told that my family has "Indian Blood in our family" but that was the extent of it.

I do agree that the Government (White Politicians) did not want a union to develop between Blacks and Indians and started alot of racism that still exists. Also, I believe that some people are ashamed of their bloodline (be it Black or Indian) and do not want to be considered a member of a particular group because the Government made people feel ashamed. And at times, certain groups of people were treated inferior from other groups of people.

The more I research about my Native American ancestry, the more I've learned that some people get offended by petty things.

Erica

[shoshone]

Dear Erica and Mebane,

Thank you both for sharing those Views! We all learn something new about ourselves and others everyday. That's why here we are like a family. Mebane also I want to thank you for the book title. I will see if I could locate it Immediately! I am sure I will learn something new and see a different perspective about our discussion.

You guys are great!

We have truly been blessed by our ancestors.

Shoshone

[Tom]

Hello All, well I have considered this, I believe that by denying our ancestry no matter what is denied then we are still subjecting our ancestors to the same issues that they suffered from.
By aknowledging who we are we are not denying the others just being true to who we are.
Bending to puritan political bends says how far we've come, I agree it's our First nations heritage that we are defining, but denying who we are is one for them, and I won't budge an inch for a biggot!
By building on who we are is accepting our responsiblity to our heritage.
In some distant place 2 people pledged thier love for each other, not for any other reason but love and repect!
Have a Great Day!

[techteach]

Trouble is, even when you acknowledge all ancestry, it becomes difficult to fill out application forms. Very few of the forms allow for claiming mixed ancestry. And most qualify NA ancestry with being accepted by a "community." What defines a community?

Techteach

[Forest]

If you are talking about the US Census, I believe it means the community you live in. That is, if you are regarded as a Indian in the community you live in, you are an Indian, for the purpose of the census...

But what would they propose to do, poll all your neighbors? It doesn't make a lot of sense. On the last Census, there were probably thousands of folks who listed themselves as Indian whose neighbors would have never guessed they thought of themselves that way.

The BIA's Acknowledgment brance deals with community differently, but I don't think that's what you're asking about.

[Forest]

Should have read" BIA's Acknoweldgment BRANCH"

It's early yet....

[vance hawkins]

Techteach, you are so right. Everytime I see a form and it asks for your race it says "please check one". Sometimes when I have seen that I have asked the person I was filling it out for how to respond and they always say give your predominant race, or something of that nature. If they have an option for "other" I write in (@ 7/8th's Caucasian, 1/8th Am In).

Different parts of the country have different racial problems. My grandma's ancestors appear to have wanted very badly to be white. They were ashamed of having Indian ancestry. I feel their religion taught them this shame -- they were staunch Christians. This is something many of us have trouble accepting -- many of our ancestors were ashamed of who they were descended from on some level. Indians were considered the savages, the cold bloodd killers, the wild creatures of the forest in the eyes of the Caucasian members of the church.

Once you became mixed blood and Christian, there was no going back to the tribe or the tribe became Christian and verses in the Bible say "there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ." This verse was used by Church elders to go get Indian church members to refute their culture in favor of European culture, which was believed to be Christian culture by society at large. Indian converts were encouraged to be ashamed of their "heathen" past.

General Sheridan (the famous Union Cavalry leader) was talking with one of his Indian scouts in one of his Plains campaign in the 1870s when he uttered the famous comment "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." But the full story is this scout wanted very badly to please General Sheridan. He wanted General Sheridan to like him, to know he wasn't like some of the other Plains Indians. He said to General Sheridan, "I am a good Indian." Sheridan's response was "The only good Indians I ever saw were dead."

Don't forget most Indians of the 19th century didn't want to fight the whites -- but those who fought are the ones we remember today. Most knew they were outnumbered and just wanted to survive. Most Cherokee hated Dragging Canoe and thought he brought the distruction of their towns through his constant warfare, just as most Apache hated Geronimo for the same reasons 100 years later. Most would have loved to have been accepted, but didn't know how to do that.

vance

[Deirdre]

It appears that similar conversations are happening here and on "What's Offensive". Clearly the subject needs to be addressed. I am clearly in 100% agreement with Shoshone. Perhaps she said it more eloquently. I hope I have not offended anyone by my responses to this same topic. It is comoplicated when filling out forms. Sometimes I resent it. Lately, I look at myself and I don't see any one heritage. I see a bit of all 3. Like I've stated before, I learned the European in school. I discovered some about the African through travel as an adult, and now Spirit has really called me back to revisit the Native American. Too bad some will not accept me. I guess some will look at me and think "wannabe" or "mixed blood, not one of us", but I will journey anyway. I have learned so much through reading posts. I hope I can find guidance and support here. Thank you.

Deirdre

[Coharie Roy]

Some thoughts, replies, and comments on the "What's Offensive" board and this board ("Only In America").

Shoshone,

You posted a link near the bottom of your opening post and then commented on these "so called 'early Croatons' [sic]..." You said, "I cannot believe how hard these people tried to organize themselves just to stay separate and not have themselves classed as black people even though it is evident in their ancestry!!! Unbelievable."

I won't "pile on" to what Forest said in his reply to you. He offered four points for your consideration, as well as his conclusion on the matter, and I completely agree with everthing he said, especially, and including his conclusion. BUT, it's really hard to read your comments without viewing them as a personal attack on me... because... the link you posted refers to the current day Coharie Indians. So you see, these "so called Croatans" are and were all of my kinsmen; my blood relatives. We're not so many as you might expect; maybe two thousand nowadays, but much fewer circa 1916, when that booklet was first published.

Yes, we did try very, very hard to organize ourselves. And why not? All groups band together for mutual protection and to maximize their power. Because of the efforts of several of my great grandfathers, we were able to keep our Indian identity and were not forced by the white power structure of Sampson County to become solely black (despite our having substantial white ancestry; as well as our also having some black ancestry, and obviously as well as our having our core Indian ancestry). Interestingly, when the Weldon and Wilmington Railroad was being constructed circa 1840, several of our ancestors moved from Sampson County to Wayne County to work on the railroad. While there, they began to comingle with the local free-black community, and in time became part of that free-black community. Today, because the children of those Wayne County Coharie ancestors went to black schools, and because those Wayne County Coharie ancestors went to the churches of the free-black community of Wayne County, TODAY, the wider white and black community around Dudley, Wayne County, NC regard those Coharie descendents as solely black. And, during the course of my genealogical correspondence with, and having met one of those descendants in person, I can tell you that they themselves consider themselves black.

So, Shoshone, is that what you would have had us do? Would you have had us commit group suicide? Had my many grandfathers not fought "unbelieveably" hard, there would BE no Coharie Indians today. Neither would there be any Lumbee. Nor scores of any other southern Indian tribes.

Forest,

I purchased Brewton Berry's book, ALMOST WHITE about 35 years ago and still have it. Personally, I never cared much for either the book or the writer. I haven't read it lately, but my impression was that he poo-poohed the Indian ancestry of most of the mixed race groups he wrote about.

The only thing he did seem to get right was his description of the lack of belonging to either the white race, the black race, or the pan-Indian race. And that's what so many people (even here on the Saponitown board) don't understand. Maybe you can't understand it unless you've lived through/with it. I longed with all my heart for many years, perhaps until I was maybe 30, to have been born solely either white, or black, or the stereotypical western plains' Indian. I really didn't care which. I just wanted to be part of a recognizable group. A bona fide group that everyone knew about and that had a defined part in the social hierarchy of the USA. I didn't want to be who I was. It's not that I hated myself. Not at all. But by six years old (and growing up on the east coast [ Maryland and NC]), I was already weary of the stares of both white people and black people. And the comments they'd make to me, "Well, why don't you LOOK Indian?" I wanted desperately to fit in... But I couldn't. My white friends didn't understand what it was like to not fit in anywhere. And my black friends also didn't understand what it was like to not fit in anywhere. The ONLY people who understood my place in this big country we call the United States of America were my Coharie relatives. Only THEY understood, because they were living the same life as I, and they were dealing with the same longing for a sense of place in the social order as I. So (and I honestly am not pointing any accusatory fingers here), if you grew up thinking of yourself as a white person, or, if you grew up thinking of yourself as a black person, then you have no idea what it's like not fitting in anywhere, and I will not take the rebukes of people who grew up as one race (white or black), people who grew up confident in their sense of belonging and of their place in the social order, who now want to criticize me for my lack of open arms to any and all who want to now become Indian, but with a fall-back default round-trip ticket to the group they grew up in. I hope that didn't come off as mean spirited. I don't mean it to. I'm just asking you to consider where I'm coming from and to see my position. So, if a black person said they were black and that they had Indian roots, that's an accurate way to describe oneself. Likewise, if a white person said they were white and that they had Indian roots, that would also be an accurate way to describe oneself. To describe oneself as a "Black Indian" or a "White Indian" places the Black part and the white part on an equal footing with the Indian part and thereby diminishes the Indian part. (p.s.- I don't include "Hispanic Indian" because, in truth, and by and large, and because of the overwhelming mixing of the two races over the centuries, MOST "Hispanic IndianS" have become in fact what we call today Puerto Ricans and Mexicans.)

Forest & TechTeach,

Re: What defines a community.

I've often wondered what my neighbors think I am. In Clinton, NC, everybody knows who we Coharie are. But in urban Baltimore, MD, my neighbors probably think I'm Greek or Spanish, or Egyptian, etc. There is no community standard in big cities. Sans the intimacy of small town rural life, it only makes sense for the census to let individuals define what race(s) they are.

Deirdre,

Perhaps it's because I named my daughter Deirdre that I found your voice to be the most powerful... and, at the same time, the most spiritual, passionate and eloquent. And I quote you, "Denying any part of who you are is just sad and I think a little silly. I am sorry that I feel this way, but I do. Just feel that we let the oppressor win over and over again, and he's really no longer trying hard. He did such a great and devasting job that we have now internalized the evil and just keep it going among us ourselves. Again, forgive me everyone. I pray for others and for myself to be lifted from this."

I pray too to be lifted from this. You have a pure heart Deirdre.


Roy

[Coharie Roy]

TechTeach & Forest,

I forgot to add to my lengthy post just now about the idea of community vis-a-viv Indian ancestry.

What I wanted to say (but didn't) was that not only does the BIA
look at community as a pre-requisite to federally recognised tribal status, so does the State of North Carolina.

My father sits on North Carolina's Commission of Indian Affairs. In fact, he sits on the tribal Acknowledgement Committee. And, I recall that when the Occaneechee Saponi were seeking tribal recognition from North Carolina, that (according to dad) the biggest hang-up was the lack of continuity of community over the last 200 years. They wanted to see that there was a core group of Indian people conected by blood ties as well as cultural ties. That they had had/have Indian schools, Indian churches, cultural sentiments and artifacts, and so on. The committee wanted to make sure that a cluster of disparate people with a genealogical tie to an Indian ancestor had not recently coalesced (with no sense of historical or group cohesiveness), for the sole purpose of gaining tribal status.

At the time, I sided with the Occaneechee Saponi; and against my father and the committee. I've now come almost 180 degrees. I think continuity of community over a long, long span of time is vitally important for any Indian group seeking tribal recognition.

[Forest]

Roy,
Sometime when you are in the Mebane area, give me a call at the Occaneechi Tribal office. I'd be glad to show you the evidence presented to the Commission (and that gathered since then) to demonstrate Community among the Occaneechi.

I would agree with you wholeheartedly; if there is no community, there is no tribe, and if you are no longer part of the community, you are no longer part of the tribe.

And I also agree, if a person did not grow up in an Indian community, some of these issues are hard to grasp.

I don't agree with Brewton Berry on many of his conclusions, specifically, his conclusion that most of the groups really wanted to be white, but he does provide some useful insights. (Plus some interesting old photos)

Thanks for the input
Forest

[vance hawkins]

Coharley Roy,

I can relate 100 percent to what you said in your next to the last post.

Dad used to tell a story. One summer he and some friends took off in a car looking for work. He said some of them had to stand on the "running board" as there wasn't room for all of them to sit. They'd take turns sitting, standing. This was during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. They got work in the cotton fields of West Texas. They worked beside some Mexican's. Some of his Oklahoma buddies would tell their Mexican co-owrkers, "Now Alphie (Dad) is an Indian, so yall be careful what you say around him." He was "different" from his friends and they made sure others knew it.

However when I remember people asking Dad if he was Indian, he'd reply, "Oh, I have a little Indian blood, not much." By saying that, he earned the respect of full-bloods, mixed bloods, whites and blacks all. Growing up "inbetween" cultures you have an identity crisis and don't know what to be.

There were a lot of people like that in rural Oklahoma, but there was no sense of a common community amongst unenrolled mixed bloods as they were members of 20 or 30 tribes, from Eastern Woodlands to Plains culture, some just knowing they were told the were "part-Indian" and didn't know what tribe. Most married whites and always downplayed having any Indian heritage at all. Dad grew up being ashamed of being part Indian. His heroes were Gene Autry and Tom Mix (both Oklahomans), white people who sometimes fought Indians in the movies.

As for excluding unenrolled from communities that were historically displaced, and left the homelands -- well it does seem harsh to some of us who might have as much if not more Indian blood than those who remained in the East. But I do understand that is the criteria of the BIA and many states and know I must live with it. It is hard not to be torn between opposing viewpoints, seeing good and bad in both.

vance

[Deirdre]

To everyone & Coharie Roy,

I understand where you are coming from almost completely. I was raised Afo-American when the Afro was a Hairstyle!!??

I was educated during intergration. With white preschoolers and later with mixed race primary and secondary inner city kids. Belonging was the theme of my life. Whites never hestated to remind me that I was not white, but ok as a black girl. Blacks reminded me that I was different because I was white looking. It was hurtful and horrible. There was no multicultural or anti-biased curriculum and it was hard as a child. I did not belong in either group. We lived in the city - no Indians that I knew of in the 70's. My community becamse my inner circle of family members. Not until I reached college did I truly understand the ignorance, selfishness, & arrogance of the many cultures in this great land called America and how others have been osticized and the burning evil of institutionalized self oppression which plagues us all. Thank you for your reply. I was alittle scared to post my honest feelings, but am glad I was able to. What binds us more than blood I think is our culture. Our language, customs, etc. I question putting Black on the same footing with Indian or white on the same footing with Indian. Indian people need recognition because they so wrongfully been denied for so long and I am not considered Indian. Putting white on the same footing - I question also. But consider this. We are all of one race-the human race - with different ethnicities. One heart. One love. One peace. Remember, there are pressing world issues to consider also.

Deirdre

[Dreaminghawk]

Forest says>>> I would agree with you wholeheartedly; if there is no community, there is no tribe, and if you are no longer part of the community, you are no longer part of the tribe

While I understand what you are saying, there has got to be a way to accept known blood ties without endangering the precious federal recognition. You know where I stand on this issue and I hope you are not offended by my continued concern with this issue. The Hayes cousins are no less indian because they live in Person co., for example. I truly do understand the requirements to be part of the "tribe" but it ain't right to deny family because they don't fit the artificial requirements of the almighty federal government. Won't right yesterday,...... ain't right today ........and ain't gonna be right tomorrow.

[Forest]

I don't think it has ever been a matter of denying family.... Obviously there are many people who have geneological ties to various tribes, but for whatever reason, are not part of the community, either by choice, ancestor's choice, whatever...

Let's talk about this sometime when you down our way. It's kind of a long issue to get into via email, and I'm not big on long posts.

Happy Holiday all

[quest for facts]

Forest and Dreaminghawk,
I understand the idea behind not being a part of the community not part of the tribe BUT it makes us no less a Saponi or Nottoway in my case. I am still a Nottoway even though I live 800+ miles away from Southampton county. It was the choice of my ancestors to leave the community not my choice and one day i will return does this mean i still would not belong? That is not the response or attitude I have received from my Nottoway people but that's probably because we are a long way from any federal recogntion if that should ever happen.
Linda

[Tom]

This is an interesting topic.
My family came to Canada in the 1920's, and we have been here ever since, my grandmother that came here now has about 300 direct descendants, and many of my family members still look very much Indain.
Amongst our family and (I have posted those images) are patterns on clothing, moccasins and atleast two eastern siouan words remembered by my family, in the USA we have many more relatives that share in this tradition, it's ours plain and simple.
Not belonging to a commmunity does not mean that you don't belong to a tribe, really that term is an English composite theory.
Being a person of first Nations descent does not mean that you have to belong anywhere, point is it's blood, not association.
We can all join clubs and call it what we want , looking at what defines a group in a collective sence may be a blood tye, but not always..
I'd like to know and see the genealogies of many of the southern "Tribal" groups, I have visited with many and because uphere we do acknowledge mixed blood people and those populations that have been displaced we have a very liberal acceptance towards all people,. many southern groups are more non Indian than Indian., but that does not mean they are not Indian it just means that the family focus has been maintained.
Did you know that there are isolated families of Iroquoian people along the Rocky Mountains?
These people are still Iroqouian, what defines them as a group is thier blood they are one big family group, and although they have been exogomous for generations they are still Iroquois.
So not belonging to a community does not mean that you are not Indian or that you don't have a "tribe", lets face it look at how the original Eastern Souian people and thier friends the Cherokee people lived in large family communities, many with Creek, Chickasaw and Shawnee relatives, they (the Cherokees) may have spoke the same language but they were not all on good terms. The Eastern Souian people fragmented into family groups, perhaps never sharing in a theoretical "tribal focus" (whatever that means).
The sence of tribe is one that was brought here, because my first language is English Iam not a memeber of the English tribe.
What defines a group of people is a blood connection, we may share in the culture of our nieghbour but we are not kin.
If community means tribe then what defines "community" not tribe, it's blood, and in this case it is Indian blood, not unlike the Tunica Biloxi, Ofo, Avoyel Choctaw "Tribe" of Louisiana, what makes them a cohesive group is that they are related to each other first, no matter where they live, in Chicago, Texas or anywhere else.
I often see people looking for recognition as "Indian" people, theory has it that our people crossed the Bering straight, I wonder if they handed out "Bering Straight Cards" back then , the -one way only- Directly to America, one night at the BIA.type.!
Point is we'll be here long after the BIA is done with and we'll still be the original people.
Have a Great Day.

[Dreaminghawk]

Tom,
The BIA has always been the "final solution" to the ndn "problem". If they can continue to define ndn as a smaller and smaller group and they can convince the defined group to be exclusionary, then finally they will succeed in defining the american ndn out of existence. The changes need to be forced in the BIA's definitions, not the tribe's makeup.
In deference to Forest, ( and he knows I love him;-), the triracial isolate of southern Person co, NC is too mixed to be a part of just 1 tribe. Although this core group has been together for over 200 years, they probably represent at least 2 dozen eastern tribes, saponi and iroquois..... with many of them going back to cheroenhaka, nansemond, pamunkey, mattaponi.....who knows what else. How can you know, considering how long the original tribes have been dispersed? Why should it matter?
Involve the BIA and see an open-hearted inclusionary people become exclusionary....... that saddens me.

[quest for facts]

I agree

[Linda]

Coharie Roy, I just wanted to say that was a beautifully written post and you made me understand some things I hadn't before. Thank you.

As for the issue of community, it may be important to the BIA and government recognition processes to conceive of it in terms of past history. I think, however, that what's most important is the community that exists in the present. Even in this virtual gathering place, there are elements of community evolving.

Of course, there can be much more depth when people have physical proximity to each other. There are many communities out there, who have either historically lived together as community and are carrying that into the present, or are people just recently coming together defined by Native identity. Ultimately, it's not important how they define themselves along ancient tribal roots, but how closely knit they are as a community here and now. It's the quality of their relationships, the degree of commitment, the shared vision, the quality of the group culture that determines what their success will be.

In the end, it doesn't matter at all whether or not the outside world "recognizes" them as a community. If they are, in fact, a viable community they will move forward into the future as one. The intrinsic strengths of a tribal community will enrich the individuals within it, and only those strengths will determine the long-term viability of that community, the rest of the world be damned. The rest of the world doesn't even need to know that they exist. They only need to know and support one another.

I spoke to a beautiful but frail 84 year old woman in Northern California last week who talked about her experiences in the 70's with some counter-culture individuals trying to come together as community. It failed because they put all their energy into buying land and planning the physical space, when, she explained, they should have been putting all their energies into their relationships. For example, they really didn't need a building to meditate in. What they needed was to be finding a common wavelength in real time. The rest is just vanity.

[Forest]

Well folks, I guess one of the good things about this board is that we can agree to disagree on things. Such as the definition of "Tribe" and "community".

And by the way, Tom, I'm not trying to be ugly, but I'll put our genealogies up against anyone's... They are MUCH better than anything most western tribes could come up with at this point, because few western tribes kept those kinds of official records until recently on which to base a genealogy, whereas most of the East Coast tribes were forced to for the purposes of State or Federal recognition.

And while I'm on the subject, when you live in a community where official recognition can bring assistance for the elders, scholarships for the kids, housing assistance for the ones who need it, then I'm sorry, it does make a difference.... State recognition has opened opportunities for the Occaneechi that were previously closed, as well as providing official acknowledgement of who the people are.

Do you need recognition from the State or Feds to be Indian? Absolutely not. Does it make life better for the community? Absolutely. And our community is what counts.

This is my last post on this topic; I started to delete it, since I seem to be taking a stance contrary to what most of you believe, but after thinking about it, I figured I'd go ahead and say what I think

[Deirdre]

Oh no Forest, please don't delete posts. If it's in your heart and can present something we have not considered, we must try to be open-minded and at least think about it. I am wondering now, what can be done to reverse the BIA's treatment of NDN recognitin and affairs? Letters? Petitions?

I think for those of us who have NDN ancestry we don't need the recognition of the Fed govt. But for the sake of the prosperity of a community and for the reasons you gave, it is certainly important. Don't we have a human obligation to care for the young and the old? IF there is something that NDN's are entitled to that will help in this effort, then the govt should give it up! When people organize and stick to the one common agenda that binds them, they usually make some progress. For instance, among Blacks in the 20th century it was stopping random lynchings, freedom, and later integration and affirmative action. We got it. Many had to die, but we got it. Just a thought.
Deirdre

[Tom]

Forest perhaps we need to reintroduce ourselves, I'd like to know more about you and where your from etc, don't get me wrong Forest, I think that people who will achieve fed, recg. will achieve it and for many that will bring things up, like you say but so far they the feds have done little good for many of the western Sioux and many others.
Keep posting Forest your additions are more than welcomed and I hope to meet you one day, I'll look for your postings in the future.

[Dreaminghawk]

Tom,
Forest is the historian for the Eno 0ccaneechi. His genealogical work is impeccable. He is the man most responsible for gathering the proof needed to present the OBSN to the BIA for recognition.
He is a man that I greatly admire and respect.

Forest,
You were right to ask that we take this issue to a face to face. I was wrong to present it on an open forum, read by people who don't understand the issues of this specific case. I regret my action and any disrespect I have shown you with my rashness. I will ask your forgiveness when you can see it in my eye at our next meeting. I would not want to do anything to be denied your "3 sisters" soup ;-)

To All,
My beef is, and has always been with the BIA, not Forest or the OBSN. I contend that we change the BIA in regards to recognizing eastern tribes and descendents. I would gladly be part of a discussion on how to approach that problem..... in my opinion it will be through groups like the Eastern Souian Descendents Assn. ...... but I am done with this thread. Aho

[Saponi 1]

Forest is actually Tribal Historian and Federal Acknowledgement Officer for the Occaneechi Band of the Saponi Nation (OBSN).
The Eno Occaneechi are another band of Saponi.

Sapon1

[quest for facts]

Forest,
I don'tsee your stance as contrary at all. I certainly understand the need for recognition to help the community and in that way I am all for it my problem is with the BIA saying who is indian and who is not. It is not their decision that should be for the individual tribe to determine. What gives them the right to cut us up in 1/4 or 1/8's I don't see them doing that to any other race? Also if you are white you are considered white, by the government, no matter where you live. Why is it different for us?
Linda

[Dreaminghawk]

Saponi I says>>>> Forest is actually Tribal Historian and Federal Acknowledgement Officer for the Occaneechi Band of the Saponi Nation (OBSN).
The Eno Occaneechi are another band of Saponi.

For the last 20 years I have heard the group in Alamance co called the EO until the last few years. Now they are OBSN. John Blackfeather refers to himself as EO. Where is this other tribe of EO located?

[Saponi 1]

Dreaminghawk, I really have no idea where they are located,
I know they apparently have a festival. There was a split a some point from the OBSN, I am not sure who split from who...

Sapon1

[Tom]

Hey Folks well if the Bia and the Dept of Indian and northern Affairs (Canada) would allow First nations people to identify themselves on the same terms as the national Constitutions we'd be much better off,.
In both countries The Federal dept. . demand NDN people to ID themselves in thier (The Feds) terms only, so, it is a polarized identity based on what they have determined Native people to be, in doing so they have taken the right to self determination away, and asking people to become the people that they (feds.) want them to be.
It is still subjucation and dis-honor!

[Felicia]

Tom -

Can this be challenged/changed? Just curious what you think, Thanks again!

[Tom]

hello well everything is subject to change!
there is a new thought on this and we'll here more about it soon, think of recognition on a personal basis, like the Metis People of Canada, proving descent and obtaing membership from a larger body of people.