Which North American city is "oldest" in its inhabitants ancestry in the area?

[JManc]

Originally Posted by 10023

Yeah but let's be honest, these weren't "cities".

There weren't cities in Pre-Columbian US or Canada but there were settlements.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by JManc

There weren't cities in Pre-Columbian US or Canada but there were settlements.

Well, some of the mound building cultures in the southern US had settlements of 10's of thousands.

Populated areas of the Pueblo and Hohokam would have many thousands of people in numerous farming settlements through a singular river system but nothing we would consider a "city" more like a loose collection of farming villages.

Central Mexico is the only place with real city size populations to develop in the new world, the rest were really just settlements, nomadic tribes, etc. as you say

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia was founded in 1605 but isn't a city.

And almost no one living in Annapolis Royal today is descended from the original inhabitants of Port Royal (the original French town which became Annapolis Royal).

Though I am actually descended from an original settler of Port Royal/Annapolis Royal.

I even still bear his surname, and so do my kids.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

I'm pretty sure the oldest city in the US and Canada is pretty cut and dried: Santa Fe.
.

Not sure.

St. Augustine, FL is considered the oldest city in the U.S., is it not? Though I agree for the purposes of the OP you'd have a better chance of finding locals whose families go back to the 1600s in Santa Fe than in St. Augustine.

As for Canada, Quebec City was founded in 1608, and St. John's, Nfld. is debatable in terms of a date but some people place it in the 1500s.

I still think Quebec City or Montreal in terms of the U.S. and Canada probably take this.

The first colonist at Quebec City, Louis Hébert, has tons of descendants walking around that city and this province today. I know a bunch of them personally.

The current premier of the province of Quebec (like a state governor), Philippe Couillard, is directly descended from one of the first settlers of Quebec City in the early 1600s as well: Guillaume Couillard.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Acajack

And almost no one living in Annapolis Royal today is descended from the original inhabitants of Port Royal (the original French town which became Annapolis Royal).

Though I am actually descended from an original settler of Port Royal/Annapolis Royal.

I even still bear his surname, and so do my kids.

I was in Annapolis Royal just last year but don't know much about the current population. Are they mostly anglo due to the Acadian expulsion?

[Sun Belt]

Q: Oldest in terms of its inhabitants most likely to have been living either in the city or the local area/region for many generations?

A: I would guess the Boston suburbs and the many small towns of New England have the most multi-generational families dating back to pre Revolutionary times in America.

Santa Fe, NM and Central NM still have old Spanish family lineage. Also New Mexico's long tradition use of chilis dating back to the 19th century from Hatch, NM in their food have created their own Mexican food style flair that is quite different from other examples of Mexican food in nearby Texas, Arizona and California.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by isaidso

I was in Annapolis Royal just last year but don't know much about the current population. Are they mostly anglo due to the Acadian expulsion?

Yeah, the Annapolis Valley from west (Annapolis Royal) all the way to its eastern end (including the historical site of Grand Pré) has basically no Acadian residents whatsoever.

Unless at some point Jos Saulnier from Meteghan married Mary MacDiarmid from Middleton and settled down there in 1978.

In all my lifetime I've never met an Acadian who was actually "from the Valley". Neither have my parents or any of my Acadian relatives - including those who live in Nova Scotia.

The expulsion was a very thorough enterprise in that area - obviously.