[Aztlan] ANCIENT PACIFIC COAST TRADE REPLICATED

[Benjamin Carter]

All,

The question of whether or not South Americans were able to travel to 
Central America/Mexico is one of great interest. However, it is quite 
clear that the question of whether or not something is possible is 
different than whether or not it happened. Other researchers have 
already shown much of what is concluded in this short article (I look 
forward to reading the scholarly article in the near future). I highly 
suggest folks take a look at the work of Cameron Smith, who built a 
full-size model and sailed from Salango, Ecuador up the coast (not a 
miniature to float in the Charles- a useful project for students, but 
completely not scientifically valid). Such vessels have been replicated 
numerous times, the most famous being Thor Heyerdahl's Kon Tiki. Smith 
is the one that determined that shipworms were a major issue (though 
this was probably already known by local fisherman and sailors). He 
determined that it was likely that, when in harbor, boats would have 
been pulled up on the shore to dry out, which would have prevented 
waterlogging and killed off the shipworms.Smith has published much of 
this work online- I suggest a Google search to find out more.

Similarly, the potential voyage has already been modeled by Richard 
Callaghan (Antiquity 2003).

A couple of notes of relevant information about this argument. The 
vessels (if they did indeed contact Mesoamerica) need not have come from 
what is now modern-day Ecuador. Clinton Edwards, in many articles and at 
least one book, solidly established that such sailing rafts were also 
present in Peru, though mainly from Sechura and north.

Similarly, it is often indicated that balsas are only present in 
Ecuador. Unless there is something that I am missing, this does not 
appear to be true. Balsa would have been available on the flanks of the 
Andes almost down into Chile and certainly to the north into Colombia. 
It is a fairly widely distributed genus. In fact, the Chongon-Colonche 
Hills, the purported source of the balsas because this is the only 
location near the alleged ports of trade (the major example being 
Salango/Puerto Lopez area) where the trees grew, is not a great source 
of balsa. Balsa trees do grow in these hills and they were floated down 
local rivers during the El Nino of 1998, but the trees are much more 
plentiful elsewhere. This does not mean they were not available in 
sufficient quantity nor that they were not used, only that we shouldn't 
limit ourselves to this area.

Lastly, since Jorge Marcos seminal article on Spondylus, it has been 
assumed that it drove these voyages to the north. The Ecuadorian 
Spondylus were in such high demand that they were overfished, forcing 
trades to go ever further to the north. First, Spondylus is also 
available on the north coast of Peru, a fact that has been known for a 
long time, but repeatedly ignored (or glossed over). Second, his 
interpretations were based upon the difficulty of acquiring Spondylus, 
which supposedly lived at such depths so as to require professional 
divers and evidence of overfishing. In my own research, I have found 
that Spondylus (both S. princeps and S. calcifer) are actually available 
in relatively shallow depths and may not have been difficult to harvest. 
Similarly, in an exhaustive literature search as well as working in the 
area for 10 years, I have identified no DEFINITIVE evidence for 
overfishing Spondylus on the coast of Ecuador throughout prehistory. Of 
course, that doesn't mean it didn't happen, only that we don't have the 
necessary evidence to support a hypothesis based upon overfishing.

Could Ecuadorians (or Peruvians) sail to Mexico? It appears that it was 
possible. However, did they actually do it? I think that remains to be 
proven. Yes, I am aware of a number of arguments about the similarity of 
textiles, dogs, shaft tombs, etc. between Ecuador and West Mexico, but I 
think these need to be reassessed. I won't say that I can argue with all 
of these arguments yet, but many of them appear to have conflated time 
such that connections appear to be similar, but in fact are not. Also, I 
think that they have severely ignored Middle America. I think many of 
the answers lie there.

Ben Carter

michaelruggeri at mac.com wrote:
> Listeros,
>
>
> Researchers and students at MIT built a replica of a raft that could
> engage in trading voyages along the Pacific coast of the Americas and
> tested it to stability and seaworthiness and cargo capacity made of
> the same materials as found in Ecuador. They found that shipworms were
> the biggest problem and they live along the Pacific coast and devour
> the balsa wood rafts quickly. The researchers found that they could
> make two round trip voyages between Peru and Western Mexico before the
> raft needed replacing. The rafts cannot be left in harbor long since
> this is where the shipworms enter.
>
> They found the voyages would take 6 to 8 weeks and could only be taken
> when  trade winds were favorable and as a result traders would have to
> stay at their destinations for 6 months to a year each trip. This
> would have allowed for a transfer of knowledge between widely
> separated groups. The rafts had a capacity of 10 to 30 tons, the same
> capacity as the barges that once plied the Erie Canal.
>
> This is the first analysis to use modern engineering techniques to
> determine design parameters and constraints of ancient watercraft to
> prove the feasibility of this kind of trade.
>
>
> Innovations Report has the story here;
> http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/verkehr_logistik/bericht-105942.html
>
> I have made a tiny URL;
> http://tinyurl.com/32awn9
>
> Mike Ruggeri
>
>
>
>