Aboriginal society

Those are native american

Typically only the inhabitants of what would become the USA are referred to by that label.

Not really. There are some primitive civilization-like findings by archaeologists but nothing on the scale of central and south american peoples.

What, you mean elementary?

the stinky smelly natives didn't believe in a concept of property. They controlled the place they lived and the area they hunted in. If another tribe came in they would be attacked. They didn't really have countries or empires, it was nomadic society which all believed the stronger of two tribes has the right to destroy the weaker.

The land wasn't really ever stolen

>why isn't this in the history books
>a picture, clearly from a history book

There are two answers to your questions. The first, and you're not gonna like it, is that it IS in history books, and you're fucking retarded.

The second, and arguably the better answer depending on where you live, is that history is recorded by the winners, and most countries don't like admitting that cultures they genocided even existed. Even when the majority were killed by plague before the genocide. It looks bad on their rep, ya know.

The Apache were asshats, but they sure knew how to keep the mexicans out of Texas

they were nomadic tribes, they didn't effectively control anything

These maps piss me off. They had concepts of territory and shit but it isn't the same as Europeans. Plus by the time Europoors showed up in America in large numbers most Native Americans had already been ravaged by disease. Most of their land was empty.

>they were nomadic tribes
Most natives were not nomadic. That was mainly only the plains tribes.

It is.

The (for the most part) lack of a written tradition hampers the creation of a definite chronology, though. The oral traditions certainly help, though not as much as some other aboriginal cultures, but as always those come with myth and cultural drift to take into account.

>We didn't cross the border the border crossed us!
>This is are land!
t. modern Mexican living in historical Shoshone/Apache/Comanche territory who would have been skinned alive for doing so two hundred years ago.

The aboriginals in Australia never even developed a society

It is, you would know if you went to college.

>Typically only the inhabitants of what would become the USA are referred to by that label
Uh, no. "Natives" of the Americas are all referred to academically as American Indians. Only governments refer to them individually as different things (Native Americans, Aboriginals, Indios, etc.).

>Why isn't this in History Books
I'm pretty sure every single fucking textbook on North American history has a map like that.

No written records means that its anthropology and not history.

Not a very accurate map tbqh. Its missing dozens of ethnic states and kingdoms. In high school we did cover very little of precolumbian US cultures. Given the archeology work of today though it's suprising some stuff was never mentioned like the mound builders. Maybe it's changed since I was in high school but US history always started with the pilgrims. I wish I had a more thorough history.

>Why isn't this in History Books
They are, they're just not in school textbooks because they're not historically significant. The only reason the average person needs to know anything about Native Americans is 1. if those natives had some kind of significant contact with their society or 2. if they're from Central America or the Andes area and descended from natives. Beyond that, Native Americans barely impact today's society whatsoever.

tfw that picture was probably taken from a history book

This. General history books in school have brief sections of most world history. Teachers simply don't have the time to teach the whole thing and the curiculum needs to focus on things that will be on standardized tests.

You're going to have to wait until college before you specialize in specific areas of history and anthropology.

>uh

>Why isn't this in the history books?

Because smallpox is a bitch, yo.

They all be dead and shit.

Because most of them aren't interesting or relevant.
The only really cool tribes/civs in US territory are the mound builders, pueblo/anasazi and maybe the Haida

It's because we still can't read the texts and runes they left behind and we're still deciphering their advanced societies.

There is no history without writing.

This. You're in the wrong class OP, take anthropology or archaeology.

Many civilizations in North America had no written language, so it's even more difficult to understand what was happening at any given time.

1. It is
2. No native americans believed they owned any of the land

If by history books you mean school books it's
because they never accomplished anything

What's the difference between land and territory?

It's hard to define, since tribes didn't even consider or believe that people could possibly own land. In short, territory is land you occupy, but not have a 'right' to. It was more of a "don't come here because I'm here" rather than a "don't come here because this is my land" (and because of this, it's really hard to say what land was whose territory).

That's not much of a distinction.

Yes it is, it's just hard for you to understand when you were raised with the idea that people could own land.

Squirrels fight over territory and I don't see much of a difference.

And?

It seems more like a semantics argument.

for example, India and Pakistan both claim Kashmir, but iirc India administers, i.e. 'effectively controls' it

Wrong.

I wish there were good books about the Indians. The Sioux for a time went on a steppe horde tier conquering spree as they were the tribe that best adapted to the use of guns and horses, and many people just assume they somehow got all that land peacefully.

I would be very interested in a Rise and Fall style history of a lot of these tribes.

oh you mean the native american section of 8th grade us history

It's split down the "Line of control"

Think Korean DMZ

>people

Well first of all, the people didn't write which makes it really hard to find and verify historical information.

this.

Honestly, people's who don't record their history shouldn't be considered civilizations at all.

I'd have no problem with it, and I did get taught the territories of abadigidals in Australia. Mandatory state schooling is the problem.

>civ ccuk's memory isn't good enough to know his history

It is.

Funny, almost every time I see some stupid cuntbucket post some shit online about "why isn't this taught in schools?!" or "why isn't this in the history books!" 99.99% of the time it's always something that IS in the books and taught in schools, they just don't remember it because they're vapid little shits who didn't pay attention to "some stupid class about shit that no one cares about."

Really? Your high school US history textbooks had maps of the major American cultural-linguistic groups? I don't believe you.

Normally I'd agree with you, because with a lot of this shit -- "why didn't we learn this in history class?" -- it IS part of modern curriculums, but I think it's fair to say most students don't really get a great picture of the diversity of Precolumbian America. I mean, you had people building pretty fucking sizable cities with trade routes that extended across the continent, and then some who were still nomadic hunter-gatherers. Many of them spoke languages that were no more alike than e.g. Swahili and English. That dichotomy, repeated dozens of times. But even at reasonably good schools I doubt most students have a more detailed picture than "Cherokee and Iroquois at one end, Pueblos somewhere in the middle and down in Mexico people are sacrificing each other on pyramids or something."

>Really? Your high school US history textbooks had maps of the major American cultural-linguistic groups? I don't believe you.
We spent 2 years on pre-colonial American history in Jr High. Starting from the east coast and moving westward then going to Central and South America before even touching on European contact and colonialism. And there was a map exactly like that one in our textbooks.

That shit changed all the fucking time. Love it when dumbass white kids think the natives grew out of the ground and stayed there.

>We spent 2 years on pre-colonial American history in Jr High.
Then your school was unusual. We didn't. And although I went to a public school, for both middle and high school I was lucky enough to attend one of the highest ranked schools in the country, in an area known for the unusually high quality of its public education (NoVA) -- it's not like I attended some shit school in the middle of Detroit or Bumfuck Mountain, Appalachia.

It's awesome that you covered that stuff. I'm being serious, not sarcastic. But your experience wasn't representative.

because its Fake History™

>tfw he didnt read the parts of history textbooks the class didnt cover for fun

nice map.

Apache can't into sea.

History. Written.
Pre-history. When they only babbled and drew pretty pictures.
I thought this was true.