Tappahanock, VA is on the Pamunkey River. That is in Essex Co., VA. I hope this helps. Dorothy C. White [email protected] 804.795.4296 > -----Original Message----- > From: cristy [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 6:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Succession in Powhatan Empire > > > Hi, sorry I cant help but am interested in knowing where the > Pamunkey lived > in Virginia? Years ago, my grandmother said we had ties to > them. But I > have no clue from where yet. > > Christine > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vickie Elam White" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 4:18 PM > Subject: [VAROOTS] Succession in Powhatan Empire > > > > OK, I'm really trying to understand this, so please bear with me! > > > > I read the following: > > > > "Historical accounts note several methods by which Powhatan > > [Wahunsonacock] consolidated his hold over his dominions. > Of particular > > significance was his use of a three-tiered government. > Below the paramount > > chief were the district chiefs, and below them were chiefs > of individual > > villages." > > > > Source: Helen C. Rountree and E. Randolph Turner III, "On > the Fringe > > of > > the Southeast: The Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom in > Virginia", publ. in __ > > The Forgotten Centuries: Indians and Europeans in the > American South > > 1521-1704 __, ed. by C. Hudson and C. Tesser (Athens: University of > > Georgia Press, 1994), pg. 364 > > > > So, my question concerns Openchancanough and his > successors. It seems > > as > > if some accounts I read say that his successors became > "paramount" chiefs > > of the Empire when they were actually successors to the > sub-chieftan > > positions. > > > > I've read that when Jamestown was founded, Openchancanough > was "chief" > > of > > the Pamunkey and thus a sub-chief under his brother > Powhatan. Then he > > succeeded his brother Opitchipan to become "paramount" > chief of the Empire > > himself in 1618-1619. It appears as if that opened up a > spot for a new > > "chief" of the Pamunkey. Is that where Nectowance comes in? > But, since he > > signed the 1646 treaty with the English, it seems as though > Nectowance may > > have been a "paramount" chief of the Empire rather than a > sub-chief. So, > > if Nectowance moved up from sub-chief to "paramount" chief, > then he must > > have been either a uterine-brother of Openchancanough (and > thus Powhatan) > > or the son of Openchancanough's (and Powhatan's) > uterine-sister. Right? > > > > If I'm right so far, I'll continue. > > > > I've read differing accounts about who was the "chief" of > the Pamunkey > > after Nectowance - either after his "promotion" to > "paramount" chief in > > 1644 or after his death ca 1649. Some say Totopotomoi > succeeded Nectowance > > but some say his wife Cockacoeske (known as "Queen Betty") > did. Some say > > Totopotomoi succeeded first, then after his death in 1656, > she succeeded > > Totopotomoi. > > > > Then, there was Cockacoeske's long reign until her death ca 1686, > > after > > which her niece "Queen Anne" succeeded her. By this time, > the Empire was > > no more and the title was simple "chief" of the Pamunkey, correct? > > > > If the above makes sense, and someone can correct any > mistakes, then > > maybe > > I can figure out some bloodlines. That is, assuming the rules for > > matrilineal descent for the "paramount" chief position > applied also to the > > "sub-chief" positions. Did it? > > > > > > Vickie Elam White > > [email protected] > > > > > > ============================== > > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records > added in the > > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > > > > > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn > more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx > >
The Pamunkey Indians, I believe, were loosely centered in King William County - where there is still (I think) a 1200 acre reservation. The numbers of Pamunkeys have dwindled from the 1600s when there were as many as 6000 members of the Powhatan Confederacy. In the 1980s there were still about 100 Pamunkeys living on the reservation with maybe 1000 living nearby. The Treaty of 1677 still allows for the Indians to make an annual tribute to the governor in lieu of paying real estate taxes on their reservation. I first noticed this in 1996 when Chief Swift Water (William Miles) and several of the local tribesman presented a five-point buck to Governor George Allen at the Governor's Mansion shortly before Thanksgiving. The deer was donated to Hunters for the Homeless. The custom continues today. Beverly Fleet in her Virginia Colonial Abstracts, Volume 2, describes early incidents with the Pamunkeys. Once a year, the Queen of the Pamunkey Indians went to Richmond, accompanied by her braves, to pay the yearly tribute to the Governor of Virginia. A treaty signed in 1646 and amended in 1677 called for the Pamunkeys to make an annual offering to the governor. The tribute was Virginia game - a deer, so many brace of wild ducks, wild turkeys, and so on. The Queen would arrive, wearing a crown presented by King Charles II to her tribe (now found in the John Marshall House in Richmond). In the early 1800s, they stayed there in the home of William Munford. They would take possession of the parlor of the house. Deer skins were spread upon the floor. At night, the queen lay down in the center and the braves lay around her, feet out and their heads touching some part of her body. At the slightest sound, the barking of a dog or a cat fight, the braves would be on their feet, bows drawn, with the queen protected in the center. I have long been a Littlepage genealogist. The only reason I know anything about the Pamunkeys is that their history is intertwined with the Littlepage family. Richard Littlepage first settled in what is now New Kent County about 1660. His son, Captain Richard Littlepage, is said to have negotiated with the Queen of the Pamunkey concerning Indian hire. It is noted that she lived near the Littlepage home - known as Cumberland. The home still stands - lovelier than ever. Most maps of that period clearly show Cumberland - located on the Pamunkey River. The town of Cumberland was a major port of those times and had one of the first Customs houses in Virginia. Hayden, in his Glassell Family Genealogy, said that on October 25, 1711, Richard Littlepage of New Kent County petitioned the Assembly for license to employ Indians: one woman, Mary, for a hyred servant, and for one man to hunt for him. This was granted, provided that whenever the Queen of Pamunkey shall recall them they shall at once be dismissed. When it was decided that the capital of Virginia should be removed from Williamsburg elsewhere in 1780, there was much discussion of where the new capital should be located. Among those placed suggested for the new capital was Cumberland. Thank heavens it lost by 3 votes to Richmond. The area looks very much today as it must have looked 300 years ago. Lovely. On December 7, 1784, the Indians on the Pamunkey petitioned the House of Delegates to appoint certain gentlemen to protect them in their persons and rights. Thomas Littlepage, great-grandson of the first Richard, was one of those named. Joyce -----Original Message----- From: Dorothy C. White [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 3:26 AM To: [email protected] Subject: FW: [VAROOTS] Succession in Powhatan Empire Tappahanock, VA is on the Pamunkey River. That is in Essex Co., VA. I hope this helps. Dorothy C. White [email protected] 804.795.4296 > -----Original Message----- > From: cristy [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 6:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [VAROOTS] Succession in Powhatan Empire > > > Hi, sorry I cant help but am interested in knowing where the Pamunkey > lived in Virginia? Years ago, my grandmother said we had ties to > them. But I have no clue from where yet. > > Christine > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vickie Elam White" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 4:18 PM > Subject: [VAROOTS] Succession in Powhatan Empire > > > > OK, I'm really trying to understand this, so please bear with me! > > > > I read the following: > > > > "Historical accounts note several methods by which Powhatan > > [Wahunsonacock] consolidated his hold over his dominions. > Of particular > > significance was his use of a three-tiered government. > Below the paramount > > chief were the district chiefs, and below them were chiefs > of individual > > villages." > > > > Source: Helen C. Rountree and E. Randolph Turner III, "On > the Fringe > > of > > the Southeast: The Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom in > Virginia", publ. in __ > > The Forgotten Centuries: Indians and Europeans in the > American South > > 1521-1704 __, ed. by C. Hudson and C. Tesser (Athens: University of > > Georgia Press, 1994), pg. 364 > > > > So, my question concerns Openchancanough and his > successors. It seems > > as > > if some accounts I read say that his successors became > "paramount" chiefs > > of the Empire when they were actually successors to the > sub-chieftan > > positions. > > > > I've read that when Jamestown was founded, Openchancanough > was "chief" > > of > > the Pamunkey and thus a sub-chief under his brother > Powhatan. Then he > > succeeded his brother Opitchipan to become "paramount" > chief of the Empire > > himself in 1618-1619. It appears as if that opened up a > spot for a new > > "chief" of the Pamunkey. Is that where Nectowance comes in? > But, since he > > signed the 1646 treaty with the English, it seems as though > Nectowance may > > have been a "paramount" chief of the Empire rather than a > sub-chief. So, > > if Nectowance moved up from sub-chief to "paramount" chief, > then he must > > have been either a uterine-brother of Openchancanough (and > thus Powhatan) > > or the son of Openchancanough's (and Powhatan's) > uterine-sister. Right? > > > > If I'm right so far, I'll continue. > > > > I've read differing accounts about who was the "chief" of > the Pamunkey > > after Nectowance - either after his "promotion" to > "paramount" chief in > > 1644 or after his death ca 1649. Some say Totopotomoi > succeeded Nectowance > > but some say his wife Cockacoeske (known as "Queen Betty") > did. Some say > > Totopotomoi succeeded first, then after his death in 1656, > she succeeded > > Totopotomoi. > > > > Then, there was Cockacoeske's long reign until her death ca 1686, > > after which her niece "Queen Anne" succeeded her. By this time, > the Empire was > > no more and the title was simple "chief" of the Pamunkey, correct? > > > > If the above makes sense, and someone can correct any > mistakes, then > > maybe > > I can figure out some bloodlines. That is, assuming the rules for > > matrilineal descent for the "paramount" chief position > applied also to the > > "sub-chief" positions. Did it? > > > > > > Vickie Elam White > > [email protected] > > > > > > ============================== > > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records > added in the > > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > > > > > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn > more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx > > ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx