Share.

    17 Kommentare

    1. whilst the map does note that the edges are fuzzy, they are still sharp enough to give off the impression of understood borders, and in some cases it just misses the mark entirely, such as the land of the Miami (myaamia) not including their capitol (kiihkayonki, modern day fort Wayne Indiana).

      it’s not *bad*, however

      a slightly better map: https://native-land.ca/

    2. I wonder if the places that have many names close together have the better resources?

    3. Some of these categories (like Kalapuya, Pomo, Miwok, and Yokuts) are actually small language families, not individual tribes/nations/ethnicities.

    4. JohnnieTango on

      I get the point of this map and all and appreciate it. However, something to remember is that the idea of a „nation“ is a European Enlightenment/19th century concept that has been gradually adopted out by the non-Western world.

      Not to be too pedantic, but this is really better thought of as a tribal map.

    5. Beneficial_Foot_436 on

      Where is Cherokee? map seems off.

      edit: ah found them….map still has their range off according to family

    6. I would love to see this kind of thing alongside a set of high quality illustrations that show some aspects of life in various tribes. Like our view of native Americans historically is generally pretty flat. So illustrations are an interesting way to convey some of the differences in clothing, culture, way of life and so on.

    7. In Vancouver, you have Tsleil-Waututh and Musqueam literally covering Squamish reserves. the map is not very accurate

    8. Whoa, fuzzy borders make total sense for those fluid tribal histories. Mind blown.

    9. They are close to real boundaries because they follow natural boundaries and a lot of them are made up.

    Leave A Reply