In a message dated 03/14/2000 9:12:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, linda-s-t@webtv.net (on the NATIVEAMERICAN-DELMARVA-L@rootsweb.com List) writes: << BTW, I am also distantly related to Floyd Handsor who I believe was once a member of this list. I don't know if he still is. >> Hi, Floyd is a member of the Mitsawokett list. Don't know whether he is on this one now. His e-mail is bugs@gnat.net Paul Heinegg and Ned Heite disagree 'somewhat' about the disappearance of Indians from Delmarva (go to the Heite links at http://www.mitsawokett.com/FamilyHistories/Index.html/#Family%20History%20Repo rts or directly at http://home.dmv.com/~eheite/index.html). Thomas Brown seems to side with the Heinegg camp. Tom's recent communication on this list, "They (the Piscataway) do not have a continuous history of Indian bloodlines. The contemporary group traces back to people who identified as white, black, or mulatto. There is not a single data point identifying any of their colonial ancestors as Indian," says it all. When data points are in, the Piscataway are out. The same can be said for the Nanticoke and Lenni Lenape of Delaware. But what is "continuous history?" We presume Mssrs. Heinegg and Brown mean it is one which can be found in the official documents of government and in books, logs, journals and papers left by contemporaries which either detail the lives of the important personages of the age of study or which permit construction of interpretive accounts of an individual's life. C.A. Weslager, 1980, in an address at the Bridgeton Indian Center, Bridgeton, New Jersey (see http://www.mitsawokett.com/MainMenu.html --scroll down a little more than half-way and click on "Notes from Interviews": "I should say that many of these so called Moors were aware of Indian ancestry, even though they were vague about Tribal affiliations. My own conclusion after very careful study, was that practically all of them had Indian antecedents. Of course, none of them were full blood Indians: some of them were descended from the Lenape or Delawares while others had Nanticoke Indian background, their parents or other relatives having moved to Cheswold from the Nanticoke Indian community in Indian River Hundred in Sussex County." Of course most professional historians will pooh-pooh this just as Brown put down Frank Speck, who worked with Weslager for awhile. From a historian's point of view, yes, there is no paper trail to back-up claims of Indian descent. It is sadly amusing to consider that the white man, hundreds of years ago, caused the aborigines to have little to no recorded history. They scared the bejesus out of them by expelling individuals who insisted on being called 'Indian' and then kept the quiescent ones from becoming members of the ruling body politic. Today it seems scholars want to continue this 'grand' tradition by ignoring family lore and concentrating on a rigid code developed to track the histories of the 'haves' of society. We understand the historians' problem--there must be standards by which events of the past can be understood. But, give us a break--please!! We are seeking out the lives of people who have very little recorded history, just as the have-nots in most all societies. The Delaware Genealogical Society is working on the Delaware Families Project to document all families in Delaware 1787-1800. Ned Heite says, "The Society's latest project is the Delaware Families 1787-1800 directory, which will eventually be a compendium of the state's population at the time of the Constitution. The team compiling the directory is anxious to publish only the most thoroughly documented entries. The only way the project will be fully comprehensive is if everyone contributes." Their standards for inclusion are similar to those Heinegg and Brown ask for. We have not been able to meet those standards. The records don't exist or have not yet been found. There is no provision to allow oral history. A member of the Mitsawokett List, who identity is known only by his screen name, had the following observation: From: Rarihokwats Rarihokwats <four_arrows@canada.com> Greetings. While everyone wants genealogy to be as accurate as possible, there needs to be equity when we have a historical situation where one people controlled the historical record and basically excluded another people from it. For the State Society at this point to insist upon everyone meeting standards which tend to favour the established order and discriminate against others who have been historically excluded, serves only to perpetuate the exclusion. I would suggest that you all who are close to the scene negotiate with the State Society some kind of "Scrutiny Committee", and if four or five of the most expert of you agree upon the facts that have been preserved through oral and community history, the State Society should accept it as much as they do the scrawling of a clerk two hundred years ago. Linda, you asked, "My questions is simple, "Who is correct?" The answer is--no one. The work is ongoing. Rick Gildemeister authored a piece on tri-racial isolates which we have included on our web site (http://www.mitsawokett.com/MoorsOfDelaware/trirace2.html). He says of this disagreement, "As far as Ned and Paul are concerned, at this early stage in research, there are few absolute givens, so it's good that there be these polar opposites, so that synthesizers can tease out what seems reasonable and attempt to further understanding." Hope we can be successful at our mutual undertaking! - ----------------------------------------- Aquabetty@aol.com Family History page www.mitsawokett.com Betty & Ray Terry 11505 Montgomery Rd. Beltsville, MD 20705 301-937-1766 Every time I get the urge to exercise, I lie down till the feeling passes.