Native Americans

The Dawes Rolls in Mixed-Blood Research

Were your Scots-Irish ancestors part Native American? This can be difficult to determine for mixed-blood families who were not removed to Indian Territory (Oklahoma). These families merged into the white, black or tri-racial communities where memory of the native line may have become sketchy. However, if you look at the mixed-blood families who were removed you might find some clues.

An ancestor’s surname may be found among the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Muscogee (Creek) or Seminole tribes as documented by the Dawes Commission (1894-1914). These are applications compiled to determine who qualified for tribal membership.

The Purpose of the Dawes Commission

The Dawes Commission began the U.S. Government process of breaking up tribal nations and allotting the lands to individuals. Its purpose was to change how the tribes owned land and abolish tribal governments. It was expanded by 1896 to authorize an official membership roll for the tribes. Even today, membership in the Oklahoma tribes, are based upon documenting descent from an ancestor enrolled through the Dawes Commission. An excellent guide to the history and use of the records is Kent Carter’s The Dawes Commission: And the Allotment of the Five Civilized Tribes, 1893-1914 (1999).

This source is important in mixed-blood research because it provides access to the surnames documented within the tribes. A Scots-Irish connection into the tribes was usually prior to the final 1838 Removal. The Dawes Commission records can help identify who stayed with the tribe or if the surname crossed into another tribe.

Indexes to the Dawes Commission Records

Enrollments in 1896 were considered invalid and the process began again in 1898. The majority of people enrolled 1898-1907; with a few added in 1914. The final rolls consist of 101,000 names. Only one-third of those who applied were accepted. The records also list the black Freedmen who were adopted into the tribes being descendants of their slaves (many were mixed-blood themselves).

An index to the Dawes Commission records can be found on Ancestry and the National Archives with microfilm of the applications themselves widely available.

Click Here if you would like to learn more about your Native American ancestry and their Scots-Irish connections.

Colonial Laws and the Indentured Servant (Part2)

16 Dec By Dwight Leave a Comment

Laws governing human bondage in the English colonies did not happen overnight. As needed, laws were enacted by the colonial assemblies. The Virginia and Maryland colonies were the two most powerful mainland colonies. They lead the way in defining exactly what human bondage really meant. Lawmakers didn’t think in terms of color, but in people as a commodity. For this reason, colonial laws would apply to all races.

Using Virginia colony as an example; in a December 1662 law, women servants who became pregnant by their masters were to finish out their term and then be bound over to the local church to be sold for an extra two years of servitude. An October 1670 law pronounced that all non-Christians brought by shipping (by sea) shall be a slave for life, but if brought by land (from another colony) as children they were to serve until they are 30 years old. If they were adults and brought by land, they were to serve for only 12 years. In April 1691, all whites, bond or free were forbidden from intermarrying with blacks, mulattos or Indians. This law also stated that free white women who had an illegitimate child by a black, mulatto or Indian would be bound out by the local parish church for five years and the child bound until the age of 30.

It was a series of Virginia laws passed in October 1705 which began to define in detail what a slave was. The main points were:

*Slaves brought into the colony by land or sea (except Turks and Moors) remained slaves regardless of converting to Christianity.

*Free people who were Christians in their own country were not to be sold as slaves.

*No black, mulatto, Indian, Jew, Muslim or other infidel could purchase Christian white servants.

*White men or women intermarrying with blacks and mulattoes were to go to prison for 6 months with no bail.

*If any slave resists their master during correction, it was legal to kill them as part of the correction. Escaped slaves could be killed.

*A Christian baptism does not exempt a person from bondage, and the status of all children was according to the condition of the mother.

This was the world of our colonial ancestors regardless of color!

Colonial Laws and the Indentured Servant (Part 1)

15 Dec By Dwight Leave a Comment

Until the laws caught up governing human bondage in the English New World, several systems were in place. One was outright slavery which included political prisoners, criminals, innocent kidnapped individuals, the homeless and orphans sold into bondage. Once shipped to the Caribbean, Virginia or Maryland colonies, many simply disappeared.

Another was the “indentured servant” which was different than outright slavery, however, this is a technicality if the servant didn’t survive. They were basically slaves for a contracted period of time in exchange for either passage over or for promised land. A study of white bondage using England as the focus reveals the following comparison between indentured servants, transported convicts and free immigrants in the colonial period:

Variable Indentured Servants Transported Convicts Free Immigrants

Emigration Reason escape poverty imposed punishment varies

Average age 15-24 years 20-30 years varies

Companions rarely family/friends rarely family/friends family/friends

Social status lower/lower middle lower class middle/upper middle

Select master could not could not not applicable

Marriage none none not applicable

The America before 1776 was a complex time as human slavery fueled the economy. The line between who was a slave and who wasn’t became thin. It took a century for the laws to be put into place that defined who had rights and what those rights were.

Irish Catholics were an important part of this colonial trade. By the 1600s English began to colonize a conquered Ireland. They planted Ireland with Scots and English. Workers left Ireland not only by force as convict slaves, but also were persuaded to leave as indentured servants. Ireland was so bad at the time that many gladly took up the offer to be enslaved for a set number of years. This went on for at least 100 years. The Caribbean islands, Virginia and Maryland were where most of the Irish were transported. Indentured servants would later go in large numbers to the Pennsylvania and New York colonies.

In tomorrow’s blog, I will discuss the laws which governed the practice of bondage and defined human rights, and what constituted slavery. Once the laws were in place, then slavery and servitude became color based.

Guion Miller Rolls

13 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

The Guion Miller Roll accepted applications to determine membership in the Eastern Cherokee Nation. This source documents families not removed to Indian Territory in 1838. It is an excellent resource for mixed-blood families. As with all my blogs about the Cherokee, this by default usually also means Scots-Irish ancestry.

Between 1906 and 1909, some 45,940 applications were submitted from throughout the United States, Canada and Mexico. The Guion Miller Rolls lists an estimated 90,000 individual applicants each of whom had to trace lineage to someone in the 1835 Henderson Roll, prior to the removal. Most applications were rejected based on a lack of evidence. Unless clearly fraudulent, the rejected applications still preserve the genealogy back to the 1835 time period. They also provide insight into mixed-blood families long separated from the tribe.

Indexes to the Guion Miller Rolls can be found on the National Archives website: www.archives.gov/research/arc/native-americans-guion-miller.html ; “Access Genealogy”: www.accessgenealogy.com/native/guion.php ; and on “Fold3”: http://www.fold3.com/title_81/guion_miller_roll/ The applications are widely available on microfilm.

The Guion Miller Rolls is as a guide posts as to who may have considered themselves Cherokee. Remember, even if the government didn’t consider a claim valid, DNA may prove otherwise! Then again, there were fraudulent claims of people who were only seeking government money.

Two mistakes people make when using these rolls is: 1.) They are only for Cherokee families. This is incorrect as many mixed-bloods applied, who were not Cherokee. Other, then unorganized native groups applied because there was no place else for them to apply; 2.) If an ancestor was part of a denied claim that there is no native heritage. This is also incorrect as the denied claims not only include fraudulent claims, but also ones which could not be sufficiently documented. That was the reason for rejection, not fraud.

Concerning those who were fraudulent, an excellent blog on “Thoughts from Polly’s Granddaughter” provide some thought provoking insights on the Guion Miller Roll: www.pollysgranddaughter.com/2011/06/fortune-hunters-guion-miller-roll-and.html I would also like to direct you to my two part blogs “What Does Cherokee Mean?” which appeared on 27-28 August 2012.

Kidnapped to Quebec

12 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

Often in tracing Colonial New England Scots-Irish families, you find the unexpected. What you find is these Presbyterians living in Quebec as Roman Catholics, married to Indians, and having both an Indian and French name. What the heck?

It turns out that with a little historical research into the “French and Indian Wars,” it all makes sense. Many Scots-Irish families were kidnapped by Indians and traded in what is now Quebec. The obvious implication is that who you thought were French Catholics or even mixed-bloods from the First Nations were originally Scots-Irish Presbyterians from New England and Ulster with a totally different name!

They are documented in two works: Emma Lewis Coleman’s New England Captives Carried to Canada Between 1677 and 1760 During the French and Indian Wars (1925); and C. Alice Baker’s True Stories of New England Captives Carried to Canada During the Old French and Indian Wars (1897). These can be found online, and don’t forget to look for online indexes.

Now for the historical background. These series of wars can be divided up and named. In the United States the war was named after the ruling English Monarch at the time. In Canada, either the larger European conflict or the term “Intercontential War” is used.

1688-1697: King William’s War (1^st Intercolonial War (Quebec))

1702-1713: Queen Ann’s War (2^nd Intercolonial War)

1744-1748: King George’s War and War of Jenkins’ Ear (3^rd Intercolonial War)

1754-1763: The French and Indian War (4^th Intercolonial War and 6^th Indian War)

These wars were tied to the larger European conflicts as they played out in North America. These wars pitted England/UK, its colonies and Indian allies against France, its colonies and Indian allies. The causes of the wars were the desire of both nations to control the interior of North America, and the region around the Hudson Bay. The winner would dominant the fur trade. The French were effective in mobilizing the Indians, who raided the English colonies, and brought captives back to Quebec. New Hampshire, and its Scots-Irish population, were particularily ravaged during the last two wars.

In tomorrow’s blog, I want to continue the other side of this native theme by exploring people who willingly were trying to claim Native American heritage, whether they were or not.

The Scots-Irish and Cherokee Connection (Part 3)

19 Oct By Dwight Leave a Comment

My third blog will focus on early Cherokee land and agency records. These are extracted on various websites, published or in manscript form on microfilm. These are good sources for mixed-blood research.

There is no one resource on early Cherokee land records covering the entire nation prior to removal. One example of land records is David Keith Hampton’s Cherokee Reservees (1979), which provides details of land given to the Cherokees in Hamilton County, Tennessee. This book gives the names of the applicants who settled their claims with the U.S. Government in 1817.

Following the treaty of 1817, the U.S. Secretary of War deeded land to each of the Cherokee chiefs who had signed the treaty. Each tract was either in newly ceded lands or in older lands ceded through earlier treaties, and each chief was given 640 acres (one square mile) of land. Robert Armstrong was the surveyor of this land in Alabama, North Carolina and Tennessee. The surveyor’s records for land in Georgia have not survived. Each survey and the accompanying plat have been published in James L. Douthat’s Robert Armstrong’s Survey Book of Cherokee Lands: Lands Granted from Treaty of 27 February 1819 (1993).

The Cherokee Agency in Tennessee was in operation until 1835. The agency records have been transcribed in Marybelle W. Chase’s Records of the Cherokee Agency in Tennessee, 1801-1835 (1990). The records contain much genealogical information, such as lists of widows and orphans. It also has an 1819 listing of those who had originally enrolled for emigration but misunderstood the treaty and wanted to remain.

When families, who had received their reserves, decided to move and sell their land, the transactions would be recorded in the local county land books. At that point they moved to Indian Territory or westward along with other Americans. This helped spread Cherokee rooted families across North America.

The Scots-Irish and Cherokee Connection (Part 2)

18 Oct By Dwight Leave a Comment

In this second Cherokee blog I will focus on the censuses known as rolls. These rolls include removal records (both voluntary and forced), muster rolls, rations and censuses. Most can be found online or published:

Cherokee Emigration Rolls (1817-1838): Cherokee who voluntarily removed westward.

Census of Cherokee (1835): Known as the Henderson Roll. A census of Cherokee living in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee, and is the main source for documenting Cherokee who were forcibly removed.

Ration Books (1836-38): Ration books from camps located in New Echota, Georgia and Camp Clanwaugh (near Chattanooga, Tennessee) prior to the removal process.

Cherokee Muster Rolls (1838): This muster roll was a forced removal record, accompanying the Henderson Roll.

Mullay Roll (1848): Eastern Cherokee who remained in North Carolina. It set aside money for emigration to Indian Territory.

Drennen Roll (1851): Also called the Immigrant Roll, it lists Eastern Cherokee who settled in Indian Territory after 1835, removing later on their own.

Siler Roll (1851): Eastern Cherokee living in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee.

Chapman Roll (1852): Eastern Cherokee roll listed per capita payment made to those named on the Siler Roll.

Tompkins Roll (1867): Cherokees residing in Indian Territory listed by district.

Swetland Roll (1869): Eastern Cherokee in Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee.

Hester Roll (1883): Eastern Cherokee who resided in Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee and elsewhere.

Dawes Commission (1896, 1898-1914): The final roll of the Cherokee Nation in Indian Territory. Indexed on Ancestry: www.ancestry.com

Guion Miller Roll (1909): Applications for determining the final roll for the Eastern Cherokee. This is one of the most important sources for documenting mixed-blood families who did not remove. The index is at the National Archives website: www.archives.gov/research/arc/native-americans-guion-miller.html

The next blog will focus on the early Cherokee land and agency records.

The Scots-Irish and Cherokee Connection (Part 1)

17 Oct By Dwight Leave a Comment

From the 1770s, a strong connection existed between the Cherokees and the Scots-Irish. As waves of Scots-Irish settled on the frontier, they lived, traded, fought and married the Cherokee. Millions of North Americans have Cherokee heritage because many mixed-bloods “passed for white” or blended into African American families.

By the time of removal in 1838, the Cherokee had thoroughly adopted white ways. They became Christians, developed an alphabet, printed a newspaper, held slaves, lived in towns, owned farms, and discarded the clan system. This created records.

Due to the interest in the tribe, there is a wealth of published genealogical material and how-to books. Three major works include: Myra Vanderpool Gormley’s Cherokee Connections (1995, 2002); Tony Mack McClure, Cherokee Proud: A Guide for Tracing and Honoring Your Cherokee Ancestors (2^nd ed. 1999); and Tom Mooney, Exploring Your Cherokee Ancestry: A Basic Genealogical Research Guide (1990). An excellent general work for the pre-removal period is Rachal Mills Lennon’s Tracing Ancestors Among the Five Civilized Tribes (2002).

Geography is the key to researching mixed-blood Cherokee genealogy. By terms of the Treaty of New Echota (1835) they relinquished their lands in the modern-day counties:

Alabama: Blount, Cherokee, DeKalb, Etowah, Jackson, Marshall

Georgia: Cass, Catoosa, Chattooga, Cherokee, Cobb, Dade, Dawson, Fannin, Floyd, Forsyth, Gilmer, Gordon, Haralson, Lumpkin, Murray, Paulding, Pickins, Polk, Towns, Union, Walker, Whitfield

North Carolina: Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Macon,Swain

Tennessee: Bradley, Hamilton, Marion, Meigs, Monroe, Polk

A remaining mixed-blood family often was recorded in the U.S. Census as white, black, mulatto or Indian. There are particular surnames associated with the pre-removal period. The surname may be your first clue to mixed-blood heritage. Another clue are terms “Black Dutch” and “Black Irish.” These were used by families to hide their ethnicity.

Also refer to my previous blog on August 27-28, 2012 “What Does “Cherokee” Mean?” which brings this topic into the modern arena. The next blogs will focus on Cherokee records.

Scots-Irish and Muscogee (Creek) Connection

11 Sep By Dwight Leave a Comment

The Scots-Irish came into Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Alabama, Georgia and Florida, and intermarried. The tribe removed beginning in 1836. Tribal headquarters are in Okmulgee, Oklahoma: www.muscogeenation-nsn.gov Smaller recognized tribes are in Alabama and Georgia.

When considering mixed-blood genealogy for Ulster roots, records often list a Muscogee by their tribal name. This was a matriarchal society so property was passed through the mother. If a family was trying to “pass for white” they would have associated with the father’s family.

Muscogee records can be found at the National Archives: www.archives.gov; Family History Library: www.familysearch.org; Oklahoma Historical Society: www.okhistory.org; and the Alabama Archives: www.archives.state.al.us

Three books written in the nineteenth century can provide some insights found nowhere else: George Stiggins’ Creek Indian History: A Historical Narrative of the Genealogy, Traditions and Downfall of the Ispocoga or Creek Indian Tribe of Indians, edited by Virginia Pounds Brown (1989); Thomas Woodward’s, Woodward’s Reminiscences of the Creek, or Muscogee Indians, Contained in Letters to Friends in Georgia and Alabama) (1859, 1939); and Benjamin Hawkins’ A Sketch of the Creek Country, in the Years 1798 and 1799, and Letters of Benjamin Hawkins, 1796-1806 (1974).

By treaty (1832) the Muscogee ceded their lands to the U.S. which allotted parcels to individuals. They could sell, remove westward, or stay and be absorbed into the white community. For background information see; Mary Elizabeth Young’s Redskins Ruffleshirts and Rednecks: Indian Allotments in Alabama and Mississippi, 1830-1860 (1961). The names of Muscogee can be found in the Bureau of Land Management: www.glorecords.blm.govdatabase.

U.S. Government Rolls have been extracted on various websites. These include: Abbott and Parsons (1832); Lower Creek Census (1832); Old Settler Roll (1857); Dunn Roll of Citizens (1867); and Stidham Roll (1886).

If you have a legend of an Indian ancestor, then it’s worth your time to explore Muscogee records. You might be surprised to find your Scots-Irish ancestors mentioned.

What Does “Cherokee” Mean? (Part 2)

28 Aug By Dwight Leave a Comment

The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma has placed an extensive list online of organizations they consider fabricated and fraudulent; including state recognized tribes. While some tribes are fabricated; others mixed-bloods cannot produce a historical paper trail. A fascinating non-recognized tribe is the Chickamauga Cherokee Nation (White River Band and Sac River Band) with a strong Scots-Irish connection. Their pedigrees are valid, having had a genealogist trace them, and are on microfilm at the Family History Library: www.familysearch.org The Chickamauga Cherokee claim to be the tribe from the tri-state area around Chattanooga, Tennessee which moved westward decades prior to general removal and settled in what is today Arkansas and Missouri. They assimilated so thoroughly it wasn’t until they tried to gather the paper trail many white families learned of their Cherokee heritage. Pedigrees and histories were submitted, but they were denied state and federal recognition. However it left a massive compilation of genealogies.

The key to studying the Chickamauga Cherokee is in knowing core families of the Sac River Band in Arkansas are centered in Baxter, Benton, Fulton, Independence, Jackson, Johnson, Lawrence, Madison, Newton, Pope, Searcy, Sharp, Stone and Woodruff counties. The core White River Band of families in Missouri are centered in Barry, Dade, Greene, Hickory, Howell, McDonald, Lawrence, Ozark, Polk, St. Clair, Stone and Taney counties.

State recognized tribes include the following:

Alabama: Cher-O-Creek Intratribal Indians: www.aiac.alabama.gov/tribes_Cherocreek.aspx Cherokee Tribe of Northeast Alabama: www.aiac.alabama.gov/tribes_NortheastCherokee.aspx Echota Cherokee Tribe of Alabama: www.echotacherokeetribe.homestead.com United Cherokee Ani-Yun-Wiya Nation: www.ucan-online.org

Georgia: The Cherokee of Georgia Tribal Council: www.cherokeeofgeorgia.us Georgia Tribe of Eastern Cherokee: www.georgiatribeofeasterncherokee.com

South Carolina: Lower Eastern Cherokee Nation of South Carolina: www.paialowereasterncherokeenationssc.com

For unrecognized tribes, consult: www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unrecognized-tribes-in-the_United_States Again, this doesn’t necessarily mean fraudulent, and they may have genealogies. Approach all unrecognized tribes with background and education as to the validity of their research.

Call Today! 801.699.2450

Or send us an Email