Senator Elizabeth Warren. Native or not? [closed]

+19 votes
3.3k views

There has been a lot of talk in the news over whether Senator Elizabeth Warren is Cherokee Indian as she has claimed. She states that she is from her mother's side, specifically her Great-great-great Grandmother.

This is her mother Reed-10478

and her mother's ancestors 

Either one of those blue boxes on the right is full blooded Cherokee, or the claim is false. Any takers on supporting/refuting her claim? This is not politically driven but is merely intellectual curiosity.

WikiTree profile: Elizabeth Warren
closed with the note: The discussion is going too far afield.
in Genealogy Help by Steven Tibbetts G2G6 Pilot (409k points)
closed by Jillaine Smith
I was told by a Native American that if I shared any  Archaric (sp) dna with the remains found about 60,000 years ago then I have  NA ancestors . .I have matching DNA with some tribes in FTDNA.
Like the rest of us with majority British Isles ancestry, Kathryn, Cheddar Man is our oldest ancestor, and it is quite obvious that he has African ancestry. You're basically saying the exact same thing Warren is saying: this is what I know about the last 8-12 generations; that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Sounds good to me. You two agree. It's a beautiful thing. Glad we are all on the same page. :-)
Thanks for the smile, SJ.

Still amazes me that people try to claim Elizabeth Warren somehow owes her success to checking a box on a form that she was Native American.

Go ahead and try it yourself and see how far it advances your career.

Maybe you can be President one day even!

James,

I don't believe checking a box will make you President some day. I believe lying about your heritage to curry favor is wrong. Doing it more than once is a pattern of wrongness. In effect she stole a position from an underprivileged class. Why is this acceptable?
What "privilege" did she claim? As far as I can see it is documented that she checked a box on forms twice that were strictly for tracking purposes and never granted her any kind of special status. Living in Texas, I have had lots of white people tell me they are part Cherokee. It's just a weird tradition in these parts.
What I find ironic is that now it's "popular" to claim Native American blood. Having Native American blood is what got the tribes killed off, moved to reservations, etc. And, regardless of romance books, having a Native American child if you were white got you shunned not so long ago.

I do know Elizabeth Warren is not tribal. Other than that, I'm from a long line of Scots and Irish, but I consider myself of American decent (okay, I usually say American mutt). I'm hoping she is the same.
In her own words:

“I can’t go back,” Warren said in an interview with The Washington Post. “But I am sorry for furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship and harm that resulted.”

Throughout her entire career, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren told stories about her Cherokee heritage. She’s repeatedly used the title to get ahead and documents show she listed herself as “American Indian” on a Texas Bar registration card in 1986. In 1997, she was named Harvard’s first woman of color by the Fordham Law Review. In 2010, Warren told a story of racism and discrimination within her own family.

https://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/465968-pavlich-elizabeth-warrens-fake-victimhood

Looks like she got ahead using her status as a minority.

This g2g has moved way beyond the genealogical.  The discussion is now closed.

18 Answers

+29 votes
Numerous reputable Cherokee genealogists have done the research and have documented that Ms. Warren has no Cherokee ancestors.  There is no one named Mathews, Crawford, or Marsh on the 1835 Cherokee census.  None of her other ancestors lived anywhere near the Cherokee Nation.
by
You should perhaps rethink your position that "None of her other ancestors lived anywhere near the Cherokee Nation". Her mother was born in Muskogee - have you ever been to Muskogee?

http://www.cherokee.org/Portals/0/Documents/2013/01/33080CN_Jurisdiction_through_Muskogee.pdf?ver=2013-01-28-164116-550

Whether or not it can be proved by various unspecified reputable researchers, it's not totally ridiculous to believe that your relatives might be part Cherokee if they grew up right next to the res.
Ms. Warren’s mother was born in the State of Oklahoma; her parents were from Missouri and Illinois.
Enough on this already, please.
I grew up in Oklahoma. Don't forget that there are a lot of white people there simply because of the several land rushes that happened after the Native Americans were forcibly removed to Oklahoma, and before statehood. Just because you grew up in Oklahoma doesn't mean that you might have Native American ancestry.
The Cherokee Nation estimates about 120,000 tribal members in Oklahoma, or about 3% of the state's population. Including the other Native American tribes, the Native American population in OK makes up about 6% of the total population. So Eric is right, merely being born in OK isn't reason enough to assume your family has any NA ancestry whatsoever.

I've seen people on genealogy forums straight out admit they're looking for a NA ancestor because they want a cut of the casino money they assume every tribe has in plentiful amounts.
Not everyone with Indian blood, especially in smaller quanta, is on official rolls kept by the US government or even the tribes. Please remember that being non-white, until quite recently, made your life more of a challenge. (In some ways, still true.) There's been plenty of "passing", just like amongst "octaroons" and smaller blood quanta individuals descended from black slaves.

I've spent a lot of time in Indian Country, in various regions of the country. Not everyone is officially documented. For a variety of reasons, including that native languages were not written and their methods of remembering history is different than that of the conquering culture. Plus those government boarding schools encouraged abandoning family and tribe, becoming white people's servants instead. There was not a lot of records kept for those "assimilated" Indians.

As is sometimes said in other contexts: "Absence of proof is not proof of absence."
@Jessica Key, I agree with what you just stated completely.  In the 20 years that I've been doing genealogical research, the number of ppl I've had contact with, that just want to kno, so they can get "hunting rights, fishing rights, grant money to go to school, or casino money, heck some even state, & "I won't have to pay taxes anymore".. the stuff that they will just assume they are "entitled to" blows my mind!  All one has to do is google search "Metis" lawsuits, to see how many are claiming Metis status now based on genealogical and dna/mtnda datas.  What is sad about this is that they may have found multiple grands of n8v nations, and instead of learning the cultures of those nations, they just jump on the Metis cart train, and assume this gives them rights to Metisage.  But if their ancestor was actually listed in records as Algonkin (spelling used as a specific time period in history) or Innu or Assiniboine or Sauteaux they should be looking at those Nations of ppl as thier Heritage connections.  Grabbing onto Metis, is a disservice to their own family members of the nations that were named within the historical docs.  So by not learning about their cultures of their own Ancestors, they are inadvertantly helping in the losses of the languages, Arts, traditions of their own family histories and cultures.

Just my take on all of this

Neoma Smith was from born 1834 in North Carolina, married in Tennessee.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherokee_removal

Map of a part of Cherokee territory in 1827

Detail of an 1827 map depicting a substantial part of southeastern Tennessee and northwestern Georgia as a confined territory assigned to the Lower Creek and Cherokee nations.

Cherokee removal, part of the Trail of Tears, refers to the forced relocation between 1836 and 1839 of the CherokeeNation from their lands in GeorgiaSouth CarolinaNorth CarolinaTennesseeTexas, and Alabama to the Indian Territory (present day Oklahoma) in the then Western United States, and the resultant deaths along the way and at the end of the movement of an estimated 4000 Cherokee.

She was not born in the Cherokee Nation (unless her family were among the white intruders squatting on Cherokee land), and her family is not on the 1835 Cherokee Census.
In 1834, the Cherokee Nation included the place she was born. The fact that she was married in Tennessee means they likely escaped the removal to Indian Territory.
Bledsoe County was not part of the Cherokee Nation in1819 when Neoma Smith married there. If her family was Cherokee, living in the Cherokee Nation in 1834,  they would be on the1835 Cherokee census.  They aren’t.  Removal took place in 1838-39.  If they stayed in Tenneessee after Removal they would be on the1851/1852 Siler/Chapman rolls. They aren’t.   This was a payment roll, so people were eager to sign up.  Siler’s original list was redone by Chapman after people complained they had been missed.  Regardless of where they lived, if they thought they had  a Cherokee ancestor they would have been among the 90,000 people who filed Eastern Cherokee applications in 1907 for a share of a $4 million dollar settlement. They aren’t.  Only 30,000 of the applicants turned out to be Cherokee or Cherokee descendants.
I always have to chuckle when people defer to the authority of reputable genealogists.
Cherokee, the specific subject of Elizabeth Warren's claim, weren't like turnips that fell off turnip wagons as the wagons bumped down rutted, dirt roads. They weren't like seeds that randomly sprouted up all over the place with no other connections.
Cherokee, whether eligible for enrollment or not, had family. Parents, siblings of parents (aunts and uncles), grandparents, their own siblings, spouse(s), and children. No Cherokee operated in a vacuum all by themselves. The names of relatives can be found alongside "white" members in Cherokee records, often going back 3 - 4 generations: the Dawes Final Roll, which is specific to Oklahoma between about 1890 and 1906 - and the Guion Miller Roll, in particular, is a great wealth of information for both Cherokee and the thousands of non-Cherokee (whites) who also tried to get a piece of the monies owed the Cherokee who gave up their lands in the East.

For all the claims of "hiding out", "fell off the Trail (of Tears)", "married a white wo/man", "hid in a cave", or "was ashamed" etc., there will still be documentation. Of the hundreds (thousands?) helped, not once has any of those claims (excuses) been proven. What has been proven is that all ancestors, going back well over a century of time (from the very early 1800s up through to 1940) have been found on US Federal censuses. They've been found, nicely documented, when no Tribe or its people were considered to be part of the United States (as in "citizens").
Many groups like the DAR will have to grapple with the question of paper trail versus DNA inheritance. Anyone who has done any family history with DNA has found one or more Non-Parental events that change everything down the descent line. We also know that % inheritance is a broad range, even among siblings and I would hesitate to pinpoint one GGG grandparent.

The tribes have made their position clear; they use paper trail. That's their right. Elizabeth never claimed a paper trail so it's a non-issue.

I see this as bullying-- namecalling, waves of public harrassment.
+14 votes
I grew up being told that our heritage was Irish and Indian.....Now that I have tried to document it, I am having trouble proving it.  I have pictures and they definitely look American Indian, but look for proof, and none can be found.  The person that we were told was full blood Cherokee is a mystery person when it comes to research.  She took in Orphans and they are found in her household in Census records, that were said to be Indian, and she kept them for the parents while they found a home.  She would hide in the woods when law men would come around and told all her children not to talk to them.  Every tale of lore needs investigation, they have been handed down from generation to generation and all we can say is " we were told."  I would like to say, "I have documentation that proves my heritage."

 

So I for one, thank you for the direction you have taken.  And just finding the surname in the 1835 Cherokee Census is not merely enough, I can find the surname, but do not find anyconnection.

I would like to try to help find a connection for her if there is one. I do not have a lot of time to spend on it, but every little bit helps.
by Deborah Dunn G2G6 Mach 3 (31.0k points)
edited by Deborah Dunn
+26 votes

The issue is resolved by looking at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Smith-99988 which is none of the blue boxes. 

"Crawford married his second wife Mary LONG in Oklahoma, he stated on his marriage application that his parents were Johnathan Houston Crawford and O. C. Sarah Smith and that his mother was Cherokee Indian."[1]"

 

That may not answer your question directly, but it's enough to satisfy me that she wasn't lying about being told stories passed down in her family. .  

 

 

by Stu Ward G2G6 Pilot (138k points)

Here is the link to the image of that marriage record.  You will note that neither party entered anything in the 'color' column, and there is no place to enter the race or color of parents:

Citing this Record

"Oklahoma, County Marriages, 1890-1995", database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VR3F-M8N : 4 November 2017), William J Crawford and Mary E Woolford, 1894.

If William Crawford's mother was Cherokee (which would of course make him Cherokee as well), why was he in Oklahoma Territory  (and then Missouri) instead of Indian Territory? Why wouldn't he list his color as Indian? And why didn't he apply to the Dawes Commission for a land allotment?  Not only Indian citizens but tens of thousands of white people applied for the lands being distributed by the Dawes Commission.  So many fraudulent applications were filed that the entire set of 1896 Cherokee applications was discarded and the process begun again.  

 

 

 

Do you have the right marriage?  I don't know who his first wife was but the ref says the second wife, Mary Long, not Woolford. Maybe that's the same person. I don't know. 

As to why anyone did anything back then, I have no idea. 

I was skeptical at first,  too, but the marriage license lists William's birthplace as Tennessee and his parents as John Crawford and O.C. Smith, Mary's birthplace as Ohio and her parents as C. W. Long and Margaret Cowen, so appears to be the correct couple .  Both William and Mary were 57 years old, so it was no doubt a second marriage for both.
"why wouldn't he list his color"  no offense but have you seen the Indian Schools, and the Reservations?..Once listed as Indian during even the 1900's, children were forced into the Indian Schools, Ppl were forced onto reservations, and they had no rights as free ppl. not allowed to buy land, not allowed to vote, not allowed to own guns (not even for hunting purposes).. there are many reasons why ppl wouldn't state they were Native.. there are just as many reasons why they were erroneously listed as molatto, black, and white by census taker.  If they lived off the Reservations, and lived as a white person, holding a job, if their spouse (especially if spouse was the man" then all were to be listed as the spouse race (not on all census but on some- and although was changed, many census takers still did it anyway.) There are currently ones all over the US who are obvious by skin color, eye & lid shapes, cultural ways of life, full or 3/4 full bloods, whose own parents in the mid 1900's were listed as White, and these adult children are now suiing to get theirs' and their parent birth and death records changed to reflect the truths of who they have always been. Can I back this up.  Yes I am friends with one in particular involved in this mess right now.  But I won't place her info on here publically because she is living, this is her family and her private/semi-public struggle, but I could certainly get her probably to come in here and verify this if need be.   ;-)
+11 votes

What I know about Oklahoma is that almost everyone whose family has been around a few generations has some Native ancestry.

Beyond that, I'd like to say something about the Indian Census and various other rolls of Oklahoma tribes. I looked into some of those records in depth when I was working on the profile of Florence Leona (Christie) Owens, aka Hill, Thompson, famous as "The Migrant Mother" from the Dust Bowl days.

{{Image|file=Christie-1557.jpg
|caption=Migrant Mother
}}

From what I read of the Dawes Records for her parents, who had a wildly dysfunctional marriage/family life, Florence would qualify as Cherokee. But her (white) mother's family got her father sent to prison, so even though they were married when she was born, he denied paternity and that was the end of it.

She went off like plenty of other Okies to California during the Dust Bowl and the general upheaval that put tenant farmers off their lands. From what I see, she was indeed native, even though the records say otherwise.

That's just one case.

More generally, the question of who is officially, legally Indian and who actually has Indian blood don't match 100%. I have some work experience that put me contact with numerous Oklahoma tribes, and the whole question of who is or is not Indian is a non-trivial question in many cases. Nonetheless: Oklahoma was Indian Territory for a long time, and has an exceedingly high percentage of population that have a small quantum of native blood.

by Living Winter G2G6 Mach 7 (78.5k points)
edited by Living Winter

Oh, heck. The picture doesn't show in this editor. Perhaps this will work?

Migrant Mother

+11 votes
In the family tree shown in the 1st post, the "blue boxes" are just his suppositions.  It is actually Neoma Smith who married the older John Crawford and she was alleged to be Cherokee but their has been no substantiated proof.  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Smith-99988
by David Mason G2G6 (8.4k points)
+25 votes
I thought we were not supposed to ask questions on G2G about living people, even if they are public figures. A point to consider is that this credibility issue was raised as a political criticism with a certain person using "Pocahontas" with reference to Senator Warren as an insult. Is this discussion really appropriate and productive for WikiTree?
by Shirley Dalton G2G6 Pilot (532k points)
We are OK to discuss living "Notables" - Elizabeth Warren qualifies in this category. The credibility of her claim towards her genealogy was in question before she received the insult, however, we should try as much as possible to focus on any genealogical aspects of this and not on personal attacks as those are counterproductive.
I agree and personally find it offensive.
@Shirly Dalton, Scott Fulkerson, Kelly Rosenbach, I don't see anyone discussing "the infamous- insult" nor do I see anyone trying to turn this political.  what I see and have read is the usual frustrations for finding and making Native Connections thru genealogical research.  I think the discussion because of the notable of Elizabeth W. is part of why the discussion has many responses.  the responses do help in an "off thought" kind of way.  By reading others frustrations, it may help to brainstorm other ways of searching, not only for Elizabeth Warrens' profile, but for many others either looking, or for profiles without sources..  again, just another perspective outta me.  no offense to anyone intended
@arora ,When the comment begins with "a lot of talk in the news about...either this ancestor is full-blood Cherokee or the claim is false," that doesn't sound like one trying to make NA connections. Just unnecessary for Wikitree purposes.
to me it sounds like point out the facts Kelley. sorry if this doesn't agree with some on here, but the way I see this, This is a Fact, it has been pointed out over and over in the news, and the question has consistently been .."Is Elisabeth W of Native American Ancestry?"  Anyone can turn this political by choice....I'm not, I'm am asking (SEE BELOW) Has Anyone Checked ALL THE ROLLS and SCRIPS?  and I'm also Stating it is through Brainstorming words from others that I myself do draw more ideas from places of which to research on this said notable person.

 

I'm NOT in anyway trying to be Political, about this topic, and its' too bad that the Fact that was brought up about it being is the news is making this something else entirely.  Which it should NOT.  That again, I see as a conscious choice by those who choose to see it as such.  I don't, that is my opinion, and my right as an individual person.  My comprehension of what has been asked ....Does anyone want to take this on as to if she is or isn't...seems like a fair Genealogical  Question.  each has a right to chose which words they focus on in the post. I'm focused on the Question, and what has been located and what hasn't.

As a community of ancestry researchers, I think it's very appropriate to discuss, develop, and appreciate the distinctions and concerns.

First, she did not fail her ancestry test. That's like saying someone failed a "personality test."

Her ancestry is what it is. She definitely has some "Native American blood." However, tribal standards typically dictate 1/8 as the minimum for membership. So she cannot claim membership, but she does descend from a Native American.

That is a simple analysis.

You know, this was originally to get more of her ancestry filled in. It has now taken Neoma who was clearly white and muddied it with her possibly being cherokee? Talk about mission failure. It even got selected as best answer.
Thank you, Steve.  I posted the facts about that marriage record and they were completely ignored.
Perhaps we are beating a dead horse here...time to move on.

"Elizabeth Warren's heritage was an important part of her family's story. A DNA test confirmed it. Hear the facts directly from her family." https://elizabethwarren.com/family

If someone see another Best Answer, by all means, select it.

Based upon her ancestry DNA results, she has ancestors who were of Native American heritage. That is irrefutable to a high degree of certainty.

Our goal should be to work the known ancestors, based upon family reports, and then check whether relationship is proven by birth, marriage and death records, or any ancillary records, including census, etc. Once the progenitors to the eighth generation - please see report (based on DNA), a Native American ancestors should start showing up - just because the pivotal ancestors have not yet been found does not disprove the DNA findings.

We do a disservice to the greater community if we fail to pursue this objectively. The goal is to seek the proofs that align with both family reports and definitive DNA analysis that aligns with traces in the family reports, however esoteric or anachronistic those reports may appear.

 

Bear in mind if there is a NPE, there is no paper trail.
+5 votes
Has anyone checked All the Rolls and Scrips?

https://www.archives.gov/research/native-americans/rolls/final-rolls.html

I am in no way a fan of Elisabeth Warren, but, genealogy is genealogy, and her family connections, may just not be Cherokee.  LOL, sorry, but that is the One Nation that I wanna say more than half probably closer to 2/3rds will say they are off, especially if raised in the South.  Its not because they are sure, its because that is the Nation most known in the South by most ppl.

I went thru a drive-thru fast food place in TN about 2 years ago. My traditional n8v tats were showing because of a tank top.  The girl at the drive thru window, said to me "ooh wow, I luv your tat, i want one just like that!"  I said.. "really, well this wasn't done in a tat parlor, this was done specifically for me in a N8v tradional manner." She said..."ooh so you are Indian?, so am I, I'm Cherokee, my gr.gramma was a daughter of one of the Cherokee Chiefs.

So a random stranger blurts out Cherokee, once again.  No offense to those who have been told this, my point is, that there were many other Nations that any in the south could have been connected with.  Tribes moved and taveled either willingly or forced..but they did, and intermarraiges did occur. So is it possible that Elisabeth Warren has some lineaage of N8v ancestry?  possible... maybe...But again, one ancestor if that is the situation does not make one "n8v"

I think before all disputes of Is She or isn't She is setteled full genealogical records searches of all possible Rolls/Scrips would have to be examined for any line connections within them to determine this.
by Arora Anonymous G2G6 Pilot (164k points)
The records have been extensively researched by both Cherokee and non-Cherokee genealogists.  None of her ancestors has any connection to the Cherokee...  it’s a family story and nothing more.  That doesn’t mean that Ms. Warren and her parents were doing anything nefarious, but she should acknowledge the truth now that her genealogy has been traced.   It’s a common misconception that families who moved from Tennessee to Indian Territory or Oklahoma must have been Cherokee, and also that most people in Oklahoma have an Indian ancestor.  Neither is true.  White people outnumbered Indians in Indian Territory in 1895 by three to one. There were at most about 45,000 Cherokee and Cherokee descendants living in 1900.
Kathie Forbes, I still don't see something here, excuse me, because I maybe misunderstanding what you are saying here.  Are you saying, they have all found no Cherokee, so we kno there is no Cherokee? or are you saying they have searched all her lines and all possible Native line connections including those that may be of other Native Nations and have found absolutely none at all as far back as they are able to go at this point? or is this just about no Cherokee?,because my question was more about if it was possible that the family story of Cherokee could possibly be another Nation that they just weren't aware of, and this is why I gave the link for searching additional rolls.  Many ppl will get dna or mtdna results of no n8v, but know that they are n8v, some even have thier bia status cards, but the native lines are just not in the lines that the tests can or do confirm or disaffirm.  Do you see where I'm going with this?  Many times the lines are present for many within this country and in Canada as well, just because one Nation is a "no" doesn't mean there aren't connections elsewhere. that's all I'm saying here, so I'm asking, so they have confirmed all of her possible lines are all Europe and/or other countries?
She's not claiming other tribes, that is not the issue.  She claims Cherokee and it's not there.  I am a Cherokee citizen, I have been working with Cherokee genealogy for more than 30 years and I understand the difficulty of tracing Native ancestors.  That seldom applies to the Cherokee however, since we are well-documented back to the early 1800's.
Ok, so what you are saying is because she claimed Cherokee, only it was looked for, and its not there.  thank your for the answer on the specifics of what has been looked for, now I'm not so confused. so I appreciate your time answering Kathie.
Kathie do you have any suggestions for researching connections from Cherokee citizens to their children who were not enrolled? My grandmother *might* be the child of a Cherokee man, but as she was born when records were not as common, I can’t find much in the way of birth records or anything like that, that might give the name of her father. Census records just give his first initial. I found a man with that first initial and a similar surname (he didn’t have an “s” at the end) but can’t seem to find documentation on his end either, however I have DNA matches with surnames in his family AND he references the first name of my grandmother in a letter - BUT was there another lady with a similar (uncommon) name? Who knows?
1851/52, Siler and Chapman rolls.  These are people who remained in the East at Removal.   Includes all family members.

1909 Guion Miller roll - thousands of applications for a share of a payment due to  Cherokee and their descendants affected by the Removal Act.  Applicants listed spouses, children, parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts and uncles.  2/3 of the applicants were rejected, but tons of family info regardless

Dawes applications if they lived in Indian Territory (even if they didn’t qualify) include parents and children

Genealogies in Emmett Starr’s “History of the Cherokee Indians”
Great, thank you! I will check this information out too.
+9 votes

Just to throw a bit in here.  I am another one that has a Native American story in my family that I have not been able to verify.  But, unlike some, I still have hope that the story may be true, it just may not be exactly what my grandfather told me.  I won't bore you with the details of my story, but where mine has bearing on this is that I would love to have some help from other researchers to either prove, disprove or even provide a little more information on my own Native American "possible" (for me, it's https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Murray-3851 ).  If, in researching Elizabeth Warren's family, we find out more about the family tree that she descends from, we're not just helping the Senator, but also any other descendants.  I think that's worth the effort no matter what the result is. 

by Kyle Dane G2G6 Pilot (112k points)
From just a Genealogical standpoint, you are very correct Kyle. This is important not about the significance of N8v or Not N8v, just connecting all the limbs and branches within the tree will definately help many others to make their own connections within her lines and extended families. so yes I agree, completing her tree is important, she is a notable, and others connected to her, may or may not know of their own connections to her.
what is N8v?
N8v = Native
+7 votes
So many have been told stories like this - my story was the opposite - mom figured out despite the others (she was youngest) cover - up  - no idea who or what tribe - from proximity she thought perhaps Blackfeet but no - turned out her mom was over half First Nations mix of Cree and Ojibwe (Chippewa) and I was super lucky to have found it so quickly - but here now she has gone and done the DNA test and shown some NA blood so let's be happy she found out her story was not a tall tale - husband's father has the Cherokee princes story but his genealogy shows no such thing
by Navarro Mariott G2G6 Pilot (166k points)
+7 votes
So it looks like Senator Warren can NOT claim minority status as a "Native American" even though she did. She is definitely not eligible to join a tribe. Sher even admits that much. There is nothing saying her background is Cherokee. There IS a slight amount of DNA that is shared with First Peoples. However, many white people also have this present. So this neither confirms nor denies the claim but since it does NOT rule it out everyone believes it confirms it.

The reason many White people share this is intermixed background with Asians who share these same DNA markers. Gengis khan was very prolific. So bottom line is it is inconclusive.

As far as Trump paying, that was if HE had it tested and it came out positive.

What I find fantastically funny, Canada calls them First People which is a more accurate term. In the US the are called Native Americans which is also what multi-generational white Americans should be called. Cross the Rio Grande and they are just called Latinos.
by Steven Tibbetts G2G6 Pilot (409k points)
Not sure about the 'multi-generational' term for white Americans.  I would say that 'native' means 'born' and America includes North, South, and Central America (and possibly includes some Caribbean islands).  There fore, regardless of ethnic heritage, one born in the Americas is a native American.

The term 'First Peoples' is used by persons with an aversion to words containing more than two syllables. ;>  The proper term is 'aborigines.'  For some reason, there are some who want to believe this term only applies where kangaroos range but it just ain't so.
And all that is why actual people who descend from the first people to live on the American continents call ourselves names like Lenape or Di ne,  not Indians because we didn’t come from India, or Native Americans, because we’re not the only people born here.  In the United States today there are almost 600 different tribes/nations and of course many more in Canada, Central, and South America.  All  have their own name for themselves (almost always a word that just means “people”) and a name for their home lands (almost always a word or words that mean “where the people live”).
+7 votes
1/1032 makes less American Indian than the common everyday European American.  She has vrtually no Arerican Indian DNA because the test used to comare her DNA use no Nso called Native American blood. No Cherokee blood used to compare.  Elizabeth Warren is a poser. She has limited South American DNA.

Stuart Ward that very small bit of South American DNA does not equal confidant prove she is Cherokee or any other Indian tribe from the Canadian or Northern East Coast States tribes. Let alone lead to her 8th great grand parent.  

Please leave your politics off this forum.

..
by
edited
So I guess we can say there's as much Native American in her as there is Cocaine in Coca-Cola?
+9 votes
I guess I'm one of the few that had a family story of Native American ancestors that turned out to be true.  I've traced two women so far and one of them is probably Apache, just like my dad said.
by Marcie Ruiz G2G6 Mach 5 (59.7k points)
+5 votes
The DNA test taken by Senator Warren was basically a nill as mine was. My native American lore was about a rape. It turned out not only to not be a native American but also not a rape.
by Betty Fox G2G6 Pilot (185k points)
+4 votes
Here is a Snopis of the Genealogical Trees of E.Warrens family lines, whether these are all correct I dunno. But it seems these ppl and places would be the best places to start with all connections to find confirmations of parents siblings, grands etc If you scroll all the way to the bottom of the article it lists all the sources which are NOT personal genealogical trees

https://vtcrewcat.wordpress.com/tag/elizabeth-warren/
by Arora Anonymous G2G6 Pilot (164k points)
edited by Arora Anonymous
I ensured those sources were on the profiles where I could figure out who they belonged to. One thing of interest was a Indian census & I made a profile for him at ...

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Gorman-2203

* Oklahoma and Indian Territory Indian Censuses & Rolls 1851-1959, schedule#6, citing 1880 Census of Saline District, Cherokee Nation, line#20 for John Gorman.

In Native American research, I often see people say "Show me the Indian census". So does this census mean anything in regards to Senator Warren's Native American heritage ? Thanks
That is a census of NON- Cherokee people living in the Cherokee Nation by permit.  This John Gorman was not Cherokee. This record shows that he was a 27 year old white man living in the Cherokee Nation working for someone named Riley.
+3 votes
Senator Warren's family told her that ancestor Sarah (SMITH) Crawford had some native Indian heritage. I have been working on her line and have added some info to that Sarah's father Wyatt SMITH. I question whether this Wyatt is attached to a wrong German father. I have added a transcription list of Wyatt and a bunch of his sibling heirs.  I still don't know the father's name but am planning to work on it some more.

Wyatt Smith https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Smith-35544
by N Gauthier G2G6 Pilot (293k points)
There are twelve Smiths all clustered together on the 1800 census in Hillsborough, Chatham County, N.C., including Willis, Wiley, Jordan, and Isham.   I'd say the odds are high that one of the twelve was the father of those listed on the land deed.  Land records for Chatham County should reveal who patented the land before it went to the heirs and was sold.  There is a James, Sr. age over 45 who might be a candidate for the father, a Lyris Smith, also over 45...  several possibilities..
I have been working on it and think the father might be a William or Elias but still have more research to do.
Since there doesn’t seem to be a will, land records are probably the way to find him.  I think the man listed as “Lyus” on the 1800 census is probably “Elias.”   I’ll see what I can find in the land records, but I think you are definitely on the right track.
I been thinking some more about the the German father for Wyatt ... and I remembered that German grandparents are often called Opa and Oma ... and Wyatt's daughter Sarah was supposed to also have the name Oma ... maybe someone "assumed" if was short for Neoma ... but could it have been the German granma ... OMA ???
+3 votes
here's a new viewpoint as food for thought about her test results this is from 2 "Amerindian Geneticists" who have looked at the test done and the result findings and their take on what this scientifically means.

https://www.indianz.com/News/2018/10/23/two-native-american-geneticists-interpre.asp
by Arora Anonymous G2G6 Pilot (164k points)
An interesting article, but it repeats the myth that many Cherokee cannot be identified because they refused to file a Dawes application.  Very few Cherokee managed to avoid enrollment, and those who did are pretty easily found in other records.  Many people who did not initially sign up were enrolled by relatives, some were jailed for their refusal and enrolled over their objections.  Children of those who avoided enrollment were enrolled without their parents.  The Dawes Commission attempted to locate every person from the 1890 Cherokee census who had not filed an application.  Parents, siblings, and children are recorded so an individual who didn’t enroll is not lost to history or genealogy.  Descendants of those people may not be eligible for Cherokee citizenship today but they can be clearly identified as Cherokee descendants.
In my genealogy research I have found that many family stories often have a kernel of truth, but what happens is that the details are not always remembered correctly by various family members, as the info gets passed along through the many years.

I have found that when referring to Indian heritage, "Cherokee" has often been used as a default term by those gone by, because it is the most well known tribe. Some families have found that when they indeed had Indian heritage, it turned out to actually be a different tribe. I wouldn't be surprised to find this happen in Senator Warren's case. I am not so much interested in proving or disproving her indian heritage ... just in solving it either way. I enjoy solving any genealogical puzzles :)
kathy, I don't see or maybe don't understand where you get that it repeats "the myth" my point of the article was that of the scientific opinions of the 2 scientists who stated that the test was at the very least inconclusive of any evidence of any actual amerindian blood lines due to the facts that the test itself was faulty because it did not compare genetics of any indigenous of the actual US or Canada nations, the comparisons were from those of south american genetics.

quote from the page- "Because Bustamante used Indigenous individuals from Central and South America as a reference group to compare Warren’s DNA, we believe he should have stated only that Warren potentially had an “Indigenous” ancestor 6-10 generations ago, not conclusively a “Native American” one. The distinction might seem hypercritical to most, but to the sovereign tribal nations of the United States it’s an important one."
The article quotes a (clearly uninformed) tribal member saying that “a lot of people were too afraid to sign it [the Dawes Roll] and now their descendants have no way of knowing or showing that they are a descendant of a tribal member.”    The authors of the article didn’t verify the validity of that statement which anyone who works with Cherokee records or in the tribal registration office knows is inaccurate.  The rest of the article makes sense, but when  you get to the part about how difficult it is to find that Cherokee ancestor it falls apart.  It’s not difficult at all to find a Cherokee ancestor unless you’re trying to prove a myth and no such person exists.
+3 votes
That she is native American is 100% certain as that term merely means born in America (I'll leave it to others to decide whether that is North, South, and Central America or the United States of America).  The same would be true of indigenous.  Those two words are synonymous and neither mean aboriginal.  That word means what the Canadians term 'first peoples.'  

Seeing that the question of Cherokee heritage is then mentioned, it is clear the question is whether the Senatrix aboriginal American and others have already responded to that.
by Living Anderson G2G6 Mach 7 (79.3k points)
+4 votes
How can I block any more notifications on this topic?
by Lance Martin G2G6 Pilot (126k points)
Found the answer! Go to the oringal comment I made and edit then click the box that says email me if a comment is added.

Related questions

+15 votes
8 answers
1.1k views asked Oct 15, 2018 in The Tree House by N Gauthier G2G6 Pilot (293k points)
+6 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
2 answers
116 views asked Dec 31, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Enrico Warren G2G Rookie (220 points)
+4 votes
2 answers
+5 votes
10 answers
+5 votes
2 answers
+5 votes
3 answers
601 views asked Aug 2, 2015 in Policy and Style by David Mason G2G6 (8.4k points)
+1 vote
2 answers
292 views asked Jun 12, 2013 in Genealogy Help by anonymous

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...