American Indian admixture in White Americans

[Deirwha]

There is a complex web of regulation

not necessarily in the form of regulations found in the CCRS, but there are compacts between the states and the nations and those compacts must be approved by BIA. The reasons for the complexity include the initial fact that a number of casinos were established in state that had strong anti gambling laws and lobbies (including, for instance, the horse racing industry as well as the more expected religious objectors), they existed in isolated areas surrounded by non indian land, some tribes were recognized and others not, and some tribes sought to buy non indian land and turn it into casinos. A good example of that is a hotel in downtown Fresno, California. So in California at least, the Governor's Office has been involved in these compacts for years. I personally have been involved in some side agreements related thereto.

[Maria_W]

State or Federal?

So can the Virginia state tribes have a casino?

Maria

[Yaffa]

So can the Virginia state tribes have a casino?

Maria

I would call the state and ask them what their regulation laws are on gambling in general and also ask them about a state recognized tribe and the laws.

[Deirwha]

ditto Yaffa

It is an issue for salesmanship, negotiation, persistence and financing, whatever anybody may say to the contrary.

[Maria_W]

Matriacal line of decent for Wahasenacawh

To the best of my memory this is correct...

Matriarcal line of decent rulers:
1. Wahunsenacawh's mother before ?-1590
2. Wahunsunacawh (self) first seen in records 1590-1617(dies in 1618)
3. Opitchipam (brother) from 1617-1618 (gone from records in 1629)
4. Oppechancanough (brother) from 1618-1644(dies in 1645)
5. Necotowance (nephew) 1645-1649? Signed treaty in 1646 (Not sure when he died)
6. Totopotomoi (grandnephew)aka Thomas West or Toby from 1649?-1656 (murdered in 1656)
7. ? was Weoance in 1662. (not sure who it was but since it was a matriarchal line of decent it would probably be a relative).

My ancestors were never in major line of sucession. They were minor weroances...Will post more later..

Maria

[Maria_W]

Matriarchal line....

The rule of sucession was that children of women of the bloodline suceded in this way:
The sons according to age, then the daughters, then their children if daughters are deceased. The children of the sons never ruled unless a son married back into the bloodline. Very confusing!

This is how it would have been:
Wahausenacawh
Opitchipam
Oppecancanough
Keckatough (This is the confusing part, Wahansenacawh stated he only had 3 brothers. Opithipam, Opecancanough and Kekatough, but their were numerous references to Japasaw being his brother. We don't know wether Japasaw, my ancestor was also Kekatough. Kekatough was the King of the Rappahanock according to 1 website. Have to do more research on that)
Sister
Sister

Forget the last line of the posting above. Japasaw (Kekatough?)was most likely already deceased by 1645 and couldn't be a major Weroance. Not enough sleep!
By the time Oppecacanough had died, so had Kekatough (Japasaw?)and the sisters of Wahansunacawh.

Maria

[kawashkar]

I was wondering why history books skip over American Indian government in the 19th century. It is more about assimulation, making reservations, and supporting industrailization.

Well, as a foreigner (Chilean) I also wonder why the history books of the U.S. NEVER mention the relations Europeans and Indians had in the early colonial times. Why they never mention the intermarriages and the mixed descendents that integrated to the white society?

Why Americans don't the theirs past honestly, at least on this point?

[PDHOTLEN]

some books speak the truth

I have a few books (in boxes somewhere) that wrote about how things really happened on the ground in a local setting, especially in the Northeast. Prior to the French & Indian War & the Revolutionary War, there were better relations with local Native Americans. But then the French, British & American colonists started using "Indians" to fight their wars, and the situation deteriorated drastically. And there was not a uniform system of governance throughout the colonies. Local big wigs & districts varied as to how they got along with their "Indian" neighbors. Poor governance was a big reason why white pioneer farmers moved out of the more settled areas; to avoid corruption, fraud and extortion at the hands of the local town & county governments.

[purple flowers]

The rule of sucession was that children of women of the bloodline suceded in this way:
The sons according to age, then the daughters, then their children if daughters are deceased. The children of the sons never ruled unless a son married back into the bloodline. Very confusing!

This is how it would have been:
Wahausenacawh
Opitchipam
Oppecancanough
Keckatough (This is the confusing part, Wahansenacawh stated he only had 3 brothers. Opithipam, Opecancanough and Kekatough, but their were numerous references to Japasaw being his brother. We don't know wether Japasaw, my ancestor was also Kekatough. Kekatough was the King of the Rappahanock according to 1 website. Have to do more research on that)
Sister
Sister

Forget the last line of the posting above. Japasaw (Kekatough?)was most likely already deceased by 1645 and couldn't be a major Weroance. Not enough sleep!
By the time Oppecacanough had died, so had Kekatough (Japasaw?)and the sisters of Wahansunacawh.

Maria

Maria
are you saying one of the sister's son's ruled?
isn't this fun!
you are at the fun part anyway! but there is usually more than one name , sometimes lots and lots of names depending on the tribe of course . so I can say chances they all have more than one name. and that you still have more names to find for each ancestor who had any chances of being on any record at all. .. matter of fact I don't trust people really know who their family was if they only have just one name of a " chief" or whatever. to know our ancestors we have to get all the names those people carried, over all their life, if they lived to any age at all.
well plus all the names that they may have had in other tribes for any warriors and head men who fought, especially if fought for the whites in any wars with pay or bounties . and the names that the whites called any chief or any sons of prominent chiefs/ headmen, PLUS their positional/rank of any warrior during any time frame may also have different names just for that war or names that only the tribal people called them. so understanding their very changing persona and meanings and nuances of those names . the names are the stories of their life. find and learn all of the names and you find the story of their lives. Names are so much fun and so very hard. is a really big deal and can take years to locate them in all of some of their positions, ranks and persona's in their tribe. and with the whites, and in other tribes, and at war on bounties and treaties , plus over the time of their life. sometimes their deeds can change their names , or names the tribe may have callled them and or personal close family names also change sometimes .
we should never assume any of them OWNED a name, like we do now. .. Like Powhantan was a position.. so he had other names also.. probably many as his station and power changed . hope that helps.

[GregKiroKHR1bL1]

History of Rulers, Lawbreakers, and Migrations

Books such as "The Negro in the Making of America" by Benjamin Quarles examined Colonial America and how the women would sometimes escape to the Native American camps. Men often thought they were kidnaped and not runaways. The larger textbooks did not adopt some of the ideas so university professors started to supplement the textbooks with articles and other textbooks. Germans trained many Native Americans to read and write. Yet, I do not remember a synopsis placed in a major textbook written before the 1980s focusing on colonial marriages between Europeans and Native Americans. However, I am not expert on early historic textbooks. Yet, I think the trend in writing focused on the policies of each presidential administration. Papers about the common people outside of legal issues did not become popular until the 19th century, in general.

Well, as a foreigner (Chilean) I also wonder why the history books of the U.S. NEVER mention the relations Europeans and Indians had in the early colonial times. Why they never mention the intermarriages and the mixed descendents that integrated to the white society?

Why Americans don't the theirs past honestly, at least on this point?

[purple flowers]

I think the fat lady is singing! singing!

http://www.biodiversityforum.com/showthread.php5?&p=530797#post530797

see they/ HE didn't lie.

[Yaffa]

So can the Virginia state tribes have a casino?

Maria

Maria,

Ever call VA to find out or did Bill explain to you in more detail what was going on with the Casino issue?

Yaffa

[Maria_W]

No answer yet...

Yaffa,
I got an email from Bill, but he was so tired because he is working full time again and his cousin had been really ill, blood clot in lungs. I really did't persue the subject. I quess I'll try to remember to call them. Maybe I can find the answer on the internet!

Maria

[Yaffa]

Yaffa,
I got an email from Bill, but he was so tired because he is working full time again and his cousin had been really ill, blood clot in lungs. I really did't persue the subject. I quess I'll try to remember to call them. Maybe I can find the answer on the internet!

Maria

Maria,

Hope they feel better! Google can sometomes be your best friend. I was just curious what you outcome was.

Yaffa

[Maria_W]

I think this might help....

Press Releases

October 7, 2008

Lynchburg News & Advance: The Final Step for Recognition of State's Tribes



When Virginia Rep. Jim Moran, D-8th, introduced legislation to give Virginia