The 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.
"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.
The 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.
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.