In speaking to Stacy Webb and other Board Members of the Redbone Heritage Foundation, it is clear now that the 2007 RHF Conference will be held in Lake Charles, Louisiana.
Elections, according to the RHF Bylaws, approved by the entire Board of Directors late last year, include the position of Vice President and Secretary. The Secretary position is unopposed at the moment, but a number of candidates for Vice President have thrown their hats in the ring.
A date for this 2007 Conference has not been selected but will be announced at a later date.
As everyone is well aware, the Lake Charles Conference was planned for 2006 but was moved to Natchitoches due to reported damage from the 2005 hurricanes. At the 2006 Natchitoches Conference, it was voted by the membership, except maybe Joyce Waters, to hold the 2007 Conference in Lake Charles. The Conference planning was left open in 2007 awaiting the appointment of a chair but was taken over by Raymond Alexander Bridges who without Board or membership approval announced a Non-Conference in Starks, Louisiana.
According to Raymond "Houston" Alexander Bridges, it was decided by Ray and his cousin Brenda Bass to hold a pot luck dinner at the Starks VFW Bar. According to Ray, this event was to be hosted by Elaine Metcalf and/or the Starks Historical Society. No considerations were made, by Ray and Brenda, for special diets, smoke or alcohol use. Ray stated that perhaps this would remove the "chaff." The RHF conference was cancelled at Starks by Ray and Brenda Bass, an ex-RHF member as my questioning about accommodating members "took the air out of them" or some such; however, this meeting had never been approved by RHF to begin with.
Thus, a Conference Planning Committee was appointed by RHF President Stacy Webb. Conference planning has now continued and the consensus is again Lake Charles, Louisiana. Further questions should be directed to Stacy Webb.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Friday, June 29, 2007
# 27 REDBONES -- ALL OVER, NOT JUST LOUISIANA
To say that Redbones only lived within a certain small area in Louisiana and none lived or originated from other states and did not migrate to places like Texas or Oklahoma, is amusing. It’s like what came first, the chicken or the egg. Redbones did not simply morph out of the ground around Bearhead Creek.
I think it is understood by everyone that the term Redbone was a given term. What is not known is by whom it was given, BUT THE TERM DID NOT ORIGINATE IN LOUISIANA!
In a letter from Albert Rigmaiden, Calcasieu Parish Treasurer, written May 6, 1893, to McDonald Furman in the Carolinas. Rigmaiden writes the following:
"Dear Sir,
In reply to yours of April 22nd. I will state I am unable to tell you how the name Red bone originated for the people called Red-bones, but I think the Negroes were the first to give them that name as they (the Negroes) has no use or love for them & they do not like the Negroes any better. I suppose you know the kind of people called Red bones, they are neither white nor black & as well as I can find out, the oldest ones came from S.C. many years ago. There are a great many of them in this Parish & in Rappides & Vernan Parish & some in other Parishes in this State & a good many in Texas too. Some of these people are as good citizens as any body & some are rascally & treacherous but you will find that among any People, but I think these are the most treacherous when they take a dislike to any one.
I will give you the names of some of the principal & oldest families that I know of. They are -- Ashworth -- Goins -- Perkins -- Drake -- Hoozer -- Sweat -- Buxton -- Doil or Dial -- Johnson -- Esclavant -- these people keep pretty well to gether & Marry amongst themselves mostly, but occasionally a White man or Woman Marries among them, but if they do it is generally a low class of White people. It is a very unpleasant (situation?) to live about these people for this reason, they are not looked on as being -- Negroes -- Indian nor White people & as this is a White Peoples Country, they (the White People) don't put themselves on equality, socially, with any other people except White People. Although some of these People are perfect gentlemen & ladies & well educated.
I think they get along exceedingly well and peaceably, considering all these of these drawbacks. I have given you as near the facts as I am trusting it will give you the desired information."
Yours Truly
Signed : A Rigmaiden
So what we have is a letter written (by my 5 th cousin) in 1893, who was the Treasurer of Calcasieu Parish, describing what he knows about Red Bones. It's an important date, and just two years prior, there had been an altercation at Westport, La., involving persons known as Red Bones, that had been reported in several newspapers -- 1891.
I think it is understood by everyone that the term Redbone was a given term. What is not known is by whom it was given, BUT THE TERM DID NOT ORIGINATE IN LOUISIANA!
In a letter from Albert Rigmaiden, Calcasieu Parish Treasurer, written May 6, 1893, to McDonald Furman in the Carolinas. Rigmaiden writes the following:
"Dear Sir,
In reply to yours of April 22nd. I will state I am unable to tell you how the name Red bone originated for the people called Red-bones, but I think the Negroes were the first to give them that name as they (the Negroes) has no use or love for them & they do not like the Negroes any better. I suppose you know the kind of people called Red bones, they are neither white nor black & as well as I can find out, the oldest ones came from S.C. many years ago. There are a great many of them in this Parish & in Rappides & Vernan Parish & some in other Parishes in this State & a good many in Texas too. Some of these people are as good citizens as any body & some are rascally & treacherous but you will find that among any People, but I think these are the most treacherous when they take a dislike to any one.
I will give you the names of some of the principal & oldest families that I know of. They are -- Ashworth -- Goins -- Perkins -- Drake -- Hoozer -- Sweat -- Buxton -- Doil or Dial -- Johnson -- Esclavant -- these people keep pretty well to gether & Marry amongst themselves mostly, but occasionally a White man or Woman Marries among them, but if they do it is generally a low class of White people. It is a very unpleasant (situation?) to live about these people for this reason, they are not looked on as being -- Negroes -- Indian nor White people & as this is a White Peoples Country, they (the White People) don't put themselves on equality, socially, with any other people except White People. Although some of these People are perfect gentlemen & ladies & well educated.
I think they get along exceedingly well and peaceably, considering all these of these drawbacks. I have given you as near the facts as I am trusting it will give you the desired information."
Yours Truly
Signed : A Rigmaiden
So what we have is a letter written (by my 5 th cousin) in 1893, who was the Treasurer of Calcasieu Parish, describing what he knows about Red Bones. It's an important date, and just two years prior, there had been an altercation at Westport, La., involving persons known as Red Bones, that had been reported in several newspapers -- 1891.
Another important part of this letter states that the Red Bones were neither Negroes or Indians, and he goes on to name the Red bones that he knew of.
Rigmaiden comments on where the Red bones (the older ones) had come from and that a good many of them lived in Texas. Keep in mind that Rigmaiden has a leg up on present day researchers, as he is the guy on the ground in 1883.
Albert Rigmaiden's mother, Elisha Ryan Rigmaiden, was also related to Sharafina Drake Goins.
http://jgoins.com/rigmaiden_calcasieu_parish.htm
Red Bones lived all over, it was their right.Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Thursday, June 28, 2007
# 26 REDBONE? BIGOT SHOWS HIS TRUE COLORS!
Now what Ray? Your comments are truly bigoted in the light of whom you claim to be, but like you say, "I haven't been home (Starks?) in 50 years." Now you are going to tell them who they are? American Gypsies?
Maybe you were Dawg, an American Gypsy that is, but I doubt that the majority of your cousins, including me, are going to buy it!
Now, you insult the North American Indian side of Redbone families, those who are and choose to acknowledge it, and of course there are some who never had an Indian connection. But, here he goes again in his "My Mothers People Blog": http://ashworths.blogspot.com/
Thursday, June 28, 2007
"A Point of Clarification Just because someone is white trash with a bit of Indian in 'em, does not make that person a Redbone. I'm just saying, that's all."
Posted by Houston at 8:37 AM 0 comments Links to this post
"I'm just saying, that's all?" What brought that on Ray? First you attempt to cut out Pitkin, Westport and Oakdale because you think they are not real Redbones, and then you and Brenda Bass decide you don't want the Redbone Heritage Foundation to come to your little potluck dinner at Starks on Oct 27th. BTW, Brenda Bass is not a member of RHF, neither is Terry Jackson or Linda Clark. The Bass girls membership expired in 2006.
Raymond Alexander Bridges says that he has talked it over with Elaine Metcalf as well, and she wants him to help the Starks Historical Society with their membership by holding "his" potluck dinner at the VFW bar in Starks. What was wrong with Lake Charles, what was wrong with DeQuincy?
Now this is the guy who wanted to do the Conference planning for RHF, and this is the guy who was going to increase RHF membership, and this is the guy who knew folks in Louisiana and was going to provide RHF with his cousin lawyer to handle things. Did Ray do any of this? Nope, Nada! All he did was print some bumper stickers and mail them to RHF using State of California postage. The T-shirts he produced long before joining RHF.
Ray, RHF was not founded as a "beanie with propellers on top club!" It's not a private domain with a Queen for President like it was in the past. It was not founded for Redbones, it was founded to do research on Redbones. The organization is open to every serious researcher -- including Indians!
Your bigoted comment about Indian Redbones stinks!
For everyone else's consumption, I am from Redbone families, I am a documented and registered Chickasaw Indian to boot with family connections to Cherokee Chief John Ross and Chickasaw Governor's Cyrus Harris and Nelson Chigley.
"I'm just saying, that's all!"
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Maybe you were Dawg, an American Gypsy that is, but I doubt that the majority of your cousins, including me, are going to buy it!
Now, you insult the North American Indian side of Redbone families, those who are and choose to acknowledge it, and of course there are some who never had an Indian connection. But, here he goes again in his "My Mothers People Blog": http://ashworths.blogspot.com/
Thursday, June 28, 2007
"A Point of Clarification Just because someone is white trash with a bit of Indian in 'em, does not make that person a Redbone. I'm just saying, that's all."
Posted by Houston at 8:37 AM 0 comments Links to this post
"I'm just saying, that's all?" What brought that on Ray? First you attempt to cut out Pitkin, Westport and Oakdale because you think they are not real Redbones, and then you and Brenda Bass decide you don't want the Redbone Heritage Foundation to come to your little potluck dinner at Starks on Oct 27th. BTW, Brenda Bass is not a member of RHF, neither is Terry Jackson or Linda Clark. The Bass girls membership expired in 2006.
Raymond Alexander Bridges says that he has talked it over with Elaine Metcalf as well, and she wants him to help the Starks Historical Society with their membership by holding "his" potluck dinner at the VFW bar in Starks. What was wrong with Lake Charles, what was wrong with DeQuincy?
Now this is the guy who wanted to do the Conference planning for RHF, and this is the guy who was going to increase RHF membership, and this is the guy who knew folks in Louisiana and was going to provide RHF with his cousin lawyer to handle things. Did Ray do any of this? Nope, Nada! All he did was print some bumper stickers and mail them to RHF using State of California postage. The T-shirts he produced long before joining RHF.
Ray, RHF was not founded as a "beanie with propellers on top club!" It's not a private domain with a Queen for President like it was in the past. It was not founded for Redbones, it was founded to do research on Redbones. The organization is open to every serious researcher -- including Indians!
Your bigoted comment about Indian Redbones stinks!
For everyone else's consumption, I am from Redbone families, I am a documented and registered Chickasaw Indian to boot with family connections to Cherokee Chief John Ross and Chickasaw Governor's Cyrus Harris and Nelson Chigley.
"I'm just saying, that's all!"
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
# 25 GRANNY WAS OF COLOR -- GRANNY WAS A REDBONE
Was your Granny a Redbone Portuguese Indian Princess? No? What about your Redbone Turkish or Irish Indian Princess? Not sure? Read on!
In the 1800's, about all you could say for "Free Persons of Color" was they were free, and they were of "colored peoples." What color, has never been explained -- those folks were simply placed in the coffee can of history and filed away. If they were White enough, had money and could speak good English, they climbed out of the can.
How come our census' lacked a column for Irish, Portuguese, Scot, Turk, German, Italian, Moors, French, Chinese or Jamaican? Those folks were in this country early on -- came right through the Port of New Orleans they did. Oh sure, some made the trek from the East Coast and the original colonies and others trickled down the Mississippi from Canada. Were Redbones some of these folks? You bet they were and many of the ones from Carolina brought the word "Redbone" with them. It simply meant they were carrying Indian Blood -- assimilated civilized Indians with a European mix!
You can find census records in Louisiana for Free People of Color (FPC), but those records do not go any further than that -- I lament, who were the Free People of Color? Think about it.
You had a great deal of detail, for the day -- White population age brackets and a column for "slaves" (be they Black or be they Indian slaves), but nothing to describe Free People of Color? Where was the record for Mediterranean peoples? They were either White enough or they were "Colored Peoples."
Sure, the expression "Free People of Color" could have meant "Free Africans" as well -- surely there were some, but again, what about the so called shipwrecked Portuguese (which was really an Atlantic coastal story rather than a Gulf of Mexico one, but it could have happened) or the landed Mediterranean peoples in New Orleans?
The answer of course is no one had the time to unravel this tangle, and it was far easier to put them in the can and forget them -- they were of no consequence. Our governments simply did not have a way to record or keep a record of these mixes of humanity.
From census records, the core Redbone families, the heads of households, without much exception, claim the Carolina's as their place of birth. Some spouses seem to be scattered out from the Carolina's to Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, Florida and Mississippi. So we can say that not many, if any, landed by ship in New Orleans -- unless they came from the Carolina's. But, without much exception, they were known as Free People of Color in 1810 -- in Louisiana at least -- it may not have been so in the Carolina's where they had other names such as Redbone.
Not all of these Louisiana Redbone families left the Carolina's and not all of these families arrived intact in Louisiana. It was not at all like closing up one community, climbing en mass onto an airliner and getting off in Lake Charles. Some parents, brothers, sisters, cousins and other "Redbone family surnames" never made the trip just as some never migrated to Houston, Texas; San Antonio, Texas or Tishimingo, Oklahoma. That's right, some Redbone families surely never migrated.
There are also bits and pieces scattered along the migration trail giving some clues to who the Redbones were, and some of the pieces are beginning to provide a more complete picture. Land titles, land passports, town census', marriage records and other civil records.
With DNA, some of these pieces are beginning to show some promise, yet the clues showing up are not all the same but of different family lines, and they should be.
We've always known from whence they came, and they were still the same people in Louisiana/ Texas as they were in Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia and Spanish Florida. There are still fragments of the name Redbone on Church's, Creeks, Cemeteries and other place names along their suspected route's of migration. So that in itself is telling.
So the remaining question is, and the answers are still out there for anyone to see -- who were the Redbones? I say they were mixed blooded European Peoples with a large percentage of North American Indian Blood migrating Westward with everyone else, THEY WERE NOT AMERICAN GYPSIES!
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
In the 1800's, about all you could say for "Free Persons of Color" was they were free, and they were of "colored peoples." What color, has never been explained -- those folks were simply placed in the coffee can of history and filed away. If they were White enough, had money and could speak good English, they climbed out of the can.
How come our census' lacked a column for Irish, Portuguese, Scot, Turk, German, Italian, Moors, French, Chinese or Jamaican? Those folks were in this country early on -- came right through the Port of New Orleans they did. Oh sure, some made the trek from the East Coast and the original colonies and others trickled down the Mississippi from Canada. Were Redbones some of these folks? You bet they were and many of the ones from Carolina brought the word "Redbone" with them. It simply meant they were carrying Indian Blood -- assimilated civilized Indians with a European mix!
You can find census records in Louisiana for Free People of Color (FPC), but those records do not go any further than that -- I lament, who were the Free People of Color? Think about it.
You had a great deal of detail, for the day -- White population age brackets and a column for "slaves" (be they Black or be they Indian slaves), but nothing to describe Free People of Color? Where was the record for Mediterranean peoples? They were either White enough or they were "Colored Peoples."
Sure, the expression "Free People of Color" could have meant "Free Africans" as well -- surely there were some, but again, what about the so called shipwrecked Portuguese (which was really an Atlantic coastal story rather than a Gulf of Mexico one, but it could have happened) or the landed Mediterranean peoples in New Orleans?
The answer of course is no one had the time to unravel this tangle, and it was far easier to put them in the can and forget them -- they were of no consequence. Our governments simply did not have a way to record or keep a record of these mixes of humanity.
From census records, the core Redbone families, the heads of households, without much exception, claim the Carolina's as their place of birth. Some spouses seem to be scattered out from the Carolina's to Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, Florida and Mississippi. So we can say that not many, if any, landed by ship in New Orleans -- unless they came from the Carolina's. But, without much exception, they were known as Free People of Color in 1810 -- in Louisiana at least -- it may not have been so in the Carolina's where they had other names such as Redbone.
Not all of these Louisiana Redbone families left the Carolina's and not all of these families arrived intact in Louisiana. It was not at all like closing up one community, climbing en mass onto an airliner and getting off in Lake Charles. Some parents, brothers, sisters, cousins and other "Redbone family surnames" never made the trip just as some never migrated to Houston, Texas; San Antonio, Texas or Tishimingo, Oklahoma. That's right, some Redbone families surely never migrated.
There are also bits and pieces scattered along the migration trail giving some clues to who the Redbones were, and some of the pieces are beginning to provide a more complete picture. Land titles, land passports, town census', marriage records and other civil records.
With DNA, some of these pieces are beginning to show some promise, yet the clues showing up are not all the same but of different family lines, and they should be.
We've always known from whence they came, and they were still the same people in Louisiana/ Texas as they were in Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia and Spanish Florida. There are still fragments of the name Redbone on Church's, Creeks, Cemeteries and other place names along their suspected route's of migration. So that in itself is telling.
So the remaining question is, and the answers are still out there for anyone to see -- who were the Redbones? I say they were mixed blooded European Peoples with a large percentage of North American Indian Blood migrating Westward with everyone else, THEY WERE NOT AMERICAN GYPSIES!
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
# 24 BACK TO REDBONE GENEALOGY ? -- RAY BRIDGES GENEALOGY
I'll be glad when we can get back to some real genealogy -- it's a pain in the butt answering all these questions.
Ray however, is related to me -- he is my 5th cousin. Not five times removed (which Ray doesn't understand), as we are of the same generation -- 5 TH COUSIN.
By the way, Ray's birthday is the 17 th July -- say "HAPPY BIRTHDAY RAY!"
Ray was an only child of Lawrence Bridges, deceased. His grandfather on his fathers side was Benjamin Franklin Bridges.
Ray is related to the Ashworths, and related.
But back to Ray, he claims kinship back to the Melungeon's through Jeremiah Goins, but he doesn't make it that far, he's not related to Jeremiah. He is my Chickasaw Grandmother's third Cousin and my Great Aunt Nancy Alzena Goins Thomas -- her 2nd cousin and is my GGGUncle Ransom Goins, Sr. -- 1 St cousin, but that is where it stops.
Now Ray is related to the Ashworths, and related, and related.
But back to Rays line, his Gparents were Joseph Droddy and Minnie Ashworth; his GGparents were Amos Ashworth and Mary Heard; his GGGparents were Henry Heard and Melissa Drake; and his GGGGparents were John Drake and Elizabeth Ashworth and finally his GGGGGparents (4th Great) John Aaron Drake, Jr. and Rosalie Abshire (my 4th Great Grandparents).
Now Ray is related to a lot of Ashworths. Take for instance, Eli Ashworth 1824-1896. Ray's relation to Eli, is this:
Half 3rd Great-Grand Uncle
1st cousin, four times removed
Half-1st cousin 5 times removed
2nd cousin 4 times removed
Husband of the 1st cousin 4 times removed
Husband of the 1st cousin 5 times removed
Husband of the half 1st cousin 5 times removed
Husband of the 2nd cousin 4 times removed
But, you get the point, I know his lines. Of course I had the ability to print a kinship report, and that is an important tool when you have distant relations BS ing you and the Melungeon folks about being a Melungeon through Jeremiah Goins. NOT!
And even if he had been related, the Jeremiah connection to the Melungeons has yet to be proven, and I refuse to use it until that time.
No, Ray Bridges is not related to Jeremiah Goins, the Texas Goins Patriarch. Ray is related to Sharafina Drake Goins, his 3rd Great Aunt, but not Sharafina's husband! Jeremiah is my 3rd GGfather.
Ray is related to the Ashworths.Ray however, is related to me -- he is my 5th cousin. Not five times removed (which Ray doesn't understand), as we are of the same generation -- 5 TH COUSIN.
By the way, Ray's birthday is the 17 th July -- say "HAPPY BIRTHDAY RAY!"
Ray was an only child of Lawrence Bridges, deceased. His grandfather on his fathers side was Benjamin Franklin Bridges.
Ray is related to the Ashworths, and related.
But back to Ray, he claims kinship back to the Melungeon's through Jeremiah Goins, but he doesn't make it that far, he's not related to Jeremiah. He is my Chickasaw Grandmother's third Cousin and my Great Aunt Nancy Alzena Goins Thomas -- her 2nd cousin and is my GGGUncle Ransom Goins, Sr. -- 1 St cousin, but that is where it stops.
Now Ray is related to the Ashworths, and related, and related.
But back to Rays line, his Gparents were Joseph Droddy and Minnie Ashworth; his GGparents were Amos Ashworth and Mary Heard; his GGGparents were Henry Heard and Melissa Drake; and his GGGGparents were John Drake and Elizabeth Ashworth and finally his GGGGGparents (4th Great) John Aaron Drake, Jr. and Rosalie Abshire (my 4th Great Grandparents).
Now Ray is related to a lot of Ashworths. Take for instance, Eli Ashworth 1824-1896. Ray's relation to Eli, is this:
Half 3rd Great-Grand Uncle
1st cousin, four times removed
Half-1st cousin 5 times removed
2nd cousin 4 times removed
Husband of the 1st cousin 4 times removed
Husband of the 1st cousin 5 times removed
Husband of the half 1st cousin 5 times removed
Husband of the 2nd cousin 4 times removed
But, you get the point, I know his lines. Of course I had the ability to print a kinship report, and that is an important tool when you have distant relations BS ing you and the Melungeon folks about being a Melungeon through Jeremiah Goins. NOT!
And even if he had been related, the Jeremiah connection to the Melungeons has yet to be proven, and I refuse to use it until that time.
Now Ray, why were you dodging the issue back in Richmond?
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Monday, June 25, 2007
# 23 TALKING OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF HIS MOUTH
Webb Vs. Bridges
Do you really want to know the true story about Stacy Webb? Well, it goes like this. Ray the liar, didn't give you all the story. Ya see, he didn't allow you to view the entire titles of the phony charges he cooked up -- perhaps he did this on the job with the California Supreme Court, I don't know -- but that is sad for a self proclaimed officer of the court. That was his undoing in my opinion.
To begin with, there are two Stacy Webb's in Christian County -- YOU MAY CALL THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THERE, AND HE WILL VERIFY IT! There is Stacy, a White female, and then there is Stacy a Black male in the zip code Ray provided -- whoops, Ray -- you forgot the zip code -- not hers.
Second, the charges involving our Stacy Webb begin with STACY WEBB Vs, ........, not the other way around which would read 'The State of Kentucky Vs. Stacy Webb," that is if it was against her. Ray, in his email did not let you see that -- you see, he thinks that this is his new re-election campaign strategy and it's okay to be a liar.
That Redbone gal is sharpening a mental meat cleaver and is out for blood.
You see, the illegal use of computers to access NC/IC records (FBI database), which is illegal, without good cause, and leaves a footprint, according to State Attorney's, can be tracked. I TOLD YOU GUYS NOT TO BE PASSING THAT STUFF ON, now you're involved up to your eye-balls (and the Creek, as we say it in Texas, is arising) in a serious matter. That's FED. stuff. Like Ray, you have also left a footprint in cyberspace. Can't even burn your computer. All the laying on of hands or Hail Mary's won't get you out of it.
So what was it about? Most all of it dealt with a company employee of hers who was writing double company payroll checks, unauthorized purchasing of equipment, check forgery, cooking the books and when caught did some property damage. And Stacy filed the charges.
Now some of the Jackasses involved, and I know some of you are big enough Jackasses, are welcome to call Christian County. The County Attorney there is writing an official letter, and it will be displayed at the next Conference for those too weak to call him.
The other stupid comment about Stacy making reference to Ray being "Gay," re: "Happy People" or some such, was in reference to alcohol use in Richmond. Really Ray, everyone knows you're gay -- you make no bones about it to anyone! As for you being sick, you've told all of us that many times, of course you left us hanging as to just what. And we all know about Terry's dumb stunt with Brenda.
And by the way, I'm 27 Lbs. overweight, but I'll agree, that is a lot of Hamburger Meat!
RIP,
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Do you really want to know the true story about Stacy Webb? Well, it goes like this. Ray the liar, didn't give you all the story. Ya see, he didn't allow you to view the entire titles of the phony charges he cooked up -- perhaps he did this on the job with the California Supreme Court, I don't know -- but that is sad for a self proclaimed officer of the court. That was his undoing in my opinion.
To begin with, there are two Stacy Webb's in Christian County -- YOU MAY CALL THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THERE, AND HE WILL VERIFY IT! There is Stacy, a White female, and then there is Stacy a Black male in the zip code Ray provided -- whoops, Ray -- you forgot the zip code -- not hers.
Second, the charges involving our Stacy Webb begin with STACY WEBB Vs, ........, not the other way around which would read 'The State of Kentucky Vs. Stacy Webb," that is if it was against her. Ray, in his email did not let you see that -- you see, he thinks that this is his new re-election campaign strategy and it's okay to be a liar.
That Redbone gal is sharpening a mental meat cleaver and is out for blood.
You see, the illegal use of computers to access NC/IC records (FBI database), which is illegal, without good cause, and leaves a footprint, according to State Attorney's, can be tracked. I TOLD YOU GUYS NOT TO BE PASSING THAT STUFF ON, now you're involved up to your eye-balls (and the Creek, as we say it in Texas, is arising) in a serious matter. That's FED. stuff. Like Ray, you have also left a footprint in cyberspace. Can't even burn your computer. All the laying on of hands or Hail Mary's won't get you out of it.
So what was it about? Most all of it dealt with a company employee of hers who was writing double company payroll checks, unauthorized purchasing of equipment, check forgery, cooking the books and when caught did some property damage. And Stacy filed the charges.
Now some of the Jackasses involved, and I know some of you are big enough Jackasses, are welcome to call Christian County. The County Attorney there is writing an official letter, and it will be displayed at the next Conference for those too weak to call him.
The other stupid comment about Stacy making reference to Ray being "Gay," re: "Happy People" or some such, was in reference to alcohol use in Richmond. Really Ray, everyone knows you're gay -- you make no bones about it to anyone! As for you being sick, you've told all of us that many times, of course you left us hanging as to just what. And we all know about Terry's dumb stunt with Brenda.
And by the way, I'm 27 Lbs. overweight, but I'll agree, that is a lot of Hamburger Meat!
RIP,
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Saturday, June 23, 2007
# 22 REDBONE RELATED -- BY BLOOD
But first, Ray Bridges Death threat (he might really mean it). So, what would you do if he made something up about you -- sit there like a wuss?
In a message dated 6/21/2007 4:55:22 P.M. Central Daylight Time, calcasieu@sbcglobal.net writes:
"Old Two Feathers (that's what my cousins call you), you must be hyperventolating even as we speak. I'll dance on your grave."
In a message dated 6/21/2007 4:49:26 P.M. Central Daylight Time, calcasieu@sbcglobal.net writes:
"Old man, you're going to work yourself into a stroke. You've done made the wrong bunch of Redbones mad at you."
Threats? Who knows, but just for the record, thar ya be pilgrim! The wrong bunch of Redbones, according to Ray, are Brenda Bass, Linda Clark and Terry Jackson. What are they up to?
Now the question in my mind, which has been popping up for months, "is Ray Bridges Redbone by blood?" Or, as my Spanish friends would say: "a pinche cousin by marriage." Ray dodges the issue which makes me wonder?
Are the other Redbones in the group blood Redbones? It is likely that Brenda Bass and Linda Clark are -- maybe? I am blood related to many of the Bass family. Is that a surprise? Thirty relations and twenty-five of them by blood. Oh, oh, there was an Indian in the woodpile.
I know that Linda Clark has been ragging the RHF (since the big throw down, as she puts it -- throw down?) to remove her picture from their website as an attendee at the 2006 conference. You know, they don't have to, but they likely will. But, which one is she? Maybe she should send a picture.
Yes, that is Ray's drama -- guess Linda bought into this phony war of his. War is hell I suppose, but what would Ray know about War? The part about Bearhead Creek is also phony, Ray just wants to drag folks in who don't want to be a part of his American Gypsy group -- Ray, Terry, Brenda, Linda?
Now Terry is another claiming Redbone, but is he, as I put it earlier a "pinche cousin by marriage," is he Redbone by blood? It really doesn't matter one way or the other, you're still family, except -- when you are damming the Redbone Community in the guise of a blood relative, if that is the case. Smacks of Cowboy and Indians or "I'm going to take away your little red ball," says the school yard bully.
Isn't it strange that with the help of KPLC-TV, according to Ray, and I've seen the emails, they are valid, they are to make Redbones Gypsy's? Is that why I've had 5 (five), (Cinco), (IIIII) email messages cussing Ray and KPLC for attempting to make Redbones Gypsy's? Did this fabrication really start at Starks? I hope not. Maybe Elain Metcalf could tell us.
And that brings up another matter -- the matter of twelve RHF DNA kits in Ray's hands. My suggestion is to not buy -- yeah, "BUY" any kits touted as costing $25.00 -$50.00 -$100.00 dollars a pop from the Starks area. Enough said. Psssss ..... "ya wanna buy a DNA kit cheap?"
Now let me tell you one more thing -- RHF is not going to stand for this racist story if it is indeed being concocted by Ray Bridges & KPLC-TV (as Ray has stated). You're on notice, you will be sorry you wrote the story. Hear the sound of tramping feet? (And that, is directed at where the shoe fits -- do I make myself perfectly clear?)
But, back to my blood relations. I've said I'm blood related to the BASS' and I'm more blood related to the DRAKE'S, DOYLE'S, JOHNSON'S, RYAN'S, RIGMAIDEN'S, GOINS', BAYLES, BUXTON and other Redbone families. Now I said families, not related to names, and it is all by BLOOD, NOT BY MARRIAGE.
Where does Ray come into the picture? Beats me, he refuses to discuss it. How about it Ray, how blood related are you? Put it on the table.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
In a message dated 6/21/2007 4:55:22 P.M. Central Daylight Time, calcasieu@sbcglobal.net writes:
"Old Two Feathers (that's what my cousins call you), you must be hyperventolating even as we speak. I'll dance on your grave."
In a message dated 6/21/2007 4:49:26 P.M. Central Daylight Time, calcasieu@sbcglobal.net writes:
"Old man, you're going to work yourself into a stroke. You've done made the wrong bunch of Redbones mad at you."
Threats? Who knows, but just for the record, thar ya be pilgrim! The wrong bunch of Redbones, according to Ray, are Brenda Bass, Linda Clark and Terry Jackson. What are they up to?
Now the question in my mind, which has been popping up for months, "is Ray Bridges Redbone by blood?" Or, as my Spanish friends would say: "a pinche cousin by marriage." Ray dodges the issue which makes me wonder?
Are the other Redbones in the group blood Redbones? It is likely that Brenda Bass and Linda Clark are -- maybe? I am blood related to many of the Bass family. Is that a surprise? Thirty relations and twenty-five of them by blood. Oh, oh, there was an Indian in the woodpile.
I know that Linda Clark has been ragging the RHF (since the big throw down, as she puts it -- throw down?) to remove her picture from their website as an attendee at the 2006 conference. You know, they don't have to, but they likely will. But, which one is she? Maybe she should send a picture.
Yes, that is Ray's drama -- guess Linda bought into this phony war of his. War is hell I suppose, but what would Ray know about War? The part about Bearhead Creek is also phony, Ray just wants to drag folks in who don't want to be a part of his American Gypsy group -- Ray, Terry, Brenda, Linda?
Now Terry is another claiming Redbone, but is he, as I put it earlier a "pinche cousin by marriage," is he Redbone by blood? It really doesn't matter one way or the other, you're still family, except -- when you are damming the Redbone Community in the guise of a blood relative, if that is the case. Smacks of Cowboy and Indians or "I'm going to take away your little red ball," says the school yard bully.
Isn't it strange that with the help of KPLC-TV, according to Ray, and I've seen the emails, they are valid, they are to make Redbones Gypsy's? Is that why I've had 5 (five), (Cinco), (IIIII) email messages cussing Ray and KPLC for attempting to make Redbones Gypsy's? Did this fabrication really start at Starks? I hope not. Maybe Elain Metcalf could tell us.
And that brings up another matter -- the matter of twelve RHF DNA kits in Ray's hands. My suggestion is to not buy -- yeah, "BUY" any kits touted as costing $25.00 -$50.00 -$100.00 dollars a pop from the Starks area. Enough said. Psssss ..... "ya wanna buy a DNA kit cheap?"
Now let me tell you one more thing -- RHF is not going to stand for this racist story if it is indeed being concocted by Ray Bridges & KPLC-TV (as Ray has stated). You're on notice, you will be sorry you wrote the story. Hear the sound of tramping feet? (And that, is directed at where the shoe fits -- do I make myself perfectly clear?)
But, back to my blood relations. I've said I'm blood related to the BASS' and I'm more blood related to the DRAKE'S, DOYLE'S, JOHNSON'S, RYAN'S, RIGMAIDEN'S, GOINS', BAYLES, BUXTON and other Redbone families. Now I said families, not related to names, and it is all by BLOOD, NOT BY MARRIAGE.
Where does Ray come into the picture? Beats me, he refuses to discuss it. How about it Ray, how blood related are you? Put it on the table.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Friday, June 22, 2007
# 21 MY END OF THE TALE !
By: Stacy Webb
I hope to add some of my end of the tale here.
Obviously Ray Bridges has a real problem with everyone. I am not sure that the Bearhead Creek Redbones are aware of his latest tantrum and rantings. So, I decided to post some of my communications with him here.
I am however, surprised at his lack of knowledge and research experience. Very sadly Ray has decided to create a personal war with me in attempt to hide his ignorance for the common ancestry and ethnic influence concerning the people known as Redbone. I am inclined to believe that group is much more enlightened and open minded than he would allow us to believe.
If anyone would like copies of any of the materials I am posting, please contact me, I will be happy to send those to you.
Here are some of the files and research I have sent to Ray in the last few months. Someone might get some good out of them, but he never commented one way or the other, any of it?
Dear Ray,
In response to your newest blog comments and more;
First of all, Thomas Nash was considered by his family to be a full blooded Cherokee (affidavits given by his sons and grandsons in 1896 to the five civilized tribes). You can see a copy of the affidavits, at my research journal/blog.
Second, check out the DNA results for your "white man's" descendants, they are far from white! You look pretty silly making the comment he was white with those kinds of results!
Third, I was not quoting you! The fact Thomas Nash was a progenitor of La Redbones, I was quoting Don Marler and Jane McManus. I told you this several times?
It's probably difficult for someone outside the discussion to understand why this statement is so offensive.
Ray, you and a few of your BHCRB's are the only one's who make offensive comments and continually claim you are the only RB's. Your elitist group has no basis, and it will likely lead to the groups demise.
Here is a quote from Ray Bridges;
"You people can claim kinship all you want. That does not make us recognize you as kin. If you think I have a stubborn streak on this subject, just wait until you meet the rest of the clan. We're not saying you aren't, but we are not convinced."
This is a very offensive comment and we do not have to convince you or anyone else, of anything! Anyone who shares a descent from the people known as RB, have a right to identify and be part of RHF, period.
Thomas Nash was in La., some of his children were born there, he went back and forth between La. and TX. between 1830-1850 (1850 he was 96 yrs old) he is reported to have died in Natchitoches Parish and buried at Rapides. Many of his descendants, and my grandparents, were born in Rapides Parish. Perhaps you should research the Nash family yourself before you make unsubstantiated comments like this to your blog.
I do not have time to walk you through the history of the people known as RB but likely I have more research, documents and extracted records on my blog/research journal about him, and his descendants, that would help you understand. Go check it all out for yourself!
Also, the term RB is not particular to La. How would Furnam write letters about the people known as RB from SC., if they only existed in La? The map I laid on the table in VA. that many people took an interest to, was not my map, it is a map I found on the Internet.......ahhh, someone else's work.
By the way, I have never ever been "scorned" by the Nash Network. I am in favorable standing with them and have always enjoyed a good and open relationship. The Network does not always like to hear the truth and some blame the messenger rather than the message. The person who seemed to make such a fuss about the color issue, and the person Larry Keels just adores and hangs on every word, we have found with DNA testing, he is not even related to our Thomas Nash family.
Prior to 1790, Thomas Nash is in Ms. Territory/ Natchez District along with many other known RB progenitors, including your James Ashworth!
1790 Opelousas Parish, La.
Thomas Ash
Betsy Ash
1810 St. Landry Parish as
Thomas Ash 7 (all other free not Indian) members of family.
1810 Opelousas parish, La.
Gideon Johnson
Letty Johnson
Gibson Johnson
1820 Opelousas Parish, La.
Thomas Ash
Benjamin Going
Joseph Willis
Gabe pulled his writings at your blog because you are unenlightened with your knowledge of the people known as RB. He and some other's are offended at the BHCRB's exclusiveness and "ridger's only" syndrome. I will have you notice where the Melungeon gathering is this year..it isn't the ridge (Newman's). Big Stone Gap, Va. People might be willing to contribute more to your blog, if you consider this is a learning experience and your opinions are not the end to all.
I hope to add some of my end of the tale here.
Obviously Ray Bridges has a real problem with everyone. I am not sure that the Bearhead Creek Redbones are aware of his latest tantrum and rantings. So, I decided to post some of my communications with him here.
I am however, surprised at his lack of knowledge and research experience. Very sadly Ray has decided to create a personal war with me in attempt to hide his ignorance for the common ancestry and ethnic influence concerning the people known as Redbone. I am inclined to believe that group is much more enlightened and open minded than he would allow us to believe.
If anyone would like copies of any of the materials I am posting, please contact me, I will be happy to send those to you.
Here are some of the files and research I have sent to Ray in the last few months. Someone might get some good out of them, but he never commented one way or the other, any of it?
Dear Ray,
In response to your newest blog comments and more;
First of all, Thomas Nash was considered by his family to be a full blooded Cherokee (affidavits given by his sons and grandsons in 1896 to the five civilized tribes). You can see a copy of the affidavits, at my research journal/blog.
Second, check out the DNA results for your "white man's" descendants, they are far from white! You look pretty silly making the comment he was white with those kinds of results!
Third, I was not quoting you! The fact Thomas Nash was a progenitor of La Redbones, I was quoting Don Marler and Jane McManus. I told you this several times?
It's probably difficult for someone outside the discussion to understand why this statement is so offensive.
Ray, you and a few of your BHCRB's are the only one's who make offensive comments and continually claim you are the only RB's. Your elitist group has no basis, and it will likely lead to the groups demise.
Here is a quote from Ray Bridges;
"You people can claim kinship all you want. That does not make us recognize you as kin. If you think I have a stubborn streak on this subject, just wait until you meet the rest of the clan. We're not saying you aren't, but we are not convinced."
This is a very offensive comment and we do not have to convince you or anyone else, of anything! Anyone who shares a descent from the people known as RB, have a right to identify and be part of RHF, period.
Thomas Nash was in La., some of his children were born there, he went back and forth between La. and TX. between 1830-1850 (1850 he was 96 yrs old) he is reported to have died in Natchitoches Parish and buried at Rapides. Many of his descendants, and my grandparents, were born in Rapides Parish. Perhaps you should research the Nash family yourself before you make unsubstantiated comments like this to your blog.
I do not have time to walk you through the history of the people known as RB but likely I have more research, documents and extracted records on my blog/research journal about him, and his descendants, that would help you understand. Go check it all out for yourself!
Also, the term RB is not particular to La. How would Furnam write letters about the people known as RB from SC., if they only existed in La? The map I laid on the table in VA. that many people took an interest to, was not my map, it is a map I found on the Internet.......ahhh, someone else's work.
By the way, I have never ever been "scorned" by the Nash Network. I am in favorable standing with them and have always enjoyed a good and open relationship. The Network does not always like to hear the truth and some blame the messenger rather than the message. The person who seemed to make such a fuss about the color issue, and the person Larry Keels just adores and hangs on every word, we have found with DNA testing, he is not even related to our Thomas Nash family.
Prior to 1790, Thomas Nash is in Ms. Territory/ Natchez District along with many other known RB progenitors, including your James Ashworth!
1790 Opelousas Parish, La.
Thomas Ash
Betsy Ash
1810 St. Landry Parish as
Thomas Ash 7 (all other free not Indian) members of family.
1810 Opelousas parish, La.
Gideon Johnson
Letty Johnson
Gibson Johnson
1820 Opelousas Parish, La.
Thomas Ash
Benjamin Going
Joseph Willis
Gabe pulled his writings at your blog because you are unenlightened with your knowledge of the people known as RB. He and some other's are offended at the BHCRB's exclusiveness and "ridger's only" syndrome. I will have you notice where the Melungeon gathering is this year..it isn't the ridge (Newman's). Big Stone Gap, Va. People might be willing to contribute more to your blog, if you consider this is a learning experience and your opinions are not the end to all.
Ray Bridges wrote;
"You still don't seem to get what pissed me off. Be that as it may, I prefer not to argue about theories. One is as good as another. Just because I don't buy yours does not mean that I'm close minded or ignorant. It just means you haven't convinced me. For all I know you may be right, but you've made plenty of unsubstantiated claims, some annoying and some close to being offensive."
"I don't care that you have passionately held views. I do mind that you are so sure of your opinion that you would say something as asinine as you did."
"KPLC is not interested in the history of mixed-race people in the United States. They are interested in the strange and mysterious people who inhabit the western part of the parish of Calcasieu who are called Redbones. They are the only ones about whom I feel any qualification to write."
"You people can claim kinship all you want. That does not make us recognize you as kin. If you think I have a stubborn streak on this subject, just wait until you meet the rest of the clan. We're not saying you aren't, but we are not convinced. Yelling at me does not convince me either. It just makes me stop listening. Same with telling me that I have a closed mind because I do not agree with you."
"I continue to believe that we are traveling down the same path, even if we travel at different speeds. My direction is determined by the information I learn each day. I do not have a preconceived notion about where we are supposed to end up. Can you be sure of the same? Sometimes I think you read and research to upport your conclusions."
"I do not like conflict and arguing. I will shut someone off if they persist. You can get over my silence a lot more quickly than you're likely to get over my getting down and basic and telling you off. Silence doesn't sting nearly as much as sharp words."
I'm not mad at you, but the chill is still in the air.
I'll be making a report with recommendations to the board tomorrow. The discussion is over when you blame me for not being convinced by what you consider irrefutable evidence. Your failure to convince me of something does not mean I refuse to understand your point. It means that you have failed to convince me. "ParrotsGrl@aol.com wrote:
Hi Ray
"Please don't cut off our communications, even if we disagree I hope we can stick together. I would like to read your article, I think the board members would also appreciate knowing an article will soon be published. I was not being critical, I just wanted to make sure we all have proper representation and acknowledgement. The ones in TX/Ms/SC and other points who might share our heritage, may or may not identify now but I hope to slowly change their ways of thinking and bring pride to their personal heritage. We have to remember we are representing a larger picture for Redbone Heritage Foundation and RB people in general. I do not feel because someone may or may not "identify" with their heritage does not make them any less one of us. Blood is blood and heritage is heritage..if you recognize it or not, it can't be changed. Hope you have a terrific trip and maybe get some rest before you go? I will be working on website updates and my Chronicles article. I am having some trouble with bravenet again but I have a support ticket into them, hope to get it worked out soon."chat soon!
The following emails are all to old to forward, so I am archiving the communications from Ray and myself concerning the "argument" he says we had...it never happened. We had one heated debate or exchange on the telephone after he informed me that his plans for RHF does not include the ones in TX., MS., or any other place but right there in Calcaseui Parish, La. He also informed me that he would not mention or comment on any of the groups in his coming article out of Lake Charles and he certainly did not plan on including anyone who went to or might have remained in Mississippi or any other locations for that matter.
"I intend to concentrate my article and promotional effort with KPLC toward the Redbone American Gypsy theory."
Now, I then sent him evidence his ancestor James Ashworth was in Natchez District, Claiborne Co., Ms to be exact, he bundled those documents up and sent them right back to me with NO COMMENT.
Ray and I never had any argument, and I have never gotten mad or yelled at him for anything. He is a liar.
In an email dated 4/26/2007
I received the following from Ray Bridges in response to the below information I sent to him:
Ray said:
"One list I do want is of members who didn't rejoin. I want to focus a letter and/or email to them asking them to hold tight with us and help us grow into whatever it was they imagined we were when they joined the first year. I haven't forgotten nor have I conceded any of the issues about which we discussed several weeks ago. I don't like to be argumentative. I figure we can argue all we want in Virginia."
Cheers.
My response to Ray dated 4/30/2007 in response to the above
Hi Ray
Glad to hear from you. Are you back from your wonderful adventures? That's OK if you do not agree with me, we can chat and talk about it when we see one another. I will forward you a membership email but not sure it will show only those who did not re up their due's but likely I can mark which did and which did not? I will appreciate anything you can do to help with the membership. I also have a way to send mass emails from our website and have a very very large database of email address for people who are interested in RHF. I will send those along also.
The following is the email that generated the above email to Gabe's post to the RHF blog. I will try to recover his comments about the blog posting but you can get the jest of the communications.
Hi Ray
Well, I did read the new post. I will have to agree that there are known communities of Redbones other than La. and South Carolina. In fact, I am not sure if you know but many our my RB ancestors (children of Thomas Nash) were born in Georgia and Ms.! I have an affidavit from the Nash grandchildren who say James (son of one Thomas Nash) was born in Georgia and the other children in Mississippi. Benjamin Nash (another son of Thomas and another great grandfather of mine) signed The Cherokee, old Settlers treaty in Mississippi. Thomas Nash was a registered tobacco grower and "keeper of the peace" in Mississippi as early as late 1780's. Thomas Nash, Sr who married Unknown and father of Thomas Nash who m Emily Slater and Anna Goins is reported to have died in Lawrence Co., Ms. he was born in North Carolina. True, the Redbones lived many places and I am sure are scattered all over the country.
There was a group who lived around the Black Lake area (1941 La Writers project) and Kasatchie.
There is the Ms community known as Redbone which likely was established by Thomas Nash, Sr and Tobias Gibson, prior to 1800.
Becoming Southern, The Evolution of a Way of Life, Warren County and Vicksburg, Mississippi, 1770-1860 Publisher: Oxford University Press Publication Date: 1995 Page No: 106
I purchased a copy of the above titled book, Becoming Southern and presented it to Ray at the VA Conference in Richmond. He asked me what the book was about and I told him The Redbone Community near Vicksburg, MS. Unfortunately looking back this was the obvious breaking point for Mr Bridges, he said "well, I will never read it our families were never in Mississippi and it is all a fabrication".
When I returned home, I found that his James Ashworth had in fact signed affidavits and witnessed several documents in Claiborne Co., Ms. in Natchez District. I sent the following extracted records to him as an email attachment. Within a few minutes I received an email with all the same files I sent to him in a zip folder with the only this message "NO COMMENT I am returning these to you, this is not my relative". Decide for yourself, some of you may know if it is James Ashworth a progenitor of many La Redbones or not. I do not come through the Ashworth family.
- Early AL, AR, and MI Settlers, 1700s-1800s Ashworth, ??? Book : The Natchez Court Records, 1767-1805 Page # : 369
- Ashworth, James Book : The Natchez Court Records, 1767-1805 Page # : 369
- Ashworth, James Book : The Natchez Court Records, 1767-1805 Page # : 518
- Ashworth, Private John Book : Mississippi Territory in the War of 1812 Page # : 189
South Carolina
Page 1 of 1 -- Select Page: 1
View Details - Record: 1 of 12 recordsSeries: S136002 Box - 003A Item - 00283 ignore - 00 Date: 1711-1712 Description: LONE, GYLES VS WILLIAM ASHWORTH, JUDGMENT ROLL.
View Details - Record: 2 of 12 recordsSeries: S136002 Box - 012B Item - 0004A ignore - 00 Date: 1719 Description: MOORE, THOMAS AND ELIZABETH, HIS WIFE VS JASPER ASHWORTH, EXOR. OF WILLIAM HAWETT, JUDGMENT ROLL.
View Details - Record: 3 of 12 recordsSeries: S372001 Volume - 00B1 Page - 00039 Item - 00 Date: 1720-1722 Description: ASHWORTH, JASPER AND WIFE, SUSANNA TO WILLIAM GIBBON AND ALLEN ANDREW, LEASE AND RELEASE FOR 80 ACRES OF LAND IN GOOSE CREEK AND ALL OTHER LAND OF THEIRS IN ST. PHILIPS PARISH.
View Details - Record: 4 of 12 recordsSeries: S111001 Volume - 0005 Page - 00175 Item - 02 Date: 1733/05/22 Description: INGLETON, RICHARD, MEMORIAL FOR 557 ACRES IN ST. JAMES PARISH, BERKLEY COUNTY, SUMMARIZING A CHAIN OF TITLE TO A GRANT TO JONATHAN AMORY OF MARCH 13, 1694.
View Details - Record: 5 of 12 recordsSeries: S213184 Volume - 0013 Page - 00088 Item - 02 Date: 1770/12/10 Description: ASHWORTH, JAMES, PLAT FOR 450 ACRES IN CRAVEN COUNTY.
View Details - Record: 6 of 12 recordsSeries: S213019 Volume - 0030 Page - 00149 Item - 00 Date: 1774/05/07 Description: ASHWORTH, JAMES, LAND GRANT FOR 450 ACRES IN CRAVEN COUNTY.
View Details - Record: 7 of 12 recordsSeries: S111001 Volume - 0012 Page - 00555 Item - 01 Date: 1774/09/13 Description: ASHWORTH, JAMES, MEMORIAL FOR 450 ACRES ON LITTLE PEE DEE RIVER, CRAVEN COUNTY.
View Details - Record: 8 of 12 recordsSeries: S108092 Reel - 0004 Frame - 00068 ignore - 00 Date: 1776 C. OR LATER Description: ASHWORTH, BENJAMIN, ACCOUNT AUDITED (FILE NO. 177) OF CLAIMS GROWINT OUT OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
View Details - Record: 9 of 12 recordsSeries: S108093 Reel - 0027 Frame - 00296 item - 00 Date: 1811/11/04 Description: SMITH, DAVID OF UNION COUNTY, WILL TYPESCRIPT (MSS WILL: BOOK A, PAGES 268-269; ESTATE PACKET: BOX 8, PKG 40) (1 FRAME).
View Details - Record: 10 of 12 recordsSeries: S108093 Reel - 0027 Frame - 00406 item - 00 Date: 1816/11/04 Description: GUYTON, HANNAH OF UNION DISTRICT, WILL TYPESCRIPT (MSS WILL: BOOK B, PAGE 29; ESTATE PACKET: BOX 8, PKG 30) (1 FRAME).
View Details - Record: 11 of 12 recordsSeries: S213190 Volume - 0041 Page - 00076 Item - 02 Date: 1835/10/09 Description: STAFFORD, NEILL, PLAT FOR 139 ACRES ON NORTH EAST SIDE OF PERSIMON BRANCH, MARION DISTRICT, SURVEYED BY NEIL CARMICHAEL. (2 PAGES)
View Details - Record: 12 of 12 recordsSeries: S108093 Reel - 0003 Frame - 00525 item - 00 Date: 1843/05/02 Description: LOCKHART, JAMES OF ABBEVILLE DISTRICT, WILL TYPESCRIPT (2 FRAMES) (ESTATE PACKET: BOX 57, PKG. 1357)
Perkins census includes Bunch & AshworthState of MississippiEarly Southwest Mississippi Territory Pioneer DB
Early Southwest Mississippi Territory - MSGenWeb
PERKINS Trial, Abstracts of Depositions for Plaintiff
Warren County MSGenWeb Project Pre Statehood Records
NPAP DeepMap Demo Opener
Ancestry of Tobias Gibson
McLeod-Booklet-01
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/opelousas/census/1810/0311.gif
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/opelousas/census/1810/0327.gif
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/opelousas/census/1810/0326.gif
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/opelousas/census/1810/0325.gif
1790 Census SCGenWeb Archives
http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/la/calcasieu/bible/goins.txt
Nicholas Perkins Land Claim
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/opelousas/census/1810/0316.gif
http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/ga/muscogee/cemeteries/getzmem.txtSincere
PAKANA MUSKOGEE INDIANS
Database = Native American DataSELECT surname,fname,tribe,type,enrollment_type,age,sex,blood_pct,card_no,roll_no,source,notes FROM main,surnames,tribes,enrollment WHERE main.id='167804' AND lname_id=surnames.id and tribe_id=tribes.id and enrollment.main_id='167804'
Native American Data for J W Ashworth
Name: Ashworth, J WTribe: ChoctawRecord Type: enrollmentSex: MEnrollment Type: P (Parent)Card No.: 1860
Credit belongs to the staff of SW National Archives, Fort Worth, Texas, who compiled the names from the Dawes Enrollment Cards for its National Archives
Others with this Family:
Surname
First Name
Type
Sex
Age
Blood %
Ashworth
J W
P (Parent)
M
Ashworth
Sarah
P (Parent)
F
Battiest
Gibson
P (Parent)
M
Battiest
Winnie
P (Parent)
F
Battiest
Lewis G
BB (By Blood)
M
30
FULL
Battiest
Effie
BB (By Blood)
F
24
IW
Battiest
Lewis G Jr
BB (By Blood)
M
4
1/2
Battiest
Doyle
BB (By Blood)
M
1
1/2
Battiest
Henry Lloyd
BB (By Blood)
M
1
1/2
User-Added Notes (click here to add a note): none
Native American Data for Sarah Ashworth
Name: Ashworth, SarahTribe: ChoctawRecord Type: enrollmentSex: FEnrollment Type: P (Parent)Card No.: 1860
Credit belongs to the staff of SW National Archives, Fort Worth, Texas, who compiled the names from the Dawes Enrollment Cards for its National Archives
Others with this Family:
Surname
First Name
Type
Sex
Age
Blood %
Ashworth
J W
P (Parent)
M
Ashworth
Sarah
P (Parent)
F
Battiest
Gibson
P (Parent)
M
Battiest
Winnie
P (Parent)
F
Battiest
Lewis G
BB (By Blood)
M
30
FULL
Battiest
Effie
BB (By Blood)
F
24
IW
Battiest
Lewis G Jr
BB (By Blood)
M
4
1/2
Battiest
Doyle
BB (By Blood)
M
1
1/2
Battiest
Henry Lloyd
BB (By Blood)
M
1
1/2
User-Added Notes (click here to add a note): noneFrom Ray
I forgot what I was going to say;
I started out with the intention of saying something important. Maybe not important as such, but interesting to the point.I'm writing my blog posting for KPLC right now. I think there was some point I wanted to run by you, but right now I can't remember it. Damn, I hate when that happens.I inadvertently took a copy of The Cherry Winch Country which I re-read on the plane coming home. I find it so patently offensive. I wish one of our better writers would make up a story in response to it. Hint. Hint. I would, but I'm busy. I thought your ancestor Thomas Nash was in one of those fights. Which one? The Cherry Winche book says there are three groups of Redbones: those around Oakdale and Pitkin, Bearhead Creek, and a nest of the vipers in East Texas. Was the East Texas ones a combination of your Nash and Stringers and the collateral kin from James Ashworth Jr?. You know he was in Angelina County in the 1850s and later. How extensive a community was it? How many families can you identify? Is there a community of Redbones there now, and do any of them, (other than you), identify as Redbones?My present approach to KPLC is that the word Redbone is a word used by the dominant society rather than Mulatto which had too many other meanings by the late 1800s. I think they used it on purpose to distinguish us from sub-saharan Africans.I'll send you a copy of the post when I get close to being finished. I hope you'll feel comfortable enough to challenge me if I say something you disagree with strongly. I doubt I will, but I want to run it by our board and several other interested parties before I submit it. I am who I am, but I also represent the RHF, and I don't want to be perceived as straying too far afield.Now, another request. Again, I'm not being argumentative. I want to read what you've read and understand your point of view. Where in Don's book does he credit Thomas Nash as being the proginator of so many Redbones? I want to understand where that comes from. I read through the book and couldn't find it. I've asked my buddy in Oakdale to take me around and introduce me to some of his folk when I'm down there next week. I'd also head to East Texas if there were any other Redbone identified people there besides Larry Keels, and he scares me.
More to come!
Thursday, June 21, 2007
# 20 ABOUT THE TIME YOU SAY NEVER! IMPOSSIBLE! YOU'RE SLAPPED DOWN BY FATE!
I once heard of a Lakota Indian who was attempting suicide because he had taken a DNA test hoping to prove a line to Chief Crazy Horse only to find he was related to General George Custer. Some days you can't win.
Take the ups and downs of Ray Bridges -- he was excited to take a test to determine his Indian Ancestor -- no, it was not Tiny Tim -- only to find he had a Haplo of E3a -- Western Africa. (I give credit to Ray for much of the following information.)
Such is the plight of some of the various Nash lines who are coming back E3a. It makes no difference to most, as they knew there was that chance, but to some it was devastating.
One Nash who took a 67 marker test even found out that he was not closely related to the other Nash's shown but carried the African Haplo just the same.
Of course, there are many reasons for taking a DNA test in the first place. 1). to find your ethnicity, 2). to connect family lines, 3). medical reasons, 4). paternity, and perhaps legal reasons.
If you take these tests for the reasons of one or two, you should be steeled against the results that you find should you not like them -- after all, we can't all be royalty, but what difference does it make if you are but African Royalty?
Some folks will immediately fault the test and search around for a test that would make them lighter. They will never retake the test. Lot's of things to consider here, and you really should seek professional advice if you have thin skin. Such is the problem for some of our blue blood founding pioneer families of today.
No I'm not saying they were slave owners who cavorted with their slaves against their will, I'm saying they came that way, were accepted as White way back when or entered into mixed marriages during the migration periods. To say, "no Black or Red in our family" is stupid unless you know for sure.
Why, some White men even carried their wives as slaves because they could not legally marry them, and so what, they all lived in the sticks anyway -- no roads, no phone, no ipods, and no one really cared as long as it was out of sight.
But, the tests are what they are, and they don't lie. If you mix the results of one test with another -- well, garbage in, garbage out! You really need to tell the whole story.
Here are a group of Nash results posted on the web:
Take the ups and downs of Ray Bridges -- he was excited to take a test to determine his Indian Ancestor -- no, it was not Tiny Tim -- only to find he had a Haplo of E3a -- Western Africa. (I give credit to Ray for much of the following information.)
Such is the plight of some of the various Nash lines who are coming back E3a. It makes no difference to most, as they knew there was that chance, but to some it was devastating.
One Nash who took a 67 marker test even found out that he was not closely related to the other Nash's shown but carried the African Haplo just the same.
Of course, there are many reasons for taking a DNA test in the first place. 1). to find your ethnicity, 2). to connect family lines, 3). medical reasons, 4). paternity, and perhaps legal reasons.
If you take these tests for the reasons of one or two, you should be steeled against the results that you find should you not like them -- after all, we can't all be royalty, but what difference does it make if you are but African Royalty?
Some folks will immediately fault the test and search around for a test that would make them lighter. They will never retake the test. Lot's of things to consider here, and you really should seek professional advice if you have thin skin. Such is the problem for some of our blue blood founding pioneer families of today.
No I'm not saying they were slave owners who cavorted with their slaves against their will, I'm saying they came that way, were accepted as White way back when or entered into mixed marriages during the migration periods. To say, "no Black or Red in our family" is stupid unless you know for sure.
Why, some White men even carried their wives as slaves because they could not legally marry them, and so what, they all lived in the sticks anyway -- no roads, no phone, no ipods, and no one really cared as long as it was out of sight.
But, the tests are what they are, and they don't lie. If you mix the results of one test with another -- well, garbage in, garbage out! You really need to tell the whole story.
Here are a group of Nash results posted on the web:
Kit 59288 Nash E3a 13 21 16 10 14 17 11 13 11 14 11 31 17 9 9 11 11 25 14 21 36 13 13 15 17
11 10 19 21 14 12 18 15 37 37 12 11 10 8 16 18 8 10 10 8 10 11 12 20 20 16 11 12 13 12 7 12 26 23 17 12 12 12 9 11 11 12
Kit 41245 Nash E3a 13 21 16 10 14 17 11 13 11 14 11 32
Kit 34304 Nash E3a 13 21 16 10 14 17 11 13 11 14 11 32
Now I couldn't tell you who the 67 marker Nash is, he doesn't seem to match the other Nash's, but who ever he was, he spent big bucks doing this DNA test and was pretty thorough in the information he was looking for.
Ask around and see where these folks connect up to -- who knows, you may have found a cousin.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
# 19 RAY THE AMERICAN GYPSY LIAR! LIAR! LIAR!
Just about the time you settle down to a research routine, along comes another puking Buzzard.
There is always an equal and opposite reaction to everything, but this post is a reply to the faux Southwest Louisiana Redbone American Gypsy at: http://redbones-rhf.blogspot.com/ , check it out! I think you will find his made-up "fairy tales" amusing, with Ray but a fool.
Also, to my plea to him that he consider the diet needs of participants, salt, sugar, cigarette smoke and alcohol use, he simply replied that he was providing food and maybe this would get rid of the chaff -- then, according to his blog, it "sucked the enthusiasm out of their catering planning" -- liar, liar.
To Ray,
I have no intention of attending your little "Bash RHF" meeting on the 27th and the vast majority of what you have allowed in your little missive (except for maybe some verbs) is bullshit including the comments which you have concocted concerning Sandra Loridans (in an attempt to make a fool out of Sandra and maybe curry some sort of sick poor babies from her) and attributed to Stacy -- ask him to prove it, "SHOW ME THE PROOF!" Sandra Loridans should sue him!
For every one's information, Ray is on a mission to gain fortune and fame on KPLC-TV in one final Hooray before he leaves this world -- he's quite sick you know. But his deal is to turn all REDBONES into American Gypsy's before he leaves, as suggested by Jim Serra at KPLC-TV. Then he will slink off to his little goofy part of the left coast snickering at what Bearhead Creek Redbones will now have to endure.
Read his plans:
Thursday, May 31 from Ray Bridges.
I met with Jim Serra today for about an hour and a half. We had a very good repoire. He has a production group working on the story. I told him that I didn't want to be the focus of the story.
He wants to help us make sure the meeting in October will be a success. We've just been promised a lot of focused press. We could never buy that kind of coverage.
I'm joining the VFW post at Starks tomorrow. My cousins there have their own agenda. Since I am a veteran and belong to no other VFW, they're insisting. Oh, the things we do for love! I won't know for certain whether the October 20 date is good until then. I'll check in tomorrow after my meeting with them.
The Bass sisters and I held a powwow last night and the excitement is contagious. We are getting unprecidented support from our target audience. This has the potential for being for Redbones what First Union was for the Melungeons. It could be BIG. We need to set up and start accepting early registrations so we can start to get a count.
Molly Poe, (Brenda and Linda's sister), has taken charge of the luncheon. She proposes to do Redbone food: beans with sausage over rice, mustard greens, corn bread and peach cobbler for dessert. This menu is so basic that we could feed the gathered multitude for less than $50. We already have beans and rice donated. The sausage will probably be donated next.
Molly or Linda, one or the other, suggested we consider holding our evening banquet, should we choose to have one, at a restaurant in Vinton, since most out-of-towners will probably be staying there, and any of the locals interested probably have transportation. Made sense to me, but I haven't checked out what our options are in Vinton. There's a casino there with a huge hotel and restaurant, so it may be possible.
I'll make a complete report tomorrow once the venue is secured.
Oh, Jim Serra, the KPLC guy, listed for about an hour and said he could sum up our experience in two words: American Gypsies. He may have been overly influenced by my DNA results, but he reacted most strongly to my mentioning that we always called ourselves Portugeese. He said it was his experience that there was a powerful Gypsy influence in Portugal and that very likely could have been the source of our Gypsy ancestors in Virginia. I thought it a very interesting observation.
I'll have a blog posting for him in the next week or two. The TV spot will be written and produced by the station. We may like some of it, and we may hate some of it. His needs are different from ours, but I believe he will tell a good story.
I've got another dozen interviews with older cousins lined up for the next several days, so I'm out of here.
cheers.
The scary part is his comment that: .... "We may like some of it, and we may hate some of it. His needs are different from ours, but I believe he will tell a good story."
Oh for sure, with Ray's blessing the Redbones in Pitkin and Oakdale and the remnants in the Westport area will all become Gypsy handymen bent on stealing your money and not to be trusted. 200 years, turnrd on it's ear, or so will it seem in the eyes of many.
On the surface, as claimed by some Ray Bridges backers, his idea is a wonderful idea until you come to the part about "his cousins" not wanting RHF involvement -- so who was he working for? RHF or Bearhead Creek? He claims to have discussed this with Linda Clark, Carolyn Bass and a few others, he took a vote and came to this idea to not include RHF.
Your Vice President at work for RHF. His comments are dishonest.
BTW, RHF was not formed for Redbones, it was formed to research the Redbone Culture and is open to all researchers.
So, there you have the little wuss. My opinion!
And all you Bearhead Creek Redbones who have bought into his little ploy, before you are a laughing stock of Louisiana by being called a Gypsy, you better stop him, and if you don't really care, get your cut of what he may be putting in his pockets.
Bless his little heart!
There is always an equal and opposite reaction to everything, but this post is a reply to the faux Southwest Louisiana Redbone American Gypsy at: http://redbones-rhf.blogspot.com/ , check it out! I think you will find his made-up "fairy tales" amusing, with Ray but a fool.
Also, to my plea to him that he consider the diet needs of participants, salt, sugar, cigarette smoke and alcohol use, he simply replied that he was providing food and maybe this would get rid of the chaff -- then, according to his blog, it "sucked the enthusiasm out of their catering planning" -- liar, liar.
To Ray,
I have no intention of attending your little "Bash RHF" meeting on the 27th and the vast majority of what you have allowed in your little missive (except for maybe some verbs) is bullshit including the comments which you have concocted concerning Sandra Loridans (in an attempt to make a fool out of Sandra and maybe curry some sort of sick poor babies from her) and attributed to Stacy -- ask him to prove it, "SHOW ME THE PROOF!" Sandra Loridans should sue him!
For every one's information, Ray is on a mission to gain fortune and fame on KPLC-TV in one final Hooray before he leaves this world -- he's quite sick you know. But his deal is to turn all REDBONES into American Gypsy's before he leaves, as suggested by Jim Serra at KPLC-TV. Then he will slink off to his little goofy part of the left coast snickering at what Bearhead Creek Redbones will now have to endure.
Read his plans:
Thursday, May 31 from Ray Bridges.
I met with Jim Serra today for about an hour and a half. We had a very good repoire. He has a production group working on the story. I told him that I didn't want to be the focus of the story.
He wants to help us make sure the meeting in October will be a success. We've just been promised a lot of focused press. We could never buy that kind of coverage.
I'm joining the VFW post at Starks tomorrow. My cousins there have their own agenda. Since I am a veteran and belong to no other VFW, they're insisting. Oh, the things we do for love! I won't know for certain whether the October 20 date is good until then. I'll check in tomorrow after my meeting with them.
The Bass sisters and I held a powwow last night and the excitement is contagious. We are getting unprecidented support from our target audience. This has the potential for being for Redbones what First Union was for the Melungeons. It could be BIG. We need to set up and start accepting early registrations so we can start to get a count.
Molly Poe, (Brenda and Linda's sister), has taken charge of the luncheon. She proposes to do Redbone food: beans with sausage over rice, mustard greens, corn bread and peach cobbler for dessert. This menu is so basic that we could feed the gathered multitude for less than $50. We already have beans and rice donated. The sausage will probably be donated next.
Molly or Linda, one or the other, suggested we consider holding our evening banquet, should we choose to have one, at a restaurant in Vinton, since most out-of-towners will probably be staying there, and any of the locals interested probably have transportation. Made sense to me, but I haven't checked out what our options are in Vinton. There's a casino there with a huge hotel and restaurant, so it may be possible.
I'll make a complete report tomorrow once the venue is secured.
Oh, Jim Serra, the KPLC guy, listed for about an hour and said he could sum up our experience in two words: American Gypsies. He may have been overly influenced by my DNA results, but he reacted most strongly to my mentioning that we always called ourselves Portugeese. He said it was his experience that there was a powerful Gypsy influence in Portugal and that very likely could have been the source of our Gypsy ancestors in Virginia. I thought it a very interesting observation.
I'll have a blog posting for him in the next week or two. The TV spot will be written and produced by the station. We may like some of it, and we may hate some of it. His needs are different from ours, but I believe he will tell a good story.
I've got another dozen interviews with older cousins lined up for the next several days, so I'm out of here.
cheers.
The scary part is his comment that: .... "We may like some of it, and we may hate some of it. His needs are different from ours, but I believe he will tell a good story."
Oh for sure, with Ray's blessing the Redbones in Pitkin and Oakdale and the remnants in the Westport area will all become Gypsy handymen bent on stealing your money and not to be trusted. 200 years, turnrd on it's ear, or so will it seem in the eyes of many.
On the surface, as claimed by some Ray Bridges backers, his idea is a wonderful idea until you come to the part about "his cousins" not wanting RHF involvement -- so who was he working for? RHF or Bearhead Creek? He claims to have discussed this with Linda Clark, Carolyn Bass and a few others, he took a vote and came to this idea to not include RHF.
Your Vice President at work for RHF. His comments are dishonest.
BTW, RHF was not formed for Redbones, it was formed to research the Redbone Culture and is open to all researchers.
So, there you have the little wuss. My opinion!
And all you Bearhead Creek Redbones who have bought into his little ploy, before you are a laughing stock of Louisiana by being called a Gypsy, you better stop him, and if you don't really care, get your cut of what he may be putting in his pockets.
Bless his little heart!
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
# 18 WHO IS A "REAL" REDBONE
Lately, there has been quite a discussion on who is a real "Redbone". Many from Bearhead Creek will not acknowledge Redbones in other areas, in particular people who identify as a "Redbone" in Texas.
This article is not to say that people in Texas are more "Redbone" than others but is simply to make a case for those in Texas who identify with the term "Redbone".
TEXAS REDBONES
The Redbones, in Texas, are more akin to the LUMBEE in a racial context than Louisiana Redbones. Many have the same common surnames as the Louisiana Redbones such as Goins, Bass, Dial and Ashworth but they did not stop intermarriage with Native Americans.
Such is the case with Gabe Gabehart and his Goins family.
Let me put that in perspective. Don Marler, should and probably knows, that SOUTHWEST LOUISIANA, was devoid of any Indians by the 1830's.
Where did they all go?
TEXAS.
That's right, ALL OF THEM, except for a very few Choctaw familes around Nachitoches and it appears that two Louisiana state recognized groups are from those two families including the Clifton Choctaw and Ebarb Choctaw Apache in Zwolle which is where my Miller family and some related Archers lived at one time.
The tribes that moved to Texas were the Cherokee, Delaware, Alabama, Coushatta, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Shawnee, Seneca (yes Seneca), Kickapoo and all of the remaining Caddoan tribes and many others in lesser numbers.
It was the last frontier for the Eastern Native American culture and this association of Eastern tribes fought a last ditch battle around Canton, Texas in 1839 led by Cherokee Chief Duwali, Shawnee Chief Spy Buck and Delaware Chief Harris.
Cherokee Chief Duwali was killed in that battle and was shot in the head at close range.
Most went into Oklahoma after the battle, but a few Indian families remained, like the Thompson Choctaw.
By the early 1900's there were only 5 members remaining of the Attakapa Indians in Southwest Louisiana and most of them moved to Texas as well before becoming extinct.
So, who are the so called “real” "Redbones"?
To me, any of the remaining families of partial Indian ancestry left in Texas can be termed a "Redbone".
That is, if you want to define Redbone as meaning of partial Native American Indian ancestry.
We are a whole lot more.
Louisiana people of similar surnames can claim the title all they want, but it don't make it so.
You must be from mixed blood ancestry in my opinion. To have the name Ashworth, Bass or Dial is not enough. To me, a Redbone is about mixed blood ancestry.
Louisiana Redbones, they got upset when they were called a Redbone, so many of them they don't want to identify, and I say if that is the case then so be it and just perhaps they are not Redbones in the first place.
Just because someone labels you as something does not make it so.
To me, if RED meaning NATIVE AMERICAN, is part of the meaning, then I am a true REDBONE and I am much more including SOUTH ASIAN INDIAN, GYPSY and some AFRICAN as well.
I identify more as Black Dutch but who is to deny me the use of this general term.
My culture is more Native American and it always has been with the Walts and Archer families.
In our home growing up my dad had a sign in wood he had made in great big bold letters. THIS IS THE HOME OF THE CHEROKEE.
No kidding.
How many Louisiana Redbones can say that?
Alvie
This article is not to say that people in Texas are more "Redbone" than others but is simply to make a case for those in Texas who identify with the term "Redbone".
TEXAS REDBONES
The Redbones, in Texas, are more akin to the LUMBEE in a racial context than Louisiana Redbones. Many have the same common surnames as the Louisiana Redbones such as Goins, Bass, Dial and Ashworth but they did not stop intermarriage with Native Americans.
Such is the case with Gabe Gabehart and his Goins family.
Let me put that in perspective. Don Marler, should and probably knows, that SOUTHWEST LOUISIANA, was devoid of any Indians by the 1830's.
Where did they all go?
TEXAS.
That's right, ALL OF THEM, except for a very few Choctaw familes around Nachitoches and it appears that two Louisiana state recognized groups are from those two families including the Clifton Choctaw and Ebarb Choctaw Apache in Zwolle which is where my Miller family and some related Archers lived at one time.
The tribes that moved to Texas were the Cherokee, Delaware, Alabama, Coushatta, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Shawnee, Seneca (yes Seneca), Kickapoo and all of the remaining Caddoan tribes and many others in lesser numbers.
It was the last frontier for the Eastern Native American culture and this association of Eastern tribes fought a last ditch battle around Canton, Texas in 1839 led by Cherokee Chief Duwali, Shawnee Chief Spy Buck and Delaware Chief Harris.
Cherokee Chief Duwali was killed in that battle and was shot in the head at close range.
Most went into Oklahoma after the battle, but a few Indian families remained, like the Thompson Choctaw.
By the early 1900's there were only 5 members remaining of the Attakapa Indians in Southwest Louisiana and most of them moved to Texas as well before becoming extinct.
So, who are the so called “real” "Redbones"?
To me, any of the remaining families of partial Indian ancestry left in Texas can be termed a "Redbone".
That is, if you want to define Redbone as meaning of partial Native American Indian ancestry.
We are a whole lot more.
Louisiana people of similar surnames can claim the title all they want, but it don't make it so.
You must be from mixed blood ancestry in my opinion. To have the name Ashworth, Bass or Dial is not enough. To me, a Redbone is about mixed blood ancestry.
Louisiana Redbones, they got upset when they were called a Redbone, so many of them they don't want to identify, and I say if that is the case then so be it and just perhaps they are not Redbones in the first place.
Just because someone labels you as something does not make it so.
To me, if RED meaning NATIVE AMERICAN, is part of the meaning, then I am a true REDBONE and I am much more including SOUTH ASIAN INDIAN, GYPSY and some AFRICAN as well.
I identify more as Black Dutch but who is to deny me the use of this general term.
My culture is more Native American and it always has been with the Walts and Archer families.
In our home growing up my dad had a sign in wood he had made in great big bold letters. THIS IS THE HOME OF THE CHEROKEE.
No kidding.
How many Louisiana Redbones can say that?
Alvie
Monday, June 18, 2007
# 17 A WORD CALLED REDBONE
Being of mixed ancestry is not a new concept in my own family. Although we did not call ourselves "Redbones" we did know we were mixed. We used Black Dutch, as a way to show that admixture. It is term used in the South to describe mixed ancestry.
For Louisiana Redbones to dismiss their more "Red Native American" cousins in Texas is pretty much people who do not know about the History of Texas during the mid 1800's.
Many mixed families came into Texas at that time and there were many from the Eastern Tribes of the United States.
Delaware, Coushatta, Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek just to name a few.
The Starr family lived in Texas for many years and members of the Fields family as well.
Although many of these families may not have come from the historic "Redbone" areas of Louisiana there were many others that did.
I have a hunch that the outlaws JW Hardin and Sam Bass gang were probably Redbones but it must be proved that they are of mixed blood ancestry for many white people have these same surnames.
But let me just say this one thing.
The term "REDBONE" does not belong to one individual or group.
I have heard it used in the context of a general definition to identify a mixed person of African and Native American ancestry. I have also heard it used in the African American community.
Redbone, the term, does not belong to Bearhead Creek no more than "Indian" belongs to the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw etc.
A similar and more appropiate concept is the term "Black Dutch" which was used by my family but is also used by the German Gypsy and the Pennslyvania Deutch People.
The Pennslyvania Deutch people who identify as Black Dutch know there are others who use the term for identification. They know the term Black Dutch has been used by other groups.
Just my opinion folks but unlike Melungeon, which is a uncommon term, Redbone is a common general term.
Gabe Gabehart and Stacy Webb are just as Redbone as anyone in "Bearhead Creek" or Louisiana.
In fact, one can almost make the case that Gabe and Stacy are much more "Redbone" than anybody else in Southwest Louisiana today.
Perhaps.
But true mixed ancestry people do not exclude others of the same kind of ancestry.
Alvie
For Louisiana Redbones to dismiss their more "Red Native American" cousins in Texas is pretty much people who do not know about the History of Texas during the mid 1800's.
Many mixed families came into Texas at that time and there were many from the Eastern Tribes of the United States.
Delaware, Coushatta, Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek just to name a few.
The Starr family lived in Texas for many years and members of the Fields family as well.
Although many of these families may not have come from the historic "Redbone" areas of Louisiana there were many others that did.
I have a hunch that the outlaws JW Hardin and Sam Bass gang were probably Redbones but it must be proved that they are of mixed blood ancestry for many white people have these same surnames.
But let me just say this one thing.
The term "REDBONE" does not belong to one individual or group.
I have heard it used in the context of a general definition to identify a mixed person of African and Native American ancestry. I have also heard it used in the African American community.
Redbone, the term, does not belong to Bearhead Creek no more than "Indian" belongs to the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw etc.
A similar and more appropiate concept is the term "Black Dutch" which was used by my family but is also used by the German Gypsy and the Pennslyvania Deutch People.
The Pennslyvania Deutch people who identify as Black Dutch know there are others who use the term for identification. They know the term Black Dutch has been used by other groups.
Just my opinion folks but unlike Melungeon, which is a uncommon term, Redbone is a common general term.
Gabe Gabehart and Stacy Webb are just as Redbone as anyone in "Bearhead Creek" or Louisiana.
In fact, one can almost make the case that Gabe and Stacy are much more "Redbone" than anybody else in Southwest Louisiana today.
Perhaps.
But true mixed ancestry people do not exclude others of the same kind of ancestry.
Alvie
Sunday, June 17, 2007
# 16 KPLC-TV TO SHOWCASE REDBONES AS GYPSY'S?
REDBONES AMERICAN GPYSY'S?
According to Ray Bridges, the self-proclaimed Redbone who never grew up in Louisiana -- KPLC-TV in Lake Charles, La. is in the production stages of a presentation to malign Louisiana Redbones as AMERICAN GYPSY'S?
Now what do you guys in Bearhead Creek think about that? Seems Brenda Bass and Linda Clark had a hand in it according to his email to me.
Now, that Ray is a "production" consultant, and we will from this day forward be known as the Southwest Louisiana Redbone American Gypsy's. Maybe you that is, Ray will go back to the left coast to sell his story, while you guys endure the hurricane to come.
That's all it's about you know -- money.
When I put the question about the American Gypsy story to members of RHF, they were horrified and could not imagine Ray denigrating the very people that he called his own. Ray did you guys, and it was easy!
Of course, integrity counts for a great deal, but integrity is not in his vocabulary.
Bless his little heart!
According to Ray Bridges, the self-proclaimed Redbone who never grew up in Louisiana -- KPLC-TV in Lake Charles, La. is in the production stages of a presentation to malign Louisiana Redbones as AMERICAN GYPSY'S?
Now what do you guys in Bearhead Creek think about that? Seems Brenda Bass and Linda Clark had a hand in it according to his email to me.
Now, that Ray is a "production" consultant, and we will from this day forward be known as the Southwest Louisiana Redbone American Gypsy's. Maybe you that is, Ray will go back to the left coast to sell his story, while you guys endure the hurricane to come.
That's all it's about you know -- money.
When I put the question about the American Gypsy story to members of RHF, they were horrified and could not imagine Ray denigrating the very people that he called his own. Ray did you guys, and it was easy!
Of course, integrity counts for a great deal, but integrity is not in his vocabulary.
Bless his little heart!
Saturday, June 16, 2007
# 15 WHO YOU CALLING A NAKED PAGAN? DAWG!
On behalf of all the "naked pagans" of North America, I am compelled to say it just ain't so!
The latest commentary by Larry/Lester Keels refers to indentured servants skipping out on their masters to join the "naked pagans" in the wilds of North America, and -- having the gall to take their English Surnames with them. The commentary invokes visions of landed servants casting off their clothes en mass to run naked into the woodlands in order to join benevolent naked pagans in revelry. Pretty strange from where I sit.
But really, naked Christians hanging out with naked pagans in the park?
Larry Keels writes:
"However, my guess is that this type of emigrant would have been a prime candidate to bolt from the arduous existence of indenture (ship) and take quickly to the adventures of an untamed wilderness populated by naked pagans. As the naked pagans accrued more and more of the imported culture of the Christian invaders from the Eastern Hemisphere, some of them too (sp) eventually simply usurped the surnames of famous interlopers into their backcountry (Two words)homelands."
Larry
One may pose the question: "Were my Redbone families pagan?" "Were my Indian ancestors naked?" Were all newly arrived emigrants predisposed to cast off their prized clothing and valued shoes, if they had any, to join naked pagans in the bushes? Who were these naked pagans that Larry Keels speaks of?
Moreover, anyone with a little (very little) common sense, that does not have their heads glued between the pages of a "wild west" magazine, would understand that during the winter months, in most of the United States, those invented or faux naked pagans, if it was so, would freeze their Cajones off. Even the youngest of Redbones on the Gulf Coast know you don't run around naked in the winter.It is of course another fairytale to make the wild supposition (daydreaming) that "naked pagans" were even pagans and without their own Deities. One man's idol might be another man's God. Were they influenced by "Christian" invaders only?
Larry Keels, of course, is playing "Cowboys and Indians" again. Mother! Lock up the cap gun, and send the Manifest Destiny Kid to bed early.
As far as adopting surnames of famous interlopers, I would find that just a little far fetched in the 1500--1600's. King George the what?
Naked Pagans Rule, or "Fish Naked!"
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
The latest commentary by Larry/Lester Keels refers to indentured servants skipping out on their masters to join the "naked pagans" in the wilds of North America, and -- having the gall to take their English Surnames with them. The commentary invokes visions of landed servants casting off their clothes en mass to run naked into the woodlands in order to join benevolent naked pagans in revelry. Pretty strange from where I sit.
But really, naked Christians hanging out with naked pagans in the park?
Larry Keels writes:
"However, my guess is that this type of emigrant would have been a prime candidate to bolt from the arduous existence of indenture (ship) and take quickly to the adventures of an untamed wilderness populated by naked pagans. As the naked pagans accrued more and more of the imported culture of the Christian invaders from the Eastern Hemisphere, some of them too (sp) eventually simply usurped the surnames of famous interlopers into their backcountry (Two words)homelands."
Larry
One may pose the question: "Were my Redbone families pagan?" "Were my Indian ancestors naked?" Were all newly arrived emigrants predisposed to cast off their prized clothing and valued shoes, if they had any, to join naked pagans in the bushes? Who were these naked pagans that Larry Keels speaks of?
Moreover, anyone with a little (very little) common sense, that does not have their heads glued between the pages of a "wild west" magazine, would understand that during the winter months, in most of the United States, those invented or faux naked pagans, if it was so, would freeze their Cajones off. Even the youngest of Redbones on the Gulf Coast know you don't run around naked in the winter.It is of course another fairytale to make the wild supposition (daydreaming) that "naked pagans" were even pagans and without their own Deities. One man's idol might be another man's God. Were they influenced by "Christian" invaders only?
Larry Keels, of course, is playing "Cowboys and Indians" again. Mother! Lock up the cap gun, and send the Manifest Destiny Kid to bed early.
As far as adopting surnames of famous interlopers, I would find that just a little far fetched in the 1500--1600's. King George the what?
Naked Pagans Rule, or "Fish Naked!"
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Friday, June 15, 2007
# 14 QUALIFIED REDBONE EXPERT?
Larry Keels recently posted comments from the so-called Gowen Manuscript. His comments were posted to:
http://genforum.genealogy.com/melungeon/messages/19184.html
Also read the post by Mary E. Watson. She seems very confused about what “Redbones” were. Perhaps she needs a reality check.
“mixed-with-white Choctaw families owned many slaves, and brought their slaves with them to Indian Territory in the early 1830's. Perhaps the Goings owners of slaves also sired children by these slaves, and they became 'redbone' in Louisiana?” Ah, she has a sex angle!
Whose scientific research is this? Perhaps Mary could give us a citation or two.
This Gowen commentary has been on the refuse pile of long outdated material that was never seated in reference or truth. Manuscript? Hardly! Any researcher worth their salt would question who said what, where and – immediately look for the citations? However, there are none! Just a lot of mostly “he said, she said, they said” – not documented research at all.
Philip Goings [i] (one “L”) is my fourth Great Grandfather and Jeremiah and Sharofina Drake, of course, are my third Great Grandparents. I do not have “Blue” eyes and there is no proven connection to the Louisiana/ Texas Goings and the Melungeon Goings to date. Close, but not there yet, and remember -- not all Smith’s and Jones’ are related.
Now, Larry Keels, who excerpted this material knows all this, as we have discussed his favorite post up ad nausea. Nevertheless, he continues to post this non-research and places the blame on far outdated data and suppositions which he presents here to create controversy, which -- will likely be followed by convoluted double talk if it is challenged. So, let us begin – you decide.
"Phillip Goins," a "three-quarters" Choctaw, was born in Mississippi about 1770 and was a resident of the Choctaw Nation in Mississippi, according to United States Citizenship Court records as transcribed in "The Journal of American Family Research," Volume 3. For Phillip Goins to have been a "three-quarters" Choctaw, his father and his grandfather before him would have had to have married full-blood Choctaw women. This suggests that the grandfather Goins must have arrived in the Choctaw Nation around 1710 which is regarded as highly unlikely."
No one knows what blood Quantum Philip had other than he was Choctaw[ii] and living with a Choctaw woman named “Oti Montro” (could have been Monroe or Montroe and the correct given or nickname would have been spelled “Ooti” in the Muskogeon dialect). Jeremiah’s children, by deposition, say their father was from half to full blood Choctaw. I do not know of any proof decreeing Philip to be ¾ Choctaw. For Philip to be ¾ any thing, one parent would have to be full blood and the other half, or -- both parents ¾ Choctaw. The Grandfather Goin(g)s was Stephen Goings, and he likely was “born” in Mississippi or in the surrounding areas around 1710-1720, what would be a problem with that – although it is not known where or actually when?
"Goins" is not a word in the Choctaw language, nor is it found in the "Choctaw Lexicon" compiled by the Rev. Cyrus Byington. Since the "Goins" name is Caucasian and since blue-eyed individuals have turned up among the Choctaw descendants of Phillip Goins, it is suggested that he was of Melungeon descent. The names "Goins" and "Gibson" were prominent in the Melungeon communities of Virginia, Tennessee and the Carolina's."
Another gossip comment from a person who knew little if anything -- Smith and Jones’ again? This commentary means nothing and is a total fairytale.
On my Thomas side, the family name was Pushshuke and my Great Aunt Nancy Thomas Pushshuke married Cyrus “Harris” – first Governor of the Chickasaw Nation. Another Great Aunt, Julia Thomas Pushshuke, married Nelson Chigley, a Chickasaw Senator. Another Great Aunt Adaline Goins married Lewis Mulkey, son of Mariah Ross Mulkey, sister to Cherokee Chief John Ross -- mostly so called “Caucasian” names. What, no “Eagle’s flying high?”
So what is this “it is suggested” stuff? Is that like the “they say” or “it is said?” Great research technique when you want to include your own fairy tales! P"It is possible that Phillip and Oti Goins were "invented" by the children of Jeremiah Goins and Sharofina Drake Goins to legitimatize their bid to be enrolled by the Tribal Council of the Choctaw Nation. Their claims of Choctaw blood were denied by the Tribal Council and the Dawes Commission, which investigated the evidence."
It is also possible that Philip and Ooti were really space aliens. The fact is that the Goins family was accepted by the Dawes Commission and the Chickasaw/Choctaw Citizenship Courts and then removed by the Chickasaw/Choctaw Citizenship Courts only to be re-instated by the U.S. Courts, but never accepted by the Citizenship Courts. It would have been smart for the writer of this “Celebrated Manuscript” to have read the actual court records.
But, I will say no more other than the “rest of the Goings/Goins story” will be published in the 2 nd and 3rd volumes of the Redbone Heritage Foundation Chronicles— under the sub title, -- Goin, Going, Gone to Texas” -- read the rest of the story there.
"Jane P. McManus, a Goins researcher of Covington, Louisiana wrote September 19, 1989: "Several years ago I came across a huge genealogical collection of family group sheets assembled by Curtis Jacobs in a library in southern Louisiana [Beauregard Parish Library]. Included was a sheet on the Goins family. Listed were John Goins and wife Nancy Johnson Goins. Their children were: Benjamin, James, Thomas, Stephen, Jenny [Virginia], Jerry [Jeremiah], William M. and John. ["John Goines, age 42, born in South Carolina" was enumerated as the head of Household 421 in the 1860 census or Rapides Parish, Louisiana.]William M. Goins had a bible record wherein he recorded all his family's dates. He was born August 22, 1809. He was married to Charlotte Elizabeth Nelson July 27, 1832 in St. Landry Parish. She was born December 10, 1808 in Louisiana. John Drake was bondsman. He recorded that Stephen Goins was married to Edith Perkins November 14, 1826. Jenny married Jordan Perkins March 12, 1814. [Jordan Perkins was the son of Joshua Perkins and Mary Mixon Perkins who migrated west from South Carolina to Mississippi to Louisiana in the early 1800s. They travelled with a group composed of the Willis, Sweat and Johnson families led by Rev. Joseph Willis.] Jerry married Sarafina Drake about 1820. John Goins was married to Francis 'Fanny' Nash."
So what is the point of quoting this research of Jane McManus? She is talking about a generation not directly connected to Philip, Jeremiah or Sharofina Drake Goins (other than John Drake who was Sharofina’s father and my fourth Great Grandparent, provided we are talking about the Jr. Drake). So John and Nancy’s kids had the same given names. Hello! Wake up. Jeremiah was born in Lawrence Mississippi about 1800. Sharofina was born in 1804. If John Goins was 42 in 1860, how old would he have been in 1818, and what generation are we talking about – two different John’s?
"Joshua Perkins and Jenny Goins Perkins had seven children who lived to adulthood, according to Patricia Ann Waak, Foundation member of Erie, Colorado in a letter dated October 21, 1995. One of their sons, Jesse Perkins was born about 1816. He was married about 1838, wife's name Cyndelia. Joshua Perkins and Jesse Perkins took their families westward into Texas about 1840. They appeared on the tax roll of Houston County, Texas in 1846 and were enumerated there in the federal census of 1850. Both father and son and their families appeared in the 1860 census of Bee County, Texas. Jesse Perkins and his family were enumerated in the 1870 census of Goliad County, Texas. The oldest daughter of Jesse Perkins, Martha Perkins was born about 1845 and was married about 1862, husband's name Quarles. She was remarried in 1870 to Charles Smith in Goliad, Texas. They were enumerated in Callahan County, Texas in the 1880 census. Seven children were born to them, including two sets of twins. In 1887 Charles Smith transferred all of his land to Martha Perkins Quarles Smith, shortly before her death in 1888."
Pat Waak’s work? More filler for Larry Keels, perhaps to qualify earlier skewed excerpts from Larry Keels. Notice that Larry does not seem to have any original thoughts about his excerpts as he posts none. But that is the renegade Redbone, East Texas “Cowboy and Indian,” in him.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
[i] . 1815 Natchitoches marriage document Keziah Nash
[ii] . Rueben Goins, Affidavit. 27 August 1896. NARA Document.
http://genforum.genealogy.com/melungeon/messages/19184.html
Also read the post by Mary E. Watson. She seems very confused about what “Redbones” were. Perhaps she needs a reality check.
“mixed-with-white Choctaw families owned many slaves, and brought their slaves with them to Indian Territory in the early 1830's. Perhaps the Goings owners of slaves also sired children by these slaves, and they became 'redbone' in Louisiana?” Ah, she has a sex angle!
Whose scientific research is this? Perhaps Mary could give us a citation or two.
This Gowen commentary has been on the refuse pile of long outdated material that was never seated in reference or truth. Manuscript? Hardly! Any researcher worth their salt would question who said what, where and – immediately look for the citations? However, there are none! Just a lot of mostly “he said, she said, they said” – not documented research at all.
Philip Goings [i] (one “L”) is my fourth Great Grandfather and Jeremiah and Sharofina Drake, of course, are my third Great Grandparents. I do not have “Blue” eyes and there is no proven connection to the Louisiana/ Texas Goings and the Melungeon Goings to date. Close, but not there yet, and remember -- not all Smith’s and Jones’ are related.
Now, Larry Keels, who excerpted this material knows all this, as we have discussed his favorite post up ad nausea. Nevertheless, he continues to post this non-research and places the blame on far outdated data and suppositions which he presents here to create controversy, which -- will likely be followed by convoluted double talk if it is challenged. So, let us begin – you decide.
"Phillip Goins," a "three-quarters" Choctaw, was born in Mississippi about 1770 and was a resident of the Choctaw Nation in Mississippi, according to United States Citizenship Court records as transcribed in "The Journal of American Family Research," Volume 3. For Phillip Goins to have been a "three-quarters" Choctaw, his father and his grandfather before him would have had to have married full-blood Choctaw women. This suggests that the grandfather Goins must have arrived in the Choctaw Nation around 1710 which is regarded as highly unlikely."
No one knows what blood Quantum Philip had other than he was Choctaw[ii] and living with a Choctaw woman named “Oti Montro” (could have been Monroe or Montroe and the correct given or nickname would have been spelled “Ooti” in the Muskogeon dialect). Jeremiah’s children, by deposition, say their father was from half to full blood Choctaw. I do not know of any proof decreeing Philip to be ¾ Choctaw. For Philip to be ¾ any thing, one parent would have to be full blood and the other half, or -- both parents ¾ Choctaw. The Grandfather Goin(g)s was Stephen Goings, and he likely was “born” in Mississippi or in the surrounding areas around 1710-1720, what would be a problem with that – although it is not known where or actually when?
"Goins" is not a word in the Choctaw language, nor is it found in the "Choctaw Lexicon" compiled by the Rev. Cyrus Byington. Since the "Goins" name is Caucasian and since blue-eyed individuals have turned up among the Choctaw descendants of Phillip Goins, it is suggested that he was of Melungeon descent. The names "Goins" and "Gibson" were prominent in the Melungeon communities of Virginia, Tennessee and the Carolina's."
Another gossip comment from a person who knew little if anything -- Smith and Jones’ again? This commentary means nothing and is a total fairytale.
On my Thomas side, the family name was Pushshuke and my Great Aunt Nancy Thomas Pushshuke married Cyrus “Harris” – first Governor of the Chickasaw Nation. Another Great Aunt, Julia Thomas Pushshuke, married Nelson Chigley, a Chickasaw Senator. Another Great Aunt Adaline Goins married Lewis Mulkey, son of Mariah Ross Mulkey, sister to Cherokee Chief John Ross -- mostly so called “Caucasian” names. What, no “Eagle’s flying high?”
So what is this “it is suggested” stuff? Is that like the “they say” or “it is said?” Great research technique when you want to include your own fairy tales! P"It is possible that Phillip and Oti Goins were "invented" by the children of Jeremiah Goins and Sharofina Drake Goins to legitimatize their bid to be enrolled by the Tribal Council of the Choctaw Nation. Their claims of Choctaw blood were denied by the Tribal Council and the Dawes Commission, which investigated the evidence."
It is also possible that Philip and Ooti were really space aliens. The fact is that the Goins family was accepted by the Dawes Commission and the Chickasaw/Choctaw Citizenship Courts and then removed by the Chickasaw/Choctaw Citizenship Courts only to be re-instated by the U.S. Courts, but never accepted by the Citizenship Courts. It would have been smart for the writer of this “Celebrated Manuscript” to have read the actual court records.
But, I will say no more other than the “rest of the Goings/Goins story” will be published in the 2 nd and 3rd volumes of the Redbone Heritage Foundation Chronicles— under the sub title, -- Goin, Going, Gone to Texas” -- read the rest of the story there.
"Jane P. McManus, a Goins researcher of Covington, Louisiana wrote September 19, 1989: "Several years ago I came across a huge genealogical collection of family group sheets assembled by Curtis Jacobs in a library in southern Louisiana [Beauregard Parish Library]. Included was a sheet on the Goins family. Listed were John Goins and wife Nancy Johnson Goins. Their children were: Benjamin, James, Thomas, Stephen, Jenny [Virginia], Jerry [Jeremiah], William M. and John. ["John Goines, age 42, born in South Carolina" was enumerated as the head of Household 421 in the 1860 census or Rapides Parish, Louisiana.]William M. Goins had a bible record wherein he recorded all his family's dates. He was born August 22, 1809. He was married to Charlotte Elizabeth Nelson July 27, 1832 in St. Landry Parish. She was born December 10, 1808 in Louisiana. John Drake was bondsman. He recorded that Stephen Goins was married to Edith Perkins November 14, 1826. Jenny married Jordan Perkins March 12, 1814. [Jordan Perkins was the son of Joshua Perkins and Mary Mixon Perkins who migrated west from South Carolina to Mississippi to Louisiana in the early 1800s. They travelled with a group composed of the Willis, Sweat and Johnson families led by Rev. Joseph Willis.] Jerry married Sarafina Drake about 1820. John Goins was married to Francis 'Fanny' Nash."
So what is the point of quoting this research of Jane McManus? She is talking about a generation not directly connected to Philip, Jeremiah or Sharofina Drake Goins (other than John Drake who was Sharofina’s father and my fourth Great Grandparent, provided we are talking about the Jr. Drake). So John and Nancy’s kids had the same given names. Hello! Wake up. Jeremiah was born in Lawrence Mississippi about 1800. Sharofina was born in 1804. If John Goins was 42 in 1860, how old would he have been in 1818, and what generation are we talking about – two different John’s?
"Joshua Perkins and Jenny Goins Perkins had seven children who lived to adulthood, according to Patricia Ann Waak, Foundation member of Erie, Colorado in a letter dated October 21, 1995. One of their sons, Jesse Perkins was born about 1816. He was married about 1838, wife's name Cyndelia. Joshua Perkins and Jesse Perkins took their families westward into Texas about 1840. They appeared on the tax roll of Houston County, Texas in 1846 and were enumerated there in the federal census of 1850. Both father and son and their families appeared in the 1860 census of Bee County, Texas. Jesse Perkins and his family were enumerated in the 1870 census of Goliad County, Texas. The oldest daughter of Jesse Perkins, Martha Perkins was born about 1845 and was married about 1862, husband's name Quarles. She was remarried in 1870 to Charles Smith in Goliad, Texas. They were enumerated in Callahan County, Texas in the 1880 census. Seven children were born to them, including two sets of twins. In 1887 Charles Smith transferred all of his land to Martha Perkins Quarles Smith, shortly before her death in 1888."
Pat Waak’s work? More filler for Larry Keels, perhaps to qualify earlier skewed excerpts from Larry Keels. Notice that Larry does not seem to have any original thoughts about his excerpts as he posts none. But that is the renegade Redbone, East Texas “Cowboy and Indian,” in him.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
[i] . 1815 Natchitoches marriage document Keziah Nash
[ii] . Rueben Goins, Affidavit. 27 August 1896. NARA Document.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
# 13 FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR
Were the Ashworth's "Free People of Color" in Louisiana -- really Negroes? Were the "Free Blacks" of Texas from Louisiana and points East Negroes? Were Redbones Negroes?
It's a tough question to answer with any degree of certainty or accuracy.
But, if FPC and FB's were Negroes, I believe they would have been called Negroes. Neither were they slaves or indentured servants. In my opinion, the Ashworth's, (1810 Opelousas Census), Nash's, Goins and Drakes were not Negroes but they were FPC.
William Goyens, of Nacogdoches, was not a slave or an indentured servant and was in business for himself in Texas, and he was well known as a Texas patriot. I don't believe he was known as a "Free Black" in Texas, except for maybe as our Free Black, before the banning of Free Blacks -- but there was certainly a fear he could have been drawn into this ban after the fact.
The Ashworth's of Louisiana were known to be "Free People of Color," just like the Drakes, Goins, Nash's and Redbones, but not Negroes. When they entered Texas, they were not known as Negroes, and I expect they were likely dark to black but without the Negroid features (at least most of them). Since the revolution was under way, it was simply ignored as it would have been if the Mexican government had still been in power.
Remember that Mexican Texas frowned on black slavery prior to the revolution of 1835-1836. Although there were some class taboos, Mexico did not discriminate against Negroes. Also, the word Negro was Spanish and means "Black."
According to The handbook of Texas Online,
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/AA/mla3.html,
An "act passed on February 5, 1840, which prohibited the immigration of free blacks and ordered all free black residents to vacate the Republic of Texas within two years or be sold into slavery," was to counter an earlier law, "June 5, 1837, which permitted the residence of free blacks living in Texas before the Texas Declaration of Independence."
After the passing of this February 5, 1840 Law, it was realized that it could be applied to families like the Ashworths and others who could fall under the mantle of FPC or Free Blacks.
It is also curious now that around this time, Texas President Mirabeau B. Lamar was urging the "extermination or expulsion" of all Indians in Texas. Would it have gone on later to include all Mexicans in Texas at some point -- and to a degree, did it? PWas Texas headed toward a "White only" enclave?
The Ashworths were worried for good cause and so were others like William Goyens and Samuel McCullough, Jr. And there were many others.
I've often wondered why it was called the "Ashworth Act" as it did not seem to start out that way. Why not the Hardin, Goyens or the McCullough Act? The rest of the story follows.
Here is how it seems to have played out. First, petitions were presented to the Legislature in behalf of Abner and William Ashworth, David and Aaron Ashworth, and Elisha Thomas, a brother-in-law of Abner and William Ashworth for an "exemption" to the 1840 Act (the petition included their families).
Now during the process, other petitions were presented to the House in behalf of McCullough, Richardson, Hardin and William Goyens. In fact, an attempt was made to attach these bills to the Ashworth Bill but all failed.
The Ashworth Bill as it was known passed the House of Representatives on November 10, 1840 and moved to the Texas Senate without any relief for McCullough, Richardson, Hardin or William Goyens.
In the Senate, the Bill was passed in favor of the Ashworths but with one small sentence amendment that had a huge impact for all FPC or Free Blacks in Texas. The additional words were: "and all 'free persons of color' together with their families, who were residing in Texas the day of the Declaration of Independence," after the names of the original beneficiaries -- the Ashworth's. Thus, William Goyens, along with all "FPC" in Texas, benefited by the Ashworth Act.
So did the term "all free persons of color" include Negroes as well? My assumption would be that it did, provided that they were free persons. The terms "Free Blacks," and "Free People of Color" had the same meanings in Texas. Free Blacks included Free People of Color, but Free People of Color, under the legislature, appears to have included Free Negroes in Texas as well.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
It's a tough question to answer with any degree of certainty or accuracy.
But, if FPC and FB's were Negroes, I believe they would have been called Negroes. Neither were they slaves or indentured servants. In my opinion, the Ashworth's, (1810 Opelousas Census), Nash's, Goins and Drakes were not Negroes but they were FPC.
William Goyens, of Nacogdoches, was not a slave or an indentured servant and was in business for himself in Texas, and he was well known as a Texas patriot. I don't believe he was known as a "Free Black" in Texas, except for maybe as our Free Black, before the banning of Free Blacks -- but there was certainly a fear he could have been drawn into this ban after the fact.
The Ashworth's of Louisiana were known to be "Free People of Color," just like the Drakes, Goins, Nash's and Redbones, but not Negroes. When they entered Texas, they were not known as Negroes, and I expect they were likely dark to black but without the Negroid features (at least most of them). Since the revolution was under way, it was simply ignored as it would have been if the Mexican government had still been in power.
Remember that Mexican Texas frowned on black slavery prior to the revolution of 1835-1836. Although there were some class taboos, Mexico did not discriminate against Negroes. Also, the word Negro was Spanish and means "Black."
According to The handbook of Texas Online,
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/AA/mla3.html,
An "act passed on February 5, 1840, which prohibited the immigration of free blacks and ordered all free black residents to vacate the Republic of Texas within two years or be sold into slavery," was to counter an earlier law, "June 5, 1837, which permitted the residence of free blacks living in Texas before the Texas Declaration of Independence."
After the passing of this February 5, 1840 Law, it was realized that it could be applied to families like the Ashworths and others who could fall under the mantle of FPC or Free Blacks.
It is also curious now that around this time, Texas President Mirabeau B. Lamar was urging the "extermination or expulsion" of all Indians in Texas. Would it have gone on later to include all Mexicans in Texas at some point -- and to a degree, did it? PWas Texas headed toward a "White only" enclave?
The Ashworths were worried for good cause and so were others like William Goyens and Samuel McCullough, Jr. And there were many others.
I've often wondered why it was called the "Ashworth Act" as it did not seem to start out that way. Why not the Hardin, Goyens or the McCullough Act? The rest of the story follows.
Here is how it seems to have played out. First, petitions were presented to the Legislature in behalf of Abner and William Ashworth, David and Aaron Ashworth, and Elisha Thomas, a brother-in-law of Abner and William Ashworth for an "exemption" to the 1840 Act (the petition included their families).
Now during the process, other petitions were presented to the House in behalf of McCullough, Richardson, Hardin and William Goyens. In fact, an attempt was made to attach these bills to the Ashworth Bill but all failed.
The Ashworth Bill as it was known passed the House of Representatives on November 10, 1840 and moved to the Texas Senate without any relief for McCullough, Richardson, Hardin or William Goyens.
In the Senate, the Bill was passed in favor of the Ashworths but with one small sentence amendment that had a huge impact for all FPC or Free Blacks in Texas. The additional words were: "and all 'free persons of color' together with their families, who were residing in Texas the day of the Declaration of Independence," after the names of the original beneficiaries -- the Ashworth's. Thus, William Goyens, along with all "FPC" in Texas, benefited by the Ashworth Act.
So did the term "all free persons of color" include Negroes as well? My assumption would be that it did, provided that they were free persons. The terms "Free Blacks," and "Free People of Color" had the same meanings in Texas. Free Blacks included Free People of Color, but Free People of Color, under the legislature, appears to have included Free Negroes in Texas as well.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
# 12 REDBONE? MELUNGEON RELATED?
Are Redbones, as well as, Melungeons related within their own groups? Yes/no?
Realize that some Redbones were only related to other Redbones not because of a blood relationship, but only by association, as were Melungeons. Whether this association was because of a business relationship or just living in a given area would not have made much difference -- once tagged as a Redbone or Melungeon, it stuck.
Now granted, I would not think that there would be that many "Redbones or Melungeons by association," but it must have been a pretty handy curse when you needed to put someone in a can due to, as some folks would put it, "complexion."
At the same time, I think it was also possible for Redbones and Melungeons, to pass as White because of disassociation and more acceptable coloration's to the dominant, in charge, class of folks.
But getting back to being related within groups. Although Redbones and Melungeons, more often as not, married amongst themselves and traveled with members of other tribes, they didn't have to have blood relationships. In many cases, there were no blood relationships, yet there were relationships by marriage, just like there would be in any small town.
If, you have tied your Redbone cousins to a computerized Genealogy program, run a kinship report, and see who you are closely related to and who you are not so closely related to. Find out who is married into the family that you are not related to.
First cousins are pretty closely related, but don't let the business of one, two, three, four, five times or more "removed" throw you. We're just talking about generations away from you -- it's only an expression of time between your generation and theirs.
I was surprised to discover a relationship between Elisha Ryan Rigmaiden (wife of Thomas Rigmaiden) and myself. We are first cousins, six times removed. Also surprising was my connection with Isaac Ryan (d. 06 Mar 1836 in San Antonio) who died in the Battle of the Alamo.
Isaac was the brother to Elisha Ryan Rigmaiden, and therefore the brother-in-law to Thomas Rigmaiden. If it had not been for the date of death and the place of death, I never would have followed up on it.
If I had not included that family line, and had not run that kinship report, I would never have had a clue. But, if you think about it, everyone really is related, both near and far -- to everyone else.
Are you blood related to a Redbone?
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Realize that some Redbones were only related to other Redbones not because of a blood relationship, but only by association, as were Melungeons. Whether this association was because of a business relationship or just living in a given area would not have made much difference -- once tagged as a Redbone or Melungeon, it stuck.
Now granted, I would not think that there would be that many "Redbones or Melungeons by association," but it must have been a pretty handy curse when you needed to put someone in a can due to, as some folks would put it, "complexion."
At the same time, I think it was also possible for Redbones and Melungeons, to pass as White because of disassociation and more acceptable coloration's to the dominant, in charge, class of folks.
But getting back to being related within groups. Although Redbones and Melungeons, more often as not, married amongst themselves and traveled with members of other tribes, they didn't have to have blood relationships. In many cases, there were no blood relationships, yet there were relationships by marriage, just like there would be in any small town.
If, you have tied your Redbone cousins to a computerized Genealogy program, run a kinship report, and see who you are closely related to and who you are not so closely related to. Find out who is married into the family that you are not related to.
First cousins are pretty closely related, but don't let the business of one, two, three, four, five times or more "removed" throw you. We're just talking about generations away from you -- it's only an expression of time between your generation and theirs.
I was surprised to discover a relationship between Elisha Ryan Rigmaiden (wife of Thomas Rigmaiden) and myself. We are first cousins, six times removed. Also surprising was my connection with Isaac Ryan (d. 06 Mar 1836 in San Antonio) who died in the Battle of the Alamo.
Isaac was the brother to Elisha Ryan Rigmaiden, and therefore the brother-in-law to Thomas Rigmaiden. If it had not been for the date of death and the place of death, I never would have followed up on it.
If I had not included that family line, and had not run that kinship report, I would never have had a clue. But, if you think about it, everyone really is related, both near and far -- to everyone else.
Are you blood related to a Redbone?
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
# 11 REDBONE! WHAT DO YO KNOW ABOUT THE WORD?
What do you know about the word -- Redbone/ Red Bone? Usually I try to keep it short, but this might turn into a big chunk!
Often, in Genealogy, snippets of information are posted that are never coupled together. For one, little is known about what the next guy (or gal) has or does not have -- in the way of information. If we have posted it once, we assume that everyone got it the first time, and therefore, it does not need to be repeated.
One thing that is not done, as much as it should be, is the addition of date of birth and date of death (b. - d.) -- especially for separating generations and different family lines. The Goings, Nash, Perkins, Ashworth and related families are good examples where the same given name can be found over and over, even in the same or close generations. Kinship reports are important to graphically view where your lines went and how you were actually related.
One recent surprise for me is that after all my activity in closing streets in front of the Alamo in 1993 (Daughters of the Republic of Texas & The Inter Tribal Council Of American Indians), I discover that I had a first cousin (yeah, first cousin -- not 2 nd, 3rd, 4 th etc.), Isaac Ryan (1805-1836)http://www.wtblock.com/wtblockjr/IsaacRyan.htm , who died in the Battle. A further surprise was that Isaac Ryan's brother-in-law was Thomas Rigmaiden (1788-1866) http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/calcasieu/caldiatc.htm , and his nephew, if he had survived the battle, would have been Albert Rigmaiden (1842-1910) of Calasieu Parish, La.
http://jgoins.com/rigmaiden_calcasieu_parish.htmBy the way, any of you who are related to Benjamin Hargrave, Jr. (b. abt 1741 d. 26 Mar 1827) and Rebecca Elizabeth Gwaltney Hargrave (b.abt. 1745 - d. abt 1830) would be related to Isaac Ryan and the wife of Thomas Rigmaiden, Eliza Ryan Rigmaiden (b. abt. 1806 -- d. 31 Aug 1871).
Kinship reports can often reveal confusing relationships when different family lines merge. I have many of these, such as; Charles Rueben Goins (1904-1955) who is a 2 nd cousin once removed, a 2 nd cousin twice removed and still yet, a 3 rd cousin once removed.
But getting back to what we know (or think we know) about the word Redbone. It would appear that the first time it was used in print was 1881 in various newspaper reports about a civil disorder at Westport, La. or the Sugar town area.
Now the word obviously was not coined in 1881 or there would have been an explanation about what Redbone meant added to the articles. But, the commentary was written as if "everyone knew" what the word meant. How old might the word Redbone be before 1881, as it was not a new or newspaper invented word by a long shot?
We do know, beyond a doubt, that the forefathers of the 1881 mentioned Redbones had for the most part, originated in the Carolina's in the late 1700's and drifted down through Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, and Florida before arriving in South Western Louisiana. But that in itself does not answer the question about the word Redbone.
But, had the word Redbone never have been used in mass print before for fear of a backlash? A word so sensitive that repercussions could have been expected for it's public use?
I think that even if the term Redbone had been an old word or description, maybe 100 plus years old, it may have, as recently as 1881, become a derogatory term after the Westport fight. The difference being, to denote "them or us", so to speak. Remember, it only takes "one O'Crap" to wipe out a thousand "Atta boys,"and tolerance can turn to hatred in an instance when boys in the "hoods" line up against each other.
But, at the moment, the word does not seem to be used in print before 1881, in Southwest Louisiana, yet in 1881 it is used as if it had been around for sometime.
Can it be found in print before 1881 "in Louisiana?" Do you know the answer?
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
mailto:mailto:%20Mishiho@aol.com
Often, in Genealogy, snippets of information are posted that are never coupled together. For one, little is known about what the next guy (or gal) has or does not have -- in the way of information. If we have posted it once, we assume that everyone got it the first time, and therefore, it does not need to be repeated.
One thing that is not done, as much as it should be, is the addition of date of birth and date of death (b. - d.) -- especially for separating generations and different family lines. The Goings, Nash, Perkins, Ashworth and related families are good examples where the same given name can be found over and over, even in the same or close generations. Kinship reports are important to graphically view where your lines went and how you were actually related.
One recent surprise for me is that after all my activity in closing streets in front of the Alamo in 1993 (Daughters of the Republic of Texas & The Inter Tribal Council Of American Indians), I discover that I had a first cousin (yeah, first cousin -- not 2 nd, 3rd, 4 th etc.), Isaac Ryan (1805-1836)http://www.wtblock.com/wtblockjr/IsaacRyan.htm , who died in the Battle. A further surprise was that Isaac Ryan's brother-in-law was Thomas Rigmaiden (1788-1866) http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/calcasieu/caldiatc.htm , and his nephew, if he had survived the battle, would have been Albert Rigmaiden (1842-1910) of Calasieu Parish, La.
http://jgoins.com/rigmaiden_calcasieu_parish.htmBy the way, any of you who are related to Benjamin Hargrave, Jr. (b. abt 1741 d. 26 Mar 1827) and Rebecca Elizabeth Gwaltney Hargrave (b.abt. 1745 - d. abt 1830) would be related to Isaac Ryan and the wife of Thomas Rigmaiden, Eliza Ryan Rigmaiden (b. abt. 1806 -- d. 31 Aug 1871).
Kinship reports can often reveal confusing relationships when different family lines merge. I have many of these, such as; Charles Rueben Goins (1904-1955) who is a 2 nd cousin once removed, a 2 nd cousin twice removed and still yet, a 3 rd cousin once removed.
But getting back to what we know (or think we know) about the word Redbone. It would appear that the first time it was used in print was 1881 in various newspaper reports about a civil disorder at Westport, La. or the Sugar town area.
Now the word obviously was not coined in 1881 or there would have been an explanation about what Redbone meant added to the articles. But, the commentary was written as if "everyone knew" what the word meant. How old might the word Redbone be before 1881, as it was not a new or newspaper invented word by a long shot?
We do know, beyond a doubt, that the forefathers of the 1881 mentioned Redbones had for the most part, originated in the Carolina's in the late 1700's and drifted down through Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, and Florida before arriving in South Western Louisiana. But that in itself does not answer the question about the word Redbone.
But, had the word Redbone never have been used in mass print before for fear of a backlash? A word so sensitive that repercussions could have been expected for it's public use?
I think that even if the term Redbone had been an old word or description, maybe 100 plus years old, it may have, as recently as 1881, become a derogatory term after the Westport fight. The difference being, to denote "them or us", so to speak. Remember, it only takes "one O'Crap" to wipe out a thousand "Atta boys,"and tolerance can turn to hatred in an instance when boys in the "hoods" line up against each other.
But, at the moment, the word does not seem to be used in print before 1881, in Southwest Louisiana, yet in 1881 it is used as if it had been around for sometime.
Can it be found in print before 1881 "in Louisiana?" Do you know the answer?
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
mailto:mailto:%20Mishiho@aol.com
Monday, June 11, 2007
# 10 REDBONES AND INDIANS!
The majority of Redbones and Melungeon's were Indians -- perhaps, but what else were they?
You see, leaving it at "just Indians" is not enough. There were other ethnicity's involved in the equation. Indians were the easy part to trace, it is the "mix" of other ethnicity's that are still in question -- not which one, but rather "which ones."
Yeah, that's right the "mix of ethnicity's." It is my opinion that you cannot compare the same mix of ethnicity's within each Redbone family or group. I expect there is a number of basic ethnicity's common to the families like maybe Turkish, Portuguese, etc., but again, it's just my opinion. It doesn't have to be Turkish or Portuguese either.
The DNA reports that are showing up on Redbone families run the full range of ethnicity's including American Indian. In some Redbone families, the American Indian is more and in others -- far less.
At the moment, in some Redbone families, Sub-Saharan percentages, if above the static line, still seem small in comparison to other and various European and Middle Eastern percentages. You are not going to find, if I may, "one brand" of Redbone through DNA testing across the board. That brand of Redbone just does not exist.
To say that Redbones were Tri-Racial is a Joke if your thinking is White, Red and Black like in African -- it is far more complex and complicated than that often simplistic view of our world.
As an example, according to TIME Magazine, July 2005, "Brent Kennedy always believed that he was of English and Scotch-Irish descent, just like everyone he knew in his hometown of Wise, Va." And that is the way in which most of us have thought in the past when it comes to our ethnicity -- why complicate things with a long-winded description when you were not really sure, right?
Then, according to TIME, in December of 2004 Brent finally received some answers to a suspicion he had always had. "After taking a DNA test Kennedy was told he was 45% Northern and Western European, 25% Middle Eastern, 25% Turkish-Greek and 5% South Asian."
Now this is what I'm speaking of when I refer to the "mix of ethnicity's." The Redbone mix would follow a similar mix of ethnicity's, and there doesn't have to be an addition of Sub-Saharan or American Indian either.
So the next time you decide to leap off down one hallway or another, because of complexion or high cheekbones, you might want to do a DNA test to better define your mix of Redbone ethnicity.
Leaving it as Indian, or assuming Gypsy, African, is just not enough.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
mailto:Mishiho@aol.,com
You see, leaving it at "just Indians" is not enough. There were other ethnicity's involved in the equation. Indians were the easy part to trace, it is the "mix" of other ethnicity's that are still in question -- not which one, but rather "which ones."
Yeah, that's right the "mix of ethnicity's." It is my opinion that you cannot compare the same mix of ethnicity's within each Redbone family or group. I expect there is a number of basic ethnicity's common to the families like maybe Turkish, Portuguese, etc., but again, it's just my opinion. It doesn't have to be Turkish or Portuguese either.
The DNA reports that are showing up on Redbone families run the full range of ethnicity's including American Indian. In some Redbone families, the American Indian is more and in others -- far less.
At the moment, in some Redbone families, Sub-Saharan percentages, if above the static line, still seem small in comparison to other and various European and Middle Eastern percentages. You are not going to find, if I may, "one brand" of Redbone through DNA testing across the board. That brand of Redbone just does not exist.
To say that Redbones were Tri-Racial is a Joke if your thinking is White, Red and Black like in African -- it is far more complex and complicated than that often simplistic view of our world.
As an example, according to TIME Magazine, July 2005, "Brent Kennedy always believed that he was of English and Scotch-Irish descent, just like everyone he knew in his hometown of Wise, Va." And that is the way in which most of us have thought in the past when it comes to our ethnicity -- why complicate things with a long-winded description when you were not really sure, right?
Then, according to TIME, in December of 2004 Brent finally received some answers to a suspicion he had always had. "After taking a DNA test Kennedy was told he was 45% Northern and Western European, 25% Middle Eastern, 25% Turkish-Greek and 5% South Asian."
Now this is what I'm speaking of when I refer to the "mix of ethnicity's." The Redbone mix would follow a similar mix of ethnicity's, and there doesn't have to be an addition of Sub-Saharan or American Indian either.
So the next time you decide to leap off down one hallway or another, because of complexion or high cheekbones, you might want to do a DNA test to better define your mix of Redbone ethnicity.
Leaving it as Indian, or assuming Gypsy, African, is just not enough.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
mailto:Mishiho@aol.,com
Sunday, June 10, 2007
# 9 REDBONES WERE INDIANS!
At least many of them likely were!
Now that you have picked yourself up off the floor (hope no one had one of those medic alert buttons you see on TV), we can discuss the issue. It will likely be a short issue, but who knows?
Although some of the family, through DNA research, appear to have married into Sub-Saharan families, you won't find it in genealogy research. At least not in your face -- straight out that cousin what's his name married a Black lady by the name of ......!
But it seems that this DNA research always turns up Indians in the blood line, and the family talks about that without any reservations. Of course, the old timers will tell you that being Indian in those days and even now in some places, was as bad as being labelled a Negro.
Nothing stopped Philip Goings from marrying an Indian woman and having mixed blood children and perhaps his father Stephen before him was married to an Indian woman and beyond that, at the moment, would be just pure speculation. But, they were mixed blood Indians all.
The Goings who left Mississippi/ Louisiana earlier on, Gipson Goings and James had no problem marrying into Indian families -- check the Oklahoma Indian Rolls. There are Goins/ Goings all over them.
To say or think that an Indian would never raise a hand against another Indian is Hollywood stuff that has been pumped into our heads for decades. There is no such tribe (or family if you will) called the Indian Tribe. Real Indians were not the dumb, benevolent, Hollywood speaking halting English types by a long shot. They didn't grow up in Denny's practicing their lines.
For &#*&$@, Ransom, Rueben and Seaborn were off chasing Comanches as Texas Rangers and Seaborn was killed by the Comanche in 1861. They were Choctaw Indians duking it out with Comanches, maybe even Quanah Parker for all I know.
Sorry, sometimes I get off on a rant. But to continue, my near Goins family, my 2 nd Great Uncles and Aunts, Ransom Goins, Sr, 1825-1916, and his brother Rueben Goins, 1837-1930 and Adaline Goins, 1838-1927, all had Indian spouses. Ransom Goins daughter's Nancy Alzenia Goins, 1857-1941, married a Chickasaw man, and Josephine Goins, 1861-1919, married an Indian man (Nephew of Cherokee John Ross). And there were others.
Now this story is not just common to my part of the family but to other parts as well -- you all know your Indian connections, and you all know your Redbone connections. It does not have to be all that complicated to see the picture.
So, Redbones were Indians and Indians were Redbones -- a good many of them I think. You can have all kinds of Gypsy theories, but Indians hung out with Indians.
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Now that you have picked yourself up off the floor (hope no one had one of those medic alert buttons you see on TV), we can discuss the issue. It will likely be a short issue, but who knows?
Although some of the family, through DNA research, appear to have married into Sub-Saharan families, you won't find it in genealogy research. At least not in your face -- straight out that cousin what's his name married a Black lady by the name of ......!
But it seems that this DNA research always turns up Indians in the blood line, and the family talks about that without any reservations. Of course, the old timers will tell you that being Indian in those days and even now in some places, was as bad as being labelled a Negro.
Nothing stopped Philip Goings from marrying an Indian woman and having mixed blood children and perhaps his father Stephen before him was married to an Indian woman and beyond that, at the moment, would be just pure speculation. But, they were mixed blood Indians all.
The Goings who left Mississippi/ Louisiana earlier on, Gipson Goings and James had no problem marrying into Indian families -- check the Oklahoma Indian Rolls. There are Goins/ Goings all over them.
To say or think that an Indian would never raise a hand against another Indian is Hollywood stuff that has been pumped into our heads for decades. There is no such tribe (or family if you will) called the Indian Tribe. Real Indians were not the dumb, benevolent, Hollywood speaking halting English types by a long shot. They didn't grow up in Denny's practicing their lines.
For &#*&$@, Ransom, Rueben and Seaborn were off chasing Comanches as Texas Rangers and Seaborn was killed by the Comanche in 1861. They were Choctaw Indians duking it out with Comanches, maybe even Quanah Parker for all I know.
Sorry, sometimes I get off on a rant. But to continue, my near Goins family, my 2 nd Great Uncles and Aunts, Ransom Goins, Sr, 1825-1916, and his brother Rueben Goins, 1837-1930 and Adaline Goins, 1838-1927, all had Indian spouses. Ransom Goins daughter's Nancy Alzenia Goins, 1857-1941, married a Chickasaw man, and Josephine Goins, 1861-1919, married an Indian man (Nephew of Cherokee John Ross). And there were others.
Now this story is not just common to my part of the family but to other parts as well -- you all know your Indian connections, and you all know your Redbone connections. It does not have to be all that complicated to see the picture.
So, Redbones were Indians and Indians were Redbones -- a good many of them I think. You can have all kinds of Gypsy theories, but Indians hung out with Indians.
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Saturday, June 9, 2007
# 8 SO YA WANNA BE A REDBONE?
Redbones were outlaws in Louisiana by some folks standards, but did they just not want to fit in with the dominant society? Is that why they seemed clannish or standoffish to other folks?
Of course, it may have been the fault of other folks, the dominant society that was standoffish. Certainly any group of people whether by race, religion or family ties who set them selves apart from other groups could be considered snobbish, clannish, standoffish or stuck up -- there are terms to fit every case, and those terms fit every side.
Mostly these isolation's from the majority begin with a lack of understanding about other peoples standards or lifestyles and compounded, in this instance, by a color line.
Look at the attention paid to the Melungeons of Newman's ridge. The comments about the "Ridgers" likely ranged in the 1800's from "who are they" to "what are they doing up there?" And, skin tones had a great deal to do with it."They just don't look or dress like us, and they don't associate with us!" Maybe some of this was about being too nosy about your neighbors business. Maybe it started with back fence gossip. You know the type, statements prefaced with "you know, they say that."
The elusive "they" still lives on even today when some folks wish to support their personal view. If you read the literature on the Redbones, you will find that most all of them, who are traceable, originated from within the original thirteen colonies -- seemingly North-South Carolina for the most part before arriving in Mississippi. Louisiana and Texas may have been an after thought or just part of the Westwaqrd migration. They did not just spring out of the ground in Southwest Louisiana.
There is no mystery about where they came from. The mystery is the coined term "Redbone," there is no proof it was coined in Louisiana. Other than Louisiana, you can still find Redbones from the Carolina's through Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi and Texas.
Louisiana references include Black Lake near Baton Rouge, Natchitoches and Lake Charles (near Westport). This should not be a surprise as these place names have been, in the past, known trade areas that attracted a working class "work" force.
Redbones lived all over Louisiana and still do, but of course, you will always find Redbones who will wail that they are more Redbone than the next Redbone or this area over that area is the "true" Redbone seat of power.
But the truth again is that Redbones are scattered all over the land. There are no more or less numbers of Redbones in Starks or Bearhead Creek than there are in Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Natchitoches or Alexandria -- perhaps even Texas -- I even know of one in Oakland, California.
In the 1890's, Redbones were described as being dark in coloration but not Negroes. In fact, this Southwest Louisiana official (Lake Charles, Albert Rigmaiden, 1842-1910) stated he knew a great many of them and noted that these people had migrated from the Carolina's and they hated the Negroes as much as the Negroes hated them. Of course, in many quarters, if you were dark in coloration, you were a suspected Negro. But never a mention of Mediterranean groups or Middle Eastern peoples.
By 1941, the description had changed to a mixture of White, Indian and Negro. But in one travel brochure, it was mentioned that the Redbones lived around Black Lake (Baton Rouge area) and were a combination of "maybe" Portuguese Maroons from the Gulf Coast and Indians (a Melungeon theory -- "maybe").
The writer of this brochure seems to be unsure of the facts concerning the so called color line and is likely writing his personal persuasions rather than a research paper based on fact. But what is of significance is the place name -- Black Lake -- a known place in near Central Louisiana where Redbones were "said" to live.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Of course, it may have been the fault of other folks, the dominant society that was standoffish. Certainly any group of people whether by race, religion or family ties who set them selves apart from other groups could be considered snobbish, clannish, standoffish or stuck up -- there are terms to fit every case, and those terms fit every side.
Mostly these isolation's from the majority begin with a lack of understanding about other peoples standards or lifestyles and compounded, in this instance, by a color line.
Look at the attention paid to the Melungeons of Newman's ridge. The comments about the "Ridgers" likely ranged in the 1800's from "who are they" to "what are they doing up there?" And, skin tones had a great deal to do with it."They just don't look or dress like us, and they don't associate with us!" Maybe some of this was about being too nosy about your neighbors business. Maybe it started with back fence gossip. You know the type, statements prefaced with "you know, they say that."
The elusive "they" still lives on even today when some folks wish to support their personal view. If you read the literature on the Redbones, you will find that most all of them, who are traceable, originated from within the original thirteen colonies -- seemingly North-South Carolina for the most part before arriving in Mississippi. Louisiana and Texas may have been an after thought or just part of the Westwaqrd migration. They did not just spring out of the ground in Southwest Louisiana.
There is no mystery about where they came from. The mystery is the coined term "Redbone," there is no proof it was coined in Louisiana. Other than Louisiana, you can still find Redbones from the Carolina's through Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi and Texas.
Louisiana references include Black Lake near Baton Rouge, Natchitoches and Lake Charles (near Westport). This should not be a surprise as these place names have been, in the past, known trade areas that attracted a working class "work" force.
Redbones lived all over Louisiana and still do, but of course, you will always find Redbones who will wail that they are more Redbone than the next Redbone or this area over that area is the "true" Redbone seat of power.
But the truth again is that Redbones are scattered all over the land. There are no more or less numbers of Redbones in Starks or Bearhead Creek than there are in Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Natchitoches or Alexandria -- perhaps even Texas -- I even know of one in Oakland, California.
In the 1890's, Redbones were described as being dark in coloration but not Negroes. In fact, this Southwest Louisiana official (Lake Charles, Albert Rigmaiden, 1842-1910) stated he knew a great many of them and noted that these people had migrated from the Carolina's and they hated the Negroes as much as the Negroes hated them. Of course, in many quarters, if you were dark in coloration, you were a suspected Negro. But never a mention of Mediterranean groups or Middle Eastern peoples.
By 1941, the description had changed to a mixture of White, Indian and Negro. But in one travel brochure, it was mentioned that the Redbones lived around Black Lake (Baton Rouge area) and were a combination of "maybe" Portuguese Maroons from the Gulf Coast and Indians (a Melungeon theory -- "maybe").
The writer of this brochure seems to be unsure of the facts concerning the so called color line and is likely writing his personal persuasions rather than a research paper based on fact. But what is of significance is the place name -- Black Lake -- a known place in near Central Louisiana where Redbones were "said" to live.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Friday, June 8, 2007
# 7 REDBONES! WHAT THEY WERE NOT!
REDBONE!
One thing for sure, everyone has a supposition about those folks known as Redbone’s. Indians, Creek Red Sticks, Turk’s, FPC, Mulatto’s, High Yellow’s, Escaped slaves, Gypsies and it goes on into the ridiculous and absurd. Had flying saucers been in vogue during the turn of the century, surely the word alien’s would have been added.
It is for sure that we can answer the question of what Redbone’s were not, and in this simple exercise, we can readily eliminate two – White and Black. Actually, we can probably eliminate pure blood English, French, Spaniard’s and African’s but the remaining mixed blood folks are probably too diverse to even follow, so let’s just say, Indian’s and mixed blood people.
Now I do not want to argue what tribes, or “I’m more Indian than you are” even. Nor do I want to entertain the Cowboy and Indian view from the comic books of Larry Keels who does not now and will never carry tribal issued credentials or a government CDIB card, which seems to be an issue with him. Nevertheless, the Redbone issue does appear to be partly a battle between the haves and have not. One group or entity jealous over what the other person wanted. Dominant society against all others.
Those people known as Redbone likely wanted what the dominant class had, and the dominant class did not want them to have it. Was it money? Was it land? On the other hand, was it social economic status only? If you were an Indian, should you look like an Indian and not dress like a White person? So were there two types of Indians? Those who were perceived as Indians and those who were not but did not look White, Black or Indian – but what does an Indian look like?
Now we’re not talking the classic look – those proclaiming tanned skin and high cheekbones might be describing someone from Mongolia – the classic look that is. The term “Redbone” is not like the terms Creole, Arcadian or Cajun but more like the insulting term “Coonass.”
However, the term Redbone appears to have been less offensive than the term Coonass, yet Coonass has withstood the test of time and is still a referral to Cajun’s and Arcadians. So we know Creoles, Cajun’s and Arcadians are out.
However, what happened to Redbones? What does that term refer to? There does not appear to be a specific group of people other than the mixed blood of Indians and others. The “others” being a mix of perhaps Turks, Portuguese, Middle Eastern people and more – a melting pot for sure. But, the designation narrows.Therefore, the discussion here ends with the exclusion of what Redbones were not.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
One thing for sure, everyone has a supposition about those folks known as Redbone’s. Indians, Creek Red Sticks, Turk’s, FPC, Mulatto’s, High Yellow’s, Escaped slaves, Gypsies and it goes on into the ridiculous and absurd. Had flying saucers been in vogue during the turn of the century, surely the word alien’s would have been added.
It is for sure that we can answer the question of what Redbone’s were not, and in this simple exercise, we can readily eliminate two – White and Black. Actually, we can probably eliminate pure blood English, French, Spaniard’s and African’s but the remaining mixed blood folks are probably too diverse to even follow, so let’s just say, Indian’s and mixed blood people.
Now I do not want to argue what tribes, or “I’m more Indian than you are” even. Nor do I want to entertain the Cowboy and Indian view from the comic books of Larry Keels who does not now and will never carry tribal issued credentials or a government CDIB card, which seems to be an issue with him. Nevertheless, the Redbone issue does appear to be partly a battle between the haves and have not. One group or entity jealous over what the other person wanted. Dominant society against all others.
Those people known as Redbone likely wanted what the dominant class had, and the dominant class did not want them to have it. Was it money? Was it land? On the other hand, was it social economic status only? If you were an Indian, should you look like an Indian and not dress like a White person? So were there two types of Indians? Those who were perceived as Indians and those who were not but did not look White, Black or Indian – but what does an Indian look like?
Now we’re not talking the classic look – those proclaiming tanned skin and high cheekbones might be describing someone from Mongolia – the classic look that is. The term “Redbone” is not like the terms Creole, Arcadian or Cajun but more like the insulting term “Coonass.”
However, the term Redbone appears to have been less offensive than the term Coonass, yet Coonass has withstood the test of time and is still a referral to Cajun’s and Arcadians. So we know Creoles, Cajun’s and Arcadians are out.
However, what happened to Redbones? What does that term refer to? There does not appear to be a specific group of people other than the mixed blood of Indians and others. The “others” being a mix of perhaps Turks, Portuguese, Middle Eastern people and more – a melting pot for sure. But, the designation narrows.Therefore, the discussion here ends with the exclusion of what Redbones were not.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Thursday, June 7, 2007
# 6 ARE THERE WANNABE REDBONES?
Like the Wannabe Indians of today, one can find Wannabes in every culture. Wannabe African-Americans, Wannabe Redbones, Wannabe Melungeons, Wannabe Mowa Choctaw and yes, even Wannabe Renegade Redbones.
The Wannabe African-American will tell you how they have Black friends and eat fried chicken or some such nonsense to somehow prove their ancestry and good intentions. They may even tell you that they think their ancestors were slaves, and -- their ancestors may well have been. The answer, rather than the question, is their ancestor did not have to be African to be a slave. But, their slavery example will be all they will present to hang their hat on.
The question of color is complex from then to now, but with a broad brush begins with the present day thinking of all slaves being African and all Free People of Color (including mulatto's) being Black. Fact is that at one time, there were more Indian Slaves in Louisiana than there were African Slaves.
Indians were cheaper, as low as $30.00 a pop at Natchitoches, but they were harder to work and did not hold up as well as the Africans. Whether this thinking was couched in fact would only be known to the slave owners of the day, but this seems to be the thinking of that time.
The term Mulatto had always legally meant a mix of Indian, Black or White in any combination. On the other hand, "Free People of Color" seems to reside in a catch all coffee can where nothing was constance or the same. But, the big question is, if they were Negroes, why didn't they call them that? Just what is a colored person? Was it someone who was not White? How were Portuguese classed? What would you call a Middle Eastern or Oriental person? Colored?
You see, it makes no sense to expouse that Mulatto's, Redbones and Melungeons were really Negroes or Black Africans. If they were Negroes, why not call them that? Back to the Redbones.
The latter Redbone type, the "renegade or new deal Redbone," bring their own modern, ready made, invented new age culture, repleat with a Grand Dragon or a Redbone Elder, or -- an East Texas transplant playing "Cowboy and Indian." They love to throw around the word "Elder" and seem to glow when they use it. Bunk!
These brands of semi organized lunacy, without an original thought, but with at least one Elvis era adoring member (usually known as Ethel, Mary, Mona, Marilyn or --whatever), always supports the "Elder" or "Head Cowboy" who leads her around by the nose, like a cow, when it comes to the official line. The latter of course are my opinions and observations.
The only thing missing in these cults, is a Grand Dragon and of course, even the slightest hint of research or original thoughts. That's right, original thoughts that lead to research with substance -- without the "what if" or "they say" in a poorly researched issue.
The Wanabe Redbone or Melungeon might mean well when it comes to the declaration of I'm a "Redbone" or I'm a "Melungeon," but fail the test everytime when it all hinges on having the same last name in their family history that is common in known Melungeon or Redbone families. Just like "not all Smith's and Jones' are not related," neither are "all Goins', Gibson's, Collin's or McCoy's related."
To have the connections for real, you need to prove that "family" connection, they really have to be related or at least connected by marriage.
My final thought is that if you didn't call a Redbone Negro, did you call them Redbone because they were White on the outside but "Red on the Inside?" Makes more sense.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
The Wannabe African-American will tell you how they have Black friends and eat fried chicken or some such nonsense to somehow prove their ancestry and good intentions. They may even tell you that they think their ancestors were slaves, and -- their ancestors may well have been. The answer, rather than the question, is their ancestor did not have to be African to be a slave. But, their slavery example will be all they will present to hang their hat on.
The question of color is complex from then to now, but with a broad brush begins with the present day thinking of all slaves being African and all Free People of Color (including mulatto's) being Black. Fact is that at one time, there were more Indian Slaves in Louisiana than there were African Slaves.
Indians were cheaper, as low as $30.00 a pop at Natchitoches, but they were harder to work and did not hold up as well as the Africans. Whether this thinking was couched in fact would only be known to the slave owners of the day, but this seems to be the thinking of that time.
The term Mulatto had always legally meant a mix of Indian, Black or White in any combination. On the other hand, "Free People of Color" seems to reside in a catch all coffee can where nothing was constance or the same. But, the big question is, if they were Negroes, why didn't they call them that? Just what is a colored person? Was it someone who was not White? How were Portuguese classed? What would you call a Middle Eastern or Oriental person? Colored?
You see, it makes no sense to expouse that Mulatto's, Redbones and Melungeons were really Negroes or Black Africans. If they were Negroes, why not call them that? Back to the Redbones.
The latter Redbone type, the "renegade or new deal Redbone," bring their own modern, ready made, invented new age culture, repleat with a Grand Dragon or a Redbone Elder, or -- an East Texas transplant playing "Cowboy and Indian." They love to throw around the word "Elder" and seem to glow when they use it. Bunk!
These brands of semi organized lunacy, without an original thought, but with at least one Elvis era adoring member (usually known as Ethel, Mary, Mona, Marilyn or --whatever), always supports the "Elder" or "Head Cowboy" who leads her around by the nose, like a cow, when it comes to the official line. The latter of course are my opinions and observations.
The only thing missing in these cults, is a Grand Dragon and of course, even the slightest hint of research or original thoughts. That's right, original thoughts that lead to research with substance -- without the "what if" or "they say" in a poorly researched issue.
The Wanabe Redbone or Melungeon might mean well when it comes to the declaration of I'm a "Redbone" or I'm a "Melungeon," but fail the test everytime when it all hinges on having the same last name in their family history that is common in known Melungeon or Redbone families. Just like "not all Smith's and Jones' are not related," neither are "all Goins', Gibson's, Collin's or McCoy's related."
To have the connections for real, you need to prove that "family" connection, they really have to be related or at least connected by marriage.
My final thought is that if you didn't call a Redbone Negro, did you call them Redbone because they were White on the outside but "Red on the Inside?" Makes more sense.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
# 5 MISHIHO SPEAKS!
I agree with the thought that the dominant society at the time did not know what to call these so called mysterious people and labeled them Redbone. The reason being that they were not considered White on one end of the scale, and they were not Black or African at the other end of the color line.
They were obviously mixed blooded people, but let's table that thought for the moment.
It is certain that these folks were of Indian descent but with an admixture, of what, I do not think we can determine as it was too diverse, but we can make some assumptions and speculate as to what the major mixtures could be.
If I was a mixed blooded person who was not accepted on either end of the color line, I would seek association with other mixed blooded people. Indians obviously hung out with Indians and perhaps a mix of Indian and White would hang out with Indian and White, then -- add another mixture and compound it by adding yet another. Now picture Redbone people being closer to one end of the color line or the other -- some were more White than others and some were more Black than others, and I'm not speaking of color from a racial standpoint -- only skin tones.
Compare three possible Redbone families. One with White, Indian and Turkish blood compared with a family that was mixed blood Indian with Portuguese blood and then a family with White, Turkish, Portuguese, Indian and African blood.
None would be considered White on one end of the scale and none would be considered Black at the other end of the color line. All could be called Redbone, yet none would be exactly alike.
I also believe that these groups were often forced by non-acceptance to seek other groups of the same and formed sub cultures much like the Amish do today as a society within a society.
The 1810 LA. census' counted Free White Males, Free White Females, Slaves, Free Negroes and -- Free People of Color. FPC were the folks stuck in between. Were not considered White and not thought Black. No where were Indians, Portuguese, Turks, East Indians, Chinese or any other group including mixes shown -- just FPC.
Mulatto of course was the mix. and it only included African as one of the possible mixes. If you were mixed blood, you could be called Mulatto. Thinking today is if you were Mulatto, you were automatically from a Black heritage. Unfortunately, the professional genealogist cannot assume this modern, incorrect moniker.
Now I'm not saying there was no African Blood in Redbones, FPC, or mixed blood people. There certainly was African Blood in Redbones, but not all of them. Some Redbones were obviously of North American Indian mix and others maybe Turk or Portuguese, and -- some Redbones were not mixed blood at all, but of dark complexion and associated or married into what was known as Redbone families.
The major Indian mixes in this area were Apache, Choctaw, Chickasaw and many older and more Eastern affiliated tribes. Some of these Indian folks had mixed with Turks, Portuguese and African peoples. It's easy to appoint every African as a runaway slave, but the reality is that it was more complicated than that. A slave did not need to be African -- they could be any race, Indian, White -- you name it. The complications and exceptions were many.
The reason I speak of mixed races in the Louisiana Redbone area is that it was a melting pot from way back -- before the 1810 Louisiana Census' that we have spoken of previously. The genealogy researcher must open their mind to the fact that Indians were considered just as socially unacceptable as Africans and other mixed races as well. And, if free people of color or Redbones and Indians could not socialize with the dominate society then they socialized with other Indians, Redbones or FPC.
I believe that pockets of what we could call sub cultures were created as a result of these "race hatred names." Sort of societies within societies created for survival, trade, socializing and self esteem." Some of these Redbone sub-cultures developed at various rural communities around major cities like Lake Charles, and then it became a matter of "our" hood being more Redbone than your hood.
"We might be different and you might call us Redbones, but we'll fight you if you do to our face." Likely, Redbone was not okay coming from the outside. I think that Redbones could have been a part of a cast system albeit short lived as it seems to be. Once you quit Louisiana and moved further West, you would either blend in or be called another racial slur.
Gary J Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
They were obviously mixed blooded people, but let's table that thought for the moment.
It is certain that these folks were of Indian descent but with an admixture, of what, I do not think we can determine as it was too diverse, but we can make some assumptions and speculate as to what the major mixtures could be.
If I was a mixed blooded person who was not accepted on either end of the color line, I would seek association with other mixed blooded people. Indians obviously hung out with Indians and perhaps a mix of Indian and White would hang out with Indian and White, then -- add another mixture and compound it by adding yet another. Now picture Redbone people being closer to one end of the color line or the other -- some were more White than others and some were more Black than others, and I'm not speaking of color from a racial standpoint -- only skin tones.
Compare three possible Redbone families. One with White, Indian and Turkish blood compared with a family that was mixed blood Indian with Portuguese blood and then a family with White, Turkish, Portuguese, Indian and African blood.
None would be considered White on one end of the scale and none would be considered Black at the other end of the color line. All could be called Redbone, yet none would be exactly alike.
I also believe that these groups were often forced by non-acceptance to seek other groups of the same and formed sub cultures much like the Amish do today as a society within a society.
The 1810 LA. census' counted Free White Males, Free White Females, Slaves, Free Negroes and -- Free People of Color. FPC were the folks stuck in between. Were not considered White and not thought Black. No where were Indians, Portuguese, Turks, East Indians, Chinese or any other group including mixes shown -- just FPC.
Mulatto of course was the mix. and it only included African as one of the possible mixes. If you were mixed blood, you could be called Mulatto. Thinking today is if you were Mulatto, you were automatically from a Black heritage. Unfortunately, the professional genealogist cannot assume this modern, incorrect moniker.
Now I'm not saying there was no African Blood in Redbones, FPC, or mixed blood people. There certainly was African Blood in Redbones, but not all of them. Some Redbones were obviously of North American Indian mix and others maybe Turk or Portuguese, and -- some Redbones were not mixed blood at all, but of dark complexion and associated or married into what was known as Redbone families.
The major Indian mixes in this area were Apache, Choctaw, Chickasaw and many older and more Eastern affiliated tribes. Some of these Indian folks had mixed with Turks, Portuguese and African peoples. It's easy to appoint every African as a runaway slave, but the reality is that it was more complicated than that. A slave did not need to be African -- they could be any race, Indian, White -- you name it. The complications and exceptions were many.
The reason I speak of mixed races in the Louisiana Redbone area is that it was a melting pot from way back -- before the 1810 Louisiana Census' that we have spoken of previously. The genealogy researcher must open their mind to the fact that Indians were considered just as socially unacceptable as Africans and other mixed races as well. And, if free people of color or Redbones and Indians could not socialize with the dominate society then they socialized with other Indians, Redbones or FPC.
I believe that pockets of what we could call sub cultures were created as a result of these "race hatred names." Sort of societies within societies created for survival, trade, socializing and self esteem." Some of these Redbone sub-cultures developed at various rural communities around major cities like Lake Charles, and then it became a matter of "our" hood being more Redbone than your hood.
"We might be different and you might call us Redbones, but we'll fight you if you do to our face." Likely, Redbone was not okay coming from the outside. I think that Redbones could have been a part of a cast system albeit short lived as it seems to be. Once you quit Louisiana and moved further West, you would either blend in or be called another racial slur.
Gary J Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
# 4 HOW'S YOUR REDBONE COMPLEXION?
Are you who you are, or are you trying to hide who you really are? Some of our "Renegade Redbone Elders" or "Manifest Destiny East Texas Cowboys (Butane Truck Driver)," seem focused on raising the race issue with every post they make. No original thoughts in their posts, at least none you would want to take the time to decipher, just out of context, selected, excerpted and modified quotes from every loose screw out there.
Not all Jackasses have four legs, know what I mean?
Most all of our Redbone history is simple and straight forward, we ourselves only make it complicated by searching for convoluted answers to a mystery that never existed in the first place.
People have coined words and placed labels on other people down through the ages. When I was growing up, the labels went from White boy to that Indian kid, but it was more of a joke to me than anything else, and I did not take much of it seriously.
I lived in a Hispanic Community, San Antonio, and at the time I was growing up, it was all on the Mexicans. There was even a semi-segregated area of town known as "Mexican Town." Mexicans were not allowed in what was considered to be "White Only" swimming pools.
When I lived in Florida, Negro's were not allowed to use "White" Beach's. In Augusta Georgia, Negro's were not allowed to use the drinking fountain at the airport or the "White" restrooms, but thoughtfully, someone had provided a water hose outside. I wonder where a Redbone would've obtained a drink?
You see, it was all a matter of complexion and the part of the country one grew up in, and how you were exposed to the pecking order or the complexion scale. White -- White was good -- Tan was suspect and Black -- Black was bad. So what does it come down to? I'm more White than you are! That simple.
Now if you worry about being adopted, comparing your complexion to say your sister or other relatives, you might have an identity crisis brewing. You see, you can't change who you are no matter how hard you scrub your face. Not all Jackasses have four legs you know!
Recently, Alvie Walts, over at the RanD's site, sent the following post:
"Complexion Issue or Questions. This is a term that is in use by some people in other groups.This term has always bothered me. It is used by the administrator of another Group Mr. Larry Keels.
First off. There is no "issue" or "complexion questions" in regards to my ancestors. None, at all.The only "issues" I see are in regards to color and ancestry by some of the lighter complexion descendants. Some of which are of the Gibson family which makes me sick and very sad because that is also part of my heritage.
There seems to be a "White" vs "Black" and/or "Red" vs "Black" in our groups but I am not going to get into that. I will only state that Native American is in this culture folks. If those others can't see that then they did not grow up with it and are probably not from that ancestry. If there is some Black African in my ancestry (and I suspect there is either direct or indirect from Middle Eastern ancestry), then it does not bother me, so why does it bother some of these other Redbone group people?
We may all be mixed and of the same surnames, but it does not mean we all have the same ancestry and that is a very important point.Even if I do have some African it does not make me "Black" nor does having some Native American make me "Indian". Everyone has to find their own personal identity, and some of these folks need to stop trying to force it on others because they themselves are having their own "identity" crisis in regards to there ancestry."
Alvie
Alvie is pretty much right on about Larry Keel's denial of his race. Larry's commentary often tells the tale. But does anyone out there besides Larry really care about Larry's likely African connection -- not many. Just my opinion.
Larry appears fearful of DNA testing and rails about it from time to time, but what about his claim to a Melungeon heritage -- as far as I know, from knowledgeable others, he has no Melungeon connection -- not all Smith and Jone's are related, know what I mean?
Lately, his combined Melungeon/ Renegade Redbone site is loaded with Larry Keels excerpted commentary from all kinds of fellows -- many of them "on the ceiling." Obviously Larry Keels cannot form an original thought, at least not an original thought that is not convoluted or that can be deciphered easily. Remember, not all Jackasses have four legs. Just my opinion though.
If you want a fair and balanced take on our families, check out the RanD's site. They will likely give you an invite -- without a DNA test.
How is your complexion now?
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Not all Jackasses have four legs, know what I mean?
Most all of our Redbone history is simple and straight forward, we ourselves only make it complicated by searching for convoluted answers to a mystery that never existed in the first place.
People have coined words and placed labels on other people down through the ages. When I was growing up, the labels went from White boy to that Indian kid, but it was more of a joke to me than anything else, and I did not take much of it seriously.
I lived in a Hispanic Community, San Antonio, and at the time I was growing up, it was all on the Mexicans. There was even a semi-segregated area of town known as "Mexican Town." Mexicans were not allowed in what was considered to be "White Only" swimming pools.
When I lived in Florida, Negro's were not allowed to use "White" Beach's. In Augusta Georgia, Negro's were not allowed to use the drinking fountain at the airport or the "White" restrooms, but thoughtfully, someone had provided a water hose outside. I wonder where a Redbone would've obtained a drink?
You see, it was all a matter of complexion and the part of the country one grew up in, and how you were exposed to the pecking order or the complexion scale. White -- White was good -- Tan was suspect and Black -- Black was bad. So what does it come down to? I'm more White than you are! That simple.
Now if you worry about being adopted, comparing your complexion to say your sister or other relatives, you might have an identity crisis brewing. You see, you can't change who you are no matter how hard you scrub your face. Not all Jackasses have four legs you know!
Recently, Alvie Walts, over at the RanD's site, sent the following post:
"Complexion Issue or Questions. This is a term that is in use by some people in other groups.This term has always bothered me. It is used by the administrator of another Group Mr. Larry Keels.
First off. There is no "issue" or "complexion questions" in regards to my ancestors. None, at all.The only "issues" I see are in regards to color and ancestry by some of the lighter complexion descendants. Some of which are of the Gibson family which makes me sick and very sad because that is also part of my heritage.
There seems to be a "White" vs "Black" and/or "Red" vs "Black" in our groups but I am not going to get into that. I will only state that Native American is in this culture folks. If those others can't see that then they did not grow up with it and are probably not from that ancestry. If there is some Black African in my ancestry (and I suspect there is either direct or indirect from Middle Eastern ancestry), then it does not bother me, so why does it bother some of these other Redbone group people?
We may all be mixed and of the same surnames, but it does not mean we all have the same ancestry and that is a very important point.Even if I do have some African it does not make me "Black" nor does having some Native American make me "Indian". Everyone has to find their own personal identity, and some of these folks need to stop trying to force it on others because they themselves are having their own "identity" crisis in regards to there ancestry."
Alvie
Alvie is pretty much right on about Larry Keel's denial of his race. Larry's commentary often tells the tale. But does anyone out there besides Larry really care about Larry's likely African connection -- not many. Just my opinion.
Larry appears fearful of DNA testing and rails about it from time to time, but what about his claim to a Melungeon heritage -- as far as I know, from knowledgeable others, he has no Melungeon connection -- not all Smith and Jone's are related, know what I mean?
Lately, his combined Melungeon/ Renegade Redbone site is loaded with Larry Keels excerpted commentary from all kinds of fellows -- many of them "on the ceiling." Obviously Larry Keels cannot form an original thought, at least not an original thought that is not convoluted or that can be deciphered easily. Remember, not all Jackasses have four legs. Just my opinion though.
If you want a fair and balanced take on our families, check out the RanD's site. They will likely give you an invite -- without a DNA test.
How is your complexion now?
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Monday, June 4, 2007
# 3 REDBONE AT THE ALAMO?
Some things trouble me -- Some things just don't add up.
If, in the early 1800's, Redbone family members were growing up, starting families and moving West -- out of Southwestern Louisiana -- what did they look like? I mean what did they "physically" look like? Did they in 1807 look the same in 1835, 1860 and 1880?P-It's been said that the Drakes, Goins and Hargrave's, to name a few families, were Redbones. Given, the Goins appear pretty dark in many of their pictures, and the Drakes, according to James Johnson's research lived on Bearhead Creek, but would the Texas Rangers have hired the Goins boys if they were truly Black?
And then we have Isaac Ryan, Grandson of Benjamin Hargrave, who died as an Infantry Man of the Bejar Guards at the Alamo. If he had been a Black man, would he have been employed by such an esteemed Guard?
Who were Redbones, and who were not Redbones, and who were Redbones later on? I mean these folks floated back and forth in and out of the Neutral Zone in both directions. One day a Redbone in Louisiana and the next day a Free Black in Texas?
The Ashworth's saw some of this shape shifting in Texas and for the most part I wonder if it was more political than anything else. Were they Redbone in Louisiana and then okay to ride in the Texas Revolution like the Goins boys (the previous article contained a picture of two of the Goins clan -- left and middle -- the one on the left is Rueben Goins, an ex-Texas Ranger and pretty Black) and then after the War, not okay until the Ashworth Act was passed to allow them to stay?
When is a Redbone not a Redbone and becomes the "N" word? Yeah, it's okay to use those words, they're in most dictionaries I know of. At one time in the history of this country, it was Marshal law for all Negro's and Indians 24/7. The saying was Indians were just as bad as Negro's. Not sure what that really meant except the obvious loss of Civil Rights for both parties. Of course, not all parts of the country saw these things the same way.
But, were all Redbones just as bad as all Negro's and Indians? Or were Redbones not to be messed with or taken lightly -- to their face that is. We know the Goins were part Indians living as White folks, and we know the Drakes were doing the same thing. Were they Redbones because they were "uppitty Indians?"
A lot to ponder. Some things bother me -- Some things just never add up.
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
If, in the early 1800's, Redbone family members were growing up, starting families and moving West -- out of Southwestern Louisiana -- what did they look like? I mean what did they "physically" look like? Did they in 1807 look the same in 1835, 1860 and 1880?P-It's been said that the Drakes, Goins and Hargrave's, to name a few families, were Redbones. Given, the Goins appear pretty dark in many of their pictures, and the Drakes, according to James Johnson's research lived on Bearhead Creek, but would the Texas Rangers have hired the Goins boys if they were truly Black?
And then we have Isaac Ryan, Grandson of Benjamin Hargrave, who died as an Infantry Man of the Bejar Guards at the Alamo. If he had been a Black man, would he have been employed by such an esteemed Guard?
Who were Redbones, and who were not Redbones, and who were Redbones later on? I mean these folks floated back and forth in and out of the Neutral Zone in both directions. One day a Redbone in Louisiana and the next day a Free Black in Texas?
The Ashworth's saw some of this shape shifting in Texas and for the most part I wonder if it was more political than anything else. Were they Redbone in Louisiana and then okay to ride in the Texas Revolution like the Goins boys (the previous article contained a picture of two of the Goins clan -- left and middle -- the one on the left is Rueben Goins, an ex-Texas Ranger and pretty Black) and then after the War, not okay until the Ashworth Act was passed to allow them to stay?
When is a Redbone not a Redbone and becomes the "N" word? Yeah, it's okay to use those words, they're in most dictionaries I know of. At one time in the history of this country, it was Marshal law for all Negro's and Indians 24/7. The saying was Indians were just as bad as Negro's. Not sure what that really meant except the obvious loss of Civil Rights for both parties. Of course, not all parts of the country saw these things the same way.
But, were all Redbones just as bad as all Negro's and Indians? Or were Redbones not to be messed with or taken lightly -- to their face that is. We know the Goins were part Indians living as White folks, and we know the Drakes were doing the same thing. Were they Redbones because they were "uppitty Indians?"
A lot to ponder. Some things bother me -- Some things just never add up.
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Sunday, June 3, 2007
# 2 CALL ME REDBONE
If we look at the use of the word "Redbone," and it's publicized use in what is perceived to be Redbone Country, circa 1890's, the question comes to mind was it used earlier and just not written about? Did the term come out of the closet, with the media, in the 1890's or was it coined by a writer looking for a good story?
Oh, you can find a reference here and there as far back as the 1850's -- place names, people names and convoluted definitions of similar terms like "Red-i-bone" as a "ready made" critical piece to solve the puzzle -- I think the latter is stretching.
Well then, what about the Ashworth, Drake and Goins/ Goings families in the early 1800's? Were they called Redbones during that time frame and it was a secret word so secret it never turned up in print? Not a likely happening.
In early 1800, John Aaron Drake, Jr. was known as a "Mulatto" and had to undergo a Church investigation before being allowed to marry Rosalie Abshire, and -- he was a Mulatto. But, being a Mulatto then was simply a matter of a legal description. Mulatto's were mixed blood people. You could have a mix of White, Black or Indian blood, and throw in any other color less than White, and if there was Black blood in the mix, you were not marrying a White partner.
Apparently the Church investigation came back in favor of John Aaron Drake, Jr. and he was allowed to marry Rosalie Abshire. Family lore had been that he was related to Pocohontas but in reality it likely meant he was connected to a tribe within the umbrella of the Algonquin Powhatan Confederacy.
The Goins/ Goings show up in an 1810 census as "Free People of Color" (FPC) -- colored people, not Negro's, not Indians. Another legal description to define less than White, but not a Black or Negro. It was the "neither" world.
After a while, mostly out of ignorance to the legal definitions, colored people and Mulatto's became -- Negro's. I grew up in Texas being told that colored people were Negro's. Why would I question that? After all, this was long before being politically correct (PC). If you were Black, you were a Negro.
I was also told that Hispanic's were Mexican's and Mexico had lost the war with Texas and after all, they were not White. But before the War, in Texas, Mexican citizens were just like White, and it was the Indians who were inferior. Indians were buried at the missions if they were lucky, and the White folks were buried at the Cathedral -- class has it's privileges.
But back to Redbones, Mulatto's, FPC and others. Those folks in our Redbone family all hung out together, married into each others families; Drakes, Ashworth's, Dyal's, Nash, Perkins, Hargrave, Goins, Sweat's, Taylor, Mayo and others were all intermarried and often traveled together. Indians hung out with Indians, Free People of Color hung out with Free People of Color -- their own color, and Redbones hung out with Redbones.
In a letter from Albert Rigmaiden (a 2 nd cousin of mine), May 6 1893, to McDonald Furman, Rigmaiden states the following: .... "I am unable totell you how the name Red bone originated for the people who are calledRed-bone, but 'I think the Negroes' were the first to give them that name."
Rigmaiden goes on to say that the Negroes had no use or love for the Redbone's, and the Redbones did not like them any better. Rigmaiden also states in his letter that the Redbone were neither White nor Black and from what he knew, the older ones had come from South Carolina "many years ago." I think they brought the word with them from South Carolina or -- it followed them to Louisiana.
The Rigmaiden letter only lends weight to the research of Pony Hill as to where the term Redbone originated.
Rigmaiden also gives the names he is aware of such as: Ashworth, Goins, Perkins, Drake, Dial, Johnson etc. and further states: "these people keep pretty well together & Marry amongst themselves mostly." His overall letter is some what derogatory toward the Redbone people, but here's the rub. Rigmaiden's mother, the former Eliza Ryan, was related to the Drake's and Goins. The same Drake's and Goins considered to be "Redbones." Now if Rigmaiden knew at the time, he wasn't telling, but his mother had died in 1871, so he might not have been aware of his heritage.
Rigmaiden's letter is good information from the standpoint that this was his perception of what a Redbone is/ was in 1893. I don't think the definition given by Rigmaiden should be ignored or complicated by a lot of what if's. The Rigmaiden letter is a good starting point for our search of the Redbone culture -- far better than the definitions of ole "Lester."
Call me a Redbone!
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Oh, you can find a reference here and there as far back as the 1850's -- place names, people names and convoluted definitions of similar terms like "Red-i-bone" as a "ready made" critical piece to solve the puzzle -- I think the latter is stretching.
Well then, what about the Ashworth, Drake and Goins/ Goings families in the early 1800's? Were they called Redbones during that time frame and it was a secret word so secret it never turned up in print? Not a likely happening.
In early 1800, John Aaron Drake, Jr. was known as a "Mulatto" and had to undergo a Church investigation before being allowed to marry Rosalie Abshire, and -- he was a Mulatto. But, being a Mulatto then was simply a matter of a legal description. Mulatto's were mixed blood people. You could have a mix of White, Black or Indian blood, and throw in any other color less than White, and if there was Black blood in the mix, you were not marrying a White partner.
Apparently the Church investigation came back in favor of John Aaron Drake, Jr. and he was allowed to marry Rosalie Abshire. Family lore had been that he was related to Pocohontas but in reality it likely meant he was connected to a tribe within the umbrella of the Algonquin Powhatan Confederacy.
The Goins/ Goings show up in an 1810 census as "Free People of Color" (FPC) -- colored people, not Negro's, not Indians. Another legal description to define less than White, but not a Black or Negro. It was the "neither" world.
After a while, mostly out of ignorance to the legal definitions, colored people and Mulatto's became -- Negro's. I grew up in Texas being told that colored people were Negro's. Why would I question that? After all, this was long before being politically correct (PC). If you were Black, you were a Negro.
I was also told that Hispanic's were Mexican's and Mexico had lost the war with Texas and after all, they were not White. But before the War, in Texas, Mexican citizens were just like White, and it was the Indians who were inferior. Indians were buried at the missions if they were lucky, and the White folks were buried at the Cathedral -- class has it's privileges.
But back to Redbones, Mulatto's, FPC and others. Those folks in our Redbone family all hung out together, married into each others families; Drakes, Ashworth's, Dyal's, Nash, Perkins, Hargrave, Goins, Sweat's, Taylor, Mayo and others were all intermarried and often traveled together. Indians hung out with Indians, Free People of Color hung out with Free People of Color -- their own color, and Redbones hung out with Redbones.
In a letter from Albert Rigmaiden (a 2 nd cousin of mine), May 6 1893, to McDonald Furman, Rigmaiden states the following: .... "I am unable totell you how the name Red bone originated for the people who are calledRed-bone, but 'I think the Negroes' were the first to give them that name."
Rigmaiden goes on to say that the Negroes had no use or love for the Redbone's, and the Redbones did not like them any better. Rigmaiden also states in his letter that the Redbone were neither White nor Black and from what he knew, the older ones had come from South Carolina "many years ago." I think they brought the word with them from South Carolina or -- it followed them to Louisiana.
The Rigmaiden letter only lends weight to the research of Pony Hill as to where the term Redbone originated.
Rigmaiden also gives the names he is aware of such as: Ashworth, Goins, Perkins, Drake, Dial, Johnson etc. and further states: "these people keep pretty well together & Marry amongst themselves mostly." His overall letter is some what derogatory toward the Redbone people, but here's the rub. Rigmaiden's mother, the former Eliza Ryan, was related to the Drake's and Goins. The same Drake's and Goins considered to be "Redbones." Now if Rigmaiden knew at the time, he wasn't telling, but his mother had died in 1871, so he might not have been aware of his heritage.
Rigmaiden's letter is good information from the standpoint that this was his perception of what a Redbone is/ was in 1893. I don't think the definition given by Rigmaiden should be ignored or complicated by a lot of what if's. The Rigmaiden letter is a good starting point for our search of the Redbone culture -- far better than the definitions of ole "Lester."
Call me a Redbone!
Gary J. Gabehart (Mishiho, Mish-eh-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Saturday, June 2, 2007
# 1 LARRY, AND HIS OTHER BROTHER LARRY
This commentary was sent to me recently concerning a new definition of Redbones by Larry Keels. Some of you will remember Larry as the self-acclaimed KKK interviewer and close friend, according to Larry, of an ex-mayor of Huntsville, Texas. Why Larry would think this important to a genealogy community is, well not to be rude, but these comments of Larry’s are insignificant as are many of his postings or -- out of context excerpts. However, you decide.
Larry Writes:
“In an effort (to) define these terms based on the reality of their historic usage, I arrived at this: ‘Redbone’ is seemingly a term common in the Neutral Zone and East Texas among pre-Civil War era Euro-Americans and African Americans who thought they were referenceing (his sp) people of multi-ethnic genetic heritage. Later generations of these two ethnicities (sp) seemingly continued to reference the descendants of these racially obscure people to the extent that some of these descendants seemingly began to think of themselves as ‘Redbone.’ Close scrutiny reveals only vaguely distinct differences between the culture of the referenced people and the culture of the dominant Euro-Americans surrounding them. ‘Melungeon’ is a term seemingly used in similar fashion with evidenced history to about the same era which produced the term "redbone." Both terms have been associated with many of the same surnames. The term ‘melungeon’ (his sp) was seemingly common among ‘whites’ In (his cap.) Tennessee and Kentucky before its usages was recently expanded through tourism promotions.”
Alvie Walts replies to Larry Keels’ comment with the following:
“The inability of Larry Keels to separate ethnicity and culture in regards to identity is shocking.It can only be attributed to racist thoughts of ideology from his grandiose vision of "Cowboy Manifest Destiny" whereby any and all multi-ethnic backgrounds fall into the label of White Caucasoid American.I am sorry, but identity is a hell of a lot more complex than that.”
Well Larry, what can I say? Whatever your problem is, I bet it is hard to pronounce or too complicated to understand. But, the term Redbone is found outside the area you describe and at different times in history, so I will assume your comment is just an improperly cast opinion, or you have really not studied the origins of Redbone’s.
It is my own opinion that you do seem to be hung-up on African Americans at times, but understand that you are taking about Melungeons and Redbones, not African Americans or Euro-Americans. It helps to define the subject first.
I do not understand your use of “multi-ethnic ‘genetic’ heritage?” This needs an explanation.
Are you also saying there were only three distinct groups -- Euro-Americans, African Americans and multi-ethnic folks in your current equation? Moreover, you seem to be saying that the multi-ethnic folks began to think of themselves as Redbones only after the Euro and African Americans called them such. I do not buy it! However, forgive me; you must be saying that Redbones were multi-ethnic people? Well, back to square one Larry Keels!
How could this be called a definition? Your so-called defined Melungeon says nothing except you think it was devised for “tourism promotions” -- in 1850 or later. Absurd!
When it comes to the word Redbones, the tale is as tangled as a wet, oil soaked coil of rope. The more you untangle the Redbone history of the word, the greater numbers of knots are discovered.
Defining Redbones, unlike Melungeons, is like defining a widget # 4 that you have never seen, do not know what it is about or what it does. We do know the term "Redbone" was/is derogatory, but I do not think the term was/is applied exclusively to just one ethnic group or class of people. It is like, "not all Hispanics are from Mexico," and "not all Jackasses have four legs."
FPC, Mulatto and other words wrapped in the mantle of “we really don’t know,” but from within that boil of humanity comes distinct pods, family groups perhaps, groups from association, groups that were like the dominant class, but -- not quite there – especially as the whole. However, these were largely legal descriptions.
Let me launch these questions so you may dispose of them. If Redbones were Negro’s, why not call them Negro’s? If Redbones were Indians, why not call them Indians? Could it be that Redbones were a mix of someone who were assimilating into White Dominant Society? Moreover, why the term “Red?” Can you answer me those questions?
Larry, the other brother Larry, is welcome to explain his commentary at any time.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-e-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Larry Writes:
“In an effort (to) define these terms based on the reality of their historic usage, I arrived at this: ‘Redbone’ is seemingly a term common in the Neutral Zone and East Texas among pre-Civil War era Euro-Americans and African Americans who thought they were referenceing (his sp) people of multi-ethnic genetic heritage. Later generations of these two ethnicities (sp) seemingly continued to reference the descendants of these racially obscure people to the extent that some of these descendants seemingly began to think of themselves as ‘Redbone.’ Close scrutiny reveals only vaguely distinct differences between the culture of the referenced people and the culture of the dominant Euro-Americans surrounding them. ‘Melungeon’ is a term seemingly used in similar fashion with evidenced history to about the same era which produced the term "redbone." Both terms have been associated with many of the same surnames. The term ‘melungeon’ (his sp) was seemingly common among ‘whites’ In (his cap.) Tennessee and Kentucky before its usages was recently expanded through tourism promotions.”
Alvie Walts replies to Larry Keels’ comment with the following:
“The inability of Larry Keels to separate ethnicity and culture in regards to identity is shocking.It can only be attributed to racist thoughts of ideology from his grandiose vision of "Cowboy Manifest Destiny" whereby any and all multi-ethnic backgrounds fall into the label of White Caucasoid American.I am sorry, but identity is a hell of a lot more complex than that.”
Well Larry, what can I say? Whatever your problem is, I bet it is hard to pronounce or too complicated to understand. But, the term Redbone is found outside the area you describe and at different times in history, so I will assume your comment is just an improperly cast opinion, or you have really not studied the origins of Redbone’s.
It is my own opinion that you do seem to be hung-up on African Americans at times, but understand that you are taking about Melungeons and Redbones, not African Americans or Euro-Americans. It helps to define the subject first.
I do not understand your use of “multi-ethnic ‘genetic’ heritage?” This needs an explanation.
Are you also saying there were only three distinct groups -- Euro-Americans, African Americans and multi-ethnic folks in your current equation? Moreover, you seem to be saying that the multi-ethnic folks began to think of themselves as Redbones only after the Euro and African Americans called them such. I do not buy it! However, forgive me; you must be saying that Redbones were multi-ethnic people? Well, back to square one Larry Keels!
How could this be called a definition? Your so-called defined Melungeon says nothing except you think it was devised for “tourism promotions” -- in 1850 or later. Absurd!
When it comes to the word Redbones, the tale is as tangled as a wet, oil soaked coil of rope. The more you untangle the Redbone history of the word, the greater numbers of knots are discovered.
Defining Redbones, unlike Melungeons, is like defining a widget # 4 that you have never seen, do not know what it is about or what it does. We do know the term "Redbone" was/is derogatory, but I do not think the term was/is applied exclusively to just one ethnic group or class of people. It is like, "not all Hispanics are from Mexico," and "not all Jackasses have four legs."
FPC, Mulatto and other words wrapped in the mantle of “we really don’t know,” but from within that boil of humanity comes distinct pods, family groups perhaps, groups from association, groups that were like the dominant class, but -- not quite there – especially as the whole. However, these were largely legal descriptions.
Let me launch these questions so you may dispose of them. If Redbones were Negro’s, why not call them Negro’s? If Redbones were Indians, why not call them Indians? Could it be that Redbones were a mix of someone who were assimilating into White Dominant Society? Moreover, why the term “Red?” Can you answer me those questions?
Larry, the other brother Larry, is welcome to explain his commentary at any time.
Gary J. Gabehart, Mishiho (Mish-e-ho)
Mishiho@aol.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
