147
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 29 points 3 days ago

I'm more surprised that the Maori only arrived in New Zealand like a 1000 years ago.

[-] WrongOnTheInternet@hexbear.net 25 points 3 days ago

They had to come pretty far and it required quite sophisticated maritime technology

[-] Barabas@hexbear.net 8 points 3 days ago

I always compartmentalised the Polynesian triangle expansion as somewhere around 0-400 AD for some reason.

New Zeeland being settled for a shorter time than Iceland just seems strange to me.

[-] WrongOnTheInternet@hexbear.net 9 points 3 days ago

There's smaller hops from island to island and the distance is shorter, e.g. here is NZ if it was in the northern hemisphere with the same distance from NZ - Australia depicted as NZ - Scotland

[-] Barabas@hexbear.net 8 points 3 days ago

I understand why, but I think of Iceland as a recent venture (relatively speaking). It is a bit like having to recalibrate that Rome never conquered the highlands of Sardinia. There were just guys up there intermittently raiding their settlements for 1000 years.

[-] huf@hexbear.net 6 points 3 days ago

wait what, really? OH MY GOD COOL, eternal guerillas resisting the great satan?

[-] huf@hexbear.net 4 points 3 days ago

i think they had an early expansion and then the big one, no?

[-] GoodGuyWithACat@hexbear.net 5 points 3 days ago

Around the same time Vikings settled Iceland.

this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
147 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13955 readers
635 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS