English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-07 19:55:59 · 10 answers · asked by tallus1 1 in Arts & Humanities History

10 answers

I don't think this is a good explanation. Look at other undeveloped people to this day: some people in Africa, some people in the islands in the Australia. Usually people are undevelopped because of the environment conditions. You cannot say that all the natives were undevelopped. Look at the myas, the incas and the aztecs. They had technologies that were much better than what the Europeans had at the time. So...

2007-01-07 20:05:53 · answer #1 · answered by Ana 3 · 0 1

I don't know if you're talking about Western America or of the world, but the west was populated by native Americans. It's believed they got there by crossing a land bridge from Asia into Alaska then the rest of America. However, the Pacific ocean and the Rocky Mountains isolate the West from the rest of the US. The East was populated much faster than the West coast of the US because it was difficult for whites to make the hard journey through the mountains and desert to get to the West. Until the 1800s only native Americans populated these lands (along with some Mexicans and Spanish.)

This doesn't mean they were underdeveloped. Most of the country's surviving native population lives in the West to this day.

2007-01-07 20:05:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

If youre referring to Native Americans, spend a night in a tipi sometime before you say "undeveloped". A tipi is cool in summer, warm in winter (you make a campfire in the middle, the smoke goes out the top and the lodge stays nice and warm), and can be set up or taken down in a half hour or less. A tipi properly set up can even withstand a small tornado, I know because I went through a tornado in my own tipi while at a powwow and the tipis withstood the storm while the campers and tents were blown all over the place!

2007-01-07 21:17:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Honestly, I don't liek the term "undeveloped" because I don't believe they were undeveloped. Sure they didn't have the "technology" that Europe did at the time but they did have many things that Europeans lacked. They had great hunting skills and medicinal skills. They weren't undeveloped they were jsut developed in their own way and they were happy like that.

But, yes, I do believe that because they were so isolated that they didn't have Europes technological advancments.

2007-01-07 20:04:47 · answer #4 · answered by JessiBaby 2 · 0 0

Please define natives and the west, then define undeveloped. I will assume by natives you mean native americans and I assume by the west you mean the western U.S.A. Since I am not sure, I can only suggest you read some of the many stories written about modern native americans by Sherman Alexie. One of my favorites is, "The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fist Fight in Heaven."

2007-01-07 20:04:02 · answer #5 · answered by famandertiff 2 · 0 0

Virtually all of Europe's advantages over the indigenous people of the west came from the fertile crescent, that is, mesopotamia or present day Iraq. These ideas were able to spread because of geography, because europe was just to the east. The Americans, on the other hand were across an entire ocean, plus the geography over there was north to south instead of east to west so it was harder for ideas to spread

2007-01-07 20:00:34 · answer #6 · answered by jdog 3 · 0 0

depends upon what one terms " underdeveloped " as in the U.S. there were many indications of highly civilized areas. look at the Illinois Indigenous People City of Cahokia. this was a thriving City and had numerous People living, traveling to and from this area.

there were other major cities in the Southern States one of which is Mound City -- and not Saint Louis which at one time was referred to as " Mound City. "

my Anthropology Professor wanted someone to develop a paper on what Turtle Island ( U.S. ) life would have been like had the European " discoverers " never found Turtle Island. have been thinking about doing this as a different but just as highly advanced Civilization would have taken place.

2007-01-08 01:30:58 · answer #7 · answered by Marvin R 7 · 0 0

undeveloped how? let's see the europeans build a pyraimd the size of teotihuacan along with the precision and astronomical accuracy.

2007-01-08 01:55:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

To live with nature and not trying to dominate every thing you touch is not underdeveloped. You are confusing history written by the conquerors as the total truth, and that they were civilized.

2007-01-07 20:10:17 · answer #9 · answered by darscoind 2 · 0 0

Are you speaking of the natives of USA?

2007-01-07 20:04:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers