NAFPS Forum
General => Research Needed => Topic started by: shkaakwus on April 10, 2009, 07:30:31 pm
-
wolfhawaii:
Having read your posts on Jane Ely, and being aware that you and I both know Sam Beeler, personally (in meatspace), and setting aside, for the moment, any issues about enrollment: Is it your considered opinion that Sam Beeler is not an American Indian?
-
Ray, I am pretty sure you know him better than I do.....what do YOU think? Sam is still a mystery to me since dumping me off at Nuyagi after I travelled all the way from Hawaii via Oklahoma to see him in 2006....haven't seen or heard from him since. My definition of who is indian is probably a lot more liberal than some other folks (and yet who is "traditional" Cherokee may be more narrowly defined than some others.) You had some posts over at Woodland Indians forums supporting him, as I recall. I spent some time looking for evidence of the Sandhills folks on the 1910 Monmouth Co. NJ census records recently without much luck, not sure how to account for that. Can you shed some light on what is going on up there with those folks?
-
If you've been reading about the Sand Hill Indians, over at Woodland Indians Forum, then you already know I have no doubt that he is an American Indian.
Most genealogical researchers are well-aware that census records are, more often than not, useless for identifying American Indians living in most of the eastern United States. I'll be glad to post (at Woodland) federal records identifying, as "Indians," every member of the Sand Hill Indian five-man council, who served from the 1920's through the 1950's. Many other kinds of records (birth, marriage, death, land, court, etc.) are much more informative than census records, for this particular purpose. Have you consulted any of the eleven bibliographical citations on the Sand Hill Indians that I listed at Woodland? That might be a place to start!
-
Here you go: http://woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=5980
-
Thank you for the link; I find census info occasionally helpful to find relationships among people, geographical locations etc but i do not rely on them for racial classifications. Perhaps some of the people listed as black on that 1910 census were actually indians from NC. I can imagine the conversation that took place when the individual noticed the census taker had listed him as black and made him change it to Indian. Plecker was infamous in Virginia for trying to reclassify all the Indian people to black.
I do find their (Sandhills)situation interesting and I am curious as to why there seems to be some kind of argument about who is and isn't one by some of the known descendents esp. in relation to Sam and his successor's group. I am also interested as to why Sam has been said to be enrolled CNO yet was chief of Sandhills and was actively recruiting for SECCI. Sam also claimed a connection to Stokes Grounds in OK yet a statement was made by a spokesperson who claimed no knowledge of Sam. None of these things are definitive in any way but having at one time considered Sam a friend and having taken his statements at face value it was somewhat disconcerting to hear contrary information from others and lose contact with Sam so abruptly. I have a feeling that he had an agenda, thought he could use me to further it, and quickly backed out when all did not go according to his plan.....still don't know what the agenda was but I have a glimmer of it that will remain unsaid. His behavior was not in keeping with clan traditions.
I take it you are working on behalf of the tribe in their quest for recognition?
-
I don't think there were any living Indians from North Carolina, among the Sand Hill Indians, in 1910. That generation was long gone, by then. In most cases, I doubt that people were ever asked about their race--the census taker simply identifying them by his own lights. In those rare cases where a person might notice what the census taker was writing down, corrections could be made--and were.
Those who know Sam Beeler may judge his character, as they will. My only interests are restricted to whether or not he is an American Indian, and whether or not he is a Sand Hill Indian. In the newspaper article, by Joe Ryan, that you posted in the Jane Ely thread, Claire Garland, Director of the Sand Hill Indian Historical Association, says that Sam is not a Sand Hill Indian. Fascinating, in view of the fact that in her Sand Hill Indian Historical Association newsletter, Summer 2006, Issue 4 (which I have in front of me, right now), Sam Beeler and five members of his family are listed as members, and there is a feature article, with portrait photo, on "Sam Beeler, Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill Band of Indians"! (boldface type supplied by the editor of the newletter)
Whether or not Sam is enrolled CNO or not is not my concern, although Wyman Kirk, who calls himself one of three CNO people who are monitoring phony Cherokee groups, said (in a letter posted at this forum) that Sam Beeler is apparently enrolled CNO. To the best of my knowledge, the SECCI (whatever anyone thinks of it) does not prohibit CNO citzens from joining; nor does the CNO prohibit their citizens from joining the SECCI.
I would like to see any and all real American Indians get governmental recognition. I am not working for anyone.
-
RAY?? HERE?? :o
-
Ray, I don't care to research too deeply into the Sandhills and their indian status; if they are real hope they get somewhere with it, but i have a lot more to do than worry about them. I am curious why you are so personally involved in their cause and specifically pop out of the woodwork anytime Sam Beeler's name is mentioned? Why did you start this thread? Are you in fact Sam Beeler's sockpuppet?. You were very involved in the Nuyagi thread a while back but you deleted all that for some reason. What is your stake in all this? For a while there i wasn't even sure there was a real person named Ray Writenhour and thought it was a pseudonym for someone else connected to all the business up in NY/NJ......I did find that there is a real person named that who is a white scholar of the Delaware people, and I had hoped one day to get your (or his) take on some of the issues up there.
So , apparently, Wyman Kirk of CNO says Sam is CNO.... through whom is he enrolled? Why does he work so vigorously in organizing extremely distantly related Cherokee descendents, i.e. SECCI and it's predecessors, and formerly was chief (though there seems to be some controversy) of the Sandhills, an organization not even recognized by the state in which they reside? If injustices have been done I would like to see them rectified, but in the meantime I am curious to hear answers to these questions.
-
wolfhawaii writes:
"Ray, I don't care to research too deeply into the Sandhills and their indian status; if they are real hope they get somewhere with it, but i have a lot more to do than worry about them."
Yes, you've got so much more to do you were spending time looking for Sand Hill Indians in federal census documents for Monmouth County, New Jersey, frequenting the Woodland Indians Forum, reading the Sand Hill Indian threads, and finding newspaper articles on Sand Hill Indians to post on this forum! LOL! Who asked you to "worry" about them?
"I am curious why you are so personally involved in their cause and specifically pop out of the woodwork anytime Sam Beeler's name is mentioned? Why did you start this thread? Are you in fact Sam Beeler's sockpuppet?"
Why am I "so personally involved in their cause"? Because I had a good friend, Jim Revey, who never got the recognition he deserved. "Pop out of the woodwork"? That's an odd turn of phrase given the fact that it has now been more than a year since you asked, "Where's Ray Writenhour when we need him? He seemed to know a lot about folks up there." [wolfhawaii, April 10, 2008, NAFPS, re: Jane Ely] I thought it was time to provide a little balance to all the negative stuff you've been posting, recently. Hence, this thread. "Sam Beeler's sockpuppet"? I suppose I shouldn't dignify the insult by answering, but, Sam Beeler hasn't got any idea what's being said, back and forth, on this forum, so far as I know. He doesn't even own a computer.
"You were very involved in the Nuyagi thread a while back but you deleted all that for some reason. What is your stake in all this?"
My only involvement in that thread was an attempt to separate the Sand Hill Indians from the Nuyaagi Keetoowah Society issues. What makes you think everybody has a "stake" in something?
"For a while there i wasn't even sure there was a real person named Ray Writenhour and thought it was a pseudonym for someone else connected to all the business up in NY/NJ......I did find that there is a real person named that who is a white scholar of the Delaware people, and I had hoped one day to get your (or his) take on some of the issues up there."
Well, now you have it.
So , apparently, Wyman Kirk of CNO says Sam is CNO.... through whom is he enrolled? Why does he work so vigorously in organizing extremely distantly related Cherokee descendents, i.e. SECCI and it's predecessors, and formerly was chief (though there seems to be some controversy) of the Sandhills, an organization not even recognized by the state in which they reside? If injustices have been done I would like to see them rectified, but in the meantime I am curious to hear answers to these questions.
Sorry. You'll have to ask a. Wyman Kirk, and b. Sam Beeler those questions. Only Sand Hill Indian questions hold any interest for me. Sam is a Sand Hill Indian through his mother and maternal grandmother. I have no idea what his CNO lineage is, nor, as I said, do I care.
-
I don't think there were any living Indians from North Carolina, among the Sand Hill Indians, in 1910. That generation was long gone, by then.
Sam himself told me about numerous Cherokee individuals and families coming up to NJ from NC to work in that general time frame; I was curious to see if they could be located on census records and so I spent a little time browsing the 1910 Monmouth Co. NJ records without reaching any conclusions. I have a minor personal interest in Delaware history and migrations as one branch of my family had lived in the area of former Delaware towns...add my past acquaintance with Sam Beeler and thus ....my interest in the Sandhills. Sorry your friend Jim Reevey didn't get the recognition he deserved; you honor his memory. Why were the Sandhills excluded from the NJ Commission on Indian Affairs when other groups whom Sam encouraged to come into the state were included?
ADDED: Thank you for returning and responding to the questions I asked and being civil in your responses.
-
"Why were the Sandhills excluded from the NJ Commission on Indian Affairs when other groups whom Sam encouraged to come into the state were included?"
Good question. It's one I've been asking for years.
Here is Sam Beeler's testimony before the NJ Commission on Indian Affairs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxGpCJEjWSY&feature=channel_page
-
I thought it was time to provide a little balance to all the negative stuff you've been posting, recently. Hence, this thread.
What "negative stuff"?
-
Well, let's see. On March 21, 2009, you posted this at the "Jane Ely" thread:
"Jane's former partner Sam Beeler had also solicited members for SECCI; this seems odd as he has been said to be enrolled Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (a claim I seriously doubt) and has been active in the Sandhills Band in NJ. The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma has formed a task force to combat fraudulent Cherokee "tribes" including SECCI and Sandhills."
That's one. Then, on March 23, 2009, in the same thread, you posted that newspaper article on the Sand Hill Indian lawsuit, in which Claire Garland and others had nothing but negative things to say about Sam Beeler.
-
I did seriously doubt that Beeler was enrolled CNO, but having seen Wyman Kirk's statement again recently, I won't argue the point. The federally recognized Cherokee Nations generally do not permit dual enrollment, though there are some . It is CNO's characterization that SECCI and Sandhills are frauds, not necessarily mine. In my opinion, SECCI is a heritage group composed of people of distant and nonexistent Cherokee ancestry that masquerades as a tribe. I do not know enough about the Sandhills to make a conclusion....I was hoping you might provide more info on the background of the dispute between Ms. Garland et.al. and the current and recent past leadership of the Sandhills. The first article was actually posted by educatedindian, which sent me on a search for more info and I posted the other excerpts. Do not attribute to me what others may write.... also, I know far more than i have said so nelagi gihli gesesdi (be leaving the dog alone.)
-
Unfortunately for you, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma's officially published opinion is that Beeler and Sandhills are frauds.....deal with it. Unless YOU have more evidence that the Sandhills are legitimate, Beeler and his cousin Holloway are legitimate, and their critics are wrong, you are wasting bandwidth.
[Al's note: Insults and personal disputes removed.]
-
wolfhawaii writes:
"Unfortunately for you, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma's officially published opinion is that Beeler and Sandhills are frauds..."
Here's their list. Unfortunately, for you, it doesn't list the Sand Hill Indians as frauds! You're having a bad day.
http://taskforce.cherokee.org/Home/tabid/106/Default.aspx
-
If the two of you want to resort to name calling or anything else personal, it has to be done offlist. Anything further like that will also be deleted.
-
From Indian Country Today:
http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/archive/41218897.html
New Jersey tribe files lawsuit to reclaim ancestral lands
By Bobbie Whitehead, Today correspondent
Story Published: Mar 13, 2009
Story Updated: Mar 13, 2009
{snip}
The Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians are descendants of the Delaware Tribe, once known as the Lenape Indians of New Jersey, before being sent to Oklahoma, Holloway said. When the majority of the Delaware tribe left for Oklahoma, he said the group that calls itself the Sand Hill Band did not leave and has continued since 1711 to live, practice its culture and function as a tribe in New Jersey. The Delaware Nation of Oklahoma does have knowledge of the Sand Hill Band and acknowledges its existence as a tribe, said Tamara Francis, Delaware Nation cultural preservation director. (snip)
Though the Sand Hill Band does not have state recognition, Holloway said his tribe is listed with the BIA as “federally recognized but unsupervised.”
Despite Holloway’s claim of federal recognition, BIA records don’t list the Sand Hill Band under its federally-recognized tribes. However, BIA records show that the tribe filed a letter of intent to seek federal recognition in 2007 as did the other three New Jersey tribes.
The Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians tribe has some Cherokee members that joined the tribe in the 1700s, and the Sand Hill Band is the original indigenous tribe in the state for which U.S. treaties were written and the only New Jersey tribe with legitimate land claims, Holloway said.
“We are the only Indian tribe in New Jersey that can sell authentic Native American goods,” Holloway said.
Though, the Indian Arts and Crafts Board disputes the claim.
“We don’t have any official statement from the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office indicating that there are officially state-recognized tribes by the state of New Jersey that would meet the definition of Indian tribe under the Indian Arts and Crafts Act Public Law 101-644,” said Meredith Stanton, Indian Arts and Crafts Board director.
View Oldest Comments First
Monday, Mar 16 at 11:58 AM Loretta Francis wrote ...Can you say LIBEL?
Monday, Mar 16 at 11:34 AM Tamara Francis wrote ...RE: Tribal Comment I am the Delaware Nation Cultural Preservation Director. I want to make this perfectly clear to everyone. I did not give a quote to this article's author. An email was sent to the author of this article acknowledging that my office was aware that the Sand Hill exist but I, in no way, shape or form acknowledged them as a tribal entity, as was written in this article. An interview was never given to Ms. Bobbie Whitehead. No creedence should be given to this article.
So....if the Delaware Nation, BIA, State of New Jersey, and the Indian Arts and Crafts Board do not recognize the legitimacy of the Sandhills, are we all just to take Writenhour, Beeler, and the Holloways word on it?
-
This article you've posted has nothing to do with Sam Beeler (you know, the subject of this thread), who is totally opposed to the actions and pronouncements of the present Sand Hill Indian Chief. You'll have to try a different tack. So far as the positions of the federal government and federally-recognized tribes are concerned, regarding the "legitimacy" of the Sand Hill Indians--as I said before, I could care less. I wonder that you put so much emphasis on their opinion.
[Personal attacks and sidetracks removed.]
-
wolfhawaii writes:
"Unfortunately for you, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma's officially published opinion is that Beeler and Sandhills are frauds..."
Here's their list. Unfortunately, for you, it doesn't list the Sand Hill Indians as frauds! You're having a bad day.
http://taskforce.cherokee.org/Home/tabid/106/Default.aspx
So, several younger members of the Ross family attended Lawrenceville Classical and Commercial High School, New Jersey in the latter 1830s and early 1840s. Attendance at a school does not constitute “a clear presence of substantial Cherokee community in New Jersey??? as claimed by the so-called Nuyagi group.( Actually this info was found on the Sandhills website http://www.sandhillindians.org/ . Claims made on this page (attributed to Beeler) are dispelled by the various statements made by officials of the respective governments/organizations.)editing added.
This group also suggests that visits by representatives of the Cherokee people constitute migrations. Cherokees and other tribal leaders were likely to call on one another to visit or to pay respects to those who have passed on as they do now. This does not constitute a migration. The group uses whatever it can to try to validate itself as a Cherokee tribal community—it is not.
I believe that both the Cherokee and Muscogee (Creek) people “Indianized??? New York as Nuyagi—it does not mean “place of rocks. There is only one recognized Delaware Tribe in Oklahoma and they reside at Anadarko, Oklahoma among several plains tribes. There was a contingent of Delaware who came into the Cherokee Nation in 1867 and agreed to become Cherokee tribal members.
I believe that Wyman Kirk has already addressed the Keetoowah issue completely and with more information and comprehension than I could provide.
Dr. Richard L. Allen
Policy Analyst
Cherokee Nation
end quote
From Wyman Kirk of the CNO: "I have also seen mention of a "Dr" Sam Beeler who is a prominent member of the Sand Hill Band of Cherokee and Lenape (also known as the Sandhill Band of Indians of New Jersey), a group who had crossover members (including Beeler) with the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society. Beeler makes claims that he is a "traditional" Keetoowah, and he was listed at one time as the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society medicine man (or great elder or something of the like). Beeler makes claims to some sort of connection to the Oklahoma Keetoowah Society and the grounds at Stokes Smith near Vian, Oklahoma. This is patently false, and Beeler has no status as a member of any kind to Stokes Ceremonial Grounds (my uncle, Snow Fields, was the Secretary of the Stokes Grounds Keetoowahs until his passing last year, and one of his job duties was to keep the member roles). I can assure you that Sam Beeler was not now, or ever, a member of Stokes Grounds; nor did he ever apply for membership (to obtain membership, you must speak Cherokee fluently, have an unbroken matrilineal line/have a clan, and agree to the basic tenets of the religion). I can also say that he was not now, or ever, a member of the other Keetoowah grounds in Oklahoma. (Here's a link to info on Beeler: http://sussex.edu/newsandevents/2003/11/200311073.htm). One final note on Beeler, he is apparently an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation and claims he is a fluent speaker of Cherokee (this information does nothing to counter the arguments against his claims, though I have my doubts as to his degree of fluency in the Cherokee language)."
So cousins Beeler and Holloway have had a falling out.... huh... as far as the statements of the federally-recognized nations, generally the participants on this board are respectful of their right to claim or disclaim who their relations are...just because you don't care what the recognized nations have to say, doesn't mean others don't.
-
I see all you can do is regurgitate some old stuff from this forum. Okay.
wolfhawaii posts:
"So, several younger members of the Ross family attended Lawrenceville Classical and Commercial High School, New Jersey in the latter 1830s and early 1840s. Attendance at a school does not constitute "a clear presence of substantial Cherokee community in New Jersey??? as claimed by the so-called Nuyagi group."
Matters of interpretation and semantics. Have you read the Ross papers?
"( Actually this info was found on the Sandhills website http://www.sandhillindians.org/ . Claims made on this page (attributed to Beeler) are dispelled by the various statements made by officials of the respective governments/organizations.)editing added."
They're "disputed"--not "dispelled."
"This group also suggests that visits by representatives of the Cherokee people constitute migrations. Cherokees and other tribal leaders were likely to call on one another to visit or to pay respects to those who have passed on as they do now. This does not constitute a migration."
In two instances, on the Sand Hill Indian website, the word, "migration," is used, where "move" or "visit" or some other word would have been a better choice. Big deal. In fact, the primary meaning of "migrate" is just "move." So, if one wanted to get pedantically literal, these movements WERE "migrations"--though, not migrations in the usual way we understand that word.
"The group uses whatever it can to try to validate itself as a Cherokee tribal community-it is not."
One man's opinion; and, the standard, official, politically expedient position of the CNO regarding any non-federally-recognized Cherokee descendants. They held the same position with regard to the UKB, until it was recognized! LOL!
"I believe that both the Cherokee and Muscogee (Creek) people "Indianized??? New York as Nuyagi-it does not mean "place of rocks."
I have no doubt, myself, that "Nuyagi" is a phonetic representation of "New York;" however, the gloss as "place of rocks" is a perfectly understandable folk etymology and paraphrase, which has been read into this name. The Lenape who lived in New York called that area, "Minising," which has been glossed as 'where the stones are gathered together'--and the people there were called, "Minsi," glossed as 'people of the stony country.' In Cherokee, "nv ya" means 'rock' and "gi" means 'people'--so, "nv ya gi" equals 'people of the rocks.' This would be a more accurate gloss, but it's easy enough to see where this came from.
"There is only one recognized Delaware Tribe in Oklahoma and they reside at Anadarko, Oklahoma among several plains tribes. There was a contingent of Delaware who came into the Cherokee Nation in 1867 and agreed to become Cherokee tribal members."
More CNO talking points dutifully delivered. LOL! Tell this to members of the Delaware Tribe of Indians headquartered in Bartlesville. Then, try to dodge the rocks being hurled in your direction!
"From Wyman Kirk of the CNO: "I have also seen mention of a "Dr" Sam Beeler who is a prominent member of the Sand Hill Band of Cherokee and Lenape (also known as the Sandhill Band of Indians of New Jersey), a group who had crossover members (including Beeler) with the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society."
Yes. You can count the number of Sand Hill Indians who were or are members of the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society on the fingers of one hand, and have one or two fingers left over.
"Beeler makes claims that he is a "traditional" Keetoowah, and he was listed at one time as the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society medicine man (or great elder or something of the like)."
Says who? I think Kirk may be confusing Sam Beeler with Ray Evans Harrell, here. As for being "traditional Keetoowah," I accept Sam Beeler's characterization of himself, as such. The Nuyagi Keetoowah Society was formed in 1928, by traditonal Cherokee people living in New York and New Jersey. Sam Beeler is a member of that religious society.
"Beeler makes claims to some sort of connection to the Oklahoma Keetoowah Society and the grounds at Stokes Smith near Vian, Oklahoma. This is patently false, and Beeler has no status as a member of any kind to Stokes Ceremonial Grounds (my uncle, Snow Fields, was the Secretary of the Stokes Grounds Keetoowahs until his passing last year, and one of his job duties was to keep the member roles). I can assure you that Sam Beeler was not now, or ever, a member of Stokes Grounds; nor did he ever apply for membership (to obtain membership, you must speak Cherokee fluently, have an unbroken matrilineal line/have a clan, and agree to the basic tenets of the religion). I can also say that he was not now, or ever, a member of the other Keetoowah grounds in Oklahoma. (Here's a link to info on Beeler: http://sussex.edu/newsandevents/2003/11/200311073.htm)."
Huh? This guy is tilting at windmills! All this site says is that Sam Beeler "participated" in stomps at the Stokes Grounds in Oklahoma. Sam Beeler never said he was a "member" of that Stomp Grounds, or any other in Oklahoma. I know someone who is a member of this list, right here, who is not enrolled, and not even Cherokee, who has been to the stomps at Stokes!
"One final note on Beeler, he is apparently an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation and claims he is a fluent speaker of Cherokee (this information does nothing to counter the arguments against his claims, though I have my doubts as to his degree of fluency in the Cherokee language)."
So, this guy has his "doubts" about Beeler's "fluency." So, what?
"So cousins Beeler and Holloway have had a falling out.... huh..."
You can pick your friends. You can't pick your relations.
"as far as the statements of the federally-recognized nations, generally the participants on this board are respectful of their right to claim or disclaim who their relations are...just because you don't care what the recognized nations have to say, doesn't mean others don't."
That's their prerogative. My prerogative is to research the facts and make my own decisions, rather than to rely solely on the word of somebody else, who is demonstably unfamiliar with the subject under scrutiny, and who has a political and financial stake in taking the position he does. In fact, the CNO does not disclaim them as their relations--it only disclaims them as a "tribal community"--a point with which I and others disagree. In Sam Beeler's case (again, the subject of this thread!), they obviously acknowledge that he is an enrolled member of the CNO! So, thanks for showing that Sam Beeler is an American Indian and a Cherokee! I appreciate your help in this matter.
-
Have you read the Ross papers?
Please forgive me jumping in here, but do you have a good link for these online? I thought I had one here, but can't seem to find it.
-
I don't. Didn't know they were online.
-
Matters of interpretation and semantics. Have you read the Ross papers? I will leave interpretation and semantics to you. I have not had access to the Ross papers to read them.
"( Actually this info was found on the Sandhills website http://www.sandhillindians.org/ . Claims made on this page (attributed to Beeler) are dispelled by the various statements made by officials of the respective governments/organizations.)editing added."
They're "disputed"--not "dispelled." The claim is made that the Sandhill Band is recognized by the "revered Keetoowah Society, Delaware nation, New Jersey, and the US Govt; the info posted above shows this claim is not supported
One man's opinion; and, the standard, official, politically expedient position of the CNO regarding any non-federally-recognized Cherokee descendants. They held the same position with regard to the UKB, until it was recognized! LOL! The UKB preceded the reemergence of the CNO by 30 years
"I believe that both the Cherokee and Muscogee (Creek) people "Indianized??? New York as Nuyagi-it does not mean "place of rocks."
I have no doubt, myself, that "Nuyagi" is a phonetic representation of "New York;" however, the gloss as "place of rocks" is a perfectly understandable folk etymology and paraphrase, which has been read into this name. The Lenape who lived in New York called that area, "Minising," which has been glossed as 'where the stones are gathered together'--and the people there were called, "Minsi," glossed as 'people of the stony country.' In Cherokee, "nv ya" means 'rock' and "gi" means 'people'--so, "nv ya gi" equals 'people of the rocks.' This would be a more accurate gloss, but it's easy enough to see where this came from. I agree that Nuyagi means "place of rocks; disagree that "gi" means people....it is a locative as far as I recall
"There is only one recognized Delaware Tribe in Oklahoma and they reside at Anadarko, Oklahoma among several plains tribes. There was a contingent of Delaware who came into the Cherokee Nation in 1867 and agreed to become Cherokee tribal members."
More CNO talking points dutifully delivered. LOL! Tell this to members of the Delaware Tribe of Indians headquartered in Bartlesville. Then, try to dodge the rocks being hurled in your direction! The Bartlesville folks are/were Cherokee citizens by treaty who decided to reestablish themselves independently of CNO; I support their right to do so if they wish
"From Wyman Kirk of the CNO: "I have also seen mention of a "Dr" Sam Beeler who is a prominent member of the Sand Hill Band of Cherokee and Lenape (also known as the Sandhill Band of Indians of New Jersey), a group who had crossover members (including Beeler) with the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society."
Yes. You can count the number of Sand Hill Indians who were or are members of the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society on the fingers of one hand, and have one or two fingers left over. (The original discussion this came from was as regards the Pomona group which was attempting to usurp the group which held the charter and the land; Sam Beeler's other cousin David Michael Wolfe and he were involved in that as far as i know. Both are persona non grata there i beleive.)
"Beeler makes claims that he is a "traditional" Keetoowah, and he was listed at one time as the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society medicine man (or great elder or something of the like)."
Says who? I think Kirk may be confusing Sam Beeler with Ray Evans Harrell, here. As for being "traditional Keetoowah," I accept Sam Beeler's characterization of himself, as such. The Nuyagi Keetoowah Society was formed in 1928, by traditonal Cherokee people living in New York and New Jersey. Sam Beeler is a member of that religious society. I refer to my statement above. The former website of the NKS of Pomona NY is no longer available but I am quite sure Ray Harrell was never on it. Again, the claim that the Keetowah Society recognizes them in NJ or NY is patently false. I asked elders and officials at several of the ceremonial grounds in Oklahoma and no one had ever heard of Sam Beeler
"Beeler makes claims to some sort of connection to the Oklahoma Keetoowah Society and the grounds at Stokes Smith near Vian, Oklahoma. This is patently false, and Beeler has no status as a member of any kind to Stokes Ceremonial Grounds (my uncle, Snow Fields, was the Secretary of the Stokes Grounds Keetoowahs until his passing last year, and one of his job duties was to keep the member roles). I can assure you that Sam Beeler was not now, or ever, a member of Stokes Grounds; nor did he ever apply for membership (to obtain membership, you must speak Cherokee fluently, have an unbroken matrilineal line/have a clan, and agree to the basic tenets of the religion). I can also say that he was not now, or ever, a member of the other Keetoowah grounds in Oklahoma. (Here's a link to info on Beeler: http://sussex.edu/newsandevents/2003/11/200311073.htm)."
Huh? This guy is tilting at windmills! All this site says is that Sam Beeler "participated" in stomps at the Stokes Grounds in Oklahoma. Sam Beeler never said he was a "member" of that Stomp Grounds, or any other in Oklahoma. I know someone who is a member of this list, right here, who is not enrolled, and not even Cherokee, who has been to the stomps at Stokes! The website claims that they are recognized by the "revered Keetoowah Society" and Wyman Kirk's statement and my own inquiries show this not to be the case.
"One final note on Beeler, he is apparently an enrolled member of the Cherokee Nation and claims he is a fluent speaker of Cherokee (this information does nothing to counter the arguments against his claims, though I have my doubts as to his degree of fluency in the Cherokee language)."
So, this guy has his "doubts" about Beeler's "fluency." So, what? In my opinion he is an intermediate speaker at best, and doesn't know the songs well enough to lead or follow
"So cousins Beeler and Holloway have had a falling out.... huh..."
You can pick your friends. You can't pick your relations.
"as far as the statements of the federally-recognized nations, generally the participants on this board are respectful of their right to claim or disclaim who their relations are...just because you don't care what the recognized nations have to say, doesn't mean others don't."
That's their prerogative. My prerogative is to research the facts and make my own decisions, rather than to rely solely on the word of somebody else, who is demonstably unfamiliar with the subject under scrutiny, and who has a political and financial stake in taking the position he does. In fact, the CNO does not disclaim them as their relations--it only disclaims them as a "tribal community"--a point with which I and others disagree. In Sam Beeler's case (again, the subject of this thread!), they obviously acknowledge that he is an enrolled member of the CNO! So, thanks for showing that Sam Beeler is an American Indian and a Cherokee! I appreciate your help in this matter. Whatever...is that what you came here to prove?
-
The "revered Keetoowah Society" referred to is the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society. The late Jim Revey, Sand Hill Indian, was named the official representative of the Delaware Tribe of Indians, headquartered in Bartlesville, for dealing with the state government in New Jersey. At that time, the Delaware Tribe had federal recognition. Delawares recognize the Sand Hill Indians as Lenape. Governor Driscoll of New Jersey was ceremonially "inducted" into the Sand Hill Indians in 1949, and the 1980's gubernatorial proclamation recognizing the Lenape as the indigenous people of New Jersey, was written, largely, by Jim Revey, Sand Hill Indian. The Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution for 1948, published by the U.S. Government Printing Office, lists the Sand Hill Indians as a remnant Indian community in New Jersey. Federal documents, such as in the link I posted, earlier, list Sand Hill Indians as "Indians." The politically and financially motivated pronouncements of the CNO do not "dispel" any of this.
So, the CNO didn't exist for 30 years? Apparently, they weren't Indians, then? Maybe, I picked a bad example. However, recognized tribes frequently deny the legitimacy of other groups seeking recognition--often, with good reason, but not always. The EBC has been fighting the recognition efforts of the Lumbee, for years. If the Lumbee receive full recognition, this time, will that mean that they were always legitimate Indians--or, that they only became real Indians after receiving full federal recognition? Or, will they still be non-Indians after receiving recognition?
That the "Bartlesville folk" were ever "Cherokee citizens" is denied by a lot of them--and I agree with those who deny it. This point is debatable, and not yet settled. If they were "Cherokee citizens by treaty," how is it that the CNO argues that the Freedmen are not? (That's a rhetorical question.)
I have no idea which branch of the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society Sam Beeler is affiliated with. Nor do I see what difference it would make to the CNO. Nor do I care.
The question of Sam Beeler's "fluency" in Cherokee (and this is way out of my area of expertise) only mattered if he claimed to be a member of the Stokes Stomp Ground in Oklahoma. He didn't! He said he "participated" in those stomps. As I said, someone else on this list has done that! And, I'm betting those elders you talked to don't know who he is, either. By the way, that fellow says a lot of the folks at that great traditional stomp ground looked awfully white.
I said why I came here. To ask you if you thought Sam Beeler was NOT an American Indian, and to provide some balance to your negative posts. I think I've achieved those goals.
-
The "revered Keetoowah Society" referred to is the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society. I have no idea which branch of the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society Sam Beeler is affiliated with. Nor do I see what difference it would make to the CNO. Nor do I care.
The question of Sam Beeler's "fluency" in Cherokee (and this is way out of my area of expertise) only mattered if he claimed to be a member of the Stokes Stomp Ground in Oklahoma. He didn't! He said he "participated" in those stomps. As I said, someone else on this list has done that! And, I'm betting those elders you talked to don't know who he is, either. By the way, that fellow says a lot of the folks at that great traditional stomp ground looked awfully white.
I said why I came here. To ask you if you thought Sam Beeler was NOT an American Indian, and to provide some balance to your negative posts. I think I've achieved those goals.
This is the first i have heard that NKS is the "revered" Keetoowah Society referred too; Sam always said (to me)the recognition was specifically from Stokes Smith Grounds in OK. As to the NKS, who allegedly brought the fire to NJ from Oklahoma? A sacred fire can't be moved any old way; if this was done properly, people would know about it. You made the comment about not being able to pick relatives....why do other relatives of Sam Beeler not recognize him as being cousin to their cousin James Revey? Claire Garland says he is not a relative, why does she say that? Your comment about racial phenotypes at the ceremonial ground in OK is seems like race-baiting and is quite ugly. During the National Holiday lots of people go to the stomps that are not regular attendees, including you and/or your buddy. There are still some unresolved questions in my mind, but maybe no one else cares.
-
Sorry, fella. You're fishin' in a dry creek bed. I'm a white man and a Christian. I have never been to Oklahoma and I have zero interest in traditional Cherokee religion. Sam Beeler told me that the Keetoowah Society referred to at the Sand Hill Indian site is the NKS. You say he told you something different. Since the site, itself, doesn't say which one, that's where that stands. I can't answer why Claire Garland says he's not a relative. Ask her. And, while you're at it, you can ask her why she published a feature article in her 2006 newsletter titled, "Sam Beeler, Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill Band of Indians"! We're all "cousins," of one sort or another. Do you know who all your 3rd and 4th cousins are? I know I don't. I certainly don't know who all of Sam Beeler's cousins are--nor, Claire Garland's! I do know that John Kraft, highly respected white scholar of the Lenape in New Jersey, was a good friend of Jim Revey; and, he testified that Jim thought very highly of Sam Beeler. The comments about whites at the Stokes Stomp Grounds is not mine; although, like Vine Deloria, Jr., I do base who I think should be recognized as an Indian primarily on race. Any Wannabe can learn tribal history, culture and language. With the CNO's treatment of the Freedmen, I think we know who the "race-baiters" are. Also, I find that protests about BQ usually come loudest from white Wannabes, or what this forum calls PODIA's (enrolled or not), rather than from real Indians.
Funny. When your name was mentioned on this board, over a year ago, I asked Sam Beeler if he knew you. He said he did, told me a little about who you are, and had nothing at all disparaging to say about you. Still doesn't, as far as I know--though I haven't spoken to him in quite some time. Then, a month or so ago, you start posting all this negative stuff, obviously attempting (unsuccessfully) to denigrate Sam Beeler. So, you apparently have some real personal issues with him. Maybe that's why nobody else cares. I know I don't.
-
You started this thread and I shared my concerns. It seems there are other people who have similar concerns, however, Sand Hills and Lenape affairs are best left in the hands of those immediately concerned. Our mutual frames of reference are quite different and we should leave it at that. Raising personal issues or creating them is not the purpose of this forum. I don't see you haranguing educatedindian about having posted the original article about the Sand Hill lawsuit on the Jane Ely thread.
-
You started this thread and I shared my concerns. It seems there are other people who have similar concerns, however, Sand Hills and Lenape affairs are best left in the hands of those immediately concerned. Our mutual frames of reference are quite different and we should leave it at that. Raising personal issues or creating them is not the purpose of this forum. I don't see you haranguing educatedindian about having posted the original article about the Sand Hill lawsuit on the Jane Ely thread.
If "Sand Hills and Lenape affairs are best left in the hands of those immediately concerned," why is it that you and "other people" with "similar concerns" feel the necessity to "share" your "concerns" about them? That's something you were doing long before I began this thread!
Our frames of reference are very different. With that I wholeheartedly agree.
I'll leave it to the readers to decide who raised the personal issues on this thread.
I don't "harangue" educatedindian about this subject because, a. he doesn't know Sam Beeler; b. he hasn't said anything in this thread; and, c. he holds the big eraser. I debate you because you and I know Sam Beeler; you post in this thread, continually; and, you can't edit or delete my posts.
-
I don't know whats going on with anyone else , but the reason i haven't been responding to this isn't because i don't care , but more that i don't understand why it's so important whether or not people in an internet forum think Sam Beeler is or isn't an American Indian.
Personally I am guessing he probably has enough descent to be accepted as an NDN by quite a few other folks who are indisputably NDN themselves ( as in people who are enrolled in a federally recognized tribe)
But so what ?
The question of whether or not the Sand Hills band should rightfully be recognized as a soveirgn indigenous Nation is a whole different issue , and I don't see how that question would or should hing on Sam Beeler's personal identity .
One thing I do see about Sam Beeler that makes me wonder is that he has repeatedly choosen to support people and groups that other people in larger culturally stronger communities seem to feel are behaving in ways that are exploitive and degrading to Cherokee culture.
I am reffering to Sam's relationships with Jane Ely , Medicine Crow , and intertwining the Sand Hill bands cultural history with the Nuyagi Keetowah and Ray Harrell and the SECCI
The thread on Jane Ely
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1668.0
Medicine Crow
http://forum.americanindiantribe.com/viewtopic.php?t=1489&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=
asc&highlight=%3Cbr%20/%3Esand+hill+beeler (http://forum.americanindiantribe.com/viewtopic.php?t=1489&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=
asc&highlight=%3Cbr%20/%3Esand+hill+beeler)
From the Sandhill's website
http://web.archive.org/web/20050209015517/http://www.sandhillindians.net/info.htm
Who are the Keetoowah-Cherokee and what does the term, Keetoowah mean?
The word Keetoowah refers to the Mother Mound of the Cherokee culture. Tradition tells the Cherokee that Keetoowah Mound is the navel of the earth from which the Cherokee people originated. Spiritually, traditional Cherokee people refer to themselves as Keetoowah. Not all Cherokee people are traditional, and therefore are not known as Keetoowah. All Keetoowah are Cherokee however. There are four officially recognized Keetoowah Groups:
I Original Keetoowah Society
II Nighthawk Keetoowah Society
III Nuyagi Keetoowah Society
IV United Keetoowah Band
Pre-History of the Nuyagi Keetoowah in the Northeast
“The Indian community of Monmouth county New Jersey pre-dates the revolutionary war. It includes elements of two distinct Indian Groups. The first group representing the original indigenous inhabitants of New Jersey who are the Lenape. The second group is reflective of Cherokee migrations into the state of New Jersey beginning in 1711. The ranks of the two separate Indian entities were swollen by the intermarriage with the local non-Indian population. Although the groups were strengthened by intermarriage they retained their Cherokee identity. (con...)
As far as i know the Nuyagi Keetoowah are not officially recognized.
As there is supposedly only a handfull of members of the Sand Hill band who are involved in this group why does this Sand Hill bands webpage seem to put so much emphasis on being connected with the Nuyagi Keetowah ? Am I wrong in interpreting this as Sam Beelers influence?
I could say quite a bit more than I have about some of the people involved in the Nuyagi Keetowah , but as it gets into some peoples personal histories I don't like to unless I am really sure this is being used to mislead the public. I'm not sure about that, but i have seen enough to feel there is probably good reason why spokes people for the CNO have spoken out against this group.
But if the Sand Hill band truly has retained their Cherokee heritage and culture why does the bands webpage seem to be saying their cultural heritage is reflected in the very questionable Nuyagi Keetowah ?
And if Sam has a strong identity within his own tribe why was he involved in a questionable group like the SECCI ?
http://web.archive.org/web/20051102202851/http://www.secci.com/Officers/District+Deputy+Marshalls.htm
District Deputy Marshal's
NEW WORLD DISTRICT
Oakley Silver Cloud Washburn
OCHLOCKNEE DISTRICT
vacant
RED BIRD SMITH DISTRICT
West---Billie Rainwater Barnes
East----Tony Thunder Wolf Ledford
ECHOTA DISTRICT
vacant
SACRED VALLEY DISTRICT
William Night Panther Phipps
STANDS TALL DISTRICT
Jack White Eagle Shryock
OVERLAND DISTRICT
William Night Panther Phipps
GREAT LAKES DISTRICT
James Coyotes Voice Curtis
OLD SETTLERS DISTRICT
Jack White Eagle Shryock
BUFFALO DISTRICT
David Three Feathers Hull
GREAT BEAR DISTRICT
Glen Fire Bear Stewart
Keetoowah District
Sam Beeler
Four Corners District
Dick Hogle
http://web.archive.org/web/20040526114026/http://secci.com/TL/2003/December.htm
Honorary Memberships of the NY Nuyagi Keetoowah community (Wolf Dance Hicks)
Wolf Dance announced the majority vote of 'yes', with one abstention of the Council to accept the Honorary Memberships of the entire New York Nuyagi Keetoowah community. She further noted that it would truly be an honor for us to have them as members. Their Keetoowah Medicine Priest, Star Singer Harrell, came to our National Tribal Grounds last year and honored us with our Sister Fire and Sacred Mound, and has since trained Jeff Shadow Hawk Banks as our own Firekeeper. In addition, the SeCCI Ceremonial Team recently visited this community where they were given the utmost respect, hospitality, and knowledge. Chief Panther reported that the Keetoowah community would be taking the invitation to their Council and have not yet responded with a reply. Wolf Dance reported that several of their community will be coming to the re-matriation of the Traveler this coming November, planned for the the Saturday following Thanksgiving, November 29th.
shkaakwus
If "Sand Hills and Lenape affairs are best left in the hands of those immediately concerned," why is it that you and "other people" with "similar concerns" feel the necessity to "share" your "concerns"? That's something you were doing long before I began this thread!
Seeing some of the people Sam Beeler is involved with , he seems to be acting more like a lot of PODIAs who have lost the cultural understanding that comes from being a part of a strong community which has retained it's culture. Maybe there is some reasons behind this which I don't understand, but on the face of it it looks like a problem, at least in the opinion of some people who don't like to see their culture corrupted. Whether or not Sam Beeler is an American Indian or a good man, seems to be kind of beside the point.
Another reason i haven't posted in this thread is when Shakaakwus was posting here a couple years ago they began a thread in the non frauds section on the Sand Hills band and when these same questions came up , they got upset and deleted all their posts and the entire thread with everyone elses posts. ( People can't do this any longer since then ) I didn't feel that was a fair or respectful thing to do, and I don't feel like going through this again . I did save most of that old thread and couid repost it if anyone wants the info that was removed ...
I get tired arguing with people ....
-
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I don't know whats going on with anyone else , but the reason i haven't been responding to this isn't because i don't care , but more that i don't understand why it's so important whether or not people in an internet forum think Sam Beeler is or isn't an American Indian."
So, it's not important to know whether or not somebody who presents himself as an American Indian is, in fact, an American Indian? It is to me.
"Personally I am guessing he probably has enough descent to be accepted as an NDN by quite a few other folks who are indisputably NDN themselves ( as in people who are enrolled in a federally recognized tribe)"
"Guessing" isn't good enough for me. And, "folks who are indisputably NDN" does NOT = "people who are enrolled in a federally recognized tribe." There are a multitude of non-Indians enrolled in some federally recognized tribes; and many Indians who are not enrolled.
"But so what ?"
See above.
"The question of whether or not the Sand Hills band should rightfully be recognized as a soveirgn indigenous Nation is a whole different issue , and I don't see how that question would or should hing on Sam Beeler's personal identity ."
His personal identity does not hinge on the Sand Hill Indians being recognized by the Federal or State government. It does hinge, in part, on whether or not the Sand Hill Indians are really Indians. They are, and he is.
"One thing I do see about Sam Beeler that makes me wonder is that he has repeatedly choosen to support people and groups that other people in larger culturally stronger communities seem to feel are behaving in ways that are exploitive and degrading to Cherokee culture."
Please give me the name of one traditional Keetoowah who says this. Thus far, all I've seen is the statements of Cherokee Christians!
"I am reffering to Sam's relationships with Jane Ely , Medicine Crow , and intertwining the Sand Hill bands cultural history with the Nuyagi Keetowah and Ray Harrell and the SECCI
The thread on Jane Ely
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1668.0
Medicine Crow
http://forum.americanindiantribe.com/viewtopic.php?t=1489&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=
asc&highlight=%3Cbr%20/%3Esand+hill+beeler "
On this, I will say only this (and they are my thoughts, alone): Go to war for your country. Suffer some severely debilitating injuries. Live in constant pain. Find little or no relief for that pain from the orthodox medical community. Then, see what alternative medicine practices you'll try and who you'll "associate with."
"As there is supposedly only a handfull of members of the Sand Hill band who are involved in this group why does this Sand Hill bands webpage seem to put so much emphasis on being connected with the Nuyagi Keetowah ? Am I wrong in interpreting this as Sam Beelers influence?"
You are not wrong about that, but I'm not going to be drawn into too much of a discussion about the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society. If you want to post that old thread about it, go for it. When that thread was here, I was able to get Sam Beeler to answer your questions. I'm not going to bother being a go-between again.
"I could say quite a bit more than I have about some of the people involved in the Nuyagi Keetowah , but as it gets into some peoples personal histories I don't like to unless I am really sure this is being used to mislead the public. I'm not sure about that, but i have seen enough to feel there is probably good reason why spokes people for the CNO have spoken out against this group."
You "could say quite a bit more"? While you're at it, why don't you tell us what you know about Rachel Sequoyah, Myrtle Driver, Rick Bird, Kay Walkingstick, Lloyd Owl, Sedan Foster, Eli Pumpkin, Lon Murphy, William Webber, William Lee Smith, Andrew Dreadfulwater, Leon Miller, Archie Sam, William Tallfeather, and Henderson Climbingbear? Tell us how phony these members of the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society were or are.
"Seeing some of the people Sam Beeler is involved with , he seems to be acting more like a lot of PODIAs who have lost the cultural understanding that comes from being a part of a strong community which has retained it's culture. Maybe there is some reasons behind this which I don't understand, but on the face of it it looks like a problem, at least in the opinion of some people who don't like to see their culture corrupted."
I just named more than a dozen enrolled Cherokee people that Sam Beeler has been "involved with" in the NKS. Who are these people who are seeing "their culture" corrupted? So far, I haven't seen any remarks by anybody but Christians!
"Whether or not Sam Beeler is an American Indian or a good man, seems to be kind of beside the point."
It may be beside the point you are trying to make. It is not beside the point, to me.
"Another reason i haven't posted in this thread is when Shakaakwus was posting here a couple years ago they began a thread in the non frauds section on the Sand Hills band and when these same questions came up , they got upset and deleted all their posts and the entire thread with everyone elses posts."
It was in my power to delete that thread, and I did. As explained, then, I wasn't going to have the topic of the Sand Hill Indians diverted to a Nuyagi Keetoowah Society thread.
"( People can't do this any longer since then ) I didn't feel that was a fair or respectful thing to do, and I don't feel like going through this again . I did save most of that old thread and couid repost it if anyone wants the info that was removed ..."
I would simply hope that you don't post it on this thread. Isn't there a NKS thread where you could rehash that?
"I get tired arguing with people ...."
Me too.
(edited to correct "William Tallfeather," originally written as "William Feather")
-
You mentioned the Sand Hill band isn't listed by the Cherokee task force as a fraud.
However Sam Beelers version of the Sand Hill bands website points to a close cultural and historical affiliation with the Nuyagi Keetoowah and the CNO task force does include the Nuy Keetoowah Inc of NY on it's fraudulent groups list.
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:7N5X_sDoUhkJ:taskforce.cherokee.org/LinkClick.aspx%3Ffileticket%3Dvq4J90gQMtc%
253D%26tabid%3D106%26mid%3D2118+%22nuy+keetowah%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca (http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:7N5X_sDoUhkJ:taskforce.cherokee.org/LinkClick.aspx%3Ffileticket%3Dvq4J90gQMtc%
253D%26tabid%3D106%26mid%3D2118+%22nuy+keetowah%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca)
It seems exceedingly disrespectful to defend Sam Beelers choice in associates by dismissing the opinion of Cherokee people such as Wyman Kirk and Richard Allan. They are obviously working hard to protect their Cherokee identities and culture. That you would attempt to undermine their ability to do this by claiming their opinions are "Christian" is really offensive to me.
You listed Rachel Sequoyah, Myrtle Driver, Rick Bird, Kay Walkingstick, Lloyd Owl, Sedan Foster, Eli Pumpkin, Lon Murphy, William Webber, William Lee Smith, Andrew Dreadfulwater, Leon Miller, Archie Sam, William Feather, and Henderson Climbingbear. I don't know who these people are , or if they were ever truely supportive of the Nuyagi keetoowah as claimed, but I got the impression most of them passed on long before Sam Beeler's time.
Which of these people you named are currently involved in supporting the Nuyagi Keetoowah which does appear to be strongly associated with Sam Beelers version of the Sand Hill's history and identity ?
The way you brush off the cultural distortions being created by Sam Beelers associates only suggests you are not aware of the value of maintaining real cultural practices and the damage done when these practices are corrupted and exploited. As a non native and non Cherokee person, I don't think you have any right to decide this isn't important and to dismiss the feelings of the Cherokee people who find this offensive and have said so
When it comes to Sam beelers identity as an NDN you say "Guessing" isn't good enough for me. "
Instead of the Sand Hill website having all that information about their Nuyagi Keetoowah roots maybe they could put their members lines of descent and their families history and how this connects with what they are claiming is the present day Sand hill band - some of whom sound like they don't recognize Beeler's claims at all.
Without that information all anyone without it can do is guess. And yes I am just guessing that Sam Beeler is NDN - mostly because i seem to remember someone from the CNO saying he was enrolled in the CNO . I suppose as it's the CNO that doesn't mean he is what some people would consider 'really an NDN " and it could mean he is nothing more than a distant descendant who is also enrolled.
-
M-P writes:
"You mentioned the Sand Hill band isn't listed by the Cherokee task force as a fraud."
Yes. After wolfhawaii stated, incorrectly, that they were so listed.
"However Sam Beelers version of the Sand Hill bands website points to a close cultural and historical affiliation with the Nuyagi Keetoowah and the CNO task force does include the Nuy Keetoowah Inc of NY on it's fraudulent groups list."
Yes. I didn't say they didn't.
"It seems exceedingly disrespectful to defend Sam Beelers choice in associates by dismissing the opinion of Cherokee people such as Wyman Kirk and Richard Allan."
Why? Do you know Wyman Kirk and Richard Allen? Do you know who their "associates" are? I'm one up on you. I know Sam Beeler.
"They are obviously working hard to protect their Cherokee identities and culture."
All that's "obvious," to me, is that they've compiled a list of groups that are not CNO, EBC or UKB, and branded them all as frauds. I sincerely doubt that they've actually met with or done any serious research on the historical background of any of these groups. I imagine they're right 90% of the time, but you or I could compile the same, or a longer, list, just by googling "Cherokee" on our computers!
"That you would attempt to undermine their ability to do this by claiming their opinions are "Christian" is really offensive to me."
I'm not "undermining" anybody's ability to do or say anything they wish. The Nuyagi Keetoowah Society was begun in 1928, by a group of traditionalist Cherokee living in the New York/New Jersey area--LONG before what you're calling "cultural protection" began. In fact, formation of the NKS was done, specifically, to preserve and protect Cherokee traditional religious practices in the "diaspora." I really can't worry about what an anonymous poster, who may simply be another phony or Wannabe herself (or himself), for all we know, finds "really offensive."
"You listed Rachel Sequoyah, Myrtle Driver, Rick Bird, Kay Walkingstick, Lloyd Owl, Sedan Foster, Eli Pumpkin, Lon Murphy, William Webber, William Lee Smith, Andrew Dreadfulwater, Leon Miller, Archie Sam, William Feather, and Henderson Climbingbear. I don't know who these people are , or if they were ever truely supportive of the Nuyagi keetoowah as claimed, but I got the impression most of them passed on long before Sam Beeler's time."
Well... I can tell you that some are founders of NKS, some joined at a later date, and most were personally associated with Sam Beeler during his early (and later) membership in the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society.
"Which of these people you named are currently involved in supporting the Nuyagi Keetoowah which does appear to be strongly associated with Sam Beelers version of the Sand Hill's history and identity ?"
None of the people I named were or are Sand Hill Indians. They're enrolled Cherokee Indians. What you are calling "Sam Beelers version of the Sand Hill's history and identity" is Sam Beeler's history and identity--as an enrolled Cherokee, and as a certified member of the Sand Hill Indians. It's what he knows from his life's experience. He's not a professional academic historian! The primary purpose of introducing the information on the NKS, in his Sand Hill Indian website, as I understand it, was to show that traditional Cherokee people (the NKS) recognize the Sand Hill Indians as Cherokee descendants.
"The way you brush off the cultural distortions being created by Sam Beelers associates only suggests you are not aware of the value of maintaining real cultural practices and the damage done when these practices are corrupted and exploited."
I have a body of work in fighting and exposing phonies and Wannabes, spanning years, that I'll match against yours, any day.
"As a non native and non Cherokee person, I don't think you have any right to decide this isn't important and to dismiss the feelings of the Cherokee people who find this offensive and have said so"
Two members of CNO officialdom does not = "the Cherokee people." Sam Beeler and those folks I listed as NKS members are also "the Cherokee people."
"When it comes to Sam beelers identity as an NDN you say "Guessing" isn't good enough for me. "
Okay.
"Instead of the Sand Hill website having all that information about their Nuyagi Keetoowah roots maybe they could put their members lines of descent and their families history and how this connects with what they are claiming is the present day Sand hill band - some of whom sound like they don't recognize Beeler's claims at all."
I suppose they'll decide what is or isn't important information to give out to the public. There is plenty enough information elsewhere on the web to support their claims to being Sand Hill Indians--including Jim Revey's signed certifications for Sam Beeler and his mother.
"Without that information all anyone without it can do is guess. And yes I am just guessing that Sam Beeler is NDN - mostly because i seem to remember someone from the CNO saying he was enrolled in the CNO "
"Someone from the CNO" said so? It was Wyman Kirk, whose opinion on every other matter you seem to take as definitive!
I suppose as it's the CNO that doesn't mean he is what some people would consider 'really an NDN " and it could mean he is nothing more than a distant descendant who is also enrolled."
That's correct. It "could mean" that, hypothetically, to someone with no more knowledge of his background than that he's enrolled CNO.
(edited to say, "William Feather" should be "William Tallfeather")
-
When that thread was here, I was able to get Sam Beeler to answer your questions. I'm not going to bother being a go-between again.
Quote from moma p in the same post .. and your answer .. ..
"I get tired arguing with people ...."
Me too.
(i have been reading this, and i, like moma p and others, simply do not see the point)
first: see bold above .. you are in here being a "go-between", why is sam beeler not in here answering for himself? .. .. .. i say this because i have a problem when others attempt to answer for someone, i feel that person/s should answer for themselves .. ..
second: if you get tired of arguing with people then why are you persisting in thisargument??
sorry, i am just trying to make some sort of sense of this, trying to find the point in it .. .. .. .. ..
-
Since I don't know what point it is that you don't see, there's not much I can say about it.
No. I am not here as a "go-between" for Sam Beeler. I'm here because wolfhawaii specifically asked for me, by name, to come here and comment on the things discussed in this thread. You'd know that if you had actually bothered to read this thread, instead of jumping in, just now. Sam Beeler doesn't own a computer, and is, so far as I know, completely unaware that this discussion is taking place. You'd also know this if you had actually bothered to read this thread, instead of jumping in, just now. I am not "answering for" Sam Beeler. I'm answering questions put to me.
Why didn't you ask Moma_Porcupine why she is "persisting in this argument," instead of me, since she was the first to say she's getting tired of arguing with people? Your bias is showing.
Sorry for your confusion and inability to make sense out of this. I hope you get better.
-
I just came across a document that was given to me a number of years ago. (probably about 10 years ago) But it seems relevant as it includes Sam Beeler's name. I guess it could also be a thread of its own, since there are others on the list that have been discussed here, but as I state below I don't feel it is appropriate to post the whole list. Perhaps if there are questions about a specific state, group or person I can post that.
In 1993, then Primary Chief Wilma Mankiller wrote letters of concern to the BIA and a number of state governments protesting the number of groups that are illegally claiming to be “Cherokee.” The research and documentation of this was done by two well known and highly respected members of the CNO and a CNO student doing her master’s research on the development of the CNO government. As I do not have their permission to post this in it’s entirely and because it is my understanding that this will be published in book form one of these days I have only cut some interesting names and groups to post here. This list is over 15 years old and therefore many of these people may be gone now, but some continue to appear in these discussions.
I did not create this list and I personally do not know any of these groups or people and can not comment on their activities, other than I absolutely respect the leaders who have placed this on this list.
** The term “Free Cherokee” appears in 32 different states from Alaska to Washington State, and these are all listed as non-recognized by the CNO, KBC, or EBC.
Also, many of the “Free Cherokee” list in their titles specific Cherokee “Clans” and bands – ie: spider clan, Pine Tree Clan, Eagle Bear clan, turtle clan, humming bird clan, panther clan, Dung Beetle Clan, wolf band, Green Mountain Band, Tennessee River Band, Five Nations Band, Della White Cloud Band, White River Band, Osprey Band, Star Hawk Band, Dogwood Band, Arkansas Bear Tribe Band, Good Medicine Band, Eagle Bear Band, Wild Potato Band, Coyote Band, Star seeker
Indian Names people have listed include: Chief Rainbow Newmoon Shootingstar, Night Owl Smith-Talking Stick Carrier, Red Moon Song, Grandmother Speaks, Tsali Standing Bear-Cherokee Nation of Texas Medicineman and spiritual leader, M. RedHawk-Keeper of the Wind, War Eagle, Chief Blue Flame Moon Wolk, Chief Shining Bear Fur, Chief Little Bird on His shoulder, Swift Hawk, Leaping Deer Rains – Clanmother, Chief Morning Star, Wind Eagle-tribal elder, Chief Sundown, Shield Wolf, Young Bear, Gater, Chief Sun Hawk,
Chief Harvest Moon, Brave Bear. Chief Touches the Earth, Chief Whitefeather, Chief Medicine Bearman, Star Dancer, Chief Dove, Brave Bear, Distant Eagle, Chief Spirit Woman, Chief Quiet Man, Chief Singing Waters, Chief Yellow Fawn, Red Bear, Chief Time Walker, Chief Lone Wolf, Princess Che’Kee, Chief Lone Oak, Water Woman, Chief Lightfoot, Sings Alone, Chief Bloody Shirt, Principal Chief Rattlesnake, Assistant Chief Red Bear, Strawberry, Chief Graywolf, Rainbow Walker, Principal Chief Silver Fox, Chief Dark Wind, Chief Crazy Wolf, Chief Wounded Eagle, Chief Turtle Hatching, Snake Redhawk, Walking Bear. Chief Dancing Crane, Pathfinder, Walks-far-wolf, Chief Black Eagle, Falling Star, Fire Eyes, Chief Shadowwalker, Whitefeather Dove, Grey Eagle, Seven Hawks, Bear Who Walks Softly, Sitting Wolf, Chief Harvest Moon,
Some also just use their names and titles : Jim Groves, Medicine Man, Amonsoquath Tribe of Cherokee of Ashland MO.
Some are in a class of their own – for example -
Court of the Golden Eagle* Aka His Royal and Imperial Majesty, The Oukah, Emperor of Tsalagi (The Kingdom of Paradise), King of the Upper Cherokees, King of the Middle Cherokees, King of the Lower Cherokees, Keeper of the Ancient Traditions and the Supreme God of the Sun, Aka Donald Robinson, Dallas, TX
Chief Henry Clayton, NATO Nation, Ft. Worth, Texas - According to the Dallas Observer, NATO is an acronym for Native American Tribal Organization. The group consists of four members who have bestowed titles on one another. They are Henry Clayton; his older brother, Gil Clayton; Kerry Cartier; and, Ted McGeehee. Clayton claims "to be part Cherokee,
Choctaw, Creek, and Comanche
-
kosowith:
I don't know any of these people. I've never heard of any of them, unless "Principal Chief Rattlesnake" is that guy, William Jackson, who used to head the SECCI. Except for that organization, which we've already acknowledged Sam Beeler's participation in, at one time, none of these people and organizations have any more to do with Sam Beeler than they do with Wilma Mankiller.
-
As I stated in my opening this could be a separate thread as it is NON-recognized people and groups across the US that the CNO, KBC and EBC publically state are not members, or affiliated with them. I stated that the list includes many groups calling themselves "Free Cherokee" and that the Free Cherokee are found in 32 state from Alaska to Washington state. I also mentioned that this is an old list that was comisioned when Former Principal Chief Mankiller was in office. I did not state that they were all affliated or associated with Mr. Beeler. I amnot sure where you got that. What I did state is that Mr. Beeler was on this list.
The person going by Rattlesnake is in fact a William "Rattlesnake" Jackson, Principal Chief (when this list was compiled) also listed are Red Bear Smith, Assistant Principal Chief. Mary "Strawberry" Jackson, Secretary/Treasurer
Vivian "Panther" Lawson, Assistnat Principal Chief, Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy
Ochlocknee, GA (phone numbers and addresses removed)
I do not know any of these people and that is why I didn't list all of their names and addresses. I am not showing an association between them other than they are, including me Beeler, all listed as non-enrolled frauds by the CNO, KBC and EBC.
-
There's quite a bit of things we need to look at in that list. The Free Cherokee have been discussed before, as has the so called Oukah, the would be emperor. But those other names and groups mostly have not been touched.
Could you cut and paste your post and start a new thread with it? I could do it, but not without giving the false impression that your words are mine.
Then if you want you can remove anything in your posts no relevant to the discussion on Beeler.
I wish I could get hold of that MA thesis, but there's no way to get it here overseas. If anyone can get it, please let us know.
Also if you could send any of that document to me, I'd appreciate it. None of it will be posted, just be used to give me an idea of what to research.
-
kosowith writes:
"As I stated in my opening this could be a separate thread as it is NON-recognized people and groups across the US that the CNO, KBC and EBC publically state are not members, or affiliated with them."
You made no statement, in your first post, regarding "NON-recognized people." Only organizations were so designated. Since "people," as in "individuals," are not granted recognition, that wouldn't make any sense, anyway. Nor did you say, in your first post, that all the individuals named were said to be non-members of the CNO, UKB or EBC."
"I stated that the list includes many groups calling themselves "Free Cherokee" and that the Free Cherokee are found in 32 state from Alaska to Washington state. I also mentioned that this is an old list that was comisioned when Former Principal Chief Mankiller was in office. I did not state that they were all affliated or associated with Mr. Beeler. I amnot sure where you got that. What I did state is that Mr. Beeler was on this list."
That's right. You didn't state "that they were all affiliated or associated with Mr. Beeler." And, I made it clear to readers that NONE of them were affiliated or associated with Mr. Beeler, except for those who may have been in the SECCI--which had been previously stated, in this thread. I am not sure where you got that I got that from you.
"The person going by Rattlesnake is in fact a William "Rattlesnake" Jackson, Principal Chief (when this list was compiled) also listed are Red Bear Smith, Assistant Principal Chief. Mary "Strawberry" Jackson, Secretary/Treasurer
Vivian "Panther" Lawson, Assistnat Principal Chief, Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy
Ochlocknee, GA (phone numbers and addresses removed)"
Okay. Nothing new, here.
"I do not know any of these people and that is why I didn't list all of their names and addresses. I am not showing an association between them other than they are, including me Beeler, all listed as non-enrolled frauds by the CNO, KBC and EBC."
You did not say that the list said everybody named was stated to be "non-enrolled." Can you quote the exact language where it says that? That might be helpful.
-
Do you know Wyman Kirk and Richard Allen? Do you know who their "associates" are?
When someone emailed the CNO tribal government a question about the Nuyagi Ketoowah the CNO directed their question to Wyman Kirk and Richard Allen.
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=157.15
See Reply #19 Reply #23 Reply #30
Though I know you disagree with this, you need to accept that I attribute a lot more authority on Cherokee matters to the Cherokee tribal government and the people they select to speak for them than I attribute to you.
Why didn't you ask Moma_Porcupine why she is "persisting in this argument," instead of me, since she was the first to say she's getting tired of arguing with people?
I'll answer that .
Because I don't like to see people with some eroded bits and peices of Cherokee culture or heritage thinking they know better than the leaders selected within the Cherokee community when it comes to protecting their culture and identity from exploiters.
Over and over I read people creating all these arguements to try and justify their belief that they and their motely PODIA friends should have just as much right to define what is acceptable within Cherokee culture as the culturally strong Cherokee communities and Elders within those communities .
I repeatedly hear the legitimate Cherokee spokes people who stand in the way of these peoples sense of entitlement dismissed as "Christians" or government collaberators.
I think the Nuyagi Keetoowah is relevent to Sam Beeler, because it looks like the website representing Beelers understanding of the Sand Hill band's history and culture is using the Nuyagi Keetoowah to validate these claims.
A great example of how unreal , dishonest and disrespectful these arguements are, that try to dismiss members of the CNO as Church and government collaborators, can be seen by taking a closer look at Ray Evens Harrell who claims to be the High Medicine priest of the Nuyagi Keetowah.
I have posted the details in Reply #100 in the link below
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=157.90
Reply #30
So, it's not important to know whether or not somebody who presents himself as an American Indian is, in fact, an American Indian? It is to me.
If that's true I'm sure you will think it's important to check out the claims of some of the people behind the organization Beeler seems to be using to support some of his claims.
-
I was trying to be nice, guess that was wasted. I agree That Richard Allen or Lee Fleming would be absolutely the best place to go for verification of these groups and people - I used both because the list I have shows first the name of the group - for example,
The Free Cherokees, Snake Band, Chief Singing Waters, (address and phone numbers removed) Oakville, CT 06797 -
or Tehlaki Croatan Nation - Dr. Leslie P. Panchula aka Princess Che'Kee. (address and phone numbers removed) Pompano Beach, FL
(claims to be descended from an ancient Cherokee Band that time and other Cherokees have forgotten
Exact wording on the original is - "The Cherokee Nation, the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokees and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians are the only Cherokee people who have maintained an historic and legal relationship with the federal government. The following Individuals and entities who are incorporating identification as Cherokee within their organization title or otherwise style themselves as Cherokee are not recognized ligetimate Cherokee organizations, tribal entities or individuals."
It would seem that if some of these people are enrolled they have placed themselves in an uncomfortable relationship with their Nations of enrollment
-
"Trying to be nice"? No. You listed a whole bunch of nutjobs in an attempt to link them, in people's minds, with Sam Beeler--even though they had nothing to do with him (the subject of this thread). So, these folks say Sam is not enrolled? I guess somebody in CNO country doesn't know what they're talking about. Wonder who?
-
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"When someone emailed the CNO tribal government a question about the Nuyagi Ketoowah the CNO directed their question to Wyman Kirk and Richard Allen.
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=157.15
See Reply #19 Reply #23 Reply #30"
I recall that that "someone" was Joseph SWM, the enrolled Eastern Band Cherokee fellow, who was your good buddy on here, at that time. As anyone who was here, at that time, knows, he and I were continually at odds. In the end, he (unlike you) actually attended a Nuyagi Keetoowah Society gathering and remarked how good and traditional and well-run the entire event was! [Childish remarks removed]
"Though I know you disagree with this, you need to accept that I attribute a lot more authority on Cherokee matters to the Cherokee tribal government and the people they select to speak for them than I attribute to you."
I should hope so! Similarly, I attribute a lot more authority on Cherokee matters to actual Cherokees, like Sam Beeler, than I attribute to you (whoever you are).
"Quote
Why didn't you ask Moma_Porcupine why she is "persisting in this argument," instead of me, since she was the first to say she's getting tired of arguing with people?
I'll answer that .
"Because I don't like to see people with some eroded bits and peices of Cherokee culture or heritage thinking they know better than the leaders selected within the Cherokee community when it comes to protecting their culture and identity from exploiters."
Just exactly how do people "exploit" their own culture and identity? Sam Beeler's mentor and tutor and spiritual advisor was Danawa Destoti (William Webber), enrolled Cherokee traditionalist from Oklahoma (born in Gore, Indian Territory), who was a founder of the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society!
"Over and over I read people creating all these arguements to try and justify their belief that they and their motely PODIA friends should have just as much right to define what is acceptable within Cherokee culture as the culturally strong Cherokee communities and Elders within those communities "
I doubt that. [Personal attack removed] The CNO is a tribe made up mainly of PODIA's, as you like to call other people. (And, I say this knowing that there are thousands of real high BQ Indians in the CNO, living in or near their historic national territory--which fact gives it its legitimacy.) There is no argument. The Sand Hill Indians are who they say they are. I suggest you peruse the blibliography of scholarly sources I've provided at the Woodland Indians Forum, regarding the Sand Hill Indians; as well as all the threads concerning them, at that site. If you can't tell the difference between an American Indian and what you, disdainfully, call a "PODIA," I can't help you. Maybe, others will actually study the matter, rather than making wild accusations.
"I repeatedly hear the legitimate Cherokee spokes people who stand in the way of these peoples sense of entitlement dismissed as "Christians" or government collaberators."
Where did I call these people "government collaborators"? You're getting carried away. I have nothing against "Christians." I am one! (As are most Sand Hill Indians, BTW.) I simply pointed out that you have not consulted with any traditional religionists who know who the Sand Hill Indians are, or who have been to a NKS gathering.
"I think the Nuyagi Keetoowah is relevent to Sam Beeler, because it looks like the website representing Beelers understanding of the Sand Hill band's history and culture is using the Nuyagi Keetoowah to validate these claims."
To validate what claims? If you mean that it's there to provide a traditionalist religious society's acknowledgment of the Sand Hill Indians, you don't have to "think" that. I already said that!
"Quote
So, it's not important to know whether or not somebody who presents himself as an American Indian is, in fact, an American Indian? It is to me.
If that's true I'm sure you will think it's important to check out the claims of some of the people behind the organization Beeler seems to be using to support some of his claims."
You think wrongly. I know who Sam Beeler is. He's a Sand Hill Indian of New Jersey. [Sidetrack removed]
-
shkaakwus
referring to Joseph SWM,
In the end, he (unlike you) actually attended a Nuyagi Keetoowah Society gathering and remarked how good and traditional and well-run the entire event was!
It seems you pick and choose what you want to listen to .
I trust the opinions of the people Joseph was reffered to through the CNO tribal government over Joseph's opinion. I have no idea who Joseph is but having seen him participating here and also advertising Cherokee healing for $50 an hour I see no reason to assume he would know or care if something was off.
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1003.0
Oh and BTW Joseph was just someone who posted here. I never considered him a "buddy".
shkaakwus
Just exactly how do people "exploit" their own culture and identity?
Thats like asking how could a European possibly exploit and contaminate one of their own rivers? individuals misusing collectively owned resources is a common problem.
shkaakwus
You think wrongly. I know who Sam Beeler is. He's a Sand Hill Indian of New Jersey.
I believe you that Sam Beeler is of Indian descent of sufficent degree to be considered an Indian of both the Sand Hill band and the CNO , but i don't believe that that means he can do no wrong or support no wrong doing.
I don't understand why you are so passionate about defending your friend from any mildly critical comment. I guess that is your right to do so, but trying to discuss this seems like a waste of both of our time.
I hope you won't mind if I don't continue to refute what looks to me to be your falacious arguments point by point. I'm sure if I do, you can easily come up with more. I've already said what I think needs to be said, and I'm sure you will be happy to hear I know very little as to the specific details of this situation.
As a matter of principle , I will always choose to support the definitions explained by spokes people in the tribes that were culturally strong enough to have always been visible and recognized ...
-
M-P:
I'm satisfied that I've made the points I wanted to, on this thread. If there's more to respond to, I'll be around.
-
Shkaakwus, per your advice, I contacted Claire Garland and received the following response:
Sent: Thu, 7 May 2009 2:29 pm
Subject: Re: Sand Hill Indians
Hi Steve,
the first time I heard of Sam Beeler was after Jim Revey passed. Sam was in the Neptune Museum trying to get our family artifacts, claiming to be related to the Sand Hill Group.
He called several times but I could make no connection to any of our relatives. He joined our Historical Assn and sent a press release stating that he was the Chief of the Sand Hills in Paterson.
No one knew him or anyone in his family. Then the NJ State Commission requested that I send a cease and desist letter to him. I hear that the Paterson group is trying to unseat Holloway.
I will send the article from the Star Ledger.
Claire
-
I've been reading more about the Sand Hill band , trying to understand who Sam Beeler is and why there seems to be a disagreement.
If I understand this properly , Beeler says he is the grandson of Sarah Holloway who Beeler says was a member of the Sand Hill band, but as Wolfhawaii just showed us, some members of the Sand Hill band seem to be saying he isn't related to them.
It looks like it would take a lot of research and some people who aren't biased , to verify or refute these different versions of this history, and i am no where close to having an opinion either way, but i did see something that seems odd and it made me wonder.
http://www.woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=5787
#1 Feb-28-2009 10:09:am
sschkaak
Jim Revey's obituary
This obituary appeared in the ASNJ Newletter, Vol. 183 (October, 1998), pages 1 & 2. [It should have read "3" parts Delaware--not "4." Just a typo.]
On May 18, 1998 New Jersey lost one of its most informed, dedicated and outspoken Native Americans. James "Lone Bear" Revey was a full blooded (4 parts Delaware, 1 part Cherokee) Indian and member of the Sand Hill Delaware band, formerly located in Monmouth County. He was the appointed New Jersey representative of, and spokesperson for, the Federally recognized Delaware Tribe of Indians, and was devoted to the preservation of his people's heritage. To this end he spent most of his adult life as genealogical consultant, researcher, author and lecturer on the Lenape or Delaware people. Mr. Revey served on the New Jersey Indian Commission and was consultant to several museums including the State Museum of Pennsylvania, the Indian Village at Waterloo and the Mashantucket Pequot Indian Museum. He headed the "New Jersey Indian Office" and was proprietor of "Lone Bear Indian Crafts" in Orange, New Jersey, which made artifacts and articles of ceremonial attire for Museums, the Broadway Stage (e.g., "Singing in the Rain"), for Indian ceremonial performances and other events. Mr. Revey was a popular and much sought after speaker in elementary schools throughout the State, while also giving scholarly presentations for historical societies and universities. His written articles were published by Seton Hall University Museum, and the Moravian Historical Society. Mr. Revey was 74 years old. *"Lone Bear" was buried on June 30th at Hillside Cemetery in South Plainfield in a simple, traditional Lenape Indian ceremony. David Oestreicher and Herb Kraft participated and represented the Archaeological Society of New Jersey. On Saturday, September 19th a memorial service was held at the Senior Citizens Center in the Municipal complex in Old Bridge (Middlesex County). Here he was eulogized by colleagues, relatives and friends who cherished their association with this distinguished individual.
It is unlikely that anyone will take Jim Revey's place. He had an extensive knowledge of Delaware and Cherokee genealogy and willingly took the time to help people discover their heritage. He had a passion for Native American history but rarely had the time to put his thoughts in writing. He endeavored to protect his Delaware Indian heritage and was offended by and opposed many of the so-called "wannabees" who claimed Lenape/Delaware ancestry on tenuous evidence, and who promulgated misinformation, and enacted dances and rituals that were inaccurate. Who will assume these responsibilities now?
Rest in peace, Jim. It was an honor & a privilege to have known you.
Herb
(We thank Herb Kraft for writing this obituary for us. Ed.)
So this obituary says there is no known sucessor .
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/with_lawsuit_against_nj_little.html
With lawsuit against N.J., little-known Indian group is thrust into spotlight
by Joe Ryan/The Star-Ledger
Sunday March 22, 2009
(begins ...)
Revey was the longtime head of the New Jersey Indian Office in Orange. Most say he was the Sand Hills' contemporary patriarch.
But some -- including the Paterson Sand Hills -- contend Revey was more than an unofficial leader. They say he was chief.
Sam Beeler grew up in Paterson and has been active for years in local American Indian causes. As he recalls it, Revey lay dying at age 74 when he asked Beeler to assume leadership of the Sand Hills.
"He asked me to take over," Beeler said.
And so Beeler became chief, he said.
(Con...)
Which makes me wonder why this obituary not only doesn't mention Beeler but strongly implies the author, had never heard of the new Chief , and that he believed there wasn't going to be a sucessor.
It seems a little strange that Revey would name a sucessor and that this wouldn't be common knowledge to people familiar with the Sand Hill band.
Shkaakwus ... It seems you posted this obitury so presumably it is legit.
Is there an explaination for this ?
-
wolfhawaii:
I understand what Claire Garland is telling you. It's no different than what she said in Joe Ryan's article. What I don't see from her is a satisfactory explanation of why Sam Beeler and five members of his family were granted membership in the Sand Hill Indian Historical Society--of which Society Claire Garland is the Director--when "NOBODY knew who he was"! And, then, they ran that article, "Sam Beeler, Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill Band of Indians," in the Summer, 2006 issue of their newsletter! Mrs. Garland says she first heard of Sam Beeler "after Jim Revey passed." That was in 1998. This article in her newsletter is eight years later!
I recall when Sam Beeler was trying to retrieve those items from the Neptune Historical Museum. That was in 2003. The township made a decision to close the museum, which occupied one room in the public library, for financial reasons. The town had no plan of what to do with the Sand Hill Indian items. He was trying to get them back FOR the Sand Hill Indians IN MONMOUTH COUNTY (i.e., Claire Garland's group)--NOT for himself! Although, he did have some items his grandmother made that had been loaned to that museum, and he wanted those, too.
So far as I can tell, the rift did not take place until 2008, when Sam Beeler's Sand Hill Indians approached the New Jersey Commission on Indian Affairs, requesting a seat on that Commission. And, it took place at the instigation of members of the Commission. It didn't originate in either of the two groups.
I have nothing personal against Claire Garland. She's a Sand Hill Indian. The current problem all boils down to how "Sand Hill Indian" is defined, which I hope to get into in answer to Moma Porcupine's post.
-
...
HOLY @#$% RAY! YOUR SPEECHLESS???? :o
-
...
HOLY @#$% RAY! YOUR SPEECHLESS???? :o
How about giving me a couple minutes to answer. I hit the damn send button too fast and had to start over. See my reply, above.
-
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"this obituary not only doesn't mention Beeler but strongly implies the author, had never heard of the new Chief , and that he believed there wasn't going to be a sucessor.
It seems a little strange that Revey would name a sucessor and that this wouldn't be common knowledge to people familiar with the Sand Hill band.
Shkaakwus ... It seems you posted this obitury so presumably it is legit.
Is there an explaination for this ?"
That obituary was written by Herbert C. Kraft, so let me know if this letter explains this for you:
http://woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6140
I'll have to get into the explanation of the differing definitions of who is a Sand Hill Indian, tomorrow. It's way too late, for me, to do that tonight.
-
The current rift between two Indian groups in New Jersey, both calling themselves "Sand Hill Indians," results from an honest difference of opinion over the definition of that term. In short, Claire Garland's group seems to restrict the term to members of the Revey and Richardson families, and their descendants, plus some of the Indian in-laws of those families, such as the Crummel family.
The definition of Sam Beeler's group includes the above people, but also extends the name to include other New Jersey Indian families whose names were kept on the rolls of the Sand Hill Indians, beginning in 1887, when the Sand Hill Indians' first list of Indian families in NJ was compiled. (This list did not include Ramapough, Nanticoke or Powhatan names.) Subsequent rolls were compiled in later years. These lists include other Indians who lived in or moved to Monmouth County, NJ, such as the Clay, Ashton and Holloway families, as well as NJ Indian (as opposed to non-Indian) relations of Sand Hill Indians, such as the Hill, Ray, Douglas, and Johnson families; most of whom lived in other counties of New Jersey; and, a few other Indian families living elsewhere in the state, such as the Whitaker and Armstrong families, with whom they associated.
Hence, the divide.
-
shkaakwus
What I don't see from her is a satisfactory explanation of why Sam Beeler and five members of his family were granted membership in the Sand Hill Indian Historical Society--of which Society Claire Garland is the Director--when "NOBODY knew who he was"! And, then, they ran that article, "Sam Beeler, Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill Band of Indians," in the Summer, 2006 issue of their newsletter!
I guess this situation would depend on things like if people have to prove they are related to the Sand Hill band before being allowed to join this Historical Society, if the person who wrote the article saying Sam Beeler was the Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill band of Indians was one of the same people who are now saying he isn't, if the person who wrote this understood and agreed with all the implications that title was being used to imply, and if the members of the Historical Society who didn't write that article would feel they had the right to tell whoever wrote that article they couldn't publish it as a part of the 2006 newsletter, and that this was worth disputing at the time.
shkaakwus
Mrs. Garland says she first heard of Sam Beeler "after Jim Revey passed." That was in 1998. This article in her newsletter is eight years later!
I'm not sure what point you were trying to make with this comment. If Garland has known Beeler since 1998 - 1999 why should it be remarkable that she knows him and that Beeler and some family members had joined the Sand Hill Indian Historical Society by 2006 ?
I typed out the scanned letter in the link you posted. ( I think you made a typo when you said this is a letter written by Herbert C. Kraft. Assuming I managed to find what you were trying to refer to, it looks like this letter was written by John Kraft, who is Herbert's son. )
http://woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6140
Lenape Lifeways
Educational Programs Inc.
PO Box 239 Stanhope NJ 07874 (975)-691-2516
June 15 , 2008
Dr Carroll Holloway
NJ Sand Hill Indians Inc.
PO Box 1012
Montague. new Jersey 07827
Dear Dr. Holloway
This is to inform you that I have known Sam Beeler for about five years as the former chairman of the New Jersey Indian Office. A registered and recognized member of the Sand Hill Band of Cherokee/Lenape Indians, I understand that Sam has often lectured on the culture and historical legacy of his people. additionally , Sam has been helpful to myself and other professionals in providing information about the contemporary Native American community in New Jersey. in this specialized field, his insight and understanding has been valuable. I do hesitate to speak at length about his professional capacity , for excluding telephone conversations, I have only met Sam a few times to discusss the possiblility of creating exhibits for Waywayanda State Park and a longhouse construction for the Paterson Mueseum. Perhaps my strongest impression of him is that he was a cousin of the late James "Lone Bear" Revey, a very dear friend of mine, whom i had the greatest respect for. Jim of course knew Sam well and spoke highly of him. My father the late Herbert C. Kraft, a much respected scholar and author of New Jersey prehistory - also found him to be an interesting and charming man and provided Sam with information and advice about the region's archeological remains.
I don't know whether any clear picture has emerged from this letter, but I do wish to express my appreciation of the good will Sam has gendered over the years. His work with and concern for the Sand Hill community is genuine and refreshing and hopefully will contribute to the greater understanding and appreciation of these people.
Sincerely
signiture
John T. Kraft
I'm not sure how you are thinking this letter transcribed above, explains why Herbert C. Kraft never mentioned Sam Beeler being appointed to be James Revey's successor as Chief of the Sand hills band ? I don't see this mentioned at all in this letter. Perhaps you could explain, as what you may be trying to show us isn't obvious.
I also see where John Kraft says his strongest impression of Sam Beeler was that he was a cousin of James Lone Bear Revey.
In the article I posted a link to in post # 47 , I read where people who are Sand Hill Indians say Sam isn't related to them.
Could you provide some information on the family line through which Beeler is cousins with James Revey ?
I see where the name of Beeler's Mother and Grandmother Sarah Holloway are already published, so it doesn't seem like I'm not able to find where this is explained, because it's private.
http://gardenstatepol.com/blog/?p=343
Also if you want to refer to information on other websites or in scanned documents it would be easier to understand how you are interpreting this , if you could quote the parts that are relevent and explain what you think this is showing.
-
Shkaakwus wrote:
What I don't see from her is a satisfactory explanation of why Sam Beeler and five members of his family were granted membership in the Sand Hill Indian Historical Society--of which Society Claire Garland is the Director--when "NOBODY knew who he was"! And, then, they ran that article, "Sam Beeler, Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill Band of Indians," in the Summer, 2006 issue of their newsletter!
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I guess this situation would depend on things like if people have to prove they are related to the Sand Hill band before being allowed to join this Historical Society,"
Shkaakwus replies:
Members listed in this issue of the newsletter all claimed Sand Hill Indian ancestry. Related to whom? Proof? He can prove who his grandmother was! You're obviously accepting Claire Garland's definition of Sand Hill Indian--even though you haven't got enough knowledge on the matter to decide which definition is correct. Kind of funny, since, when I was here last time you actually called all of the Sand Hill Indians PODIA's, and once even suggested that they might be Chinese! LOL! If this thread was about Claire Garland, instead of Sam Beeler, you'd be after her.
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"if the person who wrote the article saying Sam Beeler was the Chairman of the Tribal Council of the Sand Hill band of Indians was one of the same people who are now saying he isn't, if the person who wrote this understood and agreed with all the implications that title was being used to imply, and if the members of the Historical Society who didn't write that article would feel they had the right to tell whoever wrote that article they couldn't publish it as a part of the 2006 newsletter, and that this was worth disputing at the time."
Shkaakwus replies:
Nonsense! Claire Garland and her relations had FULL editorial control over the content of that newsletter. Sam Beeler didn't!
Shkaakwus wrote:
Mrs. Garland says she first heard of Sam Beeler "after Jim Revey passed." That was in 1998. This article in her newsletter is eight years later!
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I'm not sure what point you were trying to make with this comment. If Garland has known Beeler since 1998 - 1999 why should it be remarkable that she knows him and that Beeler and some family members had joined the Sand Hill Indian Historical Society by 2006 ?"
Shkaakwus replies:
My point is: How many years does it take to realize somebody is not related to you? Claire Garland claims she knew Sam Beeler since Jim Revey died and got suspicious when Sam Beeler was trying to get things from the Neptune Historical Museum. So, she knew him since 1998, and got suspicious in 2003. His membership (and that of his family members) in the Sand Hill Indian Historical Society (Claire Garland, Director) and that article calling him "Chairman of the Tribal Council" were accepted in 2006! Do the math!
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I typed out the scanned letter in the link you posted. ( I think you made a typo when you said this is a letter written by Herbert C. Kraft. Assuming I managed to find what you were trying to refer to, it looks like this letter was written by John Kraft, who is Herbert's son. )"
http://woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6140
Shkaakwus replies:
If I didn't know that you're deliberately misquoting what I wrote, for your own purposes, I'd think you're in dire need of some reading comprehension exercises. I NEVER said this letter was "written by Herbert C. Kraft." And, again: You "managed to find what" I was "trying to refer to"...? It must have been real difficult to figure out how to click-on a link with nothing else on it! LOL! "It looks like this letter was written by John Kraft, who is Herbert's son"? It "looks like" this? That's exactly what the letter says!
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I'm not sure how you are thinking this letter transcribed above, which you seem to be reffering to, explains why Herbert C. Kraft never mentioned Sam Beeler being appoionted to be James Revey's successor as Chief of the Sand hills band ? I don't see this mentioned at all in this letter. Perhaps you could explain, as what you may be trying to show us isn't obvious."
Shkaakwus replies:
In your previous post, you wrote: "this obituary not only doesn't mention Beeler but strongly implies the author, had never heard of the new Chief , and that he believed there wasn't going to be a sucessor." The letter proves he did know Sam Beeler--contrary to your conjectural interpretation of his words. Herbert C. Kraft's lament over the passing of his friend had NOTHING to do with the Sand Hill Indian "chieftaincy." Kraft was just saying what everyone who knew Jim Revey knows--that Jim will never be replaced as a native craftsman, a historian of his people, a teacher, and a living cultural treasure of the State of New Jersey. There is nobody like him left, in those respects. That's all Kraft was saying. The letter certainly proves that Herb Kraft knew who Sam Beeler was before his (Herb Kraft's) death in 2000.
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I also see where John Kraft says his strongest impression of Sam Beeler was that he was a cousin of James Lone Bear Revey. In the article I posted a link to in post # 47 , I read where people who are Sand Hill Indians say Sam isn't related to them. Could you provide some information on the family line through which Beeler is cousins with James Revey ?"
Shkaakwus replies:
Do you really suppose I would have said, earlier in this thread, that I don't know who all of Sam Beeler's cousins are--and, that I would now magically be able to provide that information? I'm not even sure this is how Sam Beeler used this word. Many New Jersey Indians call every other New Jersey Indian, "cousin." It's something like "all my relations." Doesn't mean somebody is your first cousin! I'm not saying which way Sam Beeler was using this word (because I don't know), but almost any NJ Indian will confirm what I just said about use of the word.
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"I see where the name of Beeler's Mother and Grandmother Sarah Holloway are already published, so it doesn't seem like I'm not able to find where this is explained, because it's private."
http://gardenstatepol.com/blog/?p=343
Shkaakwus replies:
Answered above.
Moma_Porcupine writes:
"Also if you want to refer to information on other websites or in scanned documents it would be easier to understand how you are interpreting this , if you could quote the parts that are relevent and explain what you think this is showing."
Shkaakwus replies:
I prefer my method and will continue to employ it.
-
I guess I have terminal curiousity. I have been continuing to dig.
First of all, I see the Sand Hill band website is owned by Sam Beeler
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/sandhillindians.org
Registrant Email:beeler[AT]cherokeenation.zzn.com
Admin ID:tuCkc8L9GjU7nssB
Admin Name:Sam Beeler
Admin Organization:NJ Sand Hill Band
So presumably he is responsible for the information posted there.
I'm not disputing that there is proof of a group of people in the area of Neptune who have both Lenape and Cherokee heritage, and who have retained a memory of their heritage and and identity based on this. What makes me doubtful is how many aspects of the history being presented by Beeler doesn't seem to agree with other sources.
What initially seems to have made people think something was fishy was the seemingly exaggerated emphasis Beeler puts on the Cherokee heritage of the Sand Hill band and that his website repeatedly seems to use distorted or inaccurate historical information to support these claims.
Responsible researchers generally quote what they are reffering to and then explain how they are interpreting this, because they have enough humility to understand their own interpretation of the facts is not a fact in itself. Making a claim and providing documentation , does not mean you have made a documented claim - no matter how much you want to believe it does.
It's already been pointed out the claim Beeler's Cherokee version of Sand Hill history is recognized by the Nuyagi Keetowah is pretty flimsy.
Then there is stuff like this...
http://www.sandhillindians.org/time_line.htm
1711-1713 First recorded migrations of Keetoowah-Cherokee people into New Jersey *2 and 3 This community [1711-1713] is the core group from which the Nuyagi Keetoowah were established.*2 and 3
The sources given are 3 books- not references to primary documentation, but maybe this is found in the books.
The problem is, I don't see an explanantion of who these people were ( their names) and the lines of descent which connect the present day descendents to this alleged core group of Cherokee...
So if some Cherokee people did move into the area in 1711 , I don't understand how they connect to the present community? What were their names ? Who were their kids and grand kids ect ?
Another example is the Sand Hill website mentions letters written by Chief John Ross which prve a "substantial Cherokee community in NJ .
http://www.sandhillindians.org/info.htm
In 1841, Principal Chief John Ross established a clear presence of substantial Cherokee community in New Jersey through his correspondence and other documentation.
According to CNO scholar Richard Allen this correspondence was letters to family members attending a school in NJ;
http://newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=157.30
Reply #30 -31
There is no explanation of how Beeler believes these letters actually connect with ancestors and history of the present Sand Hill band. Cherokee historian Richard Allen says there is no connection . It isn't just a matter of interpretation .
Are the Cherokee people mentioned in this corespondence actually the ancestors of the people who are now Sand hill band? If not, it seems to me this documentation wouldn't have anything to do with the actual history of the Sand Hill band.
Another thing I notice is this
http://www.sandhillindians.org/time_line.htm
1861-1864 Civil War: Yet another recorded migration to New Jersey, Chief John
Ross of the Cherokee Nation lives in exhile in New Jersey with the Keetoowah-Cherokee community. *2,3,5,6,12
Other sources make me unsure if this is true ...
http://digital.library.okstate.edu/Chronicles/v013/v013p421.html
on July 14, 1862, the Union forces occupied Tahlequah. ..........
the Confederate service now occupied Tahlequah and burned Rose Cottage, the Park Hill home of Chief Ross and the council house at Tahlequah, on October 28th and 29th, 1862.......
In February 1863, the tide of war again changed and the supremacy of the Union again was established in the Cherokee portion of the Territory. The Cherokee council again met and repealed the act deposing Chief Ross and reinstated him. The chief, then in Philadelphia, hastened to Washington to confer with Government authorities and on September 1, 1865, arrived at Tahlequah, preparatory for entering into the Ft. Smith conference with the United States Commissioners. He was dissatisfied with Section 9 of the treaty of June 19, 1866 wherein the tribe was enforced to adopt their former negro slaves into tribal membership and immediately thereafter left for Washington to enter his protest against its ratification. The old chieftain was much broken in health and passed away at the Medes Hotel on lower Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D. C., on August 1, 1866. .........
His second wife was Mary Brian Stapler whom he married at Philadelphia on September 7, 1844 and who died at the temporary home of Chief Ross at 708 South Washington Square, Philadelphia, on July 20, 1865 ......
.
http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/R/RO031.html
Ross again came to national attention during the American Civil War of the 1860s when he led the tribe through the tense disputes over Cherokee allegiance to the Union. Reluctantly, he accepted alliance with the Confederacy but abandoned the Cherokee Nation when the Federals invaded Indian Territory. He spent a good part of the remainder of the war in Washington, D.C., pleading the Cherokees' cause. At war's end he was able to come home for a short time but returned to the capital city to argue the Cherokee case once more. He died there in 1866. Chief Ross's remains were returned to Tahlequah and entombed in a family plot.
http://www.oklahomagenealogy.com/letter-chief-john-ross.htm
Letter of Chief John Ross
"Philadelphia, Pa., 708 Washington Place,
April 2, 1863.
I don't see any mention of Chief John Ross living in exile in New Jersey with a Cherokee community . And even if he did, unless this cherokee community is the ancestors of the Sand Hill band it doesn't seem to be a part of the Sand Hill bands history . It is this type of disconnected history which makes me skeptical of the Beeler's version of Sand Hill band history.
If someone wanted to defend Beeler from unfair skeptism, it would help if they could explain is why a tribe with a real history and real culture would be making so many claims that seem to be bogus.
I did find a Sand Hill Indian history website which includes more complete genealogical information - along with the origins of the Sand Hill Indians which names names and explains lines of descent . This is the website belonging to Claire Garland -.
http://www.sandhillindianhistory.org/
( I am quoting from various chapters within this website - just to give a brief summery )
Finding themselves on the losing side of European conflicts, Joseph and Rebecca
Richardson lost their homelands in the Cherokee territory of Georgia and migrated north
on the Appalachian Trail with their twelve children to join relatives in New Jersey. The
youngest son, Isaac Revey Richardson, was born April 10, 1818 in Eatontown village at the family home on South Street and Richardson Avenue. Isaac Revey Richardson was
the grandfather of Ryers Crummel, Adeline Richardson Thomas, Robert Richardson,
Jonathan Richardson, Julian Russell Richardson, Charlotte Richardson, Theodora
Richardson Bell and James and Robert Revey.
After hiding out in the mountains for a while, Ike’s forefathers chose to make a better life for themselves by moving north following the Appalachian Trail. They lived with their Lenape cousins, the Reveys in the area called Shrewsbury, of which Eatontown village and the hamlet of Tinton Falls were a small section. Since Isaac married Elizabeth Revey from New York, part of the Sand Hill history is tied to Manhattan.
In 1818 full-blooded Cherokee Indian, Isaac Revey Richardson, was born to Rebecca and Joseph Richardson in the small village of Eatontown , NJ, (just a few years after the British burned the White House). Indian Ike was the youngest of twelve siblings, some of whom remained in the mountains of Georgia when the family left or migrated westward to Ohio , Indiana or Oklahoma and were never heard from again
In 1826 Ike’s parents, Rebecca and Joseph Richardson, bought property near South Street in Eatontown village, near several other Revey and Richardson families.
Ike’s four sons, Isaac W., Theodore, Richard and Joseph Richardson, owned fifteen acres of farmland at Sand Hill buying the property in 1877
In 1844 Ike married Elizabeth S. Revey, a distant cousin from New York, at the Trinity Church in Lower Manhattan. Her parents, Susan and Richard P Revey, are buried at the Indian Burial Grounds, now called Shadow Lawn Cemetery on Squankum Road in Tinton Falls, NJ. Ike bought property in 1845 near his parents near the Pine Brook on Richardson Avenue in Eatontown village. Isaac and Elizabeth’s four sons, Isaac W., Theodore, Richard, Joseph, and four daughters, Emma, Elizabeth, Susan, Restella (and one stillborn child) were born there
A relative Jonathan Richardson was “bounded out for a period of one year to Jacob Corlies”. If he remained for the year, he would receive three months of schooling and a new suit of clothes.
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:NxaE96oeLkcJ:sandhillindianhistory.org/chapter6.pdf+%22Sand+
Hill%22+Crummell&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca (http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:NxaE96oeLkcJ:sandhillindianhistory.org/chapter6.pdf+%22Sand+
Hill%22+Crummell&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca)
Chapter 6
The Family Grows
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:Iv-PSu6H8KYJ:sandhillindianhistory.org/chapter7.pdf+site:
sandhillindianhistory.org+Cherokee+Crummel+%22new+jersey%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca (http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:Iv-PSu6H8KYJ:sandhillindianhistory.org/chapter7.pdf+site:
sandhillindianhistory.org+Cherokee+Crummel+%22new+jersey%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca)
Chapter 7
The Clan Expands
What I found interesting is some of the family names of people related to the Sand Hill Indians I see in this source. i listed most of them below ...
Richardson
Revey
Crummell
Morris*
Vandeveer*
Thomas*
Burkhard*
Bell*
Fox*
Coleman*
Johnson
Cook*
Clark*
Fitzgerald*
Dickerson*
I also found some old photos of the Sand hill Indians ( Yeah I know Ray has posted links to some other pictures already )
http://books.google.ca/books?id=gjUqYLfH5ugC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=%22Sand+Hill%22+
Crummell&source=bl&ots=ofBPW_pKlc&sig=eK_rxbddfUqxmFK2cHW1n94pafk&hl=en&ei=r3cUSriSLaaItA
PhkJzfDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10 (http://books.google.ca/books?id=gjUqYLfH5ugC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=%22Sand+Hill%22+
Crummell&source=bl&ots=ofBPW_pKlc&sig=eK_rxbddfUqxmFK2cHW1n94pafk&hl=en&ei=r3cUSriSLaaItA
PhkJzfDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10)
Neptune and Shark River Hills
By Evelyn Stryker Lewis
Edition: illustrated
Published by Arcadia Publishing, 1998
ISBN 0738556998, 9780738556994
128 pages
In 1949 there is a picture of Sand Hill people surnamed
Bell*
Gardener*
Dickerson*
Thomas*
Fox*
(Gaines ?)
Holman*
James ( Lone Bear) Revey
Richardson
Crummell
The thing that strikes me is the differences between the family names given by these sources and the names on Beelers website .
http://www.sandhillindians.org/familynames.htm
Beelers list has James Revey's name at the end of it and a date of 1973. If James Revey made this list, as it appears, I am not sure why it seems to not include many of the closely related family members who were Sand Hill Indians .
And of course the other question that comes up is how does Sam Beelers grandmother Sarah Holloway connect with this family which was named for the place they lived _ Sand Hill ?
And lastly in reply to a few of the more personal comments ...
shkaakwus
If I didn't know that you're deliberately misquoting what I wrote, for your own purposes, I'd think you're in dire need of some reading comprehension exercises. I NEVER said this letter was "written by Herbert C. Kraft."
Actually i'm deliberately trying to be polite and stay with the actual questions without getting diverted into who has the stupidest most obnoxious personality. In this case you are absolutely right. I did misread what you wrote and i am very sorry for thinking you made a typo when it was a problem in my own reading comprehension.
shkaakwus
The letter proves he did know Sam Beeler--contrary to your conjectural interpretation of his words.
I never asked if Revey actually knew or met Beeler and you are inventing a question which wasn't there Presumably Mr Revey knew and met many people who were distant relative who he liked. That doesn't make them all chiefs of the Sand Hill band. Obviously whether or not Mr Revey actually knew or met Sam Beeler and liked him is not relevent to Beelers claim to be Revey's successor as Chief of the Sand hill's band.
shkaakwus
Herbert C. Kraft's lament over the passing of his friend had NOTHING to do with the Sand Hill Indian "chieftaincy."
Yes, you have a good point there and that is something else I noticed. This seems to be more evidence supporting the version of the story that Mr Revey was more of a patriarch than a Chief. If James Revey was the Chief of the Sand Hill band, surely this would also have been mentioned in the obituary?
when I was here last time you actually called all of the Sand Hill Indians PODIA's, and once even suggested that they might be Chinese! LOL! If this thread was about Claire Garland, instead of Sam Beeler, you'd be after her.
I don't want to get sucked into arguing with you about what was and wasn't said. if anyone cares and doesn't mind getting a headache, I uploaded the first page of that discussion into a google doc. People can read for themselves what was said - in context - in the link below.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcwzmv4g_114d36phrgx
Yes if Claire Garland was making the same claims as Sam Beeler and using what looked like flakey out of context history to support these claims I would have the same reasons to be skeptical. She isn't.
Maybe this is just a problem caused by unclear communication and as you know a lot about Sam Beeler's version of this history maybe you can provide more details about the names , connections and missing links and clear up these misunderstandings.
For instance , perhaps you could explain how Beelers grandmother Sarah Holloway connects to the Sand Hill Indians - Or in other words, how does Sarah Holloway connect to the Richardson or Revey families , and if she doesn't, why is Beeler and Holloway calling themselves Sand Hill Indians?
(edited to change word met to "knew or met " and to give the source of the information about the nature of Chief John Ross's letters to Cherokee people in NJ in 1841 )l
-
Moma Porcupine writes:
"I guess I have terminal curiousity. I have been continuing to dig. First of all, I see the Sand Hill band website is owned by Sam Beeler http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/sandhillindians.org Quote Registrant Email:beeler[AT]cherokeenation.zzn.com Admin ID:tuCkc8L9GjU7nssB Admin Name:Sam Beeler Admin Organization:NJ Sand Hill Band So presumably he is responsible for the information posted there."
Shkaakwus replies:
I thought we acknowledged this, already.
Moma Porcupine writes:
"If someone wanted to defend Beeler from unfair skeptism, it would help if they could explain is why a tribe with a real history and real culture would be making so many claims that seem to be bogus. I'm not disputing that there is proof of a group of people in the area of Neptune who have both Lenape and Cherokee heritage, and who have retained a memory of their heritage and and identity based on this. What makes me doubtful is how many aspects of the history being presented by Beeler doesn't seem to agree with other sources."
Shkaakwus replies:
The sentence I've put in boldface type is the kind of dismissive, condescending put-down which causes me to respond in a way which you, then, characterize as "obnoxious." You've failed to ever read the sources on the Sand Hill Indians I provided the first time I was here, nor have you done so yet. Still, you think you can arrogantly deign to characterize the significant cultural retentions of the Sand Hill Indians as "a memory of their heritage and identity." You persist in talking about them this way, though it appears obvious that you've never met a single one of them, nor have you bothered to read any of the accounts of them in the literature. As A. Hyatt Verrill wrote: "...these Indians have yet retained their old tribal customs, councils, ceremonials, arts and crafts, and their clan system, as well as their chieftainships, although surrounded by the whites and civilization for over two hundred years." [in Verrill, A. Hyatt, The Real Americans, New York (1954), page 100] Further information on their history, traditional craftwork, medicine practice, green corn dance, and other customs is provided in this and the other sources I've cited. One has to read these before presuming to characterize the Sand Hill Indians as one of your so-called "PODIA" groups--or, in any way, whatsoever, for that matter. In other words: You have to know what you're talking about, first!
Moma Porcupine writes:
"What initially seems to have made people think something was fishy was the seemingly exaggerated emphasis Beeler puts on the Cherokee heritage of the Sand Hill band and that his website repeatedly seems to use distorted or inaccurate historical information to support these claims. Responsible researchers generally quote what they are reffering to and then explain how they are interpreting this, because they have enough humility to understand their own interpretation of the facts is not a fact in itself. Making a claim and providing documentation , does not mean you have made a documented claim - no matter how much you want to believe it does."
Shkaakwus replies:
Regarding what I've put in boldface type, immediately above: It seems to me, this entirely depends on the quality of the documentation being cited. Of course, that can't be judged by somebody who has never read those sources. You say, "...they have enough humility to understand their own interpretation of the facts is not a fact in itself." And, I would add that the relevant facts cannot be interpreted by someone who doesn't know what those facts are. If I write, "the Delaware Indians once made petticoats of hemp and moccasins of corn husks"--and cite my sources for this information--it is not up to me to provide you with the actual quotations from those sources! Sources are cited so you can check what I'm saying, if you're so inclined. A written history is not a series of quotations!
Moma Porcupine writes:
"It's already been pointed out the claim Beeler's Cherokee version of Sand Hill history is recognized by the Nuyagi Keetowah is pretty flimsy."
Shkaakwus replies:
No such claim was ever made! The claim is that the Nuyagi Keetoowah Society recognizes that the Cherokee background of the Sand Hill Indians is authentic and legitimate. Where is the claim made that the NKS recognizes "Beeler's Cherokee version of Sand Hill history"?
Moma Porcupine writes:
"Then there is stuff like this... http://www.sandhillindians.org/time_line.htm Quote 1711-1713 First recorded migrations of Keetoowah-Cherokee people into New Jersey *2 and 3 This community [1711-1713] is the core group from which the Nuyagi Keetoowah were established.*2 and 3" The sources given are 3 books- not references to primary documentation, but maybe this is found in the books. The problem is, I don't see an explanantion of who these people were ( their names) and the lines of descent which connect the present day descendents to this alleged core group of Cherokee... So if some Cherokee people did move into the area in 1711 , I don't understand how they connect to the present community? What were their names ? Who were their kids and grand kids ect ?"
Shkaakwus replies:
"They have some Cherokee blood from members of the latter tribe who passed New Jersey on a northward migration in 1713." [Verrill, ibid., p.100] This is part of their traditional oral history! On the "Red Record" thread, the administrator of this forum, as well as others, argue that this kind of history is to be given equal weight with the historical accounts written and documented by whites. Now, you demand the white version (i.e., "documentation") as the only source of authority you'll accept! How many CNO, UKB and EBC Cherokees can provide you with an unbroken chain of genealogical documentation showing who their Cherokee ancestors were, living in the period, 1711-1713? (I'll wager the answer is "none.")
{I have eliminated, from my reply, all your references to John Ross and his habitations during the Civil War, etc. It has nothing to do with the Sand Hill Indians, other than that it exhibits one Sand Hill Indian's pride in his Cherokee roots, and his pride in finding that there is another Cherokee-New Jersey connection. It's his website. He can write about anything he wants to, and can decide how much space is taken up by whatever he desires.}
Moma Porcupine writes:
"I did find a Sand Hill Indian history website which includes more complete genealogical information - along with the origins of the Sand Hill Indians which names names and explains lines of descent . This is the website belonging to Claire Garland -.http://www.sandhillindianhistory.org/ ( I am quoting from various chapters within this website - just to give a brief summery ) Quote Finding themselves on the losing side of European conflicts, Joseph and Rebecca Richardson lost their homelands in the Cherokee territory of Georgia and migrated north on the Appalachian Trail with their twelve children to join relatives in New Jersey. The youngest son, Isaac Revey Richardson, was born April 10, 1818 in Eatontown village at the family home on South Street and Richardson Avenue. Isaac Revey Richardson was the grandfather of Ryers Crummel, Adeline Richardson Thomas, Robert Richardson, Jonathan Richardson, Julian Russell Richardson, Charlotte Richardson, Theodora Richardson Bell and James and Robert Revey. Quote After hiding out in the mountains for a while, Ike's forefathers chose to make a better life for themselves by moving north following the Appalachian Trail. They lived with their Lenape cousins, the Reveys in the area called Shrewsbury, of which Eatontown village and the hamlet of Tinton Falls were a small section. Since Isaac married Elizabeth Revey from New York, part of the Sand Hill history is tied to Manhattan. Quote In 1818 full-blooded Cherokee Indian, Isaac Revey Richardson, was born to Rebecca and Joseph Richardson in the small village of Eatontown , NJ, (just a few years after the British burned the White House). Indian Ike was the youngest of twelve siblings, some of whom remained in the mountains of Georgia when the family left or migrated westward to Ohio , Indiana or Oklahoma and were never heard from again Quote In 1826 Ike's parents, Rebecca and Joseph Richardson, bought property near South Street in Eatontown village, near several other Revey and Richardson families. Quote Ike's four sons, Isaac W., Theodore, Richard and Joseph Richardson, owned fifteen acres of farmland at Sand Hill buying the property in 1877 Quote In 1844 Ike married Elizabeth S. Revey, a distant cousin from New York, at the Trinity Church in Lower Manhattan. Her parents, Susan and Richard P Revey, are buried at the Indian Burial Grounds, now called Shadow Lawn Cemetery on Squankum Road in Tinton Falls, NJ. Ike bought property in 1845 near his parents near the Pine Brook on Richardson Avenue in Eatontown village. Isaac and Elizabeth's four sons, Isaac W., Theodore, Richard, Joseph, and four daughters, Emma, Elizabeth, Susan, Restella (and one stillborn child) were born there Quote A relative Jonathan Richardson was "bounded out for a period of one year to Jacob Corlies". If he remained for the year, he would receive three months of schooling and a new suit of clothes. http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:NxaE96oeLkcJ:sandhillindianhistory.org/chapter6.pdf+%22Sand+Hill%22+Crummell&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca Quote Chapter 6 The Family Grows http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:Iv-PSu6H8KYJ:sandhillindianhistory.org/chapter7.pdf+site:sandhillindianhistory.org+Cherokee+Crummel+%22new+jersey%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca "
Shkaakwus replies:
Yeah. I posted a link to this website of Claire Garland's at the Woodland Indians Forum, over a year ago, on March 16, 2008, and recommended it to everybody; and, I posted a link to that post near the end of the Sand Hill Indian Pictorial thread, at that same forum, which you've been reading. Not sure what it is you're trying to prove by posting all this. It's traditional oral history of the Richardson descendants, for the most part. I particularly liked this passage regarding the Richardsons--just after moving north, from Georgia: "They lived with their Lenape cousins, the Reveys in the area called Shrewsbury..." So, these "unrelated" Cherokee Richardsons called the Lenape Reveys their "COUSINS"! LOL! (I hope I don't have to explain the wry irony in this statement, given what's transpired, to date, on this thread!)
Moma Porcupine writes:
"Quote Chapter 7 The Clan Expands What I found interesting is some of the family names of people related to the Sand Hill Indians I see in this source. i listed most of them below ...
Richardson Revey Crummell Morris* Vandeveer* Thomas* Burkhard* Bell* Fox* Coleman* Johnson Cook* Clark* Fitzgerald* Dickerson*
I also found some old photos of the Sand hill Indians ( Yeah I know Ray has posted links to some other pictures already )
http://books.google.ca/books?id=gjUqYLfH5ugC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=%22Sand+Hill%22+
Crummell&source=bl&ots=ofBPW_pKlc&sig=eK_rxbddfUqxmFK2cHW1n94pafk&hl=en&ei=r3cUSriSLaaItA
PhkJzfDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10
Quote Neptune and Shark River Hills By Evelyn Stryker Lewis Edition: illustrated Published by Arcadia Publishing, 1998 ISBN 0738556998, 9780738556994 128 pages In 1949 there is a picture of Sand Hill people surnamed Bell* Gardener* Dickerson* Thomas* Fox* (Gaines ?) Holman* James ( Lone Bear) Revey Richardson Crummell The thing that strikes me is the differences between the family names given by these sources and the names on Beelers website . http://www.sandhillindians.org/familynames.htm Beelers list has James Revey's name at the end of it and a date of 1973. If James Revey made this list, as it appears, I am not sure why it seems to not include many of the closely related family members who were Sand Hill Indians ."
Shkaakwus replies:
As I already wrote, in a previous post, the Sand Hill Indians enumerated, on their rolls, the New Jersey Indian families with whom they associated, over the years, beginning in 1887. The names changed over time, as other Cherokee and Lenape people, previously unassociated, arrived in Monmouth County, or, simply, came to be known. (Such is the case with the Holloways.) Jim Revey cited names from several of these rolls, on lists he compiled for various purposes. He only cited Indian surnames. He didn't list the surnames of non-Indians who married into the band. These lists you cite include many non-Indian names of this latter sort. To my knowledge, Jim never made a single complete list. He'd just name some, usually from memory, if he was just talking to you--or, jotted them down on a piece of paper. In one published list, for example, he gives the names, Douglas, Myers, Crummel, Whitaker, Richardson, Waters, Horner, Armstrong, Clay, Ashton, Van Etta, Hill, Ray and Revey. [Weslager, Clinton A., Magic Medicines of the Indians, Somerset, NJ (1973), page 125.] As you can see, a lot of these names are NOT found in the lists you quoted, but many (though not all) are included in the list on Sam Beeler's website. This all goes back to the two competing definitions of "Sand Hill Indian." Some confine the term to the Revey-Richardson family. Others include all those listed on the rolls kept by the Sand Hill Indians. The lists you cite adhere to the first definition. The lists published by C. A. Weslager and Sam Beeler accord with the second definition. And, by the way, individuals in the New Jersey American Indian Hill, Ray and Douglas families were Jim Revey's direct ancestors. They aren't anywhere to be found on Claire Garland's website, because they don't fit the more narrow definition of Sand Hill Indian she favors.
Moma Porcupine writes:
"And of course the other question that comes up is how does Sam Beelers grandmother Sarah Holloway connect with this family which was named for the place they lived _ Sand Hill ?"
Shkaakwus replies:
Once again, you fail to recognize that most Sand Hill Indians did not live on Sand Hill (no matter which definition of Sand Hill Indian you choose). This could all be cleared up, nicely, if those who cleaned out Jim Revey's office, after he died, would release the documents and rolls he held at the office. (Providing, of course, they weren't all thrown out in the garbage.) In any case, see Sam Beeler's certification as a Sand Hill Indian, here: http://woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=25830#p25830 The Holloway connection to the Sand Hill Indians is geographical and temporal (at least, in the main). The Cherokee, Sarah Holloway, was born in Sea Bright, Monmouth County, NJ, in 1900, where her family was then living. She would have been enumerated in the Sand Hill Indian rolls, early in the 20th-century, evidently. Sea Bright is about 4 miles down the Shrewsbury River from Eatontown (where Ike Richardson was born); 2 miles from Little Silver (where Johnson Revey lived); and about 6 miles from where Claire Garland lives, today. And, for a time, Sarah Holloway's family resided at Whitesville, in Neptune--the location of Sand Hill. A photograph of Sarah Holloway, in Indian regalia, can be seen in the Sand Hill Indian Pictorial thread, at Woodland Indians Forum, here: http://woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=2609 [picture #5].
Moma Porcupine writes:
"And lastly in reply to a few of the more personal comments shkaakwus Quote If I didn't know that you're deliberately misquoting what I wrote, for your own purposes, I'd think you're in dire need of some reading comprehension exercises. I NEVER said this letter was "written by Herbert C. Kraft." Actually i'm deliberately trying to be polite and stay with the actual questions without getting diverted into who has the stupidest most obnoxious personality. In this case you are absolutely right. I did misread what you wrote and i am very sorry for thinking you made a typo when it was a problem in my own reading comprehension."
"shkaakwus Quote The letter proves he did know Sam Beeler--contrary to your conjectural interpretation of his words. I never asked if Revey actually knew or met Beeler and you are inventing a question which wasn't there Presumably Mr Revey met many people who were distant relative who he liked. That doesn't make them all chiefs of the Sand Hill band. Obviously whether or not Mr revey actually met Sam beeler and liked him is not relevent to Beelers claim to be Revey's successor as Chief of the Sand hill's band."
Shkaakwus replies:
Your poor reading comprehension skills are showing, again. The quotation: "The letter proves he did know Sam Beeler" does not refer to Jim Revey! It refers to Herbert C. Kraft. So, right after apologizing for misreading what I wrote, you do the exact same thing, again!
Moma Porcupine writes:
"shkaakwus Quote Herbert C. Kraft's lament over the passing of his friend had NOTHING to do with the Sand Hill Indian "chieftaincy." Yes, you have a good point there and that is something else I noticed. This seems to be more evidence supporting the version of the story that Mr Revey was more of a patriarch than a Chief. If James Revey was the Chief of the Sand Hill band, surely this would also have been mentioned in the obituary?"
Shkaakwus replies:
Above, you cite the book, Neptune and Shark River Hills, By Evelyn Stryker Lewis. In a recent post (May 2, 2009) at the Archaeological Society of New Jersey List, Evelyn Stryker Lewis wrote: "As former curator of the Neptune Historical Museum and Neptune Township historian it was my pleasure to know Jim Lone Bear Revey as a colleague and friend. The museum hosted a standing exhibit on the Sand Hill Indians of Neptune (of which he was chief) as well as archives documenting their history and geneological descent -made available mostly through Jim's generosity." [boldface type supplied by Shkaakwus] You have to understand the Lenape concept of who is a "Chief." A Chief is somebody who is regarded as such by his people, and recognized as such by others. In the old days, the same word ("kikeyjumhet") was used for "elder" (cf. "patriarch") and "chief" in Lenape communities.
Moma Porcupine writes:
"Quote when I was here last time you actually called all of the Sand Hill Indians PODIA's, and once even suggested that they might be Chinese! LOL! If this thread was about Claire Garland, instead of Sam Beeler, you'd be after her. I don't want to get sucked into arguing with you about what was and wasn't said. if anyone cares and doesn't miond getting a headache I uploaded the first page of that discussion into a google doc. People can read for themselves what was said - in context - in the link below.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcwzmv4g_114d36phrgx "
Shkaakwus replies:
Excellent! Thank you.
Moma Porcupine writes:
"Yes if Claire Garland was making the same claims as Sam Beeler and using what looked like flakey out of context history to support these claims I would have the same reasons to be skeptical. She isn't. Maybe this is just a problem caused by unclear communication and as you know a lot about Sam Beeler's version of this history maybe you can provide more details about the names , connections and missing links and clear up these misunderstandings. For instance , perhaps you could explain how Beelers grandmother Sarah Holloway connects to the Sand Hill Indians - Or in other words, how does Sarah Holloway connect to the Richardson or Revey families , and if she doesn't, why is Beeler and Holloway calling themselves Sand Hill Indians?"
Shkaakwus replies:
This is all kind of redundant, at this point, since I've answered it above. One more time: You're still hung up on accepting a definition of who is a Sand Hill Indian that isn't the only one out there. Let me see if these selected passages help explain the wider definition. Jim Revey wrote:
"Those Indians who lived in the Pohatcong and Schooley Mountains about four generations ago all came down from the mountains to live in the towns in Morris County and elsewhere. Some of these Delaware Indians intermarried with Indians of Monmouth County years ago." [Note by Shkaakwus: These mountains are located in Morris County and Warren (formerly, Sussex) County, NJ.]
"There were also intermarriages between Burlington County Indians with those who remained in Monmouth County."
"Cherokee and other Indians from the South came into Pennsylvania and then crossed the Delaware River into New Jersey. Some of these Cherokee Indians married with the Indians living in Monmouth County, thus bringing more Indian blood and some new family names."
"In 1887, a list was made of the names of Indian people who lived in Monmouth County and elsewhere. The list includes the Indians that had intermarried with the Indians from Morris and Burlington Counties, and their families."
"...by 1890 the people were beginning to move away from Sand Hill."
"The great majority of Sand Hill Indians have lived away from the Sand Hill for forty-five to fifty years or more." [source: "The Delaware Indians of New Jersey, from Colonial Times to the Present" by James "Lone Bear" Revey, in Kraft, H. C., ed., The Lenape Indian: A Symposium, South Orange, NJ (1984), pp.81 & 82 - words in boldface supplied by Shkaakwus, for emphasis]
In an attempt to make a long story short, Sam Beeler's Sand Hill Indians include all those American Indian families from the 1887--and subsequent--Sand Hill Indian rolls. These are the families named on the lists published by Weslager and Beeler, cited above. These families were either ancestral to, or near neighbors of, those living on Sand Hill.
-
shkaakwus
So far you have presented a lot of old records, and pictures showing the descendents and close relatives of the Richardson, Revey and Crummell families who lived at Sand Hill . You have shown evidence these families were recognized as Indian, and that these specific families retained parts of their political and cultural identity up until the present times. We all agree about that.
You are also saying there was 11 other families ( or more ) who lived in the area who were also Sand Hill Indians. According to Beeler and associates , these other families were also recognized as Indian , and their descendents also retained parts of their political and cultural identity up until present . You say James Revey listed the names of some of these other familes as being Douglas, Myers, Whitaker, Horner, Armstrong, Clay, Ashton, Van Etta, Hill, Ray.
While I will take your word for the fact this list was made, and that at some point in time there was people with these surnames in the area who were Indians, in itself this list doesn't provide any explaination of who these families were, and how and if they were related to the Sand Hill Indians. Even if these families were Indian back in - say - 1820, unless they continued to intermarry with other families who can be shown to also be Indian, it's extremely unlikely they retained anything of a political or cultural identity . It's very common for urban areas to have a substantial population of Indians from other places. But not all Indians who's families live in an urban area are of the same tribe. There was also many completely non native people with these same common surnames.
I don't see where anyone has presented any evidence which shows why any families with these surnames should be considered Sand Hill Indians. Instead it seems these families are being sandwiched in with the families that did live at Sand Hill, and who can be shown to have retained their identity and culture.
I know that it would be a lot to provide a full family history for each of these , but starting with just one example , could you provide some information on who the oldest known ancestor of the family who was surnamed Douglas, that Beeler is considering a Sand Hill Indian ? What was this persons first name ? When and where were they born ? Where did they live? Who did they marry ? Who were their children and grandchildren ? What was their tribe ? You say James Revey is a direct descendent of this family. Could you please explain how ? What evidence is there this family was Indian and that descendents OF THIS FAMILY, who are now claiming to be Sand Hill Indians , actually were Sand Hill Indians who retained their cultural and political identity ? ( I am NOT asking for more evidence showing the Revey's Richardsons and Crummells, who lived at Sand Hill, were Indians, I'm asking about the Douglas family here... )
You also provided some evidence showing Sarah Holloway was a Sand Hill Indian.
You point to a picture of Sarah Holloway in an Indian craft store . The store is said to be located in Paterson and is said to belong to the Sand Hill Indians . Sarah is posing for the picture wearing a light colored outfit with fringes and a head band holding a blanket. Standing on the other side of the room and beside or behind the counter are 3 other woman wearing similar dark brown outfits with fringes and head bands. They are obviously staff at the store. It isn't clear if the woman on the left identified as Sarah Holloway is a customer or a worker.
You also posted a link to a scanned document which states Sam Beeler is a Sand Hill Indian through his grandmother Sarah Holloway and this document is signed James Revey .
I see the same document posted here by someone who is a strong supporter of the Paterson Sand Hill claiments.
http://gardenstatepol.com/blog/?p=343
1900 – Chief Sam Beeler’s grandmother, Sarah Holloway is born in Monmouth County into the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians as part of the Keetowah Bird Clan.
1930 – Chief Sam Beeler’s mother, Roemena Ali, is born to Sarah Holloway of the Keetowah (Kithuwagi) Bird Clan of the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians.
Links to a scanned document
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13268385@N04/2868783501/sizes/l/in/set-72157606454376580/
1950 – Chief Sam Beeler is born in Paterson into the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians. He is the Grandson of Sarah Holloway of the Keetowah (Kithuwagi) Bird Clan and son of Roemena Alli. The birth certification is signed by Chief James “Lone Bear” Revey from the New Jersey Indian Office in Orange, NJ.
Links to a scanned document
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13268385@N04/2869611846/sizes/m/in/set-72157606454376580/
Below is copies of the James Revey signitures from the 2 different documents linked to above. I enlarged these put these side by side for comparison ...
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcwzmv4g_119c66s86hk
As far as I can see , the signiture on both certificates looks pretty much identical. Even to the exact positions of the gaps in the lines left by the pen.
I'm not sure how to inturpret this .
Considering all this, I'd like to see much more complete details as to who these other families are, and an explanation as to why Beeler and associates feel these families should be considered Sand Hill Indians . If the details of these other families names and histories were further explained , it would allow people to see if their claims could be verified through historical facts and primary documentation , independant of peoples personal agendas.
If Sarah Holloway was Cherokee and she was born in the area, it makes sense that Sam Beeler would have grown up in a family which for 3 generations had felt an affinity with the Sand Hill band and their shared Cherokee heritage. But that would not in itself make Sarah's descendents members of this tribe.
-
Moma Porcupine writes:
"So far you have presented a lot of old records, and pictures showing the descendents and close relatives of the Richardson, Revey and Crummell families who lived at Sand Hill . You have shown evidence these families were recognized as Indian, and that these specific families retained parts of their political and cultural identity up until the present times. We all agree about that."
Well... I guess we're making progress.
"You are also saying there was 11 other families ( or more ) who lived in the area who were also Sand Hill Indians."
Not exactly. What I said was that Indian families related to the Reveys and Richardsons--and, other Indian families living in Monmouth County, New Jersey--were listed on the Sand Hill Indian rolls, beginning in 1887. Those related families resided in other New Jersey counties (Burlington, Morris, Warren, Sussex and Passaic), in large part, though some did live in Monmouth County.
"According to Beeler and associates , these other families were also recognized as Indian , and their descendents also retained parts of their political and cultural identity up until present ."
Change "their descendants" to "some of their descendants," and we're in agreement.
"You say James Revey listed the names of some of these other familes as being Douglas, Myers, Whitaker, Horner, Armstrong, Clay, Ashton, Van Etta, Hill, Ray."
Correct.
"While I will take your word for the fact this list was made, and that at some point in time there was people with these surnames in the area who were Indians, in itself this list doesn't provide any explaination of who these families were, and how and if they were related to the Sand Hill Indians. Even if these families were Indian back in - say - 1820, unless they continued to intermarry with other families who can be shown to also be Indian, it's extremely unlikely they retained anything of a political or cultural identity . It's very common for urban areas to have a substantial population of Indians from other places. But not all Indians who's families live in an urban area are of the same tribe. There was also many completely non native people with these same common surnames."
1. You don't have to take my word for it, but Jim Revey's--the published sources of whose lists I cited, previously. 2. That "area" where there were people with these surnames who were Indians includes the counties I mentioned, above--not just Monmouth County. 3. These families were Indian in 1887 (and thereafter), when the Sand Hill Indian rolls were compiled. You don't have to go back to 1820. 4. First: Acculturation and assimilation have altered the lifestyles of New Jersey's Indian population, to no greater extent than they have changed the way of life of other Indians, living elsewhere (such as members of the CNO, UKB, EBC, or Delaware Tribe of Indians). In some respects, even less. Second: Jim Revey also wrote: "Many of these people now in Monmouth County married close relatives in order to keep their degree of Indian blood high." ["The Delaware Indians of New Jersey: From Colonial Times to the Present," in Kraft, H. C., ed., The Lenape Indian: A Symposium, South Orange, NJ (1984), p.81.] He wasn't particularly happy to write those words, but he did write them, truthfully. Of course, intermarriage with other races has taken place frequently, as well--like in many other tribes. 5. The Sand Hill Indians are an amalgam of different tribes, to begin with: Lenape, Cherokee, some Tuscarora (according to their own oral history), and, perhaps, others (though I don't know of any others). 6. Most of these Indians were living in very rural areas in 1887.
"I don't see where anyone has presented any evidence which shows why any families with these surnames should be considered Sand Hill Indians. Instead it seems these families are being sandwiched in with the families that did live at Sand Hill, and who can be shown to have retained their identity and culture."
If you don't believe the people listed on the Sand Hill Indian roll of 1887 (and later such rolls) are Sand Hill Indians, then you never will see it. These families are the relations and near neighbors of those living at or close to Sand Hill. That is the evidence!
"I know that it would be a lot to provide a full family history for each of these , but starting with just one example , could you provide some information on who the oldest known ancestor of the family who was surnamed Douglas, that Beeler is considering a Sand Hill Indian ?"
Yes.
"What was this persons first name ?"
Squire.
"When and where were they born ?"
He was born March 1, 1760, on a voyage from Virginia to Newton, Sussex County, New Jersey.
"Where did they live?"
Sussex County, New Jersey. (Union County, New Jersey, during the final few years of his life.)
"Who did they marry ?"
I don't know his wife's name.
"Who were their children and grandchildren ?"
I'm not going to do a lot of free genealogical research for you. However, his daughter, Malinda Douglas, married Abraham Ray, and their children were Louisa, James, Sarah, Isaac, Abraham, Philip, Susan and George.
"What was their tribe ?"
Lenape.
"You say James Revey is a direct descendent of this family. Could you please explain how ?"
Chief Douglas was Jim Revey's great-great-great grandfather, being his mother's mother's father's mother's father.
"What evidence is there this family was Indian and that descendents OF THIS FAMILY, who are now claiming to be Sand Hill Indians , actually were Sand Hill Indians who retained their cultural and political identity ? ( I am NOT asking for more evidence showing the Revey's Richardsons and Crummells, who lived at Sand Hill, were Indians, I'm asking about the Douglas family here... )"
The evidence is Jim Revey's surname lists drawn from the 1887 Sand Hill Indian roll and other Sand Hill Indian records. Two living descendants "OF THIS FAMILY" (i.e., "Douglas") that I know of, are Jim Revey's two nieces. While I know some of the folks now enrolled in the Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians, I certainly don't know all of them, nor do I have access to their membership records. However, I do know that anyone who can prove descendancy from this Douglas family is eligible for enrollment--just as anyone who can prove descendancy from a Cherokee named on the Dawes Roll is eligible for enrollment in the CNO; and, just as is the case with any lineage-based federally recognized tribe.
"You also provided some evidence showing Sarah Holloway was a Sand Hill Indian. You point to a picture of Sarah Holloway in an Indian craft store . The store is said to be located in Paterson and is said to belong to the Sand Hill Indians . Sarah is posing for the picture wearing a light colored outfit with fringes and a head band holding a blanket. Standing on the other side of the room and beside or behind the counter are 3 other woman wearing similar dark brown outfits with fringes and head bands. They are obviously staff at the store. It isn't clear if the woman on the left identified as Sarah Holloway is a customer or a worker."
It is my understanding that she was the proprietor.
"You also posted a link to a scanned document which states Sam Beeler is a Sand Hill Indian through his grandmother Sarah Holloway and this document is signed James Revey . I see the same document posted here by someone who is a strong supporter of the Paterson Sand Hill claiments. http://gardenstatepol.com/blog/?p=343 Quote 1900 - Chief Sam Beeler's grandmother, Sarah Holloway is born in Monmouth County into the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians as part of the Keetowah Bird Clan. Quote 1930 - Chief Sam Beeler's mother, Roemena Ali, is born to Sarah Holloway of the Keetowah (Kithuwagi) Bird Clan of the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians. Links to a scanned document http://www.flickr.com/photos/13268385@N04/2868783501/sizes/l/in/set-72157606454376580/ Quote
1950 - Chief Sam Beeler is born in Paterson into the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians. He is the Grandson of Sarah Holloway of the Keetowah (Kithuwagi) Bird Clan and son of Roemena Alli. The birth certification is signed by Chief James "Lone Bear" Revey from the New Jersey Indian Office in Orange, NJ. Links to a scanned document
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13268385@N04/2869611846/sizes/m/in/set-72157606454376580/
Below is copies of the James Revey signitures from the 2 different documents linked to above. I enlarged these put these side by side for comparison ... http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcwzmv4g_119c66s86hk As far as I can see , the signiture on both certificates looks pretty much identical. Even to the exact positions of the gaps in the lines left by the pen. I'm not sure how to inturpret this ."
Allow me to help you. I see two possible interpretations: 1. One or both certifications are forgeries. 2. James Revey affixed his signature to both certifications with a rubber signature stamp or self-inking signature stamp. (He did run a busy craft company and the New Jersey Indian Office, which two pursuits necessitated a large correspondence.) Without seeing the originals, it is impossible to tell which is the case. I can testify to this much: The stationery is authentic, the signature is Jim's signature and his signature is located where Jim signed almost all of his correspondence to me. In addition, he sometimes did use a typewriter. I have a good number of personal letters from Jim Revey, on which I base this information I'm telling you. More than this, I can't say.
"Considering all this, I'd like to see much more complete details as to who these other families are, and an explanation as to why Beeler and associates feel these families should be considered Sand Hill Indians . If the details of these other families names and histories were further explained , it would allow people to see if their claims could be verified through historical facts and primary documentation , independant of peoples personal agendas."
I'm afraid the documentation you require is probably non-existent, for the most part. Census enumerators were instructed to list the "color or race" of people "by observation," until 1960. And, no federal census prior to 1930 is available to the public until 2012, when the 1940 census is made public. It was an extremely rare instance when they listed Indians, who were citizens of the United States (as opposed to enrolled reservation Indians), as "Indians," in the eastern states. Other records weren't much better. After explaining the problems with using census and other records to prove Indian ancestry in New Jersey, Jim Revey wrote, "But Indian people in the state were able to keep their own records of the Indian families luckily and we know who they are." [James Revey, personal correspondence, 22 Aug 1984]
"If Sarah Holloway was Cherokee and she was born in the area, it makes sense that Sam Beeler would have grown up in a family which for 3 generations had felt an affinity with the Sand Hill band and their shared Cherokee heritage. But that would not in itself make Sarah's descendents members of this tribe."
You're forgetting the certifications. As I've said, before, let those who now hold the records of the Sand Hill Indians, which were taken from the New Jersey Indian Office, release the names on the various historical rolls and documents of the Sand Hill Indians, if what we have doesn't satisfy you.
-
( some of what i'm replying to here is comments from Shkakwus's original post which were later edited ...sorry but I can't rewrite what i'm responding to when stuff gets edited later... )
Shkakwus
I'm not going to do a lot of free genealogical research for you.
You're the one who started this thread , and you' re the one wanting to defend Sam Beelers claims.
I am giving you an opprotunity to do this by pointing out some of the obvious questions.
I'm not hoping to become a member of the Sand Hill band, so you don't need to worry about doing me any unpaid favors...
I do accept your explanation that at least some of these people are distant relatives to the group of people who lived at Sand Hill , in much the same way as people with a Cherokee gr gr gr gr gr grandma who left the tribe before people went to Oklahoma might be a distant relative to people in the UKB even though they can't rightly claim to be the UKB.
It seems the key point of contention is that the people who's families actually lived at Sand Hill are objecting to the descendents of people who were distant relations or nieghbors using the history of their families and the name of their community which was located at Sand Hill, to legitimize themselves.
What were indigenous people in the area called before the Richardson / Revey and Crummell families took up residence at Sand Hill? Wouldn't this be a more appropriate name for the descendents of families who were not those who lived at Sand Hill?
I also am wondering about the "rolls" you keep mentioning....
Reply #52
The definition of Sam Beeler's group includes the above people, but also extends the name to include other New Jersey Indian families whose names were kept on the rolls of the Sand Hill Indians, beginning in 1887, when the Sand Hill Indians' first list of Indian families in NJ was compiled.
Reply #58
The evidence is Jim Revey's surname lists drawn from the 1887 Sand Hill Indian roll and other Sand Hill Indian records.
Reply #56
As I already wrote, in a previous post, the Sand Hill Indians enumerated, on their rolls, the New Jersey Indian families with whom they associated, over the years, beginning in 1887. The names changed over time, as other Cherokee and Lenape people, previously unassociated, arrived in Monmouth County, or, simply, came to be known. (Such is the case with the Holloways.) Jim Revey cited names from several of these rolls, on lists he compiled for various purposes. He only cited Indian surnames. He didn't list the surnames of non-Indians who married into the band.
shkaakwus
reply # 58
If you don't believe the people listed on the Sand Hill Indian roll of 1887 (and later such rolls) are Sand Hill Indians, then you never will see it. These families are the relations and near neighbors of those living at or close to Sand Hill. That is the evidence!
So, I'm not clear what exactly you are talking about.
Did this 1887 list simply include all the surnames someone believed were used by Lenape or Cherokee or other Native families in the area at some point in the past 200 years, or did this 1887 list include identifiable individuals with first and last names and family relationships who were all living members of the Sand Hill community as it existed in 1887 ? What were the names of the people who wrote recorded these rolls, and who were they given to? Is the original rolls that were written in 1887 still in exisitnce ? Who has this original list now and who gave it to them ? I would be interested to know the history of these alleged pieces of paper.
How come nobody has scanned that document and put it on line?
James Revey wasn't even born in 1887 , so presumably this list would include many people who weren't alive in his own lifetime. You have said Revey made various lists for various purposes.
Revey was the Chairman of the New Jersey Indian Office. Did this office only represnt the descendents of the 3 families who lived at Sand Hill, or did this office rerpresent people of various tribal origins living in NJ?
Why do Beeler and associates feel sure everyone named on these lists was considered by Revey to be a Sand Hill Indian?
shkaakwus
I'm afraid the documentation you require is probably non-existent, for the most part.
shkaakwus
However, I do know that anyone who can prove descendancy from this Douglas family is eligible for enrollment--just as anyone who can prove descendancy from a Cherokee named on the Dawes Roll is eligible for enrollment in the CNO; and, just as is the case with any lineage-based federally recognized tribe.
So if Squire Douglas was born in 1760, in theory that would include some people who's ancestors continues to marry back into the native or mixed blood community and it would also include people who's only Indian ancsetor was someone who was born in 1760 and who's family has had no contact with a Native community for 200 years ...
shkaakwus ( I see this comment is now edited out but I will reply anyways ...)
If you're a descendant of somebody on the Dawes Roll, that would, in itself, make you a member of the CNO, if you so choose. Why do you suppose the rules would be different for the Sand Hill Indians?
For one thing the Dawes rolls were not a historic list of the surnames of Cherokee forebears who lived hundreds of years ago . The Dawes rolls were made at the time these people were living, and they recorded identifiable individuals with first and last names and often included information on family relationships. The people on these lists with few exceptions is people who were at the time members of the Cherokee community.
http://www.archives.gov/genealogy/tutorial/dawes/#about
The Rolls contain more than 101,000 names from 1898-1914 (primarily from 1899-1906). They can be searched to discover the enrollee's name, sex, blood degree, and census card number. The census card may provide additional genealogical information, and may also contain references to earlier rolls, such as the 1880 Cherokee census. A census card was generally accompanied by an "application jacket". The jackets then sometimes contain valuable supporting documentation, such as birth and death affidavits, marriage licenses, and correspondence.
The other problem is lots of old historic records list Native people who the present day tribe decides are too distantly related to be considered members of the community.
Different tribes have different ways of defining this, and I think it's imprtant it be left to the authorities within tibes to define this. In this case it's more easily confused because the descendents of the 3 families that actually lived at Sand Hill consider themselves more as a clan , so there is no undisputed authorities who are recognized as having the right to define this. However, the fact remains that most the history and evidence of a recognizable continuously existing Native community , relies heavily on the history of the Revey , Richardson and Crummell families that lived at Sand Hill. So it seems to me it is those people who are undisputably closely related to those 3 families who should have the right to say how their family history and the name of the community that existed at Sand Hill, is used.
Shkakwus
Jim Revey wrote, "But Indian people in the state were able to keep their own records of the Indian families luckily and we know who they are." [James Revey, personal correspondence, 22 Aug 1984]
Right . And the people who ARE James Revey's family and relatives who actually lived at Sand Hill seem to be saying the gr gr gr gr gr gr gr gr great grandchildren who descended from some distant ancestor who was born in 1760 are NOT Sand Hill Indians.
Maybe these other families are really truely Indians, and are really truely a wrongly unrecognized tribe, but if they are it seems fair to expect them to demonstrate this using their own families history, not by borrowing the history of their neighbors and distant cousins.
One of the things that bothers me about this situation is I see people who do descend from the families who have an indisputable right to claim to be descendents of the Sand Hill Indians being attacked .
http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=9056
Courtroom Drama at the NJ Commission on American Indian Affairs - UPDATED
by: carolh
Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 01:04:31 AM EDT
One woman, named Claire Garland from the Township of Neptune Historical Association, at least it WAS called that, up till a year and a half ago, when they decided to call themselves the Sand Hill Indian Historical Association and proceeded to tell all the other 13 families of the Sand Hill Band of Indians - the actual TRIBE - that they were imposters.
From what I found it looks like Claire has been involved in maintaining her families history well before 2006.
http://www.njea.org/page.aspx?a=2374
NJEA Frederick L. Hipp Foundation for Excellence in Education Project Directory
2001-2002 Projects and Coordinators
The Life and Times of Cherokee Indian Ike
Claire Garland
Tinton Falls Schools
674 Tinton Ave.
Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
732/542-0775
Carolh reffering to Holloway , from the bluejersey link above
He made his case expertly with document after document, skewering the arguments of Claire Garland and ending with the photograph of Claire with Sam Beeler, who Claire has repeatedly denied on the record, even knowing.
What was so discrediting about Ms. Garland's testimony was that she actually lied about knowing Chief Sam Beeler, in recorded minutes at previous Commission meetings and then when confronted with a photo of her and Chief Beeler at an Indian event, which she denied was her.
(Photograph of Chief Sam Beeler and Claire Garland)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13268385@N04/2869856786/
I'm don't know if thats Claire in the picture and if it is, I don't know if she actually denied this, or if this was some sort of misunderstanding. I have a hard time imagining why she would deny knowing Beeler if she did. We all know people we disagree with and most of us have had our seemingly friendly smiling picture taken at public events with people we don't particualrly like. We all know people we try to get along with inspite of our differences. So what?
I really wonder why anyone would be presenting this picture as "evidence" . Evidence of what? Claire was obviously aquainted with Sam Beeler. If she did seem to be denying this, I have to wonder if maybe she was confused by people making such a big issue over a non issue, and she thought they must be refering to her trying to explain that Sam Beeler and his family were not known to Claire's family, who are James Revey's relatives, until after James Revey died ...
This is what Claire was reported as saying in other news articles...
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/with_lawsuit_against_nj_little.html
With lawsuit against N.J., little-known Indian group is thrust into spotlight
by Joe Ryan/The Star-Ledger
March 22, 2009
(begins ...)
No one had ever heard of him in our family," said Garland, who lives in Lincroft and has compiled a 17-page family tree stretching back to 1790 using property deeds,obituaries and other records.
At first Beeler and the Neptune Sand Hills were cordial,
( Con...)
If things were cordial at first obviously Beeler knew the people he is now disagreeing with.
Claire's statement above appears to be colaberated by this comment made in October 2002 , from someone who seems to be completely uninvolved in this dispute .
http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/th/read/BOWER/2002-10/1034008856
From: "Colleen Pustola" <ladyaudris@earthlink.net>
Subject: [BOWER] FW: Daniel W. BOWERS-1840 NJ
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 10:40:56 -0600
( This begins an explaination of some information this person has been tryting to find )
John married and had a son, Daniel W. born on
June 21, 1840. In order for Daniel to get married to Rachael Gray sometime
around 1860-1864, they went to PA to the Moravina Church in Bethlehem. Where he
took the last name Bowers. They were full-blooded Lenni Lenape (Munsee). The
man (James "Lone Bear" Revey) who had information on this worked at the East
Orange, NJ Indian Bureau and has passed away a few years ago. No one
there can find any of his (Lone Bear) work and does not know how to get a hold
of his family. This seems odd to me.
The comment above does sound like this person had actually been in contact with the New Jersey Indian Office as this information does fit with what Shkakwus said in a earlier post ;
Skakwus
This could all be cleared up, nicely, if those who cleaned out Jim Revey's office, after he died, would release the documents and rolls he held at the office. (Providing, of course, they weren't all thrown out in the garbage.)
I'm not sure if the East Orange NJ Indian Bureau is the same as the new Jersey Indian Office, and I suppose it might have just been a misunderstanding, but the statement that "no one there knew how to get in touch with James Revey's family" does fit with what Claire Garland has said about her family not knowing Sam Beeler or his family until relatively recently.
At the time, Sam Beeler does appear to have been the Chairman of the New Jersey Indian Office located in Orange.
I found this dated August 2002...
http://web.archive.org/web/20020820111913/http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1028538609242988.xml
City uncovers its Cherokee roots
Paterson exhibits Indian influences
Monday, August 05, 2002
That lack of awareness is understandable, says Beeler, chairman of the New Jersey Indian Office in Orange.
According to Shakawus, Beeler has been in the position of being Chairman of the New Jersey Indian Office since James Revey passed away - which was in 1998.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13268385@N04/2868785243/sizes/m/in/set-72157606454376580/
What sort of a place was the New Jersey Indian Office? Was there a lot of people who worked there in different offices , or was it just one office ? Is the position of Chairnman of the New Jersey Indian Office an elected or appointed position and if it's appointed who has the authority to make this appointment? ? Was Beeler invloved there before James Revey's death and did James Revey's appoint Sam Beeler to the position of Chairman ?
Prior to 1998 , were any of James Revey's relatives also involved in this office? Other than cleaning out Revey's office, after he passed on, did they remain involved ? If so what was their names?
I doubt I will have much more to say on this as I've already let you know all the things that look like gaps that need to be filled in. I want to support whoever is being respectful and telling the truth , but beyond that my own opinion is niether here nor there. The information you are providing is helping create a clearer picture of whats going on.
Thanks for that.
-
I spoke with Dr. Richard Allen by phone several weeks ago; he expressed surprise that his colleague Wyman Kirk had stated that Sam Beeler was apparently enrolled CNO. It seems the issue of his enrollment is not fully resolved. After hearing a list of the enrolled Cherokees alleged to have been founders and members of the Nuyagi Keetoowah organization, Dr. Allen mentioned that one person on the list was a close relative. Perhaps more information will be forthcoming as Dr. Allen's schedule permits. I personally find it interesting that at a time when Redbird Smith was ceremonially killing fires in OK, someone would allegedly carry the fire from OK to NJ.
-
Moma_Porcupine:
I'm not going to attempt to reply to everything you posted, which includes a lot of quotations from myself and others. Trying to format such a mess into a reply would take days and days. I'll just post a reply which addresses some of what you can't seem to understand, no matter how many times I say the same thing, here.
In 1887, the Sand Hill Indians compiled a list of Indians then living in the State of New Jersey, with whom they were connected by blood, by marriage, or by proximity--and, in all cases, socially. This list was kept by the Sand Hill Indian council until 1953, when the Monmouth County band, disbanded. Afterwards, this, subsequent lists, and all other Sand Hill Indian records were kept by one of the last council members. When he died, all these things passed to Jim Revey, who kept them on file at the New Jersey Indian Office, from which office he administered the affairs of the Sand Hill Indians. The 1887 list was a list of individuals, but it has never been published. Only some of the surnames of the people on this list--along with surnames on other lists among the Sand Hill Indian records--have been published. The sources for all this are found in published works by Jim Revey, C.A. Weslager, David Oestreicher; and, in private correspondence and phone conversations between Jim Revey and myself (and, perhaps, others).
The New Jersey Indian Office was a single small office, in a building at 300 Main Street, Orange, NJ, which was maintained by Jim Revey. He had no staff. Its purpose was to document and provide assistance, generally, to all indigenous Indians of New Jersey, who could prove 1/4 American Indian BQ; and, to educate the public on the Indians of New Jersey. Evelyn Stryker Lewis wrote: "Jim was a man who took his native heritage very seriously, tirelessly working for NJ's native population through the NJ Indian Office which he manned singlehandedly and which he supported out of his own pocket. He was the state's contact in all matters of Indian reburials. He was dedicated to educating the public about Lenape history and culture and addressed thousands of school children, historical groups, and the general public over the years" (post to ASNJ List, 9 Mar 2009). In addition to this, he administered the affairs of those Sand Hill Indians who looked on him as their leader. Since the contents of his office were his private property, I assume it all went to his next-of-kin, sometime after his death. The fact that he asked Sam Beeler to take on the work and chairmanship of the NJIO, did not entitle Sam Beeler to Jim's property. Sam never occupied the office in Orange. Regular probate procedures would dictate settlement of his estate. So, whoever got those things, also got the 1887 list and all other Sand Hill Indian records. Only some of the surnames on that list, and other lists, have been published--the ones in Weslager's book, and those at Sam Beeler's website. Appeals for release of these records have fallen on deaf ears, so, the published lists and private communications with Jim are all I can tell you about these other families. (Of course, members of those families know who they are!) Since Claire Garland is such a close family member of Jim Revey, why not ask her who has these Sand Hill Indian records? I sent her an e-mail quite a while ago, but she never wrote back, so I didn't pursue the matter with her.
I'm not going to take too much time responding to your ridiculous attempt to slight people's heritage by using hyperbolic expressions like someone's "gr gr gr gr gr gr gr gr great grandfather" was an Indian, which deliberately exaggerate the degree to which they married outside their race. I'd wager these people have an average Indian blood quantum higher than 80% of the CNO. Some have a lot, some have a little, but this is no different than any lineage-based federally recognized tribe.
In the end, it's a matter of whose definition of Sand Hill Indian you accept. You obviously accept Claire Garland's definition, which is fine with me. I've layed out the case for the other definition, and I think those people have a good argument. BTW, Sam Beeler's Sand Hill Indians also had, and have, Reevey and Dickerson members, so where does that leave this dispute?
Finally, if you do believe in sovereignty, then you will allow a tribe to make up its own mind about who is or will be eligible for membership. The federally recognized Mashantucket Pequots allow people from their neighboring unrecognized Narragansetts to join their tribe. There is a much closer connection among the families included in Sam Beeler's Sand Hill Indians--which NEVER excluded Claire Garland's group, but invited them to join, when her folks had NO organized tribe. She declined--which is certainly her prerogative--but, this is where the matter now stands. I understand both arguments. In the end, though, that means I understand why Sam Beeler's tribe calls themselves Sand Hill Indians. If you don't understand that, by now, then I don't see how you ever will. As I've said before, I'm satisfied that I've made the points I wanted to when I began this thread.
-
This whole subject continues to trouble me ... There is a lot of complex issues here, but staying with the most basic ....
Reply #5 on: April 11
shkaakwus
My only interests are restricted to whether or not he is an American Indian, and whether or not he is a Sand Hill Indian.
Reply #30
Shkaakwus
His personal identity does not hinge on the Sand Hill Indians being recognized by the Federal or State government. It does hinge, in part, on whether or not the Sand Hill Indians are really Indians.
Although Shkaakwus seems to think it's important to prove Sam Beeler is a Sand Hill Indian through his grandmother Sarah Holloway, and to prove that Sarah Holloway is a Sand Hill Indian through her Cherokee family temporarily living in the same general area, and thus being included in the Sand Hill Indian community, I notice nobody is showing where Sarah Holloway's family connects to any pre 1930 records showing they were Cherokee . People who are aware of the problems created by the many people who make mistaken or false claims to an NDN identity , generally understand the importance of being able to verify claims, and when it comes to people claiming to be Cherokee, there seems to be agreement that some records ought to exist.
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1632.msg12756#msg12756
Reply #20
bls926
While I agree with what you've said about some of the Eastern Nations, the Cherokee are probably the most documented, censused people around. The Dawes Roll and the Baker Roll were not the first time the government counted Cherokee people. Even if you aren't enrolled today, you can find an ancestor on one of the many rolls. And if you can't, there's a problem. Can't explain it away by your folks hid out in the mountains or left the Trail. Your family should have been listed on one of the censuses taken years before the 1900's. Something to think about for all those claiming, without any documentation, a long-ago Cherokee ancestor
http://www.cornsilks.com/Dwords-wannabee.html
David Cornsilk
I often wonder how someone could be 1/8 Cherokee, which means a great grandparent was a full blood, and there be absolutely no records of that fact, while an authentic Cherokee might be 1/512 and there is literally hundreds of linear feet of documents proving it.
David Cornsilk
Wannabes claim that their ancestors "hid out" from the census takers. I say no one was even looking for their ancestors because they were not Indians. Wannabes will say "my ancestors were left off the Dawes Rolls." But then I will wonder what about the 29 other rolls that predate Dawes?
Wannabes will say "my ancestors jumped off the Trail of Tears." Which leads me to ask, "Why then, are your ancestors not listed on the Trail of Tears Roll?" Did your ancestors have an erasor and hitchhike to Washington, DC to cover their tracks and erase their own records? Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot there was a huge conspiracy to erase Indian records, LOL. But then what about the missionary records, which authentic Cherokees' ancestors appear in great numbers? Why are your ancestors NO WHERE to be found at any time in Cherokee history?
If you are a serious researcher of your family history and not a wannabe, you will state the hypothesis and then do research. When you are finished you will announce your findings. That will either be what the records say or what they do not say. If you are a wannabe, you will proclaim yourself to be an Indian no matter what the records say.
Shkaakwus clearly understands the importance of providing a lineage back to an ancestor or ancestors who were recorded as Indian ...
http://forum.americanindiantribe.com/viewtopic.php?t=679
Ray Whritenour
Mon May 09, 2005 9:42 pm
Since both William LittleSoldier and James Running Turtle are members of this forum, simply let each man provide his proof of Lenape ancestry. Submit a simple, unbroken lineage, here, tracing back to your Lenape ancestors. I have an account at Ancestry.com, which I will use to verify your information for the rest of us. If you can't provide the proof, nobody has any reason to believe your claims. We await your replies.
Ray Whritenour
http://forum.americanindiantribe.com/viewtopic.php?t=852&start=30
Ray Whritenour
Look: This seemingly endless arguing, back and forth, about who is and who is not a Lenape is, in fact, the easiest question to settle. If you're not an enrolled member of one of the past or present federally-recognized U.S. or Canadian tribes, you MUST PROVE your Lenape ancestry with documentation, by the accepted standards of genealogical research, so that others can check your claims. If you can't do this, I do NOT recognize your claim, and neither will any agency of the federal or state governments. WHAT IS SO DAMN DIFFICULT? SHOW US THE PROOF!
I see where it was mentioned that the Holloway family is listed on the 1851 Siler roll.
http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10298
The problem is, most families living in the US named Holloway were purely European in origin and without a verifiable lineage tracking back to a family which can be proven to include the specific individuals listed on this roll, this information is irrelevent. I don't see where the information that would make this relevent to Sarah Holloway's family has been provided ...
Is there is any lineage or lineages which connect Sarah (Holloway) Ali to a recorded Cherokee ancestor ? Is there records connecting Sarah (Holloway) Ali to the someone who can be proven to be the sibling of someone who was recorded as being Cherokee ?
This missing information is the basis of all the other claims that are being made by Beeler and his relatives . It would really help to collaberate at least part of what is being claimed, if this basic genealogical information could be provided , including sources like birth and death records housed in the New Jersey State Archives, census records, deeds or obituaries , which track Sarah Hollway's family back to some verifiable family members listed on the aformentioned Cherokee rolls.
One other thing that isn't being mentioned much, is that Sarah Holloway's married name was Ali, meaning her children would have normally been surnamed Ali and not Holloway .
Sarah Ali's passing is recorded in the public information found in the social security death index search found on the LDS family history website. The birth date of this Sarah Ali is the same as the birth date in the Sand Hill membership papers, so presumably this is the same person.
Sarah ALI
Birth Date: 21 Feb 1900
Death Date: Feb 1969
Social Security Number: (deleted )
State or Territory Where Number Was Issued: New Jersey
Death Residence Localities
ZIP Code: 07513
Localities: Paterson, Passaic, New Jersey
Peoples Park, Passaic, New Jersey
Although the present Paterson Sand Hill groups leader Carroll Holloway is said to be Sam Beeler's cousin, and papers identifying Sarah Holloway and her daughter Romena Ali and her grandson Sam Beeler as Sand Hill Indians are being used to substantiate Holloway's claims to being a Sand Hill Indian, it isn't clear how he would connect to Sarah (Holloway) Ali, as his surname is not Ali. Depending how far back he connects with the Holloway line , his lines of descent may be very different than Sarah Holloway's.
Some explanation Carroll Holloway's line of descent would also be helpful to people wishing to verify the most basic part of the claims being made..
-
I don't mean to suggest Sam Beeler is responsible if other people post incorrect information about him, but some of what has been posted by Shkaakwus does make me wonder ....
http://www.woodlandindians.org/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=9440
#3 Sep-18-2007
sschkaak
I was very good friends with Jim Revey, for many years. I have a copy of Jim's own signed certification of Sam Beeler as a Sand Hill Indian, through Sam's grandmother, Sarah Holloway. Through another lineage, Sam is an enrolled citizen of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. His Certified Degree of Indian Blood is 3/4.
If Sam Beeler does in fact have a CDIB of 3/4 , this 3/4 would have to be well documented ...
http://cita.chattanooga.org/bia/cdibfedreg.htm
SUMMARY: This rule will establish documentation requirements and standards for filing, processing, and issuing a Certificate of Degree of Indian or Alaska Native Blood (CDIB) by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (Bureau).
(con...)
You must show your relationship to an enrolled member(s) of a federally recognized Indian tribe, whether it is through your birth mother or birth father, or both. A federally recognized Indian tribe means an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community which appears on the list of recognized tribes published in the Federal Register by the Secretary of the Interior (25 U.S.C. ß 479a-1(a).
Certified Copy of a Birth Certificate is required to establish your relationship to a parent(s) enrolled with a federally recognized Indian tribe(s).
*
If your parent is not enrolled with a federally recognized Indian tribe, a Certified Copy of your parent's Birth or Death Certificate is required to establish your parent's relationship to an enrolled member of a federally recognized Indian tribe(s). If your grandparent(s) were not enrolled members of a federally recognized Indian tribe(s), a Certified Copy of the Birth or Death Certificate for each grandparent who was the child of an enrolled member of a federally recognized Indian tribe is required.
*
Certified copies of Birth Certificates, Delayed Birth Certificates, and Death Certificates may be obtained from the State Department of Health or Bureau of Vital Statistics in the State where the person was born or died.
When I have asked about how Sarah Holloway connects to the Sand Hill clan, Shkaakwus has repeatedly explained that Indians living in New Jersey were rarely mentioned in the government records - however these same records are what is required to get a CDIB .
Reply #58
I'm afraid the documentation you require is probably non-existent, for the most part. Census enumerators were instructed to list the "color or race" of people "by observation," until 1960. And, no federal census prior to 1930 is available to the public until 2012, when the 1940 census is made public. It was an extremely rare instance when they listed Indians, who were citizens of the United States (as opposed to enrolled reservation Indians), as "Indians," in the eastern states. Other records weren't much better.
So if Beeler can document this line , maybe that means Sarah Holloways family moved to New Jersey shortly before she was born, and they came from somewhere where they were well documented as Cherokee ?
As the Sarah Holloways family is being emphasized as Beeler's identity , I am guessing ( maybe wrongly ) that Sarah Holloway is one of the ancestors who is being claimed to be part of this 3/4 , and from what is reported below, it also sounds like she is being claimed to have been close to full blood.
http://www.sussex.edu/newsandevents/2003/11/200311073.htm
Dr. Beeler is a Native New Jersey Indian raised by full blood traditionalists and has practiced the ancient Keetoowah beliefs since childhood.
If I am understanding this correctly , that means Sarah born 1900 would have 8 great grandparents born about 1810 ( using the average of 30 years between generations ) and using an average 50 year life expectancy, this would mean these 8 individuals would likely be for the most part alive from 1810 - 1860. There would also be another 16 individuals who were Sarah Holloways gr great grandparents who would have been alive on average from 1780 - 1830.
There is lots of records existing for this time period of both Cherokee and non Cherokee people , so whether all these people lived in a recognized Cherokee community , and then Sarah's parents moved to New Jersey , or whether these people all lived in a New Jersey community , where Shkaakwus suggests they would not have been recorded as Indians, - or whether some of these people lived somewhere in between - a good porportion of the facts about these ancestors of Sarah Holloway and their siblings was almost certainly recorded in records made between 1800 and 1900.
I do understand that it's possible some people, in some situations who have distant ancestry may not be able to document this, but except for adoptions, I really doubt anyone with enough Cherokee descent to claim they ARE Cherokee, would be unable to document at least part of this. This is just my opinion based on what I have seen and read, and it may be wrong, but there is a lot of evidence to support this conclusion and I have seen practically nothing of substance to disprove it.
In other areas I have seen families that were wrongly recorded or even lied about their origins to the record makers , but what I notice is if you look at all the siblings in a 3 generation period, it can be proven they are lying because the stories of where they came from and their race tend to be different, or can be proven not to be true through other records . Also the stories tend to vary from census to census or record to record. And at least as far as i have seen some of these family member do occasionaly get recorded as being Indian . So yes people did sometimes lie, but if they did this can usually be proven.
On the other hand a lot of people seem to honestly believe they are of Native descent who aren't.
Based on what studies of mt and Y DNA in the general population of the Eastern US , suprisingly few people report unexpectedly finding the mtDNA of an undocumented Native ancestor who assimilated and "hid". On the other hand there is an astounding number of people claiming a full blood Cherokee great grandma who's claim is not supported by mtDNA which proves a European line.
I don't mean to be sarcastic, but the truth is, Sarah Holloway didn't just materilaize out of nowhere. A detailed explanation of her recorded family background between 1800 -1900 ( whether that shows her family as Cherokee or not ) would really help other researchers investigate and decide if what is being claimed about this family is even possible.
As Shkaakwus got banned from posting unless he agrees to stay within Al's guidelines, I know he may have a problem posting a reply. If Shkaakwus wants to PM me to provide this information I would post it for him or maybe one of his friends from the woodlands indians forum ,who also are members here ,could post this for him or send it to me to post.
I do have sympathy for people of Native descent who fall through the cracks, and I am honestly interested in investigating the claims there was a hidden Native community which retained it's identity in that area. I'm sorry to keep going on about this, but as what I am asking isn't getting answered I keep thinking maybe I didn't explain what I was asking clearly enough. I'm sorry if I have used too many words and i failed to get to the point. I hope this makes what I am trying to ask, clearer.
--------------
edited to remove the comment below from a place it didn't fit in well with the general train of thought. I still can't figure out where to put this ... :-[
So I don't know if I am misunderstanding what Shkaakwus was claiming. If Beeler doesn't have a CDIB of 3/4 I wonder where Shkaakwus got this wrong information.
-
As Shkaakwus got banned from posting unless he agrees to stay within Al's guidelines, I know he may have a problem posting a reply. If Shkaakwus wants to PM me to provide this information I would post it for him or maybe one of his friends from the woodlands indians forum ,who also are members here ,could post this for him or send it to me to post.
Hi Moma P
Since Shkaakwus was banned, I don't think Al would be fond of any of us posting his replies for him. You are welcome to copy this and your other questions over to Woodland, on the Beeler threads. Hope that helps.
-
Hi Tree hugger
Thanks for responding. It is a bit awkward communicating when Shkaawus isn't willing to edit attacking personal comments out of his otherwise informative posts. Personally I try to err on the side of caution as I don't like being edited - but that means you all miss some really nasty but very witty one liners . ;D
I'm probably overly paranoid , but I also err on the side of caution when it comes to keeping clues to my identity private. I wouldn't feel safe to join the woodlands forum as that would give you access to some information which could seriously endanger me or my family if it got into the wrong hands. I'm not saying I think anyone over there might intentionally do something to hurt me but I don't expect people to necessarily have the foresite to make sure not to reveal my personal information. Especially if those people are on a different side of an issue than i am and get annoyed with me.
Maybe Al can make a suggestion on how to do this .
Or if you don't feel like i am dragging you into something , I guess you could get the basic information from Shkaawus and post just the facts without any commentary on anybody's annoying personality . ;D ;D ;D
Personally I don't care if Shkaawus is rude. If there is no truth in what he says or it is distorted it probably just makes him look bad. But I do respect why Al wants people to be polite and refrain from personal attacks as what we all try to do here is difficult enough without that sort of diversions.
I hope we can find a way to get the information Shkaawus may have, included in this thread. Thanks again for responding.
-
Understood. I've sent you a pm, I don't want to take this thread off topic. :)
-
Hi Tree Hugger
Thanks for the PM.
Looks like I am stuck . I guess if Shkaawus feels it's important to get the facts out there he could always do as Al suggested
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=848.195
Reply #205
educatedindian
Banned from posting but not from the forum. Should he wish to apologize for his behavior the ban will be lifted.
If he did this he would then be able to disagree with me , he would just have to do it within certain boundaries. ( and none of his replies to me were a problem anyways )
If not, this sounds like Shkaakwus can still send PMs , so if Shkaawus wanted to send me a PM with just the genealogical facts, I would be willing to post this for him . I guess whatever he chooses all depends how important he feels it is to get the facts out there.
For that matter it looks like Sam Beeler has a face book page
so I suppose he is perfectly capable of registering here and answering these questions for himself.
(edited to remove a link to the wrong face book page)
I am thinking some of the people Beeler has taking his side in this may be doing him more harm than good.
-
You're welcome.
I'll try not to take this off topic. That link you posted to facebook is in no way this Sam Beeler.
I can't, nor won't speak for Shkaawus. Perhaps you could get one of your friends to repost your questions there, where he can answer freely? Just a thought.
Edit to add: it might be a good idea to take this kid's facebook link off.
-
Thanks for pointing that out. I will remove it. I did find a Sam Beeler in North jersey listed on face book a while back , with a friend called Medicine Crow. I didn't really check it out at the time and I thought that was the same one, but I guess not.
-
I checked my "Dawes Rolls Plus" by Blankenship; no Holloway, Beeler, or Alli names on there. If Sarah Holloway was born in NJ in 1900, from what line of descent would Sam Beeler be enrollable in CNO? The Dawes Roll is the pertinent roll for CNO membership and was taken between 1898 and 1907; very few people who did not live in Indian Territory (Present day Oklahoma) were enrolled. With all of the documents posted on other sites relating to his Sand Hill status, if he were a 3/4 blood enrolled Cherokee all this discussion over his enrollment would be settled by posting his card.
-
Hi Wolfhawaii
Actually what would put an end to this stage of the discussion would be genealogical facts on Sarah ( Holloway) Ali's genealogical background which can be verified through independent sources.
Scans of cards or papers don't put an end to anything. For example there was scans of letters from the Eastern Band Cherokee tribal office saying Lawernce Sampson wasn't enrolled there , which Lawernce Sampson brushed off as fakes . And then there is the tribal ID Brooke Medicine Eagle scanned as proof she was enrolled in the Crow tribe ,which lots of people say is faked.
The other thing is that it seems to me that NAFPS generally isn't geared towards researching peoples claims to be NDN or how much, unless this is being used to make some claims to gain the public trust. I can see where Sarah Holloway's lineage is being used this way but I can't see where Beeler is using his other lineages in this way . So except for the apparent contradiction of Shkaakwus's statements that Beeler has a CDIB of 3/4 which requires government records to acquire, and his other comments , that the Sand Hill Indians were mostly undocumented in government records, trying to verify the other claims seems to be kind of a side issue.
-
MP, you make valid points; I would like to add that an enrollment card can be checked, and it is a pillar of Schackuwwuus' (whatever. sp) and Beeler's claims of cultural authenticity. Similarly, as you noted, the NKS is used to bolster the claims of the Holloway/formerly Beeler Sandhill organization to authenticity. There are some concerns i have regarding that organization and its alleged history. Some of the names used in Beeler's /Writenhour's claim of the history of NKS were actual Oklahoma and NC Cherokees; where is the evidence of their involvement. I am short of time but will post more later.
-
As Shkaakwus got banned from posting unless he agrees to stay within Al's guidelines, I know he may have a problem posting a reply. If Shkaakwus wants to PM me to provide this information I would post it for him or maybe one of his friends from the woodlands indians forum ,who also are members here ,could post this for him or send it to me to post.
Hi Moma P
Since Shkaakwus was banned, I don't think Al would be fond of any of us posting his replies for him. You are welcome to copy this and your other questions over to Woodland, on the Beeler threads. Hope that helps.
Hello again!
I just wanted to let you know that Shkaakwus is not able to use the PM feature here as well. I just wanted it to be clear that he can not receive or respond to Private messages.
Wolfhawaii, why don't you repost the questions? The invitation is open to you too.
After the posting the other night, I'm finding it hard to believe any research posted.
I assure you, you can post there unedited.
Hope this helps in some way.
-
Hi Tree Hugger
Thanks for letting us know Shkaakwus can't use the PM function .
-----edited to add
if Wolfhawaii or someone else wants to go over to the Woodlands forum with these questions ,that would be very helpful, but
-------------
Can Shkaakwus read whats posted over here? If he can , why does anyone else has to take the questions and post them over on Woodlands? If Shkaakwus wants to answer them, he can read the questions here, copy them and post them in woodlands , and answer them however he wants over there. Then someone could copy whatever facts he provides ( probably minus personal comments ) and post that over here . A link can be provided to the original. That way Shkaakwus can say whatever he feels he needs to ,and if people want more than what whoever copies it considers to be the straight facts, they can go there and see whatever he said in it's entirety.
Tree Hugger
After the posting the other night, I'm finding it hard to believe any research posted.
What post "the other night" are you referring to ? It's not clear what you are saying here or who's facts or research you are saying you now have a hard time believing. I'm guessing you are wondering about some of the information someone in particular presented as factual.
I agree it's always good to try to verify the central facts, when people use these facts to support an important conclusion .
-
Hi Tree Hugger
Thanks for letting us know Shkaakwus can't use the PM function .
-----edited to add
if Wolfhawaii or someone else wants to go over to the Woodlands forum with these questions ,that would be very helpful, but
-------------
Can Shkaakwus read whats posted over here? If he can , why does anyone else has to take the questions and post them over on Woodlands? If Shkaakwus wants to answer them, he can read the questions here, copy them and post them in woodlands , and answer them however he wants over there. Then someone could copy whatever facts he provides ( probably minus personal comments ) and post that over here . A link can be provided to the original. That way Shkaakwus can say whatever he feels he needs to ,and if people want more than what whoever copies it considers to be the straight facts, they can go there and see whatever he said in it's entirety.
Tree Hugger
After the posting the other night, I'm finding it hard to believe any research posted.
What post "the other night" are you referring to ? It's not clear what you are saying here or who's facts or research you are saying you now have a hard time believing. I'm guessing you are wondering about some of the information someone in particular presented as factual.
I agree it's always good to try to verify the central facts, when people use these facts to support an important conclusion .
Hi Moma ;D
This will be the last post involving woodland on this thread (I hope).
1. Yes he can read. I might add, why would he want to play tag with posts when he can't reply. You could all take the conversation somewhere else besides Woodland. I can see his point in not wanting to do this.
2. It's totally unethical to have a discussion on another forum, bring the posts here and edit the reply to fit this format. I'm sure that Al would agree with this too. If someone wants to repost your questions there, and let him answer, fine. I wouldn't appreciate them being posted here with edits. As I'm sure you wouldn't like any of your posts manipulated.
3. You know the post that I'm talking about. It's the facebook link. There is no way that you did not realize that it was not the Sam Beeler in question. Unless you had never looked at any documentation, including the ones you've used in your research.
4. Just to make it clear, I am not promoting the forum. If that's where Ray feels comfortable posting, that's fine. If you all want to continue to question his past posts here on NAFPS, I can't see how you're going to get clarification. In fact it looks a little strange questioning past posts when you all know he is not capable of answering. I would like to see these issues resolved as well, but I'm not sure what else to offer.
-
3. You know the post that I'm talking about. It's the facebook link. There is no way that you did not realize that it was not the Sam Beeler in question. Unless you had never looked at any documentation, including the ones you've used in your research.
Um ....well actually I really didn't know the post you were talking about. That seemed to me to be a pretty minor error. It's not like i wrongly attributed any quotes i found in that link to Sam Beeler . All i did was post the wrong link. I thought maybe you were reffering to something more serious that had come up on Woodlands.
Tree Hugger, i generally try really hard not to make any mistakes because if I do I know that will be used to discredit stuff I post that is accurate. Why would i want to set myself up for that ? If that was obviously the wrong Sam Beeler , what could I possibly gain by posting a link to the wrong person except to make myself look stupid ?
To further explain how i made this error ... and that there was no malicious intentions involved ... A while back I was researching something else and came across a facebook link to a Sam Beeler in ( I think ) in North Jersey . It sounded like the same Sam Beeler. I clicked on it and saw someone called Medicine Crow and listed as this Sam Beelers friend. I then did a search on the term "facebook" and "Medicine Crow" and "Sam Beeler" and on this persons page I found a Sam Beeler listed as Medicine Crows friend .
I think this is the link ...
http://www.facebook.com/people/Medicine-Crow/659131126
I'm not sure if the page looks the same as it did when i visited it before , however , I saved screen shots of that page and did a search on a couple of the other names listed as Medicine Crows friends. One was located in Australia so I concluded this was probably the same person. When I clicked another link on this facebook page i got told I wasn't registered so I wasn't able to see much more than what I am explaining here. I went back to my previous google search and copied the link to what I thought was Sam Beelers face book page in my notes, and that is the link I posted here.
Apparently I made a mistake and i copied the wrong link. I'm sorry I did this and i appreciate you pointing out my error.
From this , and the fact the Sand Hill Indian website is registered in Sam Beelers name , and the fact there is associated with this an email, I concluded that Beeler probably does have access to the internet and can probably speak for himself.
posted in Reply #55
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/sandhillindians.org
Quote
Registrant Email:beeler[AT]cherokeenation.zzn.com
Admin ID:tuCkc8L9GjU7nssB
Admin Name:Sam Beeler
Admin Organization:NJ Sand Hill Band
Based on this , i felt I had enough evidence to say it seemed he could speak for himself. Quite simply I didn't feel I needed to do more to try and investigate a face book page it seemed i needed to be registered to view, in order to come to this conclusion.
You're right and i shouldn't have assumed it was the right link without revisting it and I apologize for being negligent. I guess I should also explain i am not sure how much information people get about who visits their facebook page and I felt hesitant to revist the page just before i posted a link to it. I don't know much about the workings of cyberspace, but I do know some website collect quite a bit of information on who visits them and when.
I do make mistakes sometimes, especially if i am busy with other stuff . I appreciate it when people point them out , and if I have made any other mistakes here or elsewhere I hope you or someone else will also point that out to me. We all have blind spots sometimes and I appreciate the correction.
In fact it looks a little strange questioning past posts when you all know he is not capable of answering.
Oh I'm sure he could figure out a way to answer if he really wanted to. Sorry but i don't see Shkaakwus as a victim in this. I'm a bit surprised you do. But i guess we all see things differently and thats OK.
-
I haven't checked recently, but the cherokeenation.zzn address for Sam Beeler was defunct 2 to 3 years ago. The historical facts alleged by Beeler and presented here by Shkaakwus stand on their own and can be checked whether or not Ray is here to discuss them.
-
I spoke with Dr. Richard Allen of the Cherokee Nation in person when i was in Oklahoma a couple of weeks ago; he stated that Beeler had been investigated "several years ago" and that they had found no merit in his claims. While searching the Net today, I found this genealogy that appears to be Mr. Beeler's line: http://www.descendantsofdicey.com/
The family tree tracing back from Samuel Wilhoite Beeler Jr. shows his father as Samuel Wilhoite Beeler Sr. and mother "Nina", no further information on her. On the paternal side the ancestry traces back numerous generations to a former slave named Dicey. It appears that Samuel W. Beeler Sr. was married 3 times, but I found no information showing Romena Ali or the Holloway line in the tree.
-
Edited; I know this is an old post, but came across an interesting news tidbit about Holloway on another blog.
Sam Beeler's name is mentioned.
http://www.jstandard.com/content/item/at_home_in_two_tribes/11572
At home in two tribes
Native American Jew reflects on his roots
People scratch their heads most of the time,” Ronald Yonaguska Holloway said, describing the typical first reaction to him.
He stands at 6 feet 5 inches, and with his broad build is a bear of a man, but behind his imposing physical stature are a soft-spoken voice and effervescent personality that put people at ease. As chairman of the Sand Hill Band of the Lenape-Cherokee tribe, Holloway is leading its struggle to reclaim what he said are its historic land, water, and hunting rights in New Jersey. (He lives in Milford, Pa.) That struggle led him last February to file a lawsuit against this state, alleging illegal seizure of lands, breach of treaties, and attempted genocide.
What he wants most when the fight is over, he told The Jewish Standard late last month, is “to see a place our tribe can call home.”
Holloway is obviously proud of his Native American heritage. The Sand Hill are the oldest indigenous tribe in New Jersey, he said. Among its history of warriors and leaders, though, Holloway may be unique — he is also a member of another tribe known for its longevity, the tribe of Israel.
As closely tied as he is to his Native American tribe’s leadership and heritage, Holloway’s convictions have been shaped by his family and dual heritage, which may seem at first glance at odds, given the polytheistic nature of Native American beliefs and Judaism’s steadfast monotheism. But Holloway has spent a lifetime meshing them to become the man he is today.
A nice Indian boy and a nice Jewish girl…
Holloway was born in 1963, a year after his mother, Dolores Havel, wed his father, Carroll Holloway. The family moved from Philadelphia to California when Holloway was 5 or 6 years old and his parents divorced when he was 7.
Holloway and his newborn brother Jeff went to live with their mother in Burbank. Havel did her best to give the older boy, in particular, a Jewish education, but struggled because of her own strained ties with her religion.
“The late ’50s and early ’60s were not a time for strong cultural ties,” he said. “It was a looser time, and that came back to haunt her when she was trying to pass tradition on to me. As with any culture, without a strong core it’s amazing how quickly tradition and language can fall by the wayside.”
When he was growing up, Holloway recalled, his mother would allow him to bring home only Jewish friends. His family did not belong to a synagogue, but Havel would encourage her son to visit other families, who would then bring him along to shul and holiday meals.
“She made sure I was taken care of by placing me with people she knew would tend to what I needed to round me out,” he said. “My understanding of Judaism always came from my friends and their parents. The first thing is you get fed,” he added with a chuckle.
At 13, Ron Holloway “pecked and hemmed and hawed, grunted, tried to cough a couple of times” through a makeshift bar mitzvah in his mother’s apartment. Guests mostly included his mother’s coworkers. His bar mitzvah preparations consisted of lessons from his mother after dinner before she turned to do laundry and other chores. Despite her own loose affiliation, Havel made sure that her son had a handle on his heritage.
“She would always whisper in my ear, ‘You’re a chosen one,’” Holloway recalled.
In junior high, Holloway began going to “powwows and did standard Indian stuff” with his father, “looking at rocks and weapons, and talking about streams and rivers and all those things that are important to him.”
Holloway developed a deep sense of spirituality, which he continues to draw on today. His father was generally supportive of Holloway learning about and growing in his Jewish heritage.
“In order to grow, a proper human had to understand where they were and where they came from,” Holloway said. “I can’t think of one time he ever belittled either [culture].”
Last year, Holloway earned a doctorate in theology, which he said gives him an understanding of other religions that is sorely needed.
“If you want to understand people you have to understand what they believe,” he said.
Under U.S. law, Native Americans were forbidden from practicing their religion until the establishment of the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978. Holloway noted the irony that his people were forbidden to practice their religion in a country founded on the cornerstone of religious freedom.
“I find the two cultures have really suffered similar atrocities from being considered second-class citizens, being belittled and not wanted,” he said.
Being a ‘chosen one’
“Being of Hebrew and Indian descent, it’s a little easier than some would suspect,” Holloway said. “They’re both very tribal. A lot of the Native American holidays or important days parallel the Hebrew lunar calendar. From that aspect it was a fairly simple blend. It was more unique that you get your Hebrew descent from your mom and in the United States you get your Indian descent from your dad, so nobody could quite stake a claim.”
After graduating from high school at age 17, Holloway enlisted in the Marines. After training in Japan, he was shipped to the demilitarized zone in South Korea, where he ended up serving as the Hebrew lay leader on his base. With the help of a rabbi in Japan and his own limited experience, Holloway cobbled together a 15-minute service for other Jewish soldiers.
Holloway enjoyed the hospitality of the Jewish communities of Japan and Korea, which he described as “nice and tight-knit.”
The Marines, he said, are one of the most diverse units of the American military, and he rarely encountered trouble because of either of his heritages.
“In squad bay they’re calling you chief, but after maneuvers you pull out the yarmulke,” he said. “The Catholic chaplains were always weirded out by that, too.”
Holloway returned to California after his service and became a police officer. In 1986 he married a non-practicing Jewish woman. Holloway and his now-ex-wife would often laugh about their mothers. In 1990, their son R.J. was born. Like his father, R.J. can claim a dual heritage.
“He finds himself in the same situation I find myself in: Jewish mom with Indian dad — except his dad is Jewish, also,” Holloway said.
R.J. is looking at both cultures now, Holloway said, and is interested in learning more about his Jewishness. Because of his own admittedly weak Jewish education, Holloway said he has not been particularly dutiful in educating his son.
“But I make sure he’s constantly aware of it,” he said. “I try to inculcate all the important lessons.”
Holloway said he’s raised his son to be spiritual but not religious. His hope is that one day he will succeed his father as chief of the Sand Hill and R.J. will succeed him as chairman. Whether R.J. will find a Jewish bride, like his father and grandfather, is not something Holloway is campaigning for.
“I do not believe in enforcing who he should or should not marry,” he said. “As long as he finds somebody he loves and who’ll make him happy I’ll support that.”
“But,” he adds with a hearty laugh, “if he can find a Jewish Indian girl, I’m set.”
The battle continues…
On Nov. 27, Holloway represented the Sand Hill in Manhattan at a ceremony organized by the Dutch Collegiate Church. The ceremony marked the church’s official apology to the Lenape for centuries of mistreatment. Holloway, who delivered the keynote address, called the event “a great first start in healing.”
“You get a chance to see the human race has a good chance to move forward when those old wounds are healed,” he said later.
The Lenape, along with other tribes between New Jersey and Rhode Island, are what is known as a first-contact tribe. They were the first to deal with British and Dutch settlers, and as such, signed treaties with those governments. Those treaties were transferred from Britain to the newly formed United States. According to Holloway, those treaties guarantee the Sand Hill Band certain land, water, and hunting rights in New Jersey, which the state has not honored.
At the request of the Sand Hills’ then-Chief Sam Beeler, Holloway began getting more active with the tribe’s affairs in 2005, becoming its executive director, as it struggled to reclaim these rights.
“We’re looking to coexist but have ourselves acknowledged as being part of the state,” Holloway said of his tribe’s lawsuit.
In 2008, the tribe switched over from a traditional government to a constitutional government and redefined the role of chief. His father became chief and Holloway was elected chairman, the tribe’s supreme secular authority according to its constitution.
As a result of that change, the chief assumed control of tribal matters of a more traditional nature. Chief and chairman work together but operate independently.
The N.J. Indian Commission declined to comment on the case when reached earlier this week.
Holloway is seemingly as driven in his current role by his mother’s Jewish heritage as he is by his father’s Lenape roots.
“I feel that if I can offset or rectify one wrong, then I will have kept both sides of ancestors happy,” he said. “I’m proud of both heritages. I wear them both equally. I find both peoples to be equally strong.”
Native Americans have long suffered in the United States, where they weren’t even acknowledged as citizens until 1924. For thousands of years the Jewish people have suffered pogroms, expulsions, inquisitions, and other violent and horrific acts of anti-Semitism. Suffering is not the only commonality between the two cultures, but it can create a powerful bond.
“I use my dual heritage really as a lesson,” he said. “Both peoples — we’re both keenly aware of what our Hebrew brothers and sisters went through during the Second World War and suffered over the centuries. The American Indian is not too dissimilar.”
During the Holocaust, Jews in Europe were forced to sew yellow stars on their clothes to identify themselves. Native Americans must carry what Holloway called an Indian card, to identify themselves.
“It’s very belittling to have to carry something to prove who you are,” he said.
Holloway’s parents both taught him the dangers of appeasing those who treat others as second-class citizens.
“That only emboldens those [people] to go on further,” he said. “I’m very conscious of the atrocities that have happened. That is something that both cultures have in unison. That is something that is branded into my conscience by my father and my mother.”
-
The above article from The Jewish Standard, January 15th, is about Ron Holloway, the Chairman of one faction of the Sand Hill Band. He's Carroll Holloway/Medicine Crow's son. It really isn't about Sam Beeler.
-
This seemed the bes thread for it, since questions about Beeler's legitimacy are tied up with the Sandhill Band's. Note there are earlier posts with statements from the Delaware and Dr Richard Allen of the CNO. Plus the thread on a group claiming to be Keetowah in NY.
Seems the band wants Manhattan...seriously. I don't think it was Lenape land. Manhattan once belonged to a diifferent people, the Wappinger. The Lenape are related, but not the same.
--------------
http://www.dnainfo.com/20100618/manhattan/this-land-is-our-land-indian-tribe-files-suit-for-ownership-of-manhattan
MANHATTAN — In the latest twist in a two-year battle, the New Jersey Sand Hill Band of Lenape and Cherokee Indians filed a suit in a New Jersey court claiming it owns Manhattan, as well as the Hudson New Jersey, Delaware and Eastern Pennsylvania.
While the lawsuit may seem unrealistic, tribe spokesperson Laura Zucker said they are confident in their case.
“Oh no, they’re going to win, there’s no question about it,” she said. “They do have a really good case, and they know it. They’re in it to win it.”
The suit claims that the tribe’s land was stolen from them through a series of fraudulent treaties that violated international treaty laws. They are seeking the “return [of] all land, water, trees, etc. encompassing the fraudulent 'Manhattan' purchase, damages, and punitive damages,” according to court documents.
This isn’t the tribe’s first attempt at getting ownership of the Big Apple. They originally filed suit in April 2009, suing officials in New Jersey, including the governor, secretary of state and attorney general with violation of human rights, genocide and breaking of treaties.
That suit was dismissed in 2009.
Chief Ronald Holloway also appeared in front of the United Nations earlier this year asking for help in reclaiming damages from the state. According to Zucker, the United Nations is still reviewing the case.
-
Cita in chattanooga was used in a reference, frankly ivd seen its white members and their casper the ghost tom kunesch they are fraids themelves and its sick to seem them given any validity.