This is giving me real flight from Egypt by the Israelites vibes. The slaves rising up and fleeing to some promised land, the waters washing away the pursuers. I like it!
To add to your point, from what I've understood in the last chapter it implied the lands to be empty which if memory serves me right is not true at all. A great deal of Indians lived in the unorganised lands beyond the United States but were not counted because they were not baptised. Again this is based on my memory (probably something I read on this very site) but I do not believe the lands to be empty.So, this is interesting to say the least. I haven't seen too many timelines deal with successful slave revolts before and I'm interesting to see where this goes. However, I do have a question: Are the rebels heading down towards Florida, or hoping to establish themselves in some of the more unpopulated regions of Georgia (people often fail to realize just how low Georgia's Anglo population was during this time - and indeed, would remain, until after the Civil War). Because if it's the prior ... that would be an interesting choice. I could see the British actually accepting the would-be settlers, as it would provide much needed population to the region (and battle hardened ones to boot), coupled with the precedent of the previous Spanish policy of accepting run away slaves into Florida.
In either case, what are Prosser's views, and relations, like with Native Americans? You've established already that he is sympathetic to poor whites as well as Quakers, and it would be interesting to see if he also extends an olive branch out to different Native tribes. Of course, the Cherokee themselves were also slave holders - so that might well throw a spanner in the works.
By empty I’m merely referring to lands underpopulated by our current groups of interest I.E. white people shooting at the slaves or Slaves needing to be freed. They would do their best to avoid the natives at this point and would not try and be antagonistic.To add to your point, from what I've understood in the last chapter it implied the lands to be empty which if memory serves me right is not true at all. A great deal of Indians lived in the unorganised lands beyond the United States but were not counted because they were not baptised. Again this is based on my memory (probably something I read on this very site) but I do not believe the lands to be empty.
whoever was there would sadly be classified as fauna with bows and arrows until the first decade of the 20th century.To add to your point, from what I've understood in the last chapter it implied the lands to be empty which if memory serves me right is not true at all. A great deal of Indians lived in the unorganised lands beyond the United States but were not counted because they were not baptised. Again this is based on my memory (probably something I read on this very site) but I do not believe the lands to be empty.
They pushed south along the coast, and then headed west, freeing and sparking slave revolts along the way, crossing the Mississippi where they dashed a Federal Army and can now begin recrossing as that was the major threat hot on their heels. We’ll see next story how the situation is growing unpopular for the northerners.So, this is interesting to say the least. I haven't seen too many timelines deal with successful slave revolts before and I'm interesting to see where this goes. However, I do have a question: Are the rebels heading down towards Florida, or hoping to establish themselves in some of the more unpopulated regions of Georgia (people often fail to realize just how low Georgia's Anglo population was during this time - and indeed, would remain, until after the Civil War). Because if it's the prior ... that would be an interesting choice. I could see the British actually accepting the would-be settlers, as it would provide much needed population to the region (and battle hardened ones to boot), coupled with the precedent of the previous Spanish policy of accepting run away slaves into Florida.
In either case, what are Prosser's views, and relations, like with Native Americans? You've established already that he is sympathetic to poor whites as well as Quakers, and it would be interesting to see if he also extends an olive branch out to different Native tribes. Of course, the Cherokee themselves were also slave holders - so that might well throw a spanner in the works.
The Federal army also had lost an entire winter gathering forces and waiting for the northern snows to melt, as well as dealing with clogged supply lines trying to push past refugees to the south. So General Neville force marched his army through the south to catch up, this lending even more to the slaves as his army is well past exhaustion.So they basically used the Spanish / French Louisiana. Which makes a lot of sense, it is easier for them to do that because the federal forces would have a lot longer to go.
It is vital that Prosser and others get the word out of how merciful he is being toward white people compared to what some might be saying, as well as the fact that, while there is some looting and murdering going on, he is executing the worst of the offenders. Some might not believe it, maybe most wouldn't, but there would be a growing thought that maybe, as stragglers start to come in and show how they were spared, the rebels really are being relatively kind.
It would have been funny to see James Wilkinson, who notoriously spied for the Spanish, leading the army. I can see Prosser not really wanting his help if he knows that Wilkinson is a traitor. After all, if he is willing to go against his own country, the United States, who is to say he wouldn't be willing to betray them also.
Very good, hopefully the British can recognize the new republic and start commerce with it and to serve as a competitor for American influence.
Baptism had nothing to do with it. The Indians tribes were regarded as quasi-sovereign entities, and "tribal" Indians as not part of the United States as a political system. They were exempt from "direct taxation", as noted in the Constitution's reference to "Indians not taxed", who did not count as "inhabitants" for the purpose of apportioning representation in the House of Representatives,To add to your point, from what I've understood in the last chapter it implied the lands to be empty which if memory serves me right is not true at all. A great deal of Indians lived in the unorganised lands beyond the United States but were not counted because they were not baptised.
Yeah overall Jefferson’s presidency will be regarded as a failure, he lost the war, glided into political irrelevance, centralized power against his own beliefs and desires, and basically crushes manifest destiny.I love how you used Wilkinson there. Someone like him isn't going to show his true colors too easily, but they know how to get to him. And while a "fix" wouldn't be obvious, I'm sure later historians will have a field day once it is discovered how he was induced to sell out without leaving a paper trail. It's like it was said of Hal Chase, he was such an expert at playing first base that he could make the errors involved throwing a game look accidental very easily.
I can just see the movies being made about this once Hollywood forms, wherever it does.
Jefferson will not have cut down on the Navy like he did in our timeline oh, but the destruction wrought on the federal forces will be just as bad as his neglect of the Navy was.