Creation Stories

22 November 2011

Nanticoke and Lenape Creation Stories

 

It must be stated that there are differing Nanticoke and Lenape creation stories that are well documented to the 17th and 18th centuries. Sadly, some that are being widely circulated today in modern publications are not historic, but are the modern invention of cultural enthusiasts and not the product of an authentic tribal community’s tradition. Those collected here are from historically well documented tribal communities…

 

Of the historically documented accounts, one of the earliest recorded tells of how a Lenape Elder answered the inquiry of a Dutchman who wanted to know where the Lenape People came from… He was silent for a little while, either as if unable to climb up at once so high with his thoughts, or to express them without help, and then took a piece of coal out of the fire where he sat, and began to write upon the floor. He first drew a circle, a little oval, to which he made four paws or feet, a head and a tail. “This,” he said, “is a tortoise, lying in the water around it,” and he moved his hand round the figure continuing, “This was or is all water, and so at first was the world or the earth, when the tortoise gradually raised its round back up high, and the water ran off of it, and thus the earth became dry.” He then took a little straw and placed it on end in the middle of the figure and proceeded, “The earth was now dry, and there grew a tree in the middle of the earth, and the root of this tree sent forth a sprout beside it, and there grew upon it a man, who was the first male. This man was then alone, and would have remained alone; but the tree bent over until its top touched the earth, and there shot therein another root, from which came forth another sprout, and there grew upon it the woman, and from these two are all men produced.” [Jaspar Dankers & Peter Sluyter, Journal Of A Voyage To New York In 1679-80.]

 

The following retelling pulls from traditional elements that are common in several of the most well known, and historically well documented, accounts of Northeastern Woodlands and Algonkian stories. While the origin of the inclusion of the role of “Muskrat” is unclear, and may be a “borrowed feature” from another tribal cultures and not originally told by the ancient Lenape… it is an old addition, becoming a traditional element for some tribal communities over the generations. “Muskrat” is included in a similar story among the Seneca that is recorded by Arthur C. Parker [Seneca Myths and Folk Tales. Buffalo: Publications of the Buffalo Historical Society, v. 27, 1923. pp. 59-73]. It has also been reported as an element included in stories of the Onondaga, Mohawk, Ojibway/Anishinabe, Potawatomi and others. This retelling, which is one of the versions currently told among the Nanticoke-Lenape tribal communities of the Delaware Bay region, also includes the role of Muskrat, which is recorded to have traditionally been an animal of some mythological significance among the Nanticoke, as documented by James Athearn Jones [Traditions of the North American Indians: Tales of an Indian Camp, vol.II. London: Henry Colburn and Richard Bentley, 1830. pp. 49-91].

 

After the Great Spirit and creator of all, “He-Who-Creates-Us-By-Thought,” brought the world into being, there came a time very long ago when the animals were living in deep water with no dry land. They grew weary of being wet and wanted to find a way to bring up the mud from under the water. From the greatest to the least, each one dove under the water. One by one they tried to dive deep enough to bring up some of the mud. And, one by one, they failed, being unable to dive so deep and so long. It seemed as though none could bring up the mud from the bottom. All came back to the surface, gasping for air. It seemed an impossible task, for none was willing to risk their life to bring up the mud. Finally, after all the others had tried and failed, humble Muskrat took his turn. Muskrat dove deep and was under the water for a very long, long time. The other animals feared that Muskrat had drowned, for he stayed below the water much longer than any of them had. When Muskrat finally came back up to the surface, he was exhausted and close to death. The animals saw that there was a clump of mud scraped from the bottom in Muskrat’s paw. Humble Muskrat had risked his life to dive deeper than any of them had in order to bring the mud up from the bottom. “He-Who-Creates-Us-By-Thought” summoned Turtle to the surface of the water and placed the mud from Muskrat’s paw upon the back of Turtle. “He-Who-Creates-Us-By-Thought” caused the mud to grow, covering Turtle’s back. As Turtle continued to raise his back, more water drained off and the mud that grew and grew became dry, becoming the land. And the animals had dry land to live upon. One day, in the middle of the land upon Turtle’s back, there grew a tree. From that tree grew a shoot. And, from that shoot sprouted a man. The Man would have been all alone, but then the tree grew another shoot. And, from that shoot sprouted a woman. This was the first man and the first woman. They are the ancestors of us all.

 

A further illustration of the variety of historically well documented creation stories among the Lenape is the following version reported to be from the Munsee-Lenape as recorded by the Reverend John Heckewelder (c.1780) [History, Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States. Philadelphia: The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1876. p.250]…

 

“The Minsi…say that in the beginning, they dwelt in the earth under a lake, and were fortunately extricated from this unpleasant abode by the discovery which one of their men made of a hole, through which he ascended to the surface; on which, as he was walking, he found a deer, which he carried back with him into his subterraneous habitation; that there the deer was killed, and he and his companions found the meat so good, that they unanimously determined to leave their dark abode, and remove to a place where they could enjoy the light of heaven and have such excellent game in abundance.”

 

By the late 18th century, George Henry Loskiel provides information that demonstrates a common influence for the Iroquois and Munsee as he reports that “…the Iroquois say, that the Indians formerly lived under ground, but hearing accidentally of a fine country above, they left their subterranean habitations, and took possession of the surface.” Giving further evidence of the variety of creation stories, he also reports that…

 

The Delawares say, that the heavens are inhabited by men, and that the Indians descended from them to inhabit the earth: That a pregnant woman had been put away by her husband, and thrown down upon the earth, where she was delivered of twins, and thus by degrees the earth was peopled. The Nanticoks [sic] pretend, that seven Indians had found themselves all on a sudden sitting on the sea-coast, but knew not how they came there, whether they were created on the spot, or came from some other place beyond the seas, and that by these the country was peopled. [George Henry Loskiel.  A History of the Mission of the United Brethren Among the Indians in North America, Part 1. London: The Bretheren Society for the Furtherance of the Gospel, 1794. p.24]

 

 


Recommended Reading

11 November 2011

Recommended Non-Fiction and History Books:

A Delaware Indian Symposium, Herbert Kraft

A Study of Delaware Indian Medicine Practice and Folk Beliefs, Gladys Tantaquidgeon

A Study of the Delaware Indian Big House Ceremony, Frank G. Speck

David Zeisberger’s History of Northern American Indians, Rev. David Zeisberberger

Delaware’s Forgotten Folk: The Story of the Moors and Nanticokes, C. A. Weslager

Eastern Shore Indians of Virginia and Maryland, Helen C. Rountree and Thomas E.Davidson

History, Manners, and Customs of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania and the Neighboring States, John Heckenwelder

Legends of the Delaware Indians and Picture Writing, Richard C. Adams

Memoirs of Rev. David Brainerd, Based on the Life of Brainerd, Prepared by Jonathan Edwards, D.D. and Afterwards Revised and Enlarged by S.E. Dwight

Mythology of the Lenape, John Bierhorst

Oklahoma Delaware Ceremonies, Feasts, and Dances, Frank G. Speck

Strong Medicine Speaks: A Native American Elder has Her Say, Amy Hill Hearth

The Celestial Bear Comes Down to Earth, Frank G. Speck

The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, William W. Newcomb, Jr.

The Delaware Indians, C.A. Weslager

The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage, Herbert Kraft

The Nanticoke, Frank W. Porter, III.

The Nanticoke and Conoy Indians, Frank G. Speck

The Nanticoke Community of Delaware, Frank G. Speck

The Nanticoke Indians Past and Present, C. A. Weslager

We Are Still Here! The Tribal Saga of. NewJersey’s Nanticoke and Lenape Indians, John R. Norwood

White Deer and Other Stories Told by the Lenape, John Bierhorst

William Penn’s Own Account of the Lenni Lenape or Delaware Indians

 

Recommended Fiction For Children and Youth:

Little Bear Builds a Wigwam, Sherman Stoltzfus

The Indians of New Jersey: Dickon Among the Lenapes, M.R. Harrinton

The Legend of the Cape May Diamond, Trinka Hakes Noble

 


Non-Historical Stories and “Prophesies” – Fiction and Fairy Tales

10 November 2011

There are many people who are erroneously teaching recently “invented” stories and “prophesies” as traditional to the Nanticoke or Lenape.  Stories are an important part of Native American Culture, they tell of our history, our life, our culture, and our beliefs.  These stories are specific to a certain People, they carry within them cultural, historical, and sometimes ceremonial meaning to a specific People, these cultural understandings are often lost when a story is passed on to another unrelated people,  when these stories are taken out of their context they often lose their cultural value.  Contemporary stories and the sharing of stories among Native People is not unheard of, and actually happened a lot among tribes who interacted, and intermarried, however even in contemporary stories a cultural identity remains in the story and these often show a change of times for that specific people.  Shared stories are often retold honoring whomever shared the story, for example a shared Cherokee Story told by, say a Lenape, is still a Cherokee story.  In the following two reviews, this is quite possibly what happened.   Outside of Lenape Communities and Lenape People there was little available regarding traditional Lenape stories during the time frame in which these stories were made up, and during this time there was an abundance of non-tribal people wanting to claim Lenape Culture and Heritage as their own, despite not knowing the culture, history, language, and beliefs; therefore, taking stories from other cultures and modifying them to meet their needs.

A Review of “The Fourth Crow Prophecy” 

Over recent years, a purported “Lenape” prophecy has come to life, but this story is not a Traditional Lenape “Prophecy.”  The characters, crow and fox, are not predominant figures in Traditional Lenape Culture.  The crow has no significant role in Lenape culture, and certainly is not a symbol of Lenape People as implied in this story.  The role of a crow in Traditional Lenape stories is extremely limited and are found in stories of outside influence; for example,  a story called “Crow brings Corn” documented in the New York City Area around 1679 attributed to Lenape in the area is actually of Seneca and Narragansett.  The assertion that this story has been “….passed down for decades”  is hard to accept considering it was concocted  in the late 1980’s and is tied into another non-Lenape Story, “Rainbow Crow,” which will be reviewed next.  The manner in which this story is told and documented is also a good indicator that it is not Lenape, or even Native American.  It is told in a simplistic, “broken” flow, one might find in an old western movie where a Non-Native was cast to speak broken English to imitate a Native.  In contrast, authentic Lenape stories are often very complex, culturally detail oriented, and will often tie into other Lenape stories.  This story has none of these characteristics.  Furthermore, the translation of this story into Lenape is in the manor of a non-Lenape speaker translating a story from English into Lenape, word for word, using a vocabulary list with a poor understanding of the language, not to mention the use of words from two different, and not interchangeable, dialects of Lenape.  In conclusion, the understanding of the coming of “Four Crows” in traditional and contemporary authentic Lenape Culture is nonexistent, and has absolutely no cultural tie to Lenape People, history, or Culture and should not be perpetuated as such.  We, as Lenape People, have many traditional stories documented, recorded, and passed down through generations that teach us an understanding of our Ancestors ways, life, and beliefs and these are the stories that should be told of our people, and by our people.

A Review of “Rainbow Crow” Retold by Nancy Van Laan

Again the lack of the  “crow” as a major figure in Traditional Lenape Culture must be expressed.  The role of the Crow in many other Native American Cultures is well documented, however this specific story is believed to have come from a modified version of a traditional story among the Cherokee called “Cherokee First Fire, “ which can be found in “Myths of the Cherokee” by James Mooney.  The source credited with telling this story probably took the Cherokee story and modified it to fit his needs and mislabeled it “Lenape.”  Again, much like the “Forth Crow Prophecy,” there are no cultural connections between this story and Lenape Culture, it is undocumented and unknown among any Lenape People prior to its publication in 1989.  This is a “nice” story, and may be inspired by some elements of a generic view of American Indian culture, but it is not historically traditional among the Lenape.  Many of the references in this story are not related to Lenape Culture and belief.  In conclusion, once again, perpetuating this story as “Lenape” is misleading and demeaning our traditional stories.  There is no shortage of true Lenape and Nanticoke stories that accurately portray our history, life, culture, and beliefs that can be told, and shared, these stories are important to our people, cherished pieces of our culture that everyone can not only learn from, but appreciate for their lessons.

Continuing Culture and Community Authenticity

American Indian Tribal Culture is not stagnant.  Typically, what is historically “traditional” can also be historically evolving.  Each generation can pass down not only what is ancient, but also what has become a common practice or story as time has gone on.  The key to determining what is authentically part of a “tribal” tradition is to determine if it originated among, or was adapted by, a historic and continuing tribal community and has been passed from one generation to the next.  An authentic American Indian tribal community is made up of interrelated people, descended from a historic tribe or tribes, who have continued a tribal identity that can be documented through many generations.  Such a tribal community may pass on, or establish, authentic tribal traditions and practices as expressions of their ancient and continuing identity.

Non-historic cultural enthusiast groups, even when erroneously calling themselves “tribes,” “bands,” or “nations,” do not have the characteristics of authentic tribal communities and, therefore, cannot originate authentic tribal traditions.  And, to retell their inventions as though they are tribal traditions is to do violence to the very culture they claim to celebrate.


Free Downloadable E-Book!

8 June 2010

We Are Still Here… The Tribal Saga of New Jersey’s Nanticoke and Lenape Indians

This booklet is a summary of the history of the Nanticoke and Lenape people of southern New Jersey and Delaware.  The electronic version is free to download.


A Timeline of Historical Highlights

8 June 2010

A Few Highlights In the History of the Interrelated Nanticoke and Lenape Tribal Communities

of Southern New Jersey and the Delmarva.

1608: The Nanticoke encounter Captain John Smith and his men during Smith’s exploration of the Nanticoke River. At the time, the Nanticoke are the dominant tribe on the Delmarva, with a strong Lenape presence extending from New Jersey into Delaware.

1632: After the murder of their chief, the Lenni-Lenape destroy the Dutch fortress of Swaanandel in Lewes, Delaware.

1638: Swedes and Finns establish “New Sweden” in the Lenape homeland in the Delaware Bay area in New Jersey and Delaware.

1642: The Nanticoke and other tribes are declared enemies of the Maryland colony.

1668: A series of treaties are signed between American Indians and the Maryland colony which describe the Nanticoke as the head of a confederation of tribes on the Delmarva.

1682: The Lenape establish a peace treaty with William Penn.

1698: October, The Maryland Government set aside the Chicacoan (Chicone / Chiconi) reservation for the Nanticoke. The Puckamee village on the south bank of the Nanticoke River was simultaneously abandoned and claimed by settlers.

1711: The Broad Creek and Indian River Reservations are set aside by Colonial authorities.

1748: European encroachment and hostilities force many Nanticoke to flee north from Maryland into New Jersey and Delaware, and west into Oklahoma and into Canada. Many become part of existing Lenape migratory and remnant tribal communities.

1758: The Brotherton Reservation is created in Burlington County, New Jersey. Many of the remaining Lenape Indians refuse to move onto the reservation. In 1801, the reservation is sold and the few in residence left the state, although some would later return. Historical references to other Indian tribal communities in New Jersey, especially referring to the Indians of Cohansey Bridge (Bridgeton in Cumberland County, NJ), continue during and after the period. That same year, in Delaware, muster rolls identify several Nanticoke ancestors of the modern communities.

1816-1820: The Gouldtown Church community of Nanticoke and Lenape people is officially established in Cumberland County, N.J.

1855: A Delaware court case identifies various Moor/Nanticoke families.

1877: A school exclusively for “Moor” (Lenape and Nanticoke) children is built at Moore’s Corner, west of Cheswold on Kenton Road. A second school is also built later in Cheswold and a third at Fork Branch. The term “Moor” is used to refer to the Indian Community of Cheswold and generally of Indians in each of the three communities.

1881: The Delaware Legislature lists representatives of the Indian River community in a school tax exemption act due to the “special” status of the racial group.

1888: According to historian J. Thomas Scharf, the so-called “Moors” recognized themselves, and were recognized by their neighbors, as a distinct ethnic group at least as early as a century ago. Scharf described them as having settled in nearby Little Creek [now Kenton] Hundred in about 1710, and remarked that they had owned better than a thousand acres of land among them. The Durham family was among these early settlers.

1892: May 19 article entitled “Kent County Moors” appears in the The Times of Philadelphia, and John Sanders of the Cheswold Community is interviewed. In the article, he indicates that the commonly used term “Moor” is misleading. Sanders states, “We are Indians, and we belong to a branch of the great Delaware [Lenape] Nation, which used to hold all the country from New York to Cape Charles.”

1896: Smyrna Press publishes an article that was either a reprint or based upon an 1895 article in the Philadelphia Press. It identifies the Cheswold Indian community and suggests that the most reasonable reason for the “Moor” designation is due to the former name of the area in which they lived being “Moortown.”

1897: James Mooney, of the Bureau of American Ethnology of the Smithsonian Institute writes to a “Mr. Thurman” on June 10th and July 29th regarding isolated Indian communities along the Eastern Seaboard, which he believes are of Native American origin. Listed among these Indian groups are the “Moors” of Delaware in each letter. He appears to use the name to refer to both Kent and Sussex County Delaware communities.

1899: William H. Babcock in American Anthropologist, identifies and describes Cheswold and Millsboro Indian Communities and references the southern New Jersey “party.”

1903: Delaware Legislature on March 20th, in Chapter 470 entitled “Miscellaneous,” identifies all named in the previous 1881 act, and their descendants after them, as “Nanticoke Indians,” and provides for legal designation of that identity for the purpose of “migrating.” Descendants of those listed in 1881 are not limited to the Sussex County Nanticoke Tribe, but include families currently in the Kent and Cumberland County communities in DE and NJ.

1908: M. R. Harrington, curator of the Southwest Museum in Los Angeles, collects a corn sheller made from a log, splint baskets, and an eel pot from the Cheswold community which are placed in the possession of the Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, New York City along with specimens from Indian River.

1912: American Anthropologist includes a report from The Museum Journal of the University of Pennsylania regarding the work of Speck and Wallis among the Nanticokes, identifying the isolate communities in Millsboro and Cheswold, Delaware, as Indian.

1914-1964: The Moor/Lenape School Board Trustees are listed by the State of Delaware. The board is exclusively comprised of members of the Cheswold tribal community.

1921: As the State of Delaware upheld school segregation between whites and blacks, another class was recognized by the following exemption, “The State Board of Education may establish schools for the children of people called Moors. No white or colored child shall be permitted to attend such a school without the permission of the board of Trustees of said school and of the State Board of Education.”

1930: Original Delaware Census records in which the census field worker identified Sussex County tribal families as “Nanticoke,” “Mixed,” or “Indian” are illegally crossed out by a census supervisor and replaced with the misclassification “African” or “Negro” when they are filed with the field office.

1935: Delaware Revised Code (2631, Section 9) equates “Moors” as “Indians” and commits to providing funding for school teachers for them, separate from “White” schools and “Colored” schools.

1946: Anthropologist William H. Gilbert identifies the Bridgeton, Cheswold, and Millsboro communities as Indian isolate groups, describes social dynamics and lists family names, citing overlap between the families.

1959: The Journal-Every Evening of Wilmington publishes an article in which a man identified as a “Delaware Moor” cites that his people started the “Big Thursday” picnic celebration, recalling a gathering of 1,500 “Moors” from Bridgeton and Cheswold in 1934. ”

1967: The Morning News of Wilmington publishes an article which muses on the history of Cheswold and the belief that the Cheswold “Moors” are of Delaware (Lenape) Indian descent.

1972: The January issue of Delaware Today includes an article entitled “Delaware’s Forgotten Minority — The Moors.” The article indicates that the Cheswold community members had a “M” for “Moor” on their driver’s licenses from the 1950s through to the 1970s, when many were changed by the state to “Other.”

1982: New Jersey officially recognizes The Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Indian Tribe and calls on the US Congress to do the same.

1994: Forks Branch area near Cheswold is studied by Delaware historians and archaeologists and determined to have been an Indian enclave related to the current day Cheswold community.

1996: The State of Delaware completes “The Bloomsbury Report,” which identifies an area near Cheswold as a site of Indian activity related to the families in the Cheswold community. It also states that the modern members of the Lenape in Cheswold and the Nanticoke of Millsboro are of common bloodlines from the same general Indian stock.

2000: The U.S. Census Bureau lists Cumberland County, N.J., as a Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape American Indian Statistical Area.

2006: The National Museum of the American Indian, Smithsonian Institution, publishes “We Have a Story to Tell: The Native Peoples of the Chesapeake Region,” a guide for high school teachers that includes the history of the Indian River Community and repeatedly refers to the Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape of New Jersey.

2007: The Bridgeton, Cheswold, and Indian River communities were invited guests to the opening reception celebration of the People of the Chesapeake permanent display at the National Museum of the American Indian, Smithsonian Institution.

Highlights In the History of the Interrelated Nanticoke and Lenape Tribal Communities of Southern New Jersey and the Delmarva.

1608: The Nanticoke encounter Captain John Smith and his men during Smith’s exploration of the Nanticoke River. At the time, the Nanticoke are the dominant tribe on the Delmarva, with a strong Lenape presence extending from New Jersey into Delaware.

1632: After the murder of their chief, the Lenni-Lenape destroy the Dutch fortress of Swaanandel in Lewes, Delaware

1642: The Nanticoke and other tribes are declared enemies of the Maryland colony.

1668: A series of treaties are signed between American Indians and the Maryland colony which describe the Nanticoke as the head of a confederation of tribes on the Delmarva.

1682: The Lenape establish a peace treaty with William Penn.

1698: October, The Maryland Government set aside the Chicacoan (Chicone / Chiconi) reservation for the Nanticoke. The Puckamee village on the south bank of the Nanticoke River was simultaneously abandoned and claimed by settlers.

1711: The Broad Creek and Indian River Reservations are set aside by Colonial authorities.

1748: European encroachment and hostilities force many Nanticoke to flee north from Maryland into New Jersey and Delaware, and west into Oklahoma and into Canada. Many become part of existing Lenape migratory and remnant tribal communities.

1758: The Brotherton Reservation is created in Burlington County, New Jersey. Many of the remaining Lenape Indians refuse to move onto the reservation. In 1801, the reservation is sold and the few in residence left the state, although some would later return. Historical references to other Indian tribal communities in New Jersey, especially referring to the Indians of Cohansey Bridge (Bridgeton in Cumberland County, NJ), continue during and after the period. That same year, in Delaware, muster rolls identify several Nanticoke ancestors of the modern communities.

1816-1820: The Gouldtown Church community of Nanticoke and Lenape people is officially established in Cumberland County, N.J.

1855: A Delaware court case identifies various Moor/Nanticoke families.

1877: A school exclusively for “Moor” (Lenape and Nanticoke) children is built at Moore’s Corner, west of Cheswold on Kenton Road. A second school is also built later in Cheswold and a third at Fork Branch. The term “Moor” is used to refer to the Indian Community of Cheswold and generally of Indians in each of the three communities.

1881: The Delaware Legislature lists representatives of the Indian River community in a school tax exemption act due to the “special” status of the racial group.

1888: According to historian J. Thomas Scharf, the so-called “Moors” recognized themselves, and were recognized by their neighbors, as a distinct ethnic group at least as early as a century ago. Scharf described them as having settled in nearby Little Creek [now Kenton] Hundred in about 1710, and remarked that they had owned better than a thousand acres of land among them. The Durham family was among these early settlers.

1892: May 19 article entitled “Kent County Moors” appears in the The Times of Philadelphia, and John Sanders of the Cheswold Community is interviewed. In the article, he indicates that the commonly used term “Moor” is misleading. Sanders states, “We are Indians, and we belong to a branch of the great Delaware [Lenape] Nation, which used to hold all the country from New York to Cape Charles.”

1896: Smyrna Press publishes an article that was either a reprint or based upon an 1895 article in the Philadelphia Press. It identifies the Cheswold Indian community and suggests that the most reasonable reason for the “Moor” designation is due to the former name of the area in which they lived being “Moortown.”

1897: James Mooney, of the Bureau of American Ethnology of the Smithsonian Institute writes to a “Mr. Thurman” on June 10th and July 29th regarding isolated Indian communities along the Eastern Seaboard, which he believes are of Native American origin. Listed among these Indian groups are the “Moors” of Delaware in each letter. He appears to use the name to refer to both Kent and Sussex County Delaware communities.

1899: William H. Babcock in American Anthropologist, identifies and describes Cheswold and Millsboro Indian Communities and references the southern New Jersey “party.”

1903: Delaware Legislature on March 20th, in Chapter 470 entitled “Miscellaneous,” identifies all named in the previous 1881 act, and their descendants after them, as “Nanticoke Indians,” and provides for legal designation of that identity for the purpose of “migrating.” Descendants of those listed in 1881 are not limited to the Sussex County Nanticoke Tribe, but include families currently in the Kent and Cumberland County communities in DE and NJ.

1908: M. R. Harrington, curator of the Southwest Museum in Los Angeles, collects a corn sheller made from a log, splint baskets, and an eel pot from the Cheswold community which are placed in the possession of the Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, New York City along with specimens from Indian River.

1912: American Anthropologist includes a report from The Museum Journal of the University of Pennsylania regarding the work of Speck and Wallis among the Nanticokes, identifying the isolate communities in Millsboro and Cheswold, Delaware, as Indian.

1914-1964: The Moor/Lenape School Board Trustees are listed by the State of Delaware. The board is exclusively comprised of members of the Cheswold tribal community.

1921: As the State of Delaware upheld school segregation between whites and blacks, another class was recognized by the following exemption, “The State Board of Education may establish schools for the children of people called Moors. No white or colored child shall be permitted to attend such a school without the permission of the board of Trustees of said school and of the State Board of Education.”

1930: Original Delaware Census records in which the census field worker identified Sussex County tribal families as “Nanticoke,” “Mixed,” or “Indian” are illegally crossed out by a census supervisor and replaced with the misclassification “African” or “Negro” when they are filed with the field office.

1935: Delaware Revised Code (2631, Section 9) equates “Moors” as “Indians” and commits to providing funding for school teachers for them, separate from “White” schools and “Colored” schools.

1946: Anthropologist William H. Gilbert identifies the Bridgeton, Cheswold, and Millsboro communities as Indian isolate groups, describes social dynamics and lists family names, citing overlap between the families.

1959: The Journal-Every Evening of Wilmington publishes an article in which a man identified as a “Delaware Moor” cites that his people started the “Big Thursday” picnic celebration, recalling a gathering of 1,500 “Moors” from Bridgeton and Cheswold in 1934. “

1967: The Morning News of Wilmington publishes an article which muses on the history of Cheswold and the belief that the Cheswold “Moors” are of Delaware (Lenape) Indian descent.

1972: The January issue of Delaware Today includes an article entitled “Delaware’s Forgotten Minority — The Moors.” The article indicates that the Cheswold community members had a “M” for “Moor” on their driver’s licenses from the 1950s through to the 1970s, when many were changed by the state to “Other.”

1982: New Jersey officially recognizes The Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Indian Tribe and calls on the US Congress to do the same.

1994: Forks Branch area near Cheswold is studied by Delaware historians and archaeologists and determined to have been an Indian enclave related to the current day Cheswold community.

1996: The State of Delaware completes “The Bloomsbury Report,” which identifies an area near Cheswold as a site of Indian activity related to the families in the Cheswold community. It also states that the modern members of the Lenape in Cheswold and the Nanticoke of Millsboro are of common bloodlines from the same general Indian stock.

2000: The U.S. Census Bureau lists Cumberland County, N.J., as a Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape American Indian Statistical Area.

2006: The National Museum of the American Indian, Smithsonian Institution, publishes “We Have a Story to Tell: The Native Peoples of the Chesapeake Region,” a guide for high school teachers that includes the history of the Indian River Community and repeatedly refers to the Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape of New Jersey.

2007: The Bridgeton, Cheswold, and Indian River communities were invited guests to the opening reception celebration of the People of the Chesapeake permanent display at the National Museum of the American Indian, Smithsonian Institution.