Re: Winkler Review: 2005 ... references Estabrook
-
In reply to:
Re: Winkler Review: 2005 ... references Estabrook
kevin mullins 6/13/08
So you basicly agree with the reviewer's conclusions concerning Winkler's coverage of previously presented data?
another excerpt from http://cebillingsley.blogspot.com/2005/01/review-essay-melungeons.htmlhttp://cebillingsley.blogspot.com/2005/01/review-essay-melungeons.html
Winkler titles his first chapter “A Raceless People” and explores the question of race as it pertains to Melungeons, telling the story of the inability of society to fit them into a particular racial category. But American society, and southern society in particular, had no trouble deciding that, whatever the Melungeons were, they were not “white”, which resulted in challenges for them in voting, in education, in marriage, in military service, and in all the ways non-whites were disadvantaged by the dominant white culture. For this very reason, it made sense for Melungeons to assert their Portuguese or even Indian ancestry and to reject the idea of African-American ancestry, while also refusing to apply the epithet “Melungeon” to their own people. As Winkler states: “The history of nearly all tri-racial groups has been marked by their efforts to overcome their inferior social status.”[23]
Winkler also points out that it did not and does not really matter if Melungeons or other tri-racial groups actually had African-American blood, whether the proverbial one drop or more; the pertinent and overarching fact is that their neighbors believed that they did and thus treated them accordingly. Melungeons assertions of Portuguese ancestry and descent from sailors shipwrecked on American shores was an understandable coping mechanism, and perhaps even true, but it fell on deaf ears.[24]
In his second chapter, “Race and Conquest on the Eastern Seaboard,” Winkler reviews early contact between Europeans, Native Americans, and Africans, and the settlement of the eastern seaboard, particularly relating to the varied theories of Melungeon origin. He retells the story of Raleigh’s Lost Colony in some detail, along with the importation of Armenian and Turkish workers to Virginia in the seventeenth century, the presence of the Romany people (Gypsies), the intermarriage of Native Americans and free blacks, and the presence of Spanish and Portuguese sailors. Winkler concludes:
As the English consolidated their hold on North America, the contributions of
these individuals and families of non-English origin were often overlooked or
forgotten. The racial attitudes of the dominant English society forced many of
these swarthy or mixed-race people to keep a low profile, band together in
extended family groups, and often to migrate to more sparsely-populated areas
where racially-restrictive laws had not yet been enacted.[25]
The narrative continues as Winkler examines the historic references to the Melungeons and to people who might have been the original Melungeons, up to and including their settlement on Newman’s Ridge in Hancock County, Tennessee. At that time, he writes, “they considered themselves white people with Indian ancestry,” although “[t]hat opinion was not universally shared by their white neighbors, and their legal status would be questioned repeatedly.” During the nineteenth-century, Melungeons came under increasing scrutiny: more disparaging stories about them were published; their right to vote was challenged; court cases were fought to determine their status—and they were forced to negotiate their racial identity. In the precedent-setting “Celebrated Melungeon Case” of 1872, Melungeons were found to be Carthaginian with no African-American blood. [26]
Winkler devotes his third chapter to Will Allen Dromgoole, a woman writer who was responsible in large part for forming the general public’s opinion of Melungeons through a series of articles she wrote in the 1890s. Writing her popular stories about these strange people in a time when “America was obsessed with race,” Dromgoole portrayed them so negatively and in such a racist light, that “[t]o this day, many Hancock Countians resent the articles” she wrote.[27]
In “Scientific Racism,” Winkler’s fourth chapter, he moves the story into the early twentieth century, cogently detailing the effects of eugenics and the progressive movement on the Melungeon people. From Darwin, to Galton, to Kellogg, and even Hitler, Winkler describes the rise of eugenics, which “provided a pseudo-scientific rationale for the ethnic hostility that was gaining momentum in the United States.” Virginia’s Racial Integrity Law of 1924 and publication of books like Mongrel Virginians added to the frenzy over racial classification and had a deleterious impact on the status of Melungeons.[28]
In his chapter titled “A Time of Transition,” Winkler examines the situation of the Melungeons and other tri-racial groups from the 1930s through the 1970s. At the beginning of this period, more articles appeared, retelling the unflattering old tales of the mysterious Melungeons. Of special note is “Sons of the Legend,” which appeared in the Saturday Evening Post in 1947. Not only did W. L. Worden’s piece portray the Melungeons as moon-shining, non-Caucasian, child-bride marrying misfits, it did so in a popular magazine with a nationwide readership—“[a]nd the people of Hancock County were not happy with what [Worden] had to say.”[29] From there, Winkler moves on to the rise of more scholarly research, the reclassification of many tri-racial isolate groups as Indian tribes, the Civil Rights movement, the outmigration of Melungeons from their traditional homelands, and their assimilation into broader American society. By the 1970s, though a combination of the Civil Rights movement, the appearance of a sympathetic portrayal in a popular book, and the debut of the outdoor drama Walk Toward the Sunset in Hancock County, those with Melungeon heritage began to complete the arc from shame to pride in their identity.
In his sixth chapter, Winkler brings the state of Melungeon research up to date. In many ways, “Into the Twenty-First Century” is the meat of the book. Winkler discusses the theoretical and rhetorical divide between Kennedy and his backers versus DeMarce, Henige, and others of like mind, discusses the role of the Internet in popularizing Melungeon research, then segues into the DNA evidence. Although the DNA findings move forward our knowledge about the Melungeon ancestry, they do not settle all aspects of the controversy. Winkler summarizes the results, which were based on a very small sample:
In short, the DNA study indicates today’s Melungeons are primarily of European
descent, with some Native American and African-American ancestry. Some
Melungeons have genetic sequences matching the Siddis of northern India, others
reflect a Turkish or Syrian ancestry. Some of those who consider themselves
“Melungeon” possess all of those “exotic” genes; others have some of them—and
others reflect only the “generic” European genes. The Melungeons are by no means
uniform in their genetic backgrounds; they are a mixed-ethnic population with
varying degrees of mixture within that population.[30]
In his concluding chapter, Winkler speculates on the many ways the data on Melungeons might be interpreted and attempts to define who is and who is not Melungeon. He opines that the recognition of the Melungeon’s varied ethic heritage and the history of discrimination against them “will probably lead to a fuller understanding of America’s tumultuous history of race relations and the absurdity of the concept of race in general.”[31]
So, how should we interpret the many obfuscations, legends, and family origin stories of the Melungeons and other tri-racial isolate groups—and, indeed, for the many individuals who claimed Spanish, Portuguese, and Moorish backgrounds? Were there really that many families of exotic ancestry in the South? If not, why would so many people claim such ancestry?
More Replies:
-
Re: Winkler Review: 2005 ... references Estabrook
kevin mullins 6/14/08
-
Re: Winkler Review: 2005 ... references Estabrook
Lucy Suder 6/14/08
-
Re: Winkler Review: 2005 ... references Estabrook