Consequences of a higher Cherokee prescence in Mexico?

Even long before the Trail of Tears, a number of Cherokee had decided on moving out west in the early 19th century, settling down in places like Missouri or Arkansas. But another place was Texas, still in Spanish hands, in the region around Nacogdoches. The Spanish welcomed their prescence, hoping they would act as a buffer against American expansion. This trend continued when Mexico gained independence.

Despite so, the Cherokee would go on to have their requests of having land titles unsuccesful. First by the independence of Mexico from Spain, and then by the political turmoils that plagued the country. Even when Mexico was more willing, in face of the increased American immigration, those titles still went ungranted due in part for lack of funds and the like. When Texas declared their independence, the Cherokee chose neutrality on the conflict.

So now the question is, what if things had gone better for the Cherokee? A possible PoD could be Richard Field's trip to Mexico City, when trying to secure a land grant. He already had Governor Trespalacios's support of living in East Texas in exchange of patrolling the Sabine River against American incursions and smuggling. He was unsuccesful in OTL, but perhaps things in Mexico are more stable and he succeeds. Or maybe he succeeds despite the problems in Mexico City? So now the Cherokee have official recognition of owning land in East Texas by the government, and also have to fulfill the conditions mentioned previously.

Could this lead to a higher Cherokee prescence in Texas? Would other Cherokee still in the US move to Mexico? How could it affect American immigration to the region? If Texas still revolts, do the Cherokee now actively join in supporting Mexico instead of remaining neutral? Would this actually make the revolution fail? What of future consequences, like facing Manifest Destiny America? Could other tribes be influenced on these events?

I think it's an interesting scenario, with many potential butterflies, and I would like to know what's the general opinion on this.
 
Okay, I guess I'll contribute first.

If the Cherokee are able to get their land grants, and that early as well, I think it will impact on the Cherokee still in the US. The ones already west of the Mississippi may indeed decide to move to Mexico to try their luck as well (Mexico won't object, it's more non-Americans moving in), and perhaps the ones still east might also consider moving, once things look innevitable they'll be forced to move west, one way or another. So by the time of the Trail of Tears, they'll be moving instead to Texas rather than the future Indian Territory.

The 1824 Colonization Act would also be affected if it's still made, since some land would be already taken by the Cherokee, so less grants will be given, so that is going to butterfly away an American colony or two (or more?). So, it will impact on the number of Americans in Texas by the 1830's. And speaking of, in OTL the number of Cherokee in Texas in those times was only that of a few hundred. I'm not sure their numbers would increase that much in this scenario, at least at first, so perhaps they can't effectively act as a buffer or guard the Sabine well. But, I do see there being an impact, so the number of Americans crossing over (specially the ones that snuck in after the 1830 Immigration Ban) would be smaller than OTL, even if not by that much.

As their loyalty to Mexico would be strengthened, so perhaps the Cherokee now would also join up in suppressing the Texan Revolution, instead of remaining neutral like in OTL. It's unlikely the situation that led to the signing of the Treaty of Velasco would be repeated, then (even without the Cherokee joining, honestly, but that's another topic); so that is also butterflied away. I'm not fully sure what would be the US's reaction to this, but I think it will certainly have something happening in relation to it (at the very least, there's no Texas to annex and use their claims to trigger the Mexican-American War; so the M-A War, if it still happens, would be over another thing). One thing for sure, the Cherokee are likely to continue living in Texas, unlike OTL, where the Texans expelled them.

Anyway, as Texas's revolt happened around and before the ToT, and if the Cherokee do contribute and help Mexico win the war, then it would definitely impact on what the other tribes might think on the matter. At the very least, a significant number of the other Cherokee would also move over (or maybe the US is capable of doing something about it), and perhaps now have the numbers to be a true buffer. They would still be throwing their lot with Mexico, specially if the US still has Manifest Destiny in their mind, I would think. At this point, I'm not fully sure how things would go, but this should be a start.

So, any thoughts?
 
I would suggest researching the role that chattel-slavery played in the Cherokee culture during the antebellum years.

A lot of the animosity that the Mexican government felt against the norteamericano immigrants was wrapped up in their support of slavery. This is something that could easily be transferred to a more muscular Cherokee presence in Texas.

Something else worth considering is how the Cherokee would clash with the Comanche. The few Cherokee who settled in Texas IOTL were in the far eastern part of the state, but if the Cherokee diaspora from Georgia and North Carolina came primarily to Texas, instead of Oklahoma, then their geographical footprint would be substantially larger and could overlap the eastern part of the Comancheria. You could very easily have a Fort Parker type massacre in eastern central Texas where the Cherokee fall foul of the Comanche.

It's a flip of the coin as to whether a larger Cherokee presence in Texas would result in them aiding the Mexicans. It's certainly possible. But it's also possible that neutrality would be seen as the best option. Keep in mind, to make a larger Cherokee population happen by the time of the Texas Revolution, you might need to speed up the timing of the trail of Tears. Most of the Cherokee who eventually settled in Oklahoma came after the Texas Revolution.
 
I would suggest researching the role that chattel-slavery played in the Cherokee culture during the antebellum years.

A lot of the animosity that the Mexican government felt against the norteamericano immigrants was wrapped up in their support of slavery. This is something that could easily be transferred to a more muscular Cherokee presence in Texas.

Something else worth considering is how the Cherokee would clash with the Comanche. The few Cherokee who settled in Texas IOTL were in the far eastern part of the state, but if the Cherokee diaspora from Georgia and North Carolina came primarily to Texas, instead of Oklahoma, then their geographical footprint would be substantially larger and could overlap the eastern part of the Comancheria. You could very easily have a Fort Parker type massacre in eastern central Texas where the Cherokee fall foul of the Comanche.

It's a flip of the coin as to whether a larger Cherokee presence in Texas would result in them aiding the Mexicans. It's certainly possible. But it's also possible that neutrality would be seen as the best option. Keep in mind, to make a larger Cherokee population happen by the time of the Texas Revolution, you might need to speed up the timing of the trail of Tears. Most of the Cherokee who eventually settled in Oklahoma came after the Texas Revolution.

To be fair, even the Mexican government made an exception to the American inmigrants. Indeed, for Texas, the plan was to implement gradual abolition. It was only until 1829 when Guerrero decided to put a stop to it right there and then. If the Cherokee get their grants, the same thing would be applied. They'd keep their slaves, and a gradual abolition would be in place instead of a full ban like in the rest of the country. The government would be willing to do such a thing, if it means they have something to keep American expansion in check.

Yes, problems with the Comanche would arise, but the Comanche were already a pain for the Hispanic settlements in the area. And I think the Comancheria also overlaped with American territory at the time. You already had places like Fort Towson in place to guard the frontier. The government may plplace more focus on the area to help the Cherokee out (if they already gave the grants, then might as well). Or, since my proposed PoD is before teh 1824 Colonization Law, maybe there's not as much American settlement, and the CHerokee don't have to go as far west to overlap with the Comancheria.

Neutrality was mostly only in place because the Americans in Texas were also trying to gain their support. There's also the factor of Houston, who was the one mainly responsible for that. It's really telling that when Houston's presidency ended, the Cherokee were prompty attacked and forceibly relocated... again. But if the Cherokee have their grants, then they would have a closer attachment to the place. And while the Cherokke weren't relocated until after the Revolution, the Trail of Tears had already happened for other tribes. And even in the 1820's, you already had some Cherokee moving west of the Mississippi (and a consequence of having the grants could mean a higher immigration even at those times to Mexico). So the Cherokee would know what the Americans would do. So, having their grants, it'd give them more reason to not let the Americans take over, Houston or no Houston. So yes, I see it more likely they'd not be neutral like OTL and actually help out down the revolt.
 
Hmm...interesting. My "New Albion" timeline (Britain establishes colonies on west coast of North America; US takes Canada during American Revolution ) has Spain seek a higher settlement of Tejas, but they're hard to find. I have settlers from Irish and Scottish Catholics after the Invasion of England by France and Spain has failed, and Christian refugees after the conquest of the Barbary Coast (it's complicated), but am still short of fighters against the Americans. This seems like a possible option.
 
Top