GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-05 > 1051816646


From: alani920 <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Blonde Indians
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20030501163608.15540.qmail@web41209.mail.yahoo.com>


David,
You are correct, and it is probably because
historically Natives did not view themselves as a
race. If someone was deemed acceptable they were
welcomed into the tribe. That is what is hard to
explain to some of us who are so caught up in racial
identity. They were concerned about tribal, and
spiritual identity.

Maybe after all of these discussions we will find our
way back to those beliefs.

Anita Wills
--- David Faux <> wrote:
> Hi Anita: Very interesting family tree. Some might
> say a classic example of the "melting pot" reality
> in many old stock American families. Among those
> Cherokees and others who for one reason or another
> remained on or moved to a reservation, I doubt that
> the genetic mix would be much different. I would
> love to be proved wrong on this point. In essence I
> have said something that could be construed as
> controversial - that no one alive today whose
> ancestry is traced to the Continental USA below the
> 49th parallel is 100% Native North American, and
> therefore no one in this category on or off a
> reservation would have findings of 100% NNA on the
> DNAPrint test and also have a Y- chromosome and
> mtDNA haplotype characterisitic of Native North
> American Indians. Where I am from (near
> Hagersville, Ontario, Canada) the only difference
> between those on the Six Nations Indian Reserve and
> the adjacent New Credit Indian Reserve and myself
> (whose property adjoined these Reserves) was a ma!
> tter of degree. There were some who on the other
> side of the road who had less NNA than myself (for
> example until recently a woman gained a "status
> card" and became "Indian" if she married a
> registered Indian). The reality is that from the
> perspective of DNA, I have mostly European and some
> NNA, and across the road they ran the gamut from
> people such as myself, to those who were mostly NNA
> with some European. The point, it is extremely
> unlikely that anyone whose ancestral roots lie
> between Southern Canada and Central Mexico is
> genetically "pure" (meaning 100%) NNA - let alone
> someone whose phenotype is blonde with fair skin.
> The historical and genealogical records do not
> support claims of "purity" in populations from this
> geographic area. David.
>
> alani920 <> wrote:David,
> My maternal lines are made up of Cherokee, and Sioux
> from Central Virginia. It is seldom spoken of in
> History books, but Native Americans assisted slaves
> who escaped. If you think about what group was in
> the
> best position to know the terrain, then that would
> not
> be surprising. Natives were enslaved before Africans
> were brought over, and many continued to serve
> Indentures, after slavery. That is the case with
> several of my Native Ancestors who were required to
> serve 30 year Indentures, because of their Mulatto
> Statutes.
>
> My Grandfather was Cooper colored, and had Straight
> black hair. He wore a braid until about the age of
> twelve when it was cut off. His family intermarried
> not just with whites, but with blacks as well. They
> were remnants of Delaware Indians left in
> Pennsylvania. So in Pennsylvania, I have Light, and
> dark skinned cousins. It was interesting to see the
> makeup of our family when we had gatherings.
>
> Anita Wills
>
>
> Dr. David K. Faux, P.O. Box 192, Seal Beach, CA,
> 90740, USA
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
>
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion
> online genealogy records, go to:
>
http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
>


=====
ftDNA Results posted at:
http://www.familytreedna.com/ftLogin.asp?kit=8718
http://talkinghistory.oah.org/arch2003.html#Anchor-54865

The Pen Is Mightier Then The Sword

This thread: