4 ms·
This map contains a lot of overlapping and very rounded regions that I think convey that it's rough areas of settlement rather than some internationally-recogni
by baddox 6y ago
This map contains a lot of overlapping and very rounded regions that I think convey that it's rough areas of settlement rather than some internationally-recognized partition of the land.
- jml7c5 6y agoI wonder if something more like a smooth probability map would make more sense, rather than overlapping borders. The hard lines can give an unreasonable sense of certainty, even if the intent is to indicate uncertainty.
- notJim 6y agoThe FAQ also contains this, and more nuanced discussion about what the map means. Why are we recognizing more than one Nation on this territory? Indigenous history stretches back thousands and thousands of years. Some Indigenous nations were nomadic, while many had permanent communities and seasonal communities. Often, boundaries between territories overlap because the Indigenous Nations were continuously sharing the land and negotiating agreements through their own diplomatic and legal systems. But heaven forbid we try to understand something before immediately assigning it to a particular side in the culture war du jour.
- simonsarris 6y ago"Continuously sharing and negotiating" is a wild ride of a euphemism. It's like writing that the Mamluks and Ottomans continuously shared and negotiated a couple of peninsulas. It's true, but what it doesn't say is incredible.
- protomyth 6y agoYeah, different tribes did wage war on other tribes. The echoes of those conflicts are remembered today.
- luckylion 6y agoThe FAQ strangely avoids the fact that Indigenous Nations also waged war against one another over territory. Sharing the land and negotiating agreements is a strange euphemism. It sounds more interested in narratives of Noble Savages than historical facts.