alternatehistory.com

Well, they certainly did in OTL, but I'm talking about martial races here:

Ethnic-racial stereotyping is not unique to South Africa. Elsewhere in the world certain ethnic groups, with popular military history, have often been selected as the best combat material. These include the Gurkhas, Bedouin, Scots, Sikhs, Ibans, Berbers, Cossacks, Maori, Mongols, Kurds, Zulus, Irish and Montenegrins (Enloe 1980:26). During the colonial era, the British in East Asia identified distinctive characteristics for the various population groups in the subcontinent. For instance, Pathans were regarded as independent and calculating, the Dogras were shy and proud, the Gurkhas playful and comical, yet crazed and bloodthirsty in battle, the Sikhs prone to scheming and plotting yet tenacious in defence, while the Jats were viewed as stolid and dense. This resulted in the overrepresentation of some ethnic groups. In Burma, the Arakanese, Chins, Kachins, Shans and particularly the Karens were dominant in the armed forces. In Iraq, the British relied on Kurds, Assyrians and Yazidis. The northerners dominated in the defence forces of Nigeria, Ghana, Sierra Leone and Uganda (Horowitz 1985:446--7).
http://www.unisa.ac.za/default.asp?Cmd=ViewContent&ContentID=11593

Make sure you read the Wikipedia article first. It would appear that a "martial race" wasn't just a people who had a powerful military and fighting tradition. To some extent, it was also about political plays to divide and conquer the native peoples against each other. So perhaps they would have considered the Iroquois a martial race, but not the French-allied Huron.
Top