To Paul Heinegg:
I have a few questions
1. Didnt the children of "free indians" regardless whether or not the father was white, a black slave, a free black, or slave or free person of mixed ancestry considered free?
2. And do you believe that maybe their were more "indians" or people of native american ancestry during the colonial period then what the recorders of that time counted? It makes sense that they would label people with mixed native american ancestry as "mulatto" "fpoc" and even "negro"? I dont think that ALL of the native american population was decimated. Some of them mixed with the african slave population, europeon population, and other populations of mixed-race. I found that the origins of some fpoc families in Louisiana have native americans at the root of their trees. Their descendents are labeled "negro", "mulatto", and "gens de coleur libre". The term "griffe: seems to have almost disappeared in the 19th century documents accept in a few cases. I guess when studying the fpoc/slave population, the native american element has to be included.