Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: KarlInOhio

isn’t cherokee one of those “catchall” tribal relations? IOW since there was so much intermarriage a claim can be stated for just about anyone. (as long as you don’t also claim a piece of the casinos)


18 posted on 05/01/2012 8:01:54 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: longtermmemmory

Its been reported her ancestors were part of the Fugarwee tribe.


19 posted on 05/01/2012 8:09:31 AM PDT by ully2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: longtermmemmory
This reminds me of the Family Guy episode where Peter tries to convince the Indian casino owners that he is a member of their tribe, in order to get a cut of the casino profits.

Peter Griffin invokes his Indian heritage.

24 posted on 05/01/2012 8:15:28 AM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: longtermmemmory
Basically correct. See my post #21.

Pre-1960's, intermarriage and assimilation was seen as a necessity to ensure tribal survival.

Post-1960's, rules on minimum blood (usually at least one grandparent) were generally imposed in order to limit tribal membership and ensure greater distribution of "stuff" to those on the team. Smaller teams = more goodies to distribute. Some tribal lines can be combined to claim membership such as the Mandan and Arikara in North Dakota. Most cannot. Thus, if you are 1/8th Cherokee and 1/8th Sioux, your combined 1/4th doesn't count for either tribe.

29 posted on 05/01/2012 8:22:01 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson