Scarlet Legacy

Joseph Newman-Misc postings of interest

2008-12-08T16:46:00.000-08:00

In a message dated 12/8/2008 4:21:15 A.M. Central Standard Time, manahoac_saponi@yahoo.com writes:
I came across something in the Saponi records about one of the chief's dying.....well what he died of is what struck me as very interesting.Ok well we all know about Brent Kennedy.Well this document talked about "Pleursy"....which is something I have also along with Tachycardia (doctors do not know what causes my Pleursy)....but any way.....I'll copy and past what the document says....and then I'll show you something about Pleursy."The daughter of the Tetero (that is Tutelo) king went away with the Sapponies, but being the last of her nation, and fearing she should not be treated according to her rank, poisoned herself, like an old Roman, with the root of the trumpet plant. Her father died two years before, who was the most intrepid Indian we have been acquainted with. He had made himself terrible to all other Indians by his exploits, and had escaped so many dangers that he was esteemed invulnerable. But at last he died of a pleurisy, the last man of his race and nation, leaving only that unhappy daughter behind him, who would not long survive him."Here is most of the page that came from and the source info:Page 89The Westover Manuscripts: Containing the History of the Dividing Line Betwixt Virginia and North Carolina; A Journey to the Land of Eden, A. D. 1733; and A Progress to the Mines. Written from 1728 to 1736, and Now First Published: Byrd, William, 1674-1744And in earnest they would have served well enough for that purpose, if the white people in the neighbourhood had not debauched their morals, and ruined their health with rum, which was the cause of many disorders, and ended at last in a barbarous murder committed by one of these Indians when he was drunk, for which the poor wretch was executed when he was sober. It was matter of great concern to them, however, that one of their grandees should be put to so ignominious a death. All Indians have as great an aversion to hanging as the Muscovites, though perhaps not for the same cleanly reason: these last believing that the soul of one that dies in this manner, being forced to sally out of the body at the postern, must needs be defiled. The Sapponies took this execution so much to heart, that they soon after quitted their settlement and removed in a body to the Catawbas. The daughter of the Tetero king went away with the Sapponies, but being the last of her nation, and fearing she should not be treated according to her rank, poisoned herself, like an old Roman, with the root of the trumpet plant. Her father died two years before, who was the most intrepid Indian we have been acquainted with. He had made himself terrible to all other Indians by his exploits, and had escaped so many dangers that he was esteemed invulnerable. But at last he died of a pleurisy, the last man of his race and nation, leaving only that unhappy daughter behind him, who would not long survive him.The most uncommon circumstance in this Indian visit was, that they all came on horse-back, which was certainly intended for a piece of state, because the distance was but three miles, and it is likely they had walked on foot twice as far to catch their horses. The men rode more awkwardly than any Dutch sailor, and the ladies bestrode their palfreys a la mode de France, but were so bashful about it, that there was no persuading them to mount till they were quite out of our sight. The French women used to ride a-straddle, not so much to make them sit firmer in the saddle, as from the hopes the same thing might peradventure befall them that once happened to the nun of Orleans, who, escaping out of a nunnery, took post en cavalier, and in ten miles' hard riding had the good fortune to have all the tokens of a man break out upon her. This piece of history ought to be the more credible, because it leans upon much the same degree of proof as the tale of bishop Burnet's two Italian nuns, who, according to his lordship's account, underwent the same happy metamorphosis, probablyby some other violent exercise.Ok now let's get into the Brent kennedy thing. Below is from Medicalnet.comWhat is sarcoidosis?Sarcoidosis is a disease that results from a specific type of inflammation of tissues of the body. It can appear in almost any body organ, but it starts most often in the lungs or lymph nodes.(Note:....most often in the Lungs...keep that in mind).Ok on the the next thing:Familial Mediterranean fever aka FMT:From Wikipedia (not a fully reliabale sources..but anyway).Familial Mediterranean Fever (FMF) is a hereditary inflammatory disorder that affects groups of people originating from around the Mediterranean Sea (hence its name). It is prominently present in the Armenian people, Sephardi Jews (and, to a much lesser extent, Ashkenazi Jews), people from Turkey, and the Arab countries.Signs and symptoms: (Take note of number 3)There are seven types of attacks. 90% of all patients have their first attacks before they are 20 years old. All develop over 2-4 hours and last anytime between 6 hours and 4 days. Most attacks involve fever:[1]1.Abdominal attacks, featuring abdominal pain affecting the whole abdomen with all signs of acute abdomen (e.g. appendicitis). They occur in 95% of all patients and may lead to unnecessary laparotomy. Incomplete attacks, with local tenderness and normal blood tests, have been reported. 2.Joint attacks, occurring in large joints, mainly of the legs. Usually, only one joint is affected. 75% of all FMF patientsexperience Joint attacks. 3.Chest attacks with pleuritis (inflammation of the pleural lining) and pericarditis (inflammation of the pericardium). Pleuritis occurs in 40%, but pericarditis is rare. 4.Scrotal attacks due to inflammation of the tunica vaginalis. This occurs in up to 5% and may be mistaken for acute scrotum (i.e. testicular torsion) 5.Myalgia (rare in isolation) 6.Erysipeloid (a skin reaction on the legs, rare in isolation) 7.Fever without any symptoms (25%) So now I'll quote from WebMD (Now my doctor told me I can't die from Pleursy...my doctor always just gives me some kind of inflamatory medicine....but apprently the Tutelo Chief died from it) but anyway on with WebMD.Understanding Pleurisy - the BasicsWhat Is Pleurisy?Pleurisy, also called pleuritis, is an inflammation of the pleura, which is the moist, double-layered membrane that surrounds the lungs and lines the rib cage. The condition can make breathing extremely painful. Sometimes it is associated with another condition called pleural effusion, where excess fluid fills the area between the membrane's layers.The double-layered pleura protects and lubricates the surface of the lungs as they inflate and deflate within the rib cage. Normally, a thin, fluid-filled gap -- the pleural space -- allows the two layers of the pleural membrane to slide gently past each other. But when these layers become inflamed, with every breath, sneeze, or cough their roughened surfaces rub painfully together like two pieces of sandpaper.In some cases of pleurisy, excess fluid seeps into the pleural space, resulting in pleural effusion. This fluid buildup usually has a lubricating effect, relieving the pain associated with pleurisy as it reduces friction between the membrane's layers. But at the same time, the added fluid puts pressure on the lungs, reducing their ability to move freely. A large amount of fluid may cause shortness of breath. In some cases of pleural effusion, this excess liquid can become infected.What Causes It?Viral infection is probably the most common cause of pleurisy. Other causes include the following:Lung infections, such as pneumonia and tuberculosis Other diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (lupus), rheumatoid arthritis, cancer, liver and pulmonary embolism Chest injuries Drug reactions Pleurisy and pleural effusion are generally only as serious as the underlying disease causing it. If you have either of these conditions, you may already be undergoing treatment for the underlying disease; if not, seek medical attention immediately.A pleural effusion can occur without pleurisy Kidney disease, heart failure, and liver disease can cause pleural effusion without inflammation or pain.So....it's a interesting thing....I wish there was more about what caused the Tutelo Chief's Pleursy......If it was TB then why did William Bird not say TB....if it was Pneumonia why did he not say that? Why did he just say "A Plesury"? If it was TB then I'm sure it would have spread to the rest of the tribe which the Saponi/tutelo did not suffer a TB Epidemic....what deaths they had usually came from wars...they was almost always fighting. He did not say the Chief died of Disease......he did not say if the Chief died in winter, spring, Summer, etc either which makes it hard to tell if the Chief may have goten Pneumonia. but anyway I figured I woudl share this information.The location this Chief was at was Brunswick, Virginia at the Saponi Reservation.

Tennessee Melungeons

2008-12-08T16:20:00.000-08:00

In a message dated 12/8/2008 6:16:46 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, manahoac_saponi@yahoo.com writes:
Thing with that is.....the louisa county records...look at the date....them are not the oldest records.

John Collins, (c1690 - 1752)
The birth year of John Collins is again an estimate based on a 1716 deed in Bertie County, NC.
John Collins wrote his will on 27 December 1749 in Bertie County, NC.

thats older than any of the other Virginia records...the hyde county records are

----------------------------

But none of these can be connected to Thomas Collins Sr., Thomas Collins Jr., Samuel Collins, Thomas Gibson and his sons Charles, Reuben, Major etc., --- they can be easily traced from Virginia to North Carolina to Tennessee. The Bertie County Collins, IIRC are R1b -- Vardy's is R1a and Valentine's is E3a..... Joanne

Joanne Wrote:
In a message dated 12/8/2008 8:37:50 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, manahoac_saponi@yahoo.com writes:
So....do we have Newman's ridge links to Bertie county, nc? yes we have that......Bunch and collins....We even know that Valentine Collins' dna matches perfect with the Bertie county, nc's DNA....His dna matches Henry Bunch....who it just so happens....henry's daughter married into the Collins family of Bertie.....Bertie being close to the Machapunga tribe where the Vandermullen, collins, Gibbs, and Austin are in the late 1600-early 1700's....oldest records.

I think I can say, with a fair degree of certainty, that these Gibsons who were called 'Tennessee Melungeons' can be traced back to Louisa Co., Virginia along with the Bunch, Collins, Goins, Goodmans, and others. The DNA match of Valentine Collins to the Bunch line could be from a union in 1747 in Virginia-- assuming Henry Bunch probably comes from the Louisa County line ;

1745 May 28 Louisa Co. VA "Ordered that William Hall, Samuel Collins, Thomas Collins, William Collins, Samuel Bunch, George Gibson, Benjamin Branham, Thomas Gibson, and William Donathan be summoned to appear at the next Court to answer the presentment of the Grand jury this day made against them for concealing tithables within twelve months past."
1747 Louisa Co VA: Thomas Collins sold 186 acres on Turkey Creek on the south side of the Southanna River to John Powell..the land lies near Gilbert Gibson, Thomas Gibson and Sam Bunch land.

The above Gilbert Gibson is no doubt the son of 'Gibby Gibson' who died in 1726 and left a Charles City County will. He is buried in the Lightfoot cemetery at Sandy Point with Francis, likely his wife, named in the will, and his father, Thomas Gibson. These Gibson lines were in Virginia in the early 1600s and I have found no connection to the Gibbs/Gibbes families you mention.

I have been in contact with researchers from the Bertie County Collins who assure me the DNA of those Collins do not match any of the 'Melungeon' Collins lines -- to my knowledge there is no proven link from the Bertie County families to the Hancock County,Tennessee Melungeons.

The Collins left Louisa County with the Bunch, Gibsons etc., and are found 1750 in Granville;

The 1750 tax list of Granville County, NC list the following:
Gideon Bunch 2 tithes (Micajer and William)
Thomas Collins Sr. 1 tithe, Samuel Collins 1 tithe, John Collins 1 tithe
Thomas Gibson with tithes Charles and George Gibson.

These are the families of the Newman's Ridge Melungeons. The 'other Melungeons' the ones in Hamilton County, Wilson Co, etc., by 1850 were from Bertie Co., North Carolina and Marion County, South Carolina. Why their kinfolks were called Lumbee, Smiling, Redbones, Carmel Indians etc., I don't know. Maybe as Dragging Canoe said in 1775;

"Whole Indian Nations have melted away like snowballs in the sun before the white man's advance. They leave scarcely a name of our people except those wrongly recorded by their destroyers." Joanne
Joseoph Newman wrote:

Well..the collins started out as Machapungs in Hyde county, NC. There was also VanderMullen with them and alot of Native people named Gibbs. This was a time when the Saponi was in the Bertie county, NC area.

Also....when the English first came to america....not the spainsih but the english.....their first stop was Hatteras island....they found a ship wrecked to pieced and it was partially burned.....the Hatteras tribe (the real name of the Croatoan) had the ship's flag in their village and there was mixed kids in the tribe already from the people of the Wreckage. The French and spainish was both on Hatteras before the English. The english got their in 1585.

The first english even had Portuguese men on their crew...one named Fernando.

Now if you google the meaning of gibson...you'll find several websites that says thats a proven variation of gibbs and gibbes.

Another surname found with the Saponi which originated from the Machapunga and Hatteras was Austin.

It was also proven that some (not all) Hatteras had moved in with the Mattamuskeet.

Handbook of American Indians, 1906
Hatteras. An Algonquian tribe living in 1701 on the sand banks of Cape Hatteras, N. C. east of Pamlico sound, and frequenting Roanoke Island. Their single village, Sandbanks, had them only about 80 inhabitants. They showed traces of white blood and claimed that some of their ancestors were white. They may have been identical with the Croatan Indians with whom Raleigh's colonists at Roanoke Island are supposed to have taken refuge.

Now we also know some of the Saponi at the brunswick reservation did in fact speak Algonkian.

The Hatteras when visited in the 1600's had blue and grey eyes...could read from books.....said their ancestors came from a book called Raleigh.....they showed signs of mixed ancestry...etc etc.

In fact there was several portugesse the english brought to Hatteras island on each trip. a few examples are,
Enrique Lopez, Portuguese merchantDiego Menendez de Valdes (He may be spainish)
Alonzo Cornieles, Captain of the Santa Maria of San Vicente (spainish or Portugesse)
Edward GorgesMaster BremigeMaster VincentCaptain John Copeltope(I'm sure at least one of them 4 was portugesse)
Simon Fernandez, chief pilot (Portugesse man)
Iohn Gostigo (Probally spainish or portugesse)

But anyway....that who the English brought to Hatteras island in the 1580's.....this does not even count the spainish and French who came to Hatteras before 1585.

But on to the colony of 1587...here is some names.

John Cheven
John GibbesThomas HarrisRichard Darige
William NicholesThomas ScotThomas ColmanGeorge Martyn

Now Simon Fernando the portugesse....he came on pretty much every trip from 1585-1587.....he was a proven portugesse..and I'm sure he had some mixed children by the women in his off and on 2 years with the Hatteras.

Now Sir Francis Drake was the person who picked up the first "Colony"....the first colony was not the first English trip....there was actually 6 trips....the first colony was more like the 3rd trip. lost colony was the 5th trip. Sir Francis drake was the 4th trip. Anyway.....Traveling with Drake was John Hawkins and william collins.....those two got left behind at Veracruz....they knew drake was going to Hattera to drop off supplies. This is proven..not a theory. ok so there was problems with the spianish in Verazcruz blah blah....so Hawkins and Collins knew there was a french colony in florida....so they went there...found the colony fisnihed off by the spainish.....so this crew started following the Native American paths up the East coast....Logic would say they would have went for Hatteras since they knew there was a Enlgish colony there and Drake was there.....little by little people from their crew started just staying with various tribes....Hawkins and Collins and their crew was staying a few days with each tribe that would take them in....probally spent a few weeks with some tribes.....anyway they probally got to Hateras and found out the First colony was not there...because the first colony had gotten the other tribes angry and the colony rode off to england with drake (Hatteras was still friendly to the english)....ok so they continue north and enter canada....end of a 11 month jounry and they finnally make it back....only some of the crew made it back though.....Only person I know who made it back was john Hawkins....I have not seen William collins listed as making it back to England. This is all proven.

Ok on to the next stuff.....

Newman's ridge stories....shipwrecked....burned portuguese ships....took native women as wifes....nc coast....all that stuff can be proven as stuff that really did happen on Hatteras island even before the First english came.......We also have proof of the Newman's ridge surnames found among the Hatteras and Machapunga before any other records and all the surnames related to native americans.....we even have the names "Captain John Goring 1586"(goring, Going, Goin) and" John Gostigo 1585-1586 "

We know the Saponi did often go live with the Catawba and cheraw.....we know the Lumbee are cheraw, Tuscarora, and Croatoan/Hatteras....their original name was Croatoan of roberson county.

Ok so let's see what the Saponi reocrds have.

1701:John Lawson finds Sapona indians along the banks of the Yadkin river (at that time was named Sapona river).Also in 1701 NC Davidson County. Trading Fort established on Sapona River (now called Ydkin River) at the Indian town of Sapona Town.

1701-1709:After John Lawson's visit to Sapona Village around Febuary 1701, the Saponi and Tutelo left their villages behind.The Siouan tribes had been getting attacked from the North and South Iroqious tribes.These 2 tribes moved Eastward and the Saponi creek near Nashville NC probally shows the path they took. Occaneechi and the other allied tribes followed. They was all moving toward the settler's settlements so Saponi village was no longer safe..They crossed the Roanoak river before the Tuskarora war of 1711.Their new Village was called Sapona townn. The Location was slightly East of roanoak river and about 15 miles westward from Windsor in Bertie county NC.So....do we have Newman's ridge links to Bertie county, nc? yes we have that......Bunch and collins....We even know that Valentine Collins' dna matches perfect with the Bertie county, nc's DNA....His dna matches Henry Bunch....who it just so happens....henry's daughter married into the Collins family of Bertie.....Bertie being close to the Machapunga tribe where the Vandermullen, collins, Gibbs, and Austin are in the late 1600-early 1700's....oldest records.

Hatteras island by the way is riddled with Shipwrecks.

So anyway....these Saponi move back to Virginia..

1733:Saponi not happy with their living with the Catawbas and returned to Virginia. These Saponi bring with them some Cheraws (Catawba). They were forced to petition Lt. Governor Gooch for permission to resettle in Virginia, which was granted (Merrell 1989:116). Note: This Cheraw/Saura town very near the settlement of the 'Rockingham County Indians' known as the Gibson and Goins.
Ok so we have the gibson and Goins name there...but anyway lets move along.

1723:The Stegaraki were located by Governor Spotswood of Virginia at Fort Christanna about 10 years earlier, and the Mepontsky, also placed there, may have been the Ontponea. We hear of the former as late as 1723, and there is good reason to believe that they united with the Tutelo and Saponi and followed their fortunes, and that under these two names were included all remnants of the Manahoac.Now let's see who these tribes was...

The Stegaraki, who were in Orange County along the Rapidan River
The Ontponea, who were located in Orange County

And of course we know Louisa county, VA was the first known location of the Saponi under the name Monasukapanough.......ok so the Saponi leave the reservation....etc etc.

In 1730, "William Bohannon came into court and made oath that about twenty-six of the Sapony Indians that inhabit Colonel Spotswood's land in Fox's neck go about and do a great deal of mischief by firing the woods; more especially on the 17th day of April last whereby several farrows of pigs were burnt in their beds, and that he verily believes that one of the Indians shot at him the same day, the bullet entering a tree within four feet of him; that he saw the Indian about one hundred yards from him, and no game of any sort between them; that the Indian after firing his gun stood in a stooping manner very studdy [steady] so that he could hardly discern him from a stump, that he has lost more of his pigs than usual since the coming of the said Indians; which is ordered to be certified to the General Assembly. " Orange county VA1742 ""Alexander Machartoon, John Bowling, Manicassa, Capt. Tom, Isaac, Harry, Blind Tom, Foolish Jack, Charles Griffin, John Collins, Little Jack. Indians being brought before the court by precept under the hands and seals of Wm Russell & Edward Spencer, Gent. for terrifying one Lawrence Strother and on suspicion of stealing hoggs........."" The above put up security individually. It was ordered that their guns be taken from them till they are ready to depart out of this county, "they having declared their intentions to the Court to depart this colony within a week" (Orange Co..VA Order Book 3 1741-1743. 309) Orange Co Va Microfilm Reel 31, Va "25 Jan 1745 Louisa County, Virginia Court: William Hall, Samuel Collins, William Collins, Samuel Bunch, George Gibson, Benjamin Brannum, Thomas Gibson, & William Donothan appear to answer an indictment for concealing tithables. Plead not guilty, Case continued."

1743-1747:Governor Clarence Gooch of Virginia reported to the Colonial Office that the "Saponies and other petty nations associated with them . . . are retired out of Virginia to the Cattawbas" (British Colonial Office 1743).

1749:3598 pg 384 WILLIAM MACKINTOSH 13 October 1749 200 acres in Johnston County on the S. side of the Neuse River on a place called Powells run near Sapony Camps, joining near the sd. run.

13 Oct 1749 Johnson Co. William Mackintosh 200 A on S side of Neuse on place called Powells run near Sapony Camps (975.6 R 2hm Colony of NC 1735-1764 V 1)

Now let's look real quick at another Person.....The Mattamuskeet's chief/King wasSquires..under him was the Mackey/Macay, etc family.....now we would want to see if for a fact there was anyone really important from the Mattamuskeet was traveling with these Saponi into virginia from Hyde county, nc area.

Which we do find that....Tonk Mack aka Tony Mackey.

27 Sept 1728 Sir: The 27th of September John Carter brought Negro Cofey to my house, as he says, by your orders, for me to examine concerning what the Saponys have told him about the white people, which I have done, and he tells me: that Great George told him that John Sauano and a fellow called Ben Harrison was gone to the Cotobers to fetch one hundred of them to come and see why their Indians was put in prison, and if Capt. Tom was hanged they would carry their wives and children over the Roanoke River and then they would drive the white people and negros as far as James River, and he says that Tony Mack told him that if Pyah was hanged he and the Cotobers would come and take revenge of the English, and he says that Sapony Tom told him if his son Harry Erwin was hanged they would kill you and three or four more Gentlemen and then go off, and he says that Dick told him that we had no business to come to the fort armed to concern ourselves about their killing one another, but we were like a sow that had lost her pigs would rally for a little time and then have done *, but when they began a war with the English they never would have done *. This from your humble servant to command, Thomas Avent The original document is held by the Virginia Historical Society, Richmond, VA and will give you a copy of the original. http://aventfamily.org/taveltr.htm
Now we already know about the Saponi recorded in Granville, nc and how the Collins, bunch, riddle etc was there at the same time....we know about the Newman's ridge records etc etc....we know about the Broad river records, etc etc.....so let's go back to Hyde county, NC where the oldest records are.

Children with surnames attributable to the Mattamuskeet were well represented among the apprentice bonds of this period. Twelve persons with the surname of Longtom, and twelve with the Mackey surname were apprenticed (see appendices 40 and 41). Other families of probable Indian descent are also represented in the records. The Collins family was represented by apprentice bonds on ten different individuals. One member of the Elks family was apprenticed. The Barber family, which had at least partial Indian descent, was represented by eleven individuals, and the Chance family was represented by a single bond. It is probable that other "free persons of color" families were descended from Indians, but no level of proof exists to prove that supposition.

The Mattamuskeets were, as indicated previously, joined by Indians from Roanoke and Hatteras Island by 1761. The names of these individuals were not identified on any of the extant deeds. This could mean the Indians from those areas moved to the Mattamuskeet area at a period later than that covered by the available records. Individuals with Mattamuskeet surnames do not occur in the Hyde County Records from 1761 to 1792. In fact, there is reference to only a single Indian during that time. This reference appeared in the Hyde County Court Minutes of 1765. It called for William Gibbs to show cause why an Indian woman named Cati Collins should not be set free. It is not clear from the reference whether William Gibbs was holding Cati Collins as an apprentice or a slave. The outcome of the show cause order could not be determined due to a break in the County Court Minutes from 1765 to 1767 (see appendix 35).

March 1765: Cate COLLINGS (COLLINS) , an "Indian Woman" servant of William GIBBS,Constable of Arrowmuskeet. March 1765 Hyde County Court Minutes andOrphans Book 2, on motion of Patrick Gordon ordered that Wm. GIBBS"shew" cause if he has any, why Cate COLLINGS (COLLINS) an Indianwoman, now in his service should not be set free.June Court 1765 - ordered that Wm. GIBBS have timely notice that heshow cause why Cate COLLINGS (COLLINS), an Indian woman be not set atliberty. 1820 Hyde county, NC Census shows the collins, Mackey, and Gibbs family living right next door to each other.

From Hyde County bastardry Bonds:AbijahAmanda (of colorE.S. HalaJamesJohnJohn (of color)Mahala/MahaliaRichardSaml. (of color)WellingtonFrom Hyde County Wills 1709-1775:BailyElizabethHannahHenryUriahFrom Hyde County Court Records 1736-1762:AnnBaileyHannahUriahFrom Hyde County Court Records 1762-1783:HenryAnd there's a mention of a Collins Creek in the following deed abstract:James Cleaves, blacksmith to Henry Tuley, ship carpenter, both of Hyde Co £70 in silver dollars @ 8s each 50 acres E side Matchapungo River, N side Slades Creek; beg Cleves corner pine in savannah, W170p with his line to black oak at head of Collins Creek, S110p along creek to Silvesters line, along his line N60° E200p to 1st.. 25 Aug 1780. James Cleaves. Wit: Ben Russel, Sam Davis. Proved at Aug Ct 1780. Test: Thos Smith, Dep Clk. Test: Joseph Hancock, Reg. Regd 26 Oct 1781.A few things about the above deed worth mentioning:

The Cleaves and Collins had been neighbors going back to at least 1737 time frame. In 1737, a Darby MackCartee deeded to his grandson Benjamin Cleaves several items and Uriah Collens was one of the witnesses. So that means there were already Collins in the Hyde County/Matchapungo/Mattamuskeet area prior to the 1740-1750 window you mention for Granville County.2) The Russell family name is one that is found amongst the Mattamuskeet Indians and shows up as such in the original records. Furthermore, the Collins were already in the region of Bath County (which at one time included Hyde Precinct) as far back as 1701 based on entries such as the Will and Testament of Richard Collins on 23 Sept 1701 with legatees listed as Edmon Parse/Pearce, Ann Nelson, John Bunting, Roger Montague (who was involved in land transactions for King Charles Town which was a Machapunga town in that area as well as land transactions with John Squires who may be the same John Squires who was later appointed "King" of the Mattamuskeet."Here are the individuals listed in Richard Collins estate inventory which was sworn on 22 Nov 1701 by the appraisers of his estate:Rodger MontagueCapt BlountMr LongNicholas DawAlex McFarlaneEdmund PearceArchibald MackarelJon WatsonEsther BrooksJoseph HolbrookMr DuckinfieldTho CooperMr DearhamEd Gantling (Gatlin)Indian Will (<-- not a slave, this was someone he owed money to)James WelshJohn Nelson(Note:.....We know the Blount name associated with the Tuscarora....Tuscarora had a reservation in Bertie county, nc.....we know the Collins and Bunch show up in Bertie county, nc....free peopl of color and mulattos...pell mell...etc etc...Let's see if we can fnd Saponi and Tuscarora connection.)

June 1733:The Sapony and Nottoway Indians met with the Governor and Council. The Sapo-nies were given permission to join the Tuscaroras if they wished, provided that neither Nation would hunt on any lands patented in Virginia, nor go among the inhabitants in groups of more than three. The Sapo-nies were permitted to stay at their town until their corn was gathered. If they decided not to join the Tuscaroras, they were to move to some place beyond the inhabitants between the Roanoke and Appomattox rivers."Soon after this they all left the Fort. Some joined the Catawbas, and some eventually joined the Five Nations of the Iroquois in New York."After the Indians left the region, all their former lands were taken up in grants. The site of the Fort became known as Fort Hill Plantation.

Anyway back to the Hyde county records.

According to a 1701 Lords Proprietors grant to Mr. William Barrow, a William Collins arrived into Bath County sometime prior to May of 1701, as William Collins was one of William Barrow's headrights.In 1707, a Lawrence Collins was witness to a court transaction in Bath County.In case there is any question as to whether or not the Collins of Hyde County and other known Mattamuskeet Indians were in the same place at the same time, it may be of interest that on the 3rd day of September of 1746 the following transactions took place in the courthouse:Land transactions between Samuel Selby to his son Samuel Selby, Jr.; George Squires (Mattamuskeet chief's son) to Saml. Selby, Jr. proved by James McIntosh (one of my ancestors); a deed from "Long Tom and Other Indians" to Cason Brinson for land "in Arrowmuskeet" proved by Saml. Selby; a deed of gift from Edwd and Ann Tison to Danll Tison on east side of Matchapungo River proved by Uriah Collins.On the 7th of June in 1748, Uriah Collens was in court on the same day as Henry Gibbs (either the father or brother of William Gibbs who was involved in Cate Collins servitude case) and "Charles Squires King of the Arromoskeet Indians"

Pretty hardcore evidence if you ask me. All the stuff above is fully proven...nothing above is theories....I'm just putting all the historical records (well I have lots more records besides this) on the table for everyone to see. Oh yea one more bit of info.....The collins of Bertie county, NC had a son named john collins who left Bertie county, nc and would of maybe been about the age of the john collins of orange county, Va's indian court records. check out Valentine collins' DNA result next to the bertie county, nc's Bunch family also :)

From: steven hill To: randsgroup@yahoogroups.comSent: Sunday, December 7, 2008 1:41:02 PMSubject: RE: [RandSgroup] Tennessee Melungeons
Your theory has one serious flaw...The Gibson, Mullins, Collins, Goins of Newman's ridge never resided in the PeeDee-Drowning Creek area. They migrated in from Virginia. A small group of Portuguese sailors were captured by the Dutch warship White Lion and sold to Virginia planters circa mid-1600's. These men soon bought their own freedom thoguh they had already taken wives from off the gingaskin Indian reserve and owned their own houses ('slavery' was quite different in early coloial Virginia). Some surnames of these mixed Indian-Portugeuse marriages were Francisco (anglicized to Francis, and Cisco), Rodriguss (anglicized to Driguss and Driggers), Harmon, and a few other surnames I can't remember just now. One other surname that sprung from this union is most likely Chavez (anglicized to Chavis) but it hasn't been conclusively proven - - the Chavis line originated the Gibson mixed-Indian line. Not only did Driggers, Francis, and Chavis appear in the founding families of the "mixt crew" on Drowning Creek (present day Robeson County - the Lumbee Indian tribe) but also did other Gingaksin reservation residents' surnames such as Jacobs, Clark, and others, and this may account for the "portugeuse" origin talked about by early historians. It is possible that the gibson and Goins lines among the early newman Ridge "melungeons" were conencted back to the Portugeuse-Indian mixed families around the gingaskin reserve as they came from an area of VA that was very close to Chesepeake Bay. yet the Portugeuse blodd would account for very little of their total blood quantum, and the majority was definatively Native.
To: RandSgroup@yahoogro ups.comFrom: KyRoots@aol. comDate: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 12:43:53 -0500Subject: Re: [RandSgroup] Tennessee Melungeons
This is just my opinion but for what it is worth:

In 1848 the 'Melungeons' told a journalist the 'legend' of the Melungeons. They said they were 'Portuguese Adventurers' who had mixed with the Indians. From my research I'd have to say these Portuguese were from the Pee Dee - Drowning Creek -- and mixed with the Indians in that area.

In 1754 it was reported to the governor there were 50 mixed families living there -- and *no Indians* -- these families who can be traced back to that geographical area, went to court for years in all parts of this country claiming to be Portuguese -- there were simply too many to be some sort of a 'cover up' -- in my opinion. Judges, juries, Senators, anthropologist, ethnologist, historians, sheriffs, tax collectors etc., all testified they believed these people were 'Portuguese. '

After residing in SC/NC border and mixing with the Indians they moved into the area of Newman's Ridge where they mixed with the Indians of that area, [being with the Bunch, Goins, Gibsons, Collins, etc, who had lived 'as Indians' in Virginia and North Carolina] -- the blacks and the whites as they told it in their 'legend' -- which formed the 'present race' -- in 1848.

They told this story in 1848 and included the Indian, black, white and Portuguese -- which was retold Dromgoole in 1890 --

Here are a few "Portuguese stories"
http://www.geocities.com/ourmelungeons/portuguese.html

In a message dated 12/7/2008 11:55:35 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, ponyhill71@hotmail. com writes:
isn't it funny that the earliest historical references to the "Melungeons" of Newman's Ridge, Tenn. specifically stated they were Indians from Virginia and that the first Gibson, Mullins, Collins who came into Tenn. "were nearly full-blooded" Indian, and here we have "Melungeons" from that same place almost 100 years later (who had recently moved to Texas and Oklahoma and were trying to get land through the Dawes Commission) all claiming that their grand-parents were "Indian."??? ? http://www.geocities.com/ourmelungeons/cherokee1.html Where was all this "mysterious race" and "exotic origin" back then? It appears the people themselves were very well aware of their Native ancestry, that their grand-parents were Indians who had taken White spouses, yet the White "historians" consistently tried to create some fantastic migration story for them...Portugeuse pirates, lost Spanish explorers, lost colony of Roanoke, etc. Just like in scientific experiments. ..the simplest answer is usually the right one.

A River Worth Fighting For by Dennis Montgomery

2008-09-17T01:07:00.000-07:00

Roiled by the spume of conflict, threatened by the stain of pollutants, the storied York yet flows free, guarding its great bounty
In the grand panorama of the historic York River, the diminutive marsh periwinkle is as nothing--and as everything. Time out of mind, the puny, ubiquitous snail has glided among the cordgrass and arrow alum of the river's tidal wetlands and never erected to its passing a monument more substantial than the fragile form of its white spiral shell. Yet in the sweep of the river's saga the periwinkle's place is as enduring as the granite Yorktown Victory column, its slippery, shiny trail as integral a part of York's storied landscape as the networks of battlefield trenches.
For more than 400 years historybook heroes have come to the York to perform their parts in the dramas of human dominion and political supremacy. The periwinkle has haunted this stage the better part of 40 centuries.
If most men took their bows and went marching into the wings, some paused long enough to notice that the York River valley is an amphitheater for the productions of life itself, a coliseum for performances in which the stars have been fiddler crabs and catfish, great blue herons and snapping turtles, and, yes, marsh periwinkles. Every croaker, mullet, and spade fish; every cattail, hibiscus, and marshmallow acts its pivotal part in the exquisitely scripted interplay of species that ecologists bill as the balance of a river's natural environment.
A walkon, man arrived about 4,000 years into the opening act, and, as they say, stole the show. Red, white, and black, man became with his impudence and his exploits the stuff of the York's facts and fables; his story became the river's history. Nevertheless, man's doings are but subplots, superfluities in a broader, essential epic.
Told out of the context of the York, isolated from the river environment, the chronicles of the river's massacres, battles, and wars are but facts without nuance. It was, after all, the river that was worth fighting for.
The York collects itself off the tip of modern West Point at the confluence of the Pamunkey and the Mattaponi to run 33 miles southeast. Between Guinea Neck and Tue Point it spills into the vast shallow protein soup of the Chesapeake Bay. An average of two miles wide and 20 feet deep, the river drains 2,661 square miles of a Virginia watershed that stretches west to the Blue Ridge. Rising and falling with the sea, the York is the silvery backbone of an intricately reticulated and extraordinarily delicate network of life.
Perhaps 6,000 years ago, the modern York began to water salt marshes and timber stands. Rich with oysters, sturgeons, and blue crabs, the river was a fat natural sideboard supporting a perpetual feast, a food chain.
Long before Europeans came, protoAlgonquians had taken their place in the estuary system. Mounds of oyster shell still betray their village sites. Oysters remained a primary resource, to become the foundation of York watermen's livelihoods, until disease wiped out most in the 1980s. Sturgeon, once abundant, vanished in the 19th century. Now threatened is the blue crab, pressured by overharvesting. Eel, prized in the Orient, has become a profitable alternative. The food chain is losing links.
By the time the first white settlers, a Spanish Jesuit missionary party of 10, reached the York in 1570, the valley was the preserve of mature kinship groups like the Pamunkey, the most powerful of the 28 tribes in what would become Tidewater's Powhatan empire. Living in proud, powerful bands, the Pamunkey had a culture as sophisticated as their circumstances required. Denominated savages by the meddlesome Jesuits, the Indians regarded the intruders as they did mayflies and, when priestcraft became too troublesome, swatted them with about as much compunction as they would any noisome pest.
Of the Spanish party, two youths survived the slaughter. One was a Spanish lad rescued the next year; the other an Indian Christian apostate baptized Don Luis, who grew up to be, some historians suppose, the implacable enemy of the English, the werowance--approximately "chief"--Opechancanough.
When in 1607 the English fetched ashore on the south side of the peninsula formed by the York and James, the chief of chiefs was Powhatan. Another Pamunkey, he was the sire of Pocahontas.
Captain John Smith said it was at the York River village of Werowocomoco on modern Purtan Bay that Pocahontas saved his brains from a Pamunkey headsman. Smith had two or three more adventures on the York, all as hair raising, including a challenge of Opechancanough to single combat on a York River island. As usual, Smith was scrapping over food.
The English had arrived with gold fever and suffered recurring fits of pointless prospecting. They never quite cured themselves, but their hunger demonstrated to them the greater value of Virginia's ready natural resources--most of which they were equally inept at gathering. Most of Smith's York trips were to buy, extort, or steal Indian maize, beans, meal, and meat--native commodities the tiny Jamestown band could or would not otherwise acquire in quantities sufficient to their bellies.
To this period dates the first map of Tidewater, and thus the York, the simple sketch Tindall's Draught. A prominent feature is Tindall's Point, now Gloucester Point opposite Yorktown, where the river narrows to a milewide natural anchorage. Inexplicably, a close copy of this sensitive document found its way to Spain, England's bitter enemy. There is a smell of espionage about the matter.
Some believe "Tindall" a misrendition of settler George Kendall's surname and credit him as the draftsman. Indeed, there is no better explanation for the map's title. As it happens, Kendall, soon shot for mutiny, had in England been an "intelligencer," a spy. Coincidentally, Tindall's Draught includes the 10,000acre tract of modern Camp Peary, a tightly guarded Central Intelligence Agency training base.
Until mid17th century, the north shore of the York was the Powhatan stronghold. By Smith's count, Opechancanough's village at Pamunkey Neck--modern West Point--numbered 300 bowmen. Through a bloody miscalculation, the Pamunkey began to lose their grip on their York domain in 1622. That year Opechancanough masterminded the massacre of more than 350 Virginia settlers, illustrating to the English their vulnerability.
Partly to protect its northern flank from further assaults, in 1630 the colony offered 50 free acres to every person who would settle at Chiskiack in the following year. A few miles above modern Yorktown, it was once an Indian village and very near the Jesuits' camp. Captains John West and John Utie got 600 acres each at the mouth of King's Creek for accepting care of the farmers who began to clear fields between King's and Felgate Creeks. Governor John Harvey opened York plantation, on which stands today's Moore House, and a few miles upstream, George Read patented the site of today's Yorktown. Captain Nicholas Martiau, an ancestor of George Washington's, also moved into the neighborhood.
Three years later the English built a palisade--a log fence--across the Peninsula between the head of Queen's Creek on the York and Archer's Hope Creek on the James. The idea was to protect lives and livestock from the depredations of marauding wolves and Indians. It was a remarkable, if simple, bit of early environmental engineering.
In 26 years of struggle, the colony had never got on its feet. The problem seems to have been the lack of a reliable source of palatable protein. The palisade contained cattle turned out to pasture and helped make Virginia a more attractive and survivable habitat for humans. To its construction is credited the establishment of the village of York, the peninsula's second town, and Middle Plantation--later Williamsburg--its second capital. Jamestown was its first.
The first English child born on the York, John West, Jr., arrived that year. He was 11 when Opechancanough rose again, killing perhaps 500 colonists, most on the York. This massacre backfired, too. In 1653, after the inevitable rounds of retaliation, the Pamunkey submitted to a treaty that forced them to a reservation on the tributary that bears their name. Today 50 or so mixedblood descendants remain, living on 1,200 somnambulant acres of farms and homes that were once the most sacred piece of Pamunkey property, the site of the religious center Uttamussackpamaunkee.
North, on the Mattaponi, is Virginia's other reservation, home to the remnant of the tribe that gave its name to the York's other source.
With the peace of 1653 came prosperity--of a sort. In the colony's first decade, a native plant, tobacco, had become Virginia's economic mainstay. A pricey sweetscented variety grew particularly well along the York, and the commerce its cultivation created long underwrote many a prominent Virginia family.
As its markets expanded, so did settlement. The Wests moved to Opechancanough's old lands in 1650--hence the name West Point. A fort was dug at Gloucester Point in 1667. A road inland opened. Plantations rose.
Tokens of gentry wealth--18thcentury Rosewell's ruins, wellpreserved Elsing Green, and a score more mansions of merit--dot the river valley.
If the farms enriched the planters, they impoverished the land's sandy soils. Tobacco exhausted the nutrients, and run off from plowing began to silt in creeks and streams--a colonial version of what environmentalists call nonpointsource pollution. In the course of 400 years, some shipdeep streams turned to brooks; others just disappeared. Habitat loss had begun.
Though slaves began to reach Virginia in 1619, most of the farm laborers in the 17th century were English indentured servants. They enjoyed some privileges of race, but their lot could be miserable, and to many the future looked worse. At the end of their indenture most males were turned out with few possessions and fewer prospects.
York County records preserve a coroner's jury's hardhearted memorial to one man's escape from voluntary servitude:
The 10th of June, 1661. The jury setting upon the body of Walter Catford, who, for want of Grace, tooke a Grindstone and a Roape, and tyed it about his middle and crosse his thighes, and most barbarously went and drowned himselfe contrary to ye law of the king and this country, whoe is found guilty of his own death . . . The said Walter Catford was servant to Mair Thomas Beale at ye time of his death.
Other members of Catford's class chose selfhelp over selfdestruction. The year of his suicide a handful of York County servants, angered by poor rations, plotted an uprising. In 1663, other insurrectionists tried to combine with servants from Middlesex and Gloucester Counties. Sporadically, the York's late 17thcentury farmers, most exservants, indulged in plantcutting riots intended to maintain tobacco prices by reducing supply.
The most spectacular revolt to sweep the servant's class was gentryled Bacon's Rebellion in 1676. Conceived as an Indianfighting force, gentleman Nathaniel Bacon's extralegal army threatened Governor William Berkeley's rule. Nowvanished Gloucester Town on the York's north shore became the fulcrum of the struggle for authority, and was in Bacon's hands when he died of flux, as dysentery was called.
Berkeley, thus sure of victory, recorded Bacon's death:
His usual oath which he swore at least a Thousand times a day was God damme my Blood and God so infected his blood that it bred Lice in an incredible number so that for twenty dayes he never washt his shirts but burned them. To this God added the Bloody flux and an honest Minister wrote this Epitaph on him:
Bacon is dead, I am sorry at my heart
that Lice and flux should take the hangman's part.
The hangman was not cheated of a crop of other necks, among them that of Thomas Hanford, reputed to be the first Virginiaborn victim of a Virginia gallows.
Rivers served for highroads of commerce in colonial Virginia, and settlement patterns followed them, a straggling manner of habitation that fostered riverbased trade and goaded government to a series of attempts to legislate towns into existence. Yorktown was the product of such an effort in 1691. Laid out as a 50acre seaport on Read's land, the town had 85 lots and a 5acre public waterfront.
Beside a protected harbor within sight of the bay, Yorktown's situation made it among the few colonial tidewater towns to thrive. It developed in two tiers--wharves and seamen's bars and brothels on the beach, merchants' homes on the bluff. In 1715 the Yorktown Customs House rose, and in 1722 came the fabled Swan Tavern, which met travelers' needs 20 years before Williamsburg's Raleigh. By the account of a visitor in 1742, the town was an oasis:
You perceive a great Air of Opulence amongst the Inhabitants, who have some of them Houses, equal in Magnificence to many of our superb ones at St. James's . . . .
The Taverns are many here, and much frequented, and an unbounded Licentiousness seems to taint the Morals of the young Gentlemen of this Place . . . There are some very pretty Garden Spots in the Town; and the Avenues leading to Williamsburgh, Norfolk, &c., are prodigiously agreeable.
The transportation advantages attracted General Charles, Earl Cornwallis to Yorktown in August 1781. The place seemed to him safer than Portsmouth, the port the British seized when they opened their Virginia campaign. General Washington and his French ally the Comte de Rochambeau saw in the decision a chance to trap Cornwallis, and they took it. They marched from New York--following a now wellmarked route that traverses some of Virginia's most picturesque byways--shipped the army down Chesapeake Bay, and linked up with a French fleet that had sailed from the West Indies.
When French menofwar appeared off the Virginia Capes on August 26, the British Navy faced a predicament. Unless a relief fleet dispatched by the English could spring it, Cornwallis's army was trapped in the York. The rescue flotilla arrived September 5, but could not drive off the French force. Cornwallis was doomed.
Bottled up in the river with him was a mixed assembly of 71 other English vessels. They were now almost useless, and he ordered about 40 of them scuttled to forestall any allied amphibious attempt. At least 29 are still on the bottom. Twentiethcentury reclamations of artifacts and information from them began in 1909 and have continued, periodically, under the guidance of archaeologists.
Washington marched on Yorktown September 28 and on October 9 began a bombardment described by American Surgeon James Thacher:
The bomb shells from the besiegers and the besieged are incessantly crossing each others' path in the air. They are clearly visible in the form of a black ball in the day, but in the night, they appear like fiery meteors with blazing tails, most beautifully brilliant, ascending majestically from the mortar . . . . I have more than once witnessed fragments of the mangled bodies and limbs of British soldiers thrown into the air by the bursting of our shells.
Cornwallis was insulted from within as well, for in his camp lurked a spy. The Marquis de Lafayette had accepted the offer of slave James Armistead to infiltrate Cornwallis's headquarters camp posing as a runaway. For weeks he smuggled out intelligence--for which he won freedom, a pension, and the indulgence of the general's last name.
On October 17 Cornwallis proposed to surrender his command--a quarter of the British army in America. Subordinates drafted the capitulation agreement, executed two days later, at the Moore House. The table tradition says they used has since been removed to Elsing Green, but there is a more poignant reminder of the battle in a small enclosure in the yard, a headstone inscribed:
In Memory John Turnerwho departed this lifeOctober the 13thin the year of our Lord 1781Aged 30 YearsAh cruel ball so sudden to disarmAnd tare my tender husbandfrom my ArmsHow can I grieve too muchWhat time shall endBy Mourning forSo good So kind a friend.
It wasn't apparent that Yorktown was the last major battle of the Revolution. Washington said the victory was "an interesting event that may be productive of much good if properly improved, but if it should be the means of relaxation and sink us into supineness and [false] security, it had better not have happened."
Some in Yorktown almost wished it hadn't. Nearly half its houses destroyed in the bombardment, occupied in turn by British, French, and Americans, the community was a shambles. Merchant David Jameson said:
As soon as it was known that preliminaries of Peace were agreed on the Soldiers then stationed at York became very licentious, and no vigilance or exertions of the officers could keep them within bounds, very few nights passed without Robbery or gross insult being committed by them.
As he left, Washington ordered the American earthworks destroyed to safeguard his garrison, and farmers obliterated most of the British defenses. The river wrecks decayed, and damaged homes were razed or repaired. The troops left; normalcy returned.
Fire destroyed much of the lower town, the seaport, in 1814, but handier anchorages were already capturing Yorktown's trade, and it was slipping into the dusty life of an ordinary Virginia village.
Lafayette returned in 1824 for the anniversary of the battle, and that was about the biggest affair along the York until 1862, when General George McClellan led the Union Army up the Peninsula in an illmanaged march on Richmond. The Rebels remodeled the last of Yorktown's British fortifications--erasing most of the remaining originals--and stalled the Yankee advance. The invaders dug in. Captain Henry Blake of Massachusetts wrote:
The redoubts and file pits of the Revolution, which had diminished until they were only 20 inches in height intersected those of the Union army at several points. A few metallic relics, corroded by the rust of eighty years, were brought forth from their hiding places in the earth.
After about a month, Confederate General Joe Johnston, perhaps remembering Cornwallis's dilemma, ordered a withdrawal. McClellan passed upriver, took West Point and established a supply port at White House on the Pamunkey, as he had at Yorktown. George and Martha Washington had honeymooned there, and a fine brick manor built on the foundations of the original house had descended in Martha's family. Living in it at the time were Mrs. Robert E. Lee and her daughter Mary. Before they left they tacked a note on the door:
Northern soldiers who profess to reverence the name of Washington, forbear to desecrate the home of his early married life, the property of his wife, and now the home of his descendants--A granddaughter of Mrs. Washington.
The soldiers reduced it to a pit of brick rubble. Another landmark, Yorktown's Swan Tavern, disappeared in the explosion of a Union ammunition dump, but something constructive seems to have come of the campaign, nevertheless.
In McClellan's ranks marched a Connecticut soldier, Elisha Benjamin Andrews, later president of Brown University. In 1893 John D. Rockefeller, Jr., entered the Rhode Island school, and Andrews became his mentor. It is not hard to imagine the veteran sharing with the young student stories of the Peninsula Campaign. Perhaps from Andrews he first heard about Yorktown and Williamsburg.
In 1881 Yorktown celebrated the centennial of Washington's victory. President Chester A. Arthur came for the dedication of the Victory Monument, and the sponsors christened a landscaped victory park, but most travelers recorded how shabby the town had become.
Railroads had steamed into Tidewater after Reconstruction, making going concerns of burgs like Walkerton, West Point, and Aylett, but bypassing Yorktown. Whatever prospects it had left as a entrepot seemed to be lost.
The Southern Railway made West Point its terminus, and a fullfledged town emerged. The Terminal Hotel--with 14 saloons roaring around it--became the most popular destination in the region. In 1913 the community also became the site of a Chesapeake Corporation pulp plant, still among the largest industries on the York, and a small shipyard.
West Point's bloom faded eventually, first with the removal of the railroad terminus to Newport News, then under the ravages of devastating fires in 1903 and 1926. By the time of the second blaze, World War I had changed everything, anyway.
The DuPont chemical company opened a naval explosives factory near Yorktown at Penniman, now the U. S. Naval Supply Center, Cheatham Annex. Workers reported in droves, military bases opened, and warships returned to the river. From Williamsburg, Mary Coleman wrote:
the old era vanished entirely. Rumors of rising land values as a result of the advent of munitions works, training camps, etc., battleships in the York River, soldiers' wives seeking board and lodging, all created a chaos that one can hardly believe now. Roads improved. There was frantic construction of every kind. Eating houses and bootlegging establishments sprang up everywhere.
Between the world wars came a revival of interest in the colonial era. Colonial Williamsburg, the Colonial National Historical Park, the Colonial Parkway, and scores of other historical preservation efforts began. In the 1930s, the National Park Service reconstructed American lines at Yorktown, and the city began to transform itself into a national museum.
The approach of World War II redoubled the pressures of slapdash development--a Navy Mine Warfare School opened at what is now the Coast Guard's Reserve Training Center, as did the Seabee training base that became Camp Peary, and the U.S. Naval Weapons Station, now a nuclear weapons depot, got its start. But much of the area's native beauty and many of its natural resources survived.
The York is among Virginia's cleaner rivers, thanks to the stewardship of industries, installations, and individuals on its shores. That is not to say that there are no threats. Nutrient runoff from farms and developments, wetland loss, petroleum washed from mall parking lots and suburban streets, dirt from construction sites are among the worries to be resolved. And they are being addressed.
Farmers using environmentally friendly "best management" practices are reducing fertilizer pollution that is to lifechoking algae as gasoline is to fire. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act is stopping wetland destruction and regulating development in sensitive areas. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation, among others, is trying to see that as much mind is paid the river's natural history as its social and political history. "Save the Bay" is the slogan.
On the river a forest of masts shines whitely in the summer sun. The wind is washing off the bay, tossing lines of seaweed against children splashing in the waves at a Yorktown beach. A tall steel bridge arches above them to the left; to their right dashes a sailboat on a closehauled reach, turning up a filmy jellyfish in its roiled wake.
In the sweltering heat, an old man relaxes on a bench in the shade of a tree, watching his grandkids. Yards away, on the muddy bottom, sprawl the ribs of the wreck of H.M.S. Fowey, the ship that carried Dunmore and his stolen powder from Virginia, that led the British evacuation fleet out of Boston Harbor, that escorted Benedict Arnold into the Chesapeake.
Upstream, on the western horizon, a white plume rises from a paper factory stack. It towers above a mountain of pine logs that marks Opechancanough's old stronghold. Downstream, a bobbing line of crabpot floats leads the eye to the broad, broad bay. Captain Smith must have rounded the headland just there for his first glimpse of the York.
Colonial Williamsburg Journal Vol. 17 , No. 1 (Autumn 1994).

Race and Ethnic Standards for Federal Statisticsand Administrative Reporting (Sept 1997)

2008-09-17T01:00:00.000-07:00

The Statistical Policy Division, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determines federal standards for the reporting of "racial" and "ethnic" statistics. In this capacity, OMB promulgated Directive 15: Race and Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics and Administrative Reporting in May, 1977, to standardize the collection of racial and ethnic information among federal agencies and to include data on persons of Hispanic origins, as required by Congress. Directive 15 is used in the collection of information on "racial" and "ethnic" populations not only by federal agencies, but also, to be consistent with national information, by researchers, business, and industry as well.
Directive 15 described four races (i.e., American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, and White) and two ethnic backgrounds (of Hispanic origin and not of Hispanic origin). The Directive's categories allowed collection of more detailed information as long as it could be aggregated to the specified categories.
Directive 15 was not clear regarding whether the race or origins of persons was to be determined by self-identification or by others, e.g., interviewers. Research has shown substantial differences of racial/ethnic identification by these two methods.
Directive 15 noted the absence of "scientific or anthropological" foundations in its formulation. Directive 15 did not explain what was meant by "race" or "origin," or what distinguished these concepts. However, the race and ethnicity categories of the Directive are used in scientific research and the interpretation of the research findings is based often on the "variables" of race and ethnicity.
Since Directive 15 was issued 20 years ago, the United States population has become increasingly diverse. Criticism that the federal race and ethnic categories do not reflect the Nation's diversity led to a review of Directive 15. Formal review began in 1993 with Congressional hearings, followed by a conference organized at the request of OMB by the National Academy of Sciences. OMB then instituted an Interagency Committee for the Review of Racial and Ethnic Standards, and appointed a Research Subcommittee to assess available research and conduct new research as a basis for possible revision of the Directive.
Among the guidelines for the review, OMB stated that ." . . the racial and ethnic categories set forth in the standard should be developed using appropriate scientific methodologies, including the social sciences." The guidelines noted, too, that "the racial and ethnic categories set forth in the standards should not be interpreted as being primarily biological or genetic in reference. Race and ethnicity may be thought of in terms of social and cultural characteristics as well as ancestry." However, the distinction between the concepts of race and ethnicity was, again, not clarified.
The recommendations from the Interagency Committee were published by OMB in the Federal Register July 9, 1997 (Vol. 62, No. 131: 36847-36946), with a request for public comment by September 8, 1997. The recommendations included (1) maintaining the basic racial and ethnic categories from the 1977 Directive; and (2) collecting race and ethnicity data through two separate questions (p. 36943), with ethnicity collected first. The minimum designations for "race" were: "American Indian or Alaskan Native," "Asian or Pacific Islander,""Black or African-American," and "White." The minimum designations for "ethnicity" were: "Hispanic origin," or "not of Hispanic origin." To account for multiple races, OMB recommended that respondents be allowed to report "More than one race."
History and Problems with the Concept of "Race": A Biological Perspective
Anthropologically speaking, the concept of race is a relatively recent one. Historically, the term "race" was ascribed to groups of individuals who were categorized as biologically distinct. Rather than developing as a scientific concept, the current notion of "race" in the United States grew out of a European folk taxonomy or classification system sometime after Columbus sailed to the Americas. Increased exploration of far-away lands with people of different custom, language, and physical traits clearly contributed to the developing idea. In these pre-Darwinian times the observed differences--biological, behavioral and cultural--were all considered to be products of creation by God. It was in this intellectual climate that the perceived purity and immutability of races originated. Perceived behavioral features and differences in intellect were inextricably linked to race and served as a basis for the ranking, in terms of superiority, of races.
Early natural history approaches to racial classification supported these rankings and the implications for behavior. For example, in the 18th century, Carolus Linneaus, the father of taxonomy and a European, described American Indians as not only possessing reddish skin, but also as choleric, painting themselves with fine red lines and regulated by custom. Africans were described as having black skin, flat noses and being phlegmatic, relaxed, indolent, negligent, anointing themselves with grease and governed by caprice. In contrast, Europeans were described as white, sanguine, muscular, gentle, acute, inventive, having long flowing hair, blue eyes, covered by close vestments and governed by law.
In the 1800s, the first "scientific" studies of race attempted to extract the behavioral features from the definition of race. However, racist interpretation remained. For example the origin of racial variation was interpreted as degeneration of the original "Caucasian" race (the idea of a Caucasian race is based on the belief that the most "perfect" skulls came from the Caucasus Mountains). Degeneration explained the development of racial differences and racial differences explained cultural development. Biology and behavior were used to gauge the degree of deterioration from the original race. Measures of intellect were an important part of these early studies. In some cases, the degree of facial prognathism, bumps on the skull as interpreted by phrenology, cranial index, and cranial capacity were used as measures of intelligence. IQ is just the latest in the list of these so-called "definitive" features used to rank races.
The clearest data about human variation come from studies of genetic variation, which are clearly quantifiable and replicable. Genetic data show that, no matter how racial groups are defined, two people from the same racial group are about as different from each other as two people from any two different racial groups.
One of the basic principles about genetic transmission in families is that different variants are transmitted to different offspring independently. The more generations of mixing, the more likely such heterogeneity in geographic origin of genes within the same person will be. Fixed sets of traits are not transmitted across generations as many people assume. Rules like the "one drop of blood" rule show clearly how vague and social, rather than biological, are categorical terms for people.
Modern humans (Homo sapiens) appear to be a fairly recent and homogenous species. Regardless of ancestral geographic origins, humans maintain a high degree of similarities from a biological perspective. Admixture, even among and between highly isolated populations, has resulted in widespread, worldwide distribution of genes and thus human variation.
It is because people often share cultural identity and geographic ancestry that "race" or a system of terms for grouping people carries some information that can be useful for biomedical purposes (as in assigning resources for disease screening). For example, sickle cell hemoglobin is a health risk associated with black or African-descended populations and PKU or phenylketonuria is a health risk associated with white or European-descended populations. Despite being loaded with the historical or colloquial connotations, such terminology may in practice be about as effective as any other questionnaire-based way to define categories of people that capture at least limited biological outcomes.
"Race" as a concept is controversial because of the numerous instances in human history in which a categorical treatment of people, rationalized on the grounds of biology-like terms, have been used. Common examples of this include arguments about which "race" is more intelligent, better at mathematics or athletics, and so on. The ultimate use of categorical notions of race have occurred to achieve political ends, as in the Holocaust, slavery, and the extirpation of American Indian populations, that, while basically economic in motivation, has received emotional support and rationale from biological language used to characterize groups. The danger in attempting to tie race and biology is not only that individuals are never identical within any group, but that the physical traits used for such purposes may not even be biological in origin.
The American Anthropological Association recognizes that classical racial terms may be useful for many people who prefer to use proudly such terms about themselves. The Association wishes to stress that if biological information is not the objective, biological-sounding terms add nothing to the precision, rigor, or factual basis of information being collected to characterize the identities of the American population. In that sense, phasing out the term "race," to be replaced with more correct terms related to ethnicity, such as "ethnic origins," would be less prone to misunderstanding.
Social and Cultural Aspects of "Race" and "Ethnicity"
Race and ethnicity both represent social or cultural constructs for categorizing people based on perceived differences in biology (physical appearance) and behavior. Although popular connotations of race tend to be associated with biology and those of ethnicity with culture, the two concepts are not clearly distinct from one another.
While diverse definitions exist, ethnicity may be defined as the identification with population groups characterized by common ancestry, language and custom. Because of common origins and intermarriage, ethnic groups often share physical characteristics which also then become a part of their identification--by themselves and/or by others. However, populations with similar physical appearance may have different ethnic identities, and populations with different physical appearances may have a common ethnic identity.
OMB Directive 15 views race and ethnicity as distinct phenomena and appropriate ways to categorize people because both are thought to identify distinct populations. Although this viewpoint may capture some aspects of the way most people think about race and ethnicity, it overlooks or distorts other critical aspects of the same process.
First, by treating race and ethnicity as fundamentally different kinds of identity, the historical evolution of these category types is largely ignored. For example, today's ethnicities are yesterday's races. In the early 20th century in the US, Italians, the Irish, and Jews were all thought to be racial (not ethnic) groups whose members were inherently and irredeemably distinct from the majority white population. Today, of course, the situation has changed considerably. Italians, Irish, and Jews are now seen as ethnic groups that are included in the majority white population. The notion that they are racially distinct from whites seems far-fetched, possibly "racist." Earlier in the 20th century, the categories of Hindu and Mexican were included as racial categories in the Census. Today, however, neither would be considered racial categories.
Knowing the history of how these groups "became white" is an integral part of how race and ethnicity are conceptualized in contemporary America. The aggregated category of "white" begs scrutiny. It is important to keep in mind that the American system of categorizing groups of people on the basis of race and ethnicity, developed initially by a then-dominant white, European-descended population, served as a means to distinguish and control other "non-white" populations in various ways.
Second, by treating race and ethnicity as an enduring and unchanging part of an individual's identity, OMB and the Census ignore a fundamental tension and ambiguity in racial and ethnic thinking. While both race and ethnicity are conceptualized as fixed categories, research demonstrates that individuals perceive of their identities as fluid, changing according to specific contexts in which they find themselves.
Third, OMB Directive 15, Census and common sense treat race and ethnicity as properties of an individual, ignoring the extent to which both are defined by the individual's relation to the society at large. Consider, for example, the way that racial and ethnic identity supposedly "predict" a range of social outcomes. The typical correlation is that by virtue of being a member of a particular racial or ethnic group, imprisonment, poor health, poverty, and academic failure are more likely. Such an interpretation, while perhaps statistically robust, is structurally and substantively incomplete because it is not the individual's association with a particular racial or ethnic group that predicts these various outcomes but the attribution of that relationship by others that underlies these outcomes. For instance, a person is not more likely to be denied a mortgage because he or she is black (or Hispanic or Chinese), but because another person believes that he or she is black (or Hispanic or Chinese) and ascribes particular behaviors with that racial or ethnic category.
Current OMB Directive 15 policy and federal agency application of the Directive that does not take into account the complexities of racial and ethnic thinking is likely to create more problems than it resolves. Racial and ethnic categories are marked by both expectations of fixity and variation, both in historical and individual terms. Attempts to "hone" racial categories by expanding or contracting the groups listed in Directive 15 and on the Census form or by reorganizing the order in which questions are posed, will continue to miss important aspects of how people actually think about race and ethnicity. Similarly, treating race as an individual rather than relational property almost certainly compromises the value of the data collected. Finally, by ignoring the differences between self- and other- strategies for identification, Directive 15 and the Census application creates a situation where expectations about the nature of the data collected are violated by the way most people use common sense to interpret those same questions.
Overlap of the Concepts of Race, Ethnicity and Ancestry
A basic assumption of OMB Directive 15 is that persons who self-identify or identify others by race and ethnicity understand what these concepts mean and see them as distinct. Recent research by the US Bureau of Census and other federal agencies, supported by qualitative pretesting of new race and ethnicity questions and field tests of these new question formats, has demonstrated that for many respondents, the concepts of race, ethnicity and ancestry are not clearly distinguished. Rather, respondents view race, ethnicity and ancestry as one and the same.
It should be pointed out that the race and ethnicity categories used by the Census over time have been based on a mixture of principles and criteria, including national origin, language, minority status and physical characteristics (Bates, et al, 1994.) The lack of conceptual distinction discussed below is not exclusive to respondents, but may represent misunderstandings about race and ethnicity among the American people. Hahn (1992) has called for additional research to clarify the popular uses of these concepts.
The following outlines some of the evidence for the lack of clear distinctions between the concepts:
First, respondent definitions of the concepts. Cognitive pretesting for the Race and Ethnicity Targeted Test and the Current Population Survey Race Supplement suggest that, except for some college-educated respondents who saw the terms as distinct, respondents define all of the concepts in similar terms. Gerber and de la Puente (1996) found that respondents tended to define race in terms of family origins. Thus, common definitional strategies included: "your people," "what you are," and "where your family comes from." These concepts were invoked also to define the term "ethnic group" when it appeared in the same context. Many respondents said that "ethnic group" meant "the same thing" as "race." In subsequent discussions, the term "ethnic race" was frequently created by respondents as a label for the global domain. McKay and de la Puente (1995) found, too, that respondents did not distinguish between race and ethnicity, and concluded that many respondents are unfamiliar with the term "ethnicity." for example, several respondents assumed that a question containing the term "ethnicity" must be asking about the "ethical" nature of various groups. They concluded that the terms "race," "ethnicity," "ancestry" and "national origin . . . draw on the same semantic domain."
Second, perceived redundancy of race and ethnicity questions. In most Federal data collections, Hispanic origin is defined as an "ethnicity" and is collected separately from "race." In most recent tests, the Hispanic origin question precedes the race question. Both Hispanic and non-Hispanic respondents tend to treat the two questions as asking for essentially the same information.
For example, when Hispanic and non-Hispanic respondents are asked what the Hispanic ethnicity question means, they often say that it is asking about "race." Respondents often comment on this perceived redundancy, and wonder aloud why the two questions are separate. Non-Hispanic respondents attempt to answer the ethnicity question by offering a race-based term, such as "Black" or "White." (McKay and de la Puente, 1995.)
In addition, many Hispanic respondents regard the term "Hispanic" as a "race" category, defined in terms of ancestry, behavior as well as physical appearance (Gerber and de la Puente, 1996; Rodriguez and Corder-Guzman, 1992; Kissim and Nakamoto, 1993). They therefore tend to look for this category in the race question, and when they do not find it there, they often write it in to a line provided for the "some other race" category. More than 40% of self-identified Hispanics have not specified a race or ethnic category in the 1980 or 1990 Census. Census Bureau research has shown that over 97% of the 10 million persons who reported as "Other race" in 1990 were Hispanic (U.S. Census Bureau, 1992.)
Third, multiethnic and multiracial identifications are frequently not distinguished. Some respondents who identify as "multiracial" offer only ethnic groups to explain their backgrounds. For example, McKay et al. (1996) found that some individuals who defined themselves as "multiracial" offered two ethnicities, such as "German and Irish" as an explanation. The authors concluded that such reporting "presents the overlapping of the semantic categories of race and ethnicity. . . ." (p. 5). Other respondents in the same research who identify with only a single race category subsequently mention an additional "race" category when answering the ancestry question.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The American Anthropological Association supports the OMB Directive 15 proposal to allow respondents to identify "more than one" category of "race/ethnicity" as a means of reporting diverse ancestry. The Association agrees with the Interagency Committee's finding that a multiple reporting method is preferable to adoption of a "multiracial" category. This allows for the reflection of heterogeneity and growing interrelatedness of the American population.
2. The American Anthropological Association recommends that OMB Directive 15 combine the "race" and "ethnicity" categories into one question to appear as "race/ethnicity" until the planning for the 2010 Census begins. The Association suggests additional research on how a question about race/ethnicity would best be posed.
As recommended by the Interagency Committee, the proposed revision to OMB Directive 15 would separate "race" and "ethnicity." However, the inability of OMB or the Interagency Committee to define these terms as distinct categories and the research findings that many respondents conceptualize "race" and "ethnicity" as one in the same underscores the need to consolidate these terms into one category, using a term that is more meaningful to the American people.
3. The American Anthropological Association recommends that further research be conducted to determine the term that best delimits human variability, reflected in the standard "race/ethnicity," as conceptualized by the American people. Research indicates that the term "ethnic group" is better understood by individuals as a concept related to ancestry or origin sought by OMB Directive 15 than either "race" or "ethnicity." While people seldom know their complete ancestry with any certainty, they more often know what ethnic group or groups with which to identify. It is part of their socialization and daily identity. Additionally, there are fewer negative connotations associated with the term "ethnic group."
4. The proposed revision to OMB Directive 15 advocates using the following categories to designate "race" or "ethnicity": "American Indian or Alaskan Native," "Asian or Pacific Islander," "Black or African-American," "White," "Hispanic origin," "Not of Hispanic origin." Part of the rationale for maintaining these terms is to preserve the continuity of federal data collection.
However, the "race" and "ethnicity" categories have changed significantly over time to reflect changes in the American population. Since 1900, 26 different racial terms have been used to identify populations in the US Census. Preserving outdated terms for the sake of questionable continuity is a disservice to the nation and the American people.
The American Anthropological Association recommends further research, building on the ongoing research activities of the US Bureau of the Census, on the terms identified as the population delimiters, or categories, associated with "race/ethnicity" in OMB Directive 15 in order to determine terms that better reflect the changing nature and perceptions of the American people. For example, the term "Latino" is preferred by some populations who view "Hispanic" as European in origin and offensive because it does not acknowledge the unique history of populations in the Americas. OMB may want to consider using the term "Hispanic or Latino" to allay these concerns.
5. The American Anthropological Association recommends the elimination of the term "race" from OMB Directive 15 during the planning for the 2010 Census. During the past 50 years, "race" has been scientifically proven to not be a real, natural phenomenon. More specific, social categories such as "ethnicity" or "ethnic group" are more salient for scientific purposes and have fewer of the negative, racist connotations for which the concept of race was developed.
Yet the concept of race has become thoroughly--and perniciously--woven into the cultural and political fabric of the United States. It has become an essential element of both individual identity and government policy. Because so much harm has been based on "racial" distinctions over the years, correctives for such harm must also acknowledge the impact of "racial" consciousness among the U.S. populace, regardless of the fact that "race" has no scientific justification in human biology. Eventually, however, these classifications must be transcended and replaced by more non-racist and accurate ways of representing the diversity of the U.S. population.
This is the dilemma and opportunity of the moment. It is important to recognize the categories to which individuals have been assigned historically in order to be vigilant about the elimination of discrimination. Yet ultimately, the effective elimination of discrimination will require an end to such categorization, and a transition toward social and cultural categories that will prove more scientifically useful and personally resonant for the public than are categories of "race." Redress of the past and transition for the future can be simultaneously effected.
The American Anthropological Association recognizes that elimination of the term "race" in government parlance will take time to accomplish. However, the combination of the terms "race/ethnicity" in OMB Directive 15 and the Census 2000 will assist in this effort, serving as a "bridge" to the elimination of the term "race" by the Census 2010.
REFERENCES
Bates, Nancy, M. de la Puente, T. J. DeMaio, and E. A. Martin
1994 "Research on Race and Ethnicity: Results From Questionnaire Design Tests." Proceedings of the Bureau of the Census' Annual Research Conference. Rosslyn, Virginia. Pp 107-136.
Gerber, Eleanor, and Manuel de la Puente
1996 "The Development and Cognitive Testing of Race and Ethnic Origin Questions for the Year 2000 Decennial Census." Proceedings of the Bureau of the Census' 1996 Annual Research Conference. Rosslyn, Virginia.
Hahn, Robert
1992 "The State of Federal Health Statistics on Racial and Ethnic Groups." Journal of the American Medical Association 267(2):268-271. March.
Kissim, E., E. Herrera and J. M. Nakamoto
1993 "Hispanic Responses to Census Enumeration Forms and Procedures." Report prepared for the Bureau of the Census. Suitland, MD.
McKay, Ruth B., and Manuel de la Puente
1995 "Cognitive Research on Designing the CPS Supplement on Race and Ethnicity." Proceedings of the Bureau of the Census' 1995 Annual Research Conference. Rosslyn, Virginia. Pp 435-445.
McKay, Ruth B., L. L. Stinson, M. de la Puente, and B. A. Kojetin
1996 "Interpreting the Findings of the Statistical Analysis of the CPS Supplement on Race and Ethnicity." Proceedings of the Bureau of the Census' 1996 Annual Research Conference. Rosslyn, Virginia. Pp 326-337.
Robey, Bryant
1989 "Two Hundred Years and Counting: The 1990 Census." Population Bulletin 44(1). April.
Rodriguez, C. E., and J. M. Cordero-Guzman
1992 "Place Race in Context." Ethnic Racial Studies Vol. 15, Pp 523-543.
U.S. Bureau of Census
1973 Population in U.S. Decennial Censuses: 1790-1970.1979 Twenty Censuses: Population and Housing Questions: 1790-1980.1992 Census Questionnaire Content, 1990. CQC-4 Race.
Go to Executive Summary
See also AAA Statement on "Race"See also AAA Statement on "Race" and Intelligence

RELATIONS BETWEEN RACE AND ETHNIC GROUPS

2008-09-17T00:57:00.000-07:00

Race and ethnic relations may follow many different patterns, ranging from harmonious co-existence to outright conflict. George Simpson and Milton Yinger (1972) have provided a useful typology of six basic patterns of intergroup hostility or co-operation. This typology covers virtually all the possible patterns of race and ethnic relations, and each pattern exists or has existed in some part of the world.

1. Assimilation. In some cases a minority group is simply eliminated by being assimilated into the dominant group. This process may involve cultural assimilation, racial assimilation, or both. Cultural assimilation occurs when the minority group abandons its distinctive cultural traits and adopts those of the dominant culture; racial assimilation occurs when the physical differences between the groups disappear as a result of inbreeding. Brazil is probably the best contemporary example of a country following a policy of assimilation. With the exception of some isolated Indian groups, the various racial and ethnic groups within the society interbreed fairly freely. Portugal attempted a policy of assimilation in the African colonies that it ruled until the mid-seventies. The Portuguese even created a special status, assimilado, for those Africans or people of mixed race who were considered sufficiently Portuguese in color or culture to share the privileges of the dominant group.

2. Pluralism. Some minorities do not want to lose their group identity; their members have a strong consciousness of kind and pride in their own heritage, and are loyal to their own group. The dominant group in the society may also be willing to permit or even to encourage cultural variation within the broader confines of national unity. Tanzania, for example, is a pluralistic society that respects the cultural distinctions among its African, Asian, European, and Middle Eastern peoples. In Switzerland four ethnic groups, speaking German, French, Italian, and Romanche, retain their sense of group identity while living together amicably in the society as a whole.

3. Legal protection of minorities. In some societies, significant sections of the dominant group may have hostile attitudes toward minority groups, but the minorities may enjoy the protection of the government. In such cases the government may find it necessary to introduce legal measures to protect the interests and rights of the minorities. In Britain, for example, the Race Relations Act of 1965 makes it illegal to discriminate against any person on racial grounds in employment or housing. It is also a criminal offense to publish or even to utter publicly any sentiments that might encourage hostility between racial and ethnic groups in the population.

4. Population transfer In some situations of intense hostility between groups, the problem is "solved" by removing the minority from the scene altogether. This policy was adopted, for example, by President Amin of Uganda, who simply ordered Asian residents to leave the country in which they had lived for generations. In a few cases, population transfer may involve outright partition of a territory. Hostility between Hindus and Muslims in India was so intense that the entire subcontinent was divided between them in such a way that a new Muslim state, Pakistan, was created. There are signs that Cyprus is becoming permanently divided into Greek and Turkish territories, and Lebanon into Muslim and Christian territories. Voluntary and forced population transfers have been taking place in both countries.

5. Continued subjugation In some cases the dominant group has every intention of maintaining its privilege over the minority group indefinitely. It may be fully willing to use force to achieve this objective, and it may even physically segregate the members of the various groups. Historically, continued subjugation has been a very common policy. In the early colonial empires, for example, it was implicitly assumed that colonial domination over the subject peoples was to be a permanent state of affairs. The climate of world opinion is now such that few countries dare to endorse openly a policy of continued subjugation, but the pattern does persist in some cases. The outstanding example is South Africa, where, under the policy of apartheid, the white minority proposes to keep its power over the black majority forever, and has openly declared its willingness to use all necessary force to achieve this goal. Less overt policies of continued subjugation are found in several Latin American countries, where dominant Hispanic groups continue to oppress the indigenous Indian minorities.

6. Extermination. The extermination of entire populations, or genocide, has been attempted and even achieved in several parts of the world. The methods of genocide include systematic slaughter by force of arms and the deliberate spreading of infectious diseases, particularly smallpox, to peoples who have no natural immunity to them. Dutch settlers in South Africa entirely exterminated the Hottentots and came close to exterminating the San, who at one point in South African history were actually classified as "vermin." British settlers on the island of Tasmania wiped out the local population, whom they hunted for sport and even for dog food. There is strong evidence that economic interests in Brazil, with the connivance of the Brazilian government, have slaughtered the Indian occupants of land that is wanted for agricultural development. Between 1933 and 1945 several million Jews were murdered in Germany. The most recent example of attempted genocide occurred in the African state of Burundi in 1972, when the dominant Tutsi tribe massacred nearly 100,000 members of the Hutu tribe.
These patterns are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and a society can adopt more than one of them at the same time. It is interesting to note that at some point in its history the United States has made use of every single one of these six strategies. Immigrant groups, particularly those from Scandinavia and other parts of northern Europe, have been assimilated into the mainstream of American life. There is a strong trend toward pluralism at present, with different groups, such as blacks and native Americans, asserting pride in their own cultural traditions. Legal protection of minorities has been entrenched in law through a series of civil rights acts. Population transfer was used extensively against the native Americans, who were often forced to leave their traditional territories and to settle on remote reserves. Continued subjugation was practiced against blacks, particularly through slavery in the South. Extermination was used against the native Americans, and several tribes were in fact hounded out of existence.

Robinson, I. (1977). Patterns of Race and Ethnic Relations, (pp.267-268). Sociology. New York: Worth.

Map Ethnic Racial Isolates Reputed Partial Indian Origin

2008-09-16T23:58:00.000-07:00

ETHNONYMS: Aframerindians, Creoles, Half-Breeds, Marginal Peoples, Mestizos, Metis, Micro-Races, Middle Peoples, Quasi-Indians, Racial Islands, Racial Isolates, Southern Mestizos, Submerged Races, Tri-Racials, Tri-Racial Isolates
This generic label covers some two hundred different groups of relatively isolated, rural peoples who live in at least eighteen states mainly in the eastern and southern United States. In general, the label and the various alternatives refer to distinct peoples thought to have a multiracial background (White-Indian-African-American, African-American-White or Indian-White, Indian-Spanish) who historically have been unaffiliated with the general White and African-American population or with specific American Indian groups. Estimates place the number of people in these groups at about seventy-five thousand, although some groups have disappeared in recent years through a combination of migration to cities and intermarriage with Whites and African-Americans. The best known of these groups is the Lumbee Indians, numbering over thirty thousand mainly in North and South Carolina.
Classification of a group as an American Isolate rests on (1) real or ascribed mixed racial ancestry of group members; (2) a social status different from that of neighboring White, African-American, or American Indian populations; and (3) identification as a distinct local group with the assignment of a distinct group name.
American Isolates existed prior to the American Revolution, perhaps as long ago as the early eighteenth century, and they increased in number throughout the nineteenth century as they came to public attention in the areas where they lived. Among factors leading to group formation were the presence of offspring of African-American male slaves and White women and the offspring of Indians and free or enslaved African-Americans. Once a small community of multiracial members began, it grew primarily through a high fertility rate and became more and more isolated both socially and physically as its members were rejected by Whites and chose, themselves, to shun African-Americans. The movement of Indian groups west also contributed to their isolation. More recently, isolation was maintained in part through government action, most significantly through the banning of Isolate children from public schools. Most Isolate groups were and continue to be described by outsiders in such stereotypical terms as lazy, shiftless, criminals, violent, illiterate, poor, or incestuous.

Groups known to have still existed in the 1950s and 1960s include the following, listed by state:
Alabama: Cajans, Creoles, Melungeons (Ramps)
Delaware: Moors, Nanticoke
Florida: Dominickers
Georgia: Lumbee Indians (Croatans)
Kentucky: Melungeons, Pea Ridge Group (Coe Clan, Black Coes)
Louisiana: Natchitoches Mulattoes, Rapides Indians, Redbones, Sabines, St. Landry Mulattoes, Zwolle-Ebard People
Maryland: Guineas, Lumbee Indians, Melungeons, Wesorts (Brandywine)
Mississippi: Creoles
New Jersey: Gouldtowners, Ramapo Mountain People (Jackson Whites), Sand Hill Indians
New York: Bushwhackers, Jackson Whites
North Carolina: Haliwa Indians, Lumbee Indians, Person County Indians, Portuguese, Rockingham Surry Group
Ohio: Carmel Indians, Cutler Indians, Darke County Group, Guineas, Vinton County Group
Pennsylvania: Karthus Half-Breeds, Keating Mountain Group, Nigger-Hill People, Pooles
South Carolina: Brass Ankles, Lumbee Indians, Turks
Tennessee: Melungeons
Texas: Redbones
Virginia: Adamstown Indians, Brown People, Chickahominy Indians, Issues, Melungeons, Potomac Indians, Rappahannock Indians, Rockingham Surry Group
West Virginia: Guineas.
While it is difficult to generalize across all Isolate groups or individuals, most live in rural areas and derive their income from farming and unskilled or semiskilled labor. Social status within a group is based on wealth, access to the White Community, primarily through intermarriage, and residence in a settled, named Isolate community.

On Borrowed Ground:Free African American-Life in Charleston, South Carolina

2008-02-25T20:43:00.000-08:00

Free blacks and slaves organized in 1791.

The free mulatto elite had the most tools to court such an attitude from white aristocrats. The source of these tools lay in the development of Charleston's free African-American community. Free African Americans had grown mainly from selective manumissions, interracial sexual relations in which the mother was white, and immigration. Those slaves whom masters manumitted were typically past their usefulness or in special favor with the master. Masters commonly manumitted their mulatto children and mistresses in their last will and testament. Immigrants from Santo-Domingo in the 1790s were also a source of Charleston's free African-American population. In each case most African Americans who gained freedom were mulatto. Thus, while the slave population of Charleston's district was less than one-quarter mulatto, Charleston's free African-American community developed and maintained a mulatto majority (73% in 1860) and were even known in the city as free people of color.7 Lighter skin color served as a noticeable difference between most free African Americans and their slave counterparts, a difference white Charlestonians recognized and free mulattoes exploited. In addition, the mulattoes from Santo-Domingo and those who gained freedom because of blood or sexual relationship with an ex-master tended to be educated and have some skill with which to make a living. Many also inherited money or property from an ex-master. Thus, not only did free mulattoes have light skin color to differentiate themselves from Charleston slaves, they also had money and/or property.
Mulatto elites most clearly employed the symbols of freedom through establishment of exclusive societies. Free mulattoes established the Brown Fellowship Society, the first of its kind, in 1790. It later became the most exclusive of many mulatto benevolent societies in Charleston. It accepted only elite (wealthy and respected) mulattoes into its ranks, excluding blacks, slaves, and the poor. The society worked hard to Page 7improve the lives of its members. It operated as a credit union for its constituents, pooled money to buy expensive property in the city, and educated the society's children.8 The members of the society made a conscious effort to push themselves away from what they considered to he the lesser elements of Charleston's African- American community, and they did so to raise themselves up in their own eyes and in the eyes of white aristocrats -- for with white respect came privilege and safety. These mulatto elites took full advantage of their lighter skin color and affluence to gain this respect.
With the Brown Fellowship society free African Americans began to borrow the social ground which distinguished them from Charleston slaves. But these rich mulattoes did not create space for themselves alone. Other free African Americans and slaves who worked out, giving the appearance of freedom, gained space as well.
Free black elites followed the lead of free mulatto elites, establishing their own space on borrowed ground -- space which mulatto elites had made available. Free blacks reacted quickly to the formation of the Brown Fellowship Society, forming the Free Dark Men of Color in 1791.9 The society served a similar purpose for the free dark elite as the Brown Fellowship Society did for the mulatto elite. It gave free black men an organized social outlet, allowing them to embrace their darkness. It gave them an identity, just as the Brown society gave to mulattoes. These dark men were defining themselves as different from both slaves and free mulattoes. The dark elite lacked the numbers and thus the resources to form a status group comparable to that of the mulatto elite, but in the face of both white and mulatto discrimination, free black elites had little choice but to close ranks and defend their portion of borrowed ground.
Page 8Both the mulatto and black elite defined themselves in opposition to slaves, the single largest social group in Charleston. This slavery was much different from the slavery of cotton, rice and indigo plantations of rural South Carolina. Urban slavery provided much more mobility and many more work opportunities than rural slavery. Many slaves worked as skilled or semiskilled artisans, as did free African Americans. Often these artisans had as much independence and autonomy as their free African-American counterparts. A full 15 percent of the slave population lived away from their masters. These slaves hired themselves out in the city and only saw their masters once a week to collect their earnings. They had the opportunity to live away from the eye of whites and develop their own social groups with other slaves and free African Americans.1O Another group of slaves served free African-American family members and lived as de facto free. Thus, Charleston slaves were far from being a homogeneous social group. Both slaves who worked out and those owned by free African-American family members helped to blur the line between slave and free in Charleston. It was precisely this blurring that required free African-American elites to use class and color as well as status to create their social space.
Poor free African Americans and slaves had regular contact, further obscuring social distinctions between the two. These African Americans, slave and free, went to the same churches, which "served as educational forums, involved slaves [and free African Americans] in leadership roles and provided the basis for a modest organizational life."11 Slaves and free African Americans married amongst themselves and across the lines of social status, color and sometimes class. Slaves and free blacks also met at the race tracks, drank and gambled together.
In addition, slaves and free blacks faced similar discrimination form whites. Night patrols harassed both groups, and neither slaves nor free Page 9African Americans could stay at white hotels, go to white restaurants or to the theater.12 The push of white oppression economically and socially limited most free blacks and slaves who worked out. Thus, pieces of each African-American status group merged to create a new social group.
Ironically, the blurring of the lower levels of the free African-American community with privileged slaves gave free African-American elites the opportunity to establish a distinctive place in Charleston society. White aristocrats recognized and protected free African-American elite social space as a buffer between whites and slaves who passed for lower class free African Americans.

Early Trade Routes

2008-01-04T22:57:00.000-08:00

Universal Trade Language-Mobilian-DR Sibley

2008-01-04T22:44:00.000-08:00

Although focused on Mobilian Jargon's "descendant" languages, Berquinuvallon apparently applied his description also to the pidgin, if an abridged and questionable English translation that appeared within a few years after the French original ( Berquin-Duvallon 1806; see also Crawford 1978: 113 n. 12) is any indication:
It [Mobilian Jargon] is not without melody, but rendered unpleasant to the ear by the harsh, inarticulate and guttural pronunciation of the savages. I have seen many vocabularies collected from the dialects of these people, but they are all so vague and distorted that they promote no useful purpose. ( Berquin-Duvallon 1806: 95)
Berquin-Duvallon's description could indeed have applied to Mobilian Jargon. The supposed inarticulateness then referred to its phonological variation, and that of gutturalness perhaps to the mistaken identification of apical-veolar and lateral fricatives. The most convincing comment has been his observation about its tendency towards consonant-vowel alternation, which is evident more in Mobilian Jargon than other Southeastern Indian languages. As regards earlier vocabularies as sources, Berquinurallon could have drawn on only a few instances, such as that by Bourgeois, and did not offer any better description, as far as is known. Berquin-Duvallon's comments ultimately provide no new information other than a measure of Mobilian Jargon's acceptance and significance in colonial Louisiana.
In a letter of 24 April 1802 addressed to the explorer William Dunbar in Natchez and accompanying vocabularies of Atakapa and Chitimacha, Martin Duralde, commandant of the Attacapas Post near present-day Opelousas in south-central Louisiana, gave two reasons for the difficulty of learning native languages, especially those of the Opelousa and Coushatta Indians: ____________________
24
'The Mobilian language is the mother tongue from which derive the different dialects that these diverse tribes use and by means of which all can understand and communicate with each other. Although the majority of words that make up these dialects, being intermixed with vowels and not abounding in reduplicated consonants, are not harsh to the ear, they seem all the same to be--in the mouth of the Indians and from an effect of their pronunciation--muted. inarticulate, and guttural. As to the vocabularies or collections of isolated words from these dialects that have been published in French, English, Spanish, etc. to date, the most positive thing that I can say about them is that one ought to give them hardly any credence or heed whatsoever, considering that the manner in which these words are pronounced and therefore written in each European language differs from case to case and deviates more or less from the real pronunciation and that to properly pronounce such collection of vague and desultory words only nurtures a vain curiosity, far from being an object of true usefulness' (author's translation).
l'une que ces nations ne Se communiquant avec les blancs qu'au moyen de la langue mobilienne commune, personne ne prend interêt à en connaître l'originaire; l'autre que quand on n'est pas certain Sol même du vrai original, on ne doit point l'exposer aux yeux des Savans. [sic] ( Duralde 1802 MS: 2) 25
This statement reveals Duralde's own insecurity about which language was which in the complex sociolinguistics of Louisiana, just as it indicates that Mobilian Jargon was the Native Americans' preferred medium in contact with colonists and presumably other outsiders.
Incidental references to Mobilian Jargon appeared in other sources of the period. For the same year, the newspaper Moniteur de la Louisiane mentioned a 30-year-old slave born in Senegal who could speak not only Spanish, French, and English, but also "Mobilian" ( Fortier 1904: 219), confirming its use by African Americans.
From 1802 to 1806, another French visitor, Claude C. Robin, repeated much conventional wisdom about Mobilian Jargon, yet added the Talabouche Indians among its speakers, and emphasized its function as a diplomatic medium; according to Robin, the pidgin in fact was the means by which the larger groups had gained influence and status:
A travers ces grandes régions habitaient particulièrement les nombreuses nations des Chactas, des Alibamons, des Chichacas, des Pascagoulas, des Biloccis, des Talabouches, des Mobiliens. Il faut que ces nations, riveraines de la Mobile, fussent devenues puissantes et fameuses dès les siècles les plus reculés, puisque, quoique chacune d'elles parlât une langue particulière et très différente, elles avaient adopté pour langue commune la Mobilienne, qui, comme l'a été long-temps en Europe la langue latine, était devenue et est encore leur langue publique et politique. ( Robin 1807: ii. 54-5) 26
In addition, Robin mentioned an encounter with some unidentified Native Americans on one of Louisiana's many rivers, during which the different parties drew on a few words of French, the Native Americans' language or likely Mobilian Jargon, and hand signs for mutual communication (see Sect. 8.3).
In 1803 and 1804, after the Louisiana Purchase, by which the United States obtained much of the territory between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains, John Sibley, US Indian Agent at Natchitoches, sur- ____________________
25
'one being that, with these nations communicating with the whites only by means of the common Mobilian language, nobody takes an interest in knowing the original one; the other that, when one is not certain oneself about the true original, one must not expose this to the eyes of the scholars' (author's translation).
26
'Across these vast regions lived in particular the numerous nations of the Choctaw, the Alabama, the Chickasaw, the Pascagoula, the Biloxi, the Talabouche, and the Mobile. These nations, bordering the Mobile river drainage, must have become powerful and renowned many centuries ago, for although each of them spoke a particular and very different language, they had adopted as a common language Mobilian, which--as the Latin language once was in Europe--had become and still is their public and diplomatic language' (author's translation).
veyed Indian groups within the Red River drainage, and reported the following inventory-like assessment about their languages:
BOLUSCAS [ Biloxi] . . . Their native language is peculiar to themselves, but speek Mobilian [Jargon], which is spoken by all the Indians, from the east side of the Mississippi . . .
APALACHIES . . . have their own language, but speak French and Mobilian [Jargon].
ALABAMAS . . . they speak the Creek and Choctaw languages, and Mobilian [Jargon]; most of them French, and some of them English . . .
PACANAS [unidentified] . . . their own language differs from any other, but speak Mobilian [Jargon] . . .
TUNICAS . . . Their native language is peculiar to themselves, but speak Mobilian [Jargon] . . .
PASCAGOULAS [unidentified] . . . speak Mobilian [Jargon], but have a language peculiar to themselves; most of them speak and understand French.
TENISAWS [Taënsa] . . . All speak French and Mobilian [Jargon] . . .
CHACTOOS [Chatot, unidentified and not to be confused with the Choctaw] . . . have their own peculiar tongue; speak Mobilian [Jargon]. [sic] ( Sibley 1807: 724-5)
Sibley further noticed that, besides their native language, the Coushatta spoke Choctaw, which in this case cannot reliably be interpreted as Mobilian Jargon because Sibley distinguished between Choctaw and Mobilian Jargon among the Alabama. For several other groups (specifically the Natchitoches, Atakapa, Opelousa, Washa, Choctaw, and Arkansas), Sibley ( 1807: 724-5) made no mention of Mobilian Jargon. Yet his absence of references to the pidgin among these Native Americans hardly constitutes negative evidence; such in fact would contradict his initial statement that all Native Americans east of the Mississippi spoke Mobilian Jargon. Of greater interest is his observation that Mobilian Jargon persisted next to French among the Alabama, the Apalachee, the Pascagoula, and the Taënsa; some Alabama also knew English.
Sibley's survey eventually became the source for two other travel reports of the early nineteenth century. Henry Marie Brackenridge, a lawyer who had travelled in Louisiana in 1810 and 1811, listed under the heading of Biloxi most of the same Louisiana Indian communities as speaking Mobilian Jargon: Apalachee, Alabama, Pacana, Pascagoula, Tunica, plus Coushatta ( Brackenridge 1962 [ 1814]: 82). Probably drawing on Adair's views, Brackenridge ( 1962[ 1814]: 82) also described it as "the court language amongst the Indian nations of Lower Louisiana." Sibley's and Brackenridge's information then became the major source for a survey of Indian groups west of the Allegheny Mountains by John F. Schermerhorn ( 1814: 23, 26-7), who prepared it for the Society for Propagating the Gospel and listed many of the same groups among Mobilian Jargon speakers--only to disagree strongly with Sibley about linguistic differences among Louisiana Indians:
The last ten tribes [the six mentioned listed earlier plus the Biloxi,Coushatta, Taensa, and Choctaw] mentioned as distinct, and many of which, Silby observes, have a distinct language, though they speak the Mobilian [Jargon], have all emigrated from Missisippi territory and Georgia, and are or were parts of the Chactaws, or Creek Indians. What Silby observes, therefore, as to their possessing a language distinct from the Mobilian [Jargon], I apprehend is erroneous; for it is a fact that the Chactaws and Chickesaws speak the same language; and [Le Page] Du Pratz observes, that the Chickesaws and Alibamans speak the same language. But the Alibamans, says Dr. Silby, speak the Mobilian [Jargon]; of course, to those parts of the nation that have crossed over the Missisippi, the Mobilian [Jargon] is their former tongue, and not a different language, as Silby observes. [sic] ( Schermer horn 1814: 27-8)
Manifestly, Schermerhorn understood few of the sociolinguistic complexities of Louisiana Indians that Sibley and others before him had begun to unravel, and demonstrated little personal experience in interacting with Louisiana Indians (see Crawford 1978: 55-6).
From 1810 until 1813, John Maley, another traveller through what then was the US Southwest, made incidental observations about Louisiana Indians along the Red River. On his visits to Coushatta, Caddo, and Choctaw Indians, he learned their language, which he identified as "Choctaw," but which differed little from tribe to tribe according to Maley ( Flores 1972: 103, 160). In this case, he undoubtedly referred to Mobilian Jargon, and provided some linguistic evidence: "tompullu" or †tãfola 'hominy' among Coushatta and Caddo as well as "Chicamaw, Chicamaw, Chicamaw feenee" or †čekama, čekama, čekama fen ǝ 'good, good, very good' among Coushatta Indians ( Flores 1972: 57, 72, 93).
In the next decade, a resident of Natchitoches, J. H. Cosgrove, noted the use of Mobilian Jargon by clerks in local stores trading with Indians, presumably Caddo. Similarly, the "Indian language" was the medium of plantation owners in their interactions with native peoples ( Kniffen, Gregory, and Stokes 1987: 96-7). Few details remain, however.
In 1826, a resident of Navasota northwest of Houston reported two basic words of Western Muskogean origin among the nearby Bidai Indians (possibly Atakapan): púskus 'boy' and tándshai 'maize' ( Gatschet 1891: 39 n. 2). These words clearly have corresponding equivalences in Mobilian Jargon, poskoš poškoš 'baby, child' and tanče 'corn.' Rather than single loanwords, they possibly represented Mobilian Jargon, by the fact that they constituted basic vocabulary. The pidgin may indeed have extended even to the central Gulf Coast of Texas. For 1839, an observer by the name of J. O. Dyer ( 1917:1) described an intertribai community speaking Karankawa (isolate), Tonkawa (isolate), Comanche (Uto-Aztecan), and other languages as follows: "The clan was a conglomeration of outcasts from neighboring tribes, who kept alive by begging, stealing, and fishing, and their language in 1839, [was] a jargon mostly of Spanish-English mixed with Indian
dialects." Some suggestive evidence for this medium to have been Mobilian Jargon comes from an apparent Natchez or originally Muskogean loanword: Karankawa lá-ak 'goose' ( Gatschet 1891: 77, 98) with its similarities to Natchez laalak ( Haas 1956: 65), Choctaw/Chickasaw šalaklak (Munro, forthcoming), and Mobilian Jargon †šalaklak ).
Between 1836 and 1838, a major-general of the US army named Ethan Allen Hitchcock ( 1930: 168, 174), learned from two sources that Biloxi in the Indian Territory ( Oklahoma), originating from Texas, "can understand the Choctaw language, but their own tongue has so much changed that they can hardly be understood by the Choctaws." The limited intelligibility of the Biloxi's "Choctaw" to Choctaw Indians suggests that it was Mobilian Jargon instead, but that it was also in decline among the Choctaw of Oklahoma.
The period between 1837 and 1841 was the time when the German poet Gustav Dresel ( 1920-1: 407) observed how Texas and other Indians communicated with Europeans. In 1838, he recorded an Alabama of eastern Texas to have said: "No, Qshaw, Papeshille; plata, plata, shoke me fina," or †no, (e)kšo, papešele; plata, plata čokǝma fena as a sample of a Hispanicized version of Mobilian Jargon (for further discussion, see Sect. 8.3). Dresel ( 1920-1: 371) further quoted a Coushatta's response: "You good man, you good papeshillo, you Dutchman." While Dresel had learned some Indian expressions and sign language, his Alabama host also spoke some Spanish and English. As reflected in these linguistic attestations, Mobilian Jargon coexisted with Spanish and English. Similarly, Dresel ( 1920-21: 348) had earlier observed some unidentified Indians north of St Louis in Adams County, Illinois, to mix French and "Indian" in their speech, and may have witnessed Mobilian Jargon in its northern extension. Although there exist no clues to corroborate the latter hypothesis, the translator of the English version, Max Freund (in Dresel 1954: 140-1), confirmed Dresel's example among the Alabama-Coushatta near Livingston in eastern Texas a century later, in the 1930s: "A particularly intelligent member of the tribe was invited by this editor to examine the Indian words and phrases quoted by Dresel in his diary . . . He declared them to be perfectly correct and still in colloquial use."
In 1840, a French traveller, Victor Tixier, encountered Choctaw some twenty miles "above New Orleans," and partook in their sagamité or hominy by invitation with the apparently proverbial, almost formulaic encouragement of "Tchoukouman-finan, ce qui voulait dire: C'est très bon" ( Tixier 1844; 40) 27 or †čokomã fenã 'very good.' While Tixier did not care for the Choctaw's offering, he responded similarly out of courtesy. His pronunciation of the phrase made his hosts laugh.
In 1849, the ethnologist William Bollaert ( 1850: 277) reported that Lipan
____________________
27
'which meant: "It is very good"' ( Tixier 1940: 56).
12.4. Other Native American Contact Languages of Greater Southeastern North America
As a major interlingual medium of southeastern North America, Mobilian Jargon raises the question of other indigenous contact media in the area, in which case it may serve as a model for their study. The discussion on the pidgin's variation has already included the lingua francas Creek and Apalachee as Eastern Muskogean varieties (see Sect. 8.5). As in these cases, modern linguistic data for other Native American lingua francas in the area are sparse or non-existent; but the ethnographic and historical literature does contain incidental references to a few unrelated indigenous contact languages. 10
For the early nineteenth century and for today's four-state area of Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas, the ethnologist John R. Swanton
____________________
10
This section draws in part on earlier surveys by Crawford ( 1978: 5-7) and Silverstein ( 1973 MS: 12-13. 21-8).
SIBLEY, JOHN ( 1807), 'Historical Sketches of the Several Indian Tribes in Louisiana, South of the Arkansa River, and between the Mississippi and River Grand,' in [Meriwether] Lewis, [William] Clark, [John] Sibley, and [William] Dunbar, Travels in the Interior Parts of America, Communicating Discoveries Made in Exploring the Missouri, Red River, and Washita ( London: Richard Phillips), 40-53.
( 1911: 7), following the US Indian agent John Sibley, mentioned a Caddo trade language, presumably spoken among alloglossic Caddoan groups and perhaps in contact with their Muskogean, Siouan, and Plains Indian neighbors. Currently, there are no details available about the linguistic structure or social history of Caddo as a lingua franca.
Daniel G. Brinton ( 1859: 134-5) argued for Timucua of northeastern Florida as an indigenous lingua franca throughout much of the peninsula in the early seventeenth century. He based his finding on sociolinguistic observations by the missionary Francisco Pareja, who had apparently experienced no difficulty in speaking Timucua to neighboring groups of different linguistic backgrounds. Unfortunately, Brinton did not provide further supportive information. Julian Granberry ( 1987: 20-1, 26-55) has since described Timucua as a creolized blend of Macro-Chibchan, Arawakan, Muskogean, and other languages, without, however, specifying its preceding process of language convergence. 11
Another native contact medium was apparently based on the language of the Shawnee Indians, a widely scattered group of Algonquians who in colonial times wandered across much of eastern North America from the Ohio River valley and even Pennsylvania as far south as Georgia and eastern Texas. In the early eighteenth century, the French-born Anglican missionary Francis Le Jau ( 1956 [ 1706- 1717]: 11, 19, 41, 68-9, 73, 87) learned from a trader about "Savannah," "Saonah," or "Savannock," and described it as "fine smoth [sic] and easy to be got." The missionary called it "the transcendent language of America," apparently understood from colonial Carolina to Canada, and compared it not only with Latin and Arabic as international languages, but also with the lingua franca Creek of Southeastern Indians. Because of its easy intelligibility and extensive use, Le Jau engaged European traders with knowledge of the lingua franca Shawnee to help him translate the Lord's Prayer in a first step towards the Native Americans' conversion to Christianity, and he sent one of several versions to his superiors in England, published by John Chamberlayne ( 1715: 89) and again by Edmund Fry ( 1799: 258). There exist other, incidental mentions of a possible lingua franca Shawnee. An early source on Creek as intertribal medium, the naturalist William Bartram ( 1958 [ 1791]: 245, 294) also made a reference to the "Uches" (Yuchi) speaking "Savannuca" or "Shawanese." Several decades later, Thomas S. Woodward, who made pertinent observations about Mobilian Jargon and especially its eastern variety
____________________
11
In describing the Tawasa dialect of Timucua as "a blend of both Timucuan and Muskogean characteristics." Granberry ( 1987: 20) drew an analogy to "the same kind of creolization that we see in the neighboring Mobilian 'jargon'." This reference suggests that Granberry understands creolization simply as language mixture rather than in the technical linguistic sense, as there are no indications that Mobilian Jargon creolized or became the first language of a community.
For the mid- eighteenth century, James Adair, trader among the Cherokee and Chickasaw, mentioned a "mixed language" used between the once powerful and numerous Catawba and their neighbors in the Piedmont area of upper South Carolina and adjacent North Carolina northeast of the Creek Indians. According to Adair ( 1968 [ 1775]: 224-5), this contact medium was made up of more than twenty different "dialects or languages," among which he mentioned the following: Catawba (distant relative of Proto-Siouan), which apparently served as the "court" or standard language; Wataree (unidentified); Eno (Siouan?); Chowanoc (Algonquian?); Congaree (Siouan?); Natchez (Gulf); Yamasee (unidentified); and Coosa (unidentified). By Adair's indications, speakers of the lingua franca Catawba drew on linguistic elements from three or four different language families, possibly even more. Unfortunately, there are no other known attestations that confirm or elaborate Adair's observations.
The language of the Tuscarora, once a sizable and influential group of Iroquoians in eastern North Carolina, likewise functioned as a lingua franca, understood by at least some members of every adjacent alloglossic community such as the Pamlico (Algonquians) and the Woccon (Siouans). In the early eighteenth century, the English explorer John Lawson ( 1967 [ 1709]: 233-9) recorded a vocabulary of almost 200 entries and a few phrases. He further described this "Indian Jargon" to be imperfect in its moods and tenses and so deficient that the Indians could not express themselves with any elegance; apparently they barely understood each other, and younger members could not follow the elders' abbreviated speech in councils and debates ( 1967 [ 1709]: 239). However, Lawson's vocabulary consisted of everyday expressions, numbers, and words related to the trade in hides and European goods, the latter suggesting the use of the lingua franca Tuscarora also in contact with Europeans.
Still farther north in the early eighteenth century, linguistically diverse Indians of south-central Virginia apparently spoke a common medium associated with the influential Occaneeche (Occaneechi) Indians. On a visit with them, the local historian Robert Beverley ( 1855 [ 1722]: 148, 157) compared their general language to the intertribal medium of Algonquin among Great Lakes Indians and to the lingua franca Sabir of the Levant; he further
observed "broken and imperfect sentences," and mentioned the medium's use in religious ceremonies similarly to Latin in the Catholic mass. The nineteenth-century ethnologist Horatio Hale ( 1883: 12-13) equated the lingua franca Occaneeche with Tutelo (Siouan), and may have been accurate in his assumption short of supporting evidence. Recently, Edward P. Alexan der ( 1971) discovered a small vocabulary of so-called Saponey (Saponi), recorded by a young Irish veteran by the name of John Fontaine at Fort Christanna in southern Virginia around 1716. Many words are Siouan in origin, close to Tutelo; but most numbers are Algonquian except for one or two identified as Iroquoian, and several entries remain unidentified (see Alexander 1971: 309-13). Especially noteworthy is the similarity of the word for 'six' in Saponey ("Quiock," probably an incorrect copying of "Ouiock"), Pamlico ("Who-yeoc"), and the lingua franca Tuscarora ("Houeyoc"), whose etymology is Tuscarora (see Alexander 1971: 310, 312 n. 71, Goddard 1972, and Lawson 1967 [ 1709]: 233). This vocabulary represents a mixed vocabulary collected from Indians of different linguistic backgrounds or, more likely, an intertribal contact medium rather than Saponey proper. By all indications, "Saponey" was not exclusive to the Indians of the same name, but was also the language of their affiliates, namely Occaneeche (Siouans), Stenkenocks (Algonquians?), Meipontski (Algonquians?), Tutelo, and possibly other Indians, which helps to explain their conflicting linguistic classifications. In early 1700, these groups had all fled from marauding Iroquois to Fort Christanna, and probably used Saponey as the basis for an interlingual medium. Moreover, this lingua franca Saponey apparently served as a trade language, as suggested by numerous references to exchange in the vocabulary and by the role of Fort Christanna as a trading center for Occaneeche and other Virginia Indians at the time ( Alexander 1971: 304-7). If the Occaneeche and Saponey Indians in fact were closely related associates, "Saponey" was a variety of the lingua franca Occaneeche.
There are incidental references to a lingua franca in use among the member groups of the Powhatan confederacy of the Virginia coastal plain. In 1844, a clergyman by the name of E. A. Dalrymple collected a vocabulary of a few numbers and additional terms among the Pamunkey Indians, once a dominant tribe of the Powhatan. Surprisingly, these words do not resemble the vocabularies of Algonquian or other languages in the area, and have remained unidentified except for the numeral 'one' with its similarity to equivalent forms in Powhatan and Delaware ( Howell, Levy, and Luckenbach 1979). This instance recalls the case of Nanticoke (Eastern Algonquian), spoken by the neighbors of the Powhatan Indians across the Chesapeake Bay, who borrowed the numerals 'one' through 'ten' from Mandingo-speaking African slaves ( Brinton 1887). While the Mandingo loans in Nanticoke do not provide etymologies for Dalrymple's unidenti-
fied entries, they suggest the possibility of borrowings from other, distant languages. Curiously, Dalrymple's word list also present both l and r as apparently distinctly variable sounds, whereas Eastern Algonquian languages have exhibited either /l/ or /r/, but not both. However meager, these features point to a possible contact medium ( Howell, Levy, and Lucken bach 1979: 79-80) or "jargonized Powhatan" ( Goddard 1977: 41) rather than Pamunkey proper, an Eastern Algonquian language. Some indirect support for a Pamunkey or Powhatan Jargon comes forth from the fact that, as a result of early, prolonged, and close contacts by English speakers with Virginia Indians,
Powhatan is the source of more loans into English than any other single Algonquian language. These loanwords include the English terms: chinquapin, chum, hominy, matchcoat, moccasin, muskrat (a loanblend), opossum, persimmon, pone (and corn pone as a loanblend), puccoon, raccoon, terrapin, tomahawk, tuckahoe, and wicopy (Dirca palustris L.). All or most of them entered English during the first two decades of contact and probably before the outbreak of hostilities in 1622. ( Siebert 1975: 290) 12
On the northernmost border of southeastern North America, there existed Delaware Jargon, an indigenous contact language of New Netherland in the early seventeenth century between the Delaware Indians (including the Munsee, the Unalachtigo, and the Unami) and their associates. It, too, served as primary medium in early contacts by the Delaware Indians and their affiliates with European immigrants, especially Dutch colonists and later Swedish and English settlers, with the fur trade as a major activity. Delaware Jargon was a genuine pidgin with a lexical base in Unami, a dialect of Delaware or Lenape (Algonquian), but included words from other languages such as Natick, a dialect of Massachusett (Algonquian), and a few single "loan-words" from European languages (including Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, and English). Delaware Jargon exhibited little inflectional or derivational morphology and limited morphosyntactic redundancy, but revealed distinct syntactic patterns of negative-subjectpredicate constructions and object-verb as predominant word order, shared by the area's Algonquian and Iroquoian languages ( Prince 1912; Thomason 1980). Sarah G. Thomason has interpreted these areal-typological characteristics of Delaware Jargon as evidence for its pre-Columbian existence, and has placed it in the sociohistorical context of Algonquian-Iroquoian contact, in particular a loosely organized alliance of eastern Algonquian groups led by the Delaware in opposition to Iroquois Indians. By some historical indications, the Delaware and other Algonquians used the pidgin as a sociolinguistic buffer behind which they could withdraw, and misled Europeans into thinking of the pidgin as Delaware proper ( Goddard 1971: 15-16; Thomason 1980: 182-6). 13

We slept at the house of the great chief on beds of canes which are plaited and tied, like beds of sacking (lits de sangles), interlaced with each other and covered with buffalo skins. The next morning we went to walk in their fields where they sow their corn. The women were there with their men, working. The savages have flat, bent sticks, which they use to hoe the ground, for they do not know how to work it as is done in France. They scratch the soil with these crooked sticks and uproot with them the canes and the weeds which they leave on the earth in the sun during fifteen days or a month. Then they set fire to them, and when they are reduced to ashes they have a stick as large as the arm, pointed at one end, with which they make holes in the earth 3 feet apart; they put into each hole seven or eight grains of corn and cover them with earth. It is thus that they sow their corn and their beans. When the corn is a foot high they take great care, as in France, to get rid of the weeds which get into it, and repeat it two or three times a year. They make use even now of their wooden hoes, because they find them lighter, although we have given them hoes of iron.
We remained some days in this village, and then we returned to our fort. a
Like Pénicaut, Iberville speaks of this village as if it belonged to the Pascagoula tribe alone:
The 29th [of April, 1700] I repaired at 7 in the morning to the village, in which there are about 20 families. This nation has been destroyed, like the other [i. e., the Biloxi], by diseases; the few who remain are well-formed people, especially the women; they have the best figures of any I have seen in this country. Having known that I was going to come to their village they made me a cabin entirely new. One can go from this village to the fort [ Biloxi] in a day by land. * * * [The Choctaw] are five days' journey from this village, straight to the north. The village of the Mobile is three days [journey] from here, to the northeast. * * * b
After this time, however, French endeavor was divided between Mobile on one side and the Mississippi on the other, little attention being paid to the small tribes intervening. The only reference to them in La Harpe is to the effect that the Pascagoula declared war against the Tawasa in March, 1707, but Bienville reconciled the two. c This probably had something to do with the first settlement of the Tawas at Mobile. Unlike the Biloxi, the Pascagoula appear to have remained near the place where we first find them. Dumont gives an account of their temple and mortuary ceremonies as if, in his time, they constituted one village with the Biloxi, d in which case he probably visited them just after the return of the latter from the neighborhood of New Orleans.
Du Pratz ( 1718- 1726) has the following to say of them:
Returning toward the sea and to the west of Mobile is the little nation of Pachca-Ogoulas, which the French call Pascagoulas. This nation is situated
on the shores of the bay which bears their name, which signifies Bread Nation. This nation is composed of but one village, containing at most 30 cabins. Some Canadians have established themselves near them, and they live together like brothers, because the Canadians, being naturally peaceful, and understanding, besides, the character of the natives, know how to live with the nations of America; but what contributes principally to this durable peace is that no soldier frequents this nation. In speaking of the Natchez I have shown how the presence of soldiers destroys the good understanding which ought to be preserved with these people in order to obtain the advantages hoped for. a
This was one of the tribes that in 1764 moved from Mobile to Louisiana. From Hutchin's narrative it appears that they settled first on the west side of the Mississippi not far from Red river, where they had a village counting 20 warriors, b but in 1787 permission was granted them to locate at the confluence of the Rigolet du Bon Dieu and Red river, a permission confirmed in 1792. Their territory was bounded above by Bayou de la Ceour and below by Bayou Philippe, which falls into Red river from the left in descending. Louis de Blanc, their chief, occupied an eminence at the upper end of this territory, but their principal village was on a point called Mount Pleasant. In 1795 the Baron de Carondelet desired that the Pascagoula should be assembled, elect a chief, and form a new village on Catahoula bayou, c but instead they determined to move to Bayou Boeuf, and settled on the Choctaw land there the same year. Land was granted them by a body of Choctaw, who had been the first to make this bayou their home. d Just below them were the Biloxi, who had preceded them by a year or two. Early in the nineteenth century the Pascagoula and Biloxi sold their lands to Miller and Fulton, two of the early settlers of Rapides parish, and the sale was confirmed May 4, 1805. The Pascagoula signers were the chiefs, Big Bread, La Culotte, Ajadonah, Cosauh, Ningo, and Big Head. At the time the two tribes and the Choctaw near them numbered "not less than 500 souls." e Sibley, writing at about this time, but basing his statements on information gathered prior to 1798, has this to say of them:
PASCAGOLAS, live in a small village on Red river, about 60 miles below Natchitoches; are emigrants from Pascagola river, in west Florida; 25 men of them only remaining; speak Mobilian, but have a language peculiar to themeselves; most of them speak and understand French. They raise good crops of corn and garden vegetables; have cattle, horses, and poultry plenty. Their horses are much like [those of] the poorer kind of French inhabitants on the river and [they] appear to live about as well. f
Morse, in his statistical tables of 1822, gives three bodies of Pascagoula Indians, one numbering 80, on Red river, 160 miles from its mouth and close to the Apalachee; a second of 60 persons, 160 miles higher up; and a third of 100 on Biloxi bayou, 15 miles above its junction with the Neches. a In 1829, 111 Pascagoula are reported living with 65 Biloxi in eastern Texas on Red river. b For their later history see pages 31 - 32. They now appear to be entirely extinct, but a group of Biloxi, their close companions, is shown in plate 12,b.
THE MOCTOBI
This tribe is scarcely referred to later than Iberville's first expedition, and there is some reason to think, since individuals belonging to it make their first appearance in company with the Biloxi, that the name may have been that by which the Pascagoula were known to their neighbors. At any rate they must have been a very small group. In some places they are called Capinans, and Capinans was the name of a plantation or small settlement in their neighborhood. References to them occur in Margry, Découvertes, IV, 154, 155, 193, 195, 311, 451, 602; V, 378, 547.
THE MOBILE BAY AND APALACHICOLA RIVER TRIBES
These have been enumerated, so far as it is now possible to do so, in the first part of this paper, and their linguistic affinities have been carefully inquired into. c Their history, however, is interwoven with the histories of the Apalache and the Creeks and requires a study of those peoples to bring out its full significance; therefore it will be well to postpone it until a later occasion.
THE TUNICAN GROUP
THE TUNICA
The name of this tribe signifies simply "men" or "people" in their language, but they prefer to call themselves as a nation by another term, Yoron. They are perhaps referred to as the town of "Tanico" of the Elvas De Soto narrative, d ecountered somewhere in northeastern Louisiana or southeastern Arkansas, where the Indians made salt. This is considerably north of their location in 1682, but Chickasaw and Choctaw tradition places "Tunica oldfields" on the Mississippi river near Friar point, not many miles below the present Helena, Ark., which would indicate that they had formerly lived in that neighborhood. a When first encountered by Europeans, however, they occupied several small villages on the south side of Yazoo river, about 4 leagues from its mouth. The name appears on Marquette's map, based on his expedition of 1676, under the form "Tanik8a," b but he places them inland west of the Metchigamea and Arkansas along with the "Akoroa" and several other tribes.