Would Native American society have changed without European interference?

We all know the damage that the Europeans did to the Native Americans. They invaded their land, killed their animals (the buffalo), their children were taken from them, etc.

But before the Europeans arrived, the Native-Americans lived a primitive hunter-gatherer society in which they worshipped the Great Spirit and used the land, but didn't 'own' it in the European sense.

Here's a question. If for some reason, the Europeans never came to North America, would Native American society have changed that much without European interference?
 
But before the Europeans arrived, the Native-Americans lived a primitive hunter-gatherer society in which they worshipped the Great Spirit and used the land, but didn't 'own' it in the European sense.

Well, except for these guys. And an entire region of peoples of which these guys just happened to be the strongest when the Europeans showed up. And of course these guys, who were as centralized as any European power was back then. And many more.

Obviously there were several things introduced by Europeans, with even some positives like horses. But to imply two continents of people were in a state of flux prior to the Columbian Exchange is ridiculous.
 
I doubt we would see much structural change, at least relatively. 500 years are a big timespan so you are going to see probably Mississippian permanent civilizations happen and maybe everything from Mississippi to the Inca would be organized city states and kingdoms, but still far from the changes seen IOTL.
 

Magical123

Banned
Dale Cozort had any interesting premise that dealt with this, the trajectory of their societies if th Europeans didn't interfere.

I've also read that the most advanced cultures were at a Bronze Age level of social development and Neolithic level of technological development. I imagine eventually metalworking would prove itself more useful than simple ornamentation and trade networks between the tribes, chiefdoms and powers would continue to grow in breadth and complexity.

Perhaps in a bottle if we wanted to be really speculative they might have reached a level of development equal to that of Europeans say around 6400 AD basically 5,000 years or so more and they would have caught up.
 
We all know the damage that the Europeans did to the Native Americans. They invaded their land, killed their animals (the buffalo), their children were taken from them, etc.

But before the Europeans arrived, the Native-Americans lived a primitive hunter-gatherer society in which they worshipped the Great Spirit and used the land, but didn't 'own' it in the European sense.

Here's a question. If for some reason, the Europeans never came to North America, would Native American society have changed that much without European interference?

Most of the inhabitants of the Americas before 1492 did not live as hunter gatherers, but in societies which knew agriculture.

Australia had hunter-gatherers societies when Europeans arrived, and had had hunter-gatherers societies for thousands of years. If somehow the Europeans or somewhere else had arrived 1000 later, it is likely that whoever came would still find a hunter-gatherer society.

But in the Americas, the last 1000 years befofe Columbus saw a lot of change. Maize expanded towards NE of OTL US, and towards islands at the mouth of the River Plate; metallurgy expanded from the Andes to Mesoamerica; llamas' area expanded into Central Chile.

Imagine what would change if the Americas were left alone for another 1000 years. If the Andean world and Mesoamerica get in direct contact, you may have writting in the Andes, and potatoes and llamas in Mesoamerica, and from there these might reach North America. These in turn would lead to significant social changes. New cities will be formed, religions might change, who knows how the Americas would have looked like...
 
Last edited:
I almost typed something rude. There wasn't a native American society before the white-eyes showed up, there were thousands that were constantly changing and evolving. Also the people of these societies were human beings not plaster saints. Stop getting your history from TV.
 
Most of the inhabitants of the Americas before 1492 did not live as hunter gatherers, but in societies which knew agriculture.

Australia had hunter-gatherers societies when Europeans arrived, and had had hunter-gatherers societies for thousands of years. If somehow the Europeans or somewhere else had arrived 1000 later, it is likely that whoever came would still find a hunter-gatherer society.

But in the Americas, the last 1000 years befofe Columbus saw a lot of change. Maize expanded towards NE of OTL US, and towards islands at the mouth of the River Plate; metallurgy expanded from the Andes to Mesoamerica; llamas' area expanded into Central Chile.

Imagine what would change if the Americas were left alone for another 1000 years. If the Andean world and Mesoamerica get in direct contact, you may have writting in the Andes, and potatoes and llamas in Mesoamerica, and from there these might reach North America. These in turn would lead to significant social changes. New cities will be formed, religions might change, who knows how the Americas would have looked like...
You had proto-writing in the Inca(something with colors and vases, can´t explain it myself).

But thing is they are achievements when looked from an internal perspective, but if you think that around where the Middle Eastern world was in 500 BCE it kinda pales in comparison, at least IMO.

Dale Cozort had any interesting premise that dealt with this, the trajectory of their societies if th Europeans didn't interfere.

I've also read that the most advanced cultures were at a Bronze Age level of social development and Neolithic level of technological development. I imagine eventually metalworking would prove itself more useful than simple ornamentation and trade networks between the tribes, chiefdoms and powers would continue to grow in breadth and complexity.

Perhaps in a bottle if we wanted to be really speculative they might have reached a level of development equal to that of Europeans say around 6400 AD basically 5,000 years or so more and they would have caught up.
5000 is too much, if anything if you put the advanced part around 1000-500 BCE(pls someone correct me on that if it´s stupid) you could say in 2-4 millennias would be enough, but it really depends and it´s kinda ASB to have no one contact them at this point.
 

Magical123

Banned
You had proto-writing in the Inca(something with colors and vases, can´t explain it myself).

But thing is they are achievements when looked from an internal perspective, but if you think that around where the Middle Eastern world was in 500 BCE it kinda pales in comparison, at least IMO.


5000 is too much, if anything if you put the advanced part around 1000-500 BCE(pls someone correct me on that if it´s stupid) you could say in 2-4 millennias would be enough, but it really depends and it´s kinda ASB to have no one contact them at this point.
I'm saying if we took all the tribes, cultures and civs in the Western Hemisphere gave them a virgin earth, massive simulation, or bottle world so as to extrapolate their development they would reach 1500s level technology by 6000 AD.

Perhaps a little more or a little less.
 
What if they never developed more advanced technology, only a more complex society?

The Eurasian continent had many unique features, ranging from horses through competing medieval cities to China's approach towards international diplomacy that laid the groundwork for the rapid advancement of technology. Roots of this stretch back all the way to the Ancient Middle East.

The Inca, Mayan, and Aztecan empires were arguably less advanced technologically than ancient Mesopotamia, but still managed to create a more complex society, steeped in tradition, strict rules, and roles for every inhabitant, that had both good and bad sides for the average person, but was also a generally more structured existence.

In Eurasia, the Roman Empire and Ancient China were pretty 'laissez-faire' in many aspects, to use a modern term to refer to them, while the empires of Mesoamerica and South America were more organized, totalitarian, and dare I say "hive-minded."
 
I'm saying if we took all the tribes, cultures and civs in the Western Hemisphere gave them a virgin earth, massive simulation, or bottle world so as to extrapolate their development they would reach 1500s level technology by 6000 AD.

Perhaps a little more or a little less.
That's an extraordinarly definite statement to make. Do you have anything to back it up?
 
But before the Europeans arrived, the Native-Americans lived a primitive hunter-gatherer society in which they worshipped the Great Spirit and used the land, but didn't 'own' it in the European sense.

That's not actually true. Native Americans practiced sophisticated agriculture over a large part of both continents. The people that Columbus discovered for instance, were an agricultural people who had a domesticated food animal, the hutia, and who cultivated Cassava. Cassava turned out to be such a useful and effective tropical crop that it was adopted in many parts of Africa as a food staple, displacing traditional trops. Maize, turkey, punkins, peanuts, sunflowers, potatoes and sweet potatoes were domesticated in North and South America. Agricultural complexes ranged up and down the Eastern Seaboard, through the great lakes and at least as far as Manitoba Canada. Trade networks extended right across the continent. In meso-america and the andes, civilizations emerged and were working their way into the bronze age. But they were only a little ahead. Copper working had been developed elsewhere, including in the great lakes. There were increasingly sophisticated polities, confidederations and emerging or evolving states.
 

Magical123

Banned
That's an extraordinarly definite statement to make. Do you have anything to back it up?
Assuming the path of progress is similar in duration to Europeans and accounting for invasions, cultural collapses and any appendant local disasters or plagues it's a fair assumption to make.

With horses maybe 4000 AD, without at least another 2000 years for the Indians to reach 14th century levels of technological and social development.
 
Much of what was needed to spur a revolution in society-culture-technology was already in place and slowly working its way into populations of North America. Metal working, crop rotation, specialization etc. The big hinderance was the lack of large scale inter cultural interaction and trade. Yes, I know trade goods from Aztlan have been found as far away as the Mound Builders of Ohio but this was by comparison to European-Asian Trade very limited in scope.

Unfortunately, the Americas lacked good domesticateable animals above the dog and llama. Without the larger beasts of burden to ride or pull wagons trade was small scale and based upon what could be carried. Thus, without widescale trade the spread of new ideas was slow. Would have been an eventual move towards Eurasian levels of development...almost certainly. The land now called Pennsylvania alone has all the key ingredients for an industrial revolution. The Native Americans living there were by no means stupid or uninventive. They just lacked the competitive pressures of population density, trade and large scale warfare to push them to change. But the seeds were there even if they were slower to germinate.

Benjamin
 
Assuming the path of progress is similar in duration to Europeans and accounting for invasions, cultural collapses and any appendant local disasters or plagues it's a fair assumption to make.

With horses maybe 4000 AD, without at least another 2000 years for the Indians to reach 14th century levels of technological and social development.

I wonder, the Inca came up with completely different forms of (proto?) writing, invented rope/suspension bridges and came up with loads of things the old world never thought of....while ignoring the wheel. Tenochichlan was a huge jump, using water for in city transport. There is good argument that the Chacoan Pueblos had the most advanced primitive astronomy in the world.

So, considering that new world civ was just getting going, isn't it possible some warped, revolutionary tech couldn't be devised alt tl?
 

Magical123

Banned
I wonder, the Inca came up with completely different forms of (proto?) writing, invented rope/suspension bridges and came up with loads of things the old world never thought of....while ignoring the wheel. Tenochichlan was a huge jump, using water for in city transport. There is good argument that the Chacoan Pueblos had the most advanced primitive astronomy in the world.

So, considering that new world civ was just getting going, isn't it possible some warped, revolutionary tech couldn't be devised alt tl?
It's certainly possible that progress would have been accelerated with more cultural and trade contact, larger empires arising then breaking and diffusing however I don't think it would make a substantial difference perhaps take off a few centuries, perhaps if their lucky a cumulative millennium
 
Already was changing. The Ancestral Puebloans otherwise known as the Cliffdwellers had built a strong civilization with good trade that had collapsed at least a century before Columbus, and the ancestors of the Apache and Navajo were migrating in that area. Then, you have the Dorset being completely displaced by the more advanced Thule. The Incas were only the most recent dominant Andean civilization,likewise the Aztec were newcomers compared to the rest of Mesoamerica and the Mayas had so many collapses and revivals,it's hard to keep up with them.Pre-Columbian Native Americans were fairly dynamic,they just needed faster ways of travel and even greater trade. Maybe a timeline,where the horse hadn't gone extinct in the Americas?
 

Magical123

Banned
What if they never developed more advanced technology, only a more complex society?

The Eurasian continent had many unique features, ranging from horses through competing medieval cities to China's approach towards international diplomacy that laid the groundwork for the rapid advancement of technology. Roots of this stretch back all the way to the Ancient Middle East.

The Inca, Mayan, and Aztecan empires were arguably less advanced technologically than ancient Mesopotamia, but still managed to create a more complex society, steeped in tradition, strict rules, and roles for every inhabitant, that had both good and bad sides for the average person, but was also a generally more structured existence.

In Eurasia, the Roman Empire and Ancient China were pretty 'laissez-faire' in many aspects, to use a modern term to refer to them, while the empires of Mesoamerica and South America were more organized, totalitarian, and dare I say "hive-minded."
The Amerindian empires you mentioned would probably have collapsed after some more expansion, and society would have changed and as previously mentioned were a fairly dynamic lot.
 
Look at the Southeast/Midwest, with the Mississippians, which were a more complex, advanced version of the peoples that came before them. Once they rebounded from their partial collapse, given a century the people there would've been building something far more impressive than what came before them. Drought was a major cause of the decline, but we know from climate records that after the 16th century, there have been no droughts in the Southeast or Midwest/Plains on the level of the megadroughts in previous eras.

What I'd be curious about is what might become of California and the Pacific Northwest. California in particular had some of the least organised societies in the Americas outside of the polar regions. Either region could've played host to much more developed societies on the level of the Mississippians or Mesoamerica.
 
We all know the damage that the Europeans did to the Native Americans. They invaded their land, killed their animals (the buffalo), their children were taken from them, etc.

But before the Europeans arrived, the Native-Americans lived a primitive hunter-gatherer society in which they worshipped the Great Spirit and used the land, but didn't 'own' it in the European sense.

Here's a question. If for some reason, the Europeans never came to North America, would Native American society have changed that much without European interference?

This post is anexcellent example of the following trope:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_savage
 
The Pacific Northwest tribes had a complex society. Huge,oceangoing canoes,potlucks,gigantic totem poles, even some like the Salish had a dog breed with woolly type fur for them to weave with. They were also the pirates of that area,raiding the California tribes and probably parts of Pacific Coast Mexico. They also readily adapted to new technology and used it to their advantage. True,they weren't agricultural,but I think they were traders as well as slavers.
 
Top