Submitted by CTHistory42 t3_10gx1la in Connecticut
Comments
Kolzig33189 t1_j55cghv wrote
I had the same thought - Mohegans and Pequot fought over land/territory constantly and land close to their respective “borders” changed hands frequently. I’m sure the same thing happened with other neighboring tribes in nearby states, just not as familiar with their history. So it’s helpful to know when they are basing this map.
On a side note - didn’t Algonquin tribes occupy a bunch of land in New England and NY? Don’t see them on here.
Independent_Source97 t1_j55mxzm wrote
>Algonquin
IIRC, the Algonquin tribe were mostly in Canada around Ontario. The Algonquin language and its dialects were spoken by about 24 different tribes in the northeast.
Whaddaulookinat t1_j55tyjb wrote
There do seem to be outposts of Algonquin settlers in the New England/NYS area that probably arrived only a century or two before European contact... But the numbers may be fairly small and likely would've had more political contact with surrounding tribes.
Swede577 t1_j56bccs wrote
The Quinnipiac's that spoke Algonquin at one point controlled all of CT.
Since 1997, more extensive research, based on linguistics and early historical records, has extended the boundaries of the 1500-1600 AD Quiripi/Renapi/Quinnipiac confederacies to include all of what is now Connecticut, eastern New York, northern New Jersey, and half of Long Island (prior to the immigration of the Pequot/Mohegan peoples into eastern CT
WikiSummarizerBot t1_j56be5h wrote
>Quinnipiac is the English name for the Eansketambawg (meaning "original people"; cf. Ojibwe: Anishinaabeg and Blackfoot: Niitsítapi), a Quiripi-speaking Native American nation of the Algonquian family who inhabited the Wampanoki (i. e. , "Dawnland"; c.
^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Whaddaulookinat t1_j56cjkf wrote
Very interesting, thank you!
maxanderson350 t1_j55ejuw wrote
True; and I would suspect that there were countless tribes inhabiting Connecticut before the tribes listed on this map even came into existence.
dabasauras-rex t1_j55gmef wrote
Are the Mohican seen in western CT Algonquin ?
Edit - seemingly yes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohicans
CTHistory42 OP t1_j55lq8b wrote
Good questions and points all. I just posted it to get the discussion started - with the disclaimer that no one is saying it's perfect. Most of all, the group itself.
Here's the website for them: https://native-land.ca/
maxanderson350 t1_j55oj2q wrote
Thank you very much for sharing the link. A few things I noticed on the website that I found interesting:
- Europe, Asia, and the Middle East are more or less empty of indigenous peoples. I found that particularly odd because those are the parts of the world historians know the most about due to extensive records and archeological finds.
- From a quick review of CT tribes, it does appear that this is a map not of the "original" peoples of Connecticut but rather the people who the European settlers found. I consider "original" misleading because, for example, while the Tunxis were found living along the Farmington River by Europeans in the early 1600s, there is no basis to believe (and seems quite far-fetched to suggest) that the Tunxis were in fact the "original" people of that land. Simply put, the idea that the land did not change hands over thousands of years is hard to believe.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j567h9m wrote
Your Native American historical knowledge is far superior to mine. You're right about the use of the word "original". But it's always interesting to see how r/Connecticut will respond. There are some very talented/knowledgeable folks on this site
mistiklest t1_j56hyer wrote
> Europe, Asia, and the Middle East are more or less empty of indigenous peoples. I found that particularly odd because those are the parts of the world historians know the most about due to extensive records and archeological finds.
The way they seem to be using the term indigenous peoples seems to be in distinction to colonizers. In this sense, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East don't have indigenous people, because they've not been colonized.
Then again, Europeans, Asians, and Middle Easterners also spent a lot of time conquering and killing each other.
Lost_city t1_j56x87a wrote
But even parts of Europe were colonized. For example, Latvia was one of the last parts of Europe to become Christian. Germans conducted a series of crusades to conquer the people, and established a ruling structure over the indigenous people there for centuries that resembled later colonies all over the world.
mistiklest t1_j56xv0q wrote
Yeah, that's the sort of thing I had in mind with my last sentence.
maxanderson350 t1_j5702er wrote
Perhaps that is how they are using the term. But if the term "indigenous" is being used solely to convey the inhabitants of land prior to being conquered then Europe, Asia, and the Middle East would have an almost unlimited number of indigenous peoples.
I'm not sure I understand any distinction though regarding spending "a lot of time conquering and killing each other" as I wouldn't assume the Americans were any different.
LizzieBordensPetRock t1_j558c2l wrote
Unless they are also using archeological info?
maxanderson350 t1_j55ae0a wrote
Perhaps, but it would be good to know the context and basis for this map.
Swede577 t1_j56a5gm wrote
The state found a PaleoIndian site in Avon on the Farmington River that was radiocarbon dated to 12500 years old. They would have been some of the first human inhabitants after the last ice age.
maxanderson350 t1_j570iu6 wrote
yes, that's a fascinating discovery and speaks directly to my point. Thanks for sharing.
mistiklest t1_j56ogid wrote
> Only question I have is what is the time period for this?
I think it's more of an archive of the places that still extant Indigenous groups count as their homelands than it is a historical or archaeological document.
adam_west_ t1_j554234 wrote
Fascinating…Interesting to see how ‘ordered’ the tribes are in Long Island and how diffuse they seem to be throughout CT. I wonder how much of that may be attributed to topography / geology?
FloodMoose t1_j557l3p wrote
The land definitely played a role. There's occupation along the major rivers.
merryone2K t1_j554nul wrote
Really, really cool. And I just love "Podunk" as a word; didn't realize it came from a native tribe. TIL.
nick-j- t1_j57pimg wrote
I thought it was a nickname for Poughkeepsie actually
drwhogwarts t1_j577qpg wrote
That stood out to me too. So every time someone uses that term they're insulting a native American tribe... I had no idea.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_j5571bm wrote
Is there also a map of known alliances/enemies? These tribes fought, allied, and/or assimilated with each other all the time so the idea that these always/only occupied what this map is showing is incorrect. It’s at best a snapshot of what we know at the time.
smurphy8536 t1_j55sskv wrote
Probably why they say in the title that it’s a work in progress seeking more information and corrections.
Squadbeezy t1_j562og2 wrote
“Owned property” might be the incorrect terminology, just to keep this in line with the spirit of this project. Maybe, “tribes who lived for time immemorial”?
CTHistory42 OP t1_j5670ey wrote
Yup. At least 10,000 years - and maybe more
Squadbeezy t1_j56bx3b wrote
Totally. I think I’ve heard the phrase “time immemorial” when describing how long Native Americans have lived places - at least in the Pacific Northwest.
Whaddaulookinat t1_j55n9yb wrote
"Munsee Lenape"? Oh boy that'll rile up the usual suspects 😂😂
For those unaware: The lumping of Munsee and Lenape is, frankly, super controversial and may be post contact mythology/whisper campaign to delegitimize Lenape claims by some states and other tribes. Or could be absolutely true. Or somewhere in between. Honestly worth a read into it, it gets amazingly petty.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j567re5 wrote
Huh ... was completely unaware. I have much reading to do yet.
Whaddaulookinat t1_j568leu wrote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramapough_Mountain_Indians
A pretty good primer under the "Controversy" section... I did a very deep dive years ago on the Ramapo and seems pretty much in line with what I remember but I'd have to comb through that section with the research notes I have somewhere here. I should say there is a slight difference between the northern (NYS/CT) Lenape - Ramapo and the southern (NJ/PA)... but the article gives an idea why adding the Munsee is not totally solid.
IIRC the Ramapo in Kent are still trying to get only state recognition with the property they've accumulated past the green. I should say in honest that family lore is that our original English ancestry intermarried with the CT Ramapo for a whole lot of generations and honestly going through the existing records I could it seemed plausible if not extremely likely.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j569gi9 wrote
I will definitely check out the link / Controversy section. Thank you!
​
Had no idea about the Ramapo and Kent (Kent, CT or Kent, NY?)
Whaddaulookinat t1_j569nsz wrote
Kent, CT although last I heard the corporation does have holdings in NY but I'm in no way aware if its contiguous to what else they have or how big.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j56ablj wrote
I am gob-smacked (to steal a favorite term from my British friends). I only knew of the Schaghticoke gfight with the feds for property and tribal land recognition (actually, basic tribal status - they have some land). Thanks again!
Whaddaulookinat t1_j56cduz wrote
I'm really not familiar with the recent Schaghticoke on-goings but I do remember some drama about that.
If you really want a wild, wild ride the Golden Hill tribe in Bridgeport is a great encapsulation on a whole lot of threads about Native history. Granted though there's a lot of tragedy in that too.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j56znys wrote
Is that the group that owns the equivalent of a residential property in (I think) Trumbull, or somewhere close by? I believe it's listed as a reservation or official tribal property if a Google search is done
Whaddaulookinat t1_j5b2s2z wrote
That's the one
CTHistory42 OP t1_j57eweg wrote
Interesting read.
xtermin8r69 t1_j55y76o wrote
Wait a second. Is podunk in there as a joke or was there really a podunk tribe and were they considered insignificant? Lol
brownstone79 t1_j56fvh2 wrote
They were a real tribe from around North central CT. There’s a Podunk river in East Hartford/South Windsor.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j5674ka wrote
It's straight off the website of the project team - so, unless they inserted it as a joke, I think we're talking about a real tribe
FloodMoose t1_j5581xl wrote
There's a newly launched CT data webpage that may help with this too. Lots of datasets were made available at the end of last year.
jdloyola t1_j56axpl wrote
Nice Shinnecock.
brownstone79 t1_j56hx8c wrote
When I was a kid, the Simsbury Historical Society’s main property was called Massaco Plantation. I always thought it was a cool tribute to the former tribe.
Ethanol_Based_Life t1_j56t4tz wrote
Chickens Warrups in Redding was Mohawk and then there is Mohawk Mountain. I'd think they'd be on the map.
dabasauras-rex t1_j55m0di wrote
I grew up in a part of CT that still had loads of geographic references to Uncas, sachem of the Mohegan’s. I always thought that was cool. According to Wikipedia (maybe dubious source) he lived to 94-95 years old! Born in the late 1500s and died in the late 1600s. That’s so wild to me…. Like George Washington lived in the next century and he didn’t even make it to 70!
CTHistory42 OP t1_j55mgyb wrote
I agree.
Also, there are so many references to Native Americans in town names, river names, street names - you name it!
fraxinus2000 t1_j57tue1 wrote
And…”Connecticut”
CTHistory42 OP t1_j59pg0z wrote
Good point!
AvogadrosMoleSauce t1_j55qaoo wrote
Neat; So I live in occupied Wangunk land?
[deleted] t1_j56iict wrote
[removed]
AutoModerator t1_j56iif1 wrote
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed because you do not meet the required karma threshold.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
red_purple_red t1_j56j8pb wrote
Do NOT look up the major donors to this organization!
mistiklest t1_j56ldkv wrote
Why?
CTHistory42 OP t1_j56zg80 wrote
Yes, why?
uuuge t1_j57lfjv wrote
Cool map. Let's do one for Canada also.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j59pkvf wrote
If you go to their site, I think you'll find that it's already been done. There's a very cool interactive globe that you can use to see a lot of such maps.
bunny_Lord_ t1_j57wnn9 wrote
Did Elmwood CT have native Americans?
CTHistory42 OP t1_j59peth wrote
Considering its proximity to the Connecticut River and the existence of the rock outcroppings in the Behind the Rocks neighborhood of Hartford, I'd hazard a guess that the answer is yes
bunny_Lord_ t1_j5rhjx3 wrote
That's awesome!! Thanks for the reply!!
CTHistory42 OP t1_j5rjjbm wrote
You are welcome!
maybe_little_pinch t1_j58ibyb wrote
Good to note that some of these major tribes included smaller tribes. Like I know of the Paugasuck, Wepawaug, Nipmunk, and Potatuck. Some of the smaller tribes were absorbed or split away from larger tribes due to wars and migration.
My great (several times over) grandfather was Paugassett.
my2hundrethsdollar t1_j59n5tg wrote
Does this mean when someone says they grew up in a “podunk town” it could have racist origins? I have never heard of Podunk tribes before.
CTHistory42 OP t1_j59pm6a wrote
I hadn't either
gangleshmorp1 t1_j56w2eh wrote
I thought they believed the land belonged to no one
maxanderson350 t1_j555lwq wrote
Very cool map.
Only question I have is what is the time period for this? I think it's misleading to claim this is a map of original native american tribes and I'm not sure there is any evidence that these boundaries were static over thousands of years. Rather than calling this a map of original or indigneous tribes, it should be described instead as a snapshot in time - likely of the period during which first contact with Europeans were made?