"Indian Barrier State" on the Great Lakes: plausible size?
- Thread starter oshron
- Start date
Not with the pressures of the British Government backing the Native Americans, this wouldn't just become an Indian war but an international affair
I'm very familiar with the Proclamation of 1763 and with the intention behind the line. What is your understanding of the proclamation and the intention of the line?
Your assumption, that the Crown will back the Indians over their own people, is, I believe, erroneous.
I think the people shouting "It'd die! It'd die!" are being counterproductive and unimaginitive.
The Yanks did love their land, but nobody is arguing that they wouldn't be able to keep on grabbing land. And the British could conceivably construct an Indian-run protectorate in the areas around the Great Lakes without having to choose between Canadian settlers and natives. There is still a lot of land to the west to be settled, and the Americans may gain New Orleans at a later date. Point is, the Americans and Canadians can both expand to the west without coming into conflict with the Indian state directly, depending on its precise size and location.
And if the Indians have the British as their backers, the Americans, having lost a war resulting in this state being formed to begin with, are unlikely to want to come into conflict with it. And so long as the British feel they need a buffer state, they may very well prevent too many Canadians from settling "Indian" land - after all, it would serve their interests to do so, regardless of how the natives feel about it.
The Yanks did love their land, but nobody is arguing that they wouldn't be able to keep on grabbing land. And the British could conceivably construct an Indian-run protectorate in the areas around the Great Lakes without having to choose between Canadian settlers and natives. There is still a lot of land to the west to be settled, and the Americans may gain New Orleans at a later date. Point is, the Americans and Canadians can both expand to the west without coming into conflict with the Indian state directly, depending on its precise size and location.
And if the Indians have the British as their backers, the Americans, having lost a war resulting in this state being formed to begin with, are unlikely to want to come into conflict with it. And so long as the British feel they need a buffer state, they may very well prevent too many Canadians from settling "Indian" land - after all, it would serve their interests to do so, regardless of how the natives feel about it.
One thing that comes to my mind is that this native state would likely block Northerners from going west but would not block Southerners. The south could easily expand Slave holding states while the new England would probably Be cramped in with less and less power everyday.
It would be especially interesting if this native state also had legalised slave holding.
It would be especially interesting if this native state also had legalised slave holding.
Why wouldn't there be a Indian Buffer State along the St.Lawrence River instead of the Great Lakes? I can't see the Americans giving up all the resources that are located there for the sake of a peace treaty.
An Indian DMZ from Detroit to the east makes more sense, assuming that the Crown can bribe the Indians into accepting that. And even if they do, how long could it last? Indians still have their traditional weaknesses vis-a-vis a conflict with the American military and unless they're willing to change that, they're just cannon fodder for the next British/American war.
An Indian DMZ from Detroit to the east makes more sense, assuming that the Crown can bribe the Indians into accepting that. And even if they do, how long could it last? Indians still have their traditional weaknesses vis-a-vis a conflict with the American military and unless they're willing to change that, they're just cannon fodder for the next British/American war.
David S Poepoe
Banned
Don't see why the lower peninsula of Michigan would work fine. A treaty line would extend along the southern border as the state border in OTL runs from lake to lake. It would be the perfect buffer state between the US and Canada.
Why on earth think Tecumseh's alliance last any better than the other tons of natives whom we sadly only drove all the way to the Pacific? Magic British guns that didn't do the job IOTL?
Emperor-of-New-Zealand, our tude, like the British we were descended from, was that the natives were inferiors to steal everything from, not be afraid of; and our experience was very much right on not fearing, as you see from our borders. And, er, we already had New Orleans. There was only among the biggest battles of the war there, I'm afraid, where we totally beat the Napoleonic vets that we keep hearing too mucn about on 1812 threads.
Emperor-of-New-Zealand, our tude, like the British we were descended from, was that the natives were inferiors to steal everything from, not be afraid of; and our experience was very much right on not fearing, as you see from our borders. And, er, we already had New Orleans. There was only among the biggest battles of the war there, I'm afraid, where we totally beat the Napoleonic vets that we keep hearing too mucn about on 1812 threads.
The Proclamation line sort of died after the American War of Independence. Especially if the British win the war of 1812 and set up this Indian protectorate, they would not be blind to demographics. At some point, they would encourage westward migration into the old Northwest.
The line was only meant to be a short term fix until the British government could map out a plan for "asserting sovereignty" over the western lands. But yes, the course of events moved too quickly for those plans to be developed & implemented in much of British North America.
They are being unimaginative, but the outcome is pretty much right. About the best you could do for the Indians is set them up to become the Maori of this whatever-you-call-it Great Lakes New Zealand. The military disparity isn't why it's inevitably going away - it's the population disparity. Whatever it starts as, it won't end as an Indian Protectorate. Even if you could keep the American settlers out (you can't) there're more than enough Canadians to do a simple demographic overrun job.
I agree with your feelings about the comments
While the protectorate in my TL may be too big, I feel one IOTL Wisconsin and the UP could work. You have natural boundaries which could serve as borders, and Lake Michigan and Superior serve as a natural block to settlers moving west.
Regardless of what might work in theory if such a protectorate were brought to fruition, the reality is, that, given what be know about British interactions with the native populations of North America, Australia and New Zealand in OTL, it most likely would not be established at all in this time period in a "British win the War of 1812" scenario. If one were established, my hunch is that it would be one along the lines of the map I posted up thread.