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?
Carolinian Cotton Confederation.
No, no,no.
Karolinian Kotton Konfederation.![]()
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.
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.
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"![]()
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.
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.