Strange Maps

July 14, 2007

147 – The Stillborn State of Sequoyah

Filed under: 20th Century Map, America., Indigenous Peoples, Non-Fictional, Oklahoma, Proposed, USA — strangemaps @ 9:16 pm

sequoyah.gif

The US state of Oklahoma almost entered the Union as two states – Oklahoma and Sequoyah. The latter is the name of a failed attempt in the early 20th century by Native Americans, who formed (and still form) a large part of the population in eastern Oklahoma, to constitute a state of their own.

The US acquired most of Oklahoma from France in the Louisiana Purchase of 1803 (the Oklahoma Panhandle came into US possession only after the Mexican-American war of 1846-’48). The area was set aside as Indian Territory by the Indian Removal Act (1830), which provided for resettlement (voluntary and forced) of Native American tribes east of the Mississippi.

In 1866, the Indian Territory was roughly halved when the US government forced new treaties on the tribes living there. The western and central parts of Indian Territory became government land. From the 1870s onward, prospective settlers began to push for opening these lands for Euro-American settlement under the 1862 Homestead Act. Even though the government resisted (attempting to honour the 1866 treaties), the settlers’ pressure became too great to resist. In 1884, a court in Kansas ruled that settling on these lands wasn’t a crime.

Congress followed by authorising settlement by the Dawes (General Allotment) Act of 1887. In 1889, President Benjamin Harrison opened up 8.000 sq. km of so-called Unassigned Lands (in central Oklahoma) for settlement by Euro-Americans by means of a land run. This involved dividing up the land on a first-come basis. In total, there were five major land runs in Oklahoma, although most of the rushes after the one of 1889 involved a lottery to counter cheating (some of the settlers were calles ‘Sooners’, because they had already literally staked their claim before the land was opened for settlement).

In 1890, the 1866 treaty lands plus No Man’s Land (nowadays known as the Oklahoma Panhandle) were joined into the Oklahoma Territory. The eastern part of present-day Oklahoma remained Indian Territory. In a convention at Eufaula in 1902, representatives of the Five Civilized Tribes started a drive towards statehood for the Indian Territory. The name for their proposed state was Sequoyah, a prominent Cherokee – in fact, the man who devised the Cherokee alphabet. In 1903, the delegates met again to organise a constitutional convention.

This convention met at Muskogee in 1905, presided over by General Pleasant Porter, Principal Chief of the Creek Nation. Vice-presidents were the high representatives of each of the five ‘civilized tribes’: William C. Rogers (Cherokee), William H. Murray (Chickasaw), Green McCurtain (Choctaw), John Brown (Seminole) and Charles N. Haskell (Creek). If Sequoyah never achieved statehood, it wasn’t for the efforts of the Convention: it drafted a constitution, established county boundaries for the new state, elected delegates to petition the US Congress for statehood and saw its proposals overwhelmingly endorsed in a referendum held in Indian Territory.

However, Eastern politicians pressured then US President Theodore Roosevelt against admitting two Western states (Sequoyah and Oklahoma) into the Union, fearing this would disproportionally diminish Eastern states’ political influence. Roosevelt then decided both territories could only enter the Union as a single state. Having already laid the groundwork for their own state, Indian Territory representatives had a big influence in establishing Oklahoma. The constitution of Oklahoma, admitted as the 46th state in 1907, is based largely on that of Sequoyah.

The tantalising concept of an ‘Indian’ state of the Union was recycled by alternate history writer Harry Turtledove, in whose novel ‘How Few Remain’ the Indian Territory enters the Confederate States of America as the Confederate State of Sequoyah.

Nowadays, Oklahoma is the 20th-largest (181.196 sq. km), 28th-most populous (3.45 million) state of the Union. Its name, chosen by Chief Allen Wright of the Choctaw Nation during the 1866 treaty negotiations means Red People in his native language. That name applied at first only to the aforementioned Unassigned Lands, in central Oklahoma. Oklahoma today is a blend of Western and Native (or, to use the less-varnished phrase of bygone days ‘cowboy’ and ‘indian’) cultures. The state has the US’s second-largest Native American population, both percentage-wise (11,4% compared with Alaska’s 19%) and in absolute terms (about 400.000, compared with California’s 680.000). Additionally, a quarter of the state’s white and black populations have some Native American ancestry. Oklahoma is home to about 50 Native tribal headquarters, more than any other state. Ten of the Native languages spoken in Oklahoma have over 10.000 speakers. Tahlequah in eastern Oklahoma, where Native Americans still predominate, is the Capital of the Cherokee Nation.

This map of the ‘State of Sequoyah’ – complete with a proposed State Seal – was compiled from the USGS Map of Indian Territory (1902), revised to include the county divisions made under direction of Sequoyah Statehood Convention (1905), by D.W. Bolich, a civil engineer at Muskogee. It was found at this page of the McCasland Digital Collection of Early Oklahoma & Indian Territory Maps at the Oklahoma State University Library, where it can be seen in greater detail.


34 Comments »

  1. There should have been, and there should be an Indian State. mIndians bonly should govern her. The white man OWES Indians more than could ever be repaid. My family were Kentucky Cherokees. Before you jump, and say; “There were no Kentucky Cherokees.” Remember, the white man started that rumor. Indians recognized no state line between KY and TN. The southern part of KY was full of Cherokees.

    Comment by Harold Young — July 15, 2007 @ 12:21 am

  2. [...] Item. [...]

    Pingback by DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » The Stillborn State of Sequoyah — July 15, 2007 @ 1:15 am

  3. Hmmm… I’d have figured Sequoyah was denied separate admission because it was largely Democratic, which would have bothered the Republican majorities in Congress (as well as Teddy Roosevelt, also a GOP’er).

    Nice research. Well-written and well-drawn. I know that many of those counties, with similar borders and names, ended up becoming Oklahoma counties (i.e., McCurtain County, Muscogee County, Sequoyah County, etc.).

    Comment by Darrel Jones — July 15, 2007 @ 6:42 am

  4. Facinating map of what might have been. Is there any movement to seriously try to separate Oklahoma into two states? Or is it more like the Texas independance folks who seem to be a bunch of nutters by and large? But still a good find.

    Comment by David Schwartz — July 15, 2007 @ 3:45 pm

  5. The Commonwealth of Virgina was broken up into two states, Virgina and West Virgina, after the Civil War. Most West Virginians were Northern sympathizers whereas the rest of Virginia consisted of Southern sympathizers. So you see, had this not happened we would have had a very yugly flag with only 49 stars.

    Comment by John Fredrickson — July 15, 2007 @ 11:24 pm

  6. Actually, Texas has the right to split into 5 states without Congressional approval. It was part of the agreement that admitted Texas into the Union.

    Comment by austin — July 16, 2007 @ 1:07 am

  7. Very interesting. I would have thought that we could have had lots more than just 51.

    Comment by Retum — July 16, 2007 @ 1:40 am

  8. Great post especially since Oklahoma is celebrating its centennial this year!

    http://clotheshorseok.wordpress.com

    Comment by clotheshorseok — July 16, 2007 @ 2:58 am

  9. Actually, John Fredrickson, West Virginia was created in 1863….during the Civil War….not after it. There would be no point to breaking up *after* the war.

    Comment by mikecash — July 16, 2007 @ 3:08 am

  10. [...] Interesting piece on the almost-state of Sequoyah, which would have been a twin of Oklahoma.  Also see the map collection for same. [...]

    Pingback by Memnison Journal : Altered States: the USA — July 16, 2007 @ 3:34 am

  11. Texas has already split into 6 states. Look at a map of the Republic of Texas — the borders encompass parts of 6 states. So the split has already occurred and cannot occur again.

    Comment by Texan — July 16, 2007 @ 3:35 am

  12. Wow. This is a pretty informative post. Glad I hit the main wp.com site when I did.

    Living a scant few miles west of the Creek/Lincoln county line, and not being born or raised here, not only could you say this “hits close to home” but also was a great read into the history of where I currently reside.

    Thanks. :)

    Comment by Luke — July 16, 2007 @ 3:48 am

  13. Actually, I think the flag would have looked a lot nicer if there were only 49 stars. 7 times 7 is 49…seven rows and seven columns of stars…?

    Comment by Stefan — July 16, 2007 @ 3:53 am

  14. I very much enjoyed reading this. I am a proud Oklahoman though I have lived in the Okie Diaspora for 42 years. Some of my forebears were on the Choctaw roll.

    N.B. — I always object to the term “Native American.” Americans were the enemy, the conquerers of the Indians. Would Scots and Welsh enjoy being called “native English” (or the English native Normans)? What would Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull say to being called Americans, native of otherwise? S.H.F., hailfreedonia.com

    Comment by hailfreedonia — July 16, 2007 @ 9:56 am

  15. That’s really interesting. I never knew that. I wonder how things would be different now if we were 51 states?

    As for the Harold Young’s comment about what “whites” owe… I’m a little disappointed by that. I admit I’m a white female. I don’t know much about discrimination (but I’m learning by living as a minority abroad).

    Yes there was so many wrong things done by former politicians and “founding fathers” of the US, but I have to ask. When do we stop “owing”? The people who came before us (whites) did so much damage. So much, demands that say things like “you owe us,” isn’t going to fix what happened. Things won’t get magically better.

    I used to think the same way. “We owe it to them.” But then my mom asked me at one point, when do we stop owing them? How much will it take? And when do WE and THEM finally come together? (Despite what it may sound like, I’m not trying to say supress native culture.)

    Anyway, just some thoughts. I enjoyed reading this and others reactions. The comment about Democratic/Republican politics is a bit believable. I could see that happening even now.

    Comment by callmeforeign — July 16, 2007 @ 3:10 pm

  16. Interesting. I’ve only lived in Oklahoma for 4 years, and I’m learning something new all the time. Thanks for the history lesson! –Stef

    Comment by Stef — July 16, 2007 @ 5:33 pm

  17. Callmeforeign: You, as a person, should not consider yourself responsible for what someone else did generations ago. “White people” do not owe “red people” anything. However, the government of the United States is the same entity as it was in the 19th century. The United States owes the Indian nations a very great deal.

    What it will take at the least is an honest re-examination of the treaties signed between the U.S. and Indian nations. Most of them were extorted from “chiefs” without the authority to speak for their nations, in the few cases where the U.S. didn’t simply seize what it wanted at gunpoint.

    Comment by James Erwin — July 16, 2007 @ 6:18 pm

  18. Actually, Oklahoma could have been 3 states. According to the “No Man’s Land” museum in the Oklahoma panhandle, there was a push to create a separate state out of the Oklahoma panhandle to be called Cimarron.

    And no, I don’t think Texas has the right to split into 5 separate states at this time. If I remember correctly from my Texas History course, this provision went away after the Civil War when Texas was readmitted to the Union.

    That stuff about having been split into 6 states is nonsense. Sure, old maps will show Texas claimed land into present-day Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming, but that has nothing to do with statehood. The western lands were in dispute at the time of statehood, and I think the present-day border came into being around the end of the Mexican War in the 1840s. At the time Texas was claiming these lands, they weren’t split into all these other states. So no, Texas has not already been split into multiple states, and the current citizens would never allow it to be split.

    Comment by Jean — July 16, 2007 @ 7:18 pm

  19. Very good blog, very rich nice pictures and articles, congratulations !!!

    Comment by valentin10 — July 17, 2007 @ 12:22 pm

  20. [...] Territory of the southern United States lobbied for statehood. The tribes proposed creating a tribal state called Sequoyah (hi res image here). At the constiutional conference in 1905 a constitution was drafted and later [...]

    Pingback by MetaFilter: Sequoyah…a U.S. state that never developed « Identity Unknown — July 28, 2007 @ 3:10 am

  21. [...] was going to be a state called Sequoyah . It was half of what is now [...]

    Pingback by G’s Place » Blog Archive » The state of Sequoyah — July 28, 2007 @ 11:59 am

  22. I grew up in OK and had always been told that Sequoyah was just a way to rally the Native population around the Democrats in the state and against the Republicans so when tptb inevitably brought the area into the union it would be difficult – if not impossible to have 2 more Republican votes in the senate…

    Comment by GLD — July 29, 2007 @ 8:34 pm

  23. There was also a “failed” state of Franklin proposed for western North Carolina.

    Comment by David — August 3, 2007 @ 11:36 pm

  24. callmeforeign and Harold Young’s comments really struck a chord with me. I was born in Creek County and am white. But all my life I have had Indian friends from various tribes and consider myself very lucky in that regard.

    What I believe fervently is that Indians have a right to feel the way they do about white ppl and the US Govt. What was done to them was shameful and counted as genocide of the first order. So don’t confuse the stereotype of the strong silent Indian with anything other than a person who carries the weight of their race’s survival with them … proudly!

    And when you hear about how there may be controversies over Indian Gaming you can bet your sweet bippy it has everything to do with the “white man” wanting to rape and pillage the success of Indian ingenuity and efforts yet one more time.

    I am proud to be an Oklahoman and would be even more proud to have been a Sequoyhan!

    Comment by Peg — August 10, 2007 @ 4:33 pm

  25. Hey about 6 years ago the New Yorker had a map of New York City divided as if it was Eastern Europe and the Middle east. With names like “Manhattanstan” can you find this and post it?

    Comment by MYK — September 17, 2007 @ 6:41 pm

  26. [...] read more | digg story [...]

    Pingback by Rare Hot Politic » How the US almost had 51 states: The Stillborn State of Sequoyah — November 9, 2007 @ 5:56 pm

  27. Having come across this site by accident -thanks to my brother mucking around on my computer – I can honestly say I am glad he did. Being English it is difficult to understand the individualistic passion behind some of your comments against the wider view point in respect of historic outcomes of statehood. Coming from a country where the majority of it’s people have no idea where Cornwall is in relation to Cumbria on a map, I envy you your passion. The plight of the tribes is a shameful part of US history but no different from the atrocities handed out by the British to native peoples in the past. We are all sadly in the same boat. However it is unrealistic to apologise for events of which the present generation did not take part nor can a present generation be ‘owed’ by the events of the past. The past is the past and all we can do is hopefully learn from it.

    Comment by Prue — July 31, 2008 @ 7:05 am

  28. I really appreciate this site. I am a proud, lifelong Oklahoman, Seqouyan and I am proud to be Mvskoke. I just wanted to remind everyone that many tribes to this day maintain sovereign tribal nations within the geographic area of the state that should have been, Seqouyah. There are maps of these Tribal Nations’ boundaries on their websites.

    Comment by Double A — September 9, 2008 @ 6:47 am

  29. [...] 28, 2007 in home There was going to be a state called Sequoyah . It was half of what is now [...]

    Pingback by The state of Sequoyah « G’s place — December 30, 2008 @ 4:03 am

  30. thanks for this map..
    good 
    luck

    Comment by Solomon — May 11, 2009 @ 7:42 am

  31. merci

    Comment by aspicco . — May 17, 2009 @ 5:27 am

  32. teşekkür ederim

    Comment by yory — June 12, 2009 @ 9:38 pm

  33. Vielen Dank

    Comment by moon — July 3, 2009 @ 4:35 am

  34. Muchas gracias

    Comment by sun — July 4, 2009 @ 7:07 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com.