Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

[smartcooky]

I have a hypothetical question to ask.

I can prove my ancestry back about five generations by simple dint of producing a birth, marriage or death certificate and or a copy of an entry page in an official birth/death/marriage record. I have certified copies of many such documents for my mum and dad, and all my grandparents and I can easily access a registration page for my French great grandfather; I've already seen a copy it and know where to get it if need be.

Now, lets say, for argument's sake, that, when taunted by the racist in the White House, instead of getting a DNA test, Warren produced something like this.....

I don't have to ask if she would have been attacked for this by the right - that's just a given..... they were going to attack her no matter what she did.

However, would producing such a document still be considered an insult by Native Americans?

If so... why? If not... why not, given their umbrage over a DNA test?

 

[Meadmaker]

Excellent post.

Unfortunately, it's not just her choices from the past that are troubling. Current times, she's handled the whole thing from a defensive posture that suggests an internal fragility that won't cut it in a general election. We can't afford this risk, given the existential threat that Trump presents.

I wish this wasn't the case. I like her. I wish she could be POTUS. It's not going to happen.

I think you found the phrase that I was trying to find to describe what I think of Warren's handling of this affair. I've been surprised by it, and somewhat disappointed, but she really has seemed to fall apart and not know what to do.

 

[The Shrike]

However, would producing such a document still be considered an insult by Native Americans?

Caveat: I'm not Native and I'm no expert on Native American studies. I was as floored by my Native friends' anger about Warren's DNA test as some folks in this thread were when they first heard it from me.

So, far out on a limb here, I would expect that this certificate would carry more weight than a DNA test and be less offensive to modern Native Americans. In 1921 in South Dakota, if you said you were "Indian" then you were Indian. What these two star-crossed lovers might have had in their genomes with respect to single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with European genotypes is anyone's guess.

 

[The Shrike]

She claimed more than native ancestry. There are specific claims of two grandparents, specific tribes, and reactions to those family members. She has no evidence of that. By describing it as "some amount of native ancestry" is moving the goalposts.

Move them where you like, I suppose. I have multiple times in this thread acknowledged that she claimed some specific tie to Cherokee and/or Delaware people.

"As a kid, I never asked my mom about documentation when she talked about our Native American heritage," Warren said in a 2012 campaign ad. "What kid would? But I knew my father’s family didn’t like that she was part Cherokee and part Delaware. So my parents had to elope."

A bit more:

"Gloria Wysong, a cousin, said that her mother told her that the family's heritage "was Delaware, but the Delaware and Cherokee merged together."

And David Herring, Warren’s brother, said he grew up hearing, "Your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee."

But other cousins had no such memories."

Again, woman claims Native ancestry based on family lore. Family corroborate the lore. Woman takes DNA test confirming Native ancestry. None of this should be in dispute by rational people.

Further, Trump owes a million bucks to the charity of her choosing:

" "I will give you a million dollars to your favorite charity, paid for by Trump, if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian," Trump said.

Trump now denies saying that, but in any event, Warren did get tested and the results did find Native American ancestry. We asked four experts to review her report and they all found it credible."

More?

"Researchers told us the test results fit with Warren’s account of her Native American ties. Warren has said that she was told her great-great-great-grandmother was Cherokee.

That doesn’t mean the woman was pure Cherokee. Counting back the generations, that woman would have been born roughly in the middle of the 1800s. By then there was plenty of mixing of different groups. What followed, however, was unpredictable.

"Different families and groups interacted in different ways with European settlers in the region," Bolnick said. "When there was intermarriage, the offspring sometimes became part of indigenous communities, and sometimes they identified with non-indigenous groups.""

Come on in, the reality's fine! If you want to debate some specific policy of Warren's, wouldn't that be more interesting than parroting Faux News ignoramuses trying to disparage the character of a woman with independent corroboration of her claims?

What's more, we could use this thread to discuss actual policies to help some of the most embattled and disenfranchised people we've got. Imagine that!

 

[Belz...]

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/w6h0kgf98kxnd42/NA-MarriageCert.png?raw=1[/qimg]

I don't have to ask if she would have been attacked for this by the right - that's just a given..... they were going to attack her no matter what she did.

However, would producing such a document still be considered an insult by Native Americans?

If so... why? If not... why not, given their umbrage over a DNA test?

You answered your own question. I just take it more broadly.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Move them where you like, I suppose. I have multiple times in this thread acknowledged that she claimed some specific tie to Cherokee and/or Delaware people.

"As a kid, I never asked my mom about documentation when she talked about our Native American heritage," Warren said in a 2012 campaign ad. "What kid would? But I knew my father’s family didn’t like that she was part Cherokee and part Delaware. So my parents had to elope."

A bit more:

"Gloria Wysong, a cousin, said that her mother told her that the family's heritage "was Delaware, but the Delaware and Cherokee merged together."

And David Herring, Warren’s brother, said he grew up hearing, "Your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee."

But other cousins had no such memories."

Again, woman claims Native ancestry based on family lore. Family corroborate the lore. Woman takes DNA test confirming Native ancestry. None of this should be in dispute by rational people.

Further, Trump owes a million bucks to the charity of her choosing:

" "I will give you a million dollars to your favorite charity, paid for by Trump, if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian," Trump said.

Trump now denies saying that, but in any event, Warren did get tested and the results did find Native American ancestry. We asked four experts to review her report and they all found it credible."

More?

"Researchers told us the test results fit with Warren’s account of her Native American ties. Warren has said that she was told her great-great-great-grandmother was Cherokee.

That doesn’t mean the woman was pure Cherokee. Counting back the generations, that woman would have been born roughly in the middle of the 1800s. By then there was plenty of mixing of different groups. What followed, however, was unpredictable.

"Different families and groups interacted in different ways with European settlers in the region," Bolnick said. "When there was intermarriage, the offspring sometimes became part of indigenous communities, and sometimes they identified with non-indigenous groups.""

Come on in, the reality's fine! If you want to debate some specific policy of Warren's, wouldn't that be more interesting than parroting Faux News ignoramuses trying to disparage the character of a woman with independent corroboration of her claims?

What's more, we could use this thread to discuss actual policies to help some of the most embattled and disenfranchised people we've got. Imagine that!

There is no evidence her great great great grandma was cherokee. That was her claim.

You didn't posts single point of fact I did not know or disagreed with.

 

[Drewbot]

There is no evidence her great great great grandma was cherokee. That was her claim.

Cherokee geneology researcher did some work on this.

http://www.pollysgranddaughter.com/p/elizabeth-warren-information.html

Nothing back to 1793, all listed as white, none on the Cherokee records.

She claims to have Indian blood through her mother so that side of her family is shown here. All were always found in all records as white. They were never found in any Cherokee records or listed as Indian. The Trail of Tears was in 1838-39. We chose to show back to the generation born before that time, though we have traced most her lines back further. Additional information or documentation available upon request.



Generation 1

1. Pauline Louise Reed: born 14 Feb 1912 in Hughes County, Oklahoma; died 19 Jul 1995 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma.
3. Bethania Elvina "Hannie" Crawford: born 29 Oct 1875 in Laclede County, Missouri; died 11 Nov 1969 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma.

Generation 3

4. Joseph H Reed: born abt 1837 in Ohio; died 13 Feb 1898 in Fort Smith, Sebastian County, Arkansas.
5. Charity Louise Gorman: born abt 1841 in Illinois; died bef 1900.
6. John Houston Crawford: born 26 Mar 1858 in Laclede County, Missouri; died 23 Jan 1924 in Hughes County, Oklahoma.
7. Paulina Ann Bowen: born abt 1860 in Missouri; died 1905 in Johnson County, Arkansas.

Generation 4

8. Joseph H Reed: born 17 Jun 1793 in New Jersey; died 27 Feb 1847 in Richland County, Illinois.
9. Eliza Bell: born 1798 in New Jersey; died 1869 in Richland County, Illinois.
10. Ezekiel Gorman: born 1800 in Missouri; married 7 Dec 1828 in Cape Girardeau County, Missouri; died 20 Mar 1867 (bef) in Washington County, Illinois.
11. Elizabeth Mathieus: born abt 1810 in Missouri.
12. Preston H Crawford: born 1824 in Tennessee; died 1875 in Laclede County, Missouri.
13. Edith May Marsh: born 5 Mar 1826 in Tennessee; died 24 Jun 1871 in Laclede County, Missouri.
14. George Washington Bowen: born 14 Feb 1826 in Indiana; married 1 Jan 1846 in Camden, Ray County, Missouri; died 14 Jan 1907 in Clarksville, Johnson County, Arkansas.
15. Bethany Clark: born 27 Feb 1828 in Kentucky; died 17 Jun 1926 in Johnson County, Arkansas

 

[BobTheCoward]

Cherokee geneology researcher did some work on this.

http://www.pollysgranddaughter.com/p/elizabeth-warren-information.html

Nothing back to 1793, all listed as white, none on the Cherokee records.

I don't know how accurate any of that is.

What I find interesting about those numbers is how much the heuristic of average age of the generation gets blown apart

From the other source....

"Researchers told us the test results fit with Warren’s account of her Native American ties. Warren has said that she was told her great-great-great-grandmother was Cherokee.

That doesn’t mean the woman was pure Cherokee. Counting back the generations, that woman would have been born roughly in the middle of the 1800s. By then there was plenty of mixing of different groups. What followed, however, was unpredictable.

Great great great grandmother is 5 generations back. 4 generations back the youngest ancestor was born in 1826 (average 1813). That means gen 5 was not born mid 1800s.

 

[theprestige]

I wonder how you think that evidence would appear. Newspaper clippings? Diary entries? Skeletons not missing any bones?

I wonder why you think that matters. If you have a claim without evidence, you don't get to move the goalposts to some other claim that does have evidence.

 

[The Shrike]

There is no evidence her great great great grandma was cherokee. That was her claim.

"Warren has said that she was told her great-great-great-grandmother was Cherokee."

I mean, I'll keep trying to be patient if there's some reading comprehension thing afflicting you, but I don't think there is.

Hint: In my family history, I was *not* told the story of how my oldest sibling was born a bit earlier than expected without being premature if you catch my drift. It wasn't 'til my 20s that I did the math and figured out that my parents' wedding anniversary should have been a few months earlier than it, in fact, was.

Sometimes we're told as children things that are not true, we're not told things that are true, we're things that are only partly true, we're told things that the tellers believe to be true, etc.

You didn't posts single point of fact I did not know or disagreed with.

Then what are you on about? Do you actually think it's some kind of gotcha! moment if Warren claims she was told that her great-great-great grandmother was Cherokee but in fact it was her great great great great grandmother? It's not.

 

[The Shrike]

Nothing back to 1793, all listed as white, none on the Cherokee records.

Consistent with Warren's claim that she had no tribal affiliation.

She had family lore which was corroborated by genomic analysis. That's it.

 

[BobTheCoward]

"Warren has said that she was told her great-great-great-grandmother was Cherokee."

I mean, I'll keep trying to be patient if there's some reading comprehension thing afflicting you, but I don't think there is.

Hint: In my family history, I was *not* told the story of how my oldest sibling was born a bit earlier than expected without being premature if you catch my drift. It wasn't 'til my 20s that I did the math and figured out that my parents' wedding anniversary should have been a few months earlier than it, in fact, was.

Sometimes we're told as children things that are not true, we're not told things that are true, we're things that are only partly true, we're told things that the tellers believe to be true, etc.


Then what are you on about? Do you actually think it's some kind of gotcha! moment if Warren claims she was told that her great-great-great grandmother was Cherokee but in fact it was her great great great great grandmother? It's not.

It might not even have been that great great great grandmother. It may have been grandfather.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Again all I care about is this same level of apologetics be applied the next time we a society have to stop what we are doing and have one of those talks about cultural appropriation.

Yes every thing being discussed is the biggest nothing-burger imaginable.

So if we could have the same mentality the next time someone writes a think piece to feed the outrage machine when a white person takes a belly-dancing class or whatever that would just be super.

But we won't.

 

[crescent]

Cherokee geneology researcher did some work on this.

http://www.pollysgranddaughter.com/p/elizabeth-warren-information.html

Nothing back to 1793, all listed as white, none on the Cherokee records.

Generation 4 contains people in Tennessee and Kentucky - both of which had large Cherokee populations. One person even moved from Kentucky to Arkansas, part of the path taken in the removals. All it takes is for some Cherokee marry some white people, and then for the children produced to not associate with the tribe and to describe themselves as white on paperwork. Racial "passing" happened and is well documented.

The links you've got go back to her Great-Great-Grandparent's generation. The claim seems to be that maybe her Great-Great-Great-Grandmother was Cherokee. Given the Cherokee population in Tennessee and Kentucky, that seems plausible. If I had to guess, I would say the Bethany Clark was at least part Native American, born in Kentucky not long before the Trail of Tears - her time and location fit. If one of her parents were white, they might have pulled strings or lied to get her classified as white and thus avoid being forced into relocation.

You posted a link that contains corroborating evidence, not disproving evidence.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Generation 4 contains people in Tennessee and Kentucky - both of which had large Cherokee populations. One person even moved from Kentucky to Arkansas, part of the path taken in the removals. All it takes is for some Cherokee marry some white people, and then for the children produced not stop associate with the tribe and to describe themselves as white on paperwork. Racial "passing" happened and is well documented.

You posted a link that contains corroborating evidence, not disproving evidence.

And it's worth pointing out, once again, that her claims in this matter are so innocuous and used in such situations where it would hardly matter if the family lore were completely wrong.

 

[applecorped]

If it was so innocuous why bring it up at all?

Everyone knows why.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Generation 4 contains people in Tennessee and Kentucky - both of which had large Cherokee populations. One person even moved from Kentucky to Arkansas, part of the path taken in the removals. All it takes is for some Cherokee marry some white people, and then for the children produced not stop associate with the tribe and to describe themselves as white on paperwork. Racial "passing" happened and is well documented.

The links you've got go back to her Great-Great-Grandparent's generation. The claim seems to be that maybe her Great-Great-Great-Grandmother was Cherokee. Given the Cherokee population in Tennessee and Kentucky, that seems plausible. If I had to guess, I would say the Bethany Clark was at least part Native American, born in Kentucky not long before the Trail of Tears - her time and location fit. If one of her parents were white, they might have pulled strings or lied to get her classified as white and thus avoid being forced into relocation.

You posted a link that contains corroborating evidence, not disproving evidence.

But the people that have been arguing in defense of Warren placed generation 4 at mid 1860s. Now we are speculating about people in the late 1700s. Your story is a work of creative writing now where we have people not relocated but then ended up in the area for an independent reason.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

If it was so innocuous why bring it up at all?

Everyone knows why.

If your posts are so vacuous why post at all? Unless you are a hypocrite, you are no longer allowed to have minor indulgences. You are now only allowed to bring up truly important items all the time. Bye.

 

[Belz...]

If it was so innocuous why bring it up at all?

You mean when he called her Pocahontas?

 

[crescent]

But the people that have been arguing in defense of Warren placed generation 4 at mid 1860s. Now we are speculating about people in the late 1700s. Your story is a work of creative writing now where we have people not relocated but then ended up in the area for an independent reason.

I have not seen that. The claim is that her Great-Great-Great grandparents were Cherokee. Previously it had been argued that this person must have entered the family tree after the Trail of Tears.

Drewbot, however, was kind enough to show that she had fifth-generation ancestors in Cherokee-populated areas before the relocation, and that one of those ancestors even moved to Arkansas.

It is the right generation in the right place, on a timeline that fits with where Cherokee actually lived at the time.

I don't know certain, but as more and more information gets presented, her version of family lore gets more and more plausible.

The fun part is that there is record of a man with the "Clark" surname moving to Kentucky and marrying a Cherokee woman in the early 1800's. He seems to have been one of Pocahontas' descendants. It would be the height of irony if it were proven that Warren were actually a descendant of Pocahontas.