Names for a Independent South

I don't think the southern colonies would've gone for something that different from the United States of America.

Perhaps the Federated States of America or the Commonwealth of American States?
 
I don't think the southern colonies would've gone for something that different from the United States of America.

Perhaps the Federated States of America or the Commonwealth of American States?

Considering that "Columbia" and "Alleghenia" almost ended up the US' demonym at separate times, I find nothing out of the ordinary about something like "Grand Carolina" or "Appalachia" becoming a national name for an independent South.

EDIT: Also WRT the OP, I contest that the Carolinas weren't THAT overwhelmingly likely to refuse ratifying the Constitution with a slave clause included, as there's no evidence from Rutledge or anyone else during the Convention's minutes saying so or outlining a plan to conduct such a move in that event (see THIS TL for what IMO would be a likely turnout in said event, with special emphasis on pg.6).
 
Last edited:
The problem is that North Carolina wasn't a big slave state until after the Revolution and at the time there was a fair bit of anti-slavery thought once you got away from the coastal plantations, especially in the Quaker communities. The other issue is that North Carolina never really had much in common with South Carolina economically which is why they were divided into two colonies in the first place. Economically and politically North Carolina has far more in common with Virginia while South Carolina would be better associated with Georgia.

Where Virginia goes North Carolina will follow.
 
Seriously, what is wrong with "Confederate States of America" in 1789?

After all the US constitution was adopted to replace the Articles of Confederation. Any states that opted not to join the new union might, initially by default at least, consider the Articles of Confederation as the basis of their confederation.


"Carolina" would probably be another option for North and South Carolina if the southern states opted not to form a federation but become completely independent nations.
 
The problem is that North Carolina wasn't a big slave state until after the Revolution and at the time there was a fair bit of anti-slavery thought once you got away from the coastal plantations, especially in the Quaker communities. The other issue is that North Carolina never really had much in common with South Carolina economically which is why they were divided into two colonies in the first place. Economically and politically North Carolina has far more in common with Virginia while South Carolina would be better associated with Georgia.

Where Virginia goes North Carolina will follow.

You speak the truth about the split in between the Carolinas (I've seen this distinction first-hand, FWIW)...truth be told, had I my druthers I'd have named them both completely different things, especially given how the ephemeral "Province of Carolina" was as big a failure as the "Dominion of New England". This is also why I have a huge problem with a North-South split along the Missouri Compromise Line/VA-NC Border (besides the fact that I find it aesthetically displeasing), but that's not relevant here. Using some sort of "Confederation" title also makes sense given the use of the AoC as the national legislature around the OP's timeframe.
 
The problem is that North Carolina wasn't a big slave state until after the Revolution and at the time there was a fair bit of anti-slavery thought once you got away from the coastal plantations, especially in the Quaker communities. The other issue is that North Carolina never really had much in common with South Carolina economically which is why they were divided into two colonies in the first place. Economically and politically North Carolina has far more in common with Virginia while South Carolina would be better associated with Georgia.

Where Virginia goes North Carolina will follow.

I'd be interested to hear more about this divide - if only because I'm trying to plot out how such an early collapse of the USA would go down.
 
I'd be interested to hear more about this divide - if only because I'm trying to plot out how such an early collapse of the USA would go down.

For one, demographically the bulk of South Carolina's white population either arrived straight from Britain or from Barbados and other Caribbean isles, whereas most North Carolinians settled after moving from Virginia during the post-16th. Century period (certainly after the Lost Colony incident). Then there's the economic model differences between the two, notably the use of tobacco and logging as the main agricultural ventures (with secondary focus on cotton) in NC, whereas SC was wholeheartedly into King Cotton's cultivation (along with rice and indigo). Politically, the Lords Proprietor in NC had long chafed against those in what would become South Carolina due to their focus in public works and taxes heavily favoring Charles Town/Charleston and surrounding environs, whilst leaving things such as road maintenance, import taxes, garrisons of militia/troops, etc. in North Carolina largely underfunded and at times ignored. And finally, there's the Quaker and Scots-Irish inhabitants of North Carolina that dwarfed their equivalents to the south which informed a more "Upper Southern"/moderated religious and cultural milieu compared to South Carolina's nature of being a mainland extension of the West Indies.
 
For one, demographically the bulk of South Carolina's white population either arrived straight from Britain or from Barbados and other Caribbean isles, whereas most North Carolinians settled after moving from Virginia during the post-16th. Century period (certainly after the Lost Colony incident). Then there's the economic model differences between the two, notably the use of tobacco and logging as the main agricultural ventures (with secondary focus on cotton) in NC, whereas SC was wholeheartedly into King Cotton's cultivation (along with rice and indigo). Politically, the Lords Proprietor in NC had long chafed against those in what would become South Carolina due to their focus in public works and taxes heavily favoring Charles Town/Charleston and surrounding environs, whilst leaving things such as road maintenance, import taxes, garrisons of militia/troops, etc. in North Carolina largely underfunded and at times ignored. And finally, there's the Quaker and Scots-Irish inhabitants of North Carolina that dwarfed their equivalents to the south which informed a more "Upper Southern"/moderated religious and cultural milieu compared to South Carolina's nature of being a mainland extension of the West Indies.

Interesting - so when did the shift from Virginia to South Carolina really start then?

This does put a cramp in the standard issue "Carolina Confederation" between the two - complete with Tennessee as "West Carolina" :p
 
Interesting - so when did the shift from Virginia to South Carolina really start then?

This does put a cramp in the standard issue "Carolina Confederation" between the two - complete with Tennessee as "West Carolina" :p

What shift from Virginia to South Carolina? That split still remains in force today (it certainly was in the Civil War, where NC and most of the Upper South jumped into bed with the CSA only after VA said so) :confused:. Even now, the only parts of South Carolina that seem all that close to NC from my perspective are the upcountry portions (e.g. near Greenville), which to be fair is fairly homogenous from West Virginia to northern Alabama (the Scots-Irish were a wide-travelling bunch, doncha know).

Tennessee is a very unique case, given how it was Jackson's baby in developing the place (that, and how the Cherokee got screwed out of their own backyard) that IMO sets it apart not only from South Carolina, but North Carolina as well. I have two buddies in the Air Force, one from TN and the other from NC, and whenever I brought up the idea of union between the two I'd have sworn their reaction coulda killed the faint-hearted. Another coworker from SC seems to have quite a...less than friendly attitude towards NC in a broad sense (insofar as not liking a fellow state within the US, at any rate).
 
This is all really interesting about the difffernces between North Carolina and South - I recalled there were Whigs big in NC as late as the early 1850s and that North Carolina didn't vote to secede till after Virginia, but I thought they were as pro-slavery as South Carolina during the ARW and simply remained pro-slvery but not as radical while South Carolina by 1830 was rabidly pro-slavery.

It appears, then, that South Caroilna and Georgia might be the only ones to split off if the Constitution, say, didn't have a Fugitive Slave Clause? I wonder if any consideration would be given to just ignoring the lands west of the Chattahoochee and just letting the USA have those, so there is no arguemtna bout who owns the right to the Eastern shore of the Mississippi. After all, there would be little reason for the planters of South Carolina or that strip along the Savannah to even consider land that far west.

Of course, it would be interesting if North Carolina did go with the others, then tried to split off and come back tot he US or remain independent. Perhaps becasue of Andrew Jackson's insistence on Jacksonian democracy in defiance of the planter aristocacry. You could have Jackson fighting for independence from Calhoun.:D

As fora name, the Confederation of Southern America sounds good - it would be different from South America. But, I like Confederation of Columbia. Had Columbia, SC been founded by this point?
 
You speak the truth about the split in between the Carolinas (I've seen this distinction first-hand, FWIW)...truth be told, had I my druthers I'd have named them both completely different things, especially given how the ephemeral "Province of Carolina" was as big a failure as the "Dominion of New England". This is also why I have a huge problem with a North-South split along the Missouri Compromise Line/VA-NC Border (besides the fact that I find it aesthetically displeasing), but that's not relevant here. Using some sort of "Confederation" title also makes sense given the use of the AoC as the national legislature around the OP's timeframe.

Actually, South Carolina was known as 'Clarendon' while North Carolina was 'Albemarle' during their Province of Carolina period! :) I guess it was simpler to refer to them as North and South otherwise, though.
 
I did not know that! Thanks for telling me (where did you find that out, anyway?), now I know what to call them if I ever get my idea for an alt-FAN story off the ground :cool:. It was either that, or include the Floridas (for the sake of symmetry, I'm kinda OCD that way).
 
Actually, South Carolina was known as 'Clarendon' while North Carolina was 'Albemarle' during their Province of Carolina period! :) I guess it was simpler to refer to them as North and South otherwise, though.

Sorry to bump this but the only source for this I could find was this article. I'd love to know where you've gotten this info from.
 
Sorry to bump this but the only source for this I could find was this article. I'd love to know where you've gotten this info from.

I forget where I ORIGINALLY read it, but that's one site I got it from as well as various google-fu methods that kept the names cropping up enough I figure it to be truthful.
 
Top