Thanks Lathel....see I knew someone else would know the answer to that question. So, explain to me why the government was so insistent on the rolls of the freedmen, if their was no entitltement involved? If you know why....or you have a supposition. Given that the whole idea of having a roll.....was government directed. So, this might very well lead into the other issues I mentioned, with folks today who carry the heritage (african american/native american) who are unable to document, or legitimize their heritage?? Reminds me a bit, of some of the remarks made about the "melungeons", in some of the writings I ran across the other day. Apparently, in the need to "label" people this is confusing....and also in a way it is de-valuing of that person's history. I wrote before about the supposition I had seen regarding the melungeon heritage. In a way the division was not by ethnicity....but by economic strata. The indentured folks who came across (mostly caucasian), the african american (freed if i understand correctly), and the native americans who may have been enslaved.....all three experiencing lesser rights in a society that prizes money and power (or access to it). If it's been hard for the fullbood native person to access their background, and therefore their rights....and then hard for the mixed blood to follow back to the proper rolls......to gain knowledge and their rights....what about this ethnicity who(apparently)has no rights and no documents to even show that they could have but don't?? Just philosophical statements. jes