You don’t need a city to consider it a settlement, they had dominion over the outlined land, treaties, and trade. I’d consider that civilation, settling, and land management.
The anthropologists among us would also say yes. The alternative worldview that some peoples are civilized (thinking, organized, philosophical) and others are barbaric (violent, disorganized, brutal, militant, uncaring) is reductive and obsolete. If "civilized" is to mean anything, it refers to populations that can form the large permanent population centres we call cities.
What we call cities are vastly beyond the scale of most civilizations with writing, philosophy, etc. As recently as 1500 all it took was 5,000+ people to be considered a city in Europe.
Many Native American tribes reached that standard before Europeans first reached America. They where considered barbarians simply on religious grounds.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ute_people
You don’t need a city to consider it a settlement, they had dominion over the outlined land, treaties, and trade. I’d consider that civilation, settling, and land management.
Chaco Canyon https://www.nps.gov/chcu/learn/historyculture/index.htm
Do you think that civilization only exists within city limits?
The etymologists among us would say, yes.
The anthropologists among us would also say yes. The alternative worldview that some peoples are civilized (thinking, organized, philosophical) and others are barbaric (violent, disorganized, brutal, militant, uncaring) is reductive and obsolete. If "civilized" is to mean anything, it refers to populations that can form the large permanent population centres we call cities.
What we call cities are vastly beyond the scale of most civilizations with writing, philosophy, etc. As recently as 1500 all it took was 5,000+ people to be considered a city in Europe.
Many Native American tribes reached that standard before Europeans first reached America. They where considered barbarians simply on religious grounds.
In this context, that's exactly what we're talking about. To say the native Americans already settled the western US is being obtuse.
Cahokia comes to mind.
https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/01/27/new-study-debunks-myth-...
Do you need cities to proof settlement? What about nomads?
Settlement: a place, typically one that has hitherto been uninhabited, where people establish a community.
Yes. Nomads wouldn't count.
Tired of people trying to redefine words especially when there's the aire of racism attached to using the word in the correct way.
The entire intention of settlers is to put down roots in a given location.