Weren't John Smith and Pocahontas a mixed race marriage in Virginia
We quote the late Ned Heite, who wrote about white-Indian couplings 30 Jan 2000:
What happened to
the Delmarva Indians? Dr. Helen C. Rountree, in her several excellent
publications, has given us a picture of those Eastern Shore Indian descendants
who have been identified. Many of our neighbors are clearly identified
as Indians, and their ancestry is not in doubt.
However, I am coming
to the conclusion that most of the Indian descendants in the Middle Atlantic
region today are identified as "white," and not "mulatto"
or "black."
There is plenty
of unwritten evidence that intermarriage between Indians and whites was
the rule, rather than the exception, in the early years of European colonization.
In the latest issue of the Archaeological Society of Virginia bulletin
is Martha McCartney's insightful analysis of the census records for the
Virginia colony compiled in 1619-1620. Most settlers were male; in some plantations, all were male. There simply were no "available"
English women.
Therefore, we must
assume that these fellows were either gay, celibate, or mated with Indian
women. Take your choice, but remember that they were largely young and
robust single Englishmen, away from home and not terribly well regulated.
So only the third choice stands the test of reasonableness.
Flash forward nearly
a century, and? ---the Virginia legislature passes a law stating that the
child of a white and an Indian is a mulatto, but the child of a white
and a half Indian (that is, with one Indian grandparent) is white.--- ? This
rule seems to have held in Delaware and Maryland, too.
Why do legislatures
pass laws? Because some constituent believes there is an issue to be addressed.
We don't talk about gun laws unless there is gun violence. Clearly there
is a reason to enfranchise as "white" anyone with only one Indian
grandparent. My suggestion: The legislators, or their constituents, needed
to define a difference between "mulatto" and "white"
for purposes of the civil law.
The logical inference
from the Virginia legislature's definition is that there must have been
plenty of white planters with Indian ancestry who wanted their franchise
protected during a period when racial divides were becoming sharper and
sharper.
Indian wives would
help explain why so many genealogies are easily traced through the male
line, but hit dead ends at the female side. If the mother was an Indian,
and if the marriage was sanctioned only in the most irregular way, a child's
legal record (in cases of probate for example) would refer only to his
or her father's side, the mother's family being outside the English legal
system.
B&R Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, 7 May 2008 3:47 am
Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Mildred Jeter Loving (1940-2008), & an apology (was Re: What would Jeffer...
Weren't John Smith and Pocahontas a mixed race marriage in Virginia some
time before the Loving's decided to make a Federal case out of the whole thing.
J South
**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family
favorites at AOL Food.
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
______________________________________
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
|
