Native American Sailors

uniface

Silver Member
Jun 4, 2009
3,216
2,900
Central Pennsylvania
Primary Interest:
Other
Native Americans reached Polynesia 800 years ago and interbred with local islanders – centuries before European explorers arrived in the Pacific.

Researchers from the US and Mexico used large-scale genetic analyses to show that modern-day Polynesian populations contain traces of Native American DNA.

Statistical analysis revealed that prehistoric Polynesian populations first met and interbred with people from what is today Colombia around the year 1,150 AD.

This event – which took place on the South Marquesas islands – occurred at roughly the same time Polynesians first arrived in the area from the west.

The finding finally confirms a long-running theory that the two groups had met – and explains why sweet potatoes from the Americas can be found in Polynesia.

The team's large-scale modern genetic analysis was able to prove what studies of the sweet potato itself and ancient bones could not.

'We found identical-by-descent segments of Native American ancestry across several Polynesian islands,' Dr Ioannidis said.

This, explained, provided 'conclusive evidence' for a 'shared contact event' prehistoric Polynesian and Native American peoples – one in which children with a parent from each group were born.

Further analysis of the genetic signals revealed that the event occurred around 1,150 AD – during Europe's Middle Ages – and, Dr Ioannidis said, 'around the time that these islands were originally being settled by native Polynesians.'

Alongside this, the team were also able to confirm the previous theory that the Native Americans who interacted with the Polynesians came from the region that, today, is Colombia.

The full findings of the study were published in the journal Nature.

REVEALED: How Native Americans reached Polynesia 800 years ago by raft and interbred with islanders - centuries before European explorers arrived in the Pacific - Madness Hub
 

Upvote 0
Nature has a paywall, of course. If one pastes the url of the Nature article, which is available at the link to the Nature article uni left, that url is at the very bottom of the abstract page, one can read the entire paper in Nature. Just post the Nature full article URL in the link below:

https://www.sci-hub.tw/?fbclid=IwAR02N11N9IO9hWSiyT0gIoGusfQsoTBmbP48JQuvArhvQtkmFp5rBsKYpdY

Edit: my instructions seem confusing. Click on the link below, go to bottom of page, past all the citations. You will see the DOI. Copy it and paste it in the sci-hub link I pasted above. That will open the entire Nature article....

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2487-2
 

Last edited:
A couple of observations.

1. If it was from South America to Polynesia it was probably a one way trip. Fishermen off the Pacific coast routinely get carried out into the ocean by currents and wind if their boats lose power. Some might remember this guy who survived a much longer journey in an open boat from Mexico to the Marshall Islands. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/José_Salvador_Alvarenga

2. It could have been from Polynesia to South America and back. Polynesians could essentially live for years on flotillas of canoes, and stood a reasonable chance of making it back. It would also explain few likely chicken bones found in some pre-European tombs in Peru.

3. Either way, if it was friendly, it's odd that the yam and maybe a chicken were the extent of the trade. Pottery was unknown to most Polynesians. They had some smaller varieties of bottle gourds, but not the massive ones common in South America. Things like the bow and arrow, basic metal trinkets and gold/silver jewelry, etc.
 

My vote would be for option two as people living on islands during sea level rise would foresee the danger and know in which direction to sail for higher ground before it was life or death. They would have recognized the need to explore and are therefore more likely to have made the journey successfully
 

My vote would be for option two as people living on islands during sea level rise would foresee the danger and know in which direction to sail for higher ground before it was life or death. They would have recognized the need to explore and are therefore more likely to have made the journey successfully

If that is true they were able to sail back home. No doubt there were skilled seafaring people much earlier than is generally accepted.
 

The early sailors were aso expert at navigation by using the stars as reference. So while I'm sure some were blown to islands by storms etc. it's plausible they could sail to fixed points ad back.
 

Thor Heyerdahl would be very pleased. The Polynesians he first met even recognized the Kon-Tiki raft as matching their oral memories of vessels used by their ancestors....



Heyerdahl may have had the departure point wrong, Peru, and the relative time period, but now we know he was otherwise so, so right....

 

Last edited:
the articles I read on this were pretty clear that the opinion was Polynesians were the ones that made contact and not vice-versa. The 1,150 time frame matches up nicely with south Pacific Polynesian expansion. Perhaps the lack of pottery can be explained by the lack of need for such. PNW has great easily obtainable clays (I use them all the time), but their basket and wood technologies replaced the need for ceramics. As for the bow...perhaps if your primary meat sources are from the sea, the bow is not as useful. And if your warfare tactics are shock and awe raids (think Vikings in longboats) the bow is also less useful.

I have also read provocative articles on the Chumash (southern CA coastal area natives) and their sewn redwood plank canoes, with both the boat technology and the word for the canoe being similar on some Polynesian islands.
 

J. M. Adovasio a noted archeologist said he has always been astounded that prehistoric travel by boat has been given so little attention by his peers.
 

so true....it is only in the past 10 years or so that I have been reading that the spread of Native Americans may have been facilitated by coastal travel as opposed to the "ice free corridor". It always seemed obvious to me...what is easier, drifting down a coastline in sight of shore and abundant, easy to harvest food resources...or humping over mountains fighting off grizzly bears and wolf packs.
 

Every culture had some type of boats. It only stands to reason. If my brothers and I had been born along the banks of the Trinity river in what is now east tx say 10000years ago... By age 10 we would have so e sort of floating travel device even if we had never seen one before. Its obviously would have made rafts, canoes, boats, floatillas of cane bundles, etc.
 

and coastal waters and beaches are filled, even today, with easy to acquire food stuffs that may vary from season to season but are always abundant. PNW was one of the few places in the world where hunter gatherers could live in year round settled villages.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top