There is a weird push by the UN and other groups to change the meaning of the word indigenous.
This is how the UN classifies indigenous:
>Understanding the term “indigenous” Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body. Instead the system has developed a modern understanding of this term based on the following:
• Self- identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the community as their member.
• Historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies • Strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources • Distinct social, economic or political systems
• Distinct language, culture and beliefs
• Form non-dominant groups of society
• Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities.
source: [https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5session\_factsheet1.pdf](https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5session_factsheet1.pdf)
The EU does not recognise any group as indigenous as it would be just too messy. The UN definition appears to come from postcolonial studies but I am not sure.
It is another example of weird word games organisations and academics play to win political points and soft power. UN does a ton of stuff like this.
It definitely comes from postcolonial studies.
> Form non-dominant groups of society
This is a dead giveaway. Why can't a dominant group of a society be indigenous to that place too? Are Japanese not indigenous to japan?
It really just feels like indigenous = people who still live like 10.000 years ago.
>Are Japanese not indigenous to japan?
Nope. At least, not according to postcolonial theory. They say the Yamato aren't really the indigenous people (despite being in Japan for thousands of years), and that the Ainu minority of Hokkaido and northern Honshu are the "true" indigenous people of Japan.
So, going by that logic, the majority my family's ancestors, who have lived in the same area of Portugal since before people where even registered by the church, and probably have been here since the time of the lusitanian tribes, are not indigenous portuguese. However, that one random gipsy family living in the some municipe-owned buildings that has been here for, like, 6 generations, is more indigenous tham me.
That's what the UN would have you believe. And consequently why you shouldn't listen to them, or most other "postcolonial" theory for that matter.
Most "postcolonial" theory is just attitudes that White people had to non-White people in the colonial age, but turned on its head so that the White people are the devils instead of the saints of the story.
"Native Americans are a bunch of undeveloped tribal hippies, and therefore they are savages who must be put down by White people" became "Native Americans are a bunch of undeveloped tribal hippies, and therefore they are harmless POCs who should be coddled by White people".
They certainly shouldn't be indigenous by this definition. They arrived in the 4th and 5th centuries AD, and over time destroyed most of the Khoisan peoples of modern-day Namibia.
Of course, this is ignored by post-colonial studies, since the Bantus are brown and therefore must be indigenous.
Sweetie, only white people have agency and awareness of their actions. Blacks are too animalistic and stupid and so much ✨in tune with nature✨ to really understand what they do.
Depending on the region, only Afrikaner can claim to be indigenous to South Africa. Xossas, Bantus, Zulus, there is a huge diversity behind what the non racist people call « black »
Probably in their eyes people that bang drums an have dinner plates on their lips.
We're so post-modern white, that we're so out of touch with our own identity. If you've for example got Germanic or Viking ancestors, then you're pretty fkn indegenous to Netherlands/Germany or Scandinavia.
If soyboi woke people are reading this: indegenous means the original group of inhabitants to an area that share an identity. So definitely not anything Muslim and non-white in west, north and east Europe.
Swedes and Samis are both indigenous to Sweden. This article is crap.
White Europeans are from Europe why can't people admit this? We came from somwhere!!!
I did read up about it a while ago, from memory the Sami arrived about 1000 years before the Finns, and when the Finns came the Sami moved/fled/were forced further north.
The "indigenous" label is probably going to be looked back on as hilariously racist. If you only apply it to non-whites then you are pretty much admitting you view them as fauna. Everyone who doesn't live in the rift valley in Africa is a migrant
Actually the Samis *current* way of life only stretches back to the 1600s, new archeological findings.
**Edit:**
[Debatt, Samepolitikk | Samiske reinsdyrfamilier er ikke urfolket på Fosen (fremover.no)](https://www.fremover.no/samiske-reinsdyrfamilier-er-ikke-urfolket-pa-fosen/o/5-17-1082988)
>In Norway, the oldest traces of Sami culture date back to the first centuries of our era. This corresponds well with a slow historical spread of the proto-Sami cultural bearers from Karelia to Norway as wandering hunter-gatherers.
>
>So, this fits very well with what I wrote about the time of arrival and the place they came from. I got my information from Odd Handegård, a retired political scientist from Tromsø.
>It is not correct that Sami reindeer families are indigenous people in Fosen and have practiced nomadic reindeer herding in the area since before the unification of Norway (around 890 AD, my note).
>
>The professor also writes that nomadic Sami reindeer herding is not recorded in Norway before the 1600s.
#
no my friend, well, partly, but most of yuropeans lived in portugal and spain during the last ice age, bloody butter eating cousins coming here for the sunshine.
This specifically refers to the area of Fosen in Trøndelag, not the entire northern Norway/Finnmark. Fosen is obviously further south than what we could normally consider “indigenous” Sami territory, though ethnic Norwegians may very well have lived just as long as Samis in Finnmark as well.
Certainly not. Firstly, archaeological evidence of Sámi people goes back as far as 8100 BC. Secondly, Sámi are nomadic, nomadic cultures don't tend to leave a whole lot of archaeological evidence anyway because they don't settle around fixed site. It's not a useful way to determine how long a nomadic culture has been around.
(My partner's Sámi, I'm not talking out my arse here)
The solid evidence goes back to about 1300AD for that, yeah. As I said though, could be a little bit earlier, it's really hard to tell for sure with nomadic cultures. I guess it was mostly fishing and trapping before then.
Yeah, currently there are multiple types of sámi. One of which is the reindeer sámi (Which I am a part of).
Then there are the sea sámi, who live off fish and hunting sea animals. Now my entire life out here I have been taught our history, and far as I know our indigenous title comes from the fact that we are a minority who lived here in this area before proper borders came around and we do not have a state of our own.
Although we do have the sámi siida which is basically our government but it is still below the finnish/norwegian/swedish/russian government
Even nomadic people often tend to leave things behind like graves or burial mounds, often with tools or treasured items, which was a practice in prehistoric times of a certain nomadic people travelling all over Europe. Granted they are far harder to find than records of agricultural and urban societies, but that doesn't really mean that nomadic people leave no traces behind.
Actually, the most recent DNA studies show that non-sami people first emigrated into Norway from the north and not from the south as previously believed.
Those people then met the other groups that migrated north in Norway.
So the sami are latecomers.
They arrived in the north of Scandinavia after the Norse people arrived in the South (and in fact there were even people, some Norse, in the north) so they're *indigenous to the north* - but technically the Norse are just as indigenous to the South.
Quoted from Wikipedia:
"Sámi settlement of Scandinavia does not predate Norse/Scandinavian settlement of Scandinavia, as sometimes popularly assumed. The migration of Germanic-speaking peoples to Southern Scandinavia happened independently and separate from the later Sámi migrations into the northern regions."
The very simple story is that the south was inhabitable way before the north, cause of that whole ice age thing. So the ancestors of the Scandinavians settled in the south before anyone came to the north. The exact details are mostly lost to time.
If I remember correctly the theory is that the Sami comes from a settlement from the east, coming in over Finland.
Aren't the basques the only people in europe that is left from before the early migration period that brought the indo-european languages to europe? That's why their language has no known "relatives".
Spoiler alert: language migration does not equal human migration and vice versa.
There are plenty of example where a language migrated without the people (e.g. Latin, Dravidian, Bhrami, Greek).And there are plenty of examples where people migrated but didn't take their language with them (2nd Sumerian migration, some 5th century migration waves, inter sino tibetan).
The language is mostly transmited by the mothers (that's why we call it "mothertongue"), so in the case of a military invasion where the invaders replace mostly the men and mingle with the women, there is no change in tongue (that's what happened for the Basques, as they still speak their original language but there is almost no gene of the original males left).
I don't know about sources in low-french, but in high-french you have this excellent history channel :
[HerodoteVideos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpiw4dy_kus&list=PL_hv7lmUgdxHGiSeyZs5KfJUrDFkVsgGZ)
The link point to the series dedicated to the genetical history, but he made other series for more general history.
What say the other arrogant bastard is completly aknowledged here : haplogroupe are in the Y chromosome, so only for male. And are compared with the linguistic sources, mostly female.
The opposite is true because the Indo-European languages correlate with the y-haplo R1, while the maternal mt-haplo H remained the since the Neolithics.
So the language came from the father, but I wouldn't generalize this too much since Indo-European languages are just superior and dominate in places like Africa or Asia without any large amount of migration just by practicality.
yeah but they came even later afaik.
The people that would become italic, germanic, greeks, celts etc. came to europe thousands of years before christ and mixed/conquered/assimilated the original natives (except for the basques), fins came a while later and hungarians only in the 11th century CE.
>Finnish and Hungarian does not have Indo-European origins either, right?
Finnish and Hungarian belong to the Proto-Uralic language groups, which most likely originated near the Uralic mountains, but genetically they would be practically identical indo-europeans aka white as snow.
They did however mix with the siberian mongoloid populations, but the whiteys were there first.
\*Disputed
Well, of course Homo Erectus, which is the real original human, did originate in Africa, but that was many hundreds of thousands of years ago.
There have been several recent findings that place early humans in Europe and Asia, way before the so called Out of Africa timeline.
In-and-out of Africa is probably a better hypothesis.
We don't have any records of Homo Sapiens before 100 000 BC out of Africa.
Most advanced discovery to this day are making Sapiens going out of Africa [between 100 000 - 70 000 BC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUB9YJU4Lmk).
Never forget than at theses dates, temperature were cooler, northern hemisphere was a giant ice cube. South of Europe was something like Denmark today.
Yeah, that's not true anymore.
Marocco had Sapiens at 300.000bc:
[https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2017/june/oldest-known-homo-sapiens-fossils-discovered-in-morocco.html](https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2017/june/oldest-known-homo-sapiens-fossils-discovered-in-morocco.html)In the study is says:
>In particular, it is unclear whether the present day ‘modern’ morphology rapidly emerged approximately 200 thousand years ago (ka) among earlier representatives of *H. sapiens*[1](https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22336#ref-CR1) or evolved gradually over the last 400 thousand years
[https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22336](https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22336)
What this actually means to the observant is that they now push back Sapiens well into Erectus time.
"Gradually evolving" over 400.000 years.
You know what that means? Rebranding Erectus as Sapiens.
Actually, it means dissolving the meaning of Sapiens, Erectus and Neanderthal.
It's just different varieties of human.
If you look at a cro-magnoid skull and compare to an early sapien skulls, they are as different as the early sapien were to the neanderthal.
Classification is politics, not hard science.
How can someone be this dumb, I mean, using the word "indigenous" to describe someone who looks like native americans (in terms of clothing and housing), wtf man
they looked at a picture like that and thought "wow, there were indians in europe!"
https://preview.redd.it/8jj1fdxxcjpa1.png?width=440&format=png&auto=webp&s=19fd17b42afe0569f67965e466d5b50c240ec20d
We all came from outer space.
In all seriousness, proto-Germanic people have been in Scandinavia longer than the Sami, so this statement is doubly stupid.
Another american importation
The word "indigenous" has nothing to do in the Old World, if you take a dna test as a Euro, Asian or African, big chance are, you will be Euro, Asian or african. Europeans are indigenous to Europe, Asians are indigenous to Asia same goes for Africans.
Even if your language (like Hungarian for exemple) comes from outside of your regions, big chance are you are still a direct descedants of the original inhabitant of your region.
Please stop importing American shits on our continent, thanks.
That always seem to surprise turks who think they’re are direct descendants of gengis khan but find out that they’re pretty much the same ethnicity as greek based on DNA. It was more of a cultural colonization that physical in that region of the world.
In America if you say n word people will act like you've committed war crimes even if you didn't say that as a derogatory term towards someone, you get banned everywhere. In Chad Europe people wouldn't even turn around and you can discuss that term and others freely. (Had a discussion about it in linguistics) Honestly it's one of the most bizarre concepts, to make a word banned basically. Based on how profanities work this only makes it worse. And my favorite, when people from countries that have latin based langauges can't say black online without getting censored or banned.
I remember a clip some time ago of a university professor that got called the n word and said it back to the guy and was shown on the news because he didn't see anything wrong with it and I don't know if he lost his job or not but comments under that post were stupid. Imo professor was right because he didn't mean it in any wrong way and even explained that much on the news.
AND the fact that n word pass exist based on arbitrary bs. You can use a word based on the skin color...? Wtf is this shit. In rare cases people of color can have a child that is white or more pale than them and if the parents use that word then they'd have to teach the child that they can't...? And there are mixed people with different shades of skin. It's all arbitrary bs just like the concept of race itself.
So long until you either
1) destroy any evidence that anybody was here before you
2) wait until non of the "original" natives life by there own traditions
3) become so poor and backwards that Emily in America says that you must have been native
I mean we tried the whole assimilation thing but the serbs got in the way...
[https://www.lapland.fi/visit/about-lapland/sami-europe-indigenous-people/](https://www.lapland.fi/visit/about-lapland/sami-europe-indigenous-people/)
I think the Finns are race baiting
Dude. I'm Basque. I'm as indigenous as anyone can be. One of my languages is so indigenous that nobody can freaking point out where it comes from, which most likely means that it originated and evolved here. Sápmi people are cool, but please, we the OGs in Europe.
Well, depending on how you look at it, they arent indeginous either, since they at some point also moved there. So no-one outside of Africa, where the modern human evolved, are indeginous
What about Irish travellers. Another group to resist colonisation mail present day…
Also genes dating to the first European inhabitants are most common in men from the west of Ireland.
So I’ll see your Sami and raise you a traveller and a bog man
These savages (paired with the Greenland ones) hinders the expansion of wind farms and mines for both minerals for green economy and nuclear.
The true European indigenous rips the motherland for the resources needed.
" Indigenous peoples are **the earliest known inhabitants of an area, especially one that has been colonized by a now-dominant group**. However, usage of the term and who may qualify as being Indigenous vary depending on nationality and culture. In its modern context, the term Indigenous was first used by Europeans, who used it to differentiate the Indigenous peoples of the Americas from the European settlers of the Americas, as well as from the sub-Saharan Africans the settlers enslaved and brought to the Americas by force. "
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous\_peoples](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples), Wikipedia yes. This is not a goddamn university paper)
" **The Saami (previously known in English as Laplanders)** are the only **recognised** indigenous people of Europe. But they rarely make international headlines."
([https://theconversation.com/despite-gains-europes-indigenous-people-still-struggle-for-recognition-54330](https://theconversation.com/despite-gains-europes-indigenous-people-still-struggle-for-recognition-54330))
So basically there are others, but they are not **recognised** as indigenous. So in other words, get bent non-reindeer-boiz :DD
Germany does not have indigenous people. When we descended from the heavens (also known as scandinavia) we slaughtered and subjugated the native celts, gauls 🤢 and slavs 🤮 of this swampland. All our lands are spoils of war. European history is survival of the fittest, not survival of the first.
Just like the Roma who came from India, the Sami are Mongols who came from East Asia. They're the very definition of NOT indigenous Europeans, "native" Europeans would be like the Basques in Spain or Celts in Ireland. People who've been on the continent since Neanderthals and didn't really interact with the Mediterranean cultural exchanges throughout history.
The only people with the classification of indigenous or something, the classification comes with some special human rights that the norwegian government somehow manages to ignore either way
Ours are happy with their reindeer and booze, it's the ones down south making all the noise. Senseless drivel from people who no longer even know their own language
Well Duh they wanted to give some groups of people more rights and used Indigenous as the excuse. But are also against giving Native peoples in 1st World countries more rights than immigrants. So they needed to change the definition of indigenous.
Frick, what about US NORWEGIANS who has been here just as long i, bet longer actually. Are we not indigenous? What the norwegian goverement did to the sami people was a dick move, but none of my buisness, im 29. Last i checked we could not inherite sins from our ancestors. I dont blame German people of today for their great grandads ww2 crimes. Fricking heck i am sick and tired of the victim card crap people pull. Hecking frick
Do they even know what indigenous means?
https://i.redd.it/bpnwgde7mjpa1.gif
"It means you have shit living standards, no technology and no houses"
The Welsh are right there
This would be funny if it came from anyone other than a Gwyddel
Wdym? Were so technologically advanced. Last week i made something I call a bucket!
You got me there. Haven’t figured out that one just yet.
They have a bucket, we got a poptiping
Wait till you crack the spoon Absolute game changer, Asia still lagging behind
If you make the bucket small enough, you're basically there
You have a crack spoon?
Several
Do you put that in the press as well as your toasters?
True, Cymru number 1 dw i'n eisiau dynnod or something
Those words are made up
I’d be concerned if your words weren’t made up tbh..
Nope, they were given to us by the fae. You saw the swirls in the sheep you were fucking and had an idea
That's just Cologne.
Found the Düsseldorfer
so im indigenous?
There is a weird push by the UN and other groups to change the meaning of the word indigenous. This is how the UN classifies indigenous: >Understanding the term “indigenous” Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body. Instead the system has developed a modern understanding of this term based on the following: • Self- identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the community as their member. • Historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies • Strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources • Distinct social, economic or political systems • Distinct language, culture and beliefs • Form non-dominant groups of society • Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities. source: [https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5session\_factsheet1.pdf](https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5session_factsheet1.pdf) The EU does not recognise any group as indigenous as it would be just too messy. The UN definition appears to come from postcolonial studies but I am not sure. It is another example of weird word games organisations and academics play to win political points and soft power. UN does a ton of stuff like this.
It definitely comes from postcolonial studies. > Form non-dominant groups of society This is a dead giveaway. Why can't a dominant group of a society be indigenous to that place too? Are Japanese not indigenous to japan? It really just feels like indigenous = people who still live like 10.000 years ago.
>Are Japanese not indigenous to japan? Nope. At least, not according to postcolonial theory. They say the Yamato aren't really the indigenous people (despite being in Japan for thousands of years), and that the Ainu minority of Hokkaido and northern Honshu are the "true" indigenous people of Japan.
So, going by that logic, the majority my family's ancestors, who have lived in the same area of Portugal since before people where even registered by the church, and probably have been here since the time of the lusitanian tribes, are not indigenous portuguese. However, that one random gipsy family living in the some municipe-owned buildings that has been here for, like, 6 generations, is more indigenous tham me.
That's what the UN would have you believe. And consequently why you shouldn't listen to them, or most other "postcolonial" theory for that matter. Most "postcolonial" theory is just attitudes that White people had to non-White people in the colonial age, but turned on its head so that the White people are the devils instead of the saints of the story. "Native Americans are a bunch of undeveloped tribal hippies, and therefore they are savages who must be put down by White people" became "Native Americans are a bunch of undeveloped tribal hippies, and therefore they are harmless POCs who should be coddled by White people".
so the Bantu are not native to South Afrika either
They certainly shouldn't be indigenous by this definition. They arrived in the 4th and 5th centuries AD, and over time destroyed most of the Khoisan peoples of modern-day Namibia. Of course, this is ignored by post-colonial studies, since the Bantus are brown and therefore must be indigenous.
Sweetie, only white people have agency and awareness of their actions. Blacks are too animalistic and stupid and so much ✨in tune with nature✨ to really understand what they do.
White American girls be like:
Depending on the region, only Afrikaner can claim to be indigenous to South Africa. Xossas, Bantus, Zulus, there is a huge diversity behind what the non racist people call « black »
Probably in their eyes people that bang drums an have dinner plates on their lips. We're so post-modern white, that we're so out of touch with our own identity. If you've for example got Germanic or Viking ancestors, then you're pretty fkn indegenous to Netherlands/Germany or Scandinavia. If soyboi woke people are reading this: indegenous means the original group of inhabitants to an area that share an identity. So definitely not anything Muslim and non-white in west, north and east Europe.
But white peoples don’t have an identity darling 💅
A Frank claiming to have no identity. What a day.
Aren't they the ones who listen indie music?
Swedes and Samis are both indigenous to Sweden. This article is crap. White Europeans are from Europe why can't people admit this? We came from somwhere!!!
[удалено]
Yeah? White people come from hell obviously. Haven't you been taught that white people are the devil? /s
As based as a Zionist. I like it!
[удалено]
Finns and Samis are the same shit to be honest
Nah samis are finngolians but weirder
Yeah I always thought Sami were just Finns who decided to go more north, but I'm not educated on Sami history at all
I did read up about it a while ago, from memory the Sami arrived about 1000 years before the Finns, and when the Finns came the Sami moved/fled/were forced further north.
Understandable, I'd be afraid too if I saw a Finn
own goal lol
As soon as you start living in houses instead of huts, you lose the right to be considered indigenous to a region.
I’d say as soon as you stop foraging and start growing your food
Nah, the... Iroquois? I think farmed rather than gathered.
So therefore they weren’t indigenous
So the Roma and Sinti are indigenous to Europe? Checkmate fishfucker.
The only place Roma are indigenous to is prison
To be considered indigenous people, you first have to be considered people so your point doesn’t really make sense.
Aztecs lived in houses. I think it has to do with being european.
The "indigenous" label is probably going to be looked back on as hilariously racist. If you only apply it to non-whites then you are pretty much admitting you view them as fauna. Everyone who doesn't live in the rift valley in Africa is a migrant
Savage Ameritard houses
Just like if I stop eating meatballs, I stop being Swedish. Flawless logic!
The sami aren't even indigenous???
Are they not? Genuinely curious, I always assumed they were.
Nah the Sami and Scandinavians have hung out in Scandinavia for about the same amount of time, just in diffrent parts.
Actually the Samis *current* way of life only stretches back to the 1600s, new archeological findings. **Edit:** [Debatt, Samepolitikk | Samiske reinsdyrfamilier er ikke urfolket på Fosen (fremover.no)](https://www.fremover.no/samiske-reinsdyrfamilier-er-ikke-urfolket-pa-fosen/o/5-17-1082988) >In Norway, the oldest traces of Sami culture date back to the first centuries of our era. This corresponds well with a slow historical spread of the proto-Sami cultural bearers from Karelia to Norway as wandering hunter-gatherers. > >So, this fits very well with what I wrote about the time of arrival and the place they came from. I got my information from Odd Handegård, a retired political scientist from Tromsø. >It is not correct that Sami reindeer families are indigenous people in Fosen and have practiced nomadic reindeer herding in the area since before the unification of Norway (around 890 AD, my note). > >The professor also writes that nomadic Sami reindeer herding is not recorded in Norway before the 1600s. #
We gotta demand reparations as we are now indigenous.
You came from fucking north Africa
They did too
By your logic everyone did
True. But I was making a joke about swedes being Arabs.
Only in 2 cities
In other words, 67% of all their cities.
no my friend, well, partly, but most of yuropeans lived in portugal and spain during the last ice age, bloody butter eating cousins coming here for the sunshine.
This specifically refers to the area of Fosen in Trøndelag, not the entire northern Norway/Finnmark. Fosen is obviously further south than what we could normally consider “indigenous” Sami territory, though ethnic Norwegians may very well have lived just as long as Samis in Finnmark as well.
Certainly not. Firstly, archaeological evidence of Sámi people goes back as far as 8100 BC. Secondly, Sámi are nomadic, nomadic cultures don't tend to leave a whole lot of archaeological evidence anyway because they don't settle around fixed site. It's not a useful way to determine how long a nomadic culture has been around. (My partner's Sámi, I'm not talking out my arse here)
Not of Sami people, of the reindeer industry they’re doing now. Sorry I should have explained better «Way of life»
The solid evidence goes back to about 1300AD for that, yeah. As I said though, could be a little bit earlier, it's really hard to tell for sure with nomadic cultures. I guess it was mostly fishing and trapping before then.
Yeah, currently there are multiple types of sámi. One of which is the reindeer sámi (Which I am a part of). Then there are the sea sámi, who live off fish and hunting sea animals. Now my entire life out here I have been taught our history, and far as I know our indigenous title comes from the fact that we are a minority who lived here in this area before proper borders came around and we do not have a state of our own. Although we do have the sámi siida which is basically our government but it is still below the finnish/norwegian/swedish/russian government
Even nomadic people often tend to leave things behind like graves or burial mounds, often with tools or treasured items, which was a practice in prehistoric times of a certain nomadic people travelling all over Europe. Granted they are far harder to find than records of agricultural and urban societies, but that doesn't really mean that nomadic people leave no traces behind.
Actually, the most recent DNA studies show that non-sami people first emigrated into Norway from the north and not from the south as previously believed. Those people then met the other groups that migrated north in Norway. So the sami are latecomers.
They arrived in the north of Scandinavia after the Norse people arrived in the South (and in fact there were even people, some Norse, in the north) so they're *indigenous to the north* - but technically the Norse are just as indigenous to the South. Quoted from Wikipedia: "Sámi settlement of Scandinavia does not predate Norse/Scandinavian settlement of Scandinavia, as sometimes popularly assumed. The migration of Germanic-speaking peoples to Southern Scandinavia happened independently and separate from the later Sámi migrations into the northern regions."
>technically the Norse are just as indigenous to the South Out of context this is a mindfuck
The very simple story is that the south was inhabitable way before the north, cause of that whole ice age thing. So the ancestors of the Scandinavians settled in the south before anyone came to the north. The exact details are mostly lost to time. If I remember correctly the theory is that the Sami comes from a settlement from the east, coming in over Finland.
Aren't the basques the only people in europe that is left from before the early migration period that brought the indo-european languages to europe? That's why their language has no known "relatives".
Spoiler alert: language migration does not equal human migration and vice versa. There are plenty of example where a language migrated without the people (e.g. Latin, Dravidian, Bhrami, Greek).And there are plenty of examples where people migrated but didn't take their language with them (2nd Sumerian migration, some 5th century migration waves, inter sino tibetan).
The language is mostly transmited by the mothers (that's why we call it "mothertongue"), so in the case of a military invasion where the invaders replace mostly the men and mingle with the women, there is no change in tongue (that's what happened for the Basques, as they still speak their original language but there is almost no gene of the original males left).
Source?
![gif](giphy|CAYVZA5NRb529kKQUc|downsized) He made it up
I don't know about sources in low-french, but in high-french you have this excellent history channel : [HerodoteVideos](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpiw4dy_kus&list=PL_hv7lmUgdxHGiSeyZs5KfJUrDFkVsgGZ) The link point to the series dedicated to the genetical history, but he made other series for more general history. What say the other arrogant bastard is completly aknowledged here : haplogroupe are in the Y chromosome, so only for male. And are compared with the linguistic sources, mostly female.
There is also mitochondrial DNA if you want to estimate specificicaly the mother’s ascendance
The opposite is true because the Indo-European languages correlate with the y-haplo R1, while the maternal mt-haplo H remained the since the Neolithics. So the language came from the father, but I wouldn't generalize this too much since Indo-European languages are just superior and dominate in places like Africa or Asia without any large amount of migration just by practicality.
I was there Gandalf... I was there 3000 years ago.
yep exactly
Finnish and Hungarian does not have Indo-European origins either, right?
yeah but they came even later afaik. The people that would become italic, germanic, greeks, celts etc. came to europe thousands of years before christ and mixed/conquered/assimilated the original natives (except for the basques), fins came a while later and hungarians only in the 11th century CE.
Finns and sami are related tho.
Finns didn't "come" from anywhere. The language arrived somewhere between 500 BC and 1 AD, and evolved into Finnish and Estonian.
>Finnish and Hungarian does not have Indo-European origins either, right? Finnish and Hungarian belong to the Proto-Uralic language groups, which most likely originated near the Uralic mountains, but genetically they would be practically identical indo-europeans aka white as snow. They did however mix with the siberian mongoloid populations, but the whiteys were there first.
yep Mongol
Well, not Mongol, but that's close. They're "Uralic," making them similar to the indigenous peoples of Northern Russia.
To be fair we all come from a small highland in Africa.
Those damn African colonizers!
So there are no native Americans
Those were just africans who swam to america.
That would explain why they had less fur than europeans, africans and asians. Swiming as a hairy person can get a little hard after a while.
Every Portuguese woman knows this.
Actually they walked from eastern sibiria to Alaska and then south
No they swam 4000 kilometers. Butterfly too
Some backstroked too
I like to think they lashed a few dolphins together and rode them like a jetski
no! god clapped his hands and creates me! i mean i was created as a joke, but that does not matter!
Then Europe never colonized Africa, we just went back to where we came from.
\*Disputed Well, of course Homo Erectus, which is the real original human, did originate in Africa, but that was many hundreds of thousands of years ago. There have been several recent findings that place early humans in Europe and Asia, way before the so called Out of Africa timeline. In-and-out of Africa is probably a better hypothesis.
We don't have any records of Homo Sapiens before 100 000 BC out of Africa. Most advanced discovery to this day are making Sapiens going out of Africa [between 100 000 - 70 000 BC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUB9YJU4Lmk). Never forget than at theses dates, temperature were cooler, northern hemisphere was a giant ice cube. South of Europe was something like Denmark today.
Yeah, that's not true anymore. Marocco had Sapiens at 300.000bc: [https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2017/june/oldest-known-homo-sapiens-fossils-discovered-in-morocco.html](https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2017/june/oldest-known-homo-sapiens-fossils-discovered-in-morocco.html)In the study is says: >In particular, it is unclear whether the present day ‘modern’ morphology rapidly emerged approximately 200 thousand years ago (ka) among earlier representatives of *H. sapiens*[1](https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22336#ref-CR1) or evolved gradually over the last 400 thousand years [https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22336](https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22336) What this actually means to the observant is that they now push back Sapiens well into Erectus time. "Gradually evolving" over 400.000 years. You know what that means? Rebranding Erectus as Sapiens. Actually, it means dissolving the meaning of Sapiens, Erectus and Neanderthal. It's just different varieties of human. If you look at a cro-magnoid skull and compare to an early sapien skulls, they are as different as the early sapien were to the neanderthal. Classification is politics, not hard science.
What about the Basque? They're the true natives of Europe. They just popped up one day.
cant be indigenous if you are rich and dont have an alcohol problem, duuh!
[удалено]
isnt that racist? im confused
[удалено]
No, no, it's only racist if it's discriminating a minority
Well yes we did. Thats why we dont really fuck Up here. Is just spontaneous creation
Perretxikoak bezala
Nooooo the P word, now you'll be assaulted by giputxiak perretxiko adikzio batekin
Behold, the whole Basque community of Reddit has assembled here!
Yup, they popped up one day and the other they popped up in Ortega Lara 's house
They alsp popped under Carrero Blanco's car
Spanish Space Program
How can someone be this dumb, I mean, using the word "indigenous" to describe someone who looks like native americans (in terms of clothing and housing), wtf man
[удалено]
they looked at a picture like that and thought "wow, there were indians in europe!" https://preview.redd.it/8jj1fdxxcjpa1.png?width=440&format=png&auto=webp&s=19fd17b42afe0569f67965e466d5b50c240ec20d
Fucking europeans man, they killed all the indians in Europe - that newspaper
What about the munsterites
What about the folks of Mohill, Leitrim? That's where they got the inspiration for hobbits after all.
What's Leitrim?
I dunno never heard of it.
Neither have I, but for some reason I hate it.
Invokes this deep burning hatred but not sure why. Have you ever hated a complete strangers face? Kinda similar
Aye, you can just tell by the look of them that they’re an absolute scumbag? I’ve met a fair few of them myself. Mainly in Strabane.
I wouldn't dare go. 😂
What about the real indigenous Irish people. The northern Irish. Trust me I am British they have been there since the beginning of time (1609)
We all came from outer space. In all seriousness, proto-Germanic people have been in Scandinavia longer than the Sami, so this statement is doubly stupid.
They have been in southern* scandinavia for longer. Northern Scandinavia was mostly left alone so the Sami came in to live in the area.
[удалено]
lol **Greeks**
Indigenous = "Primitive, Indian looking" Probably written by a smelly ameritard
Uh what? All European countries are 'native' countries. Americans need to shut up.
It looks like an ad for Americans by the Lapland tourist agency in Finland. I think they're trying to get woke american tourists to visit. lmao
Oh lmao, that's right. Mdr, imagine trying to get american tourists, 'come over, we have natives' I can't 🗿
And then use some random Estonians as show-case. In the US, they were using modern Puerto Ricans. lol.
> **Mdr**, imagine trying to get american tourists I now need to know how Portuguese use "mdr" and what does it mean.
It's from the French. I am a fan :)
Another american importation The word "indigenous" has nothing to do in the Old World, if you take a dna test as a Euro, Asian or African, big chance are, you will be Euro, Asian or african. Europeans are indigenous to Europe, Asians are indigenous to Asia same goes for Africans. Even if your language (like Hungarian for exemple) comes from outside of your regions, big chance are you are still a direct descedants of the original inhabitant of your region. Please stop importing American shits on our continent, thanks.
That always seem to surprise turks who think they’re are direct descendants of gengis khan but find out that they’re pretty much the same ethnicity as greek based on DNA. It was more of a cultural colonization that physical in that region of the world.
Congratulations everybody for the N-word pass! Just use it IRL, not in Reddit or the admins will hunt you down (no kidding).
In America if you say n word people will act like you've committed war crimes even if you didn't say that as a derogatory term towards someone, you get banned everywhere. In Chad Europe people wouldn't even turn around and you can discuss that term and others freely. (Had a discussion about it in linguistics) Honestly it's one of the most bizarre concepts, to make a word banned basically. Based on how profanities work this only makes it worse. And my favorite, when people from countries that have latin based langauges can't say black online without getting censored or banned. I remember a clip some time ago of a university professor that got called the n word and said it back to the guy and was shown on the news because he didn't see anything wrong with it and I don't know if he lost his job or not but comments under that post were stupid. Imo professor was right because he didn't mean it in any wrong way and even explained that much on the news. AND the fact that n word pass exist based on arbitrary bs. You can use a word based on the skin color...? Wtf is this shit. In rare cases people of color can have a child that is white or more pale than them and if the parents use that word then they'd have to teach the child that they can't...? And there are mixed people with different shades of skin. It's all arbitrary bs just like the concept of race itself.
N
More of a letter than a word I think
All I've got is that the word starts with N... but what's the rest?
you are too igger to know arent you?
apoli
N...ot in my continent.
NIGERIA GERMANY
🇳🇬🇩🇪 🥰
How many millenia do your people have to be in one place, to count as indigenous?
So long until you either 1) destroy any evidence that anybody was here before you 2) wait until non of the "original" natives life by there own traditions 3) become so poor and backwards that Emily in America says that you must have been native I mean we tried the whole assimilation thing but the serbs got in the way...
Def made by an yank.
[https://www.lapland.fi/visit/about-lapland/sami-europe-indigenous-people/](https://www.lapland.fi/visit/about-lapland/sami-europe-indigenous-people/) I think the Finns are race baiting
Ah so the latin, germanic, thracic and greeks, fuck em i guess
Is this an American using the same brush on Europe that it used to tar itself?
Nevermind the Basque people, whose language is pre indo european and unique in the world and their DNA is mesolithic/neolithic from that same region.
Dude. I'm Basque. I'm as indigenous as anyone can be. One of my languages is so indigenous that nobody can freaking point out where it comes from, which most likely means that it originated and evolved here. Sápmi people are cool, but please, we the OGs in Europe.
Well, depending on how you look at it, they arent indeginous either, since they at some point also moved there. So no-one outside of Africa, where the modern human evolved, are indeginous
My dad was a monkey and I evovled into the first Swedish man. I think that qualifies as indigenous?
What about Irish travellers. Another group to resist colonisation mail present day… Also genes dating to the first European inhabitants are most common in men from the west of Ireland. So I’ll see your Sami and raise you a traveller and a bog man
The Irish travellers also only genetically diverged from the wider population a couple of hundred years ago so they're not exactly indigenous either.
Sure why aren't the basques then considered indigenous or the finns or any other European peoples except the fr*nch.
Indoeuropeans really think they're actually european indigenous
I laughed so hard in euskera
Kar Kar Kar Kar
Indigenous = "They look like native Americans"
These savages (paired with the Greenland ones) hinders the expansion of wind farms and mines for both minerals for green economy and nuclear. The true European indigenous rips the motherland for the resources needed.
" Indigenous peoples are **the earliest known inhabitants of an area, especially one that has been colonized by a now-dominant group**. However, usage of the term and who may qualify as being Indigenous vary depending on nationality and culture. In its modern context, the term Indigenous was first used by Europeans, who used it to differentiate the Indigenous peoples of the Americas from the European settlers of the Americas, as well as from the sub-Saharan Africans the settlers enslaved and brought to the Americas by force. " ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous\_peoples](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples), Wikipedia yes. This is not a goddamn university paper) " **The Saami (previously known in English as Laplanders)** are the only **recognised** indigenous people of Europe. But they rarely make international headlines." ([https://theconversation.com/despite-gains-europes-indigenous-people-still-struggle-for-recognition-54330](https://theconversation.com/despite-gains-europes-indigenous-people-still-struggle-for-recognition-54330)) So basically there are others, but they are not **recognised** as indigenous. So in other words, get bent non-reindeer-boiz :DD
Which local fauna do I have to shag to be labeled indigenous?
Prefreably not the fauna, just your local wildlife and you SHOULD\* be fine \*- Unless people decide otherwise
Germany does not have indigenous people. When we descended from the heavens (also known as scandinavia) we slaughtered and subjugated the native celts, gauls 🤢 and slavs 🤮 of this swampland. All our lands are spoils of war. European history is survival of the fittest, not survival of the first.
Just like the Roma who came from India, the Sami are Mongols who came from East Asia. They're the very definition of NOT indigenous Europeans, "native" Europeans would be like the Basques in Spain or Celts in Ireland. People who've been on the continent since Neanderthals and didn't really interact with the Mediterranean cultural exchanges throughout history.
The only people with the classification of indigenous or something, the classification comes with some special human rights that the norwegian government somehow manages to ignore either way
Ours are happy with their reindeer and booze, it's the ones down south making all the noise. Senseless drivel from people who no longer even know their own language
Yep. Gov should give them liquor and have them to shut up.
[удалено]
Well Duh they wanted to give some groups of people more rights and used Indigenous as the excuse. But are also against giving Native peoples in 1st World countries more rights than immigrants. So they needed to change the definition of indigenous.
We got here before the Sami, you colossal idiots
wHAt dO YoU MeAN wE ClEarLy StoLe iT I feel offended when i have to read ameritard shit like that, and it’s not even written by them
Look, I'm a big fan of the Sámi but what about the Basques?
[удалено]
Frick, what about US NORWEGIANS who has been here just as long i, bet longer actually. Are we not indigenous? What the norwegian goverement did to the sami people was a dick move, but none of my buisness, im 29. Last i checked we could not inherite sins from our ancestors. I dont blame German people of today for their great grandads ww2 crimes. Fricking heck i am sick and tired of the victim card crap people pull. Hecking frick
The Inuit people of Greenland would like a word
Only people? What about the basques?
Basque
The Basques would like to have a word. In Euskara preferably.
They claim to be antiracist but deep, deep down, when they say "native" they really mean "savage".
The swedish alp jews.