What if a Native American uprising wiped out colonies?

In the early 1640s the Narragansett sachem (roughly: chief) Miantonomi was successfully organizing the tribes of the Connecticut River Valley and Long Island to rise up against the Puritan and Pilgrim colonies that were being established along the river and around Massachusetts Bay. The major obstacle was a competing sachem, the Mohican leader Uncas, who had developed a mutually profitable relationship with the English. Miantonomi attempted to persuade Uncas to join him. Instead, Uncas reported everything to the English and with English help eventually killed Miantonomi in 1643, establishing himself as the premiere Indian sachem of the valley. It opened the way to eventual English dominance of New England.

The English colonies of the time were small and struggling. A united Native American attack would very likely have destroyed them all and driven the English back into the sea. At the same time, there was widespread unrest among the Indians of the lower Hudson River valley over their treatment at the hands of the Dutch. The war could easily have spread to them and led to the destruction of New York and other Dutch settlements.

IOW, if Uncas had joined Miantonomi's war, it's entirely possible that every colony between Virginia and Quebec would have been wiped out. Meanwhile. England itself was in the throes of the English Civil War, a conflict that would continue for the entire decade. It would hardly have been able to spare attention for a handful of Separatist colonists on the far side of the Atlantic.

So what would be the long-term fallout from all this? Certainly the elimination of the English colonies would open up room for French expansion, but the French of that era weren't all that interested in occupying land and settling it with colonists from the home country. Considering how important the Puritans and Pilgrims have become to American popular mythology, it raises some interesting butterflies concerning the American self-image, especially the way they were used in the mid-1800s to justify Manifest Destiny.

Any thoughts?
 
Well, the natives would probably manage to take their towns, and technology (Guns, horses), it might prove to make a stronger Indian force. Probably at least a few decades before the Brits could plan to take on the Natives again, and also, this might inspire other native tribes to rise up against the French.
 
This was close to becoming accomplished a bit earlier by the Powhatan Confederacy in the early 1600's, when a group of settlers encountered starving and dead colonists, and decided to turn back home, but another group ordered them to turn back to the New World.

I guess you could construct an alternate timeline in which the English decided to abandon their attempts after the first one, which would have similar results to what you're proposing.
 
If the Six Nations join the uprising they are even stronger than IOTL, at least for the short term.

It may mean the English try the same practices they used in what became the southeast US in New England as well, breaking tribes by slave raiding and selling large portions of tribes into servitude in the Caribbean. IOW, in the long term a more depopulated NE US.

It may also mean that the patterns of settlement they tried in the southern colonies spread north, commercial ventures or dumping grounds for convicts rather than religious dissidents. A more gentrified northern US, assuming that an independence movement even gets going. After all, there were many more Loyalists in the south than in the northern colonies IOTL.
 

NothingNow

Banned
It may also mean that the patterns of settlement they tried in the southern colonies spread north, commercial ventures or dumping grounds for convicts rather than religious dissidents. A more gentrified northern US, assuming that an independence movement even gets going. After all, there were many more Loyalists in the south than in the northern colonies IOTL.
And It got more loyalist the Further south it went. IOTL Florida didn't even participate in the stuff leading up to the Revolution, or In the Revolution all that much actually. Same thing In Bermuda and the Bahamas pretty much.
 
Are we sure England will come back at this time? If so, how soon will it be? How likely is it that they focus more on lands south of Virginia?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Well, the natives would probably manage to take their towns, and technology (Guns, horses), it might prove to make a stronger Indian force.

Yes on the horses, no on the guns. Indians could breed horses just fine, but they completely lacked the knowledge and technology to manufacture guns.
 
By the 1640s, were the Southern colonies (Virginia and Carolina) as large (population) as the New England colonies? Were their efforts more at turning a profit for their investors? What were their relationships with the Native Americans like?
 
It's tricky.

The various local tribes had political squabbles/wars, and getting them united means that the perceived threat has to be major and visible. But by the time the Europeans are a visible threat they may be too strong to wipe out.

I agree that something like the 1640s are your best bet. At least for New England. I'm not sure it would succeed, even then, though. Certainly wiping out any single colony would be doable - but the survivors of a destroyed town fall back on towns that are holding out and increase their defense. The European advantage of Guns, Germs and Steel (well, OK, iron), were huge and you MIGHT get all out warfare trying to wipe out ALL indians.

IIRC, Virginia got well established a bit earlier, so you might need your date to be 1630s - and then why would the New England Indians unite (if you're trying to wipe out ALL the British colonies).

If Virginia survives, then the the Indians are still toast. Virginia will view at least New England Indians as genocidal murders and when they expand north will treat them in the same way...

If the Algonkian speakers of the coast and east bank of the Hudson destroy all the settlements of the whites, then the Dutch fall back on the Mohawk, and it becomes Iroquois-wank (maybe).

Moreover, a single uprising won't do. You need at least 2 (Virginia and New England). And you simply aren't going to get those people to also wipe out the French, so your end result is French North America... (maybe)
 
I wasn't really thinking in terms of the uprising spreading as far as Virginia, but then Jamestown in 1640 was in pretty rough shape. The death rate for new colonists there was atrocious -- IIRC only 3,000 of the first 33,000 Jamestown colonists lived more than a few years, and conditions didn't improve until the 1650s. So I'm willing to be convinced that Virginia would fail as well, especially without the support and supplies of the colonies farther north.

King Phillip's War in the 1670s showed how vulnerable individual settlements were, and that was 35 years after Miantonomi was organizing his war and after immigration had resumed at the end of the English Civil War. In 1640 the total English and Dutch population north of Virginia was about 16,000 people, including women and children. (Doesn't count French in Quebec, of course.) I can't imagine the colonists having more than 5,000 combatants spread out from Maine to New York. That's a pretty vulnerable population in the face of a concerted Indian uprising.

The guns, germs, and steel (gawd I hate that book) argument only holds after the Indians run out of powder for their own firearms. They've already been ravaged by various diseases, one reason the Indians wanted the colonists out of New England.
 
If King Phillip/Metacomet had won, which colonies would be destroyed?

It seems a bit wanky to drive ALL of the English into the sea, but I'm thinking wasting Massachusetts Bay might be doable.

Also, given how the Indians would take captives and many ended up wanting to stay with the Indians, we might see more Anglicized Indian tribes if they win.
 
I doubt King Phillip/Metacomet could have won by the time he went to war in 1675. The New England population by then was 60,000 to 70,000 or more (depending on the source), quadruple the number in 1640, and the colonists had more and larger towns to fall back to as they were driven out of the hinterlands. Also, by then the colonists were finally learning to fight "Indian style" rather than in the European fashion. The native population had suffered several more disease cycles by then as well.

I think DT is right in saying that the 1640 Miantonomi effort would have been the last best chance to reclaim New England and drive out the colonists. Whether the French would have expanded into that territory is debatable. They were far better at forging alliances with the Indians than the English were, partly because at the time they weren't as interested in creating permanent settlements and taking Indian land. Their interest at the time was more commercial than agrarian.
 
Ok, so assuming the Indian attack works, the best possible result is that they oust the English out of Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth. Life's going to get a bit harder for the Dutch in the Hudson River Valley now that the Indians have learned how to organize efficiently enough. Most likely, the Dutch will end up cooperating more with the more organized Indian polity. In the long run, this has two major ramifications: the Dutch will establish themselves as the major fur-trading power on the East coast (or so I imagine, if they learn all the same tricks the French did), and that the Indian tribes now have something to gain from centralizing and organizing into something more resembling European states. That could snowball from there, perhaps leading to the Chesapeake Bay/Potomac Valley Indians to kick the Jamestowners out?
 
Also, given how the Indians would take captives and many ended up wanting to stay with the Indians, we might see more Anglicized Indian tribes if they win.

Captive taking didn't generally work that way. To become a full member of a tribe you had to become culturally one of them. Most of the adoption of outside cultural traits came from contacts through trade or missionaries.

The Six Nations became fairly anglicized anyway, adopting western style homes fairly early for example.
 
And It got more loyalist the Further south it went. IOTL Florida didn't even participate in the stuff leading up to the Revolution, or In the Revolution all that much actually. Same thing In Bermuda and the Bahamas pretty much.

That would be rather hard, as it would not be a revolution but a foreign war. ;)
 
Top