To be an immigrant there has to be a country to go to. If you settled in Antarctica would you be an immigrant?No, you would be a pioneer. Were the James town colonist migrants? Unlike Antarctica there were stone age people living there, but they didn't welcome the newcomers with food stamps and bilingual education did they.
About ten days after the English chose their camp site hundreds of Indians attacked them in order to exterminate them, that's worse than trying to settle Antarctica. So no, the colonist were not immigrants. Yes, once there was a nation there was immigration. From 1790 to 1820 the US population grew from 2.9 million to ten million, that's 250% growth. Lots of immigration, right?
Wrong. That population growth of six million was almost entirely due to the natives having children, at the end of that period only one percent was forign born, one percent. We were not an "immigration of immigrants", and if the founders wanted immigrants then they wanted White immigrants.
The very first congress of the united states met in 1790. The constitution has been just ratified, and congress had to decide what kind of country it was going to be. In that year they pass the very first naturalization law that restricted citizenship to free white persons. The founders wanted a white country.
Later on immigration did pick up but it was from Europe.
Two groups occupied the site in prehistoric times. The Siouan-speaking Middle Missouri people (Initial Middle Missouri variant), ancestral to the historic Mandan people, first occupied the site sometime after about 900 AD. They built numerous earth lodges on the lower portion of the site. Caddoan-speaking Central Plains people (Initial Coalescent variant) moved into the area from southern areas (present-day Nebraska) sometime around 1150 AD. (The historic Arikara are a Caddoan people.) Whether they displaced the earlier group or moved onto an abandoned site is unknown. The Central Plains (Initial Coalescent) people built at least 55 lodges, mostly on the upper part of the site. There is no direct evidence that there was conflict between the two groups, and scholars have found evidence that both cultures changed gradually in relation to the other.
There is evidence that the Central Plains/Initial Coalescent villagers built well-planned defensive works for their village. They were replacing an earlier dry moat fortification with a new fortification ditch around the expanded village when an attack occurred that resulted in the massacre. The attacking group killed all the villagers. Archaeologists from the University of South Dakota, directed by project director Larry J. Zimmerman, field director Thomas Emerson, and osteologist P. Willey found the remains of at least 486 people killed during the attack. Most of these remains showed signs of ritual mutilation, particularly scalping. Other examples were tongues being removed, teeth broken, beheading, hands and feet being cut off, and other forms of dismemberment. In addition to the severity of the attack, most of the people showed signs of malnutrition and many had evidence of being wounded in other attacks. This evidence has suggested to scholars that lives of people of the Initial Coalescent culture were under more stress than was thought; they have theorized that the people were attacked by another group or several groups of the Initial Coalescent culture in the area in competition for arable land and resources
Attached: 1406a6eed2bf8d79377dfcd53e5708651226abc43d750c68620919d961a54a07.jpg (618x1024, 170.54K)