When humans first arrived in Australia, sea level was much lower than it is now. People could have taken the Northern route through Sulawesi, island hopping across the sea, then reaching Papua New Guinea which was joined to Australia. It is the most logical path because land could always be seen in the distance in times of good weather. The southern route is much more difficult in terms of resources and energy. It involves travel across large islands of the Indonesian archipelago from Sumatra to Timor then a considerably long sea journey to the northern part of Australia.
Early arrivals obviously did not plan their journey, so using the easiest and most effective route was not an issue. They just moved east to new pastures as resources were depleted with new people moving into inhabited regions. It is possible that Australia was reached by travel along both routes. Artifacts in the rock shelter at Madjedbebe in Australia have been dated at 65,000 years before the present. Not much archaeological evidence has been found for the presence of humans on either route that far back.
There is no explanation for sites in Southeast Asia dating at only 45,000 years ago. Clearly, ancestors of Australian Aboriginals must have occupied places on the routes 65,000 years ago. Furthermore, Aboriginals look quite different from Southeast Asians and Papua New Guineans.
◆ ANTHROPOLOGY ◆
●
