This is the OPs question. Everything else in the OP depends on this answer. Of course the answer is entirely subjective since the concept of “claim” is a purely arbitrary construct. So until there was an accepted definition of “claim”, no such claim is possible. Besides, how could any first person know that she is the first and therefore entitled to make the claim. It seems more than unlikely, it seems logically impossible.
Homo Erectus was actually the first human species to leave Africa, spreading to much of Asia and some islands like Indonesia, long before the Neanderthals.
Neanderthals never left Africa. They were never in Africa to begin with.
I thought there may have been some in North Africa and near the Horn, but that’s just my memory. But I think you’re right in that even if this is so, they didn’t evolve in North Africa, but rather in Europe, and may have spread back into NA. Or not, if my memory is wrong.
My understanding is that the common ancestor of Neanderthals and Sapiens is Homo Heidelbergensis (HH), and one branch of HH spread to Europe and evolved into Neanderthals, and another branch stayed in Africa and evolved into Sapiens, and Sapiens then spread and displaced/absorbed all other Homo species that were in Africa, Europe, and Asia.
The closest Neanderthal finds to Africa are in Gibraltar, Malta and Israel, there’s never been an African Neanderthal find.
Wow, Malta? Did they have boats, or was the Med much lower at the time?
The latter. During glacial periods so much water was locked up in ice that sea level was lower and islands like Malta were connected to the mainland.
I figured my Neanderthal comment was probably anthropologically inaccurate, but the point remains – if being the first humans in the Americas somehow gave you the right to two entire continents, the same logic would suggest the the first to leave Africa got to call dibs on the entire rest of the world. Reductio ad absurdum and all that …
I have the same issue with Egypt claiming ownership of ancient Egyptian artifacts in perpetuity. Anything that old “belongs” to humanity not to any particular nation state and more specifically the person who dug it up.
Native Americans don’t have a “claim” to the American continents. They were (and are) treated like complete shit by the Europeans who colonized here and their descendants, but I don’t think there is anything wrong specifically with Europeans coming here in the first place. It was the genocide that followed which was wrong.
To this day I disagree with preventing other humans from living in the US, or preventing anyone from moving anywhere. But if the immigrants start handing out smallpox blankets and enslaving the natives, we have a problem.
I’ve been lurking a lot for a long time, so I thought I’d update my OP.
My wife and I received our 23 and me results, and this is what it said. {I’m rounding off percentages}.
My wife: 60% Native American
30% Southern European {Spain we assume}
5% East Asian
5% not assigned
Myself: 55% North and Western European
45% Eastern European
As it turns out, I have a recent ancestor who was 100% Ashkenazi Jewish. I’ve been telling my family for years that we have Jewish history in our past. I based my assumptions on my Grandfather’s features. He immigrated to the U.S. in 1890. His name was the most “German” you could imagine. His skin tone and facial features were not Germanic…
Anyways, I relived my OP with my wife and she said that agreed with the gist of my concept. Especially that of modern day NA tribes claiming skeletal remains that are thousands of yeas old…
.
Hey, archaea and bacteria were present all over the globe mega-millennia before the rise of H Sapiens et al! And they still are! Should we acknowledge them as the rightful Lords of the World? (Not that they would mind much if we did or didn’t; they know they are! :))
Human history, in general, is not a story of acts of goodness and morality. That the Americas were clear of people is the only thing that allowed the first group to move in without having to fight others for the land.
The basic state of nature is, in essence, evil. Animals breed until they have to fight rivals for more territory or bring famine upon themselves. Humans didn’t escape that, and it has taken us a long time to figure out how to mitigate this circumstance of our biological origins.
Of course we can reduce my OP until the beginning of life on Earth…
That’s not the over riding question in today’s world.
If you think about it, present day interpretations of NA rights in the U.S.A. affect us all. For example, the enforcement of treaties signed in the 1830’s + or -. {think the ceded territories in WI for example}. If they are to be followed, should NA be allowed to hunt and fish with 1830’s technology or 21st century technology ?
.
Sorry maybe I’m being obtuse, what is the question exactly, whether Asians that came after the initial wave of Asians that settled North America are interlopers?
Sure, in my OP, I suggested that the Asians that came to North America many THOUSANDS of years after the original colonizers were indeed interlopers. Therefore, nowadays, how could we possibly give sovereignty to the present NA occupiers of what we consider the U.S.A. ?
.
Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, still not understanding your question. You think we should do away with reservation governments or something?
I freely admit that moral and decency might be mere opinions; but I fail to see how retconning them into functions of ancestry (of all things!) would raise them above that level!
Sorry, not being sarcastic at all. I’m just trying to fight ignorance concerning this topic. Concerning present day Indian Reservations, are they the ACTUAL owners of their historic lands…???
Who knows…
.
A lot of reservations aren’t on that nation’s historic lands; some nations got pushed west. The nations themselves were created at different points in time: some times as existing nations divided, others as different small bands joined together. Some nations disappeared post-1492, some had disappeared before. The nations which do have reservations are the factual and current owners of those lands, but if your definition of “actual owner” involves “direct biological descent from the first human being to set foot there”, that’s unlikely to be the case for pretty much anybody, not just on the Americas but on Earth. You’d be the only person on the planet to make such a claim, though, partly because that would leave an extremely tiny amount of actual owners and because it would be a bitch to test for. For example, unless your wife’s native-american ancestors were all from Tierra del Fuego, they are descended from someone who pushed somebody else south. If an island in the Pacific Ocean ever got depopulated and repopulated, would you consider the current natives (descendants of the second wave) to be “actual owners”?