Challenge: Iroquois occupation of New Amsterdam?

Is there any way that one or more of the nations in the Iroquois Confederacy could have occupied New Amsterdam?
 
That area was still thoroughly in the territory of other tribes who would strongly object to a Iroquois warband of sufficient size capable of doing this. Also the Iroquois were relatively friendly with the Dutch. It was the French we fought with.
 

Japhy

Banned
Wasn't the New Amsterdam wall made of wood? They wouldn't need cannons, just soldiers.

And yet the Confederacy doesn't have any sort of regular army, what warriors they get aren't going to be a force well versed or prepaired to capture and occupy a small European City, wood walls or no. Plus no force they can raise is going to be that big. And of course, how can they even afford to leave that force in New Amsterdam after they supposedly take it? Thats not how First Nations fought wars. Warriors came and went, often as they pleased, and would continue to do that all the way to the War of 1812 in the Northeast.

As mentioned the Mohawk territory was at the other end of the Hudson River, its not the easiest commute to make, especially when many of the Algonquin tribes in the area are blood enemies of the Iroquois.

And lastly, Iroquois dominance was in a large part due to the fact that they were able to trade with the Dutch, and later the English. Their triumph in the Beaver Wars would be impossible without the arms, powder, ammunition and supplies they traded the Dutch for. If they're going to war with the Dutch they're attacking the hand that feeds them. If they take the city how do they even maintain their strength to outlast the seige it would take and to hold it against any takers?
 

birdboy2000

Banned
The Iroquois in OTL launched plenty of raids into new france, including carrying off captives from Montreal and Quebec and coming close to taking Montreal outright. I think from a military perspective there isn't much of an obstacle, as the Dutch presence in North America wasn't nearly as strong as the French.

The problem is diplomatic; The Dutch are a valued trade partner, and the Iroquois want them there - if they take New Amsterdam, it doesn't do them much good, because to them New Netherlands wasn't a threat but a valuable place to exchange furs for goods. And if the Dutch get big enough in the Americas to scare them, then it'll be a lot harder to take it.
 
That area was still thoroughly in the territory of other tribes who would strongly object to a Iroquois warband of sufficient size capable of doing this. Also the Iroquois were relatively friendly with the Dutch. It was the French we fought with.

The Iroquois in OTL launched plenty of raids into new france, including carrying off captives from Montreal and Quebec and coming close to taking Montreal outright. I think from a military perspective there isn't much of an obstacle, as the Dutch presence in North America wasn't nearly as strong as the French.
The thing is, they'd already cleared out most of the natives on that road north, so most of the trip to Montreal was through 'their' land.

The trip south would be full of still hostile, still potent tribes.

Besides, as your other point said, theyd be committing suicide by removing their main source of arms.
 

katchen

Banned
So, the Iroquois (excuse me, Haundanasee), take Montreal, not New Amsterdam. Then they face the probllem of taking--and holding--Quebec.
 
What would compel them to hold Quebec? More likely they take their adopted captives, loot, and then go back to their strongholds in the south. They did not have the reach to hold land that far north.
 
Top