Pretty interesting. Transitioning from names and dates to historical context is a good thing. I did that too, and yet come back from time to time to the names and dates as new information comes my way. Do you match anyone in the DNA database that also has Indian blood? It likely can't go back farther much than the 1700s. Are there any suspect locations such as areas in or near reservations where your ancestors might have lived? If you could possibly get it to a tribe, many of them have excellent databases. That would really send me into search-land, lol.
Plenty of potential contact with Indians, dating back to mid 1600s in New England, later Virginia, North and South Carolina, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, etc.
Also my ancestors were in the West as part of the Mormon migration 1847, the Gold Rush 1849, etc.
But only 4% Indigenous North American can be an error. Not really that important, and it is unlikely I will ever track it down. I know who my people were, and where they lived.
I have a completed family tree going back several generations, with a couple of dead ends. Like for example a lady with the surname of "Roberts" which dead ends. That is a Welsh surname, but maybe she was part Indian.
Being part Indian wasn't a big advantage, so if it could be minimized/ignored/denied was better. It could be on either side or on both. We tested out 91 year old mother, to see if it is on her side. Expect results shortly.
I have studied DNA enough, to know the British Isles are an old melting pot, as far as physical racial ancestry goes. Many British share ancestry with Spain.
My wife is 100% Italian. Yet her mother is very tall, and has "Viking's disease" in her hands. Vikings went to Southern Italy 1000 years ago.
Etc.