Native Americans in the Southeast built.......?
Okay, the hint would be in the word SouthEAST. That's the area around Georgia, Alabama, and Florida. There are no deserts with mesas in the American Southeast, so the answer cannot be A. Hopis, Navajo, Anasazi and the like built adobe villages, and they reside in the American SouthWEST. The Indians of the American Southeast are the Cherokee, Muscogee, Seminole, and so on. By and large, they are descended from a group known as the Mississippian Indians. Mississippian Indians were also known as Mound Builders because that's how they arranged many of their cities. They built large Earthen mounds, and then built their towns and cities around them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi... http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/A... The longhouses were traditionally used by tribes in the Northeast such as the Iroquois and Mohawk, and in the Northwest by Natives like the Suquamish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Amer... Underground pits weren't uncommon features for many Native American tribes across North America, who used them as caches to store supplies of food for the winter or times of famine, and who also used them as winter shelters, so they aren't specific to any one area. So, the answer is B.
Do southeast asians, polynesians, and native americans have epicanthic folds?
Asians evolved in Asia obviously, but this is very broad term and includes a variety of populations. Ancient populations moved through "Asia" on their way to populate various other locations (the Americas, Pacific Islands, Australia, etc.) and that doesn't make them Asian necessarily. And the other problem is that this is a phenotypic trait not restricted to "Asians." "Asian" is a vast and nondescript term. For example, there are Asians in Southwest Asia that look nothing like East Asians that are the stereotypical "Asian" with epicanthic folds that you apparently are trying to make a comparison to. Polynesia is also a vast area. Many Polynesians do not have this phenotype, but then, on some islands it is common. There are also islands in Polynesia have populations descended from ancient/early migration that have more African features (google Jarawa). Native Americans usually don't have this trait, generally speaking, but some CAN have this feature...although it is usually not as pronounced as an east Asian. Many Native children have them, but "grow out" of this as they get older. The ancient Ainu are indigenous to Japan and are certainly Asian, even clustering with them on DNA tests, however they did not have this feature until later admixture with the mainstream Japanese population. The other problem with isolating a single phenotypic trait and trying to determine evolution and settlement patterns is that it can be found outside of your target population (in this case "Asian" - which I assume you mean East Asian). This trait is found in Scandinavians and Slavs, some Germans and Irish. It is not uncommon for Scandinavian babies to be born with this trait. And a really good example of a Nordic person with "epicanthic folds" is Bjork. She has no Asian or Inuit/Greenlandic or Indian ancestry. She is pure Icelandic, yet she obviously has the type of eye shape that you are asking about. It is also found in a very ancient population called the San, in Africa. There are genetic/DNA settlement maps that are pretty interesting. You might want to check that out.
Tell me interesting facts about the southeast native American Indians tribes!?
Taara, The Seminoles and other southeast tribe wore deerskin leggings and built palm leef cheekes because the groung was muddy so the houses were lifted by poles in the sky.They built birch bark canoes. Camila
Which group was the most primitive and advanced during the 1600s- Native Americans, Southeast Asians, or West Africans?
I’d have to say the Southeast Asians were the most advanced by far, with monarchies, armies, and a society comparable to that of 14th century Europe. All three civilizations had limited access to firearms, the southeast Asians had access to Dutch and Portuguese firearms, native Americans from the European colonists, and the west Africans from slave traders, and European trading settlements. West Africans were less advanced than the southeast Asian civilizations, with smaller population, and cities, and less advanced governments. (By this time, the major western African civilization of Mali and Songhai already have fallen.) The native Americans were by far the least advanced, surviving native American culture consisted of tribes with tribal systems, and survived by hunting, gathering, and fishing.
Why couldn't the Native Americans moving into the Southeast share the vast fertile lands?
They did. They lived alongside the Europeans for centuries, trading and building businesses. But Andrew Jackson needed a way to raise money to pay off the debts incurred during the revolutionary war, and kicking out the "five civilized tribes" would allow the government to raise money by selling off their farms, houses, businesses and livestock. So the real question is: Why couldn't the Americans moving into the southeast share the vast fertile lands? And the answer is - Greed.
What groups of Native Americans made up federations in the east and southeast?
The Iroquois in the northeast, and the Cherokee in the southeast. Tecumseh attempted to form a pan-Indian confederation in the Midwest, but was defeated militarily before it really got off the ground.
What are the 7 reasons why Native Americans and cotton farmers moving into the Southeast could not share the vast, fertile lands?
Racism - many believed that Native Americans were a savage, inferior race of people who did not deserve choice, fertile land.Hatred- conflicts over land and ownership of it had led to atrocities on both sides and hatred in response to the atrocities. The nature of cotton - cotton exhausts the soil and the yield of the land drops dramatically. Committed cotton farmers then need new and previously unplanted land and that was only found in the westward direction. I'll be interested to see four more reasons offered in other answers. Those three above cast a wide net over the situation.
Do Native Americans want to live in reservations, or the outside world?
A vast number do live ‘in the world outside’. All 5.2 million registered native Americans don’t live in ‘reservations’. And in most cases there’s no difference between a reservation and the rest of the state around it. There arent walls or fences or whatever. The only way you know you’re on or off reservation land is if you don’t miss the sign that says so. But native Americans live in cities or towns or just down the road or next door to the rest of us. Only some live on reservations. In fact the largest Native American populations today actually exist in large cities and urban areas. Not in reservations which are often poverty stricken, steeped in alcoholism and drug abuse and very often provide little progress for those living there. Natives very often leave the Rez for better education, better job opportunities and more and better chances in life. They certainly aren’t trapped on reservations except by choice.