So a lot of them must have ended up back in China and Japan right? What do you think happened to those ones?
So a lot of them must have ended up back in China and Japan right? What do you think happened to those ones?
So a lot of them must have ended up back in China and Japan right? What do you think happened to those ones?
They were the native Taiwanese before being genocided by China
Yeah but they just seemed to go in random directions and keep going til they hit something, I wonder what happened when a kon tiki boat showed up in a chinese harbor full of pacific islanders?
Slavery or killed off if there was already a Chinese village, early man was very tribalistic and violent. Most human fossils from pre agrarian based societies over the age of 30 are riddled with fractures and wounds hinting that life was incredibly violent
when are you under the impression that the Polynesian expansion took place?
Horrors beyond human comprehension.
There is some evidence of Taiwanese pottery in the Ryukyu island around the third or second millennium BC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chams
They somehow ended as refugees in Cambodia where they contributed to society as cattle herders and fishermen something which Khmers usually didn't do
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Micronesians
Can anyone explain why the Polynesians went everywhere in the Pacific except Australia? There's a large ass island right next to them and they decide to colonize all these tiny rocks instead.
The Yolngu people in Australia did have some contact with Indonesians prior to European settlement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makassan_contact_with_Australia
Australia is a barren poisonous rock that's still smaller than Texas to this day. It's only kept around because it's full of minerals. It's basically the moon.
The more interesting question is new guiennei but I believe there's something about one side of the island being barely habitable.
Ok, well why not Tasmania or the East Coast of Australia? I'm not an expert on the climate of Australia but don't those have more habitable lands? After all those were the first areas of British settlement and most of the Australian population lives in those regions.
The polynesian settlers that originated the south pacific migrations to New Zealand and New Caledonia would have mostly hit the more dominant eastern currents pulling them away from Australia. There probably were groups that hit the mainland coast of modern NSW or QLD from the coastal current, but settlement groups would have been tiny compared to the native aboriginals and possibly pushed out. There wouldn't have been much pressure to migrate west at that time either with nearby islands being only recently settled and not having reached the natural population carrying capacity yet.
500 years is pretty small in the grand scheme of things, if the British had never colonized Australia its very possible the polynesians would have eventually.
water currents, but also probably they didnt find anything useful down there, or abos were violent towards them
it was already taken by EMU
They died in the typhoons and didn't reach China or Japan.
I bet you money for every on of them that ended up finding another 5x5km rock two ended up back in china.
They likely inhabited Kyushu before the Yayois migrated from the mainland.
Source?
Kra Dai may be a back migration of Austronesians from Taiwan but genetic evidence is lacking. The majority of proto Austronesian O-M119 found in modern day Han Chinese is the result of a rapid exapnsion of the O-F619 subclade which is possibly related to the historical kingdom of Yue.
Always thought it was weird that the Polynesians seemed to have studiously avoided New Guinea and Australia despite them being literally right nextdoor?
They made it a bazillion miles across empty oceans to Madagascar, Hawaii, New Zealand and even S.America (see; the sweet potato) but for some reason not New Guinea and Australia. There has to be some kinda /x/ shit going on.
Madagascar is not Polynesian….. It is austronesian which is the langauge group
to which many tribes belong including most philippinos, indonesians, and even some of the papuan tribes
>ackchyually
Whatever, the point is they sailed bazillions of miles to other places while New Guinea and Australia were literally right there.
It doesn't make sense.
>https://popular-archaeology.com/article/the-mystery-of-the-tumuli/
I'll have to check that out later.
>
Whatever, the point is they sailed bazillions of miles to other places while New Guinea and Australia were literally right there.
I see that you can't read... read my post again...
you may be technically correct but practically moronic
Read my post again...
moron
Read, tard...
frick off tard
Learn to read, tard... Austronesians settled Papua...
or this one
according to map only some coast, for somebody that insist for other to learn, you are really illiterate
a true midwit
its pretty clear that anon wondered why sea people(whatever they are or whatever they name is) from Taiwan spread around, reaching Madagascar or Eastern island but stayed away from mainland New Guinea and Australia
that is why you technically correct - they are not Polynesians(although P. belong to them) but practically moronic if you could not get why anon mean and instead insist at technicalities(which are important in general but not really matter in this cause)
chronology is probably wrong and anyway both papuas and abbos were already there and new people were not welcomed
>but stayed away from mainland New Guinea and Australia
They didn't... you haven't read my post either.... Austronesians settled mainland Papua New Guinea
not according to map in OP and that was question about
>only some coast
Funny how the moron (you) switches the goalpost and grabs his beloved meme buzzwords (midwit) from his bag as long as he realizes he's been destroyed...
*as soon as
>Current evidence indicates that the Papuans (who constitute the majority of the island's peoples) are descended from the earliest human inhabitants of New Guinea. These original inhabitants first arrived in New Guinea at a time around the Last Glacial Maximum (c. 21,000 years ago) when the island was connected to the Australian continent via a land bridge, forming the landmass of Sahul. These peoples had made the (shortened) sea-crossing from the islands of Wallacea and Sundaland (the present Malay Archipelago) by at least 40,000 years ago.
>The ancestral Austronesian peoples are believed to have arrived considerably later, approximately 3,500 years ago, as part of a gradual seafaring migration from Southeast Asia, possibly originating in Taiwan. Austronesian-speaking peoples colonized many of the offshore islands to the north and east of New Guinea, such as New Ireland and New Britain, with settlements also on the coastal fringes of the main island in places. Human habitation of New Guinea over tens of thousands of years has led to a great deal of diversity, which was further increased by the later arrival of the Austronesians and the more recent history of European and Asian settlement through events like transmigration.
read this you tard
for somebody so high and mighty your ability for read with understanding is really low
it was full, abbos told them to frick off
They didn't stay away from Papua at all.
There are several Austronesian languages in Papua both in the Western and Southern part of the island. They only stayed away from the central parts of the island because they were a maritme people and wouldn't bother to go dozens of miles from the coast in territories already occupied by aggressive tribes, my dear moronic friend...
that is what I wrote you moron
read my post you moron
>it was full, abbos told them to frick off
There were barely any abos in Australia as they're too moronic to flourish, which meant the entire northern and western coast of Australia (the only good parts) were free for the taking.
>There has to be some kinda /x/ shit going on.
check this mate
https://popular-archaeology.com/article/the-mystery-of-the-tumuli/
>There has to be some kinda /x/ shit going on.
I have a romantic view of polynesians because of the Crash Bandicoot series and because of some weird CGI cartoon from the 00s or early 10s that I once watched and didn't like but I liked the mythology in that. The mc had magic powers and one of the girls that wasn't part of the main cast was very tall, strong and masculine. And the Easter Island statues gave me also a romantic view of polynesia.
Why did they avoid Australia entirely?
>in China
Probably. Not easy to trace since southern Chinks are Austronesian-like. Austronesians actually inhabited southern China back then
>in Japan
The Ryukyus are within swimming distance but no traces of Austronesian admixture have been found. Some say some ancient tribes from southern Kyushu (namely the Hayato and the Kumaso, though some say the Azumi as well) were Austronesian but that's absolutely wishful thinking based on very scant evidence. HOWEVER, there's evidence of Austronesian occupation of the Miyako, Yaeyama, and Yonaguni islands [before] Japonic-speaking peoples ever got there. Since we know the Jomon population of the Ryukyus (especially the southern half, obviously evidenced by the said "Aceramic Period") was frick low and the Ryukyuan language branch came from southern Kyushu, I bet the Austronesians simply died off/abandoned their settlements like in the Easter, Pitcairn, and Norfolk islands. With the islands vacant, the people from up north simply moved down
I can provide the articles if someone wants to read them