Jean-Somebody is a dumb so and so. My Grandmother was a Black Dutch. their family was from Illinois I think .I had this thoroughly explained to me by a person at OHS but did not write it down so have forgotten. I don't think anyone would have admitted to being Black Dutch rather than admit they were Indian.My Grandmother had coal black hair, olive skin, big brown eyes. It certainly was not to hide any Indian Heritage because my Grandfather was an Indian. My Grandmother's family were on their way from maybe Kentucky when she was born. I've been a Cherokee all my life and I've never heard that one. Also, one thing I do know is that anyone claiming to be Indian always says Cherokee. I think I'll call Bill at OHS Archives and get him to explain that to me again. I live in Okla. City. Where are you? Oleta Benge Kite On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:32:53 -0500 "Jean Cloke" <gjcloke@msn.com> writes: > Hi, I am new to the list. I find this discussion fascinating. I live > in Oklahoma in the part that was Indian Territory and have been > interested in the history of the Native American tribes that were > moved to this area for a long time. I have done some research, but > still don't feel I have even a rudimentary understanding. Some of > you seem to have more knowledge about this. > > As mentioned, some families said they were Black Dutch in order to > hide their Indian heritage. My family was one of them. My paternal > grandmother told us we were Black Dutch. She even had a wooden shoe > that someone had bought as a souvenir somewhere, so I was totally > sure we had Dutch ancestors until the late 1980's. I had already > started doing some research and couldn't find anything about what > part of Holland the Black Dutch were from. I had the opportunity to > met a Dutch missionary who visited our church and asked him. He had > no idea what I was talking about and told me there was no such thing > as Black Dutch. After more research I found out that it was a cover > for being Indian. We had also been told we had some Indian, probably > Cherokee. It seems that as it became less taboo to be Indian, the > family finally began admitting it, but later generations knew so > little that the tribal affiliation had been lost during the years > they were trying to keep it a secret. So now I'm tr! > ying to figure out what tribe or tribes and have had no luck on the > rolls. > > This discussion on where tribes were during what period is helpful. > My ancestors that supposedly married into Indian tribes were from > Germany originally. The Dibler's came through Pennsylvania (1700's- > Abt. 1855), Ohio (Abt. 1859-1866), Indiana (1867-1870's), Arkansas > (1880-1896/7), and Oklahoma/Indian Territory (1897/8-present). > > My other branch, the Sigman's immigrated from Germany in 1738 to > Pennsylvania, by the early 1790's they were in Lincoln Co., NC. They > moved around some in NC, then to Rockcastle Co., KY (1840's-50's), > Linn Co., KS (1850's-1870), Benton Co., AR (1870's-present) where > Rhoda Ann Sigman married William Geo. Dibler in 1884. They came to > Oklahoma in about 1902. Some of the Dibler's were already here at > that time. > > Anyone have any ideas about what tribes they might be based on the > area's where they lived? Pictures & history of both branches from my > grandmother indicates the intermarriage was long before they got to > Oklahoma/Indian Territory. I have considered Cherokee, Choctaw, and > Seminole, but open to ideas. > > Have a good day, > Jean > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: HealTheCircle@aol.com<mailto:HealTheCircle@aol.com> > To: > indian-territory-roots@rootsweb.com<mailto:indian-territory-roots@rootswe b.com> > > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:01 AM > Subject: Re: [INDIAN-TERRITORY-ROOTS] Hello everyone > > > What's rather interesting about the Cherokee, is that at one time, > they WERE > part of the Iroquois Confederacy (6 Eastern Tribes). I would > guess...this > was earlier than the 1770's. This was when the Chickamaugan > Cherokee withdrew > from the other Cherokee, because of their ceding of land to the > whites. > So...the ceding of land, and intermarriages had already begun by > that time. Fron > what I can tell, the early settlers, were folks who worked in fur > > trade...which brought them in very close contact with the natives > in the area where the > Cherokee lived. The first settlers lived with the native people, > married > into the tribe, and were considered part of the tribe. > > I would also read James Mooney's book...about the Cherokee > previous to the > intermarrying with the white culture. I think the name of the > book is > "History, Myths, and Secret Formulas of the Cherokee." > > One other point I'd like to make...which I am willing to hear > other > perceptions on...is that in the 1830's when the removal began > (referred to as the > Trail of Tears)....some native families who were involved in that > (Cherokee, > Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, and Creek), instructed their > children to not admit > native blood, to escape the removal. There is talk of admitting > "black > dutch", "black irish", or sometimes "italian" or "greek" instead > of native. > This is understandable if you view the horror, loss of life, etc., > that this > removal perpetrated. There are museums at the Western and > Eastern Cherokee > Nations that depict this removal. > > Also, previous to this in about 1817, there was a "Massacre of 100 > Women and > Children", of the Chickamaugan Cherokee, not far from Ross's > Landing, in > what is now Chattanooga, TN. on their way to safety. The > instruction by their > Chief was to save the rest of the children, by sending them off > with others, > non native, to be raised as other than native (my history....on my > Mitchell > family). My family found them at a campground in what is now the > Chattanooga > area, and took them West with them to Henryville, TN....as their > children. > There they intermarried with other families who also had native > in their > background. From there they traveled to AR. > > So....it is possible that people, with native blood, could have > ended up, in > areas that were not designated, as the areas in which those tribes > lived (as > a tribe). > > These brief descriptions of history (of which I am a novice) only > were cited > to show that there events previous to the birth times of her > people, that > could have brought a person who was not a "fullblood" into an > area.....but the > native blood would still have been present, even if there was > intermarriage. > > jes > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > INDIAN-TERRITORY-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com<mailto:INDIAN-TERRITORY-ROOTS -request@rootsweb.com> > 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 > INDIAN-TERRITORY-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > >