This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: dhlell_1 Surnames: Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6719.6.1.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: My 67 marker DNA indicates, according to Carl, that my ancestor was a "Falling River Lawson", but am unable to find and document the parents of RANDOLPH LAWSON b 1752, Bladen Co., (later Cumberland Co) North Carolina Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: kdsteacher Surnames: Lawson; Rees Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/988.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Who are you? I am one of Ella May Lawson's three children. My first name is Kathy. My two brothers are John and William Rees Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Yes, the yDNA haplo will tell if that male's male ancestors were Native American, but not if his female ancestors were Native American. Both males and females can test for mitochondrial (female) DNA from their mother's line. A male's own mother may have been part Native American, and it might not show up in his mitochondrial (female DNA) test due to that Native American being from his mother's father's side and not the mother's side. Female DNA, whether tested in a female or a male, will tell only the mother's mother's side back through that mother's g-mother and g-g-mother, etc., in that one line, never taking into consideration any of their fathers or husbands or any other females not in that direct line. Female DNA tests back to that female line's "clan." Female DNA can test further back that yDNA as male DNA mutates more quickly than female DNA. A good book by the British biologist who developed the female DNA test is "Seven Daughters of Eve." There are only about 20 or 22 female "clans" world wide/ 7 in Europe. There may be some clans (I believe I have heard they have found some female DNA in Native Americans that also shows up in European "clans")- when one reads this book one can understand how these clans divided thousands of yrs ago coming out of Africa and some went east and some west. Female DNA cannot tell the same things as male DNA as one does not know all the present day descendants of one's mother's female line due to different surnames involved. Matching another's female DNA is sort of random so one mainly finds out the clan/area one comes from and not actual individuals. The more people who test their female DNA the more matches may be made. Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6719.6.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Goober Pea is said (by his descendants) to have gone to Tn (c 1810), and we know Jerusha Lawson Hooker's father died in her home in 1813. John B E's children went to Hawkins Co.,TN c 1810. The names of his descendants are listed in that land sale after his death, and they later appear in Hawkins Co.,TN, including a John. The person listed as "Goober Pea" on the Stokes Co., NC Tax List is the same (same # of acres) one who is listed alternately as John, jr., indicating he is younger. He is listed as John jr in 1794 and Goober Pea in 1795 with the same land. Then as John jr in 1796 and 1797. John, Black Eye, also has the same land (# of acres/200) on these tax lists each yr. He is listed alternatively as John Sr and John B. E. We know John Black Eye had a son, John, listed in that estate sale. Jerusha's brother John was b c 1764 so was not taxed/listed early on - also he stayed in the Stokes Co., NC area (did not go to TN) testifying on Jerusha's behalf in the 1830s for her husband's Rev War Pension. He did not go to Tn as Goober Pea is said to have done. John White Eye appears to have gone to live with his daughter's family (after 1784/or at least after 1786) and no longer had land of his own. Two Johns listed in 1780 are John BE and John WE - a third joins them in 1784 (only one has a designation - as W E). The two elder Johns listed in 1785 and 86 are listed as John B. E and (plain) John. Two John's in Stokes in 1800 one is over 45 and one 26-45 (Sr and Jr). And living with Wm Hooker and Jerusha lawson Hooker an older male and female in 1800 (John W E Lawson and wife). Wm. Hooker's parents seem to have stayed in Halifax Co.,VA/were neverinSurry or Stokes so it appears tht the elder peopel in Wm Hooker's home were Jerusha's parents - and W E does not appear to have land of his own later on. Halifax Co., VA came out of Lun.(spelling?) Co.,VA and Lun. Co, VA out of Bedford Co., VA. So John B E, if old enough, might have been in Bedford Co., VA at one time before it became Halifax, etc., or it could be a relative since those Lawsons seem to like to use those designations. Have any descendants of those Lawsons done DNA testing to see if they are related? Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: carlllawson Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.1.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: You must understand that the Y-DNA and mtDNA test only the paternal and maternal lines of a male's family. Let me try to give an example. Let's look at a male's grandmother's parents on your father's side of the family (paternal line). They could have been Native Americans but the YDNA test will not show this. He does get DNA from them but it will not be shown in his YDNA test. Let's look at his grandfather's parents on his mother's side of the family (maternal line). The same holds true and will not show up in his mtDNA test. So the YDNA test only shows that his paternal father, grandfather, great grandfather and so on, were not Native Americans but any of their wives could have been and it will not show up in the YDNA test. The same holds true on the mother's side of the family. This male has 4 great grandfathers and 4 great grandmothers, the YDNA and mtDNA only looks at 1 great grandfather and 1 great grandmother. So there are still 6 others that he gets DNA from that could have been Native American. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: carlllawson Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6719.6.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: The nicknames such as Black Eye, White Eye and Goober Pea were usually used in the tax records of Surry and Stokes Counties, NC except John "Black Eye" Lawson. This nickname was used in other documents and one other county in Virginia. The first reference to this John Lawson can be found in the Bedford County, VA 1763 tithes list. Found in the "Virginia Genealogical Society Quarterly", Vol. XXIII, number 3, (1 August 1985) page 73 -- Wm. Lawson, 1 tithe, John Lawson B.E., 1 tithe, Jonas Lawson, 1 tithe and David Lawson, 1 tithe. See my web page at http://lawsondna.org/Media/virginiacounties/Bedford.html The above implies that John Lawson B.E. is part of the Falling River Lawsons and maybe a son or grandson of William Lawson of Falling River. The next reference to Black Eye is found in Surry County, NC Tax List, 1783 Capt. Gain's District. (Note: All of the information below I found in the original records at Raleigh, NC state library.) In this tax list you find a reference to a John W. E. and John B. E. along with a David Lawson and Patmon Lawson. John B.E. is the only one that owns property and it shows he has 100 acres. In the Surry County, NC, Tax List, 1784 Capt. Gain's District it is just John that owns 100 acres and it is shown to be located on Peters Creek. Again there is John W.E. Lawson and Patmun (Patmon) Losson in Gain's District but they own no land. There is a third John Lawson in the tax list but he is living in Capt. Hickman's District near Jonas Lawson. In 1785 Capt. Gain's District Tax List it shows John now with 200 acres and Patmon and David with no land. I believe this is John Black Eye Lawson with the 200 acres. John W. E. Lawson is no longer listed but we do still have a John Lawson in Capt. Hickman's District. Patmon Lawson obtains 50 acres, which he paid taxes on in 1789. The land that Patmon and John B.E. own was located in the part of Surry County, NC that became Stokes County, NC. They are listed in the 1790 Capt. Gain's District, Stokes County, NC. It is at this time, 1795, we find the name of John G. Pea (Goober Pea) and there was one other reference to him in 1798. Neither time was he shown to be paying taxes on any land. I was only able to find two references to John W.E. Lawson in the records and that was in the tax list of 1783 and 1784 as indicated above. John B.E. and Patmon Lawson's land is located on or near Little Peter Creek as shown below: - Stokes County, N. C. Land Entries 1790-1798, Book 3, Page 115, Grant 457. "The first entry under the Late Act." 9 February 1795, Matthew Moore enters 640 acres in Stokes Co. on North side of Dan River on waters of Little Peter Creek and waters of Barnes Branch; borders John Lawson "Black Eye", Joel Catchem, William Lankford, Peter Prewett and Patmon Lawson; includes some "drafts" or waters of Buck Island Creek and two iron ore banks; as "bounty claim" for iron works agreeable to an Act of Assembly passed at Fayetteville in 1788. There is one other interesting entry in the 1798 Stokes County, NC, Tax List, Capt. Cloud's District and that is for Isham (B.E.) Lawson, 200 acres. In all the tax lists it has been John Sr., or John B.E. or John Black Eye Lawson. Was this a mistake or was John's middle name Isham? If so why did they not use it before? John Sr., or John B.E. or John Black Eye Lawson disappears from the tax list in 1803. At this time we find the following: - Stokes County Deed Book 5, page 160, 15 October 1803. Thomas Lawson, John Lawson, Letty Lawson, Clem Lawson, Patmon Lawson and Randall Hall are selling to Thomas Gains 200 acres of land on Little Peters Creek. The deed does not say where they acquired the land, but they are obviously tenants in common. There is a state grant 813, dated 5 October 1778, in the Surry County Book of Land Entries, 1778 - 1781 and reentered in Vol. 1, Stokes County Record of Deeds, 1787 - 1793, page 124, Grant 1071, dated 18 May 1781, that was received by John Lawson for 200 acres, which is the same 200 acres that is sold in Deed Book 5, page160 with identical land description shown above. This John Lawson who is identified in the tax lists as John Lawson B.E. (Black Eye). Looks like John Black Eye Lawson's children and son-in-law are selling his land after he has died. I tend to believe that John Black Eye Lawson was a son or grandson of William Lawson of Falling Rivers and is the one we find in the tithes list of Bedford County, VA in 1763. I believe he with Jonas, William and David Lawson moved to Surry County, NC where they obtained land and lived. I also tend to believe that John Black Eye Lawson was the father of Patmon, John and Clem Lawson as indicated in the deed above and died in 1803. As for John W.E. Lawson I am not so sure but he could have been the son of John Black Eye Lawson. I base this on the 1783 and 1784 Capt. Gain's Surry County, tax list where he is, with Patmon and David Lawson, shown in the same District as John B.E. Lawson but with no land that was taxed. But this is only a guess. As for John Goober Pea Lawson, again I am not so sure but I do know many have indicated that he was the father of Jurusha (Lawson) Hooker, Moses and John Lawson, but I have seen no documentation on this. It was not used in his will of 1813: - Stokes County, N. C. Wills, Volumes I-IV, 1790-1864, page 144, 19 March 1813. "Word of Mouth" Will of John Lawson, June Term 1813, at the house of William Hooker where he resided for several weeks about last February 1813. Daughter Ressia, my horse and bridle for her care of me. Witnesses: Jesse Lawson and Patsy (X) Lawson As this shows he had no land to leave his children. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: banshee10704 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.2.1.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: i'm just not sure yet...do you know the names/dates of her children? sorry, i am a little slow to put this all together, i just started on ancestry.com yesterday....i have scraps of paper that i haven't even found yet from when i spent time with my grandmother that will have more info... Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: jamesmoss171 Surnames: Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.2.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: I have 2 Albert Lawson. 1906-1988 with wife Eula Bell Atkins and one born 1885 father was Thomas Clinton Lawson. Mother Nancy Jane Carnes. Was your Frances Marion Lawson b. 1884 Putnam Co. Missouri and died July 29, 1886? I have his Parents as Ruben Lawson (1865-1944) and Eliz Mead (1858-1900). I have Ruben listed with another wife. Mae White (1874-1900)Frances would be a second cousin of mine. I have no wife listed. I have not done a record search on this info so I may be wrong. Would be nice to give my Frances Marion a wife. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: lawsonronjoyce Surnames: Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Was your great great grandmother Sarah Elizabeth Watson Lawson? Was she married to Francis Marion Lawson? These are my great great grandmother and grandfather. My great grandfather was Albert Greenberry Lawson, my grandfather Ira Onus Lawson and my father Idis Kiefton Lawson. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: banshee10704 Surnames: Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: I have a great (great) Grandmother in my tree, sometimes Sarah E. Lawson and sometimes Sarah W. Lawson, who was also said to be Cherokee. I have no doubt about the validity of this because of my Grandma's appearance and her practices with herbs. My grandmothers mother, Sarah, was born in KY or TN. She also had a sister who settled in Cherokee, NC. I don't know if she was on the Rolls, i would say probably not. Her children settled in West Virginia. This information, and a couple small stories, were passed to me directly from my Grandmother. I have no further knowledge of that line, and it seems to be very hard to trace...they were extremely poor. I took her back into the hills once so she could look and it was very hard to find, although we did find a corner from the cabin foundation. No one else in my family ever showed interest and in fact, I would say even my Grandmother kept information about being Cherokee private, only whispering about things to me when my parents were! n't around. It hurts me that I don't know more and I was too young to do a good job of writing things down. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Hooker, Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: The "pushing" into NC of Cherokee by white settlers came around that 1761 date and before. Those Cherokee who stayed after that time lived as whites and were assimilated into the communities of that area. They would not have been "rounded up" in 1835 as they were living as whites for almost 100 yrs. by then and had intermarried quite a bit. Many of the PCVA Hookers moved over that line into NC starting in the early 1800s and even married across that line. Our 6 brothers line of Hookers were in that area of NC that became TN (their father came into NC from PCVA c late 1770s as did the Randolph Co., NC Hookers who match yDNA [Q1a3 haplo] with the PCVA Hookers,) Some of the 6 brothers line state b Tn, but they were b. before Tn even existed so they were all b NC between 1777-1792. In all probability Elizabeth was a Lawson who had a Hooker child out of wedlock - outside possibility would be she married a Lawson and he "adopted" the son. But the parents/adopted father, if a Lawson, should show up on a tax list in 1800 in NC as the Lawsons who went to Hawkins Co., TN did not go until after 1800, and later on if Elizabeth was married to a Lawson male, he should appear on tax lists in Hawkins Co., TN. There is a Reconstructed TN 1810 census made up of tax lists that has een published. The Lawsons who went to Hawkins Co., TN were the "Black Eye" John Lawson and his son "Goober Pea" John Lawson and their families. There were some Elizabeths in that line. They had lived in Stokes Co., NC quite near/just across the state line from the PCVA Hookers. We do not know if the Stokes Co., NC Wm Hooker and wife, Jerusha Lawson Hooker (both b in Halifax Co.,VA), family matches the Q1a3 yDNA, yet. We have a test in the hands of their descendants, but it has not yet been taken/sent in. If they match the PCVA Hookers then one of them might be a candidate for father of David.Some of those Hooekr sons moved west from Stokes Co., NC into TN. Also, we know that some PCVA Hookers also went to Hawkins Co., Tn. If David were b in TN in 1803, his family probably came from that area of NC along the NC, VA, Tn border. Most from that area did not go into Hawkins Co.,TN until about 1810. There should be tax lists which would show any Lawsons in Hawkins Co.,TN. There is a guy working on the Hawkins Co., TN Lawsons who might have some info. But unless you find some Lawsons with that rare Q1a3 haplo your David was probably fathered, as I have said, by a Hooker male from that Native American Hooker line from the area that became Pitts., Henry and PCVA. Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: jlakin46 Surnames: Lawson Crowe Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.2.2.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi Celeste, It would appear that our bunch might have been ones that were 'pushed in NC', then maybe to TN. One of the sons gave Hawkins Co TN as a birthplace, though boundaries between counties and states were more fluid then! And then there's the state of Franklin! We havan't any 1800/1820 census records available (lost) to help us find David's father. All we know is that David was b in the part of NC that later became TN. His mother's first name was Elizabeth, but no info on a maiden name. We know he was in Scott Co VA 1830 by census and marriage records of 2 sons. The family left before the round up began an in 1835 and show up on personal property records in the mountians of Logan Co VA. This was to evade the "Trail of Tears" according to oral tradition. we have had several candidates for our Lawson lines over the years, most have been ruled out by DNA testing. There are more lines though that we've never made contact with anyone doing research. The first is the Dan River Lawsons, the second are the Lawsons in Christian Co KY (near the Crowe line. Another is the David Lawson who applied for a Rev War pension in TN. DNA has been a great tool to help us eliminate lines, but I guess we will have to wait for someone else to join in the search who has more info than we do in order to find David's family. It will be interesting to see what kind of info comes out when there is a DNA database for N/A. Janet Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Hooker, Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: I have read and copied MANY of the Hooker descendants' Guion Roll apps. from all of their many g-sons and g-g-sons as well as other relatives who over an over stated the same info on the first male (Robin and his sons, Wm and Samuel) being Cherokee. Many of the Cherokee customs - like the out of wedlock children being accepted by the family/friends, etc., show their Cherokee heritage. Also, many of the Pikes and Packs from that area of PCVA had very detailed info on their Cherokee ancestors. The main thing is the very unusual Q1a3 haplo. And the new research that different groups are working on showing that haplo does show up in Cherokee males today, and it is a very unusual haplo. Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Hooker, Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Yes, many early white males who first came alone into the area of southwest VA did marry Cherokee women (there are many reports of this), but the male Cherokee marrying the female white lady was not as rare as you might believe. The VA colonial legislature had a bill introduced by Patrick Henry to encourage whites to marry with Native Americans - land was going to be granted to them if they did so! Probably this was to assimilate and maybe "subdue" the N/A. The early US policy (George Washington's) was also along that line - it was not until later (early-mid 1800s) that it became a "bad" thing to intermarry with Native Americans. Also, those early histories were very slanted/biased - one has to look at factual info like the treaty where the Cherokee sold that area of southwestern VA to the British (which I described above in 1761). And maps on-line showing the Cherokee lands in the 1700s which go into southwest VA and later, after 1761, go from the VA/NC line to Ga to Tn to AR. There were thousands of Cherokee in that area from the late 1700s-1835. Also, one of the leaders of the Cherokee in the early 1800s married a white lady - his name was John Ridge - from his father's Cherokee name "He who walks on the mt. ridge." And the Cherokee chief in the early 1800s, John Knox was only about 1/4 Cherokee! His father was white and the mother only 1/2 Cherokee. Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.2.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Actually the Cherokee were in that area of what later became Henry, Pitts., and PCVA until 1761 when they sold that land to the British by a treaty where the British paid them for that land. There definity had been Cherokee in that area for yrs. It was one of their main hunting grounds and some had started to settle but were pushed south into NC by British settlers moving in so they sold to the British. Then some individual Cherokee stayed behind as our guy (b c 1700) did. He was probably the Robert (called Robert "Sr" later in Henry Co.,VA) Hooker who acquired land in the 1740s and 50s in the area that became Pitts. and Henry Co., VA when those counties were formed. There are land records of this. His son b c 1730 in that area was said to be full-blood Cherokee by MANY of his descendants in the Guion Rolls (probably was only 1/2 or so Cherokee). This son b c 1730s was called Robin/Robert (jr) Hooker. He and his wife Alice/Ali also bought and sold land in Henry Co.,VA in the 1870s and 1880s. Their children (for sure sons Wm b c 1755 and Samuel b c 1765 and probably some other sons named Robert [b c 1761 who lived in PCVA] and maybe a James and John - who probably went to Randolph Co., NC) were born in that area of what became Pitts and Henry Co.,VA along the NC line and lived in the area of Henry, along the Dan River, which became PCVA when PCVA was formed. So there is much info on Cherokee in that area. Later after the Trail of Tears roundup c 1835 the Eastern Cherokee who had still been on the Cherokee land and escaped and hid re-located in central western NC (Cherokee, NC) along the Blue Ridge in an area which had been part of their traditional lands which stretched originally from southwest VA into NC and down to GA and west into TN and AR. First, they gave up southwest VA to the British and later slowly gave up land to the new US Gov't due to broken treaties in the 1800s which is why the law suit was brought which led to the Eastern Cherokee Funds and the Guion Miller Rolls. Because our Hooker guys had been living "off" Cherokee lands in 1835 when the Cherokee were rounded up in the Trail of Tears, and because they lived as "white" in white communities for a long time before 1835, they were turned down for the Cherokee funds as were many from PCVA. Many families from the area of the present PCVA have a long history of Cherokee heritage and there are Cherokee and other older Native American (maybe ancestors of the Cherokee) sites in PCVA. As you said earlier the long history of Cherokee heritage in the PCVA families, and their knowledge of their ancestors and their customs is evidence of this ancestry. Also, this Q1a3 haplo has been seen in present day "official" Cherokee males. More reeserch on that is now being done by several groups. Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: drdjones Surnames: Hooker, Lawson, Sizemore Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Here is the real problem that you face in trying to confirm Cherokee ancestry. There were no Cherokees in Stokes or Surry counties when the Hookers, Sizemores and other families who do sometimes show a y-Indian haplogroup. This is because the Cherokees lived in the higher mountains, not on the foothills or the plains of NC. There is a book that you can read for free at Google books written by John Brickell in 1737 called "The Natural History of North Carolina". He spent a lot of time discussing the Indians and explains very well who lived where, and the fact that there were very few Indians by numbers anywhere in NC, as well as why there were likely few white males with an Indian y-haplogroup but perhaps many with an Indian mt-DNA haplogroup. The NC Indians died off very quickly after 1700. Likewise, the Indians were long gone from Patrick County and surrounding counties by the time the families from Stokes/Surry arrived in those counties. There is a written account of this from around 1820. A few settlers did reach Eastern Tennesse while the Cherokees were there and there are several Tennessee Supreme Court records--also free at Google--that identify where the Indians in Tennessee lived--primarily around the Chattanooga (and Cherokee County, NC), and Central Tennessee. Many were removed in the removal years, and some of they came back after removal. The pre-removal Cherokees were not friendly. There are numerous reports from General Sevier and in the newspapers of the 1790s in Tennessee about the murders of whites. When the Sizemores and related families from Stokes/Surry counties were rejected from the Eastern Cherokee roll, they were not reject because they were not Indian, but because they were not Cherokee Indians. You should go online at footnote.com and read the applications yourself. I think you will begin to see that the evaluators were very careful in their evaluation, and they had many official records of which Indian groups lived where and when to work with. They also had very good records of Indian groups living throughout the area. If you or your ancestor did not live in close proximity to known locations of the Cherokees at conception or you or the ancestor or were not on a previous roll, then you had no valid claim to be a Cherokee in the government's view. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Hooker, Lawson Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.1.1.1.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: I am replying here instead of through Ancestry. Due to the early date of David's birth you may never know his father's given/first name. Have you found his mother in 1800 on a census or do you know her parents to find her father on a tax list if that 1800 census where she lived is not available? If you could find the Hooker family near her family in 1800 it might be a possibility, but you may never know the father's given name as we may never know the exact given name of the father ( b c 1750s) of our 6 Hooker brothers line. But you do know, from the unusual yDNA haplo, that he was a Hooker male from the line of that area around PCVA where this original Native American male took the Hooker name or maybe a Native American brother/relative of that "Hooker" first male. So you can trace David back to this Hooker male b c 1700 as he was the "first" with that name. The Crowe match is the same type situation as yours; the father was a male from this Hooker line. That was a Crowe female at some point had a child with a Hooker male and gave the child the mother's maiden name. Or maybe with the Crowe it was an adoption. I have not spoken with them, but they do not match other Crowes, just Hookers, from what I have seen. He is listed on our Hooker yDNa site. There were several marriages/liasons between Lawsons and Hookers (in that NA line) in the 1800s all along the VA/NC/TN border there. Again, there could have been a brother/male relative (who did not take the Hooker surname) to our first Native American (the Hooker surnamed one), but they would all trace back to the same Native American male ancestor in that era - late 1600s/early 1700s. Celeste (I think we have coresponded before) adellaholly@yahoo.com Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: jlakin46 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: There were N/A who did not even apply in an effort to keep their heritage a secret too. All of things we've discussed make it plain that families who have a tradition of N/A ancestry, probably do! I have noticed when families get together for weddings and funerals that the men stand outside talking about jobs and cars while the women stand in the kitchen talking about who married who and how many kids thet had! LOL Janet Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: jlakin46 Surnames: Lawson Hooker Crowe Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.2.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi Celeste, Yes, our David Lawson is the one whose DNA matches the Hooker line. We also have matches with the surname of Crowe (earliest known, about 1820) in KY. The match with the Hooker family has certianly given us new areas to explore while searching for our David's father, but after 12/15 years we still don't know who he was! Janet Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CelesteHolly51 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.lawson/6860.1.1.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Since these were probably Cherokee descendants many of the women had children out of wedlock - which was not looked down on by their relatives/people in this area. The Cherokee were matriarchal and heir customs were passed on with many descendants following the matriarchal/female dominated customs of the Cherokee. This led to many children having their mother's maiden name as their surname although they DNA match a male of another surname. i.e. your David who matches the Hooker male line. (If you are the Janet whose David does match this yDNa Q1a3 haplo.) Celeste Celeste Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.