Which Indian tribes would be good canidates to become states
- Thread starter 606jae
- Start date
The Union itself could legally treat natives as equals, but settlers would always come into conflict with natives as they expand west. And disease will remain a problem until the early 20th century.
That said we could see a states called Sequoyah, Cherokee, Seattle, Navajo, Sioux, and the OTL two Dakotas. Those would be after the defeat of those tribes or assimilation of those leaders.
That said we could see a states called Sequoyah, Cherokee, Seattle, Navajo, Sioux, and the OTL two Dakotas. Those would be after the defeat of those tribes or assimilation of those leaders.
The 5 Civilized tribes are your best candidates, as they were the most willing to act within the frame of American law.
These are: The Cherokee, the Chickasaw, the Choctaw, the Creek (Muscogee) and the Seminoles.
These are: The Cherokee, the Chickasaw, the Choctaw, the Creek (Muscogee) and the Seminoles.
Problem is you really can't release those as more than a single state (Sequoyah), which in and of itself was already running into significant opposition. I can't think of any other Indian Territories that could have become states unless we go back to the 1700's, and have the Founding Fathers initiate a completely different policy regarding the Indian Tribes.
Definitely one of them, but requires a POD in the 1700's, even before the founding of the country.
There problem with the iroquois is they had really low population numbers. There werent enough of them to hold off the whites long enough to get good terms, or to form a state.
As for the 5 civilized tribes, theyd have to work together bonsistently, when the individual nations had significant divisions within them, let alone between them.
As for the 5 civilized tribes, theyd have to work together bonsistently, when the individual nations had significant divisions within them, let alone between them.
The best example would be Sequoyah, and also what Thande has in Look to the West's ENA and UPSA. It's a more autonomous reservation/reserve system, almost like the princely client states of colonial India.
You also have to find a way for the colonists to treat Natives in any sort of equal manner.
You also have to find a way for the colonists to treat Natives in any sort of equal manner.
Last edited:
NothingNow
Banned
That'd require a POD back before the ARW. The Northern Frontier saw a lot of really brutal fighting that broke the already somewhat strained ties that held the Confederacy together, and along with the Sullivan Expedition destroyed any power the six nations had left, driving most of the survivors into Canada.
Before the ARW, they certainly had the capabilities to hold them off, and were on decent enough terms.
Get a prophet, or some other sort of holy figure calling for a unified front and a couple competent war-chiefs with good political links to and a good understanding of Europeans, serving as an over-all military commander and chief negotiator for the Confederacy as a whole. Akiatonharónkwen and Thayendanegea are the best choices for this, with Thayendanegea the best choice as he's an Anglican and Freemason, who spent extensive periods in New England early on.
They'd have to get explicit recognition by the colonies as being their complete equal, with all the same rights as any other sovereign state to make it work, which would be a tall order for the Continental Congress.
Eh, that depends.
With the Cherokees and the other three Northern civilized tribes it's really just a matter of resolving land disputes, and controlling settlement.
The Seminoles are something different. Had they not been taking in escaped slaves, while raiding the south-east as much as they had (something underwritten by British agents in Florida,) they probably would've been ignored by the Georgian government and Congress.
They probably could have come into the Union on their own terms if they so wanted, given that really, no-one else really gave a shit about East Florida, aside from the vicinity of St. Augustine, and the sea islands, especially after New Smyrna failed, although it had been noted that Tampa Bay would've been nice to have.
The Keys and the Dry Tortugas were pretty much a separate issue at this point.
That said, it wouldn't just be the Seminoles themselves in most of East Florida, but also the Black Seminoles/Maroons, and various other groups that seriously benefited from the relative lawless in the region.
The Cherokee were probably the closest to having this happen OTL; when some of the southern states (Georgia) tried to assert control over Cherokee territory, the Supreme Court told them it was a no-go (which Andrew Jackson, who was president at the time, promptly ignored, and kicked the Cherokee out anyways.)
Had things gone differently, I could see the Cherokee trying to become a State just to spite Georgia.
Had things gone differently, I could see the Cherokee trying to become a State just to spite Georgia.
If the ARW failed before Sullivan's Trail or even better, prevented, Thayendanegea could have helped the Iroquois remain a semi-autonomous part of the British Empire. At the very least, for the period.
The Seminoles might have ended up like the Ojibway in Minnesota and Wisconsin.
NothingNow
Banned
Yeah, maybe for 50 years or so. Thayendanegea and Degonwadonti had a lot of pull in the period. Of course, it depends partly on who William Johnson's sucessor as the Superintendent of Indian Affairs is. Guy Johnson would be a possible sucessor.
They're even more out of the way. They'd possibly be better off than the Ojibway because of that.
Excellent question. Before reading all the questions, I presumed it was about fully sovereign nation states.
Without a very early PoD, I think it is virtually impossible that any individual North American tribe could survive the effects of Anglo-American expansion and become a fully independent nation.
If we are talking about predomiantly native states in the context of the United States, I agree with most other posters. This could probably only have occurred in the context of the post-removal "5 Civlized Tribes". This would require a change in US legal perception of Indians to one which made them eligible for citizenship if they adopted Anglo-American legal systems and a move by the tribes to solidify some sort of uniform political system in Indian Territory that would allow them to apply for pan-tribal statehood. It's important to note, however, that even in the 1850's there were already a lot of whites or "mixed-bloods" living in Indian territory, many whom were dominant in the tribal political heirarchies. The probable result of "Sequoyah" statehood in the 1850's would not have been to create a uniquely "Indian state", but to create a new slave-holding southern state with a majority or near-majority Indian population.
Rex Mundi
Banned
Assuming that 'state' means a U.S. state like New York, Ohio, etc., to what extent and for how long would an Indian state be viable? It seems quite likely that any state designated as specifically Indian would, in the long run, be flooded by white American immigrants, in which case they would end up like any other state with some historical/cultural quirks.
Also, what is an "Indian" state? If it means a state with a predominantly Indian population, it's probably possible with a distant enough POD to stop white settlers or increase the native birthrate somehow, since we're only talking about a state or two. But I would argue that a state with a governor, congressmen, etc. is just another American territorial division which happens to have a lot of Amerindian citizens. An actual Indian state which retains a native form of governance would basically be a large reservation, and runs the risk of being isolated from the mainstream political system.
Also, what is an "Indian" state? If it means a state with a predominantly Indian population, it's probably possible with a distant enough POD to stop white settlers or increase the native birthrate somehow, since we're only talking about a state or two. But I would argue that a state with a governor, congressmen, etc. is just another American territorial division which happens to have a lot of Amerindian citizens. An actual Indian state which retains a native form of governance would basically be a large reservation, and runs the risk of being isolated from the mainstream political system.
I concur, except for the notion it would of necessity be a "reservation". Given changes in the constitution it might be possible for such an Indian state to be defined as an "Autonomous Region". An ethnically distinct territory that is self-governed according to tribal laws that also provides votng representatives in congress.
The Lenape might be another possibility. During the Revolutionary War, the Fort Pitt treaty permitted the Delaware and "other tribes who have been friends to the interest of the United States" to form a state and join the others states with congressional representation. Ultimately, this never went anywhere, neither side seems to have really acted on it, but with a few modest PODs, like Chief White Eyes surviving the Revolutionary War and the Lenape not changing sides, and a somewhat more successful assimilationist faction in the US, you might be able to see a moderately sized Indian state in the Northwest Territory.
Rex Mundi
Banned
I think that for self-governing Indian territories to be represented in Congress - that is to say, to have a vote on affairs and matters that concern America as a whole - you would require such a distant POD as to obviate any discussion on the USA as we know it. I just don't see it happening with the prevailing European view of the Amerindians; you would either require an enormous cultural change in the 1800's, which I just don't see happening, or go back in time way before the American Revolution.
What I can imagine is a Puerto Rico-like arrangement, but even that seems rather far-fetched. Another issue is how the government would deal with the European population in Indian states. I just don't see them letting white European Americans fall under the jurisdiction of Indian legal systems; surely an Indian territory the size of a state would have whites coming in at some point, and they would probably be obliged to abide by (and be punished under) laws more similar to those in the rest of the states.
If you set up an Indian state that doesn't have power over all of its residents - and I don't see how they would possibly be allowed to - you open the gate to more and more white immigrants who operate under and follow an entirely separate system. This in turn will surely result in the state losing any vestige of Indian sovereignty as the demographics change, and it will be integrated as a normal constituent of the United States. If you close the borders or ban white settlers or some such, then the changes of Congressional representation become vanishingly small, and whatever is left would end up a reservation in all but name.
While I do find ideas like the State of Sequoyah interesting, I agree that with the US of OTL it's really unlikely. There's no delicate way of putting this, the vast majority of Americans for the vast majority of the time that America has existed were viciously racist towards Native Americans and either did not consider them worthy to hold land or did not consider their plight worthy enough to intervene on the side of the Indians against white settlers.
For that matter, when the 5 civilized tribes and others tried to set up the state of Sequoyah, it was really a desperate, last-ditch attempt to defend themselves from white encroachment. For almost all of their history, the Native Americans of the United States have rejected political integration in the US, seeing themselves as sovereign and not subject to the US government. For that matter, there are still Indians who individually or collectively reject the idea of belonging to the United States, like the recently deceased Russell Means.
In a way it was an attempt for established native and mixed-blood families to preserve their power and authority as members of tribal nations against further white settlement, but if the State of Sequoyah as officially proposed in the early 1900's became a state, it would have been virtually indistinguishable from Arkansas or other southern states, with the exception of its very high American Indian population and the fact that its early leadership caste would have been drawn from the affluent and often mixed-blood Cherokee, Choctaw, Muscogee(Creek), and Chickasaw families who dominated the pre-Civil War Nations.
It would make a good State, but all of the Confederacy would have to support the Patriots during the Revolution to have even a remote chance of that happening.