My grandmother Cora Esther Proffitt-Hurst-Miller, her grandmother was Maude Moorehead-Failor-Turner was wanting to know if there is any information about them on the rolls. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
There is no information about them on the rolls because they were not affiliated with any tribe.
Maude was born in Pennsylvania in 1859. At some point, she moved to Missouri and is found living in Holt, MO, in 1900. Maud’s daughter, Bessie (Cora’s mother) lived in Missouri her whole life. Maud’s husband, Robert Proffitt, was also not Native American.
The family never lived in Cherokee Nation, and they appear to be from standard European-American lineages.
Maud husband was not Robert Proffit, it was Richard “Dick” Failor. I understand that they weren’t in cherokee lands. I have looked at the rolls and it appears Profitt is on the chickasaw rolls sorry to have bothered you with my interest. I would just like to know my ancestry. Thanks again
Yes, you are right. I couldn’t edit my typo. “Maud’s husband’ should read “Bessie’s husband.” Sorry about that.
Also, there may be Chickasaws that are on the Dawes Roll with the surname Proffitt, but this was not your lineage. In fact, this single Proffitt family was enrolled through the Native citizenship of the wife. Abraham Proffitt was a White man married to a 1/4 blood Chickasaw woman named Martha Walker. Your ancestry is outlined above, which is to say White families that moved from PA, KY, through the upper midwest, and into Missouri. They were not associated with any tribe. They were Euro-Americans.
Okay thanks for the information. I was always told she was native American and that is why my grandfather family wouldn’t have anything to do with her or him. Now I am wondering what is up with this. She has the looks of a native so I am curious. And so did her children.
Perhaps there is African ancestry being covered up? This is statistically more likely, compared to Native ancestry, coming from those areas where they lived and moved through. Often, White-identified individuals and families of mixed White-Black ancestry would claim Indian blood to explain darker features and they’d adamantly deny African blood. It was dramatically more acceptable in the racist American society of the past. There may also be issues of paternity or simply internal family strife, and the lore might have been built up as an effort to make sense of it, or rationalize things. It’s hard to say. But, there were no tribal communities anywhere in their vicinity, over a span of several generations. Of course, sometimes a “look” is subjective anyway, or based on old photographic qualities where the contrast and lighting can appear to be a lot darker.
However, that is what makes genealogy so fun. You can often find records or details that counter some of the lore that gets passed along and clarify the reality of their lives. And there is also DNA now, which is a wonderful tool to clarify lines of descent and confirm connections (particularly where parentage may be doubtful). Keep at it!