So, Kay, Am I to understand that the "Lumbee" is really a conglomeration of the remnants of tribes? Pushed together trying t defend themselves from the encroaching white's? I wonder if some of the tribes that were supposedly wiped out to the last person (i.e., by the measles, etc.) actually did have some survivors who ended up bonding together with other Indians who had also been dispossessed, chased off their land at the point of a musket, or simply the survivors of deliberate genocide. It is an interesting thing to think about: We don't know what happened to Roanoke. With my family story, it would sound like whatever happened, it was sudden -- and not a decision the community made together. More likely one that happened to them--with some people scattering in response to a threat. I remember a National Geographic article years ago that talked about researchers doing a thorough "dig" at the presumed site of old Roanoke. Under a fallen door -- that may have been pulled off its hinges, was the body of an old woman. Not buried, mind you, just crushed under the door. That says it all, for me. Since Europeans didn't have the tradition of burying their Grandmas under doors right outside the opening to their cabins, then she was KILLED and no one remained there to find her body and give her a proper burial. So, probably one unfriendly band of Indians attacked the Colony as a threat [and they WERE a threat -- look what ended up happening to the Indians as a result of the people of brought Roanoke to the New World!]. And then, some other friendly bands of Indians took the survivors in and raised the children. A worse scenario would be that the men were killed and the women and kids were kidnapped -- which would also account for hairy, bearded tribe members in the next several generations. [In Southeastern tribes -- beyond the Mandan whose beards and blond hair and blue eyes were apparently from a different origin: The ancient Welsh colony on the Alabama Gulf.] But whatever really happened at Roanoke, the SUPPOSED massacre was certainly used by later white colonists to justify murdering Indians. The fact that many believe as I do that the survivors were raised by Indian groups was NOT something the later colonists would have wanted to contemplate -- because believing that would have made it more difficult (ethically and morally) to wipe out Indians "in the memory of" the Lost Colonists. Probably, many of the the colonists of Roanoke WERE killed in an attack [as the Nat'l Geographic] story implies. But we--as Melungeons and Black Dutch -- are more concerned with who survived and what happened to them. If my ancestor's story is true, then some tribes deserved to be thanked, not murdered. The fact that other survivors never left the tribes is also a testament to the family they must have found when adopted into the tribe. But still, there is the specter of those that may have been forced into a tribe, bear children, and then those children grow up not knowing their real heritage. Sad, but a thing that must have happened thousands of time in the unwritten history of the world--every time one group of humans attempted to move into the lands of another group! The scary part is that the mixed off-spring from the mixing of people whose living zones pressed up against each other's--would have had the characteristics of both groups. That made them easy targets for those who objected to the mixing of the races--from BOTH sides. So, it is very likely that the offspring of Indians and Whites, of Blacks and Indians, and of Blacks and Whites were targeted for either death or being run off by Whites, especially, but also probably by some Indian groups. But it is not likely that what few independent pockets of Blacks there were, would have been hostile toward either the Indians or the Whites who wanted to mingle with them. [Just an observation -- feel free to disagree!] I am reminded of a true murderous scoundrel, General "Mad Anthony" Wayne who carried out true genocide against Indians. When he had his soldiers attack an Indian village with orders to "Kill them all!", a Captain asked him, "But Sir, What about the children?" Gen. Wayne's famous reply was: "Nits make lice! Kill 'em all!" And so they did. With impunity. Who is there to cry for the dead? The Indians, the Black Dutch, and the Melungeons. Curtis -----Original Message----- From: Kypacer@aol.com <Kypacer@aol.com> To: Melungeon-L@rootsweb.com <Melungeon-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Friday, September 15, 2000 5:13 PM Subject: [Melungeon] Re: Keyauwee, part 2 >I apologize for stopping in mid-paragraph; I got the about-to-disconnect notice Aol sends if you have been in your mailbox more than 30 minutes. >Back to footnote 436 of page 163 of Pat Elder's book: >"Lefler is unclear whether he (I assume he is referring to Lederer) found the bearded Indians among the Saponi, the Hatteras, or the Croatans, or exactly which group. Perhaps Aswell made this assumed connection when he said Melungeons were related to the bearded Keyauwee. Unfortunately, Thomas Hariot also observed men of the Pomeisoc tribe who wore beards-see Stick, Beginnings, pp.240-241." The Elder book (Continuity Press) has a lot of information on Indian tribes. > One of the most interesting parts of her book is the listing of surnames which various researchers thought to be Melungeon, Lumbee, etc. together with the counties where the surname was found and the initials of the researcher who came to this conclusion. Kay > > >==== Melungeon Mailing List ==== >Monocan Links >http://members.tripod.com/monacannation/ >http://minerva.acc.virginia.edu/vfh/vfp/monacan.html >http://falcon.jmu.edu/~ramseyil/vaindiansmonacan.htm >http://www.vmnh.org/tribes.htm >http://boe.cabe.k12.wv.us/daviscre/indians.html >http://www.montgomery-floyd.lib.va.us/compages/cechurch/guatmala/1998Pics/M onacan5.htm >