Cobb Track of Land 1888

[Brenda Collins Dillon]

I have been sorting a mountain of articles that I have kept over the years that caught my interest. I found this one sent to me by
sbtuscoffc@coastalnet.com (Livingston)
I believe Marilyn Livingston has authored a book on the Tuscarora. Has anybody read this book?


1740 several Indian families moved North of Penn. before going further
North to NY
What I have is a BIA listing with names of Indian families of different
tribes here in NC. After the Nat Turner Rebellion after 1831, It says the
Indians were threatened to be placed under bondage and immigrated to the
Quaker settlements in Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan.
On down it list some of the Indians in Ohio, in Highland Co., Ohio, in
1807-?Also in Greene Co.Ohio before 1832, today the area is called
Cedarville township in Greene Co. Ohio. the "heart of a Quaker Community".
Also some were in Indiana, Randolph Co. in the 1820's.
There is a side note that Indian families resided in Lake, Logan, Summit,
Highland, and Ross Counties, Ohio after the Indian Removal Act of 1830, the
Nat Turner Rebellion of 1831, and the NC Disenfrachisement Act of 1835...
Some of the Indian families names that were "relocated" are: Dempsey,
Hathcock, Turner, Brooks, Williams, George, Tudor, Hill, Buck, Clearwater,
Cummins, Jones, Mitchell, Crew, Head, Griffin, Teedrough, Collins, Hunt,
Cowger, Coker are listed in the heart of a Quaker Community.
As well as James, Sarah, Macklin, Jeffrey's and Decator, Washington, listed
in Greene Co. Ohio.
Hathcock, Headcock, Barnes, Parker, McGinnis, Reed, Coe, Paine, Manly,
Eaton, Rown, Hawkins, Helmer,Watson, Sweet, Jones, Hill, Martin, James,
Nichols, Austen/Austin, Brown, Hawks, Jordan in Montgomery Counties, NY.
There are also Johnsons, Norton, Whitmore, Mohack, Morgan, Chavers, Colley,
Silverlock, Top, Long, Paine, Mullins, Thorne, Eaton, Bowin, Barnett,
Parker, Duck, Austin, Simmons, Shumake, Melton, Brewington...
These are a few names listed in the BIA records as having their land taken
by land grants in VA, which made the land grab in NC easier...
As of yet the BIA will not give any Natives our listings of our ancestors
sold and or taken out of NC, or removed or sold into slavery in Barbados.
I do have a partial listing of Native American family surnames, but they
are from every Tribe in NC and quiet numerous.

[Forest]

It is not very often that I will come out and say that someone is just dead wrong about something, but I think I'm going to make an exception here.
First, most of it seems to come directly from Rick Haithcock's books, at least, in terms of the family names and county references, altho the writer does not mention his/her source.
Second, regarding the paragraph beginning "What I have is a BIA listing with the names...." I REALLY wish this were true; it would make writing the Occaneechi Petition for Federal Acknowledgment SOOOO much easier. Unfortunately, this simply is not true, in any realistic sense. The only Federal document listing ANYONE in Greene Co., Ohio as Indian is the US Census, particularly 1870/1880, when some of the Jeffries families from Greensville Co., Virginia, were counted as Indian.
Continuing on, Indians were never threatened with being placed under bondage as an State/Federal official policy in NC or Virginia. It MAY have happened as an isolated incident in a very few scattered areas. You could argue that the laws aimed at Freed slaves conceivibly threatened mixed-race/Indian people, but there is little or no evidence of enslavement actually happening in the period after 1790. If this was really the case, why did thousands of Indian people remain in Virginia and NC, never being enslaved?
I also have to say that for 90%+ of the names listed in this posting, there is NO evidence whatsoever that they families listed are Indian, mixed Indian, or anything other that non-white. There is also little evidence that many of these families moved under duress. MANY families, both white and non-white, were moving west in the 1830's, and in most cases, the migration was part of a general westward movement. It is true that many of the FPC communities in the Midwest tended to be in close proximity to Quaker settlements. The Beech Settlement in Rush County, Indiana was one such. These families were not "relocated" by the Federal government. Read Vincent's "Southern Seed, Northern Soil", for an indepth look at the Beech and Roberts Settlements in central Indiana.

The last section, beginning "These are a few names listed in the BIA records as having their land taken..." again, is poppycock. And as to the BIA having secret records of Indians "sold or taken out of NC" is simply not true. Why would the BIA have those records to begin with, since they would predate the Bureau's formation by many years, and IF they did, why has some enterprising tribal researcher not obtained them by using a FOA action?
Now if anyone can prove me wrong about this, I'll apologize. It certainly won't be the first time (nor, probably, the last) But putting out information like this gets under my skin because it is misleading, historically inaccurate, and mostly just plain wrong.
My 2 cents worth, for all that it's worth.

[Coharie Roy]

Brenda & Forest,

I'd read this information several other times on other sites. The author is Marilyn Livingston. I'd very much like to believe it inasmuch as two of those names she cites, SIMMONS and BREWINGTON are my direct lines. I even tried to call her (several times) to discover her source for the information (as well as to buy her book. She's written a book on the southern band of the Tuscarora.) Alas, to no avail. To make a long story short, until I see the source, I've decided to discount the information. My gut instinct says, why would the BIA want to keep this information hidden? (If indeed, they have it.) What's their motive? I can't see a motive, and I'm not real keen on conspiratorial theories.

[tasheaka]

Forest,
There are many small community's in the Ohio Valley that have served as home to a many Saponi families and has been an Indian community recordably over 300 years. You have raised many a eyebrow among our families who did not need to purchase anybody's book to know who their families were, and still are. It seems that alot of people are searching for only names that they feel could tie them to so called "indian families" there are some of us who have shared our geneology's with our own people so they could prove who they were.
Could you please clarify why this would be?

tasheaka

[Forest]

I really don't understand what you are asking here.

I didn't say that you or any of your families need Rick's book, or anyone elses's to tell you who you are. Nor am I myself presuming to tell you that. Nor am I, for that matter, making any kind of a value judgement on Rick's book. I said that the message Brenda posted appeared to me to have taken some of it's information from Rick's book.

I am saying that many cases I have seen of people who claim to have documentation of one thing or another do not, in the end, actually have that documentation. Don't take my word, or anyone else's, about this sort of research; double check it yourself so that you yourself can be satisfied that it's true. If oral tradition is satisfactory to you, then that's fine. In my work, however, oral tradition has to be cooroberated with additional documentation, or the Feds simply are not going to be satisfied. I do stand by my statement that many of those names in the post are not documentable as historic Indian tribal names. I am NOT saying they are not now possessed by Indian people, I am saying they are not found in the historic record as traditional tribal names.

If you are satisfied with who you are, and who your people are, then what difference does it make what I may or may not think, or anyone else for that matter. I have been happy to share what information I have on any of the Ohio communities with anyone who asked about it, but I have NEVER made a claim to know everything about all of the small mixed race and Indian communities that exist/existed there.

If you would like to restate your question, maybe I can better answer it.

[This message has been edited by Forest Hazel (edited 02-07-2002).]

[Linda]

I personally like a different approach to this kind of research. Not that I'm dismissing the validity the Forest's line of work, it's invaluable. But we need to remember, as he says, that it's geared towards the Feds, not people and their families and communities of people.

I've seen that page, or many similar to it, that list a number of names as Indian, and I suspect there's something going on there, but it's impossible to tell what, since it isn't explained how these ID's were determined. I know when I've tried to look any of it up, all I find is a census showing a lot of people listed as FPC or mullatto or black, so how was this conclusion drawn that they were NDN, much less a specific tribe? That's never explained. I don't like to disbelieve nice people, but it's not really proper to expect others to "just believe it 'cause I say it." That's expecting other people to be either 1) gullible, or 2) lazy.

Now, what Tasheaka is saying is very intriguing to me. She's providing that other piece of data -- families that are on that list of non-whites who KNOW they're NDN,who always known it. (And best of all, Saponi, yay!!) Now we're talking about something obvious and common sense.

I don't give a flip if common sense isn't good enough for the Feds. It's good enough for us. All that's really important is that we recognize one another, recognize that we have a common goal, to restore our Ancestor's culture and memory to its proper place. This IS an Indian country. It always was, no matter how much white-wash was applied, and what hasn't worn off, has chipped and pealed and flaked away. And if it hasn't yet, this internet is bringing a lot of cousins together and when we meet each other, WE KNOW IT.

I look at Brenda's pix and I see that Saponi schnoz and those familiar eyes and I know she's poured her heart and soul into finding her people. I never needed to see a scrap of "evidence" from her. When she told me the story about how her mother made her promise she'd uncover the family's story, and left her a box of data that somehow disappeared, only to be mysteriously delivered in the mail a year after her mother had died, and the way she felt about that, that something spiritual was occuring, that was all I ever needed to know exactly who she was and who her family was.

If somebody came to me and said, "hey we always thought we had NDN anestors, and now I just found out I'm tied into Brenda's line," that would be Holy Grail to me.

So maybe that will make somebody ill that I'm jumping the gun and spreading mis-information, but, to me, we have to move on. The "proof," in a European, legalistic manner ain't gonna exist for the majority of us. But, given the circumstances, isn't that kind of an inappropriate modus operandi?

This is about what we BELIEVE. What we choose to BELIEVE is fully protected under the Bill of Rights. We don't need to get recognized with any other status than that. We already have the full, legal perogative to do any of the things we wish to do with this. (BTW, the concept of "individual liberty" is more than likely an NA concept borrowed by the settlers, so we are following our Native roots in asserting this.) Why waste our time quibbling over "proofs" that more than likely aren't there?

Of course, then again, if some new evidence suddenly presents itself I'll consider it a marvelous windfall. But only because it helps fill in the picture, not because I didn't already believe what is supposedly "proven" by it.

[This message has been edited by Linda (edited 02-07-2002).]

[Saponi_NDN]

Tasheaka, You are right. Some people know who they are and always have known. As Indian people we have learned a respect for our oral histories. I don't know why Forest Hazel makes them sound like fairy tales to be completely discounted. Nor do I undrestand why he slammed Mr. Haithcock's book. I have a copy of the book and it is full of some really good and useful information.

[itconani]

i would be careful not to make this disagreement personal. i believe there are two differnt modes of clarity going on here. ive reread hazels posts and feel very supportive of his need for accuracy in the Historical data. however, i also am very well aware of many people that have alot of oral traditions, and are close to indian communities - as linda stated. it really depends on what ones goal is. but for the sake of the research, lets keep it clean and agree to disagree politely. it hard to sense emphasis, tone, inflection, etc in writing.
and...there is a "shoot the breeze" section that i see tasheaka has already found.

[Anishinabee]

The oral history of the Native American genealogies is one that is truly unique and one to be honored as it came from our elders. It may not suffice for the BIA or any other group that has set themselves up as lord and master over others. If our elders told us that we are Indian then WE ARE INDIAN. I don't need a card nor any agency tell me what I am.
As Indians, we did not conduct ourselves in a manner that would be degrading nor condescending. We would never make comments that were disparaging about our Indian brothers and sisters. This is how the invaders came to Turtle Island and took it over... it's the theory of divide and conquer.
As Indians, if we did not have anything good to say about the subject, we kept our mouths shut. Our silence was and still is our voice.
I thank the Creator for my family letting me know what I am. I don't need a list of names in a book, a researcher to validate my lineage or a governmental agency to issue me a pedigree.

[Forest]

Please go back and re-read my posts. I did not "slam" Rick's book, nor anyone's oral traditions. Nor did I refer to any of them as "fairy tales" If you want to disagree with what I'm saying at least have the common decency to read the post.

I don't intend to get in a pissing contest with any of you folks, particularly ones who hide their names behind a user name. It's a waste of time for me. My apologies if my stance that oral tradition can be enhanced, and frequently supported by historical research offended any of you. I'd hate for any of you to actually have to examine what you believe.
As for being a researcher, I'm proud of what I do and who I am, and I'm just as much an Indian as any one of you posting here. And regardless of what you may think, what I and other Indian researchers like me do has added immeasurably to everyone's understanding of Indian history. It's not my fault if the historical documentation is sometimes at odds with what is currently fashionable. Unfortunately several of you seemed to take it as a personal attack on your Indianess when I suggested that if someone makes a statement about documentation as in the message that Brenda passed along, then they should be able to produce said documentation.

Anyway, this is my last post. Linda, Roy,Brenda or any of the rest of you who actually have a question about anything, I'll be glad to share what I know if you email me.

To the rest of you, happy motoring.



[This message has been edited by Forest Hazel (edited 02-08-2002).]

[Brenda Collins Dillon]

Folks:

I didn't intend to cause such a upset with my posting. I mirely collected this article which is said to come from this author's book and wanted to know if anybody has read the book. We all have to agree there is a mountain of information out there on the Native American and Melungeons and it has to be sifted through to find what is documented and what is fiction. We all have to agree that some of us are lucky enough to have been handed down traditions, stories, pictures, and some have had the privilege of living among our people. However there are many people out there that were brought up thinking they were "pure white", lied to about their heritage, and really would just love to know the truth, learn as much as they can, and be accepted for who they are.

Some have found their way back. I have the story of Graydove2 on my site "The Journey" which is the story of how she found her way back to the Nansemond Tribe. She submitted years of documentation that weighed 5# to mail to the tribe to establish her enrollment. She was one of the few that have sucessfully made this journey. Some of us will never be able to complete this task because of the lack of information available nor the ability to really get in there and dig through the records to get to the truth.

It comes down to what you know in your heart and accepting that that MIGHT be all you ever really have. It doesn't mean giving up on your search. Forest, I hope that you won't leave because we can all learn so much from you. I came to this forum to learn, to share, and being here I have felt like this is my family and family keep the lines of communication open or they don't work out their difference.

Take care all and have a good day.

Brenda

[tasheaka]

To my saponi family,
my apology to Linda, Brenda, Forest, Coharie Roy, Saponi NDN, and itconani. I did not mean for my response to be taken so far as to offend anyone. I am fairly new to the sites however, I appreciate All the information that is shared as far as the knowlegeable sources, and some who may still be searching, we all have something to contribute.
tasheaka

[Saponi_NDN]

Tasheaka, You are right, no apology is needed. I see that you are from Ohio. I am coming up there to a Pow Wow in a couple weeks.

[tasheaka]

Saponi NDN,
Which pow wow? I know there is one on the 16th and 17th in Lima, Ohio. However, I will probably not be able to be there due to other committments.
tasheaka

[Saponi_NDN]

Tasheaka, That would be the one.

[Coharie Roy]

I don't know whether this will help sooth hurt feelings or not, but I thought I'd tell my story.

I think we all come to this to satisfy different personal needs. As well, we bring our own values. Additionally, we all have different backgrounds, histories, etc. Consequently, what I seek, may not necessarily be what someone else is seeking. And that's OK.

I may be more fortunate than some, and less fortunate than others. My father enrolled me in the Lumbee tribe, but I spent most of my childhood with my mother's people (Coharie) and feel most comfortable with them. Although I could just as easily be enrolled in the Coharie, for purely crass, selfish reasons (of the two, the Lumbee are far more likely, if ever, to receive federal recognition), I remain enrolled with the Lumbee. [ NOTE: You can't be enrolled in both tribes simultaneously. ]

Now here's the thing I wanted to say. Even though I'm an enrolled member of a North Carolina recognized tribe, that's not good enough for me. I need more. I'm 53 years old and from the moment of my first memory, I was told I was Indian. So, I don't question that. Not in the least. That's what you call our "oral tradition." Now, when I was in high school, I constructed my first genealogy. I remember going to my grandparents and aunts and uncles with questions. Virtually everyone of them told me that, "our people came from Roanoke." That's more oral tradition. And I don't question that either.

So, while I firmly believe I'm Indian, and that my ancestors came from Roanoke, I nevertheless need more. Since I was a child, I've always questioned why it was if I'm Indian, that I can't speak Indian? What tribe of Indian? Why don't I look Indian? So many questions and no answers. To this day, there are still no answers. Ironically enough, while I've been doing my own digging for about two years now, and while I still consider myself a total novice in genealogical research, I'm starting to get phone calls and e-mails from people I don't know, asking my advice and opinion about our origins. As if I'M an expert. Now THAT'S scary. Because I'M certainly not the expert. Heck, I'm LOOKING for the expert. I've got a ton of questions I want to ask him/her.

Anyway, I've learned a lot more these past two years than I ever thought possible. For instance, I can't tell you how thrilled I was to discover that there was a Fort Christanna in the historical record. And an Indian Woods reservation. And a Fort Neoheroka. Most of this information is completely unknown to most of my people.

But having discovered so much, I'm daunted by how incrediably much more there is to sift through. If I quit my job right now and devoted the rest of my life to uncovering our history, I'd grow old and die before I completed half of it.

I think I've gotten off point. All I really wanted to say, is that I NEED the details. Others may not. And that's fine. But I need the documentation. For a whole host of complex emotional reasons, I NEED to link myself, and my father, and his father, and so on, and so forth, to a documented Indian in the historical record. Now, I've done that with my Revell line. But that's the only line I can link to an historically documented Indian. And while I have "smoking guns" all over the place for virtually all of my other lines, I just can't seem to make that last generaltional linkage.

I want to apologise if I inadvertantly offended anyone in my earlier post. Perhaps I could have chosen a better word than "discount." I hope Forest Hazel and everyone else will continue to post. I look forward to seeing you all here soon.

[Linda]

Thank you all for not letting this boil over. I hope no one will leave over this. There are two approaches it seems, both of which seem necessary. There's the seat of your pants, I'm going to throw it on the wall and see if it sticks kind of genealogy, and there's the by-the-book, ready for Library of Congress type. I understand how frustrated the latter type can get, when they start to believe that people are taking the former types as Gospel.

I had a good friend bring me to task recently. There was some confusion about something I'd said, that really my husband had said (yeah, blame Barry, he won't care, hehe) and then I'd spoken to someone here who was new and made a statement like "Collins is a known Saponi name," forgetting that to newcomers this can be very confusing. It seemed to my friend like I'd gone off the deep end and was starting to see Saponi everywhere I looked and preach that gospel to all comers.

I know when I first started out with this, somebody told me "Harris is a Tuscarora name, you want an enrollment form?" I was like, 'Whoa, what do you mean, it's a Tuscarora name? It's also a Welsh name, an English name. It's an African-American name. It's a common-as dirt-name. Whatever you're selling, I ain't buying.'

After some years of this I've gotten used to the shorthand that stands for the sentence, "This can be a Saponi name, there are many with this surname who either know or suspect they are Saponi, too many for idle coincidence. So if you have stories of Natives in your family and you have this name, that's a good place to start digging." Obviously I've started using the shorthand myself, not even realizing it. Us seat-of-the-pants-ers do need to watch ourselves that we don't go overboard.

For his part, Rick is the King of the seat of the pants-ers. He's blaized so many trails there are probably a dozen dissertations suggested in his books we'll probably have to bequeath to the next generation. I look at his work and see the start of an "Encyclopedia of the Saponi." It does take awhile, though, to get the hang of his "shorthand" so I do understand why people can be taken aback.

[Linda]

Roy, I would love to hear about this Revell you have linked to a documented Indian.


I NEED to link myself, and my father, and his father, and so on, and so forth, to a documented Indian in the historical record. Now, I've done that with my Revell line. But that's the only line I can link to an historically documented Indian.

[This message has been edited by Linda (edited 02-09-2002).]

[RLEE]

Hello Forrest, I just want you to know that people like Marilyn Livingston can take my research i.e. surname list and label it as a BIA list excuse me, but you and I both know that none of the contemporary N.C state tribes existed during the said period.