T O P
311polo

It's too small to read on my mobile, but this is the kind of content that we need more of on thus sub. Instead of low quality karma farming posts that usually gets posted. Looking forward to reading through this when I get in my laptop.


Astatine_209

This is a fantastic quality map, sadly it's also been posted here at least a dozen times. Not that that means it shouldn't be posted again, but quality OC is rare in this sub.


Superjhonny66

No Swedes, Norwegians, Icelanders or Finns?


Nimonic

I assume this map is for peoples that are traditionally wholly in the Arctic. The Sami aren't quite that, but close enough.


AutoSuggestUsername2

The Sami people actually reached Finland after the Finns, they are only classified as "indigenous" thanks to some extremely liberal redefining of the term.


sailorsw00n

Sami had been in Finland for thousands of years before can you cite a source please ?


[deleted]

[удалено]


throwawaynowtillmay

How long do a people need to be in a place before they are indigenous?


[deleted]

[удалено]


throwawaynowtillmay

What about the zulu who moved into part of southern Africa which never had bantu peoples in it before? I wouldn't say they were colonizers, more just a movement of people. That said they have only been there two hundred years or so. I think I'm struggling to find a consistent definition of indigenous.


AutoSuggestUsername2

>nationalistic hate spewer. I'm not certain you have quite enough information to make such a judgement. I was referring to an article posted to Reddit a few months ago claiming the two groups arrived in the south and north of Finland at very similar times, with the south populated first. I have no dog in this fight, I didn't know there was a fight. I am as far from a nationalistic person as you will ever meet, don't do that.


ChilindriPizza

One of those is not like the others "ducks and dodges the flying tomatoes".


Proxima55

I don't get it.


ChilindriPizza

The Sami have blond hair and round eyes and tall noses. While the others have jet black hair and almond shaped eyes and flatter noses. I am avoiding using archaic terms- but will do if requested.


DrampaTheFantastico

Sami only look like that because of thousands of years mixing with Finnish people. Original Sami looked almost Asian.


alcesalcesg

outdated map reposted constantly. Eskimo is no longer the preferred term, being separate groups of Yup'ik and Inuit. Aleut was a name given to the Unangan people by the russians and has never been used to refer to themselves. Kutchin was the spelling used by the canadian government but is more accurately Gwich'in. They are kind of the outliers here as they are Dene.


Turt1estar

Weird because I’m Aleut and have never heard “Unangan”. Also, all of my Eskimo relatives still prefer to be called Eskimo and don’t consider it offensive.


Alaskan_Tsar

I'm sure its like how as a koyukon, I refer to myself as Indian. My mother and grandfather call themselves Indians and so am I. even though "Alaskan native" is more correct, Indian rolls off the tongue better. So in my mind both are correct, like "Caucasian" and "white". The same can not be said of "Eskimo" which is derogatory in nature


alcesalcesg

That may be your experience but tribal councils have indicated that they prefer not to use the term Eskimo. You're right, almost nobody (outside of canada) considers it offensive, but its not the correct term. As far as never having heard of the term Unangan, I'm not sure what to say. Again, I wouldnt say many people consider the term offensive, but it is the term given by the russians who enslaved your people. Direct guidance from tribal councils says the preferred term is Unangan.


Turt1estar

I don’t really care what the tribals councils think. I’m not going to start calling myself something different for political correctness points. Especially when the only people I’ve met who have a problem with Eskimo (you’re the first I’ve heard say I shouldn’t call myself Aleut) are white people trying to virtue signal but actually end up being offensive.


alcesalcesg

Do whatever you want I guess. I travel and work in villages all over Alaska. I try to be respectful and learn from tribal elders. I'm taking the information they have provided me and trying to provide some context on the map here.


Turt1estar

If you’re trying to be respectful, you should try to understand that a vast majority of Native Alaskans are okay with Aleut/Eskimo and aren’t going to stop calling ourselves by those names. So I don’t care how many tribal elders you talked to, you still sound like a white “savior” to me, coming in to tell us our language is wrong and we should start calling ourselves something else.


alcesalcesg

so you dont care what tribal councils say, yet you presume to speak for "the vast majority" of Native Alaskans? Got it


Turt1estar

You sound like the type of person to say Latinx and not understand why a Hispanic person might find that offensive.


Alaskan_Tsar

they speak for me. Im not an aleut, im koyukon. Hell one of my family was chief or ruby and a key member of Doyon lmt. and they speak for me


311polo

Nothing like bleeding heart white people telling us what native people largely prefer and what offends them.


Astatine_209

It's a good map even if it is old. There are old soviet maps posted here, do you have a problem with them?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Astatine_209

I agree the title should state that the map is from 1983. It's a great map but clearly quite dated.


alcesalcesg

It is a well done map, I'll give you that, but the information in it is not the best available and is not very respectful of the groups it seeks to describe. Some of the information in it is flat out wrong. I don't have a problem with old maps, I have a problem with inaccurate maps.


Astatine_209

I strongly disagree that the map is disrespectful of anyone. It used the accepted term at the time and the map makers couldn't have predicted the Zeitgeist 40 years out into the future.


alcesalcesg

I dont believe the makers were being disrespectful or that it was considered disrespectful 40 years ago, but times HAVE changed and im trying to provide context for why this map is now outdated. There are many examples in history of well meaning people using terms or information that in the historical context was perfectly appropriate, but today would be considered offensive.


Astatine_209

As I look at the map closer, I realize you're even further off base than I initially thought. Not a single group here is given the main identifier "Eskimo". The map only uses it in contexts like this: "They and other Canadian Eskimos are now generally known as Inuit" That's what offends you? Really?


311polo

Yet more white people defining what is and isn't respectful on behalf of native people.


311polo

Yet more white people defining what is and isn't respectful on behalf of native people.


Astatine_209

Is there any information about the people living in north western greenland? I've tried to find info before but without luck.


_digital__

The reads like a map that illustrates just how far Genghis Khan’s lineage has spread…


endoplasmikretikulum

there is no yakut but Sakha Turks


AutoSuggestUsername2

>yakut "Sakha, also called Yakut, one of the major peoples of eastern Siberia"


endoplasmikretikulum

Why weren't the words made up by the Russians used when the people living in the region called themselves Sakha? yakut is from Yako ( the name of Sakhas on tungic)