I agree with Jerri C. that Cherokee princess is not a real term historically. What happened with that term culturally was two-fold. On the one hand, it was derogatory and insulting in its ignorance. On the other hand, and important for many folks who begin a genealogical quest to discover an ancestress, it was given as the family title of a great-great-great-grandmother in family stories we heard as small children with wonder and awe. It is hard for the latter group to think of this as a "bad" or "rude" term. Most know there were no princesses. But I don't think my mother or grandmother were "lying" when they said we had a relative of this wonderful tribe. They meant no harm, but only love and pride in the woman's courage to follow their her into another (European) culture. So, as in most historical matters, it's a "both/and". The erroneous term means a real person for many of us. For me, it was Elouise Debbyanne Bennett who was, I believe, part Cherokee. Can't prove it, but I don't imagine that my grandparents lied to me about it. Why would they in the 1950's and earlier? Take care, all. Susan -- ============================================================================= Susan Werstein Phone: (03) 467-5632 Country code: 64 8 Lothian St. Dunedin, New Zealand E-Mail: werstein@es.co.nz =============================================================================