I obviously don't think that, hence what I wrote. I think they were in many cases fought for and the strong got the best land for the most part. There was no collective decision making. And I'm hinting that maybe the current situation doesn't make much sense for team humans.
That's an incredibly simplistic way to see History. Lands are not ranked from best to worse. How a modern population ended up where is a long and complicated process of migration and moved back and forth several times. Great lands have been scorched and abandoned and changing technology, trade and population patterns change drastically what is great land from one generation to another.
Not to mention until very, very recently, Norway was very poor land. The people who ended up being there for the oil boom in the 70s were not, by any means, some very strong people who fought their way into prime land.
[1]: https://www.norgeshistorie.no/industrialisering-og-demokrati...
I'm pretty sure the Sámi would disagree on that one.
The current Sami people may have been first in the northern parts of Norway. The actual time line is difficult to establish (politically charged). What we can say is that the current Sami people were first in the northern parts of Norway compared to the "germanic" group living in the south.
Most discussions end up in agreeing that there were two main groups in Norway. One started from the south of Norway and spread north, while the Sami people started from the north and spread south. Finding out who occupied a certain area first is very difficult, and have a tendency to be based more on politics and patriotism, than scientific facts. (on both sides)
Both groups have been in Norway for thousands of years, so there is actually not much point in debating who was first in Norway. What they can agree on is to make sure that the rights of all are protected. That was not the case historically, where the Sami people were not treated well.