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] 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

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 >

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

http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/native-american-dna.html This is the main reason I ended up in such a heated argument with Joe Scarborough awhile back over him refusing to include or correct the known Pate FEMALES and the correct birth/death/marriage dates for them in his database! http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/female-ancestor.html 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. I am not meaning to point fingers at anyone in particular - I am just attempting to show how much can be lost by ignoring that Pate females have anything to offer. Laynie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Pait" <[email protected]> To: "Joel Pate" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 4:33 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

http://tinyurl.com/2vdv6fx Perhaps not Cherokee, but Chickasaw? Anything is possible.... The above link is a cache from LinkedIn for Ronald D Pate, Chickasaw.... TX Laynie ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 1:21 PM 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] 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

What an interesting man and so accomplished. Thank you for sharing the website. Unfortunately, the surname I referred to is not Pate. Pate is Bill's line. Nita -----Original Message----- From: ThorPateLine <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wed, Jul 14, 2010 6:03 pm Subject: Re: [PATE] Native American Ancestor designation on US Censuses http://tinyurl.com/2vdv6fx Perhaps not Cherokee, but Chickasaw? Anything is possible.... The above link is a cache from LinkedIn for Ronald D Pate, Chickasaw.... TX Laynie ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 1:21 PM 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] 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 ------------------------------- 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

Very interesting find here: http://names.mongabay.com/data/indians.html #992 - PATE Laynie ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 1:21 PM 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] 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

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