Chief Donahoo and Cornstalk??? No more Mythical Chiefs on the Woodall line! An explanation Perhap?

+1 vote




I will be posting the source for where I believe this confusion may of come from:

John Woodall's daughter married a man named John Oaks I believe.  Under the regular naming conventions a son could of been name JOHN WOODALL OAKS mighta been as tall as a Cornstalk 

Here is a link to the marriage


I feel in order to do my research on my family certain things need to be cleared up!

I do not want in anyway MY Grandfather involved in Rumors nor in this Poindexter Debackel if I can possible separate him from them.  

I need these out of the way, they are clouding the real history.

If you look at my Grandfather's page their is a subsection

Its just starting

I have done the research long enough to recognize that my Woodall Grandfathers fought like majama's for this country in some wars.  Along with many others as well.

I feel that there Profiles should reflect who they really were, nothing made up.  They made there own in our history and did it well,  I am proud.  Check them out when I'm done with their profiles the Woodall's were interesting folks.


I have come to a road block in my research.  There has been a surprise finding! for me... I had been told as a child we were Native American.  It shouldn't of surprised me, but it did, and others here on Wikitree when my Grandfather showed Native in a DNA test. The information has been hard to assimilate for me even with my Grandfather's stories.  and it is a strange feeling indeed.  My Grandfather and family who were considered white,  have shown up as Native American in a DNA test.

Now in order for me to do research on Wiki in light of this test, it seems reasonable to assume I should look for other  Native Americans in his line.

I do not feel that my relatives if they were Native American would of actually trusted the US Government at the time and told the whole truth on government records.  This can lead to problems in the locating records because they are going to be Off somewhat and probably on propose.  I do believe they left a trail, but I may have to throw some brush off of the trail to find it again.

Being that it is astonishing news,  its hard to believe especially for me right now.  So I feel it seems necessary for verification of the findings. Which I will gather and present for either recognition of his Native Ancestry or for Euro Ancestry in the near future.

I'm going now and begin working on a source sheet for my Grandfather.  I will try to put all relevant data together in an organized manner for presentation.  The majority here have far more experience in such things then I do.  So I would like a group to go over the data and give their best opinions on my Grandfather's ethnic and racial background.

I have always admired the amount of knowledge in this room..  I need that knowledge now, so I can track my people.  Whom ever they turn out to be.

WikiTree profile: Floyd Woodall
in Genealogy Help by Susan Beech G2G6 (8.5k points)
retagged by Jillaine Smith
I have nothing to do with this line but the person you are linking on Geni (at the end of Floyd's paternal line on Wikitree) has a paternal line that goes to a man born in London England, so you would have to indicate where the break happened in the paternal line, if the Y DNA result that you have mentioned is correct. If you don't know where that break would be, that would be your next task and you should keep a running page of research notes somewhere.
I'd like to know how those other PM blocked you, what did they do, what means did they employ, on account of that could come in handy for the rest of us to know.  Just in case someone tries to or succeeds in blocking us.

Now, if it is merely a matter of agreement or disagreement on some family ties, child to parent, and they're asking for documentation, that's not blocking you. That's being a responsible family researcher.
There are European people with the “Q” haplotype although it is rare.  This seems to be a case that needs more legwork and documentation.
I guess because  these people in my grandfather Woodalls lines have always been  considered white on census. If my Grandpa is Native it could change things a bit.   I'm not trying to shake up the tree, I want to find my relatives.

My Grandfather told us he was Native and I have reason to believe him.

The DNA I didn't conjure up, it fell off the internet.  

I was quietly collecting data,  I didn't know.  

But I do realize that more documention and legwork are going be necessary.  

But I beginning to wonder if any proof would be enough if he is

I don't see that you're being blocked.  Several have challenged you on that claim and you have since changed your claim that some are denying your Native American ancestry.  I don't see that either.

What I do see is that folks are (rightly) questioning your methodology of tribe.

I have yet to see anyone react to your post(s) in a way that "blocks you."  Instead, I see that folks are pragmatically trying to help.  Perhaps you should amend your question to "Can you help me to Approve or Deny this Q1a3a1 Native American Result?"

I will gather my links and finding again and put them in a presentable format along with the verifications or paperwork I have on the DNA test in question.  If that isnt enough information then to say one way or the other whether he was truly Native.  

What do you expect me to do.
Q1a3a1 is an old fashioned way of expressing a Y-DNA haplogroup. In order to help you we need to have the terminal haplogroup and also the relation to the tested person.

And btw the way - Q although rare - is also seen in Europe.
This a Geographical yDNA Haplogroup Project for Native American male ancestry. We are now accepting Native American C3 and Native American Q.
This project is a meeting place for users who share the Q1a3a1 Y-DNA haplogroup, which means they are related along their paternal lines. 

- and defining SNP? I can not see the results in the group.

Results pages are not currently enabled. Contact the group administrator for additional information.

Thank you I will look into this.

Yep; Ole is correct. There is no longer a Q1a3 designation in the yDNA haplotree, even under the older nomenclature. The taxonomy was restructured in 2014. I posted about this in the original G2G question a couple of days ago:

This situation is most likely more common than not for those with Native ancestry - I mean the questionable validity of any documents relating to the family.

In my case those of the family falling above the Canadian border claimed the First Nations blood in order to get land, whereas those like my branch, that found themselves in the USA claimed white to avoid never being allowed to own land

I would believe the passed down version of family over the white documentation for these reasons - as I have stated before
Thank you. You gave me a beautiful idea.  I think I will write down some of those old stories he'd talk about.  I was young but he repeated.  

Maybe that's what I'm feeling like I should do!

again many thanks Navarro

In the future, rather than editing your original G2G post whereas you completely change it, I suggest that you close the post and start a new one.  Many people responded to your original post, so their responses relate to that post, yet now you have a completely different post.  That makes it very difficult for others coming across this to understand all of the comments.
Srry I understand.

5 Answers

+7 votes
Best answer
Susan, what are you talking about as to 'being blocked'?  I saw your post of a couple of days ago, but I don't see anything negative as to responses.

Whose DNA was tested?
by Darlene Athey-Hill G2G6 Pilot (414k points)
selected by Maggie N.
The results are being questioned when I approach others that are in the line.  I cannot possibly get cooperation when it is not believed.
If my Grandfather is Native American, then I need it to be known not questioned  So when I approach others with  new info that might shake up our tree somewhat they don't instantly reject it.

Either he is Native or he isn't.  I brought information forward several times on G2G.  Now with the DNA confirmation and it still being question by those I need to work with.   I need him to either recognized as a Native for my research purposes or its going be too difficult for me to research.
Who "rejected it?"  I've read through all the posts I can find on the subject in your feed and I don't see that anyone rejected your findings.  I have seen one instance where one Treer suggested that he might be of a different tribe than Cherokee and their methodolgy seems sound.  I'm still confused as to what you're being blocked on.
The original question/comments has been deleted and totally re-written most comments on this G2G relate to the prior question.
+3 votes
Floyd seems to be connected to his ancestors now.  At what stage have you been blocked?

Edit:  It looks to me as if, since I responded, the original question has been significantly edited, something readers of this entire thread should keep in mind.
by Julie Kelts G2G6 Pilot (319k points)
edited by Julie Kelts
I have been reseaching him for a year now the lines ends at my 4th grand father Johnaton Selfnire Woodall his line runs into the mythical Big Oak which believe might be part of this problem.  I am not interested in Mythical Chief's or any chief.  I'm trying to track my relatives!
+3 votes
by Eddie King G2G6 Pilot (549k points)

Whoever Steve Woodall is it’s unlikely he has Cherokee ancestry. If the early Woodalls were from Georgia it’s much more likely they were Muskogee (Creek) who also experienced a great deal of intermarriage.  The first Cherokees recorded with Woodall as a surname are from the 19th century.  There were far more than a hundred Indian tribes in the Southeast when European settlers arrived.  Most were quickly wiped out by war and disease, but some communities remained and some descendants remained.  Native Americans were enslaved by Europeans into the early 18th century and some married or had children with fellow slaves and indentured servants.  

That article is just full of inaccuracies.  Cherokee people didn’t “escape from the Trail of Tears” or “hide in the hills.”  Some Cherokee people in the earliest detachments went back home and then went West in later groups.  Some Cherokee went to Indian Territory at Removal but later returned to their original homes.  About 1700 Cherokee people, mostly in the North Carolina mountains, but some from mixed-blood families in Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama, simply remained in their homes. The mixed-blood families gave up their Cherokee citizenship in order to stay.  The North Carolina Cherokee became the Eastern Band.  The descendants of those who remained in the East weren’t hiding, they wanted to be included when the U.S. government offered them money in 1851, 1869, and 1907.  

People are familiar with the Cherokee so everyone seems to think they are Cherokee, but the Cherokee lived in a fairly small area mostly along the rivers that flowed down from the southwest side of the Great Smoky mountains. Georgia was largely populated by the Muskogee (Creek) Indians, the Chickasaw were in Alabama and western Tennessee, the Choctaw in Alabama and Mississippi.  There were numerous smaller tribes in South Carolina like the Yamasee, Waxhaw,  and Catawba.  It can be difficult to impossible to trace back to some of these tribes, but the Muskogee and Choctaw do have records dating back to Removal.  

DNA can sometimes confirm Native American ancestry, but it can’t connect someone to a tribe without an accurate family tree.
his dna group is exactly the same Susan got on her dna test
It suggests they are probably related, but not necessarily Cherokee.
+3 votes
Steve Woodall is a descendent of your John
by Eddie King G2G6 Pilot (549k points)
Wow thank you.   I have my Grandfather's stories too go on and so far they been proven true.
+5 votes
Calm down :)  The DNA test is consistent with so many different possibilities that it isn't evidence for anything.

You can't take one living person's Y test and assume that the Y group is the same all the way up the paper trail.  Paper trails aren't always biological.  And if there's a break, you don't know where it is.

Do the genealogy normally.  Get a sound paper tree.  Then you need positive and negative matches with other paper descendants to figure out what's going on with the Y chromosome.

Don't let the paper genealogy be dragged aside by aiming for a Native connection.  For all you know, you could be connecting to a Native with a totally different Native haplogroup.  You need actual matches, with small genetic distances, before you have any evidence.

Don't equate Y group with ethnicity and say "somebody is Native American" just because of their Y group.  Their Y chromosome represents only a small fraction of their ancestry, and you don't know how small.
by RJ Horace G2G6 Pilot (565k points)
I will collect the information I do have together in a format that I hope will be understandable.  I have had no problem following the rules with my other lines and profiles.  I  hope I did them up to Wiki Standards if there were errors I have always gone back willing and did my best to correct them, up to my ability and knowledge level at the time. I hope no one disagrees with me on that.

This Woodall line has a different story than my other lines.  You see if my Grandfather is Native than the stories he told were probably real.  If my Grandfather is Native and his stories are real then I will not be able through normal means find out about them through the regular documents. Through the stories in the books and I have a couple of these saying the Woodall  were Native that I will present.   They didn't want to be counted and sorted I suppose.  But I believe there are ways to find out more about my GP's family line

So you see it might be alot easier if my Grandfather turns white again. Just a little humor.

Related questions

+1 vote
0 answers
+1 vote
2 answers
0 votes
1 answer
+1 vote
0 answers
+1 vote
0 answers
+11 votes
1 answer

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright