Oldest cities/towns in province/state?

[kool maudit]

There were older towns, but they were not continuously inhabited. But yeah, Scandinavia is young. It lacks that Roman link and consequently has a bit of a "halfway" feeling relative to North America vs. Italy or France or something.

[xzmattzx]

The first European settlement in Delaware is Lewes. It was settled in 1631 and was called Zwaanendael by the Dutch. It was wiped out in 1632 by the Lenape Indians.

The first continuous European settlement is now Wilmington, which was settled by the Swedish in 1638. We have the unique distinction of being the only Swedish colony in the New World.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

But yeah, Scandinavia is young. It lacks that Roman link and consequently has a bit of a "halfway" feeling relative to North America vs. Italy or France or something.

Nonsense; people have been living in Scandinavia for 11,000 years or something.

I guess I like to look at things from an anthropological point of view; I could care less about buildings that are still standing. Old Town Stockholm, for example. It has a medieval street pattern but most of the buildings date from the 1500s and 1600s, no? The layout is medieval, but the look of the buildings is not. People don't seem to realize that most medieval buildings were made of wood, and wouldn't have lasted long, and were constantly being destroyed by fires anyway. The only buildings made of stone were fortresses, castles and cathedrals.

That's how I approach the history of native villages where I live in southern California. The Los Angeles basin was full of them. Every place has an ancient history.

This is why I value natural landscapes and landmarks, like hills, mountains, etc. The ancients saw those very same things, and probably revered/worshipped them, or at least gave significant meaning to them.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by muertecaza

Yeah, Arizona's oldest incorporation is "newer" than 1860, although I don't really think formal incorporation is a great measure of the "oldest cities/towns":

Oraibi on the Hopi Reservation was settled in 1100 AD and is one of if not the oldest continuously inhabited settlements in North America.

The first permanent European settlement in Arizona was Tubac in 1752 (but it has not been continuously inhabited, as the European settlements were depopulated during conflicts with Native Americans).

The old, still extent mission church in Tucson dates to 1700. The first military fort was built in 1775, and Tucson was part of Sonora, Mexico when Mexico gained independence in 1821. And then as you mention the Tucson became the oldest incorporated town/city in the Arizona territory in 1877.

Tucson evolved from a native American settlement called "Shukshon" (spelling varies) which is believed to have been first established as a village site in 2100 BC. So it's pretty darned old. All these settlements including Tucson and the presidio at Tubac and the Missions at Tumacacori and San Javier del Bac were along the Santa Cruz River which is now mostly dry except during heavy rains but used to have flowing water.

Mission at Tumacacori (about 30 miles south of Tucson) first established in 1691:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumacacori,_Arizona

Mission San Javier del Bac (about 10 miles south of Tucson) established in 1692:


Of interest is that Tubac served as the starting point and base for explorations of the Southwest by Juan de Anza that culminated in the establishment of a presidio (fort) at the site of another native village along the shores of a Pacific Ocean inlet which was initially called Yerba Buena (good grass) by the Spanish until a mission, known as Mission San Francisco de Asis was established and the village and presidio took their names from the mission.

Mission San Francisco de Asis (NOT in Arizona)

https://missiontour.org/wp/sanfranci...o-de-asis.html

[Centropolis]

for my town its the tribe that my ancestors wiped out via disease and nothing but dust blew across the place for 200 years after. later a guy in european armor took a shit here. but my town in the u.s. is 2000 years old.

[Dariusb]

I love reading these comments. Thanks for participating!

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Nonsense; people have been living in Scandinavia for 11,000 years or something.

I guess I like to look at things from an anthropological point of view; I could care less about buildings that are still standing. Old Town Stockholm, for example. It has a medieval street pattern but most of the buildings date from the 1500s and 1600s, no? The layout is medieval, but the look of the buildings is not. People don't seem to realize that most medieval buildings were made of wood, and wouldn't have lasted long, and were constantly being destroyed by fires anyway. The only buildings made of stone were fortresses, castles and cathedrals.

The first Europeans weren't who you might think

[Obadno]

Technically people have been living in Phoenix and Tucson on and off from rmthousands of years but week just go with Tucson that was officially founded in 1775 by Spaniards

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Nonsense; people have been living in Scandinavia for 11,000 years or something.

I guess I like to look at things from an anthropological point of view; I could care less about buildings that are still standing. Old Town Stockholm, for example. It has a medieval street pattern but most of the buildings date from the 1500s and 1600s, no? The layout is medieval, but the look of the buildings is not. People don't seem to realize that most medieval buildings were made of wood, and wouldn't have lasted long, and were constantly being destroyed by fires anyway. The only buildings made of stone were fortresses, castles and cathedrals.

That's how I approach the history of native villages where I live in southern California. The Los Angeles basin was full of them. Every place has an ancient history.

This is why I value natural landscapes and landmarks, like hills, mountains, etc. The ancients saw those very same things, and probably revered/worshipped them, or at least gave significant meaning to them.

Scandinavia just never had this...civilization there is like 2000 years younger than in the med

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Nonsense; people have been living in Scandinavia for 11,000 years or something.

I guess I like to look at things from an anthropological point of view; I could care less about buildings that are still standing. Old Town Stockholm, for example. It has a medieval street pattern but most of the buildings date from the 1500s and 1600s, no? The layout is medieval, but the look of the buildings is not. People don't seem to realize that most medieval buildings were made of wood, and wouldn't have lasted long, and were constantly being destroyed by fires anyway. The only buildings made of stone were fortresses, castles and cathedrals.

That's how I approach the history of native villages where I live in southern California. The Los Angeles basin was full of them. Every place has an ancient history.

This is why I value natural landscapes and landmarks, like hills, mountains, etc. The ancients saw those very same things, and probably revered/worshipped them, or at least gave significant meaning to them.

People have lived in the Americas since at least 10000 years ago and maybe tens of thousands of years longer.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

There were older towns, but they were not continuously inhabited. But yeah, Scandinavia is young. It lacks that Roman link and consequently has a bit of a "halfway" feeling relative to North America vs. Italy or France or something.

It is still clearly older than the Americas in terms of organised society but not really on the scale that most people imagine it to be.

Places like St Augustine in the 1500s and Quebec City in the early 1600s are not that far off many cities in northern Europe which were founded in the 1000-1400 range.

There is only one university in all of Nordic Europe that is older (by about 100-150 years) than Harvard (1630s) or Laval in Quebec City (1660s).

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Scandinavia just never had this...civilization there is like 2000 years younger than in the med.

It's always interesting to think about how there were cities in Ethiopia earlier than there were cities in Northern Europe.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There is only one university in all of Nordic Europe that is older (by about 100-150 years) than Harvard (1630s) or Laval in Quebec City (1660s).

Uppsala was founded in 1477 vs. Heidelberg in 1386, Oxford in 1167 (although there was teaching onsite earlier), Salamanca in 1134 and Bologna in 1088.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by eschaton

It's always interesting to think about how there were cities in Ethiopia earlier than there were cities in Northern Europe.

Ethiopia is a truly ancient civilization; the Egyptians called it Punt. Non-Mediterranean Europe isn't ancient, it's just older than its children.

The Nile, Indus, Yellow, and Tigris/Euphrates river civs are ancient.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

The Nile, Indus, Yellow, and Tigris/Euphrates river civs are ancient.

I have an obsession with Sumer, especially Ur.

This is a cool way of seeing it: think about how far away we are removed from Christ, from 32ish AD. About 2000 years. Ur was a city double that timespan in the other direction. 6000 years ago is a goddamn long time off.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I have an obsession with Sumer, especially Ur.

This is a cool way of seeing it: think about how far away we are removed from Christ, from 32ish AD. About 2000 years. Ur was a city double that timespan in the other direction. 6000 years ago is a goddamn long time off.

I always love how the pyramids were already a tourist site during Roman times. The Roman graffiti on the Sphinx is well known, but IIRC they've even uncovered the remains of souvenir stands where they sold mini-pyramids to travelers.

They would have looked much more awe inspiring TBH before the Arab armies stripped the limestone facades to build Cairo.

[Don't Be That Guy]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I guess it would depend on one's interpretation of this:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017...ay-scientists/

Either way, I somehow think people settled along the west coast of the North American continent before settling towards the eastern part of North America, so I would think ancient settlements on the west coast of the North American continent would be much older than the ancient settlements of what is now Pennsylvania.

Anything older on the coasts has been underwater since the end of the Last Glacial Period. There's a lot of evidence of ancient civilizations known and unknown that's been 200 ft underwater for 11,000 years. Also, there's no longer census that all ancient migration to North America occurred from west to east and south.

[Obadno]

Im not an expert but from the little I've dabbled in it seems like archaeologists are now coming to believe that there has been multiple waves of Human migration to the Americas.

Obviously the most famous is the Bearing Land bridge but also Northern Europeans following the ice from the British Iles to Iceland, to Greenland and then into North America and even Polynesians coming across the pacific via island hopping.

If they could make it to Easter Island it isnt wild to assume some could make it to the coast of Chile and Peru

They have even begun to find evidence of earlier Australopithecus species in southern Europe that would suggest humans and other similar species could have been migrating out of Africa far earlier than we used to think, but that is still very new and is not fully corroborated yet.

What I would say is that Humans are curious and smart by nature, and I think we should all find it hard to believe that nobody ventured out of east Africa for something close to 150,000 years and then all at once spread to every corner of the globe in under 50,000 years.

I find it tough to understand how 75% of our species history was spent without at least some of us exploring far and wide.

[dubu]

for indians, 11,500 years in the physiographic provinces of the columbia river plateau. for the oregon trail its around 200 years.

[mrnyc]

for ohio the first euros to set foot there were the french on lake erie shores in ohio and canada in the 1660s.

officially the oldest euro settled town was adelphia in 1788, now known as marietta, which is also actually the first american established town in the northwest territory.

however, marietta settlement is actually 1500yrs old as there is what is now known as a hopewell culture earthworks there. this earthworks find greatly puzzled the revolutionary era people back east at the time of the settlement. for example, ben franklin wondered if de soto had built it.

it turns out ancient native hopewell culture built pyramidal earthworks along waterway areas and traded from florida to northern canada.

i think the very oldest or among the very oldest inhabited places in the state that is known is around the famous ohio serpent mound area, which could date back to the archaic era (8k-1k bce), although that is unclear.