Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[katmai]

Dna test wise I'm 20% Native American. No idea beyond from south Texas/northern Mexico area so I don't try to claim any tribal membership.

[katmai]

I guess I'm an 11th generation immigrant

Same on Mothers side, 3rd generation on father side(can trace family back 11 generations in Mexico to ancestor who came from Spain)

[Oexmelin]

Have they? That implies a knowledge of what each tribe was specifically known for that I seriously doubt most people claiming Cherokee ancestry have.

I am not sure what you are arguing for, here.

I am telling you: "Cherokee princess" is a thing. There are historical reasons for that. Families have inherited those stories from the 1890s-1920s and probably earlier. It has little to do with current, intimate, true knowledge of individual Indigenous nations, and a lot more to do with the historical context when that myth emerged. It was reinforced by the decline of Indigenous nations as a political force, which stopped making the Indian threatening, and began making them a marker of Americana, a tied to the land that could not really be contested, because there seemed to be no one left to contest it. See: all sports team having Indian names.

I mean the native nations were heavily outnumbered and divided both geographically and politically. So I guess I took a 'political threat' to mean like a threat to the United States but now it seems to be going in some technical definition I don't understand. So organized violence is the political threat here?

Well, yes. It was a threat to the United States. It was political, because Indigenous nations are nations, not just individuals. What are you not getting?

[Oexmelin]

Well not this white person. I need to see some evidence.

There's quite a bunch of scholarship around the issue. See, among the most well-known: https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300080674/playing-indian

[Admiral Yi]

Dna test wise I'm 20% Native American. No idea beyond from south Texas/northern Mexico area so I don't try to claim any tribal membership.

Mescalero

[Valmy]

Well not this white person. I need to see some evidence.

There's quite a bunch of scholarship around the issue. See, among the most well-known: https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300080674/playing-indian

I meant I need to see evidence before I think I am descended from any indigenous nation

I remember Henry Louis Gates also saying that African Americans also often baselessly claimed native American ancestry so it does seem to be a thing for Americans. Makes sense, I mean what could be American? I mean inn addition to all the things noted in your link.

[PDH]

Well not this white person. I need to see some evidence.

There's quite a bunch of scholarship around the issue. See, among the most well-known: https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300080674/playing-indian

He gave a really good talk at UWyo when I was an Anthropology grad student (oh my god, so long ago).

[PDH]

I meant I need to see evidence before I think I am descended from any indigenous nation

I figured you meant this - but you are (and I mean no disrespect here (hell, we had beer(s) together), I am paraphrasing pure divine) a 4-corner, 90 degree angle, straight up blockhead (Devo style).  You are as straight edged as they come, Valmy, and you think things through.  Much of the US felt a romantic tie to the "lost savage" as soon as they felt they had done enough to kill them all off.

[Valmy]

I am not sure what you are arguing for, here.

I am not necessarily arguing for anything. Just my impressions from talking to people who claimed to be Cherokees.

I am telling you: "Cherokee princess" is a thing. There are historical reasons for that. Families have inherited those stories from the 1890s-1920s and probably earlier. It has little to do with current, intimate, true knowledge of individual Indigenous nations, and a lot more to do with the historical context when that myth emerged. It was reinforced by the decline of Indigenous nations as a political force, which stopped making the Indian threatening, and began making them a marker of Americana, a tied to the land that could not really be contested, because there seemed to be no one left to contest it. See: all sports team having Indian names.

Sure, I agree with all that. I was only questioning the status of the Cherokee because they were one of the "civilized tribes" or something, as that would require people to actually know something about the Cherokee. Besides, I don't see people claiming to be descended from the Creek or the Chickasaw. The reason seems to me to be because Cherokee is a cooler sounding name.

Though I guess I should note that they were used as symbols of America virtually from 1776 onwards. See: Native Americans on American currency.

Well, yes. It was a threat to the United States. It was political, because Indigenous nations are nations, not just individuals. What are you not getting?

It was a threat in what sense? Just in the sense that they disputed US control over certain territory? I mean it was not like they were going to march on Washington.

[Valmy]

I meant I need to see evidence before I think I am descended from any indigenous nation

I figured you meant this - but you are (and I mean no disrespect here (hell, we had beer(s) together), I am paraphrasing pure divine) a 4-corner, 90 degree angle, straight up blockhead (Devo style).  You are as straight edged as they come, Valmy, and you think things through.  Much of the US felt a romantic tie to the "lost savage" as soon as they felt they had done enough to kill them all off.

Well...so long as it is a Devo style blockhead.

It would just seem very disrespectful to start trying to appropriate ancestry that is not mine. I mean not that it even matters much, but still.

[viper37]

It was a threat in what sense? Just in the sense that they disputed US control over certain territory? I mean it was not like they were going to march on Washington.

I believe indian military power and crimes against settlers were vastly overrated in medias of the times, especially after Little Big Horn.

But it may also be a political threat: a faction (american political faction with maybe no clear ties to any political party but representing a faction of political parties?)  trying to gain sympathy for indian nations and therefore endanger plans to forcibly move them out of the way when land or gold was needed.  That is only an asumption though.  PDh and Oex would know more.

[viper37]

It would just seem very disrespectful to start trying to appropriate ancestry that is not mine. I mean not that it even matters much, but still.

and you think some people are put off by that?

[Razgovory]

It was a threat in what sense? Just in the sense that they disputed US control over certain territory? I mean it was not like they were going to march on Washington.

I believe indian military power and crimes against settlers were vastly overrated in medias of the times, especially after Little Big Horn.

But it may also be a political threat: a faction (american political faction with maybe no clear ties to any political party but representing a faction of political parties?)  trying to gain sympathy for indian nations and therefore endanger plans to forcibly move them out of the way when land or gold was needed.  That is only an asumption though.  PDh and Oex would know more.

I'm not sure what you are getting at.

[Tonitrus]

It gets muddled but 13th Generation is the most straight forward answer.

If one is 3rd generation on one side, but umpteenth on the other, how does one calculate that?

[Grey Fox]

It gets muddled but 13th Generation is the most straight forward answer.

If one is 3rd generation on one side, but umpteenth on the other, how does one calculate that?

Pick the bigger known number.

My 13th is on my father's side since the research was done in the late 80s. On my mother's side, I don't know when the ancestor shows up but she/I have Wallace ancestry.