Research Paper #1

The First Generation in the United States

Self-proclaimed “Manila Boy” Venancio Reyes sits in the family room of his house in San Jose, California, reminiscing about his childhood and transition into adult life in the Philippines before immigrating to the United States. His wife, Gloria Sicat, also sits in the family room waiting her turn to tell her own version of the story that eventually intertwines with his. Their stories of immigration to a new country is much more than just stories shared proudly among the family; they are accounts of active participants in history that shaped 4 generations of a family living in America today.

Reyes was born in November of 1935 in the capitol city of the Philippines, Manila. His father was a tailor and his mother was a seamstress with a side business of leasing rooms for occupants. Sicat was born in June 1937, being the third of eight children. Her parents owned a children’s garment factory. Remembering no hardship, she laughs, “there was no restriction of food”. Sicat grew up in a province near Manila called Pampanga. Pampanga is known for the Clark Air Base, which was a former U.S. air base that combined Filipino and American forces especially during World War II and later during the Vietnam War. When asked about the famed Clark Air Base, she was “only a little girl during the Japanese occupation” so she vaguely remembers any soldiers in the area. Her parents were very protective and moved the family to Manila to shelter them from the horrors of war. Reyes, on the other hand, remembers when the Japanese invaded the Manila in 1941:

I was in grade one; my dad picked me up from school and I saw the Japanese soldiers already marching on the ground and the Japanese airplanes flying in the sky at the same time. So, the president of the Philippines declared no contest – open city – they couldn’t repulse the Japanese invasion although we had American soldiers [and] the Philippine army… it wasn’t enough.

According to Roland E. Dolan’s book, Philippines: A Country Study, the Japanese attacked the Philippines only hours after the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 8, 1941. Like Reyes said, “Initial aerial bombardment was followed by landings of ground troops both north and south of Manila” (Dolan). General Douglas MacArthur, the designated commander of the United States Armed Forces in the Asia-Pacific region, was under immense pressure deciding on how to protect the area even though his soldiers and artillery were destroyed. In January of 1942, Manila was declared an open city to prevent further damage upon its people and its infrastructures. The most infamous event during World War II in the Philippines is the Bataan Death March, when more than 80,000 American and Filipino prisoners of war were forced to march 65 miles to the capital of Bataan. Weakened by maladies, lack of food, and but mostly harsh treatment including murder by the Japanese, more than 1/8 of all the prisoners died before even arriving in the north. President of the Philippines, Manual L. Quezon, and his successor, Sergio Osmena, were exiled to the United States during the march and MacArthur was exiled to Australia. As Nolan states, “the Japanese military authorities immediately began organizing a new government structure in the Philippines,” (Nolan) in which they directed civil affairs and declared the country an independent republic, but served under Japanese rule. The goal, just like declaring Manila as an open city, was to protect the Philippine people from atrocities the Japanese could perform as demonstrated in the Nanking massacre in China at the start of World War II for Asia in 1937. Filipino resistance against Japanese forces was strong underground and within guerrilla organizations and resulted in the Japanese controlling only a small fraction of the Philippines. MacArthur’s Allied forces and President Osmena returned the Philippines in October 1944 and the combat ceased when the Japanese formally surrendered in September 1945. Reyes was almost 10 years old when he caught candy thrown to the children during “Liberation Day” from the soldiers.

In the 1950s, Reyes and Sicat attended the same high school but didn’t associate much with each other. It wasn’t until college when the two started to get to know each other. Sicat graduated from the University of the Philippines and immediately started working at a local bank as an accountant. Reyes saw Sicat at the bank and soon started sending her gifts through a pledge of his fraternity where he was facilitating the hazing at the University of the East. He claims dating in the 1950s was very innocent since he never really went out on a date with Sicat; he visited her at her house and they became close quickly. Marriage became a subject between the two relatively quickly. After 2 years of dating, Reyes and Sicat got married in February 1963 and soon gave birth to their first child. Two more children followed soon after. They lived a happy comfortable life with their family and extended families in Manila. The kids visited their grandmother every weekend and played with their cousins often. Reyes and Sicat never had the idea to immigrate, to another country until they heard of the Johnson Program.

President Lyndon Johnson signed the Immigration Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Cellar Act, allowed more people, including Asians, from third world countries to enter into the U.S. because of their skills and professions rather than their countries of origin. The Civil Rights Movement in America helped to jump start immigration reform as well as voting rights and civil rights. It was monumental that Asians were allowed to migrate since the U.S. had previously tried to define who was “American” with legislature like the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 which banned Chinese immigration for 10 years; the National Origins Act of 1924 which limited the number of immigrants from each country; and the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 which excluded certain ethnic groups from immigrating, specifically those from communist influence.

Reyes and Sicat immigrated under Preference 3 for professionals and skilled individuals. They each filled out an application with their personal information including their names, spouses, children, college degrees, and so on. Documents such as university transcripts were attached and sent also. During that time, Sicat was working as an accountant and Reyes was working for an American business in the Philippines. After one month after paying an application fee, they received approval for immigration and then received their visas soon after for themselves and their three children. Before departing, each family member underwent medical examinations and X-Rays. Sicat remembers the journey to the United States: “Because of the uncertainty of not having a job and lodging, I left the Philippines first in August of 1968. At the port of entry in Honolulu, I was handed my green card by the Immigration.” She chose San Francisco because they knew of a distant relative living there. After one week of arrival, Sicat started at Pacific Bell in the accounting department so Reyes soon followed. Other than the complications of establishing their life in America, the trip itself to the U.S. was relatively easy since they both traversed by airplane. After he found a job with Caterpillar Tractor in San Leandro, they bought their first house and their kids came to the U.S. with their uncle in March 1969. A fourth child joined the family in 1969 also. With 5 years of residency, they all became United States citizens in 1973. In 1978, the family moved to San Jose since Sicat began working as an accountant for Santa Clara University and Reyes started work with Delta Airlines in the ground operations department at the San Jose airport.

Assimilating into American culture was easy for the Reyes-Sicat family. All of them already spoke English and most people treated them well. To this day, their eldest child, my mother who is turning 49 years old this year, doesn’t believe racism exists perhaps because people have never treated her differently and/or because she doesn’t notice. Most of the history between the United States and the Philippines has been incredibly peaceful, but when the first wave of Filipino laborers were brought to the Hawaii in the early 20th century, when it was still an United States annex, American laborers as well as other immigrant Asian workers discriminated against the Filipinos. In Ronald Tataki’s book, Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans, he discusses the discrimination Filipinos faced because they were close competitors to other groups in cheap labor. Their experiences in these early times are very reminiscent of black prejudice in the south without the extreme level of violence.

Their strong Catholic faith must be a large contributor to assimilating. All of us, at one point or another, have gone to private Catholic schools. In our family, knowing the Catholic religion is highly important. The Spaniards ruled the Philippines for 356 years after Ferdinand Magellan claimed the islands in 1521, which were named “the Philippines” in honor of King Philip II. The Spanish culture became synonymous with Filipino culture over time, with a high emphasis on Catholic religion. It is one of many cultural strongholds that have remained since Spanish rule, which ended in 1935 and then granted complete independence as a commonwealth state by 1946 with the help of American influence. Maybe the American annexation of the Philippines was another factor that allowed Filipinos to assimilate easily because of American influence to learn English.

So finally, why the United States? Sicat answers, “Because the [Johnson] Program was open, it was a nice opportunity, a good opportunity for us to try our luck… so far it [has] worked”. Reyes gives an answer that is a bit more in depth, “It’s truly a big opportunity. I would say a golden opportunity for Filipinos, not only Filipinos, but for some other countries [too]. It’s a dream, living in America, getting the opportunity. If you’re ambitious and you have a goal, this is where you can make it, as long as you work hard. But it’s also [about] tools, if you have a college degree, that’s your passport to success.”

For them, there was no large push to leave the Philippines, but the pull to America along with the means of the Johnson Program really attracted them. Both Reyes and Sicat believe in the American dream, believe they’ve lived through it, and have absolutely no regrets. It’s everything they have expected it to be as “the land of opportunity”.



Works Cited
• Alvarez, Arnold. "Philippine History | Filipino History." Philippine History | Filipino History. Arnold Alvarez, 23 Jan. 2012. Web. 12 Oct. 2012. .
• Dolan, Ronald E. Philippines: A Country Study. Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, 1993. Philippines. Web. 12 Oct. 2012. .
• "First Generation in America." Interview by Tiffanie K. Lee. San Jose, CA.
• Love-Andrews, Devin. "Immigration Act of 1965." Immigration Act: 1965. David W. Koeller, 11 Sept. 2003. Web. 12 Oct. 2012. .
• Takaki, Ronald T. Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans. Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. Print.

Chapter 6: Pioneers of the Century of Immigration

Since this is the chapter I will be reporting on for class, I simply took notes:

Patterns and sources of immigration changed with time and situations. From 1820-1924, about 36,000,000 people migrated to the United States. I wonder if this includes all ethnicities or just those from Europe.

Irish:

• mostly came to US because of potato famine
• Prefamine Migration (until 1844) - Mainly male catholics migrated to large US cities and used in public works since they were largely unskilled labor
• The Famine Years (1860-1930) - Ireland's agriculture decreased incredibly since farming the potato was very unstable and in result, epidemic broke out. The immigrants that came were unskilled labor, competing with blacks for laboring and serving jobs.
• The Irish Immigration (1860-1930) - New immigrants settled in neighborhoods where there were already Irish settlers. Most immigrants were now single females. Now Irish had an array of jobs in public service, laundry, and so on.

Germans:

• No major religion (Protestant, Catholic, Jewish)
• Spread settlements across United States, but in family groups
• Lived within German neighborhoods
• Took skilled jobs (beer industry, bakers, tailors, etc)
• Didn't assimilate well with language; still relied on German until WWI

Scandinavians:

• People from Sweden, Norway, and Denmark
• Settled in rural areas in Midwest
• Swedes: Farming immigrants from middle class family groups that came because of economic factors and overpopulation in Sweden. Often associated with Republican party in support of Prohibition(banishment of alcohol).
• Norwegians: Farming immigrants that settled in rural areas because of lack of agriculture space in Norway. Some settled in Brooklyn. Also Republican.
• Danes: Most information is from police records and smallest group of immigrant Scandinavians. Police records contained: year/month of departure, sex, traveling alone or in a group, occupation, age, last place of residence, and destination. Since the largest group of Danes were Mormons in Salt Lake City, they migrated in family groups, however many who came were unmarried men and women and would marry outside of their ethnicity. Women benefitted from the lack of women in the work force when looking for jobs. Most came for economic reasons and settled in the Midwest.

Chapter 5: Ethnicity and Race in American Life

I find it interesting that Michael-Guillaume Jean de Crevecoeur's pen name was, "J. Hector St. John. He chose a more English sounding name than a French one. His definition of who an American is is interesting. Although I don't believe that Americans are defined as European or a descendent, I can agree with his overall view that Americans become part of this melting pot of cultures and that it's inevitable. However, if someone of a different ethnicity is born into another country, that idea isn't limited to just one country or one people. How could that group be so unique?

"Majorities, or those who psychologically feel themselves to be majorities, don't really need to organize, and nowhere else in colonial America were such groups established by English people." I enjoy how the author points out that there are just some things groups of people were so convinced of, even though in the actual truth of it all is not true.

The idea of, "race relations" seems so obvious yet it's only obvious when it's read first. Relations can be good or bad but it doesn't mean they don't exist. It's sad that the Indians helped the English ultimately survive in the New World but nothing good came out of it. When I read, "Indians cease being Indians", it reminded me of the reading we did for homework and than discussed in class last week about. If my culture in any way became an endangered species of any sort, I'm not sure how I'd handle it. I'd probably learn the culture and language as best I can and pass it down t future generations even though they might not feel a direct relationship to it.

Whether or not a black person was a slave, free, or in between, they were still a prisoners to oppression.

"...most Americans had never seen a Catholic, which perhaps made them all the more frightening when they didn't begin to come a couple of generations after"
This statement makes Catholics look like a rare unicorn.

Chapter 4: Other Europeans in Colonal America

As much as I like history, I honestly don't know much about European history and certain ethnicities are from geographically. It's interesting to read about it! The population statistics of the 18th century are a bit incomprehensible for me just because most areas/states were dominated by English people.

Germans
The British effort to assist the German Rhinelanders was a galant effort, but obviously not everyone saw it that way. It makes sense that the London poor of that time protested because even though they were poor, they were still British citizens. I can understand how it would feel for your coutry to basically tell you that you're not worthy of aid and that you're the lowest of the low. The government probably should have thought that through. Also, I like how the author included the part about the origins of the word refugee since it didn't exist until about 70 or so years after this conflict.
I find the ideology of indentured servitude somewhat demeaning as a person, espeically since the owners couldn't or wouldn't gurantee a better life after his/her term of service and/or most of the work was too arduous to live through. I like how the author states the historical process of my view:

For one thing, the system of indentured servitude, with its feudal overtones, was simply no longer consonant with the ideology of American life, although we must note that it lasted, on an ever-diminishing scale, until at least 1830, more than fifty years after the Declaration of Independence. (74)

I like how he demonstrates how indentured servitude didn't last but I don't like how many commas are in this sentence. Maybe there is a way to be more concise without giving too much information all at once. I find myself rereading much of the book for this reason. I understand the necessity for detail but sometimes it seems it's not written in a way that is efficient. It's that or I need to work on my reading comprehension.

Scotch Irish
Is the story of the Seaflower a significant one in American history? I'm unsure since I've just heard it for the first time reading this book. According to our book, out of 106 passengers, 46 starved to death and the other 60 survived by eating their bodies. So many stories in history document cannibalism since it's such taboo. In this case, it was taboo but also a necessity to remain living. Cannibalism is a noteable subject as long as there is historcial or cultural significance. News within the last 6 months about cannibalism (or zombies) in America don't show me much significance; it just kind of makes me fear my safety not only with people on drugs (whether I know they're on drugs or not) and safety with people in general.

Scots
Sometimes when I read this book, I feel a bit dumb since the author uses so many terms I'm not familiar with. This rarely happens with me which makes this so surprising! I've had to reread so much to understand at least conceptually where the author is going with the amount of detail he provides. I don't know if I'm not well versed in European history or if he's just that detailed. I don't know if I'm supposed to know all this detailed information already or if I'm supposed to be in the process of learning it. For example, I wasn't sure what "Teutonic" meant so I continued to read on to see if he gives some sort of explanation. He does give one, but I'm unsure of what highlands or lowlands have to do with the explanation of where "Teutonic" comes from. Whenever I read now, I refer between the book and my dictionary application to make sure I understand what I'm reading.

Irish
It seems that the Irish have been persecuted as a group throughout American history. Is it because of them as an ethnicity or because of the majority's religious affiliations? Regardless, the Irish had support for the patriotic cause of the Revolutionary War. Although the history of the United States can be seemingly prejudiced, it's nice to see different groups of ethnicities from different parts of the world pull together during moments of instability.

Welsh
So would the Welsh be a sub-ethnicity of Britain? Or a British ethnicity? I want to full understand concepts like this so I have a full understanding of what I'm reading. Anyway, the Welsh language in America is another language added to the list of languages/cultures either forgotten or mixed into the Melting Pot that is America. I know they author viewed America as a mosaic, but some elements of cultures are just melted into American culutre instead of a different piece of a mosiac.

Dutch
I honor the proper use of the term, "epic" since in today's culture, the meaning of epic is diminished by using it to describe something that is unique to a person's life instead of defining something that is truly epic.

The nation of the Dutch - the Netherlands - was forged in the epic struggle between the Protestant Hollanders and the Catholic Hapsburg Empire in the late sixteenth century and the first half of the seventeenth... (88)

Whenever I hear of American presidents, I never think of their ethnicity and just label them as American. Martin Van Buren and the Roosevelts obviously have an ethnic background (Dutch) but these names are synonymous with "American".

French
When there are cultures (like the Cajuns) that accept other cultures (like non-Cajuns)without much opposition, I appreciate it. I'm not saying traditions or culture should be depleted in any way; it's just nice people can recognize when cultures are evolving. It's what the United States is built on! Each ethinicity should have different cultures and people of other ethnicities should accepot and cherish it. On the flip side, it makes me somewhat sad when I learn of people trying to define who Americans are like the use of Cajun French in schools during the WWI era.
It took me many attempts to understand who the Huguenots were. Through reading the beginning of their part, I understood they were French but why are they a separate group? The Huguenots were a Calvinistic communion of France/French protestants but it started to make me wonder how religious groups become ethnic groups. I suppose the use of "Huguenots" is like how Pilgrims and Puritans were and how Jews are now. I agree that the Huguenots had traditions and cultures, but there has to be a more accurate term than "ethnicity". Perhaps I take the use of ethnicity too narrow-mindedly.

Spanish
I like how within the first sentence of the Spanish part, the author states the Spanish established the first successful European colony. English settlements are often thought of as the most important settlements in early American history (I had this idea also). We often forget how much Spanish influence there is in early America, although it is becoming more evident today wit the Mexican population in America. I was told in my intercultural class during the summer that the percentage of Mexican people in the U.S. is equal (more or less) to the black population. Even if many of these people are from Mexico rather than Spanish settlements in the U.S. itself, the Spanish influence throughout North and South America has remained strong since the beginning of Spanish colonies.

Swedes
Sweden of the 17th century is a prime example of the phrase, "Strike while the iron is hot". It seems they had the power to establish long term influence in America, but it just didn't happen that way. Again, some European residue has become synonymous with American culture, just like the log cabin.

Jews
Another group defined by their relgious background that is seen as an ethnicity. Again, I agree that Jews have their own traditions and culture in their religion, but where they come from geologically has a significance of who these people are as a group, even if they're orthodox.

Chapter 3: Slavery and Immigrants from Africa

Of course the slave trade benefitted the British Empire. The owners of these businesses utilizing slaves made substantial product from free labor. I wonder how significantly compared to the rest of the British colonies' incomes. I also wonder what the US would be like if slaves from Africa weren't brought over. Would Africans have thought to explore the seas? When would have Africans migrate to America? What sort of response would they have gotten from the Natives and the settlers? Would the African population be as plentiful as today's population?

Yesterday I was watching Governor Romney's speech at the Republican National Convention. Perhaps I had a bit of prejudgment before I even watched it, but I tried to be unbiased overall. One of the things that stuck out to me was how he generalized who the American people are. It's true; the United States is a land of immigrants but there are other ways people came to live here. He forgot to mention the people who have taken asylum as refugees from their home countries. He forgot to mention the people whose ancestors came unwillingly as slaves. I believe if you're making a speech to appeal to the citizens of the United States, you should be as politically correct as possible and include all of its people.

It is incredibly unfortunate that the history of the first generation of slaves in the 17th century of America are lost. It is important because they were the first ones taken from the homeland and shaped the way their owners would treat the waves of slaves to come. As with anything, the first time is always the most difficult time. The slaves as well as women of the 17th century were illiterate. Africans were considered savages and animal-like while women were considered unintelligent and only suited for home life. These people were still people with thoughts and emotions that are largely lost with time.

Our book tells us that the African people came from matriarchal societies for the most part. Many of the Native American societies did too. Both these matriarchal societies lost those values and practices through the European patriarchy. The Europeans thought it was ridiculous that women had the ability to control agriculture or anything that has to do with the public realm. In response, the Europeans imposed their culture people these peoples to "civilize" them amongst other things. It makes me sad because perhaps women wouldn't have suffered under adversity as much through the years and they would have seen as equal citizens. Even today, women are still fighting for equal rights.

The Americas: A Hemispheric History

The concept of America really intrigues me since everyone has such a diverse perception of what it is. Most people internationally refer to America as the United States even though the Americas are North and South America. It would be like using the term Asians but only referring to China. I can understand why Canada or the like would be frustrated that they are within the Americas but not considered Americans in the way they would want to.

I like how Martin Waldseemuller's regret became the name of 2 continents! I would imagine that would be like naming your kid, "Harry Baals" and Harry becoming someone important... oh wait that did happen!

Columbus does have to credit of "discovering" the New World but only from the Eurocentric viewpoint. Imagine if they had a respect for the indigenous people and used their name in an English translation, "Turtle Island". Turtle Island derives from the Iroquois's creation story which involved women creating the world and relying on the turtle as a safe haven for her children. I originally learned this in Women's History because it was showing the significance women had in Native American culture.

I enjoy how this reading emphasizes how everyone who originally thought another land existed was basically brushed off due to ridiculousness. Eratosthenes's revolutionary thought and mathematics perhaps wasn't deemed insane but certainly unbelievable. Over a thousand years later, even Columbus himself didn't believe there was a New World! He thought he landed in India and called the natives Indians. The New World is full of ill-named things: America for a man who didn't "discover" America and Indians for a people who weren't Indians at all.

I like Jefferson's phrase of "all America, North and South". His phrase is more accurate than of people's speech today. People now are supposed to be more educated and such, yet Jefferson fully recognized in that instant that "America" wasn't just the United States.

Interestingly enough, I know a few Japanese South Americans. I met them all through Foothill College where there are many international students. I could tell this one guy wasn't from the US. When I heard him speak, I couldn't identify his accent when he was speaking English. I was very surprised since I have a keen ear for Asian accents. Then I learned his name: Gustavo Nakamura. I later asked him why his name was Gustavo and he told me how his family migrated to Brazil to escape poverty in Japan. It's nice that Japanese people can be accepted as Brazilians. Of course they suffered through prejudice in the beginning, but after about 100 years of habitation in South America, they're fully accepted. Here in the US, people still aren't accepting Asians as Americans in many cases. Asian people have been in the US since the early 19th century and yet they still suffered incredible amounts of hatred even from the government. It's only within the last century that Asians were granted the right to become citizens of the United States. Even to this day, many people think I'm a foreigner because of how I look. Yes, this also happens in the Bay Area.

The term, "Pan American" is interesting. I understand the approach it's taking but I am struggling to find when I would ever use that term unless it's in an academic setting. Instead of referring to my ethnic identity as "Asian American", would I accurately refer to myself as "Asian North American" or "Asian United State's citizen"? Perhaps I'm too stuck to "Asian American", but none of those other terms comfortably roll off the tongue. What is the solution?

Okay, honestly, the 2nd chapter of this is somewhat boring to me. Even the author says, "...the truth about the peopling of the hemisphere is disappointingly undramatic." I understand all this is building up to modern American history, but it feels so painstakingly slow! I'll try to summarize what I've read to show that I've read it at least:
Thousands of year ago, the first generation of modern humans in the Americas were hunters. Evidence was found to suggest that these people started farming later on with tools and began the hunter-gatherer culture. It is unclear how they figured out how to farm, with potatoes being one of the first results. Because of agriculture, people stopped being nomadic and became settlers since they controlled their own food instead of hunting until the animals are gone. With agriculture, civilizations are born. The Olmecs were the first Mesoamerican civilization that laid the ground work for other civilizations to come. The 3 staple foods of the Native Americans flourished: maize, beans, and squash. These civilizations are considered more advanced than their Pre-European counter parts.

Prehistory: Pacific Seafarers and Maritime Culture

I would consider myself someone who lives on North America's coast even though I'm a bit inland. I, nor anyone I know, regularly frequents the ocean (at least not directly). Therefore, the topic of seafaring and coastal settlement aren't of great interest. The water is usually too cold for activity!

I remember learning about Homo erectus when I was in the eighth grade. They were the first humans to stand up right and to walk largely bipedal. It makes sense how they could bethe first to migrate across waters with simple rafts.

"It now appears that the Northwest Coast route opened a millennium or two earlier than the ice-free corridor and that the diversity and richness of coastal ecosystems after the LGM may have created a 'kelp highway' that facilitated a maritime migration from notheast Asia into the Americas. A coastal route around the Pacific Rim - a linear entirely at sea level, and without major geographic barriers - featured similar types of shellfish, fish, seabirds, sea mammals, and seaweeds, as well as terrestrial plants and animals from adjacent landscapes."

I had to reread this multiple times to understand what this additional theory was communicating. I think I've been so tied to the Land Bridge theory that was ingrained in my mind as a child.

It's impossible for me to truly understand that humans have been using the ocean as transportation for 800,000 years ago. I find it sad that a lot of this evidence is being lost due to raising sea levels.

I enjoy that people find seafood as nutritional as animals found on land. More people I know eat meat more often than seafood. I don't eat chicken, beef, lamb, or pork so I'm glad that this is more accepted because now almost all restaurants have either one vegetarian option or a seafood one!

Haplogroup D populations:

• 9,200 year old skeleton found in On-Your-Knees-Cave on Prince Wales Island, Alaska
• Chumash Indians of the Santa Barbara Coast
• another population on the coast of Ecuador
• a population in Southern Chile
• prehistoric sites in Tierra del Fuego

Honestly, this packet is somewhat boring to me, but the evidence of human migration from different populations genetically and from different locations is pretty interesting. I perceive life before modernity was very difficult to survive through especially if these people were migrating into truly untouched lands that were ruled by nature.
I find that Native American technology is quite ingenious. Perhaps their designs were as sophisticated as they were because it was essential to their lives. Just for argument's sake, the direct use of bodies of water for me are recreational; for them, it was a way of life.