为什么欧洲白人不被认为是欧洲的“土著”？

Why are White Europeans not considered "indigenous" to Europe?

为什么欧洲白人不被认为是欧洲的“土著”？

Sharon Williams
Because they are not. They are not the original Europeans. The modern Europeans are a created species. They are chimeras that completely replaced not only the original indigenous Europeans, but the original Central Asians. They have multiple different and distinct cells. All indigenous people on earth were dark skinned melanated people. The indigenous Europeans were the first Africans that left the African continent and settled in the land. Modern Europeans are descendants of the Neanderthal and carry multiple DNA’s, some non human. Neanderthals didn’t go extinct, they evolved. There is history and DNA studies that now prove this.

因为他们并非如此。他们并非最初的欧洲人。现代欧洲人是一个被创造出来的物种。他们是完全取代了不仅最初的欧洲原住民，还有最初的中亚人的嵌合体。他们拥有多种不同且独特的细胞。地球上所有的原住民都是肤色深、有黑色素的人。最初的欧洲原住民是第一批离开非洲大陆并在那片土地上定居的非洲人。现代欧洲人是尼安德特人的后裔，携带多种 DNA，其中一些并非人类的。尼安德特人并未灭绝，而是进化了。现在有历史和 DNA 研究证明了这一点。

New Profile FM
They are ashamed of their negrophobic ancestors and uncomfortable with their negrocidal past.
They fabricated tools of deception to hide it all like the following:
The “Sub-Saharan” Negro stereotype and caricature. Forget the “Negroid features” of the Sphinx of Giza (Northern Egypt). Forget the racist concept of nigrescence applied to the “white descendants” of the ancient Blacks of Western Europe, particularly in the British Isles.
The false equation Moor equals Muslim. The Moors were the Blacks of the West (Western Europe, North-West Africa and even parts of the Americas). They black up as Moors to this very day to mock their former black masters, rulers and kings.
Thousands of whitewashed fakes and forgeries of the Christian Firsts and saints from early Christianity in the MENA Region and Europe. Orthodox Christians and Conservative Catholics pray to hundreds of black saints, the Holy Moors, from early Christianity in the MENA Region and Southern Europe.

他们为那些仇视黑人的祖先感到羞愧，对那段残杀黑人的历史感到不安。于是编造了种种欺骗手段来掩盖这一切，比如：将撒哈拉以南的黑人丑化成负面形象。别提吉萨（埃及北部）狮身人面像的“尼格罗特征”了。别提将“白人后裔”与古代西欧黑人混为一谈的种族主义概念“黑化”了，尤其是在不列颠群岛。将摩尔人等同于穆斯林的错误说法。摩尔人是西方的黑人（西欧、西北非甚至美洲部分地区）。直到今天，他们还把自己涂黑扮成摩尔人来嘲弄昔日的黑人主人、统治者和国王。中东和北非地区以及欧洲早期基督教的数千位被粉饰的伪圣徒和伪造的圣徒。东正教徒和保守派天主教徒向中东和北非地区以及南欧早期基督教的数百位黑人圣徒、神圣的摩尔人祈祷。

Nienke
I don't think anybody is seriously claiming that Europeans aren't indigenous/native to Europe, if they are, then they're not very intelligent.
But it's also quite rare to hear people say that Europeans are indigenous/native to Europe. Why is that?
Well in many other countries there is a distinction between invaders/colonizers and the indigenous/natives, and thus referring to a group as indigenous/native to contrast them to the invasive/colonial group(s) makes sense, especially because the indigenous/native population's are often minorities as a result of the colonization of their native lands.
Meanwhile in Europe, we don't have any colonizers/invaders, the most we have are some small amounts of migrants from outside of Europe, but as they are the minorities, whilst the indigenous/native Europeans are still the dominant majority, there's not really a need to use the terms indigenous/native for Europeans.

我认为没人会认真主张欧洲人不是欧洲的原住民，如果有人这么主张，那他们可真不聪明。但也很少有人会说欧洲人是欧洲的原住民。这是为什么呢？在许多其他国家，都有入侵者/殖民者和原住民/本地人的区别，因此用原住民/本地人来对比入侵者/殖民者是有意义的，尤其是因为原住民/本地人往往因本土被殖民而成为少数群体。而在欧洲，我们没有殖民者/入侵者，最多只有少量来自欧洲以外的移民，但由于他们是少数群体，而欧洲原住民/本地人仍是占主导地位的多数群体，所以没必要用原住民/本地人来称呼欧洲人。

There's also the fact that in Europe we often talk more about nationality than race, whereas in colonized places it's the opposite.
In the US, “White/Europan Americans” are often a mixed bag of White/European ancestry and are considered “American” and not any European nationality. Similarly “Black/African Americans” are often a mixed bag of Black/African ancestry and additionally due to the slave trade may have increased difficulty tracing any of their heritage, and again are considered “American” and not any African nationality. So how do you then distinguish the “Americans” who didn't come from elsewhere but are native? You call them “Native Americans".

在欧洲，我们常常更多地谈论国籍而非种族，而在被殖民的地方则恰恰相反。在美国，“白人/欧洲裔美国人”通常有着复杂的白人/欧洲血统，被视为“美国人”而非任何欧洲国籍。同样，“黑人/非裔美国人”通常有着复杂的黑人/非洲血统，而且由于奴隶贸易，他们可能更难追溯自己的任何血统，同样被视为“美国人”而非任何非洲国籍。那么，如何区分那些并非来自其他地方而是土生土长的“美国人”呢？于是就有了“美洲原住民”这一称呼。

But in Europe we distinguish based on (ancestral) nationality: in the Netherlands we have Dutch people, but other European people living in the Netherlands aren't suddenly considered Dutch, they are English, or German, or Russian, or Spanish, or Polish, etc. depending on their (ancestral) nationality. And we do the same with people who aren't native to Europe: Moroccans, Turks, Indonesians, Chinese, Surinams, Argentinians, etc. And yes, when you're from a colonised country, we use your nationality regardless of your race, so if you're from the US you're American no matter your skin colour, similar deal with people from Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. In this context, the terms “indigenous/native” just don't make much sense to refer to Europeans as a whole, and if we're specifically talking about the “indigenous/native” nationality of the country, we just use the demonym of that country.

但在欧洲，我们是根据（祖籍）国籍来区分的：在荷兰，我们有荷兰人，但其他欧洲国家的人在荷兰生活，他们不会突然就被视为荷兰人，而是英国人、德国人、俄罗斯人、西班牙人、波兰人等等，这取决于他们的（祖籍）国籍。对于非欧洲原住民也是如此：摩洛哥人、土耳其人、印度尼西亚人、中国人、苏里南人、阿根廷人等等。而且，没错，如果你来自一个曾被殖民的国家，我们会根据你的国籍来称呼你，而不考虑你的种族，所以如果你来自美国，无论你的肤色如何，你都是美国人，加拿大、澳大利亚和新西兰的人也是如此。在这种情况下，用“土著/本地”来指代整个欧洲人是没什么意义的，如果我们特指某个国家的“土著/本地”国籍，我们就会用那个国家的国名来称呼。

Irina Anghelescu
Well, if I remember correctly, the first ones in Europe were the Neanderthalensis (by their scientific name’s known as Homo Neanderthalensis, so they aren’t Homo Sapiens as us) but they intermarried with the Homo Sapiens so we still have a very tiny percent of Homo Neanderthalensis DNA in us. But then again, all humans came from Africa. :)
P.S. And as another info, the native Americans came from East Asia.

嗯，如果我没记错的话，欧洲最早出现的人类是尼安德特人（他们的学名是尼安德特智人，所以他们不是像我们这样的智人），但他们与智人有过通婚，所以我们体内仍有极少量的尼安德特人 DNA。不过话说回来，所有人类都起源于非洲。附言：另外，美洲原住民来自东亚。

Yvonne Fuqua
The oldest living descendants of an area are indigenous. They are the first to gain land title. The Discovery doctrine claimed that heathens were not entitled to this.

一个地区最古老的后裔是原住民。他们最先获得土地所有权。而“发现原则”却声称异教徒无权享有此权利。

Mikelis Bickis
I believe the Sami in northern Scandinavia are the only European peoples officially considered to be “Indigenous Peoples”. However, one could claim that other minorities, such Basques and Celts would meet the definition. In earlier times the Finnic and Baltic peoples could have been viewed similarly, but they now have their own countries.

我认为北欧斯堪的纳维亚地区的萨米人是欧洲唯一被官方认定为“原住民”的民族。不过，有人可能会说，巴斯克人和凯尔特人等其他少数族群也符合这一定义。在更早的时候，芬兰人和波罗的海沿岸的民族或许也会被视为原住民，但他们如今都有了自己的国家。

Stewart Rockett
There are number of peoples in Russia that many consider indigenous.
Basque people are also considered indigenous, but Celts are not, ‘Celt’ is an umbrella term for a number of different tribes.

俄罗斯有许多人被认为是土著民族。巴斯克人也被认为是土著民族，但凯尔特人不是，“凯尔特人”是多个不同部落的统称。

Linda Keres Carter
That’s a very biased definition, associated with the usage the original answer mentioned. If we take it to mean ‘people who have inhabited an area far into prehistory’ then there are aboriginal people all over Europe. Just like everybody else. 33% of my DNA is indigenous to the Balkans, one of the most invaded areas anywhere, occupying the corridor between Europe and the Middle East. Much of their DNA is also present among us, but nonetheless, all the ethnicities there retain a good deal of the DNA found in ancient excavations.

这种定义非常有偏见，与原答案中提到的用法有关。如果我们将其理解为“在远古时期就已居住在某个地区的居民”，那么欧洲各地都有土著居民。就像其他人一样。我的 DNA 中有 33% 是巴尔干半岛的土著成分，巴尔干半岛是世界上被入侵最多的地区之一，位于欧洲和中东之间的走廊地带。他们很多的 DNA 也存在于我们当中，但尽管如此，那里的所有民族仍保留着大量在古代挖掘中发现的 DNA。

Tiberius Horanszky
…and European people were/are the ones titling people in other places as indigenous. The whole habit of namings like native, indigenous, aboriginal, are coming from Europeans.
By the way the “Caucasian” (white) people are indigenous in Asia as well…

……而且是欧洲人给其他地方的人贴上了“土著”的标签。诸如“本地的”“土著的”“原住民的”这类称呼习惯都是欧洲人带来的。 顺便说一句，“高加索人”（白人）在亚洲也是土著……

Linda Keres Carter
In the Balkans, people fight over the right to call themselves ‘indigenous.’ The Balkans occupy the corridor between Europe and the Middle East. There have been countless invasions. Countless balkanizations where the locals were pitted against one another. They fight constantly over who actually belongs there. They all do. They all have a degree of ‘indigenous’ Balkan DNA. Thirty-three percent of my DNA is aboriginal to the Balkans. And the US taxpayer just paid for us to be kicked out as ‘invading nationalists.’ Go figure. That’s called ‘American privilege.’ Common term throughout the world.

在巴尔干半岛，人们为争夺“土著”这一称谓而争斗不休。巴尔干半岛位于欧洲和中东之间，这里曾历经无数次的入侵，无数次的分裂，当地人彼此争斗不断。他们总是争论到底谁才是真正的“本地人”。其实他们都是。他们都有一定程度的“土著”巴尔干血统。我的 DNA 中有 33% 是巴尔干半岛的原住民血统。而美国纳税人却刚刚为我们付出了代价，让我们被当作“入侵的民族主义者”驱逐出境。真是荒唐。这就是所谓的“美国特权”。这是全世界通用的一个词。

Cindy Treacher
Different people have different opinions and some people like to express their opinions more than others. Theories…there are so many of them around.
We have had news stories in England not that long ago about the remains of one man found in the Cheddar Gorge caves which sone say proves that everyone in England wasn’t white years ago, it is just narrow minded nonsense. If someone found some ancient remains of someone in Africa and determined that they had been white skinned I wouldn’t assume that everyone in that region was white skinned, I’d be more inclined to not believe the report but if it was accurate that would just mean it was known that there was a person in Africa who had white skin during ancient times and they might even have been a Monastic Monk travelling around or a member of a travelling flying circus.

不同的人有不同的观点，有些人比其他人更喜欢表达自己的看法。理论……到处都是。不久前，英国就有新闻报道说在切达峡谷的洞穴里发现了一具男性的遗骸，有人说这证明了多年前英格兰并非所有人都皮肤白皙，这简直是狭隘无知的胡言乱语。如果有人在非洲发现了一些古代人的遗骸，并断定他们是白皮肤的，我不会认为那个地区所有人都是白皮肤，我更倾向于不相信这个报道，但如果报道属实，那也仅仅意味着在古代非洲曾有一个白皮肤的人，他甚至可能是四处游历的修道士或者马戏团的成员。

Earl Griffiths
I can’t believe that we are a quarter of the way through the 21st century and people don’t know this ,you should be confident enough to know that White people are indigenous to Europe it goes without saying and there is a whole lot of history to prove it .My question is how do you not know that? There is The continent of Asia is divided into Eastern, Central and Western Europe ,then there is the Far East , Middle East and the Near East. to denote countries to the south .Not to over complicate things but they refer India as the Indian subcontinent. which to me sounds derogatory .It should be called the Indian peninsula which it is.. l hope this helps. I don’t have time but you can Google something countries in south east Asia or Western Europe and see what comes up.

我简直不敢相信，我们已经进入 21 世纪了，人们居然还不知道这些。你们应该有足够的信心知道白人是欧洲的原住民，这是不言而喻的，而且有大量的历史可以证明这一点。我的问题是，你们怎么会不知道呢？亚洲大陆分为东欧、中欧和西欧，还有远东、中东和近东。我不想说得太复杂，但印度被称为印度次大陆，这在我看来是贬义的。它应该被称为印度半岛，这才是正确的。希望这能帮到你。我没时间了，但你可以用谷歌搜索东南亚国家或西欧国家，看看会出现什么。

Rui Duarte
Well.. if we go back fare enough, no one is undegenous from anywhere.. except perhaps ethiopians. [This answer is only about the concept of “indigenous”].
Current european populations result from several waves of migrations, essentially east-to-west (from the steppe and from the middle-east) and also back-and-forth north-south, following glaciations. We know that early neolithic farmers from the middle-east-caucasus region replaced the stone-age cro-magnon type “indigenous” europeans. We know that germanic tribes replaced the celtic population of today's Germany: when that HAPPENED, the Celts were “the indigenous” and the Germanic tribes were the newly-arrived. We know that, from the VII century onwards, Finns that lived between the Baltic and black sea, west of the Urals, were progressively replaced by slavic farmers. When that HAPPENED, the Finns were “the indigenous” and the slavs were the newcomers.

好吧……如果我们追溯得足够久远，那么除了埃塞俄比亚人，其实没有人是任何地方的原住民。这个回答仅涉及“原住民”这一概念。如今欧洲的人口是由几波迁徙浪潮形成的，主要是自东向西（来自草原和中东），也有南北之间来回的迁徙，这与冰川期有关。我们知道，来自中东高加索地区的早期新石器时代农民取代了石器时代的克罗马农类型的“原住民”欧洲人。我们知道，日耳曼部落取代了如今德国境内的凯尔特人：当这种情况发生时，凯尔特人是“原住民”，而日耳曼部落是新来的。我们知道，从七世纪起，居住在波罗的海和黑海之间、乌拉尔山脉以西的芬兰人逐渐被斯拉夫农民取代。当这种情况发生时，芬兰人是“原住民”，而斯拉夫人是新来的。

I think the answer to your question is that we know too much about European populations and migrations to call anyone “indigenous”: except perhaps The Basques. All of today's “indigenous” yesterday's newcomers; and in Europe we know it.
“Indigenous” is not a “since ever” reality. “Indigenous” must always be time and space frxd and reported to “an event”. The “indigenous” are the peoples newcomers “find” when they arrive somewhere.

我认为您问题的答案是，我们对欧洲的人口和迁徙情况了解得太多，所以不能称任何人是“土著”，或许巴斯克人除外。如今所有的“土著”在昨天都是新来者；在欧洲，我们对此心知肚明。“原住民”并非自古以来就存在的事实。所谓“原住民”总是要置于特定的时间和空间框架内，并且要与“某一事件”相关联。原住民是后来者到达某地时“发现”的那些人。

Vivian Fregulia
I think someone could question the Europeans as being the original inhabitants of Europe due to the fact that the continent had numerous conflicts where certain groups were erased and foreigners dominated for certain periods. But there are still indigenous people in Europe. Most importantly I think is to recognize how the inhabitants of rural/remote areas still carry much of the native culture of the many countries in Europe.
I'd recommend people wanting to know more about the original inhabitants of Europe and their culture to research about Cucuteni, the first civilization of Europe, predating Sumeria, and they had developed their own writings.

我认为有人可能会质疑欧洲人是否是欧洲的原住民，因为欧洲大陆经历了多次冲突，某些族群被消灭，而外来者在某些时期占据主导地位。但欧洲仍有原住民。我认为最重要的是要认识到欧洲农村/偏远地区的居民仍保留着许多欧洲国家的本土文化。对于那些想更多地了解欧洲原住民及其文化的人，我建议他们研究一下库库特尼文明，这是欧洲最早的文明，比苏美尔文明还要早，他们还发展出了自己的文字。

Luca Rossi
Because, in many casethey are not. But reality is, as always a little more complicated. Indigenous is always a somehow relative term. If we look back enough, almost all populations have migrated from one place to another thus nobody is indigenous. In a sense the populations that you now refer to as Europeans arrived in Europe from the east and, in many cases conquered the land and killed the local population. Traces of this can still be found in European DNA. but this is not, I suspect, what you have in mind. In contemporary Europe there are population that are considered indigenous (eg. The Sami people) while others are not (like the Italians or the French). Some areas - like Sampi the original land of the Sami - have remained for centuries at the margins of major European mix, migrations, wars, exchange, settlements so much so that when a European power approached these areas it was confronted with a difference that was big and deeply lixed with the place. These population “became” indigenous while Europeans are simply not. On top of that the relation with these populations has often been of a colonial type, but that's another story.

因为，在很多情况下，事实并非如此。但现实总是要复杂一些。土著这个词在某种程度上总是相对而言的。如果我们追溯得足够久远，几乎所有的族群都曾从一个地方迁移到另一个地方，所以没有人是土著。从某种意义上说，如今被称作欧洲人的那些族群也是从东方来到欧洲的，在很多情况下，他们征服了土地，杀死了当地居民。这种痕迹在欧洲人的 DNA 中仍能找到。但我猜这并非你所想的。在当代欧洲，有些族群被认为是土著（比如萨米人），而有些则不是（比如意大利人或法国人）。有些地区——比如萨米人的原住地萨米——几个世纪以来一直处于欧洲主要的融合、迁徙、战争、交流和定居活动的边缘，以至于当欧洲势力接近这些地区时，他们面对的是与当地环境紧密相连的巨大差异。这些族群“成为了”土著，而欧洲人则不是。除此之外，与这些族群的关系往往具有殖民性质，但这又是另一个话题了。

Wikke Schrandt
Mostly because “white" is not an ethnic group, just a skin colour. There are very much so indigenous Europeans, such as the Sami in northern Scandinavia, the Basque of northern Spain and southwestern France, the Galicians of northwestern Spain, the Gaels of Ireland, Scotland and the Isle of Man, etc. However, the vast majority of Europeans have gone through many great migrations, especially around the fourth to the fifth century AD. Hence, it is difficult to track where exactly one's family originally came from.

主要是因为“白人”并非一个族群，而只是一种肤色。确实存在土生土长的欧洲人，比如斯堪的纳维亚北部的萨米人、西班牙北部和法国西南部的巴斯克人、西班牙西北部的加利西亚人、爱尔兰、苏格兰和马恩岛的盖尔人等等。然而，绝大多数欧洲人都经历过多次大规模迁徙，尤其是在公元 4 世纪到 5 世纪期间。因此，很难确切追踪一个人的家族最初来自哪里。

Henry R. Greenfield
ndigenous is a political designation, nothing more nothing less. The SAMI people who are white and have been in Finland/Sweden for less time than the other Swedes are considered indigenous but the Swedes for instance are not.
Look around the world, it is apparent that indigenous simply means a group who has definitely been in a place a long time, is generally seen as under threat in terms of culture, economics and law by a dominant culture and in general that dominant culture oppressing them is seen to be a foreign group, mainly but not always white.
In my view, indigenous is a helpful and important designation for many groups whose lives, cultures and way of life are threatened. As for the white populations in Europe, trust me, they feel under threat from the rest of the world.
If you are in Europe, you will see the demographics in terms of religion, race, cultures and the practices that go with it, changing overnight. There is absolutely no doubt that Europeans have been complacent and just carrying on with whatever their lifestyles have been for a long time and the change is coming abruptly and they are not at all ready nor do they understand the implications for them, their lifestyle and their future.

“土著”是一个政治称谓，仅此而已。在芬兰/瑞典，萨米人是白人，且在那里居住的时间比其他瑞典人短，但他们却被视为土著，而瑞典人却不是。放眼全球，很明显，“土著”意味着一个群体在某个地方居住了很长时间，通常在文化、经济和法律方面受到占主导地位的文化的威胁，而且总体而言，压迫他们的占主导地位的文化被视为外来群体，主要是但不总是白人。在我看来，“土著”这一称谓对许多生活、文化和生活方式受到威胁的群体来说是有帮助且重要的。至于欧洲的白人人口，相信我，他们觉得自己受到了来自世界其他地方的威胁。如果你在欧洲，你会看到宗教、种族、文化和相关习俗的人口构成在一夜之间发生变化。毫无疑问，欧洲人一直自满，一直按部就班地维持着长期以来的生活方式，而如今变化来得如此突然，他们根本毫无准备，也不明白这对他们自身、他们的生活方式以及他们的未来意味着什么。

The pride of Europeans is also a factor, they would not want to give in to the designation of being indigenous and the left wing would of course mock them and say they do not need protection, when they in fact are the oppressors, current or former via their ‘empires’.
There is confusion all over the European continent on the future of the people, cultures, religion and even their security as they grapple with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. While they are not exactly like Nero, fiddling while Rome burned, it is a figurative notion to throw that in as the world around them perhaps is changing more and more to a crumbling.

欧洲人的自尊心也是一个因素，他们不愿接受“土著”的称谓，而左翼当然会嘲笑他们，说他们不需要保护，而实际上他们才是压迫者，无论是现在还是过去，通过他们的“帝国”。整个欧洲大陆对于人民、文化、宗教乃至安全的未来都感到困惑，因为他们正在应对俄罗斯对乌克兰的入侵。虽然他们并非像尼禄那样在罗马燃烧时还在弹琴，但这种说法形象地表明，他们周围的世界或许正在变得越来越动荡。