Oceanic Way Finding Voyaging Tradition

RWP 2

Our traditional voyaging, knowledge and skills could give us a sustainable solution for the future generation. In this reflective writing will be explaining the oceanic way finding voyaging tradition, outlying various theories of migration in the Pacific, then I will discuss some evidence of migration based on archaeological data and finally reflecting upon my oral Fijian history and its significance.

In reflecting on way finding, can be defined as a space problem of knowing where your desired location is and the way to that location from your current location. Our ancestors were caught up with way finding when exploring the ocean. In the past our navigators travel without the use of compass, GPS as there direction. There is no weather bulletin given as the direction of sailing. Also there has been no pen, paper, calculator they use while sailing on board. Map was not imagined in those days. I was wondering then, how did our navigators navigate to this various location. Hence, after viewing the arrival presentation by Rudrud and Kauvaka, I was able to understand the various methods our ancestors used in the early days. As stated by Rudrud and kuaka on page 18 of the presentation, “navigators go out to the eastern part of the island to observe the eastern sky, for the star to rise in the east”, if there is the stormy star, they would know that it is not the right time to sail. In reflecting with today’s navigators, they mainly depend on the weather forecast of what’s the further outlook for the next few days before they sail. For example, before the Lomaiviti Princes sails the captain will get the weather bulletin and the course map of sailing direction. In the past it took 2-4 days to decide whether they can sail or not, but now days it takes only 1 day for the captain to decide.  Therefore, the use of stars and clouds were one of major element that helps our ancestor to travel and settle. Another point that our ancestors used which i want to reflect on was the units of distance for navigators .According to Rudrub 2013, the unit of distance navigators based on  was the curve of the earth and the point where you lose sight of land and it was measured in “yedaeg”. Nowadays, captain use map and GPS direction for exact distance from the shore and reefs. Distance were also measured in miles.

There were various migration theories in the pacific. The two population theory which assumes that the various people from Melanesia, Polynesia, and Micronesia did not share ancestry (Rudrub, 2013).The Melanesian/Polynesia were seen as essentially different due to the division of its colour,(brown/black).In Reflecting on this, the Melanesian group are found to be similar in life style and appearance, there for i agree the two population theory. Our origin stories that we passed from generation to generation. The competing theories that were noted in legend and were based on oral history and perspective. For example, we were told that our ancestors Lutunasobasba and their crew came through the drua; canoe named Kaunitoni. These was one of the Fijian migration oral histories. Another theory which I’d like to reflect on is the Latipa cultural complex by Thomas 1999.It was mentioned on page 9 of Rudrub,2013 that the Lapita horizon was the first to reached the island of Remote Ocenia.  It was a distinctive dentate stamped pottery style. In Fiji there were some evidence of Lapita pottery in the province of Nadroga. The accidental theory proposed by sharp was that the Polynesia were on a drifting canoe blown off when sailing, they were aimlessly floating around the pacific. Many Polynesian did not agree with this theory (Fonua P,1987). The Migration from South America by Thor Heyordal. These theories talks about some Inhabitants of Polynesia came from the Americas due to the presence of sweet potato in Oceania .In reflecting to this theory, I  did not agree with Heyerdahl’s theory since sweet potato is presence in every pacific island countries and not only on Polynesian Countries. The final theory which i want to reflect on way the ‘Near and Remote Oceania’ by Roger Green. Green’s wrote that there were two voyage of migration. The first group entered around 40,000years ago and the second occurred around 3,000yrs ago, coming from Island of South East Asia. I did not agree with this theory, there were difference between race, colour, and appearance between us the Fijian group and Asian countries. My understanding the Fijian migrated from Africa, since the appearance, colour are similar and this what I have been told by oral stories. In another reflection of language, the South East Solomon, Samoa, Tongan speaks “Photoocaenic”.  And ostrolacs speaks popular language. There was some evidence of migration that were based on archaeological data. An example of an archaeological data is Lapita pottery, inter connectedness are traced through artefacts. The lapita potteries were found in most places in Fiji and these were some evidence of existence in that place, Irwin G (1994). In another context the Lapita was not found in Fiji, it was the first to reach the Island of Remote Oceania and it was named after the west coast of New Caledonia. The linguistic evidence that was discussed on the theory were the case of Tupaia, Austronesian language, Papua Non Austronesians. It was found in PNG based on archaeological linguistics evidence (Ika),matamata(Tonga).The final discussion which I want reflection on was the evidence of domesticated plants and animal. The Kumana that were found in South America were also found in the pacific region. This was evidence of Heyerdahl theory. Also the taro, yams and sugar cane from New Guine were some evidence of migration based on plants.