Why Were Madagascar and New Zealand Discovered So Late?Were sermons in the Middle Ages devoted to Old Testament or New Testament subjects?Why were even royals in medieval europe living without running water and sewerage?Did the aborigines of Australia and the Maoris in New Zealand know about each other's existence, before the Europeans came?Were children often renamed in late Saxon England?Why are most late medieval fencing manuals German?Housing Materials, Structure and Style in the late Middle Ages in GermanyWhy were the first Universities created?Why were La Réunion and Mauritius uninhabited?Why some languages uses the term “high” to refer to an early period and the world “low” to refer to a late one?How motivated were the Australian, Canadian and NZ soldiers in the British army during the two world wars?
I2C signal and power over long range (10meter cable)
Resetting two CD4017 counters simultaneously, only one resets
Pronouncing Homer as in modern Greek
Identify a stage play about a VR experience in which participants are encouraged to simulate performing horrific activities
Was the picture area of a CRT a parallelogram (instead of a true rectangle)?
Partial sums of primes
Are taller landing gear bad for aircraft, particulary large airliners?
How to color a zone in Tikz
Taylor series of product of two functions
How can I raise concerns with a new DM about XP splitting?
Invariance of results when scaling explanatory variables in logistic regression, is there a proof?
Bob has never been a M before
Can the electrostatic force be infinite in magnitude?
Teaching indefinite integrals that require special-casing
How will losing mobility of one hand affect my career as a programmer?
Science Fiction story where a man invents a machine that can help him watch history unfold
Is there an Impartial Brexit Deal comparison site?
The most efficient algorithm to find all possible integer pairs which sum to a given integer
Can I rely on these GitHub repository files?
Proving by induction of n. Is this correct until this point?
Does "Dominei" mean something?
Female=gender counterpart?
Why are on-board computers allowed to change controls without notifying the pilots?
Can somebody explain Brexit in a few child-proof sentences?
Why Were Madagascar and New Zealand Discovered So Late?
Were sermons in the Middle Ages devoted to Old Testament or New Testament subjects?Why were even royals in medieval europe living without running water and sewerage?Did the aborigines of Australia and the Maoris in New Zealand know about each other's existence, before the Europeans came?Were children often renamed in late Saxon England?Why are most late medieval fencing manuals German?Housing Materials, Structure and Style in the late Middle Ages in GermanyWhy were the first Universities created?Why were La Réunion and Mauritius uninhabited?Why some languages uses the term “high” to refer to an early period and the world “low” to refer to a late one?How motivated were the Australian, Canadian and NZ soldiers in the British army during the two world wars?
Considering how exploration over long distances into the unknown has been a part of human nature right at the beginning, it's surprising that some fairly large places have been discovered relatively recently. The island of Madagascar, for example, is large and very close to Africa, yet it was discovered in 500 AD. Even then, it wasn't by nearby Africans, but by faraway Indonesians. New Zealand, which was just as tantalizingly close to Australia, was discovered by Polynesian sailors 800 years later.
So why were these large and incredibly close landmasses discovered so late in the history of human existence? What was stopping the settlers from getting there a lot earlier, like before the Common Era?
middle-ages navigation new-zealand madagascar
add a comment |
Considering how exploration over long distances into the unknown has been a part of human nature right at the beginning, it's surprising that some fairly large places have been discovered relatively recently. The island of Madagascar, for example, is large and very close to Africa, yet it was discovered in 500 AD. Even then, it wasn't by nearby Africans, but by faraway Indonesians. New Zealand, which was just as tantalizingly close to Australia, was discovered by Polynesian sailors 800 years later.
So why were these large and incredibly close landmasses discovered so late in the history of human existence? What was stopping the settlers from getting there a lot earlier, like before the Common Era?
middle-ages navigation new-zealand madagascar
add a comment |
Considering how exploration over long distances into the unknown has been a part of human nature right at the beginning, it's surprising that some fairly large places have been discovered relatively recently. The island of Madagascar, for example, is large and very close to Africa, yet it was discovered in 500 AD. Even then, it wasn't by nearby Africans, but by faraway Indonesians. New Zealand, which was just as tantalizingly close to Australia, was discovered by Polynesian sailors 800 years later.
So why were these large and incredibly close landmasses discovered so late in the history of human existence? What was stopping the settlers from getting there a lot earlier, like before the Common Era?
middle-ages navigation new-zealand madagascar
Considering how exploration over long distances into the unknown has been a part of human nature right at the beginning, it's surprising that some fairly large places have been discovered relatively recently. The island of Madagascar, for example, is large and very close to Africa, yet it was discovered in 500 AD. Even then, it wasn't by nearby Africans, but by faraway Indonesians. New Zealand, which was just as tantalizingly close to Australia, was discovered by Polynesian sailors 800 years later.
So why were these large and incredibly close landmasses discovered so late in the history of human existence? What was stopping the settlers from getting there a lot earlier, like before the Common Era?
middle-ages navigation new-zealand madagascar
middle-ages navigation new-zealand madagascar
asked 3 hours ago
JohnWDaileyJohnWDailey
199110
199110
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
By and large new uninhabited landmasses were discovered in one of three ways:
- By hunter-gatherers, walking there when the sea level was much lower at the end of the last glaciation.
- By hunter-gatherers hopping there from nearby islands or landmasses using their small coastal craft.
- By farming people with ocean-going vessels (usually Austronesians).
So let's look at #1. Here's what the coastlines looked like at the end of the last glaciation:
Notice that while Australia is still not connected to Eurasia, it comes damn close. Also (if you squint a bit) there are all sorts of convenient island chains in between the two.
Also notice that the distance between Madagascar and Mozambique is almost unchanged, as is the distance from Australia to New Zealand, and those distances are far greater.
The navigation techniques employed by hunter-gatherers are generally not designed to work out far out of sight of land. This includes their craft. A boat that is good for coastal fishing and/or transport is a far cry from something one could entrust their life to in the open ocean. Ocean navigation itself though requires a whole suite of specialized techniques (often including math) that really can't be developed in societies without the stratification and specialization afforded to farming societies.
So given that the distance to the horizon is about 5KM (3 miles), in the absence of convenient mountains, any body more that about 10KM from the coast is going to take some luck to bump into. The further off, the more luck needed.
Madagascar is 419km across the Mozambique channel at its closest point. Even if Mount Everest happened to be on the other side of that channel, it would not be visible to a sailor within sight of the African side.
New Zealand is ten times that distance. There's pretty much no way a breeding colony of humans is going to just randomly bump into that.
So this means both landmasses were in wait of a farming society to discover them. Enter the Polynesians. They had a agricultural package of domesticated crops and livestock that allowed for job specialization, and used it to create a specialized class/guild of navigators in their society. These folks developed and passed on the open-ocean sailing techniques that allowed their society to discover and populate a third of the globe.
Of course discoveries of nearby islands brought the opportunity for more discoveries, so this process took some time to finish populating the entire Pacific. So New Zealand wasn't hit upon until about the 13th Century.
Native Australians of course were closer (but still not close!). However, being hunter-gatherers, they simply did not have the means to bridge that gap.
Now, how about Madagascar, you might ask? After all, there were farmers in Africa pretty much as early as there were farmers anywhere on earth! Shouldn't it have been discovered earlier by African farmers, and not had to wait for Austronesians to find it?
The problem there was the initial farming package in North Africa was temperate climate crops. These don't grow very well south of the Sahara. A different tropical crop package was developed there, relying on millet and sorghum. This didn't happen until about 2000 BC directly south of the Sahara in West Africa, and it took a large amount of time for these farmers to displace the hunter gatherers in their march across the continent, and then south. They didn't reach Mozambique until 1-2,000 years ago, and by then the Austronesians were either already living in Madagascar, or nearly there.
add a comment |
You can't just go sailing to nowhere. You need to know where you're going, what you expect to find, and how long it'll take to get there. Imagine for example you're a native on Australia. You look across the sea and don't see anything. If you set off now, how much food should you bring? What if your food spoils? If you find something, you might meet hostile people or animals, so you can't sail alone. You need people, someone to read star charts, keep the ship afloat if there's a storm, and so on.
You might think this is all fine and you would still make it to New Zealand anyway, but just imagine if you were on the west coast of Australia, with the next major landmass being Antartica to the south. The expedition would not end well! On an atlas it might seem like Madagascar and New Zealand are so close to Africa and Australia, but importantly they're not visible from the coast. You need to infer (based on bird flight, sea currents, etc) that there is something "out there".
You might be interested in Wikipedia's article on Polynesian navigation. Once you know there's something out there, the prospects of an expedition improve dramatically.
add a comment |
Because New Zealand is an isolated archipelago a long way from anywhere; and everywhere:
Here is the North Atlantic at the same scale:
One might as well ask why it took so long for the Americas or Bermuda to be discovered.
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
1
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "324"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51809%2fwhy-were-madagascar-and-new-zealand-discovered-so-late%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
By and large new uninhabited landmasses were discovered in one of three ways:
- By hunter-gatherers, walking there when the sea level was much lower at the end of the last glaciation.
- By hunter-gatherers hopping there from nearby islands or landmasses using their small coastal craft.
- By farming people with ocean-going vessels (usually Austronesians).
So let's look at #1. Here's what the coastlines looked like at the end of the last glaciation:
Notice that while Australia is still not connected to Eurasia, it comes damn close. Also (if you squint a bit) there are all sorts of convenient island chains in between the two.
Also notice that the distance between Madagascar and Mozambique is almost unchanged, as is the distance from Australia to New Zealand, and those distances are far greater.
The navigation techniques employed by hunter-gatherers are generally not designed to work out far out of sight of land. This includes their craft. A boat that is good for coastal fishing and/or transport is a far cry from something one could entrust their life to in the open ocean. Ocean navigation itself though requires a whole suite of specialized techniques (often including math) that really can't be developed in societies without the stratification and specialization afforded to farming societies.
So given that the distance to the horizon is about 5KM (3 miles), in the absence of convenient mountains, any body more that about 10KM from the coast is going to take some luck to bump into. The further off, the more luck needed.
Madagascar is 419km across the Mozambique channel at its closest point. Even if Mount Everest happened to be on the other side of that channel, it would not be visible to a sailor within sight of the African side.
New Zealand is ten times that distance. There's pretty much no way a breeding colony of humans is going to just randomly bump into that.
So this means both landmasses were in wait of a farming society to discover them. Enter the Polynesians. They had a agricultural package of domesticated crops and livestock that allowed for job specialization, and used it to create a specialized class/guild of navigators in their society. These folks developed and passed on the open-ocean sailing techniques that allowed their society to discover and populate a third of the globe.
Of course discoveries of nearby islands brought the opportunity for more discoveries, so this process took some time to finish populating the entire Pacific. So New Zealand wasn't hit upon until about the 13th Century.
Native Australians of course were closer (but still not close!). However, being hunter-gatherers, they simply did not have the means to bridge that gap.
Now, how about Madagascar, you might ask? After all, there were farmers in Africa pretty much as early as there were farmers anywhere on earth! Shouldn't it have been discovered earlier by African farmers, and not had to wait for Austronesians to find it?
The problem there was the initial farming package in North Africa was temperate climate crops. These don't grow very well south of the Sahara. A different tropical crop package was developed there, relying on millet and sorghum. This didn't happen until about 2000 BC directly south of the Sahara in West Africa, and it took a large amount of time for these farmers to displace the hunter gatherers in their march across the continent, and then south. They didn't reach Mozambique until 1-2,000 years ago, and by then the Austronesians were either already living in Madagascar, or nearly there.
add a comment |
By and large new uninhabited landmasses were discovered in one of three ways:
- By hunter-gatherers, walking there when the sea level was much lower at the end of the last glaciation.
- By hunter-gatherers hopping there from nearby islands or landmasses using their small coastal craft.
- By farming people with ocean-going vessels (usually Austronesians).
So let's look at #1. Here's what the coastlines looked like at the end of the last glaciation:
Notice that while Australia is still not connected to Eurasia, it comes damn close. Also (if you squint a bit) there are all sorts of convenient island chains in between the two.
Also notice that the distance between Madagascar and Mozambique is almost unchanged, as is the distance from Australia to New Zealand, and those distances are far greater.
The navigation techniques employed by hunter-gatherers are generally not designed to work out far out of sight of land. This includes their craft. A boat that is good for coastal fishing and/or transport is a far cry from something one could entrust their life to in the open ocean. Ocean navigation itself though requires a whole suite of specialized techniques (often including math) that really can't be developed in societies without the stratification and specialization afforded to farming societies.
So given that the distance to the horizon is about 5KM (3 miles), in the absence of convenient mountains, any body more that about 10KM from the coast is going to take some luck to bump into. The further off, the more luck needed.
Madagascar is 419km across the Mozambique channel at its closest point. Even if Mount Everest happened to be on the other side of that channel, it would not be visible to a sailor within sight of the African side.
New Zealand is ten times that distance. There's pretty much no way a breeding colony of humans is going to just randomly bump into that.
So this means both landmasses were in wait of a farming society to discover them. Enter the Polynesians. They had a agricultural package of domesticated crops and livestock that allowed for job specialization, and used it to create a specialized class/guild of navigators in their society. These folks developed and passed on the open-ocean sailing techniques that allowed their society to discover and populate a third of the globe.
Of course discoveries of nearby islands brought the opportunity for more discoveries, so this process took some time to finish populating the entire Pacific. So New Zealand wasn't hit upon until about the 13th Century.
Native Australians of course were closer (but still not close!). However, being hunter-gatherers, they simply did not have the means to bridge that gap.
Now, how about Madagascar, you might ask? After all, there were farmers in Africa pretty much as early as there were farmers anywhere on earth! Shouldn't it have been discovered earlier by African farmers, and not had to wait for Austronesians to find it?
The problem there was the initial farming package in North Africa was temperate climate crops. These don't grow very well south of the Sahara. A different tropical crop package was developed there, relying on millet and sorghum. This didn't happen until about 2000 BC directly south of the Sahara in West Africa, and it took a large amount of time for these farmers to displace the hunter gatherers in their march across the continent, and then south. They didn't reach Mozambique until 1-2,000 years ago, and by then the Austronesians were either already living in Madagascar, or nearly there.
add a comment |
By and large new uninhabited landmasses were discovered in one of three ways:
- By hunter-gatherers, walking there when the sea level was much lower at the end of the last glaciation.
- By hunter-gatherers hopping there from nearby islands or landmasses using their small coastal craft.
- By farming people with ocean-going vessels (usually Austronesians).
So let's look at #1. Here's what the coastlines looked like at the end of the last glaciation:
Notice that while Australia is still not connected to Eurasia, it comes damn close. Also (if you squint a bit) there are all sorts of convenient island chains in between the two.
Also notice that the distance between Madagascar and Mozambique is almost unchanged, as is the distance from Australia to New Zealand, and those distances are far greater.
The navigation techniques employed by hunter-gatherers are generally not designed to work out far out of sight of land. This includes their craft. A boat that is good for coastal fishing and/or transport is a far cry from something one could entrust their life to in the open ocean. Ocean navigation itself though requires a whole suite of specialized techniques (often including math) that really can't be developed in societies without the stratification and specialization afforded to farming societies.
So given that the distance to the horizon is about 5KM (3 miles), in the absence of convenient mountains, any body more that about 10KM from the coast is going to take some luck to bump into. The further off, the more luck needed.
Madagascar is 419km across the Mozambique channel at its closest point. Even if Mount Everest happened to be on the other side of that channel, it would not be visible to a sailor within sight of the African side.
New Zealand is ten times that distance. There's pretty much no way a breeding colony of humans is going to just randomly bump into that.
So this means both landmasses were in wait of a farming society to discover them. Enter the Polynesians. They had a agricultural package of domesticated crops and livestock that allowed for job specialization, and used it to create a specialized class/guild of navigators in their society. These folks developed and passed on the open-ocean sailing techniques that allowed their society to discover and populate a third of the globe.
Of course discoveries of nearby islands brought the opportunity for more discoveries, so this process took some time to finish populating the entire Pacific. So New Zealand wasn't hit upon until about the 13th Century.
Native Australians of course were closer (but still not close!). However, being hunter-gatherers, they simply did not have the means to bridge that gap.
Now, how about Madagascar, you might ask? After all, there were farmers in Africa pretty much as early as there were farmers anywhere on earth! Shouldn't it have been discovered earlier by African farmers, and not had to wait for Austronesians to find it?
The problem there was the initial farming package in North Africa was temperate climate crops. These don't grow very well south of the Sahara. A different tropical crop package was developed there, relying on millet and sorghum. This didn't happen until about 2000 BC directly south of the Sahara in West Africa, and it took a large amount of time for these farmers to displace the hunter gatherers in their march across the continent, and then south. They didn't reach Mozambique until 1-2,000 years ago, and by then the Austronesians were either already living in Madagascar, or nearly there.
By and large new uninhabited landmasses were discovered in one of three ways:
- By hunter-gatherers, walking there when the sea level was much lower at the end of the last glaciation.
- By hunter-gatherers hopping there from nearby islands or landmasses using their small coastal craft.
- By farming people with ocean-going vessels (usually Austronesians).
So let's look at #1. Here's what the coastlines looked like at the end of the last glaciation:
Notice that while Australia is still not connected to Eurasia, it comes damn close. Also (if you squint a bit) there are all sorts of convenient island chains in between the two.
Also notice that the distance between Madagascar and Mozambique is almost unchanged, as is the distance from Australia to New Zealand, and those distances are far greater.
The navigation techniques employed by hunter-gatherers are generally not designed to work out far out of sight of land. This includes their craft. A boat that is good for coastal fishing and/or transport is a far cry from something one could entrust their life to in the open ocean. Ocean navigation itself though requires a whole suite of specialized techniques (often including math) that really can't be developed in societies without the stratification and specialization afforded to farming societies.
So given that the distance to the horizon is about 5KM (3 miles), in the absence of convenient mountains, any body more that about 10KM from the coast is going to take some luck to bump into. The further off, the more luck needed.
Madagascar is 419km across the Mozambique channel at its closest point. Even if Mount Everest happened to be on the other side of that channel, it would not be visible to a sailor within sight of the African side.
New Zealand is ten times that distance. There's pretty much no way a breeding colony of humans is going to just randomly bump into that.
So this means both landmasses were in wait of a farming society to discover them. Enter the Polynesians. They had a agricultural package of domesticated crops and livestock that allowed for job specialization, and used it to create a specialized class/guild of navigators in their society. These folks developed and passed on the open-ocean sailing techniques that allowed their society to discover and populate a third of the globe.
Of course discoveries of nearby islands brought the opportunity for more discoveries, so this process took some time to finish populating the entire Pacific. So New Zealand wasn't hit upon until about the 13th Century.
Native Australians of course were closer (but still not close!). However, being hunter-gatherers, they simply did not have the means to bridge that gap.
Now, how about Madagascar, you might ask? After all, there were farmers in Africa pretty much as early as there were farmers anywhere on earth! Shouldn't it have been discovered earlier by African farmers, and not had to wait for Austronesians to find it?
The problem there was the initial farming package in North Africa was temperate climate crops. These don't grow very well south of the Sahara. A different tropical crop package was developed there, relying on millet and sorghum. This didn't happen until about 2000 BC directly south of the Sahara in West Africa, and it took a large amount of time for these farmers to displace the hunter gatherers in their march across the continent, and then south. They didn't reach Mozambique until 1-2,000 years ago, and by then the Austronesians were either already living in Madagascar, or nearly there.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 hours ago
T.E.D.♦T.E.D.
76.6k10171314
76.6k10171314
add a comment |
add a comment |
You can't just go sailing to nowhere. You need to know where you're going, what you expect to find, and how long it'll take to get there. Imagine for example you're a native on Australia. You look across the sea and don't see anything. If you set off now, how much food should you bring? What if your food spoils? If you find something, you might meet hostile people or animals, so you can't sail alone. You need people, someone to read star charts, keep the ship afloat if there's a storm, and so on.
You might think this is all fine and you would still make it to New Zealand anyway, but just imagine if you were on the west coast of Australia, with the next major landmass being Antartica to the south. The expedition would not end well! On an atlas it might seem like Madagascar and New Zealand are so close to Africa and Australia, but importantly they're not visible from the coast. You need to infer (based on bird flight, sea currents, etc) that there is something "out there".
You might be interested in Wikipedia's article on Polynesian navigation. Once you know there's something out there, the prospects of an expedition improve dramatically.
add a comment |
You can't just go sailing to nowhere. You need to know where you're going, what you expect to find, and how long it'll take to get there. Imagine for example you're a native on Australia. You look across the sea and don't see anything. If you set off now, how much food should you bring? What if your food spoils? If you find something, you might meet hostile people or animals, so you can't sail alone. You need people, someone to read star charts, keep the ship afloat if there's a storm, and so on.
You might think this is all fine and you would still make it to New Zealand anyway, but just imagine if you were on the west coast of Australia, with the next major landmass being Antartica to the south. The expedition would not end well! On an atlas it might seem like Madagascar and New Zealand are so close to Africa and Australia, but importantly they're not visible from the coast. You need to infer (based on bird flight, sea currents, etc) that there is something "out there".
You might be interested in Wikipedia's article on Polynesian navigation. Once you know there's something out there, the prospects of an expedition improve dramatically.
add a comment |
You can't just go sailing to nowhere. You need to know where you're going, what you expect to find, and how long it'll take to get there. Imagine for example you're a native on Australia. You look across the sea and don't see anything. If you set off now, how much food should you bring? What if your food spoils? If you find something, you might meet hostile people or animals, so you can't sail alone. You need people, someone to read star charts, keep the ship afloat if there's a storm, and so on.
You might think this is all fine and you would still make it to New Zealand anyway, but just imagine if you were on the west coast of Australia, with the next major landmass being Antartica to the south. The expedition would not end well! On an atlas it might seem like Madagascar and New Zealand are so close to Africa and Australia, but importantly they're not visible from the coast. You need to infer (based on bird flight, sea currents, etc) that there is something "out there".
You might be interested in Wikipedia's article on Polynesian navigation. Once you know there's something out there, the prospects of an expedition improve dramatically.
You can't just go sailing to nowhere. You need to know where you're going, what you expect to find, and how long it'll take to get there. Imagine for example you're a native on Australia. You look across the sea and don't see anything. If you set off now, how much food should you bring? What if your food spoils? If you find something, you might meet hostile people or animals, so you can't sail alone. You need people, someone to read star charts, keep the ship afloat if there's a storm, and so on.
You might think this is all fine and you would still make it to New Zealand anyway, but just imagine if you were on the west coast of Australia, with the next major landmass being Antartica to the south. The expedition would not end well! On an atlas it might seem like Madagascar and New Zealand are so close to Africa and Australia, but importantly they're not visible from the coast. You need to infer (based on bird flight, sea currents, etc) that there is something "out there".
You might be interested in Wikipedia's article on Polynesian navigation. Once you know there's something out there, the prospects of an expedition improve dramatically.
answered 2 hours ago
AllureAllure
1826
1826
add a comment |
add a comment |
Because New Zealand is an isolated archipelago a long way from anywhere; and everywhere:
Here is the North Atlantic at the same scale:
One might as well ask why it took so long for the Americas or Bermuda to be discovered.
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
1
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
Because New Zealand is an isolated archipelago a long way from anywhere; and everywhere:
Here is the North Atlantic at the same scale:
One might as well ask why it took so long for the Americas or Bermuda to be discovered.
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
1
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
Because New Zealand is an isolated archipelago a long way from anywhere; and everywhere:
Here is the North Atlantic at the same scale:
One might as well ask why it took so long for the Americas or Bermuda to be discovered.
Because New Zealand is an isolated archipelago a long way from anywhere; and everywhere:
Here is the North Atlantic at the same scale:
One might as well ask why it took so long for the Americas or Bermuda to be discovered.
answered 2 hours ago
Pieter GeerkensPieter Geerkens
41.2k6118193
41.2k6118193
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
1
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
1
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
No, I might not, because the Americas were discovered very early in human history. MUCH earlier.
– JohnWDailey
2 hours ago
1
1
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
@JohnWDailey: You confuse populated with discovered. Read about Bering Ice Bridge
– Pieter Geerkens
2 hours ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
I wonder if it had something to do with climate. Meaning, polynesians didn't like to head that far south.
– John Dee
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@PieterGeerkens Don't you mean Bering LAND bridge? And seriously, what is the difference?
– JohnWDailey
1 hour ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
@JohnWDailey if there's a bridge, you can walk there. If there were a bridge to the moon, we'd have gotten there long before 1969.
– Allure
10 mins ago
|
show 1 more comment
Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51809%2fwhy-were-madagascar-and-new-zealand-discovered-so-late%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown