Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think, even as an outsider, that if you had family connections going way back to Jamestown, and to Colonial America in the 1600`s, then there is a some chance of some Native American DNA. A lot of Britons would have some, not a lot trace to 2% Roman DNA ( Romans were in Britain for 450 plus years) and by Roman blood would be Syrian, African, Slavic. Later Americans from 1840`s onwards, Jewish, Southern Irish and German descent would be telling fibs
In my family, it was an eastern Cherokee woman who married a man who was 1/2 Cherokee. Their son married a white woman, and their daughter married a white man, and their son was my grandfather. This information was found in the Native American rolls, and matched my grandfather's handwritten notes.
Native ancestry isn't a "myth" as some people believe, and it often has a paper trail that can be traced through the rolls.
There are three distinct Cherokee tribes who do not share rolls (more so after the removal). They aren’t called “Native American Rolls.’” They are Indian Census Rolls. Cherokee have various rolls Pre and Post removal. They are also documented different after the removal to Indian Territory.
I’m curious which Cherokee Roll(s) you traced your ancestry. Pre, Post rolls?
I’m actually surprised at the number of people with Huguenot ancestors. Mine were in New Paltz, NY. They assimilated pretty quickly into the majority populations because they couldn’t get proper clergy sent over from Europe. There’s only one Huguenot church that I know of. Once they switched over to a new religious group they had to give up their language and the thing that set them apart from the common herd. The 3rd amendment concerning the quartering of soldiers in homes at least partially connects back to the cultural memory of the Huguenot persecution in France.
Interesting - my Huguenot ancestors (two branches, one on each of my paternal grandparents' sides) came to Manakintown in Virginia in 1700, and were taken under the wings of the good folks down the river in Williamsburg, as their ship, the "Mary and Ann", arrived in the Virginia Colony in December, fleeing religious persecution, and they were destitute. They had initially fled France for Switzerland, then gone to Holland, then England - and finally, Virginia.
Fortunately, these French refugees were fed, clothed, and given materials to build shelters, and it didn't end there: the Williamsburg folks, largely English in ancestry, were each assigned a Huguenot family to assist for the next couple of years. I am thankful that my refugee ancestors were so kindly and generously treated despite their poverty and their differences of religious practice, language, and culture.
A small Huguenot church was built in Manakintown, just up the James River from Richmond, and Calvinist French language services, including weddings, baptisms, and funerals along with Sunday services, were held there for many years. I believe it or a replica is still standing. There is an active Huguenot church in Charleston, SC, which may be the one referred to above.
In my own family, about three generations went by before my French ancestors started marrying people of other ancestries (mostly English with a little Scots). The French surnames endured for many more generations as both surnames and given middle names, but the French baptismal names were replaced by English equivalent names fairly quickly - Pierre became Peter, Jacques became James, Jean became John, Suzanne became Susan, and so on (all examples from my own family). Rene stayed Rene, however. But his name didn't get passed down the generations, sadly. Most of this family eventually became Episcopalian/Anglican, as are many members still today. There was also a strong Methodist strain by the mid-nineteenth century. Oddly, no Presbyterians.
And sadly, the French language was lost as time went by, at least in my family, which is predominantly English on the paternal side, with the aforementioned strong Huguenot strain, a little Scots - and surprise! Quite a lot of Irish, formerly mistaken from French due to misunderstanding the roots of the surname. DNA told a different tale, so now we take pride in evidently descending from one of the High Kings of Ireland (probably via the wrong side of the blanket) rather than Charlemagne.
I really do need to get my DNA done, to see if it matches up with the well-documented written history of my family.
There were always people in my family saying that we had Native American ancestry. No Native American showed up in me, but it did show up in some of my distant relatives (I guess it skipped me). I did find an ancestor of mine on the Creek rolls. He was listed as a freedman (a Black slave of the Natives).
You have to take into account how racist those old timers were. Interracial marriage is popular to portray in historical drama in TV & movies but seldom happened in actuality. Probably disproportionally portrayed. An interracial couple would most likely been shunned by society. What’s accepted today was unusual 70-390 years ago.
Last edited by Djkingman; 09-10-2018 at 07:51 AM..
You have to take into account how racist those old timers were. Interracial marriage is popular to portray in historical drama in TV & movies but seldom happened in actuality. Probably disproportionally portrayed. An interracial couple would most likely been shunned by society. What’s accepted today was unusual 70-390 years ago.
Who says they had to get married? There was rape, and of course slaveowners had concubines from slaves.
If you know anything about the birds and the bees one does not have to be married to have children.
Historically rape happens during war or during slavery, or certain other situations. Also even maids in those days had little defense against a perverted employer.
Genetic testing shows it happened quite a bit (interracial procreation) and there's the historical records as well which also show this.
Who says they had to get married? There was rape, and of course slaveowners had concubines from slaves.
If you know anything about the birds and the bees one does not have to be married to have children.
Historically rape happens during war or during slavery, or certain other situations. Also even maids in those days had little defense against a perverted employer.
Yes, but the child of an unwed Native American/white couple would likely have stayed within the Native tribe and therefore the descendants would more likely be mostly Native American. As difficult as it would be for a white/Native American couple to marry, so too would it be just as difficult for the mixed race child of such a union to marry into white society and produce mostly white descendants. Same goes for slaves - the child of a slave was a slave and couldn't be a part of white society. Granted, some slaves went through so many generations of being fathered by white owners that by the time they were freed, some of them could pass for white. But still, this was not the "norm".
Quote:
Genetic testing shows it happened quite a bit (interracial procreation) and there's the historical records as well which also show this.
Actually, it doesn't. Racial minorities were more likely to intermix, but white (non-hispanic) Americans of European descent are largely European and do not often get DNA results outside Europe.
The average European American is 98.6% European, 0.19% African, and 0.18% Native American. The highest percentage of individuals with Native American ancestry was 8% in Louisiana, and that was lowering the threshold to people with more than 1% results in Native American. In most states there are less than 3% of white Americans who have Native American results: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...5/figure/fig3/
I suppose it depends on your definition of "quite a bit", but personally I don't think these numbers are very high at all and on the contrary suggest it's not common. Certainly, "most" white Americans with colonial ancestry do NOT have Native American ancestry.
Who says they had to get married? There was rape, and of course slaveowners had concubines from slaves.
If you know anything about the birds and the bees one does not have to be married to have children.
Historically rape happens during war or during slavery, or certain other situations. Also even maids in those days had little defense against a perverted employer.
Genetic testing shows it happened quite a bit (interracial procreation) and there's the historical records as well which also show this.
I am not naive. I know that sort of thing went on but many of the pilgrims were very devout people and largely kept to the religious teachings. The original thread was about colonials and Native Americans. You are expanding it to Sothern slave owners and a those of African descent.
You are wrong that, genetic testing of Mayfower descendants have shown Native American genes, “quite a bit”. Grouping the pilgrims into the groups you are just shows your ignorance of history and with most of the responses in this thread with people that actually have colonist ancestors including me.
I am not naive. I know that sort of thing went on but many of the pilgrims were very devout people and largely kept to the religious teachings. The original thread was about colonials and Native Americans. You are expanding it to Sothern slave owners and a those of African descent.
You are wrong that, genetic testing of Mayfower descendants have shown Native American genes, “quite a bit”. Grouping the pilgrims into the groups you are just shows your ignorance of history and with most of the responses in this thread with people that actually have colonist ancestors including me.
‘Colonials’ aren’t only those who came over on the Mayflower...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
