Why exactly are Iowa and Nebraska two separate states? Is there any sort of meaningful cultural, geographical, or historical reason for them being separate?
I get that there is a river between them.... is that it?
BTW, while they both deserve to be made fun of, I would be interested to hear a real answer, too.
Rivers make good natural boundaries. Even today when it's a lot easier to get traffic and goods across rivers, rivers are still an impediment. Two towns might be only a couple miles apart, on the opposite side of a river, but you might have to drive a ways out of your way to get to the bridge.
Iowa is about the size of an average state, if Iowa and Nebraska were one state, it would be one very long state.
Nebraska became a state in 1867. Iowa became a state in 1846.
Nerd.
The "We're both miles ahead of Minnesota" game.
Why exactly are Iowa and Nebraska two separate states? Is there any sort of meaningful cultural, geographical, or historical reason for them being separate?
I get that there is a river between them.... is that it?
BTW, while they both deserve to be made fun of, I would be interested to hear a real answer, too.
Rivers make good natural boundaries. Even today when it's a lot easier to get traffic and goods across rivers, rivers are still an impediment. Two towns might be only a couple miles apart, on the opposite side of a river, but you might have to drive a ways out of your way to get to the bridge.
Iowa is about the size of an average state, if Iowa and Nebraska were one state, it would be one very long state.
Nebraska became a state in 1867. Iowa became a state in 1846.
But I may remark, in the first place, that two states may be formed west of the trans-Mississippian states of Arkansas and Missouri; and then, by taking about equal portions of each side of the Missouri River, embracing the mouth of the Platte River, we have a third state, with a good and well-watered soil. This latter division would still leave sufficient space for the state of Iowa, by extending it as far north as the St. Peter's. Now, north of the two last-mentioned states might be formed another, embracing all the remaining tributaries of the Mississippi on its west side, as well as those of the Red River of the North, and as far north as to the British possessions.
Thus it appears, that, by a judicious division of the remaining country along the borders, taking in a small portion of the more barren region beyond it, there is sufficient space for five new states of large size, compact in their forms, and having a good portion of fertile soil; most of them possessing convenient navigable streams, with a fair prospect of mineral resources.
JOSEPH NICOLAS NICOLLET
Report to Congress, 1841
The "We're both miles ahead of Minnesota" game.
Why do you post here?