This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2010)

Look up native in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

The term "native" can have many different social and political connotations in different contexts. In some cases it is a neutral, descriptive term, for example, when stating that one is a native of a particular city or that a certain language is one's native language. However, in the context of colonialism—in particular, British colonialism—the term "natives", as applied to the inhabitants of colonies, assumed a disparaging and patronising sense, implying that the people concerned were incapable of taking care of themselves and in need of Europeans to administer their lives;^{[citation needed]} therefore, these people resent the use of the term and consider it insulting, and at present English speakers usually avoid using it. This connotation has also led to controversy over the preference of the terms Native American or American Indians, though this controversy has resulted in either term being acceptable to most American Indians.^[1] And in the context of Nativism, in some periods a potent political force, "natives" are defined as a (predominantly white) group deserving of a special privileged position in comparison to immigrants.

Other common uses[link]

"Native" may also refer to:

• Native (band), a contemporary French R&B band
• Native metal
• Native (comics), a character in the X-Men comics universe

Nationality and language[link]

• Native language and Native speaker (as opposed to foreign language and non-Native speaker)
• Native-born citizen (as opposed to foreign born)
• Indigenous peoples, people, communities, and nations who claim a historical continuity and cultural affinity with societies endemic to their original territories

Ecology[link]

• Biomass (ecology)
• Endemism
• Indigenous (ecology)
• Native plant
• Permaculture
• Wildcrafting

Computing[link]

• In computing, software has a native mode when it is written for a specific processor (see native on Wiktionary).
• In computing, software has a native support when it is written for a specific operating system.

Other[link]

• NATIVE (Northeast Arizona Technological Institute of Vocational Education), a joint technology school district serving the Arizona portion of the Navajo Nation

See also[link]

• Native Speaker, a book by Pee Lee
• Native Language Music, a record label
• Indigenous (ecology), species present by nature, not introduced
• Indigenous peoples, sometimes referred to as "natives"
• Nativism (disambiguation)

References[link]

1. ^ http://www.infoplease.com/spot/aihmterms.html

This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same title. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article.

Natives of North America.

Natives of South America.

The population figures for Indigenous peoples in the Americas before the 1492 voyage of Christopher Columbus have proven difficult to establish and rely on archaeological data and written records from European settlers. Most scholars writing at the end of the 19th century estimated the pre-Columbian population at about 10 million; by the end of the 20th century the scholarly consensus had shifted to about 50 million, with some arguing for 100 million or more.^[1] Contact with the New World led to the European colonization of the Americas, in which millions of immigrants from the "Old World" eventually settled in the New.

The population of African and Eurasian peoples in the Americas grew steadily, while the number of the indigenous people plummeted. Eurasian diseases such as smallpox, influenza, bubonic plague and pneumonic plagues devastated the Native Americans who did not have immunity. Conflict and outright warfare with European newcomers and other American tribes reduced populations and disrupted traditional society. The extent and causes of the decline have long been a subject of academic debate, along with its characterization as a genocide.^[2]

Population overview[link]

Given the fragmentary nature of the evidence, even semi-accurate pre-Columbian population figures are impossible to obtain. Estimates are made by extrapolations from small bits of data. In 1976, geographer William Denevan used the existing estimates to derive a "consensus count" of about 54 million people. Nonetheless, more recent estimates still range widely.^[3]

Using an estimate of approximately 30 million people in 1492 (including 15 million in the Aztec Empire and six million in the Inca Empire), the lowest estimates give a death toll due from disease of an astonishing 80% by the end of the 17th century (eight million people in 1650).^[4] Latin America would match its 15th century population early in the 20th century; it numbered 17 million in 1800, 30 million in 1850, 61 million in 1900, 105 million in 1930, 218 million in 1960, 361 million in 1980, and 563 million in 2005.^[4] In the last three decades of the 16th century, the population of present-day Mexico dropped to about one million people.^[4] The Maya population is today estimated at six million, which is about the same as at the end of the 15th century, according to some estimates.^[4] In what is now Brazil, the indigenous population declined from a pre-Columbian high of an estimated four million to some 300,000.

While it is difficult to determine exactly how many Natives lived in North America before Columbus,^[5] estimates range from a low of 2.1 million (Ubelaker 1976) to 7 million people (Russell Thornton) to a high of 18 million (Dobyns 1983).^[6]

The Aboriginal population of Canada during the late 15th century is estimated to have been between 200,000^[7] and two million,^[8] with a figure of 500,000 currently accepted by Canada's Royal Commission on Aboriginal Health.^[9] Repeated outbreaks of European infectious diseases such as influenza, measles and smallpox (to which they had no natural immunity), combined with dispossession from European/Canadian settlements and repressive policies, resulted in a forty- to eighty-percent aboriginal population decrease after contact.^[7] For example, during the late 1630s, smallpox killed over half of the Wyandot (Huron), who controlled most of the early North American fur trade in what became Canada. They were reduced to fewer than 10,000 people.^[10]

Historian David Henige has argued that many population figures are the result of arbitrary formulas selectively applied to numbers from unreliable historical sources. He believes this is a weakness unrecognized by several contributors to the field, and insists there is not sufficient evidence to produce population numbers that have any real meaning. He characterizes the modern trend of high estimates as "pseudo-scientific number-crunching." Henige does not advocate a low population estimate, but argues that the scanty and unreliable nature of the evidence renders broad estimates inevitably suspect, saying "high counters" (as he calls them) have been particularly flagrant in their misuse of sources.^[11] Many population studies acknowledge the inherent difficulties in producing reliable statistics, given the scarcity of hard data.

The population debate has often had ideological underpinnings.^[12] Low estimates were sometimes reflective of European notions of cultural and racial superiority. Historian Francis Jennings argued, "Scholarly wisdom long held that Indians were so inferior in mind and works that they could not possibly have created or sustained large populations."^[13] On the other hand, some have argued that contemporary estimates of a high pre-Columbian indigenous population are rooted in a bias against Western civilization and/or Christianity. Robert Royal writes that "estimates of pre-Columbian population figures have become heavily politicized with some scholars, who are particularly critical of Europe, often favoring wildly higher figures."^[14]

Civilizations rose and fell, and indigenous peoples migrated long before Europeans arrived on the scene. The indigenous population in 1492 was not necessarily at a high point and may actually have been in decline in some areas. Fernand Braudel has pointed out a problem the Amerindian faced which was not a factor in Eurasia and Africa: "The Indian population ... suffered from a demographic weakness, particularly because of the absence of any substitute animal milk. Mothers had to nurse their children until they were three or four years old. This long period of breast-feeding severely reduced female fertility and made any demographic revival precarious."^[15] Indigenous populations in most areas of the Americas reached a low point by the early 20th century. In most cases, populations have since begun to climb.^[16] In the United States, for instance, the numbers may already have recovered to pre-Columbian levels or even exceeded them.^[17]

Pre-Columbian Americas[link]

Genetic diversity and population structure in the American land mass using DNA micro-satellite markers (genotype) sampled from North, Central, and South America have been analyzed against similar data available from other indigenous populations worldwide.^[18][19] The Amerindian populations show a lower genetic diversity than populations from other continental regions.^[19] Observed is both a decreasing genetic diversity as geographic distance from the Bering Strait occurs and a decreasing genetic similarity to Siberian populations from Alaska (genetic entry point).^[18][19] Also observed is evidence of a higher level of diversity and lower level of population structure in western South America compared to eastern South America.^[18][19] A relative lack of differentiation between Mesoamerican and Andean populations is a scenario that implies coastal routes were easier than inland routes for migrating peoples (Paleo-Indians) to traverse.^[18] The overall pattern that is emerging suggests that the Americas were recently colonized by a small number of individuals (effective size of about 70), and then they grew by a factor of 10 over 800 – 1000 years.^[20][21] The data also show that there have been genetic exchanges between Asia, the Arctic and Greenland since the initial peopling of the Americas.^[21][22]

Depopulation from disease[link]

Nearly all scholars now believe that widespread epidemic disease, to which the natives had no prior exposure or resistance, was the overwhelming cause of the massive population decline of the Native Americans.^[23] They reject both of the earliest European immigrants' explanations for the population decline of the American natives. The first explanation was the brutal practices of the Spanish conquistadores, as recorded by the Spanish themselves. This was applied through the encomienda which was a system ostensibly set up to protect people from warring tribes as well as to teach them the Spanish language and the Catholic religion, but in practice was tantamount to slavery.^[24] The most notable account was that of the Dominican friar Bartolomé de las Casas, whose writings vividly depict Spanish atrocities committed in particular against the Taínos. It took five years for the Taíno rebellion to be quelled by both the Real Audiencia—through diplomatic sabotage, and through the Indian auxiliaries fighting with the Spanish.^[25] After Emperor Charles V personally eradicated the notion of the encomienda system as a use for slave labour, there were not enough Spanish to have caused such a large population decline.^[26][27] The second European explanation was a perceived divine approval, in which God removed the natives as part of His "divine plan" to make way for a new Christian civilization. Many native Americans viewed their troubles in terms of religious or supernatural causes within their own belief systems.

Soon after Europeans and Africans began to arrive in the New World, bringing with them the infectious diseases of Europe and Africa, observers noted immense numbers of indigenous Americans began to die from these diseases. One reason this death toll was overlooked (or downplayed) is that once introduced the diseases raced ahead of European immigration in many areas. Disease killed off a sizable portion of the populations before European observations (and thus written records) were made. After the epidemics had already killed massive numbers of natives, many newer European immigrants assumed that there had always been relatively few indigenous peoples. The scope of the epidemics over the years was tremendous, killing millions of people—possibly in excess of 90% of the population in the hardest hit areas—and creating one of "the greatest human catastrophe in history, far exceeding even the disaster of the Black Death of medieval Europe",^[28] which had killed up to one-third of the people in Europe and Asia between 1347 and 1351. The Black Death occurred to a European population which also had not been exposed and had little or no resistance to a new disease.

One of the most devastating diseases was smallpox, but other deadly diseases included typhus, measles, influenza, bubonic plague, cholera, malaria, tuberculosis, mumps, yellow fever, and pertussis (whooping cough), which were chronic in Eurasia. The indigenous Americas also had a number of endemic diseases, such as tuberculosis and perhaps including an unusually virulent type of syphilis, which soon became rampant when brought back to the Old World. (This transfer of disease between the Old and New Worlds was part of the phenomenon known as the "Columbian Exchange"). The diseases brought to the New World proved to be exceptionally deadly to the Native Americans.

The epidemics had very different effects in different regions of the Americas. The most vulnerable groups were those with a relatively small population and few built-up immunities. Many island-based groups were annihilated. The Caribs and Arawaks of the Caribbean nearly ceased to exist, as did the Beothuks of Newfoundland. While disease ranged swiftly through the densely populated empires of Mesoamerica, the more scattered populations of North America saw a slower spread.

Virulence and mortality[link]

A disease (viral or bacterial) that kills its victims before they can spread it to others tends to flare up and then die out, like a fire running out of fuel. A more resilient disease would establish an equilibrium; if its victims lived beyond infection, the disease would spread further. The evolutionary process selects against quick lethality, with the most immediately fatal diseases being the most short-lived. A similar evolutionary pressure acts upon the victim populations, as those lacking genetic resistance to common diseases die and do not leave descendants, whereas those who are resistant procreate and pass resistant genes to their offspring. For example, in the fifty years following Columbus' voyage to the Americas, an unusually strong strain of syphilis killed a high proportion of infected Europeans within a few months; over time, however, the disease has become much less virulent.

Thus both diseases and populations tend to evolve towards an equilibrium in which the common diseases are non-symptomatic, mild, or manageably chronic. When a population that has been relatively isolated is exposed to new diseases, it has no resistance to the new diseases (the population is "biologically naive"); this body of people succumbs at a much higher rate, resulting in what is known as a "virgin soil" epidemic. Before the European arrival, the Americas had been isolated from the Eurasian-African landmass. The peoples of the Old World had had thousands of years for their populations to accommodate to their common diseases.

The fact that all members of an immunologically naive population are exposed to a new disease simultaneously increases the fatalities. Populations where the disease is endemic have generations of individuals with acquired immunity or hardiness. In populations where a disease is endemic, most adults are exposed to the disease at a young age. Thus resistant to reinfection, they are able to care for individuals who catch the disease for the first time, such as the next generation of children. With proper care, many of these "childhood diseases" are often survivable. In a naive population, all age groups are affected at once, leaving few or no healthy caregivers to nurse the sick. With no resistant individuals healthy enough to tend to the ill, a disease may have higher fatalities than otherwise.

The natives of the Americas suffered the introduction of several new diseases at once, so that a person who successfully resisted one disease might die from another. Multiple simultaneous infections (e.g., smallpox and typhus at the same time) or in close succession (e.g., smallpox in an individual who was still weak from a recent bout of typhus) are more deadly than just the sum of the individual diseases. In this scenario, death rates can also be elevated by combinations of new and familiar diseases: smallpox in combination with American strains of syphilis or yaws, for example.

Other contributing factors:

• Native American medical treatments such as sweat baths and cold water immersion (practiced in some areas) weakened some patients and probably increased mortality rates.^[29]
• Europeans brought many diseases with them because they had many more domesticated animals than the Native Americans. Domestication usually means close and frequent contact between animals and people, which is an opportunity for diseases of domestic animals to mutate and migrate into the human population.^[30]
• The Eurasian landmass extends many thousands of miles along an east–west axis. Climate zones also extend for thousands of miles, which facilitated the spread of agriculture, domestication of animals, and the diseases associated with domestication. The Americas extend mainly north and south, which, according to the environmental determinist theory popularized by Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs, and Steel, meant that it was much harder for cultivated plant species, domesticated animals, and diseases to migrate.
• Mexican epidemiologist Rodolfo Acuña-Soto argues that mortality due to imported diseases was compounded, or even dwarfed, by mortality due to a hemorrhagic fever native to the Americas. The Aztecs called it cocoliztli. Acuña-Soto's conclusions are based in part on the 50 volumes written by Francisco Hernández, physician to Philip II of Spain. He interviewed survivors of the 1576 epidemic and autopsied many victims, then recorded his findings and observations. He found that the fever was endemic during drought years, a series of which had coincided with the early Spanish invasion of Central America.^[31] Acuña-Soto noticed that previous historians using the same reference works that he used had chosen which accounts to base their results on, so that epidemic illnesses coinciding with the Spanish invasion could, by selectively using resources, look like accounts of European-caused smallpox rather than the Aztec-recognized cocoliztli. The disease the Aztecs described, however, when read in full described a hemorrhagic fever that had nothing in common with smallpox. Such fevers are viral, spread by rodents and bodily fluid contacts between infected people. Using evidence from 24 epidemics, Acuña-Soto concluded that the Spanish did not bring the epidemic to the Aztecs, but arrived during its onset and intensification. Acuña-Soto's theory is controversial and not widely accepted as of 2007^[update].

Deliberate infection[link]

One of the most contentious issues relating to disease depopulation in the Americas concerns the degree to which Europeans deliberately infected indigenous peoples with diseases such as smallpox. Cook asserts that there is no evidence that the Spanish attempted to infect the American natives.^[32] The cattle introduced by the Spanish polluted the water reserves which Native Americans dug in the fields to accumulate rain water. In response, the Franciscans and Dominicans created public fountains and aqueducts to guarantee access to drinking water.^[4] But when the Franciscans lost their privileges in 1572, many of these fountains were not guarded any more and deliberate well poisoning may have happened.^[4] Although no proof of such poisoning has been found, some historians believe the decrease of the population correlates with the end of religious orders' control of the water.^[4]

Vaccination[link]

After Edward Jenner's 1796 confirmation of the efficacy of smallpox vaccination, the technique became better known. Smallpox became less deadly in the United States (and elsewhere). Many colonists and natives became vaccinated. Although in some cases officials tried to vaccinate natives, the disease often was carried beyond containment attempts. At other times, trade demands broke quarantines. In other cases, some natives refused vaccination because of suspicion of European Americans. In 1831 government officials vaccinated the Yankton Sioux at Sioux Agency. The Santee Sioux refused vaccination and many died.^[12]

Other causes of depopulation[link]

War and violence[link]

While epidemic disease was by far the leading cause of the population decline of the American indigenous peoples after 1492, there were other contributing factors, all of them related to European contact and colonization. One of these factors was warfare. According to demographer Russell Thornton, although many lives were lost in wars over the centuries, and war sometimes contributed to the near extinction of certain tribes, warfare and death by other violent means was a comparatively minor cause of overall native population decline.^[33]

There is some disagreement among scholars about how widespread warfare was in pre-Columbian America,^[34] but there is general agreement that war became deadlier after the arrival of the Europeans and their firearms. Europeans had gunpowder and swords, which made killing easier and war more deadly. Europeans proved consistently successful in achieving domination in warfare with Native Americans for a variety of reasons. One reason was the staying power of the Europeans, who could call on a far ranging supply network, and could sustain a conflict over several years including the winters if necessary. Almost no Indian tribes had the stored resources to conduct a war for more than a few months. The massive death toll from disease played a major role in the European conquest, but equally decisive was the European approach to war, which was less ritualistic and more focused on achieving decisive victory.^{[citation needed]} European colonization also contributed to a number of wars between Native Americans, who fought over which of them should have first access to the new weapon.^[35]

Empires such as the Incas depended on a highly centralized administration for the distribution of resources. Disruption caused by the war and the colonization hampered the traditional economy, and possibly led to shortages of food and materials.

Exploitation[link]

Some Spaniards objected to the encomienda system, notably Bartolomé de las Casas, who insisted that the Indians were humans with souls and rights. Due to many revolts and military encounters, Emperor Charles V helped relieve the strain on both the Indian labourers and the Spanish vanguards probing the Caribana for military and diplomatic purposes.^[36] Later on New Laws were promulgated in Spain in 1542 to protect isolated natives, but the abuses in the Americas were never entirely or permanently abolished. The Spanish also employed the pre-Columbian draft system called the mita,^[37] and treated their subjects as something between slaves and serfs. Serfs stayed to work the land; slaves were exported to the mines, where large numbers of them died. In other areas the Spaniards replaced the ruling Aztecs and Incas and divided the conquered lands among themselves ruling as the new feudal lords with often, but unsuccessful lobbying to the viceroys of the Spanish crown to pay Tlaxcalan war demnities. The infamous Bandeirantes from São Paulo, adventurers mostly of mixed Portuguese and native ancestry, penetrated steadily westward in their search for Indian slaves. Serfdom existed as such in parts of Latin America well into the 19th century, past independence.^{[citation needed]}

Massacres[link]

Las Casas and other dissenting Spaniards from the colonial period gave vivid descriptions of the atrocities inflicted upon the natives. This has helped to create an image of the Spanish conquistadores as cruel in the extreme. Even as late 1520, there were tentative parleys between the still explorative Spaniards who were continuously disadvantaged by the natives' superior knowledge of the terrain.^[38][39] Great revenues were drawn from Hispaniola so the advent of losing manpower didn't benefit the Spanish crown. At best, the reinforcement of vanguards sent by the Council of the Indies to explore the Caribana country and gather information on alliances or hostilities was the main goal of the local viceroys and their adelantados.^[40] Although mass killings and atrocities were not a significant factor in native depopulation, no mainstream scholar dismisses the sometimes humiliating circumstances now believed to be precipitated by civil disorder as well as Spanish cruelty.^[41][42]

However, in many areas settlers and even governments did engage in what have been called "democides", usually against nomadic Indian tribes who were seen solely as hindrances to land use by European settlers.^{[citation needed]} Whether or not these people were non-combatants (intruding on the term "massacre") is a subject to debate. Notable democides include^{[citation needed]}:

• The Taínos in the Antilles (Some believe 80% of the population disappeared in thirty years).^[4] The smallpox outbreak in 1518–1519 wiped out much of the region's indigenous population.^[43]
• The Pequot War in early New England.
• In mid-19th century Argentina, post-independence leaders Juan Manuel de Rosas and Julio Argentino Roca engaged in what they presenteded as a "Conquest of the Desert" against the natives of the Argentinian interior, leaving over 1,300 indigenous dead.^[44][45]
• While some California tribes were settled on reservations, others were hunted down and massacred by 19th century American settlers. It is estimated that some 4,500 people of the Population of Native California suffered violent deaths between 1849 and 1870.^[46][47]

Displacement and disruption[link]

Even more consequential than warfare or mistreatment on indigenous populations was the geographic displacement of native Indian tribes. The increased European population due to immigration and high birth rates of Native European settlers put pressure on native tribes to relocate and alter their traditional ways of life. The introduction of new forms of intensive agriculture by Europeans let them grow enough food in a given area to support many more people than the native hunting and gathering societies could. Displacement of native peoples living their traditional lifestyles often resulted in decreased birth rates and often higher death rates which steadily lowered their populations for some time. In the United States, for example, the relocations of Native Americans resulting from the policies of Indian removal and the reservation system created a disruption which resulted in fewer births and a short term population decline.

The populations of many Native American peoples were reduced by the common practice of intermarrying with Europeans.^[48] Although many Indian cultures that once thrived are extinct today, their descendants exist today in some of the bloodlines of the current inhabitants of the Americas.

Formal apologies[link]

United States of America[link]

On September 8, 2000, the head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) formally apologized for the agency's participation in the "ethnic cleansing" of Western tribes.^[49]

See also[link]

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal
	Aboriginal peoples in Canada portal
	Indigenous peoples of North America portal

References[link]

Notes[link]

Bibliography[link]

Further reading[link]

External links[link]

• Article by Russell Thornton on American Indian population history in North America
• Excerpts from David Stannard's American Holocaust
• Article by Alan Rinding on Brazil's Indians
• Colonial Brazil: Portuguese, Tupi, etc
• Indigenous Genocide in the Brazilian Amazon

Links to related articles v t e Indigenous peoples of the Americas History Paleo-Indians Pre-Columbian era Classification Archaeology Genetics European colonization European colonization Population history Columbian Exchange By country North America Greenland Canada United States Jamaica Mexico Central America El Salvador Costa Rica West Indies Panama South America Argentina Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Ecuador Paraguay Peru Venezuela South American Indigenous people Related topics Indigenous American studies Indigenous languages Indigenous Movements Indigenous art Artists Writers Category Portal v t e Cultural areas of indigenous North Americans Arctic · California · Great Basin · Mexico (Aridoamerica · Mesoamerica) · Northeastern Woodlands · Northwest Coast · Plains · Plateau · Southeastern Woodlands · Southwest · Subarctic v t e Pre-Columbian civilizations and cultures  Americas Paleo-Indians  · Genetic history · Archaeology of the Americas · Indigenous peoples of the Americas  North America North American pre-Columbian cultures – Caddoan Mississippian – Chichimeca –Hopewell tradition – Coles Creek – Fremont – Marksville – Mississippian – Mogollon – Plaquemine – Plum Bayou – Poverty Point – Troyville – Weeden Island –  Mesoamerica Mesoamerican pre-Columbian chronology – Capacha – Cholula – Coclé – Epi-Olmec – Huastec – Izapa – Mezcala – Mixtec – Olmec – Pipil – Quelepa – Shaft tomb tradition – Teuchitlan – Tarascan – Teotihuacan – Tlatilco – Tlaxcaltec – Toltec – Totonac – Veracruz – Xochipala – Zapotec  South America South American Indigenous people – pre-Columbian chronology – Cañaris – Chachapoya – Chancay – Chavín – Chimu – El Abra – Hydraulic culture of mounds (Bolivia) – Las Vegas – Lima – La Tolita (Tumaco) – Manteño-Guancavilca – Mapuche – Moche – Mollo – Muisca (Chibchas) – Nariño – Nazca – Norte Chico – Quimbaya – San Agustin – Shuar – Sican – Taino – Tairona – Tiwanaku – Tierradentro – Valdivia – Wari Aztec civilization Maya civilization Inca Empire – Inca civilization  Language Nahuatl language Mayan languages Quechua  Writing Aztec writing Mayan writing Quipu  Religion Aztec religion Maya religion Inca religion  Mythology Aztec mythology Maya mythology Inca mythology  Calendar Aztec calendar Maya calendar  Society Aztec society Maya society Inca society  Infrastructure Chinampas Maya architecture Inca architecture (road system) Incan agriculture  History Aztec history Inca history  People Moctezuma I Moctezuma II Cuitlahuac Cuauhtémoc K'inich Janaab' Pakal Uaxaclajuun Ub'aah K'awiil Jasaw Chan K'awiil I Manco Cápac Pachacutec Atahualpa Manco Inca  Conquest Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire (Hernán Cortés) Spanish conquest of Yucatán (Francisco de Montejo) Spanish conquest of Guatemala (Pedro de Alvarado) Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire (Francisco Pizarro) See also Portal:Indigenous peoples of North America – Columbian exchange – Mesoamerican writing systems – Native American cuisine – Native American pottery – Population history of American indigenous peoples – Pre-Columbian art – Painting in the Americas before Colonization v t e    Pre-Columbian North America Archaeological cultures North American pre-Columbian chronology – Adena – Alachua – Ancient Pueblo (Anasazi) – Baytown – Belle Glade – Buttermilk Creek Complex – Caborn-Welborn – Calf Creek – Caloosahatchee – Clovis – Coles Creek – Deptford – Folsom – Fort Ancient – Fort Walton – Fremont – Glades – Glacial Kame – Hopewell (List of Hopewell sites) – Hohokam – Leon-Jefferson – Mississippian (List of Mississippian sites) – Mogollon – Monongahela – Old Cordilleran – Oneota – Paleo-Arctic – Paleo-Indians – Patayan – Plano – Plaquemine – Poverty Point – Prehistoric Southwest – Red Ocher – Santa Rosa-Swift Creek – St. Johns – Steed-Kisker – Tchefuncte – Tocobaga – Troyville Archaeological sites Angel Mounds – Bandelier National Monument – The Bluff Point Stoneworks – Cahokia – Chaco Canyon – Casa Grande – Coso Rock Art District – Eaker – Effigy Mounds National Monument – Etowah Indian Mounds – Eva – Folsom Site – Fort Ancient – Fort Center – Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument – Holly Bluff Site – Hopewell Culture National Historical Park – Kincaid Mounds – Kolomoki – Manitou Cliff Dwellings – Marksville – Meadowcroft Rockshelter – Mesa Verde – Moorehead Circle – Moundville – Mummy Cave – Nodena Site – Ocmulgee National Monument – Old Stone Fort – Parkin Park – Pinson Mounds – Portsmouth Earthworks – Poverty Point – Pueblo Bonito – Rock Eagle – Rock Hawk – Salmon Ruins – Serpent Mound – Spiro Mounds – SunWatch – Taos Pueblo – Toltec Mounds – Town Creek Indian Mound – Winterville Miscellaneous Ballgame – Black drink – Buhl woman – Calumet – Chunkey – Clovis point – Container Revolution – Eastern Agricultural Complex – Eden point – Effigy mound – Falcon dancer – Folsom point – Green Corn Ceremony – Horned Serpent – Kennewick man – Kiva – Metallurgy – Mi'kmaq hieroglyphic writing – Medicine wheel – Mound builders – N.A.G.P.R.A. – Norse colonization of the Americas – Piasa – Pueblo dwellings – Southeastern Ceremonial Complex – Three Sisters agriculture – Thunderbird – Underwater panther Related: Genetic history · Indigenous Portal of North America · Pre-Columbian era v t e    History of the Americas History North America · Mesoamerica · Central America · Caribbean · Latin America · South America · Genetics Settlement Indigenous peoples · Indigenous population · Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact · Discovery · Exploration · European colonization · Spanish colonization · French colonization · Portuguese colonization · British colonization · Columbian Exchange · Decolonization Societies Paleo-Indians · Pre-Columbian era · Maya · Incas · Aztecs Related Maps · Culture · Geography · Indigenous languages · Epidemics · Slavery Lists Pre-Columbian cultures · Indigenous peoples · Population · Conflicts (North America, South America) Chronology Archaeology of the Americas · North America by period · North American timelines · Mesoamerica by period · Mesoamerica timeline Era: By period · By region · Three-age system · Ancient history · Pre-Columbian · Classical Antiquity · Middle Ages · Modern history · Future

Indigenous peoples of the Americas

Quechua women in the Andahuaylillas District of Peru, 2007
Total population
Approximately 48 million
Regions with significant populations
(not including mixed race populations in Latin America)
Peru 13.8 million [1]  Mexico 10.1 million [2]  Bolivia 6 million [3]  Guatemala 5.4 million [4]  Ecuador 3.4 million  United States 2.5 million [5]  Colombia 1.4 million [6]  Canada 1.2 million [7]  Brazil 700,000 [8]  Chile 692,000 [9]  Argentina 600,000 [10]  Venezuela 524,000 [11]  Honduras 520,000 [12]  Nicaragua 443,847 [13]  Panama 204,000 [14]  Paraguay 95,235 [15]  El Salvador ~70,000 [16]  Costa Rica ~60,000 [17]  Guyana ~60,000 [18]  Belize ~24,501 (Maya) [19]  French Guiana ~19,000 [20]  Suriname ~12,000 - 24,000
Languages
Indigenous languages of the Americas, English, Spanish. French
Religion
Inuit religion Native American mythology Native American religion Christianity

The indigenous peoples of the Americas are the pre-Columbian inhabitants of North and South America and their descendants. Pueblos indígenas (indigenous peoples) is a common term in Spanish-speaking countries. Aborígen (aboriginal/native) is used in Argentina, while "Amerindian" is used in Guyana, but not commonly used in other countries.^[21] Indigenous peoples are known in Canada as Aboriginal peoples,^[22] and in the United States as Native Americans.^[23]

According to a prevailing New World migration model, migrations of humans from Eurasia to the Americas took place via Beringia, a land bridge which connected the two continents across what is now the Bering Strait. The most recent migration could have taken place around 12,000 years ago, with the earliest period remaining a matter of some unresolved contention.^[24][25] These early Paleo-Indians soon spread throughout the Americas, diversifying into many hundreds of culturally distinct nations and tribes.^[25] According to the oral histories of many of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, they have been living there since their genesis, described by a wide range of traditional creation accounts.

Application of the term "Indian" originated with Christopher Columbus, who thought that he had arrived in the East Indies, while seeking Asia.^{[26][27][28][29][30][31]} Later the name was still used as the Americas at the time were often called West Indies. This has served to imagine a kind of racial or cultural unity for the aboriginal peoples of the Americas. Once created, the unified "Indian" was codified in law, religion, and politics. The unitary idea of "Indians" was not originally shared by indigenous peoples, but many over the last two centuries have embraced the identity. The term "Indian" does not include indigenous peoples such as the Aleuts, Alutiiq, Cupik, Yupik, and Inuit peoples.

While some indigenous peoples of the Americas were traditionally hunter-gatherers, and many, especially in Amazonia still are, many groups practiced aquaculture and agriculture. The impact of their agricultural endowment to the world is a testament to their time and work in reshaping and cultivating the flora indigenous to the Americas.^[32] Some societies depended heavily on agriculture while others practiced a mix of farming, hunting, and gathering. In some regions the indigenous peoples created monumental architecture, large-scale organized cities, chiefdoms, states, and empires.

Many parts of the Americas are still populated by indigenous Americans; some countries have sizable populations, especially Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and Ecuador. At least a thousand different indigenous languages are spoken in the Americas. Some, such as Quechua languages, Aymara, Guaraní, Mayan languages, and Nahuatl, count their speakers in millions. Many also maintain aspects of indigenous cultural practices to varying degrees, including religion, social organization and subsistence practices. Some indigenous peoples still live in relative isolation from Western society, and a few are still counted as uncontacted peoples.

General Introduction[link]

Native American people, from the Nordisk familjebok.

According to the New World migration model, a migration of humans from Eurasia to the Americas took place via Beringia, a land bridge that connected the two continents across what is now the Bering Strait. The most recent point at which this migration could have taken place, where the first Americans set foot on Alaska, is 40,000 - 12,000 years ago; a hotly disputed topic.^[24][25] The early Paleo-Indians spread throughout the Americas, diversifying into many hundreds of culturally distinct nations and tribes.^[25] According to the oral histories of many of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, they have been living there since their genesis, described by a wide range of traditional creation accounts.

While some indigenous peoples of the Americas were historically hunter-gatherers, many practiced aquaculture and agriculture. The impact of their agricultural endowment to the world is a testament to their time and work in reshaping and cultivating the flora indigenous to the Americas.^[32] Some societies depended heavily on agriculture while others practiced a mix of farming, hunting, and gathering. In some regions the indigenous peoples created monumental architecture, large-scale organized cities, chiefdoms, states, and empires.

Many parts of the Americas are still populated by indigenous Americans; some countries have sizable populations, especially Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and Ecuador. At least a thousand different indigenous languages are spoken in the Americas.^[33] Some, such as Quechua languages, Aymara, Guaraní, Mayan languages, and Nahuatl, count their speakers in millions. Many also maintain aspects of indigenous cultural practices to varying degrees, including religion, social organization and subsistence practices. Some indigenous peoples still live in relative isolation from Western society, and a few are still uncontacted peoples.

History[link]

Migration into the continents[link]

Map of early human migrations^[34]

  Homo sapiens

  Neanderthals

  Early Hominids

Reconstruction of the face of Luzia Woman, Minas Gerais, Brazil, one of the oldest human remains found in the Americas, dated to 11,500 years ago^[35]

The specifics of Paleo-Indian migration to and throughout the Americas, including the exact dates and routes traveled, are subject to ongoing research and discussion.^[36] The traditional Western theory has been that these early migrants moved into the Beringia land bridge between eastern Siberia and present-day Alaska around 40,000—16,500 years ago,^{[37][38][39][40]} when sea levels were significantly lowered due to the Quaternary glaciation.^[36][41] These people are believed to have followed herds of now-extinct Pleistocene megafauna along ice-free corridors that stretched between the Laurentide and Cordilleran ice sheets.^[42] Another route proposed is that, either on foot or using primitive boats, they migrated down the Pacific Northwest coast to South America.^[43] Evidence of the latter would since have been covered by a sea level rise of hundreds of meters following the last ice age.^[44]

The time range of 40,000—16,500 years ago is a hot topic of debate and will be for years to come. The few agreements achieved to date are the origin from Central Asia, with widespread habitation of the Americas during the end of the last glacial period, or more specifically what is known as the late glacial maximum, around 16,000 — 13,000 years before present.^[40][45]

Stone tools, particularly projectile points and scrapers, are the primary evidence of the earliest human activity in the Americas. Crafted lithic flaked tools are used by archaeologists and anthropologists to classify cultural periods.^[46] Scientific evidence links indigenous Americans to Asian peoples, specifically eastern Siberian populations. Indigenous peoples of the Americas have been linked to North Asian populations by linguistic factors, the distribution of blood types, and in genetic composition as reflected by molecular data, such as DNA.^[47]

Pre-Columbian era[link]

Language families of North American indigenous peoples

The Pre-Columbian era incorporates all period subdivisions in the history and prehistory of the Americas before the appearance of significant European and African influences on the American continents, spanning the time of the original settlement in the Upper Paleolithic to European colonization during the Early Modern period.^[48]

While technically referring to the era before Christopher Columbus's voyages of 1492 to 1504, in practice the term usually includes the history of American indigenous cultures until they were either conquered or significantly influenced by Europeans, even if this happened decades or even centuries after Columbus' initial landing.^[49] Pre-Columbian is used especially often in the context of the great indigenous civilizations of the Americas, such as those of Mesoamerica (the Olmec, the Toltec, the Teotihuacano, the Zapotec, the Mixtec, the Aztec, and the Maya) and the Andes (Inca, Moche, Chibcha, Cañaris).