Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

2 immense Easter Island achievements

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 2 immense Easter Island achievements
    Posted: 02-Apr-2008 at 19:09
Originally posted by Styrbiorn

That doesn't mean they are overall better; it means they are more suitable.
...
Indeed, the Romans had a much more difficult task.
 
I get what you mean.
 
My point was simply that the best sailors before the Age of Discovery were the polynesians.
I didn't say the most important army, the largest empire or the more advanced in technology and science were Polynesians at all, which we both know is not true.
 
However, the best sailors indeed were the polynesians, because we are talking about High Seas navigation. In the Mediterranean you can have very sofisticated ships to cross that small sea, but it is not the same that navigating in empty ocean during thousand of miles to reach a small island. To do the late job you has to be a superb HIGH SEAS NAVIGATOR, which weren't Phoenicians, Greeks or Romans.
 
Part of the advantage of Polynesians (and Austronesians in general) was having a better technology for HIGH SEAS NAVIGATION, and foundamental on that were the FAST cathamarans. If you want to cross an ocean without dying of hunger you need a fast ship.
 
Perhaps we should discuss the techniques of navigation to make the point clear.
 
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2008 at 15:24
You need a fast ship or a very large cargo hold.
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2008 at 22:42
However, the best sailors indeed were the polynesians, because we are talking about High Seas navigation. In the Mediterranean you can have very sofisticated ships to cross that small sea, but it is not the same that navigating in empty ocean during thousand of miles to reach a small island. To do the late job you has to be a superb HIGH SEAS NAVIGATOR, which weren't Phoenicians, Greeks or Romans.
 
 
Oh, and you have proof of this, credible sources that can be referenced?
 
 
 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2008 at 03:13
Originally posted by red clay

...
Oh, and you have proof of this, credible sources that can be referenced?
 
 
 
Do you mean I am not a credible source? ... LOL
 
Anyways. There are tons of documentation in the web and books that discuss the topic of Polynesian navigation. So far I haven't found a direct comparative analysis between Phoenician, Greeks or Roman ships and Polynesian, Javanese and other Austronesian navigators. My conclusions are just personal by comparing both technologies.
I invite other people to do the same. Compare what was available to Phonecians, for example, and what to Polynesians.
 
For instance, it is known that phoenicians sailed during the day... and took theirs boat of the sea at nigh ... That is possible to do in the Mediterranean following routes close to the coast. That's impossible to do in the Pacific, where an average trip took months from beginning to the end.
 
Some references to Polynesian navigation.
 
 
 
Techniques of navigation are shown in detail in here:
 
 
 
The polynesian navigation society:
 
 
And an interesting article
 
 
Wayfinders:
 
An%20Ancient%20Wayfinder
 
By Nainoa Thompson

The star compass is the basic mental construct for navigation. We have Hawai'ian names for the houses of the stars -- the place where they come out of the ocean and go back into the ocean. If you can identify the stars, and if you have memorized where they come up and go down, you can find your direction. The star path also reads the flight path of birds and the direction of waves. It does everything. It is a mental construct to help you memorize what you need to know to navigate.

You cannot look up at the stars and tell where you are. You only know where you are (in this kind of navigation) by memorizing where you sailed from. That means constant observation. You have to constantly remember your speed, your direction and time. You don't have a speedometer. You don't have a compass. You don't have a watch. It all has to be done in your head. It is easy -- in principle -- but it's hard to do.

The memorization process is very difficult. Consider that you have to remember those three things for a month - every time you change course, every time you slow down. This mental construct of the star compass, with its Hawai'ian names, is from my mentor, Mau Piailug. The genius of this construct is how they figured out to get in all this mental information and to compact it, and to come up with decisions based on it.

Tahiti is smaller than Maui, and it is a hard target to hit from 2,500 miles away. Even hitting a target as big as the Big Island is outside of the probability of our navigation. When we go down to Tahiti, we have this mental image of our course line for the trip. We tend to try to follow it, and if we follow it properly, we will end up in what I call a "box." In this box, there are many islands. In the Tuamotu archipelago, we cannot sail into there and not find an island. This box is four hundred miles wide. The first part of the journey to Tahiti is not trying to get to Tahiti, but to make sure that you hit this box. And then we have to identify the island that we hit, and once we do that, we know the direction to Tahiti. Or we can ask the people. Since these are coral atolls, it is very difficult to tell one from the other, so sometimes we ask the people, and hope they tell us the truth, and then from this shield of islands, Tahiti is only about 170-180 miles away. Then we can hit it -- even though it is just the size of Maui.

Now consider the return trip to Hawai'i back from the Marquesas. You are coming from the southeast to the northwest. The Hawai'ian islands are 315 miles wide, but approaching from the course you take from the Marquesas, you are approaching the islands from the skinny side. The trick that we use is that we sail toward Hawai'i, and use the stars to tell our latitude. We keep sailing upwind, and then we turn straight down west toward the Hawai'ian islands.

Sunrise%20at%20sea
At sunrise you start to look at the shape of the ocean. (Photo courtesy of the Polynesian Voyaging Society.)

Space

How do we tell direction? We use the best clues that we have. We use the sun when it is low down on the horizon. Mau has names for how wide the sun appears, and for the different colors of the sun path on the water. When the sun is low, the path is tight; when the sun is high, it gets wider and wider. When the sun gets too high, you cannot tell where it has risen. You have to use other clues.

Sunrise is the most important part of the day. At sunrise you start to look at the shape of the ocean -- the character of the sea. You memorize where the wind is coming from. The wind generates the waves. You analyze the character of the waves. When the sun gets too high, you steer by the waves. And then at sunset we repeat the pattern. The sun goes down; you look at the shape of the waves. Did the wind change? Did the swell pattern change? At night we use the stars. We use about 220 by name -- where they come up, where they go down. When I came back from my first voyage as a student navigator from Tahiti to Hawai'i, the night before he went home, Mau took me into his bedroom and said, "I am very proud of my student. You have done well for yourself and your people." He was very happy when he was going home. He said, "Everything you need to see is in the ocean, but it will take you 20 more years to see it." That was after I had just sailed 7,000 miles.

When it gets cloudy and you can't use the sun or the stars, all you can do is rely on the ocean waves. That's why Mau said to me, "If you can read the ocean you will never be lost." One of the problems is that when the sky gets black at night under heavy clouds, you cannot see the waves. You cannot even see the bow of the canoe. And that is where people like Mau are so skilled. He can be inside the hull of the canoe and just feel the different wave patterns as they come to the canoe, and he can tell the canoe's direction lying down inside the hull of the canoe. I can't do that. I think that's what he learned when he was a child with his grandfather.

The Southern Cross is really important to us. It looks like a kite. These two stars in the Southern Cross always point south (Gacrux on top and Acrux on the bottom). If you are traveling in a canoe and going south, these southern stars are going to appear to be rising higher and higher in the sky. If you went down to the South Pole, these stars are going to be way overhead. What happens if you are in Nuku Hiva, nine degrees south latitude, and you are going to go to Hawai'i? If you are going north to Hawai, the Southern Cross gets lower and lower. If you are in the latitude of Hawai'i, the distance from this star (Gacrux) to that bottom star (Acrux) is the same distance from that bottom star to the horizon. That only occurs in the latitude of Hawai'i. lf you are in Nuku Hiva and looking at the Southern Cross, the distance between the bottom star in the Southern Cross and the horizon is about nine times the distance between the two stars.

Space A%20low-lying%20atoll
A low-lying atoll can be difficult to spot from the sea. (Photo courtesy of the Polynesian Voyaging Society.)

Finding atolls that are very low is extremely difficult, but there are a lot of clues in the ocean to the presence of land. The wave patterns change when an island is near. The behavior of animals in the sea, such as dolphins, will change. Mau can read this. The main guides are sea birds. There are two general types of seabirds that Mau taught us about. The birds we use are the manu o ku (white tern) and noio (brown tern) with a long sharp black beak. These are birds that sleep on their island homes at night. At dawn they go out to sea, and come back at evening to sleep. They go about 130 miles out in the morning and come back at night. The Tuamotus are just filled with them. When we sail about 29 days down from Hawai'i and we see these birds for the first time, we know the islands are close even though we can't see them. This bird, when it is fishing, its wings flutter but when the sun goes down, it will rise up from the water so it can see, and it will go straight back to land. When we see these birds in the day, we keep track of them and wait for the sun to get low, and we watch the bird. The flight path of the bird is the bearing of the island. Then we turn on that bearing, sail as fast as we can, and at sunset we climb the mast to see if we can find the island. And if we can't see it, we heave to until the morning.

On my first voyage in 1980, we saw two birds after the 29th day, and I was extremely relieved. At least we were in the ballpark. I did everything that I was told to do, and the birds did everything I was told they would do. They went up high and they flew away, and we sailed in that direction. At night, we couldn't see the island so we took the sails down and we waited. The next morning, as Mau told us, we looked for the birds to see what direction they were coming from and that would be the direction of the island. In the morning, they go back out to the fishing ground, so the direction they are coming from is the direction to the island.

We had a great crew of 14, and we made a ring around the inside of the canoe before dawn. We waited for the first bird. All hands on deck. Not a single bird. I was in near trauma, my first voyage, early 20s. Mau was very calm and he didn't say anything. We waited and we waited. The canoe was just sitting dead in the water. It was facing south. One of the canoe members was in the back of the canoe and a bird flies right over his head. The night before that we saw the birds flying south, so how come late in the morning, with the sun very high, was this bird coming out of the north? That would suggest that we passed the island. The island was back to the north. In my -- I would say panic -- I thought we had better start sailing back in that direction to find the island before the sun goes down again. I asked the crew to turn the canoe around. The crew was very disciplined. They turned the canoe around -- and you have got to understand that now we are sailing back toward Hawai'i. And Mau, who has always said that his greatest honor would not be as a navigator but as a teacher -- that he would come and make sure that the voyage to Tahiti would be safe but if he didn't have to tell me anything the honor wolud be his. But when I started to sail north he came to me and said, "no." It was the first time that he interrupted the trip. He said, "Turn the canoe around and follow the bird." I was really puzzled. I didn't know why. He didn't tell me why. But we turned the canoe around and now we see other birds flying also. Mau said, "You wait one hour and you will find the island you are looking for."

Mau%20Piailug,%20Wayfinder
Mau Piailug, wayfinder.

Space

And about after that amount of time had passed by, Mau, who is about 20 years older than me -- my eyes are physically much more powerful than his -- he gets up on the rail of the canoe and says: "The island is right there." And we all stood up and we climbed the mast and everything and we just couldn't see it. Vision is not so much about what you do -- but how you do it. It's experience. Mau had seen in the beak of the bird a little fish. He knew that the birds were nesting, and they were taking food back before they fed themselves. He just did not tell me that in our training program.

We base our average sail time on average winds and conditions for 24 hours, but it never is. The majority of navigation is observation and adjusting to the natural environment. The more the weather gets up, the more the navigator needs to be awake, the less he can leave the crew on their own. We estimate that our navigators stay up between 21 and 22 hours a day. We sleep in a series of catnaps. Mau says the mind doesn't need much rest. But the physical body does. When the navigator is on the canoe, the crew does the physical work. When you are tired, you close your eyes. He always said that for him maybe his eyes were closed but inside here, inside your heart, you are always awake. And I have seen that. Outside here in Waikiki, training in 1979, when he was confident that I could steer by myself, he said, "Now I am going to go to sleep and you follow this star path." And like an overanxious student I wanted to try some different angles to feel what the wave patterns felt like and I thought that he wouldn't notice because he was sleeping inside the hulls. And the morning dawned, and he came up and said, "O.K., what did you sail last night? What star bearing did you hold?"

He knew that I had changed course. And when I told him, he challenged me to make sure that I knew where we went. He actually knew, lying in the hulls. Somehow, he has that ability.

 
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 05-Apr-2008 at 03:15
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 09:56
Copying a bloc of text is quite easy Penguin.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 13:04
Originally posted by rider

Copying a bloc of text is quite easy Penguin.
 
Copying a block of text is easy, indeed.
 
Selecting what to copy, it is not as easy, though.
 
And knowing about the topic, and also be ready to defend what was posted is less easy.
 
So, what you are concern about the text I copied and I pasted in here?
Perhaps we should go point by point checking about Polynesian navigation. Indeed, that was my intention in the first place.
 
 
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 14:16
But where are the sources to support your statement that the Greeks, Romans and Phoenecians were incapable of doing the same?
 
 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 14:45
Here there is information on Phoenicians
 
 
Some extract from there:
Phoenican ships
 
 
Phoenician cargo ship
 
As you can see, those ships were excelent to cross the Mediterranean and to stand pirate attacks, but were slow. You can't cross the Pacific in slow ships. With respect to the skill of navigation, by the time Polynesians were already practising high-seas navigation, Phoenicians were just learning the skills:
 
I quote:
 
Early navigation cautious, increasing boldness

The navigation of the Phoenicians, in early times, was no doubt cautious and timid. So far from venturing out of sight of land, they usually hugged the coast, ready at any moment, if the sea or sky threatened, to change their course and steer directly for the shore. On a shelving coast they were not at all afraid to run their ships aground, since, like the Greek vessels, they could be easily pulled up out of reach of the waves, and again pulled down and launched, when the storm was over and the sea calm once more. At first they sailed, we may be sure, only in the daytime, casting anchor at nightfall, or else dragging their ships up upon the beach, and so awaiting the dawn. But after a time they grew more bold. The sea became familiar to them, the positions of coasts and islands relatively one to another better known, the character of the seasons, the signs of unsettled or settled weather, the conduct to pursue in an emergency, better apprehended. They soon began to shape the course of their vessels from headland to headland, instead of always creeping along the shore, and it was not perhaps very long before they would venture out of sight of land, if their knowledge of the weather satisfied them that the wind might be trusted to continue steady, and if they were well assured of the direction of the land that they wished to make. They took courage, moreover, to sail in the night, no less than in the daytime, when the weather was clear, guiding themselves by the stars, and particularly by the Polar star,20 which they discovered to be the star most nearly marking the true north. A passage of Strabo21 seems to show that--in the later times at any rate--they had a method of calculating the rate of a ship's sailing, though what the method was is wholly unknown to us. It is probable that they early constructed charts and maps, which however they would keep secret through jealousy of their commercial rivals.

 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 14:52
With respect to Greeks, you could visit a page like this
 
 
Where you will find these kind of vessels.
 
A Minoan ship
 
Homeric ships
 
Or a merchant ship
 
Other merchant ships
 
 
Just notice once again that ship have a single squared sail and are heavy, therefore slow. Not suitable for conquering the Pacific.
 
Polynesian ships have two sails that double as square and lateen. They have smaller resistence to water and are several times faster than any Phoenician or Greek sheep. Speed is the key to conquest the Pacific.
 
 
 
Modern models
 
 
A maori canoe,
 
 
 
What a lovely boats, Polynesian had. Fast and simple. That marked the difference.
 
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 06-Apr-2008 at 15:03
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 17:34
Nice research, except if you go to the bottom of the Phoenecian page you'll see that this is only one man's opinion.  That aside the information about the speed and durability of the Polynesian's ships is impressive, as is the information about their navigational prowess.  Considering all this, tell us again how it isn't possible that the Polynesians reached the Americas.
 
 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 01:34
Originally posted by red clay

Nice research, except if you go to the bottom of the Phoenecian page you'll see that this is only one man's opinion.  That aside the information about the speed and durability of the Polynesian's ships is impressive, as is the information about their navigational prowess.  Considering all this, tell us again how it isn't possible that the Polynesians reached the Americas.
 
Well, I am afraid it is possible Polynesians had reached the Americas with theirs catamarans. The only problem with that is that the evidence is weak.
 
You know, Polynesians didn't only travel for fun. They carried a very impresive culture that included farm animals like pigs and chickens, and some vegetables like the tree of bread (from which they actually made their bread). Of them, only the chicken in the Araucania (Mapuche region in south-central Chile) it is -perhaps- the single evidence of Polynesian contact. Other evidence is the sweet potato, but specialists aren't sure if the spread happened before or after columbus. There are some other weak signs, like the curanto (cooking in stoned holes) and perhaps some designs of canoes in the people of the channels in Chiloe, Chile. However, no single cultural element, settlement, genetical traces or skeletons of Polynesians has been found so far in the Americas. I mention Chile often because is one of the more likely places for that contact.
 
If it ever happened, the more likely times of contact are between the 7th and 14th century A.D. for reasons that are too complicated to resume in a paragraph. But if happened, the contact was very sporadical and did affect the evolution of Amerindian societies.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 18:37
Hmmh. The paragraph about Phoenicians only proved their remarkable progress in a relatively short time.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 20:06

Originally posted by rider

Hmmh. The paragraph about Phoenicians only proved their remarkable progress in a relatively short time.

Rider, by the time Phoenicians were progressing in the art of navigating the Mediterranean sea, Austronesian people were already sailing long trips from Taiwan to South East Asia, getting ready to conquer Madagascar and the far away island of Hawaii, Tahiti, Easter and New Zealand.

Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2008 at 16:59
Time is relative.
Back to Top
Sander View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator


Joined: 20-Mar-2007
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 597
  Quote Sander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2008 at 17:12
Originally posted by pinguin

 
Well, I am afraid it is possible Polynesians had reached the Americas with theirs catamarans. The only problem with that is that the evidence is weak.
 
You know, Polynesians didn't only travel for fun. They carried a very impresive culture that included farm animals like pigs and chickens, and some vegetables like the tree of bread (from which they actually made their bread). Of them, only the chicken in the Araucania (Mapuche region in south-central Chile) it is -perhaps- the single evidence of Polynesian contact. Other evidence is the sweet potato, but specialists aren't sure if the spread happened before or after columbus. There are some other weak signs, like the curanto (cooking in stoned holes) and perhaps some designs of canoes in the people of the channels in Chiloe, Chile. However, no single cultural element, settlement, genetical traces or skeletons of Polynesians has been found so far in the Americas. I mention Chile often because is one of the more likely places for that contact.
 
 

Misrepresentation. Every reputable academic instution knows, for decades, that sweet potato cultivation is pre-columbian in the pacific.

In case some Hall of Maat stuff is brought up again: Its not a scholarly institution and the article itself is lousy , even by Hall of Maat standards . Some guy refers to Donald Brand, a scholar who suggested a post columbian spead. What he forgets to say is that Donald Brand not only represented a minorirty view in his own days ( the 1950 and 1960s ) but also suggested it 3 decades (!) before the archeological discoveries proved its pre colombian at many places in the pacific. No wonder the writer does not include the book and publishing date in his references . Very embarassing. LOL

The pre-colombian bones of the polynesian chicken - 50 bones of more than 5 chickens ( so not one) - in Chili ( El Arenal ) have provided solid scientific evidence of contact and is by many seen as conclusive proof. As we all know, Polynesians navigate but chickens dont. Scientific world could hardly have wished for better evidence . ( The study and results can be found easily on the net ).

'Arguments ' that pigs ( or other things ) are not in the americas make no sense. The pig did not make it to new zealand ( and some other settled islands) either and this was real settlement instead of only contact. More over, we concentrate on things that are introduced/exchanged , not on those that arent. Its about contact , not settling, so nobody expects massive acculturation or a genetic imprint.

 


Edited by Sander - 08-Apr-2008 at 17:21
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2008 at 17:35
Originally posted by Sander

Originally posted by Pinguin

Of them, only the chicken in the Araucania (Mapuche region in south-central Chile) it is -perhaps- the single evidence of Polynesian contact. Other evidence is the sweet potato, but specialists aren't sure if the spread happened before or after columbus.
 

Misrepresentation. Every reputable academic instution knows, for decades, that sweet potato cultivation is pre-columbian in the pacific.

The pre-colombian bones of the polynesian chicken - 50 bones of more than 5 chickens ( so not one) - in Chili ( El Arenal ) have provided solid scientific evidence of contact and is by many seen as conclusive proof. As we all know, Polynesians navigate but chickens dont. Scientific world could hardly have wished for better evidence . ( The study and results can be found easily on the net ).

'Arguments ' that pigs ( or other things ) are not in the americas make no sense. The pig did not make it to new zealand ( and some other settled islands) either and this was real settlement instead of only contact. More over, we concentrate on things that are introduced/exchanged , not on those that arent. Its about contact , not settling, so nobody expects massive acculturation or a genetic imprint.

 
 
Sanders, you know the "proofs" of contact are indirect. Yes, the chances are high it may happened, but the fact remain there is not arqueological remains of human manufacturing, of polynesian origin, in the Americas... so far. Chickens and sweet potatoes are indirect evidence, which is inconclusive if taken by itself. It is my oppinion, anyway.
 
By the way, feel free to cite "every reputable academic institution" that believes the sweet potato controversy is settled. It will be a very interesting novelty for me to find out the controversy died out. I also invite you to show me that all the academics agree the chicken's evidency is final.
 
By the way, the name of my country is Chile and not Chili, which is Mexican for Hot Pepper Wink


Edited by pinguin - 08-Apr-2008 at 17:53
Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
  Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2008 at 18:41
Excellent work, Pinguin!
 
The topic of early ocean travel is very interesting to me, though I have not studied very much on it.  From what I have seen, the Polynesians were far and away the best navigators of the ancient times.  However, I don't think it out of the question that Phoenicians or Romans could have crossed the Atlantic.  Since the target is so large, all it takes is a boat seaworthy of the crossing and someone dumb enough to head that direction.  If I remember correctly, they certainly had ships that could have made the crossing.  I don't know about the "dumb enough" part--it is possible that some could well have been certain enough of a round earth that they were willing to try it.  Apparently, however, the contact was insignificant.
 
A similar argument, based purely on logic, would say that Polynesians almost certainly landed in the Americas.  Hitting Easter Island is a very difficult target, and the first explorers likely wouldn't have known its existance (I don't know anything about how they would have figured out where land was from a great distance away).  If they were out to explore and were brave enough, they would likely have just kept on going (obviously, somebody went 1500km!).  At that point, making it back would have been hard, particularly if they were following the prevailing winds.
 
Has anyone discussed the trade winds of that region?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Apr-2008 at 03:51
Originally posted by DSMyers1

Excellent work, Pinguin!
 
Thanks
 
Originally posted by DSMyers1

The topic of early ocean travel is very interesting to me, though I have not studied very much on it.  From what I have seen, the Polynesians were far and away the best navigators of the ancient times.  However, I don't think it out of the question that Phoenicians or Romans could have crossed the Atlantic.  Since the target is so large, all it takes is a boat seaworthy of the crossing and someone dumb enough to head that direction.  If I remember correctly, they certainly had ships that could have made the crossing.  I don't know about the "dumb enough" part--it is possible that some could well have been certain enough of a round earth that they were willing to try it.  Apparently, however, the contact was insignificant.
 
Well, although anything that float could made the trip, that doesn't mean necesarily that happened. There is no evidence whatsoever of Phoenicians comming to the Americas.... except in the Book of Mormon, of course Wink
 
 
Originally posted by DSMyers1

A similar argument, based purely on logic, would say that Polynesians almost certainly landed in the Americas.  Hitting Easter Island is a very difficult target, and the first explorers likely wouldn't have known its existance (I don't know anything about how they would have figured out where land was from a great distance away).  If they were out to explore and were brave enough, they would likely have just kept on going (obviously, somebody went 1500km!).  At that point, making it back would have been hard, particularly if they were following the prevailing winds.
 
Well, the trip from Easter Island to the West is not as easy as it seem. First they have to travel 3.800 km in straight line to reach the Americas, or at least 5.000 kilometers in practise. Now, Easter Island had a very narrow time window to do that, because after some centuries of living there, the Easter people extinguished the palm tree, from which boats were made. Between 8th AD and 12th AD it is possible they could have tried the trip to the Americas. It is not impossible, just that evidence is still in debate.
 
If not from Easter Island, the trip would have taken 7.000 kilometers more or less, which is a trip perhaps beyond what polynesians would do. I am not sure though.
 
 
Originally posted by DSMyers1

 
Has anyone discussed the trade winds of that region?
 
More important, perhaps, are the currents. They would had to travel south, very close to the pole, before reaching the Americas.
 
Now, with respect to travelling from Europe to the Americas, if you see the sea currents will notice that reaching Europe from North America is a lot easier than the other way around. Curiously enough, Europe (Ireland, Scandinavia) receive very often boats and floating trunks comming from the Americas. There are quite a bit of testimony of people arriving there as well, probably Inuits or even North American indians. That that could sound fantastic the first time you hear it, has a lot more support that the travel the other direction. In fact, even in the biography of Columbus is mentioned the visit of "Indians" to Ireland, witnessed by the admirald.
 
Reaching the americas from Africa at the equatorial latitud is also possible, but Africans didn't have ships and lacked the sail at the time the pseudoscientific claims of afrocentrist pretends.
 
In the end, the only verified contacts before Columbus so far are the migration of Inuits during the last two milenium to North America and then to Greenland, and the settlement of norse in New Foundland during the 10th century. All the rest, so far, is fantastic speculation.
 
 
 
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Apr-2008 at 16:07
To be honest, I've seen quite few works that have been believable and have spoken about the possibility of the trip that John Cabot did in 1497 - making him reaching the continental North America before others.
Back to Top
Sander View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator


Joined: 20-Mar-2007
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 597
  Quote Sander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Apr-2008 at 13:55

Originally posted by Pinguin

 

Sanders, you know the "proofs" of contact are indirect. Yes, the chances are high it may happened, but the fact remain there is not arqueological remains of human manufacturing, of polynesian origin, in the Americas... so far. Chickens and sweet potatoes are indirect evidence, which is inconclusive if taken by itself. It is my oppinion, anyway.
  
 
Indeed , its very likely. Needles to say that good research rather concludes on basis of all the available data instead of what aint there.
 
And linguistics and - in many cases - archeaological evidence are direct evidence of contact between people.  Especially when they are separated by oceans and  transmission by man is the only attested process in specific cases. 
 
Originally posted by Pinguin

 
By the way, feel free to cite "every reputable academic institution" that believes the sweet potato controversy is settled. It will be a very interesting novelty for me to find out the controversy died out. I also invite you to show me that all the academics agree the chicken's evidency is final.
 
Well then, read some specialized academic papers instead of that Hall of Maat stuff ! Wink
 
Then you would also know that , for decades,  pre- contact kumara cultivation is generally agreed. Just as it is scientifically established to be pre european in the americas, so it is for the pacific. Both are hard to deny . See for example link to the PNAS article that next to the chicken research , mentions some studies about the pre-contact sweet potato.
 
Regarding the chicken. I mentioned conclusive and if you know what conclusive means in academic reseach , you will easily reckonize that the chicken evidence is presented in the article as conclusive evidence for contact. Hint: read the part under the heading conclusion 
 
That those researchers from the involved universities/instutions - not only American, Australian, New Zealand  but even Chilenean (Ramirez , Universidad  de Valparaiso) -regard it as conclusive aint surprising. Domesticated chickens that live on Polynesian islands in the middle of the open ocean dont leave them and cross 1000 miles of open water to a continent unless aided by humans.
 
...
Conclusion
 
This article presents well dated and securely provenienced evidence of a pre-Columbian chicken introduction to the Americas. We are not suggesting that the El Arenal-1 site represents the exact location of introduction or that the related date corresponds to the first or only introduction of chicken to South America. The date corresponds well with current archaeological evidence for the eastward expansion of the Polynesians. Most importantly, the current results demonstrate that chickens with a Polynesian genetic signature reached the south central coast of Chile before European contact with the Americas. Further analyses of additional samples from East Polynesia and South America may allow us to narrow down the source population and timing of introduction of chickens to the Americas. In addition, further archaeological research to examine possible points and timing of contact(s) along the coast and on the coastal islands of South America is clearly warranted.
 
 
 


Edited by Sander - 11-Apr-2008 at 18:06
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.