The territory of your state was first populated by Indians. Meanwhile, thousands of miles away, a King granted a corporation a royal patent and men with guns imposed a government on the original inhabitants of the land now defined by the arbitrary lines on the map of "colony."
Indians who had no concept nor notion of land "ownership," and scoffed at any notion of the same?
The Commonwealth of Virginia, while not being perfect, has certainly handled relations between the English settlers and the Indians as well as (if not better than!) any of the other original colonies.
Furthermore, the notion that the Royal government instituted by arms, a "government on the original habitants[Indians]" is demonstrably false, as the Indian tribes were operating in their own sovereign capacity for the duration of Virginia's existence—a brief look at the historic record will reveal that the Crown repeatedly entered into treaties with these sovereign Tribes, thus recognizing them as their own Governments, outside of his Dominion. Though relations between the English and the Indians were not always amicable—1622 is a rather stark example of a period lacking amity—we've generally related very well with each other. If you compare the treatment of the Indians by Virginia to any Spanish colony, for instance, the notion that somehow the English were less than honorable is laughable at best.
I hope that this clarifies the reality of the Commonwealth's history sufficiently.
Regards,
~dt~