• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

What if the Narragansett had won the Great Swamp Fight?

Reminding me of the Scramble articles, that what we generally remember as a power imbalance wasn't always and things could have gone very different before that
You've just reminded me of one of the most surreal things I've ever seen on TV, and a reminder of @Lord Roem 's point that Richard Madeley is the closest thing real life has to Alan Partridge - when he ended up apologising to one of the Naragansett descendants and asking for forgiveness because it turned out one of his ancestors was involved in the Great Swamp Fight.

 
That had to be a weird phone call John got. "So we got this film crew following this guy who--"
There was already one surreal moment earlier in the programme where he was talking with a Canadian genealogist about his (chronologically later) Canadian ancestry, it was something like:

RM: So how important did my ancestor get in politics?
Genealogist: Get out your wallet and take out a $100 bill.
RM (looks terrified as though he's being robbed on camera)

...as he was related to Robert Borden too.
 
Reminding me of the Scramble articles, that what we generally remember as a power imbalance wasn't always and things could have gone very different before that
In particular I thought, though this isn't dwelt on to the same extent, the importance of allies like the Mohawks to the colonists at this point.
 
On comparison to the Scramble articles, I did raise an eyebrow at the final paragraph describing an alternate North America as looking more like "modern day Africa". In terms of numbers perhaps, but considering the how, why and when many of modern nations of Africa took shape it's perhaps not the best comparison. So too did the assumption that the French would just abandon the western hemisphere after the bottom falls out the fur market.

Good discussion of the POD, and the immediate impacts of the divergence, but felt towards the end it got a bit "if Pitt the Elder had negotiated an end to the American Revolution then the Germans wouldn't be concerned with building an oversees Empire in the late 1800s."
 
On comparison to the Scramble articles, I did raise an eyebrow at the final paragraph describing an alternate North America as looking more like "modern day Africa". In terms of numbers perhaps, but considering the how, why and when many of modern nations of Africa took shape it's perhaps not the best comparison. So too did the assumption that the French would just abandon the western hemisphere after the bottom falls out the fur market.

Good discussion of the POD, and the immediate impacts of the divergence, but felt towards the end it got a bit "if Pitt the Elder had negotiated an end to the American Revolution then the Germans wouldn't be concerned with building an oversees Empire in the late 1800s."

Yeah, it does seem a bit wishful thinking to assume you just have this patchwork of native states, because one of the big things to remember is that with stronger native powers and weaker colonies, that just means that we're far more likely to see open conflict between, to give an example, the Iroquois and the Mohawk.

But I can see this Wampanoag-Narraganset confederation managing to survive as a clear block between Connecticut and Massachusetts Bay-Plymouth, and I can definitely see a world where London decides to side with this Confederation and secure an ally against the French leading eventually to a small, very anti-British Republic of Massachusetts.
 
It's not my area at all but didn't this like happen already several times and each time a few years later a different colony showed up and a different native tribe started a war with another giving them an in?

Feels a bit wishful thinking that Europeans would just give up and the natives would just stay United and aware of the greater threat.
 
It's not my area at all but didn't this like happen already several times and each time a few years later a different colony showed up and a different native tribe started a war with another giving them an in?

Feels a bit wishful thinking that Europeans would just give up and the natives would just stay United and aware of the greater threat.
The basic thing with colonialism and what-ifs is that the colonisers only have to be lucky once, whereas the natives have to be lucky every time. It's not like a fight with the colonies is going to lead to Anglesey being ceded to the Powhatan.
 
The basic thing with colonialism and what-ifs is that the colonisers only have to be lucky once, whereas the natives have to be lucky every time. It's not like a fight with the colonies is going to lead to Anglesey being ceded to the Powhatan.
Hmmm - I agree in these instances, yes, but I don't think that's a universal rule.
 
It's just nit picking about terminology but I kind of think if it doesn't apply then its not a colonial war.
Yes, I mean, the Iroquois did send ambassadors to Queen Anne's court so you can imagine some circumstance where indigenous nations get involved on the top table of starting a war that's also fought in Europe (i.e. not just being there when it started like the Seven Years' War) but I agree, at that point it's not just a colonial war anymore.
 
Back
Top