you said -- I have dealt with Vance Hawkins before, ad nauseum, so won't do it again here except to say that he goes around and says these types of things for unknown reasons.
reply -- well you have done it here. At least I use my real name when I post. I have no reason to hide my name from others. I am at a disadvantage -- I have no memory of having any dealinigs with you. Maybe you were using some other alias back then. I use the same name now I used back whenever it was you had your dealings with me. I am honest so I have no reason to use an alias. I am there for all to see, warts and all. You say I say "those types of things" for "unknown reasons".
My reasons as well, I have made no effort to hide. I want to help researchers to find their true heritage. I check what people say, and research their sources, and have found often, there are errors. I try to report them. For instance for the true scope of history in South Kentucky, please read "South Fork Country" by Samuel D. Perry. He tried to find the origin of many of those stories, and found them in a work of fiction where in the forward the author (a Troxell) said "SOME OF THE CHARACTERS IN THIS BOOK ARE FICTITIOUS" yet a descendant or relation of his put much of this fiction online as though it were fact.
And why am I interested, you asked me? I'll tell you. There is a record in 1775 of Nathaniel Buchanan and Benjamin Price (they were long hunters) ceating one of 3 communities that survived the Indian wars of 1777. In that record it states that nearby was "Gist's Station Camp". A friend (not a descendant of this branch of the Gist's) said he looked the location on the map and said it was on the border of Wayne/Pulaski Counties. I descend from the Gist's found at "Gist's Station" which was in Wise County, Va. (Coeburn, Wise Co, Va used to be called Guest's Station)Every one I have found who descend from this bunch of Gist's says they ave family stories of being related to Sequoyah. We know we are related NOT because of stories, but because of DNA tests, as our Gist's don't exactly match those of the other Maryland Gists. ALL of us with family stories of being related to Sequoyah are from this bunch of Gist's. And we all descend from the Nathaniel Gist who was killed at Kings Mountain. He was first cousin to the "other Nathaniel" who was his first cousin and who is usually said to have been Sequoyah's father. Oh, the person who looked up that location said it is the same land a later generation Nathaniel Gist lived there about 1800. We have family stories of having Indian blood as well. I took an autosomal DNA tesst and it came back saying I am mostly Caucasian, but we have American Indian DNA as well. THIS IS WHY I AM INTERESTED IN THOSE STORIES OF CHEROKEE IN S KY! Oh, those stories of Price's Camp in 1775 do not mention any "Northern Cherokee capitain" at Montecello or Burnside, and his camp was just a couple of miles from both locations. Thre were hunting camps there, not towns though. So my family (who I think was mixed-race but can not prove it) was in S Ky before pretty much every White family who has since moved there. We were there in 1775 according to an account written at that time -- was your family in S Ky in 1775 according to a written record of that time?
There is a book "Land of th Lake, A History of Campbell County, Tennessee" by Dr. Ridenhour (the Ridenhours were some of the earliest settlers ofthat region) that mentions the Gist that I descend from -- John Gist whose son Aaron was hung as a horsethief in 1801. Of him it says his father was a trader and his mother was indian and it says they were some relation to Sequoyah. Bu
Now have I said "I have Cherokee ancestors"? NO! Did I say "We are related to Sequoyah? NO! I think "yes" on both accounts -- but I am deceiving myself if I say so. There is a difference between evidence and proof. Now this is how you do PROPER research. You don't make false claims. You can only go where the research takes you. Adding to or taking away rom it just isn't right. I have found interesting things but they do not ammount to proof. My point is/was had I believed the stories online I would have stopped searching and never would have found any of this.
you said -- the reason for that is that the Cherokees and other Indians that lived in this state did not want ANYONE to know they were Indian because that meant removal and loss of everything you held near and dear.
perhaps true for non-Cherokee -- but NOT TRUE for the Cherokee. In 1818 a law was passed and by that law anyone of Cherokee heritage could declare that they would accept U. S. Citizanship. It was part of the government's assimilation program. If they accepted U. S. Citizenship they would be given 640 acres of their own -- quite an enticement. The names of those who accepted it are listed on the Reservation Rolls of 1818-1819.
you said -- The chances of you finding a document that states your relatives were Cherokee is a hard bill to fit
I agree. That's why I post -- to help people find some other route to their ancestors that the false stories that are all over the internet. Had I not researched further, I'd have never found my REAL Gist's -- which I HAVE found, with the help of many others.
you said -- My point is, please do not be discouraged by this person or anyone else who tries to tell you that there were never any Indians living in Kentucky
if you think that is what I said -- you didn't read it carefully. I said "in historic times". By definition, "historic times" start when written records begin. Before that is "pre-historic" times. Of course before white settlers ame to Kentucky, there were many Indian nations who had lived in Kentucky. But at the time of the first European contact -- NO THERE WEREN'T. They would have mentioned it. They spoke of abandoned Indian cabins -- these were used as hunting camps by many tribes but were never perminant homes. I'll try to find that account again if you ask politely for that reference -- it is online. :)
you asked -- The Kentucky Native American Heritage Commission is a government entity that is connected with lobbying a bill that will recognize that this state has a rich history of Native American families then and now. Now I ask you, why would the Kentucky state government recognize Cherokees and other Indians, past and present, if they never existed here?
Again, I never said Indians never existed there -- you are misquoting me. Before European contact of course tribes passed through Kentucky. After Europeans moed in all the neighboring tribes attacked them, as it was their "big pasture" so to speak. many tribes left their foot print in Kentucky at that time. Cherokee, Shawnee, kickapoo, Miami, Delaware, Seneca, and others I suspect all attacked the early European settlers.
As for the rest of your question, I have no way of knowing why the Kentucky Native American Indian Heritage Committee would do anything. Please direct that question to them, not me.
There is a RICH INDIAN HERITAGE in Kentucky -- all the tribes that passed through before written history of them was recorded, all the raids on the settler, raids by more than half a dozen distinct tribes. Then there are the mixed blood settlers who came later.