An alternate North America with a different US-Canadian border and where the Southern Secession was accompanied by a Western Secession (the Republic of the Californias). Texas later seceeded from the CSA, forming the Republic of Colorado.
There are other rivers called the Colorado in Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Chile and Brazil. None in the northeast. Colorado is a Spanish name meaning "colored red." Since the Spanish didn't colonize the northeast, there wouldn't be any rivers with Spanish names there.
The reason Im asking is because a lot of alt his maps put colorado in northern idaho, and im not sure why. Tbh, plenty of names in the northeast came from Spanish explorers who claimed the region for the Spanish. Montana is a good example
Sorry, typo. Still, a lot of maps put Colorado in the northwest, around northern Idaho and western Montana. Now that Ive had a chance to think about it, it makes sense since "Colorado could be used to describe anywhere in the Rockies. I guess it wasnt a river, hmm
I see where you are coming from on that point,but to be honest i would still believe in a different point. Where it would be something like the Republic of Texas was never annexed into the United States or during the American Civil War instead of seceding with the C.S.A., Texas instead seceded into the Republic of Texas. Still it is your view of an alternate history and your map, and it is a lot different than many other maps on da.
Love the map. I have a small biff with oregon joining the Califonias (there was a large movement for a "Cascadia" at the time, which included mostly Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia), but other then that, great work
The Republic of the Californias was created during the 'Western Secession' and was west coast movement (Washington's very far away, with sparsely settled 'desert' in the middle). I'm not sure how strong and form of the Cascadia movement would be in this timeline, with the areas of Vancouver and Seattle united in the Canadian province of New Albion.
Why do you have Oklahoma remaining a part of the Confederacy? I would think its largely Native American population would be happier independent, or at least a part of Texas or the more accepting United States.
I don't know, I guess it makes more sense to me for them to want to be a part of the US than the (presumably racist) Confederacy. Actually, on second thought, Texas is what makes the most sense to me as a partner, maybe in a sort of loose union?
Exactly My point the U.S. would have wiped them out, and taken their land, just as they did in our reality after the civil war. The North would not have treated them better, so they are in fact, better off beholden to the government in Richmond.
The CSA also agreed to honor the tribes treaties with the US by continuing their payments in gold instead of the fiat money equivalent of the gold's worth which the US decided to switch to at the start of the war. In the end it accomplished little as the Indian Territory was the scene of conflicts that very much embodied brother against brother. Fun trivia fact Stan Waite, the last CSA general to surrender, was an Indian.