How did the indigenous get to Australia when the continents drifted apart much earlier?
In: 4730
If you’re interested in this stuff I highly recommend a book called sapiens which goes into great detail. There is evidence that we may have had the capacity to sail and fish which then led to potential further expeditions.
We don’t know for sure, but land bridges may have also allowed other homo species to get there.
There was a theory being bandied about in the early 90s that they floated across the Wallace line (mentioned in other posts) accidentally as you “couldn’t see between the islands.” This was based on the curvature of the earth and distances involved.
I remember one mature age student getting into an argument with the professor involved that it was a load of crap as sea levels may have lower at the time and, more importantly, the islands are whopping great volcanos and you’re rarely out of sight of land in modern times sailing in that area.
I learnt a lesson about not disagreeing with lecturers in that one and was very glad I wasn’t doing an arts degree
And we have the Gond tribals in India with art that amazingly like aboriginal art of Australia, with physical characteristics that are of the indigenous people of Australia – use of dots and dashes as well as predominance of connection to nature.
Also – ya’ll need to read Kon-Tiki. People for thousands of years have been a bit more willing to leave sight of dry land than modern peeps.
Noob question, if you take away the waters, there’s land between each continents that make up todays map. How do each continent move around when you are grid locked by land mass? It’s not like continents are islands floating freely.
Until about 12Kya, there was dry land almost all the way between Indonesia and Australia. Interestingly, Tasmania became isolated from mainland Australia at the end of the last Ice Age, and the people isolated there regressed technologically. There was even a small population that was isolated on Flinders Island, who, when discovered by Europeans, had even lost the use of fire and clothing.
The short answer: we don’t know. There was never a point where you could walk from southeast asia to australia (or rather, the land-group it’s a part of). There were always significant (like 70-80 miles at least) open-water crossings no matter how low the sea level got, so how’d they do it?
We don’t know, but it’s taken to indicate that humans had non-trivial watercraft at 60,000 years ago at least. It’s a hell of an implication but it’s hard to see what other answer there could be.
There are implications for other cases as well, with bodies of water that we (apparently) didn’t cross. We just don’t know.
Sailing. The same way they jumped from the Horn of Africa to today’s Yemen: by building boats and sailing/rowing.
We have to remember the hunter-gatherer life included fishing. And those early humans, while traveling from the Middle East to SouthEast Asia, went along the coasts, preferring warm climates and island hopping. The fact that they still relied on stone tools and not metals yet doesn’t mean they weren’t sophisticated and organized.
I know this has already been answered but if you wanna look into a more interesting case, Google how the Polynesian people reached Hawaii in the 3rd century. Land bridges are one things, being confident enough to go into the middle of the Pacific Ocean using nothing but a canoe and the stars is an entirely different beast.
With all due respect to /u/legolili, they did not walk. They voyaged.
https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistory_of_Australia
While the lowering of sea level joined New Guinea and Australia, it did not link to mainland Asia. Even at the lowest point, there was still a 90 km gap to be crossed.
This is why the animal population of Australia remained distinct from Asia. The division is known as the [Wallace Line](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_Line).
Latest Answers