Do you have the photos of the graveyard where they are buried? I was there last weekend. Mona ____________________________________________________________ Penny Stock Jumping 2000% Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c44efdc18b4838614bst01duc
Hi, again, There is probably an analogy I should also make concerning the issue of who is a Native American. (By the way, the term "American Indian" is now back in vogue among "Native Americans.") I have Native American ancestry, but I am not legally a Native American, in the same sense that I have Irish ancestry, but I am not legally a citizen of Ireland. The inability to secure legal membership in a particular tribe does not negate that tribal ancestry. Thanks, Sharlotte -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Donnelly Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 10:15 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses Hi, Carter and everyone, That is so cool that you are an anthropologist. So am I, but a cultural anthropologist. (I am a Professor of Anthropology at Northern Kentucky University. My personal NKU web site is http://www.nku.edu/~neelys.) My speciality is Native Americans. I thought everyone on the Pate email list might like to see something I wrote, below, about "Who is an Indian?" Blood Quantum and Who Is an Indian By Sharlotte Neely (Donnelly), NKU Anthropology Who is defined as an Indian and how much Indian blood quantum (blood degree) is required vary over time, from nation to nation (the USA and Canada), from government bureau to bureau (Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of the Census), from state to state, and from tribe to tribe. Most, but not all, federally recognized Indian tribes hold lands with federal reservation status. There are three federally-recognized groups of Cherokee Indians in the USA. Only the North Carolina group has federal reservation status to their lands. The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians in North Carolina used to set the minimum blood degree at 1/32 (the equivalent of having one fullblood great-great-great grandparent) but eventually raised it to 1/16 (the equivalent of having one fullblood great-great grandparent). When this happened, some Cherokees found they were no longer legally Cherokees. The Keetowah Cherokees in Oklahoma set their minimum even higher, at ¼ (the equivalent of having one fullblood grandparent), while the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma has done away with blood degree altogether. The majority of federally-recognized tribes in the USA set the minimum blood degree at ¼, but some set it even higher. The Florida Miccosukee, Mississippi Choctaw, and St. Croix Chippewa, for example, set the blood degree at ½ (the equivalent of having one fullblood parent), while the Utah Utes have the highest blood degree at 5/8 (the equivalent of having one fullblood parent in addition to one parent who is at least ¼ blood degree). Canada used to define Indianness as having a father who was recognized as an Indian (mothers did not count), but in the 1980s Canada switched to a system of blood quantum. The USA's Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) recognizes the various blood degrees required for tribal membership but requires a minimum of ¼ for things like higher education grants. Beginning in 1960 the USA's Bureau of the Census has required only self-identification as Indian to be counted as Indian on the census. Before 1960 individual census takers decided who was and was not Indian, usually based either on whether someone physically looked Indian or had what seemed to be an Indian surname. Many census takers counted Indians as "mulattos" (mixed race people), even if they were fullblood Indians. Some states have no definition of Indianness while many have less precise definitions than the federal government. Some states, like South Carolina, with state Indian reservations, are more precise. The state of North Carolina has a government agency to deal with those they recognize as Indian. The federal government recognizes only one North Carolina tribe, the Cherokees, as being Indians while the state recognizes many others, including the Lumbee, Waccamaw Siouans, and Haliwas. So, the answer to who is an Indian is that it depends on the time period, the country, the federal bureau, the state, and/or the particular tribe. But what is the motivation for even attempting to define Indianness. The answer involves Indian treaty obligations. In the USA American Indians are unique among all ethnic groups in often having treaty obligations that flow to them from the federal government. While these obligations are often insignificant and inexpensive, the federal government still feels obligated to define who can and who cannot be a recipient of these obligations. Contemporary Indians are the descendants of people once recognized by the federal government as independent, sovereign nations with whom treaties could be concluded. At the end of the 19th century, the U.S. Congress ended the practice of treaty making with Indians but affirmed that all existing Indian treaties were still legal, binding documents. So, to continue to fulfill the obligations of these treaties, the federal government must come up with a definition of who is an Indian. Thanks, Sharlotte [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of B. Carter Pate Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 9:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses May I add a few comments on this topic? I taught some college classes in anthropology, but am not an expert. The following are rather general, but you might want to discuss them with an active expert who will know more about DNA studies: A number of genetic traits are found in European populations which, when they come together in individuals, may give an impression of resembling a Native American. (Which native American? There are varieties among them, too.) Among these are straight, black hair; dark eyes; rounded skull shape; prominent features (nose, brow, chin, etc.);, dark skin; high cheekbones; etc. These seldom are transmitted as a single unit, but are inherited in very diverse combinations. Witness how siblings may or may not resemble each other. I know a Latin American family, Cuban father, Mexican mother, with two sons very different in appearance. One the typical "romantic Latin": light, curly hair, medium height, general European appearance; the other son tall, dark, straight hair--easily mistaken for a tall Pakistani, rather than Latin. In tracing DNA connections Y-DNA depends on only one chromosome, out of 46 chromosomes. If we have some of these traits, they might have come from Indian ancestry in the other 45 chromosomes, and even be of Europopean origin. mDNA (mitochondrial DNA) is a second source, which might be roughly equivalent to a chromosomal source of DNA (more or less). So our DNÅ studies suggest only part of our genetic inheritance (two of 47 sources, not necessarily percentages.)and show links to only part of our ancestry. (I have yet to explore what the "Family" link studies mean.) So appearances may be quite deceptive and don't necessarily prove ancestry. Even a complete DNA analysis might state only probabilities, not absolute proof. Native American ancestry could be something one might be proud of, or might feign for personal or political reasons. *** Legislators and law enforcement personnel in Arizona would do well to consider the implications of this, as would responsible genealogists. Cheers! B. Carter Pate On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:32 PM, [email protected] wrote: > It has to be a direct daughter to daughter line.? We went to a lot of > trouble finding that line.? My Great Grand father had just one > daughter.? But we found two.? One would have nothing to do with > it.? The other one was a nurse and said sure.? My sister paid for > it and it turned out no Indian blood, from the one who looked like > an Indian.? My Dad looked Indian too.??? It really makes no > difference to me either.? After all the Indians were here first and > we took the land away from them.? So when we moved from Houston I > gave my part back to the Indians (in my mind anyway). > > Nita remind me next week and I will look at those census records for > you. Clovis > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gerald Pait <[email protected]> > To: Joel Pate <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 3:33 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > > > Joel: I am probably incorrect, wouldn't be the first time, but I > think I > remember that if there is any native American ancestry in the > family, it > would show up in female DNA? I'm not sure where I heard that but maybe > between you and AJ, you would know for sure. > Jerry > > > > > -------Original Message------- > > From: [email protected] > Date: 7/14/2010 1:22:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. > > For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee > Indian. > We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our line and the > report came back T2, European. The gg grandmother certainly looked > Indian > in her pictures and was a "healer" in the traditional Indian > culture manner > so - that has left us up a tree so to speak. Also, her rather tall, > headstone is shaped like a tall house with a steep roof, has chiseled > tepees on the bottom of the roof part on both sides, then moves on > to what > appears to be a log cabin on each side and the top appears to be a > church > including a cross at the pinnacle. The center section has a > narrative. > This is not a new headstone. Unfortunately, we left our camera in > another > vehicle and no one had cameras to record what the headstone > actually said > but as I remember it gave a glowing report of her life and how much > she was > going to be missed. I do not recall any reference to her being > Indian on > the headstone. > > We have entertained the thought that perhaps the gggg grandfather was > actually the Indian, passing along the features and the lore of > Indian blood > We haven't found a direct descendant on the grandfather's side to > test. > > Next item to consider was the recent TV documentary on who was > actually in > North America first - eons before Columbus. One of the interviews > was with > a group of Cherokees. They speculated they were actually of very > early > European extraction but the documentary did not give us DNA proof > of this > belief by this group of Cherokees. > > If that was actually correct, then at least some of the Cherokee > tribes > could have been very, very early European, giving us the European > mtDNA > results. > > So - will the real Cherokee tribe stand up?? > > Last item: Does anyone have free access to late 1860- early 1900 > census > records for TX? Perhaps I could recheck my gg grandmother's census > record > for the "I", etc. There is a possibility that she would not have > noted > herself as Indian since they moved to an area (Edwards Co, TX) > where they > had a horrendous Comanche raid. Being Indian might not have been the > popular thing to claim at that time. I believe they were in Gonzales > earlier. > > Nita Fry > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 7:27 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > Donna that is a good point to make for those who may not realize those > columns > > are important.? I was told all of my life that we had American > Indian Blood > on > > my fathers side of the family.? But DNA tells us no.? My great > grandfather's > > brother is listed in Oklahoma as Indian, but that is because he > married the > > niece of the governor and some how was listed on the Indian rolls.? > A bit of > > crooked politics I assume.? They got lots of land and he even had a > town > named > > after him but he was no Indian. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DMariee <[email protected]> > > To: pate <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 6:03 pm > > Subject: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses > > > > > > > > > > I found this very interesting thought I would share, perhaps many > of you > already > > > > > > knew this anyway.? This is according to Ancestry Com, "Pay special > attention > to > > > > the columns designating color and place of birth. You may find a > Native > American > > > > > > ancestor listed as I, In, Ind, B (black) or M for mulatto. It might > change > from > > > > census to census." > > > > Donna Hassan > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hi, Carter and everyone, That is so cool that you are an anthropologist. So am I, but a cultural anthropologist. (I am a Professor of Anthropology at Northern Kentucky University. My personal NKU web site is http://www.nku.edu/~neelys.) My speciality is Native Americans. I thought everyone on the Pate email list might like to see something I wrote, below, about "Who is an Indian?" Blood Quantum and Who Is an Indian By Sharlotte Neely (Donnelly), NKU Anthropology Who is defined as an Indian and how much Indian blood quantum (blood degree) is required vary over time, from nation to nation (the USA and Canada), from government bureau to bureau (Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of the Census), from state to state, and from tribe to tribe. Most, but not all, federally recognized Indian tribes hold lands with federal reservation status. There are three federally-recognized groups of Cherokee Indians in the USA. Only the North Carolina group has federal reservation status to their lands. The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians in North Carolina used to set the minimum blood degree at 1/32 (the equivalent of having one fullblood great-great-great grandparent) but eventually raised it to 1/16 (the equivalent of having one fullblood great-great grandparent). When this happened, some Cherokees found they were no longer legally Cherokees. The Keetowah Cherokees in Oklahoma set their minimum even higher, at ¼ (the equivalent of having one fullblood grandparent), while the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma has done away with blood degree altogether. The majority of federally-recognized tribes in the USA set the minimum blood degree at ¼, but some set it even higher. The Florida Miccosukee, Mississippi Choctaw, and St. Croix Chippewa, for example, set the blood degree at ½ (the equivalent of having one fullblood parent), while the Utah Utes have the highest blood degree at 5/8 (the equivalent of having one fullblood parent in addition to one parent who is at least ¼ blood degree). Canada used to define Indianness as having a father who was recognized as an Indian (mothers did not count), but in the 1980s Canada switched to a system of blood quantum. The USA's Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) recognizes the various blood degrees required for tribal membership but requires a minimum of ¼ for things like higher education grants. Beginning in 1960 the USA's Bureau of the Census has required only self-identification as Indian to be counted as Indian on the census. Before 1960 individual census takers decided who was and was not Indian, usually based either on whether someone physically looked Indian or had what seemed to be an Indian surname. Many census takers counted Indians as "mulattos" (mixed race people), even if they were fullblood Indians. Some states have no definition of Indianness while many have less precise definitions than the federal government. Some states, like South Carolina, with state Indian reservations, are more precise. The state of North Carolina has a government agency to deal with those they recognize as Indian. The federal government recognizes only one North Carolina tribe, the Cherokees, as being Indians while the state recognizes many others, including the Lumbee, Waccamaw Siouans, and Haliwas. So, the answer to who is an Indian is that it depends on the time period, the country, the federal bureau, the state, and/or the particular tribe. But what is the motivation for even attempting to define Indianness. The answer involves Indian treaty obligations. In the USA American Indians are unique among all ethnic groups in often having treaty obligations that flow to them from the federal government. While these obligations are often insignificant and inexpensive, the federal government still feels obligated to define who can and who cannot be a recipient of these obligations. Contemporary Indians are the descendants of people once recognized by the federal government as independent, sovereign nations with whom treaties could be concluded. At the end of the 19th century, the U.S. Congress ended the practice of treaty making with Indians but affirmed that all existing Indian treaties were still legal, binding documents. So, to continue to fulfill the obligations of these treaties, the federal government must come up with a definition of who is an Indian. Thanks, Sharlotte [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of B. Carter Pate Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 9:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses May I add a few comments on this topic? I taught some college classes in anthropology, but am not an expert. The following are rather general, but you might want to discuss them with an active expert who will know more about DNA studies: A number of genetic traits are found in European populations which, when they come together in individuals, may give an impression of resembling a Native American. (Which native American? There are varieties among them, too.) Among these are straight, black hair; dark eyes; rounded skull shape; prominent features (nose, brow, chin, etc.);, dark skin; high cheekbones; etc. These seldom are transmitted as a single unit, but are inherited in very diverse combinations. Witness how siblings may or may not resemble each other. I know a Latin American family, Cuban father, Mexican mother, with two sons very different in appearance. One the typical "romantic Latin": light, curly hair, medium height, general European appearance; the other son tall, dark, straight hair--easily mistaken for a tall Pakistani, rather than Latin. In tracing DNA connections Y-DNA depends on only one chromosome, out of 46 chromosomes. If we have some of these traits, they might have come from Indian ancestry in the other 45 chromosomes, and even be of Europopean origin. mDNA (mitochondrial DNA) is a second source, which might be roughly equivalent to a chromosomal source of DNA (more or less). So our DNÅ studies suggest only part of our genetic inheritance (two of 47 sources, not necessarily percentages.)and show links to only part of our ancestry. (I have yet to explore what the "Family" link studies mean.) So appearances may be quite deceptive and don't necessarily prove ancestry. Even a complete DNA analysis might state only probabilities, not absolute proof. Native American ancestry could be something one might be proud of, or might feign for personal or political reasons. *** Legislators and law enforcement personnel in Arizona would do well to consider the implications of this, as would responsible genealogists. Cheers! B. Carter Pate On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:32 PM, [email protected] wrote: > It has to be a direct daughter to daughter line.? We went to a lot > of trouble finding that line.? My Great Grand father had just one > daughter.? But we found two.? One would have nothing to do with > it.? The other one was a nurse and said sure.? My sister paid for > it and it turned out no Indian blood, from the one who looked like > an Indian.? My Dad looked Indian too.??? It really makes no > difference to me either.? After all the Indians were here first and > we took the land away from them.? So when we moved from Houston I > gave my part back to the Indians (in my mind anyway). > > Nita remind me next week and I will look at those census records > for you. > Clovis > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gerald Pait <[email protected]> > To: Joel Pate <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 3:33 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > > > Joel: I am probably incorrect, wouldn't be the first time, but I > think I > remember that if there is any native American ancestry in the > family, it > would show up in female DNA? I'm not sure where I heard that but maybe > between you and AJ, you would know for sure. > Jerry > > > > > -------Original Message------- > > From: [email protected] > Date: 7/14/2010 1:22:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. > > For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee > Indian. > We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our line and the > report came back T2, European. The gg grandmother certainly looked > Indian > in her pictures and was a "healer" in the traditional Indian > culture manner > so - that has left us up a tree so to speak. Also, her rather tall, > headstone is shaped like a tall house with a steep roof, has chiseled > tepees on the bottom of the roof part on both sides, then moves on > to what > appears to be a log cabin on each side and the top appears to be a > church > including a cross at the pinnacle. The center section has a > narrative. > This is not a new headstone. Unfortunately, we left our camera in > another > vehicle and no one had cameras to record what the headstone > actually said > but as I remember it gave a glowing report of her life and how much > she was > going to be missed. I do not recall any reference to her being > Indian on > the headstone. > > We have entertained the thought that perhaps the gggg grandfather was > actually the Indian, passing along the features and the lore of > Indian blood > We haven't found a direct descendant on the grandfather's side to > test. > > Next item to consider was the recent TV documentary on who was > actually in > North America first - eons before Columbus. One of the interviews > was with > a group of Cherokees. They speculated they were actually of very > early > European extraction but the documentary did not give us DNA proof > of this > belief by this group of Cherokees. > > If that was actually correct, then at least some of the Cherokee > tribes > could have been very, very early European, giving us the European > mtDNA > results. > > So - will the real Cherokee tribe stand up?? > > Last item: Does anyone have free access to late 1860- early 1900 > census > records for TX? Perhaps I could recheck my gg grandmother's census > record > for the "I", etc. There is a possibility that she would not have > noted > herself as Indian since they moved to an area (Edwards Co, TX) > where they > had a horrendous Comanche raid. Being Indian might not have been the > popular thing to claim at that time. I believe they were in Gonzales > earlier. > > Nita Fry > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 7:27 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > Donna that is a good point to make for those who may not realize those > columns > > are important.? I was told all of my life that we had American > Indian Blood > on > > my fathers side of the family.? But DNA tells us no.? My great > grandfather's > > brother is listed in Oklahoma as Indian, but that is because he > married the > > niece of the governor and some how was listed on the Indian rolls.? > A bit of > > crooked politics I assume.? They got lots of land and he even had a > town > named > > after him but he was no Indian. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DMariee <[email protected]> > > To: pate <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 6:03 pm > > Subject: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses > > > > > > > > > > I found this very interesting thought I would share, perhaps many > of you > already > > > > > > knew this anyway.? This is according to Ancestry Com, "Pay special > attention > to > > > > the columns designating color and place of birth. You may find a > Native > American > > > > > > ancestor listed as I, In, Ind, B (black) or M for mulatto. It might > change > from > > > > census to census." > > > > Donna Hassan > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] 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 [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
B. Carter Pate, You are a wealth of information. I am certain that others on this list have benefited from your recent informative postings. I know I have and I appreciate your taking the time to post the long explanation/insight into the anthropology side of this Native American conundrum. I took the liberty of forwarding your comments along to my Taylor cousins, also. Learning the history of who/how/why expands our understanding of those who preceded us. I really appreciate the attention to detail and sharing of information that many on this list have provided all these years. 'Those like Bill and me, coming late to the Pate research, would have no knowledge about Bill's lineage without the many on this listserve who took us in and provided so much older research that we didn't have to retrieve. Couldn't have done it, in fact. I subscribe to several surname lists but this Pate list has the best posts and the most diverse population of participants - always willing to share their knowledge and their research whether their lineage was the same or not - Pate is a Pate, DNA match or not. Thanks one and all. Nita and Bill Fry -----Original Message----- From: B. Carter Pate <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, Jul 18, 2010 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses Many southeastern NAs sometimes built over a grave a small houselike edifice, such as might be pictured on the gravestone you describe. Yours would be later, reflecting greater assimilation. I believe this was done among the Cherokees. B. Carter Pate On Jul 14, 2010, at 2:43 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Good idea and we had considered it but we already knew that this > family was from very early NC Cherokee - which ever side of the > early family it came from - male or female. The connection had > already been made before moving on to TN, to MO and then to TX. > Some stayed in MO or moved on further west. None were in the Trail > of Tears or similar displacement. > > To our knowledge, no one seriously tried to followup on the > enrollment in the OK Territory Cherokee Nation since that wasn't > the group they came from and in TX, they moved to a very isolated > area in Edwards Co., TX, and stayed there for several generations. > Also, we didn't have an Indian name to refer to. > > How much is actually fact and how much family lore, don't know but > at least 4 generations have carried the story forward - just don't > have enough really early information to tie it together. Our > cousin made a dedicated trip to MO to check out the male side of > the family that is supposed to be our connection and they deny > Indian connection although it is all over the internet that that > family's researchers do claim the early male was the Indian. Who > knows. > > Not a burning issue for me. I believe one side or the other was of > Indian extraction generations back. Many of us carry the slightly > darker skin and some Indian facial features. Great Great > Grandmother definitely looked Indian as did her mother. The > headstone certainly suggests she was born in a tepee, went on to a > log house then to Heaven (the church + steeple), > > Thanks for the advice. > > Nita Fry > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 1:01 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > Have you ever tried to make contact with the Cherokee Nation's > tribe in > > Tahlequah Oklahoma.? (The Capitol of the Cherokee Nation) also the > > Historical Museum in Ohlahoma City has a fabulous collection of Indian > > records which also includes those who tried to claim Indian blood but > > were refused enrollment. Just a thought. ellen > > > > > >> I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. > >> > >> For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee >> Indian. > >> We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our line >> and the > >> > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PATE- > [email protected] > > 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 PATE- > [email protected] 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 [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Many southeastern NAs sometimes built over a grave a small houselike edifice, such as might be pictured on the gravestone you describe. Yours would be later, reflecting greater assimilation. I believe this was done among the Cherokees. B. Carter Pate On Jul 14, 2010, at 2:43 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Good idea and we had considered it but we already knew that this > family was from very early NC Cherokee - which ever side of the > early family it came from - male or female. The connection had > already been made before moving on to TN, to MO and then to TX. > Some stayed in MO or moved on further west. None were in the Trail > of Tears or similar displacement. > > To our knowledge, no one seriously tried to followup on the > enrollment in the OK Territory Cherokee Nation since that wasn't > the group they came from and in TX, they moved to a very isolated > area in Edwards Co., TX, and stayed there for several generations. > Also, we didn't have an Indian name to refer to. > > How much is actually fact and how much family lore, don't know but > at least 4 generations have carried the story forward - just don't > have enough really early information to tie it together. Our > cousin made a dedicated trip to MO to check out the male side of > the family that is supposed to be our connection and they deny > Indian connection although it is all over the internet that that > family's researchers do claim the early male was the Indian. Who > knows. > > Not a burning issue for me. I believe one side or the other was of > Indian extraction generations back. Many of us carry the slightly > darker skin and some Indian facial features. Great Great > Grandmother definitely looked Indian as did her mother. The > headstone certainly suggests she was born in a tepee, went on to a > log house then to Heaven (the church + steeple), > > Thanks for the advice. > > Nita Fry > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 1:01 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > Have you ever tried to make contact with the Cherokee Nation's > tribe in > > Tahlequah Oklahoma.? (The Capitol of the Cherokee Nation) also the > > Historical Museum in Ohlahoma City has a fabulous collection of Indian > > records which also includes those who tried to claim Indian blood but > > were refused enrollment. Just a thought. ellen > > > > > >> I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. > >> > >> For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee >> Indian. > >> We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our line >> and the > >> > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PATE- > [email protected] > > 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 PATE- > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message
The extent of assimilation of European genes into the Cherokees from 1780 to the time of Cherokee removal (1839) was significant. John Ross, principal Chief of the Cherokees who tried to resist removal non-violently, was only 1/8 Cherokee, being descended from a line of European traders who married daughters from previous mixed marriages. The fathers were traders who lived among the Cherokees in East Tennessee. If there were a mother with European mDNA in the line of marriages, there would be little or no trace of Cherokee mDNA among the offspring, but there might have been considerable genes on the chromosomes, enough to produce an "Indian appearance". Since each generation "loses" randomly half of the chromosomal genes available from one's parents, the remaining genes one receives may incline toward resembling either ancestry. I have seen individuals of very normal European appearance among Canadian Mohawks who fully identified with Native American heritage. B. Carter Pate On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:21 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. > > For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee > Indian. We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our > line and the report came back T2, European. The gg grandmother > certainly looked Indian in her pictures and was a "healer" in the > traditional Indian culture manner so - that has left us up a tree > so to speak. Also, her rather tall, headstone is shaped like a > tall house with a steep roof, has chiseled tepees on the bottom of > the roof part on both sides, then moves on to what appears to be a > log cabin on each side and the top appears to be a church including > a cross at the pinnacle. The center section has a narrative. This > is not a new headstone. Unfortunately, we left our camera in > another vehicle and no one had cameras to record what the headstone > actually said but as I remember it gave a glowing report of her > life and how much she was going to be missed. I do not recall any > reference to her being Indian on the headstone. > > We have entertained the thought that perhaps the gggg grandfather > was actually the Indian, passing along the features and the lore of > Indian blood. We haven't found a direct descendant on the > grandfather's side to test. > > Next item to consider was the recent TV documentary on who was > actually in North America first - eons before Columbus. One of the > interviews was with a group of Cherokees. They speculated they > were actually of very early European extraction but the documentary > did not give us DNA proof of this belief by this group of Cherokees. > > If that was actually correct, then at least some of the Cherokee > tribes could have been very, very early European, giving us the > European mtDNA results. > > So - will the real Cherokee tribe stand up?? > > Last item: Does anyone have free access to late 1860- early 1900 > census records for TX? Perhaps I could recheck my gg grandmother's > census record for the "I", etc. There is a possibility that she > would not have noted herself as Indian since they moved to an area > (Edwards Co, TX) where they had a horrendous Comanche raid. Being > Indian might not have been the popular thing to claim at that > time. I believe they were in Gonzales earlier. > > Nita Fry > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 7:27 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > Donna that is a good point to make for those who may not realize > those columns > > are important.? I was told all of my life that we had American > Indian Blood on > > my fathers side of the family.? But DNA tells us no.? My great > grandfather's > > brother is listed in Oklahoma as Indian, but that is because he > married the > > niece of the governor and some how was listed on the Indian rolls.? > A bit of > > crooked politics I assume.? They got lots of land and he even had a > town named > > after him but he was no Indian. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DMariee <[email protected]> > > To: pate <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 6:03 pm > > Subject: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses > > > > > > > > > > I found this very interesting thought I would share, perhaps many > of you already > > > > > > knew this anyway.? This is according to Ancestry Com, "Pay special > attention to > > > > the columns designating color and place of birth. You may find a > Native American > > > > > > ancestor listed as I, In, Ind, B (black) or M for mulatto. It might > change from > > > > census to census." > > > > Donna Hassan > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PATE- > [email protected] > > > > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > > 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 PATE- > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message
May I add a few comments on this topic? I taught some college classes in anthropology, but am not an expert. The following are rather general, but you might want to discuss them with an active expert who will know more about DNA studies: • A number of genetic traits are found in European populations which, when they come together in individuals, may give an impression of resembling a Native American. (Which native American? There are varieties among them, too.) • Among these are straight, black hair; dark eyes; rounded skull shape; prominent features (nose, brow, chin, etc.);, dark skin; high cheekbones; etc. These seldom are transmitted as a single unit, but are inherited in very diverse combinations. Witness how siblings may or may not resemble each other. I know a Latin American family, Cuban father, Mexican mother, with two sons very different in appearance. One the typical "romantic Latin": light, curly hair, medium height, general European appearance; the other son tall, dark, straight hair--easily mistaken for a tall Pakistani, rather than Latin. • In tracing DNA connections Y-DNA depends on only one chromosome, out of 46 chromosomes. If we have some of these traits, they might have come from Indian ancestry in the other 45 chromosomes, and even be of Europopean origin. • mDNA (mitochondrial DNA) is a second source, which might be roughly equivalent to a chromosomal source of DNA (more or less). So our DNÅ studies suggest only part of our genetic inheritance (two of 47 sources, not necessarily percentages.)and show links to only part of our ancestry. • (I have yet to explore what the "Family" link studies mean.) •• So appearances may be quite deceptive and don't necessarily prove ancestry. Even a complete DNA analysis might state only probabilities, not absolute proof. Native American ancestry could be something one might be proud of, or might feign for personal or political reasons. *** Legislators and law enforcement personnel in Arizona would do well to consider the implications of this, as would responsible genealogists. Cheers! B. Carter Pate On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:32 PM, [email protected] wrote: > It has to be a direct daughter to daughter line.? We went to a lot > of trouble finding that line.? My Great Grand father had just one > daughter.? But we found two.? One would have nothing to do with > it.? The other one was a nurse and said sure.? My sister paid for > it and it turned out no Indian blood, from the one who looked like > an Indian.? My Dad looked Indian too.??? It really makes no > difference to me either.? After all the Indians were here first and > we took the land away from them.? So when we moved from Houston I > gave my part back to the Indians (in my mind anyway). > > Nita remind me next week and I will look at those census records > for you. > Clovis > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gerald Pait <[email protected]> > To: Joel Pate <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 3:33 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > > > Joel: I am probably incorrect, wouldn't be the first time, but I > think I > remember that if there is any native American ancestry in the > family, it > would show up in female DNA? I'm not sure where I heard that but maybe > between you and AJ, you would know for sure. > Jerry > > > > > -------Original Message------- > > From: [email protected] > Date: 7/14/2010 1:22:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. > > For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee > Indian. > We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our line and the > report came back T2, European. The gg grandmother certainly looked > Indian > in her pictures and was a "healer" in the traditional Indian > culture manner > so - that has left us up a tree so to speak. Also, her rather tall, > headstone is shaped like a tall house with a steep roof, has chiseled > tepees on the bottom of the roof part on both sides, then moves on > to what > appears to be a log cabin on each side and the top appears to be a > church > including a cross at the pinnacle. The center section has a > narrative. > This is not a new headstone. Unfortunately, we left our camera in > another > vehicle and no one had cameras to record what the headstone > actually said > but as I remember it gave a glowing report of her life and how much > she was > going to be missed. I do not recall any reference to her being > Indian on > the headstone. > > We have entertained the thought that perhaps the gggg grandfather was > actually the Indian, passing along the features and the lore of > Indian blood > We haven't found a direct descendant on the grandfather's side to > test. > > Next item to consider was the recent TV documentary on who was > actually in > North America first - eons before Columbus. One of the interviews > was with > a group of Cherokees. They speculated they were actually of very > early > European extraction but the documentary did not give us DNA proof > of this > belief by this group of Cherokees. > > If that was actually correct, then at least some of the Cherokee > tribes > could have been very, very early European, giving us the European > mtDNA > results. > > So - will the real Cherokee tribe stand up?? > > Last item: Does anyone have free access to late 1860- early 1900 > census > records for TX? Perhaps I could recheck my gg grandmother's census > record > for the "I", etc. There is a possibility that she would not have > noted > herself as Indian since they moved to an area (Edwards Co, TX) > where they > had a horrendous Comanche raid. Being Indian might not have been the > popular thing to claim at that time. I believe they were in Gonzales > earlier. > > Nita Fry > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 7:27 pm > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > Donna that is a good point to make for those who may not realize those > columns > > are important.? I was told all of my life that we had American > Indian Blood > on > > my fathers side of the family.? But DNA tells us no.? My great > grandfather's > > brother is listed in Oklahoma as Indian, but that is because he > married the > > niece of the governor and some how was listed on the Indian rolls.? > A bit of > > crooked politics I assume.? They got lots of land and he even had a > town > named > > after him but he was no Indian. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: DMariee <[email protected]> > > To: pate <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 6:03 pm > > Subject: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses > > > > > > > > > > I found this very interesting thought I would share, perhaps many > of you > already > > > > > > knew this anyway.? This is according to Ancestry Com, "Pay special > attention > to > > > > the columns designating color and place of birth. You may find a > Native > American > > > > > > ancestor listed as I, In, Ind, B (black) or M for mulatto. It might > change > from > > > > census to census." > > > > Donna Hassan > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] > 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 PATE- > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message
John Pate B: abt 1768, of Botetourt, VA, D: 22 Feb 1820, Ohio Co., KY also had a son William Pate B: abt 1806, KY one of his wives was Rebecca Midkiff, B: abt 1806, KY they had several children ... the one of interest here is William H. Pate, B: 1836, KY, md: 25 Jan 1853 a Lucy Ann French, B: 1836, KY; they like wise had a daughter Lucy A Pate B: 1869. I believe you can see the start of William H.'s family in the 1860, Bells, Ohio, KY Census. Not saying these are the right people, I'm just sharing what I have that seem close to what's posted. Not sure about a George maybe someones child?
Mona, I have a record of a Samuel Crawford Pate B: 27 Jan 1795, Hancock Co., KY; D: 24 Jan 1849, Hancock Co., KY. Father: John Pate B: abt 1768, of Botetourt, VA, D: 22 Feb 1820, Ohio Co., KY; Mother: Jennet Crawford B: Aug 1773, of Bedford, VA, D: 1839 Of Botetourt, VA; Spouse #1: Susannah "Sally" Barret, md: 6 Dec 1815. It appears he had 2 with Susannah. Spouse #2: Aritta Thrasher, md: 11 Mar 1824. about 10 children with Aritta
Sorry! Mona ____________________________________________________________ WEIRD! iPads for $23.74? Special Report: Apple iPads are being auctioned for an incredible 80% off! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c40e48f86c552f0d8bst06duc
Hi Mona, Was your James Isaac Pate married to Mrs. Elizabeth Marks on 10 Oct 1890 in Jefferson County, Illinois by any chance? If so, I just requested a copy of the marriage record from SIU-IRAD two days ago, thinking it may be one of "my" Jefferson Co. Pates! You may already know that Ralph and Clarence Pate, sons of the John Pate (1836-1889) who was a lawyer in Jefferson Co. IL, were in that area in the early 1900s, also. This John Pate is in Jinks' M44 line, and his descendants/relatives have tested out in the Edward Pate group in the Pate DNA Project. I would like to see your picture of James Isaac Pate, too. Can you e-mail me a copy, please? Thanks! Your "Almost Cousin", April ---- "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > I have found pictures of my gg grandfather and his brother. They both served in the civil war. DO either of these two look like anybody in your family? 20132 is Lisilious Green Pate. The other is James Issac Pate. > > > Mona > ____________________________________________________________ > LCD 42" TV for $26.42? Macbook Pro for $91.73? > Are these prices real? You WON'T Believe What We Found! > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c3f94dd5262d3f26st03duc > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hi List, For internet security reasons, Rootsweb mailing lists do not allow attachments. If you have picture that you think others on the list might be interested in, describe the who-what-where of the photo to the list and provide your contact information so you can send it to them directly. Thanks, Melanie -- Melanie Dennis [email protected]
Photos not attached. Alverne Jul 16, 2010 10:46:02 AM, [email protected] wrote: I have found pictures of my gg grandfather and his brother. They both served in the civil war. DO either of these two look like anybody in your family? 20132 is Lisilious Green Pate. The other is James Issac Pate. Mona ____________________________________________________________ LCD 42" TV for $26.42? Macbook Pro for $91.73? Are these prices real? You WON'T Believe What We Found! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c3f94dd5262d3f26st03duc ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
I have found pictures of my gg grandfather and his brother. They both served in the civil war. DO either of these two look like anybody in your family? 20132 is Lisilious Green Pate. The other is James Issac Pate. Mona ____________________________________________________________ LCD 42" TV for $26.42? Macbook Pro for $91.73? Are these prices real? You WON'T Believe What We Found! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c3f94dd5262d3f26st03duc
Hello everyone, My sister and a cousin and I went on a road trip to Ill looking for family records. On the way back we went to a place called Lewisport, KY. There was a Samuel Pate that was a Squire and he was the Justice of the Peace when Abraham Lincoln was tried for running a ferry without a license. Does anyone know of this man. Samuel Pate b 1/17/1795 d 1/24/1849 Wife Arritta b 5/31/1806 d 1/2/1882. There were other grave markers. A Lucy Pate d 1865, George Pate b 4/2/???? d 5/28/186? This graveyard was behind the house there. Mona ____________________________________________________________ SHOCKING: 13" Macbook Pro for $91.72! SPECIAL REPORT: Macbooks are being auctioned for an incredible 85% off! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4c3f8d8ab6df42cf023st06duc
Maybe they were sisters or cousins. :) David Greg Taylor http://davidgregtaylor.com/ http://dogspokenhere.com/ http://twitter.com/davidgregtaylor/ http://facebook.com/davidgregtaylor/ On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:24 PM, [email protected] wrote: > I would have to argue about her being the meanest woman in the > world.? My husband's graqndmother was.? She too had long hair down > to her waist.? She was really an Indian.? In the 1930's she got a > letter from the Bureau of Indians that she was entitled to land in > Oklahoma.? Back then it was not popular to be Native American.? So > her children tore the letter up and would not let her answer it.? I > learned this from both her daughter and my father in law.? I met her > several times and she was mean, mean I mean mean. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Taylor <[email protected]> > To: pate <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 10:28 am > Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US > Censuses > > > > > My gg-grandmother, Tebitha Jane Pate, was full-blood Cherokee. My > father knew her when he was a boy. Small, dark woman, with waist- > length black hair. Great-Grandpa said she was the meanest woman he > ever knew. > > David Greg Taylor > http://davidgregtaylor.com/ > http://dogspokenhere.com/ > http://twitter.com/davidgregtaylor/ > http://facebook.com/davidgregtaylor/ > > > > On Jul 14, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Rebecca Hall wrote: > > > > > Do you know of any Pate who is Native American? > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > 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 [email protected] > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message
Wow! I don't ever recall a topic creating so many responses. I would not normally comment on this subject, just not one of particular interest to me, but thought I should respond to a couple of postings. Laynie wrote: "A couple of us have discussed the PateDNA project off-list privately, and because of the females not being included, a lot of in-depth Pate research is being ignored - and the research already documented which includes the females has even been REFUSED to be accepted in the past when offered! That is truly sad." This was all in one paragraph, but I am not sure it all was intended to apply to the Pate DNA Project. But I will respond as though it was, just for the record and to clarify any possible misperceptions. And Jerry wrote: ". . . I think I remember that if there is any native American ancestry in the family, it would show up in female DNA? " Females with a Pate bloodline have always been welcome to join the Pate DNA Project. In fact they were some of our earliest members. We currently have seven females as members, six of them having been tested for mtDNA. We also have fifteen men who have tested their mtDNA. We have few women joining for very practical reasons. This is because mtDNA has limited genealogical value, especially compared to male Y-DNA, as explained by the following three paragraphs, which have been on the home page of our Pate DNA Project since its inception four years ago: "Only males inherit the Y-chromosome from their fathers, and the Y-DNA follows the surname, passing from father to son through all subsequent generations, unchanged (except for random minor mutations) for up to 500 years or more. These factors create a very valuable tool for genealogical research. "Females do not have Y-DNA. They neither inherit it from their fathers nor pass it down to their sons. Thus tracing family lines through maternal mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is problematical, since the mtDNA is passed through the generations only from mothers to daughters. The mtDNA does not follow the family surname due to marriages, with female birth names often quickly lost to history. The mtDNA is also passed from mothers to sons, but sons do not pass it on to their children. "A match on mtDNA proves only that the females share a common female ancestor, but the time to the most recent common ancestor may range from recent to many hundreds of years. In other words, a female who was a Pate by birth could determine a kinship through mtDNA to a female who was never a Pate, either by birth or marriage, while the reverse would never be true for a male Pate through Y-DNA." I wish that this was not true, because as a rule females seem to have more interest in genealogy than males. Yet ironically, while males carry a clear-cut means of identification of ancestral lines, females do not. God must have a sense of humor to pull this switch on us. Many of the men who have joined our Project did so only through the efforts of a wife, sister, cousin, or other female relative. When I receive a request to join the Project from a female, I basically cite the three paragraphs quoted above and encourage them to find a male Pate relative to represent them as a proxy in the Project. If this not practical, I inform them that they are welcome to submit for mtDNA testing, but they should be fully aware of its limitations. Since mtDNA is passed through maternal lines only, it cannot be used to identify family lines. For example, a female whose father was a Pate would receive no Y-DNA from him, but would receive mtDNA from her mother who was not a Pate. This Pate daughter could match mtDNA with her maternal grandmother of whatever surname, her maternal greatgrandmother of whatever surname, and so on through maternal lines for centuries. But this Pate daughter could not match her Pate grandmother nor other females in her paternal family lines. I see two practical uses for mtDNA testing. One is to establish a female haplogroup, and the other would be to confirm a kinship with another female. In the former case, you could determine a racial/ethnic ancestry received from your mother and her maternal ancestors. In the latter case, for example, if you had come to believe through genealogical research that another female was in your maternal line, you could both be tested and a match could confirm your kinship. Alternatively, you could find an mtDNA match with another female, then begin a search for the common female ancestor. If anyone knows of any other information to be gained, please let me know. Now, on to the Indians, and Jerry's question. Indian ancestry can be identified through Y-DNA or mtDNA, but caution is advised. You can read this informative website, among hundreds of others, for more explanation: http://www.manataka.org/page824.html Basically, haplogroups Q and C in males (Y-DNA) identify American Indian ancestry., while haplogroups A, B, C, D, and X in both genders' mtDNA identify American Indian ancestry. But keep in mind, that these would be direct lines, either paternal or maternal. In the case of a Pate male, his Y-DNA would have been established perhaps thousands of years ago with the first Pate male in his line. It would make no difference how many Indian women that his ancestors might have married. With mtDNA, you could prove that there was Indian ancestry in your direct maternal line, but without genealogical evidence, you would be unable to determine when or where this occurred. Of course, as noted above, men receive mtDNA from their mothers, but do not pass it to either their sons or daughters. Currently in our Project, there are no males in Y-DNA haplogroups Q and C. On mtDNA, out of 22 members, we have one in haplogoup B and another in haplogroup X. There are companies which offer DNA tests which purportedly provide a percentage breakdown of the different racial/ethnic components. These are very expensive and may be of dubious reliability. Please learn all you can about such tests in case you are tempted. There are new developments in DNA research constantly, and I think you would be well advised to be cautious. Of course, none of this above discusssion has anything to do with traditional genealogical research or documentation, neither for males nor females. Those subjects are not topics of discussion on our Project's website. The appropriate place for these discussions is here on the Pate Listserve, and I do not believe any relevant topic is ever denied access. I am reluctant to even mention this, but there is a new alternative which held promise for non-Pate males and females with a Pate bloodline to participate directly in the Pate DNA Project. This is a new test offered by Family Tree DNA called the Family Finder test, which I have mentioned here before. This test is intended to identify distant kinships of any of your ancestral surnames through autosomal DNA, which is not gender specific. However, for a number of members who have received their results from this test, including me, the results have been very disappointing. I cannot recommend this test at this time. Everyone is free to make their own decision. I will be happy to receive suggestions, comments, questions, etc. regarding the Pate DNA Project. My emailbox is always open. A. J. Pate Group Administrator Pate DNA Project
Dear Joel, I am now in Italy for a couple of years. Just before I left last Friday, I heard from Margaret Pate Finley's son that she had died in Virginia. The funeral will be in Dyersburg, Tn this week and I believe that the local funeral home is handling the funeral. She was 92 years of age and from one of the 3 Pate families that settled Dyersburg and Dyer Co. My Henderson Clarke came with his wife, Elizabeth Ann Pate, Andrew Jackson Pate is believed to have come not only with his Mother(Jane Milliken Pate), but also his uncle, Mathew. James Pate was one of the sons of the much discussed Stephen Pate will of 1817 Madison Co and Jinks family. They were there by 1830 having left Madison Co, Alabama. Margaret's ancestor was Wash Pate and he arrived about 10 years later. Margaret was a true genealogist, a stickler for detail and verification. She did everything by pen and paper. We met through our pursuit of the Pates. Always helpful and gracious, I know that the Pate families have benefited from her research. I thought that you would like to know as well. I hope that you are well. Sincerely, Meredith
We thought our great great grandmother had Indian Blood.? And it had to be mother to daughter. to daughter, to daughter etc.? That's why we did it that way.? But turned out she was not. Does it show in the male DNA? Clovis -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Pait <[email protected]> To: Joel Pate <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 3:33 pm Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses Joel: I am probably incorrect, wouldn't be the first time, but I think I remember that if there is any native American ancestry in the family, it would show up in female DNA? I'm not sure where I heard that but maybe between you and AJ, you would know for sure. Jerry -------Original Message------- From: [email protected] Date: 7/14/2010 1:22:29 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses I am going to throw out a few thoughts on Native American Ancestors. For generations we have thought our ggg grandmother was a Cherokee Indian. We recently tested the mtDNA of 2 eligible persons in our line and the report came back T2, European. The gg grandmother certainly looked Indian in her pictures and was a "healer" in the traditional Indian culture manner so - that has left us up a tree so to speak. Also, her rather tall, headstone is shaped like a tall house with a steep roof, has chiseled tepees on the bottom of the roof part on both sides, then moves on to what appears to be a log cabin on each side and the top appears to be a church including a cross at the pinnacle. The center section has a narrative. This is not a new headstone. Unfortunately, we left our camera in another vehicle and no one had cameras to record what the headstone actually said but as I remember it gave a glowing report of her life and how much she was going to be missed. I do not recall any reference to her being Indian on the headstone. We have entertained the thought that perhaps the gggg grandfather was actually the Indian, passing along the features and the lore of Indian blood We haven't found a direct descendant on the grandfather's side to test. Next item to consider was the recent TV documentary on who was actually in North America first - eons before Columbus. One of the interviews was with a group of Cherokees. They speculated they were actually of very early European extraction but the documentary did not give us DNA proof of this belief by this group of Cherokees. If that was actually correct, then at least some of the Cherokee tribes could have been very, very early European, giving us the European mtDNA results. So - will the real Cherokee tribe stand up?? Last item: Does anyone have free access to late 1860- early 1900 census records for TX? Perhaps I could recheck my gg grandmother's census record for the "I", etc. There is a possibility that she would not have noted herself as Indian since they moved to an area (Edwards Co, TX) where they had a horrendous Comanche raid. Being Indian might not have been the popular thing to claim at that time. I believe they were in Gonzales earlier. Nita Fry -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 7:27 pm Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses Donna that is a good point to make for those who may not realize those columns are important.? I was told all of my life that we had American Indian Blood on my fathers side of the family.? But DNA tells us no.? My great grandfather's brother is listed in Oklahoma as Indian, but that is because he married the niece of the governor and some how was listed on the Indian rolls.? A bit of crooked politics I assume.? They got lots of land and he even had a town named after him but he was no Indian. :) -----Original Message----- From: DMariee <[email protected]> To: pate <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 6:03 pm Subject: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses I found this very interesting thought I would share, perhaps many of you already knew this anyway.? This is according to Ancestry Com, "Pay special attention to the columns designating color and place of birth. You may find a Native American ancestor listed as I, In, Ind, B (black) or M for mulatto. It might change from census to census." Donna Hassan ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Goodness when you look at it that way, you wonder why you are researching your family. However we can't give it up. Too many mysteries to solve. I have trouble deciding who to work on. -- Clovis