Seneca “factions” developed around different issues over time and reading the factional responses to settler pressures as a single narrative shows the persistence of Seneca leaders and individuals in resisting threats to their land sovereignty. The Seneca expressed changing attitudes toward settler society. As the response to threats to Seneca land sovereignty evolved over time, the Seneca disagreed over the focus and value of American-style education and English literacy, the physical location of reservations in relation to the settler power, and their legal relationship with the settler power. In previous scholarship, these divisions have largely been viewed separately and often in terms that oversimplify the schisms. However, it is essential to understands the factional discourses that shaped the Seneca landscape, both geographically and in terms of what property and sovereignty meant for the Seneca.
Tracing these moments of factionalism chronologically shows that far from societal disintegration, Seneca political divisions ultimately protected Seneca sovereignty and autonomy as the Seneca negotiated their role in western expansion. While they did not use the term “settler colonialism” at the time, the Seneca understood that they faced an encroaching society intent on their erasure. More than “factions,” the differing tactics the Seneca used over time show the variety of ways the Seneca envisioned their land, sovereignty, jurisdiction, geography, and national belonging.