Isn't that a little over assuming the state officials are much more ignorant than federal officials, or won't seek further information from creditable individuals? Everything can be traced back to some kind of money in some way....either having to give or to keep from taking....but present or future finances are always involved. This is an observation and opinion as well. TT ----- Original Message ----- From: "csmoke" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [CREEK-SOUTHEAST] The Irony of Current Creek Membership > Leon, > I do not know all the fed reqirement for being recognized, but do know > that > you can add speaking their unique language. And I think there is > something > about all these tests met and being in existence for 200 or more years. > There is a "native site" (commanchelodge..) that I think lists criteria > for > recognition, plus a listing of all the recognized tribes. > > So, I think you could go to the site I mentioned and see who is federally > recognized. There are state (only) recognized groups (who may be > legitimate > in many ways and have a good heart...) , but I hear that the problem with > that is a " local" chief or whatever can blow a smoke at the state > bureaucrats...throw in some genealogy/etc, and the state officials do not > know nothing from nothing.... it looks ok, recognize them. Does not mean > anything special.. my view. > > Richard B. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Leon Beard" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 6:26 PM > Subject: Re: [CREEK-SOUTHEAST] The Irony of Current Creek Membership > > >> It is my understanding that when a tribe goes through the Federal >> recognition process with the B.I.A., they must prove that the majority of >> the tribe descends from Indian ancestors that were in a established >> community, that had political, social, cultural, and marriage ties to >> each >> other, and that the band must have established guidelines for membership >> requirements, and even such things as a break in leadership of the tribe >> can be a stumbling block in getting recognition, Once the tribe is given >> federal recognition the tribal roll is closed, and membership is >> generally >> only open to the direct descendants of people already listed on the roll. >> since some tribes such as the Mashantucket Pequot by passed the B.I.A. >> process their genealogies, political, social, cultural, and marriage ties >> did not come under any scrutiny >> >> >> --- On Thu, 8/7/08, [email protected] <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [CREEK-SOUTHEAST] The Irony of Current Creek Membership >>> To: [email protected] >>> Date: Thursday, August 7, 2008, 11:26 AM >>> Obviously, the Poarch Creeks can not let every Tom, Dick or >>> Harry join the >>> tribe, because it could soon become anything BUT an >>> authentic Native American >>> organization. However ... >>> >>> I do think it is ironic that most Southeastern Creek >>> families spent 180 >>> years trying to hide their Native American heritage and >>> culture, and now many >>> people are desperately trying to proof Creek descent. >>> >>> Until very late in their lives, any time we asked my >>> grandparents about >>> their Indian heritage, my grandmother would snap back, >>> "I don't want to talk >>> about it. They treated us worse than the Coloreds." >>> Survival for Eastern >>> Creeks often mandated invisibility and/or intermarriage >>> with their European or >>> African neighbors. >>> >>> The fact is that when the Creeks were living as Creeks in >>> Creek communities, >>> membership in the community had nothing to do with race or >>> blood quantum. >>> For starters, the Creek Confederacy, or People of One Fire >>> was a political >>> alliance formed by the remnants of many provinces, that had >>> been decimated by >>> Spanish diseases & weapons, and then by >>> English-sponsored slave raids. People >>> speaking several languages and dialects came together and >>> chose Mvskoke as >>> their diplomatic and trade language.These different ethnic >>> groups looked >>> different and had varying cultural traditions. One of the >>> most powerful Creek >>> towns, Tuckabachee, had originally been a Shawnee town. >>> >>> Even prior to the formation of the Creek Confederacy, >>> there had been >>> substantial gene infusions. There is a lot of evidence >>> that Mesoamerican refugees >>> arrived from time to time in the Southeast and blended >>> their genes and >>> culture with the Muskogeans. There is some evidence of >>> small bands of Northern >>> Europeans being absorbed into the Muskogean gene pool >>> 1000-2000 years ago. >>> Thousands of Muskogean women were ravaged by conquistadors >>> in the 1500s and 1600s. >>> There are historical records of Moors, Sephardic Jews and >>> Portuguese men >>> escaping Spanish expeditions and colonies to join the >>> Muskogeans. By 1700 AD, >>> many, if not most, Creeks carried some European and/or >>> African genes. The >>> reason was that mixed-blood Creeks were far more likely to >>> survive a European >>> plague than a full blood. There are many examples of pure >>> European men and >>> women being invited to become members of a tribal town in >>> the 1700s. Several >>> rose to positions of leadership. Their fellow Creeks >>> considered them Creeks. >>> >>> So when one talks about a "full-blooded" Creek or >>> Cherokee in the 1800s, we >>> are not talking about them being the same people, >>> genetically, as the >>> indigenous people first met by the de Soto Expedition. >>> They were merely mixed-gene >>> members of a Creek tribal town, when the federal government >>> first began >>> conducting censuses of Native Americans. >>> >>> Richard T. >>> >>> >>> >>> **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and >>> fits in your budget? >>> Read reviews on AOL Autos. >>> (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 >>> ) >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word >>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and >>> the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I have served for many years as tribal historian and federal recognition officer. So I can tell you that the ability to speak a unique language is not a requirement but can be used to fulfill the cultural continuity requirement. I would also not assume that every state recognized tribe is a fraud and that the only "real" tribes are federal ones. My tribe is state recognized. We are in the process of status clarification with the federal government. I was told by one of the historians at the BIA that our people had one of the easiest paths to federal recognition of any of the remaining unrecognized tribes and that it was just a matter of putting the documents together. Does this mean every state tribe is legitimate? Of course not. But don't paint them all with one brush. There are many tribes, particularly in the southeast, that remain in tribal communities, that govern themselves through the churches they established when their traditional religion was outlawed. I personally can document my tribe from first contact. And I can demonstrate that ever single member is descended either from a soldier who fought in a company in the Revolutionary War that was identified as a PeeDee Indian company or from someone who lived in the communities with them. Most of our people descend from more than one of those soldiers. I personally descend from four of them. When the Catawba had their federal recognition restored in the 1990s, suddenly federal Indians who had denounced them as not real Indians suddenly accepted them as such. And Chief Blue, to his credit, told them they were lap dogs to the BIA for treating the Catawba as something less than a tribe until the federal government said they were. We are not Indians at the whim of the U.S. government, and we are a tribe whether they recognize us or not. We seek recognition because of the benefits it could bring to the quality of life of our people, not because it will make us Indian. The Creator already did that. .....stepping off my soapbox now....... Michelle In a message dated 08/09/08 11:53:00 Eastern Standard Time, [email protected] writes: Isn't that a little over assuming the state officials are much more ignorant than federal officials, or won't seek further information from creditable individuals? Everything can be traced back to some kind of money in some way....either having to give or to keep from taking....but present or future finances are always involved. This is an observation and opinion as well. TT ----- Original Message ----- From: "csmoke" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [CREEK-SOUTHEAST] The Irony of Current Creek Membership > Leon, > I do not know all the fed reqirement for being recognized, but do know > that you can add speaking their unique language. And I think there is > something about all these tests met and being in existence for 200 or more years. > There is a "native site" (commanchelodge..) that I think lists criteria > for recognition, plus a listing of all the recognized tribes. > > So, I think you could go to the site I mentioned and see who is federally > recognized. There are state (only) recognized groups (who may be > legitimate in many ways and have a good heart...) , but I hear that the problem with > that is a " local" chief or whatever can blow a smoke at the state > bureaucrats...throw in some genealogy/etc, and the state officials do not > know nothing from nothing.... it looks ok, recognize them. Does not mean > anything special.. my view. > > Richard B. >