I do agree about generalizing however it seems to me that *history* is
written via these generalizations...and there is always two sides to
the coin....:)

History generally takes on the view of the writer...it is indeed
interesting to read the White view of history and the Indian view of
history....:)  again generally speaking it was the whites writing
history not the Indian...so unless you do your own research a poor
white kid never really sees the Indian view but only that view as the
whites wished to promote...

In fact that same Indian marriage ceremony attributed to an Indian
marriage in the 1600s that was posted earlier was attributed to my
Cherokee ancestor of 1755 in a book written by a white...hmmm, seems
it was a juvenile book i.e. a book for teens...I have never seen any
specific information regarding her wedding either white or
Cherokee....so my choice of wording would be, "this is what the
ceremonies were like but we have no record of what her specific
marriage ceremony was"... but a history will not be that specific it
will give you a generalization of what was going on among a few people
at a particular time...

I also think personal letters and memories will give one a view into
the past and believe me Indian/White marriages were not accepted among
whites in the 1700 and 1800s...although it's popular to be Indian
today two hundred years ago it was not....

Likewise the Quakers at three meetings stated their intent to marry
and after the 3rd public declaration were considered married....that
would make my grandmother cringe......:)  She came from a generation
where you had to *be married* and heaven forbid a child *out of
wedlock*...well, it just wasn't discussed....:)

So let's face it, history can also cover a lot up and often does....:)

Charlotte

On 2/28/07, Tom Magnuson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> It is, I believe, very dangerous to generalize about these things at any
> time but especially when considering a time so remote from our own.  Outrage
> always reflects social and cultural prejudices that don't travel well in
> time, space, or between elites and non-elites.  On the frontier, as noted by
> William Byrd, many lived "for generations without benefit of law or clergy."
> Legal marriage in 17th century Carolina, where there were no clergy and
> precious few European women, consisted of telling one's neighbors of one's
> intent (seven was, I believe, the magic quantity of informed neighbors
> needed to meet the law).
>
> Some of the wonderfully well informed VA historians on this list might
> address the legal process of inflicting elite ideas of marriage and race on
> the workers of the colony.  Again, my feeble recollection is that VA passed
> a law barring Indians from legal and political life only in 1691.  According
> to Leaming (1995), that also was the last year a non-Anglicized Indian name
> appeared in Virginia's colonial records. I've often thought this to be a
> final punctuation mark in VA's declaration of independence from what
> previously had been their Native American hosts.
>
> I suspect that the taboo against miscegenation which seems to have grown
> stronger after the end of slavery, when one could no longer, legally, simply
> 'go through the cabins'  is as often as not, applied to our view of a
> history that was a good deal more tolerant than are we.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jessica Welton
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:49 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Pocahontas's Wedding questions
>
>
> > Well, we all know that what was considered 'outrageous' socially
> > and vocally was frequently common behind closed doors.... but then
> > I guess that wasn't marriage by the European definition. Some DNA
> > testing of the old Virginia families would be fascinating (at least
> > to me!)
>
>
> So later in time, it might have become more common....but still into
> the early 1800s it was considered outrageous for a Native to marry a
> white...
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>


-- 
Cherokee Basketweaving Books:
http://stores.lulu.com/cherokeebasketweaver

See more of my Baskets:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cherokeebasketweaver/

Visit the Family History Store at LuLu:
http://www.lulu.com/allfamilyhistory

Can't find the records you need and you're a male surnamed Coats or
varitation, order a DNA kit to join our DNA project:
http://www.familytreedna.com/surname_join.asp?code=A59642&special=True

Coats Archive
http://www.coatsarchive.us

Baker DNA Project
http://www.bakerdna.net/

Need Original Records?
Pages through Time
http://www.pagesthroughtime.us

Becoming a grandmother is wonderful. One moment you're just a mother.
The next you are all-wise and prehistoric.
~Pam Brown

Grandchildren don't stay young forever, which is good because
Grandaddies have only so many horsey rides in them.
~Gene Perret

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html