Talk:Canary Islands in pre-colonial times

Settlement

"This is particularly problematic considering that only the peak of Tenerife is visible from the African coast on the very clearest of days and the currents around the islands tend to lead the boats southwest and west, past the archipelago and into the Atlantic Ocean." - this is rather meaningless as the Teide must have erupted on several occasions in prehistoric times. During eruptions, anyone living in the general area of the adjacent African coast would have known that something was out there.

There are also those enigmatic ruins described by Pliny the Elder (apparently based on testimony of Hanno the Navigator) which suggest that there was once a megalithic culture present which disappeared later on. Also, ratite eggshells found on the Canaries are a major oddity; they do not seem to be from the ostrich as it was historically known and some appear suggestive of the Elephant bird even (this is not to suggest anything, but merely to remark upon a fact of which no scientist can make head or tail)! These eggs are too large to have been from a flying bird, but no bones have been found. But they are far too old to have been deposited by humans:

En las islas Orientales se han encontrado restos de huevos fosilizados de grandes aves. Fragmentos y huevos casi completos han sido hallados en el Norte de Lanzarote en depósitos cuya datación oscila entre 6 y 7 millones de años. Después de realizarse diversos estudios se llegó a la conclusión de que se trataba de restos pertenecientes al grupo de las Ratites, constituido por aves no voladoras como son las avestruces, ñandús, etcétera. Más tarde se observó que estos fragmentos presentaban variabilidad en el grosor, llegándose a la conclusión de que pertenecían a dos grupos diferentes; uno era el de los avestruces actuales, y otro el de los Aepyornis o aves elefantes, extinguidos en la actualidad y de mayor tamaño que los primeros.

La presencia de estos interesantes fósiles plantea inmediatamente una pregunta: si no podían volar ¿cómo llegaron hasta la isla? Este hecho sirvió de apoyo a los investigadores que creían que Lanzarote y Fuerteventura estuvieron unidas en el pasado con el continente africano, lo que favorecería el paso de este tipo de animales. Sin embargo, actualmente la teoría más aceptada es que las islas han surgido del océano tras sucesivas erupciones volcánicas y nunca estuvieron unidas al continente, por tanto la presencia de estas aves constituye uno de los enigmas más interesantes que aún quedan por resolver. En estos momentos se está realizando un estudio, financiado por el Gobierno Autónomo, para comprobar si los restos hallados pertenecen realmente a las especies antes mencionadas y ha surgido la hipótesis de que en realidad se trataba de grandes aves marinas voladoras.[1]

This was written in 1990, and unfortunately, I have not yet found out what became of the "estudio [...] para comprobar..."

Alas, there is no real evidence to firmly place any theory upon. While I do not support outlandish theories, the prehistory of the Canaries is perhaps the one case where parsimony would favor aliens picking up humans and dumping them there... as I said, this should not be taken as me being in favor of such a suggestion, but merely to indicate that there is no good explanation at all for the few odd and ends of material evidence we do have. Dysmorodrepanis 15:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Would flightless bird eggs from 6-7 mya have much bearing on human settlement? I think the more recent past would tend to yield more clues - perhaps from 30K years ago onwards. If Teide were noticeable at all, it would be reason enough to suspect early attempts to reach the islands. In any case, many islands out of sight were reached and colonized by early seafarers (think of Polynesia). During the last Ice Age, the distance between the islands and the coast was surely smaller, and would probably not require long-range seafaring skill. Later visits by Phoenicians, Carthaginians, etc. were likely a relative breeze. Regarding the question of the enigmatic ruins described by Pliny, how about the Pyramids of Guimar? Many of these were unfortunately dismantled in the colonial era for construction purposes. Twalls 17:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

The relevance of the eggs was only relevant insofar as it was what brought me to this article ;-) The dating of 1000BC, roughly, leaves enough leeway for most theories to fit into, but the possibility that there was a human presence - not necessary continuous - for a much longer time cannot be discounted.

But the main points remain: Pyramids of Guimar - who built them? The Guanches? Hanno was generally reliable, but as the story of "the giant walls" was at least second-hand... still, accepting that the islands were settled roughly 1000BC; then by about 600BC the pyramids should have been there but the pyramid-buildes were gone. What happened to them? There seem to have been people around for the Romans to trade with roughly half a millennium later. IIRC, there was something about the Phoeniceans founding settlements... did they "import" settlers from the mainland (it would not have been beyond them, they were on fairly good terms with the berber tribes)? FWIW, there are some papers dealing with paleornithology of the early post-settlement sites; the deposits are not very informative but they do not suggest social trappings like partition of labor, pronounced stratification etc were present around c.1000BC. If I compare them to Polynesian sites, they seem much more like the stone-quarriers' camps on Henderson than the "industry" sites on Hawai'i. Less sophisticated, if anything, than Henderson - simply cave deposits which could judging from their taphronomy be just as well 10000 years old as 1000. Now, I'm not suggesting that they are that old (dating may be imprecise, but not THAT much), but the development of the culture is puzzling. It reminisces somewhat of Rapa Nui: from humble beginnings to a bloom, then down to nearly nothing, then a second phase of increasing sophistication, which is terminated by colonialization.

Clearly, the transition from the earliest settlers to the pyramid-builders to the Early Modern Guanches begs a whole lot of questions. You seem knowledgeable; if you have recent papers on this stuff, could you be so kind and put them into the article? Dysmorodrepanis 22:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Dys. Indeed, there may have been a human presence prior to 1000 BC - there simply hasn't been much found to go on. I don't believe the Guanches built the pyramids of Guimar (Heyerdahl found evidence of Guanches living under one of the pyramids, but that's it), nor do I think they necessarily left the Lybico-Berber Tifinagh script found in rock inscriptions on certain islands. According to the Spanish, the Guanches had no writing system of their own, and they even asked the Spanish if they could read the mysterious rock inscriptions. Of course, they could have brought knowledge of writing with them and then forgot it, or the invaders may have just enslaved, killed or assimilated the literate members of the Guanche population. Given the roundly documented fact that the Guanches were not seafarers (even between islands) leads me to think they were brought there, perhaps as laborers, "imported" as you say, along with several types of domesticated or semi-domesticated livestock.

There is an excellent paper in Spanish on Guanche language and cosmology, taking into account cave paintings and inscriptions - I believe I posted the link to it on either the Guanches or Guanche language page. I'll look for it. A DNA study (I don't recall if the samplings were from living Canary Islanders or Guanche remains) indicated there were two unique mutations (U6b1 and U6c1) of haplogroup U6, a very old grouping that has been present in the southern Mediterranean and NW Africa (U6 occurs in high frequency among Berbers) for tens of thousands of years. Here it is: [2] This study seems to confirm the conclusion I had already reached - that the islands were probably settled by NW Africans after the Sahara started to dry up -- "Two autochthonous derivatives of these clades (U6b1 and U6c1) indicate the arrival of North African settlers to the Canarian Archipelago in prehistoric times, most probably due to the Saharan desiccation." This would make for an earlier date than 1000 BC, though. In no way do I think this was the only migration or settlement, considering the pyramids and the inscriptions, and the reported variance in physical appearance of islanders at the time of conquest.

Not long ago, I found a very interesting site with models and maps of African paleovegetation including the northwest. I'll try to dig that up once again. I'd love to find projections of the coastline at the time. I found some of other regions, but not NW Africa / the Canaries. Twalls 03:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Cool! Thank you so much! Dysmorodrepanis 05:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Here's the link for this fellow's extensive thesis on Guanche culture, numbers, agriculture, cosmology, calendar etc (PDF, in Spanish): {http://webpages.ull.es/users/jbarrios/pdf/tesis2004.pdf] Twalls 17:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Checked on the supposed "elephant bird" eggshells; modern opinion points towards a misidentification of Eocene N African ratites(?). There probably never was a land bridge when these birds lived, but the E islands rest on continental crust which "rafted" (IONO when, probably late Mesozoic/early Cenozoic) off from Africa, leaving an archipelago between Fuertev. and the mainland for some million years. Depending on sea levels, this may have enabled flightless birds to arrive there.

But if the eggshells were not imported by humans who had found them in NAfrica (for which there is no evidence IIRC), it has still no bearing on the question of settlement. Dysmorodrepanis 18:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

How to Say 15 Words in 150 Words

Just what are these two paragraphs saying? That natural resources were vital to these herders and farmers and that few traces of their religion remain except for a few purported altars?

"Influenced by cultural materialist and cultural ecologist approaches, numerous studies of precolonial Canarian social structures have emphasised the importance of the availability of natural resources on the islands, the different degrees of access to them and the varying forms of subsistence strategies in use by the different populations. Thus most scholars have tended to adopt a clear-cut distinction between the agriculturalist and the pastoralist societies and ways of life in the Canaries (cf. Diego Cuscoy 1963: 44; González Antón & Tejera Gaspar 1990: 78).

The religious and cosmological beliefs of the indigenous Canarians have proven to be a particularly problematic field of the islands' archaeological and historical studies. Remarkably little archaeological evidence is available because indigenous Canarian people often performed their religious practices in places marked by particular striking geographical features or types of vegetation, although certain sites containing architectonic remains have been identified as sanctuaries."

Twalls 23:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

You are right. Please edit this in any way you think that is best.Jeff5102 22:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I actually looked at some earlier versions of these same passages and there was some interesting info that was edited out of it over time. Twalls 22:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Rock Inscriptions

There should be a section on petroglyphs and rock inscriptions. On some islands, the inscriptions have been identified as the western variant of Lybico-Berber script (which present-day Tifinagh is derived from). However, this writing is not associated with the Guanches living on the islands at the time of conquest. Twalls 18:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Stating the possibly obvious

"Archaeology suggests that the original settlers arrived by sea". Do tell. 203.129.50.102 (talk) 00:51, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Inter-Island Travel and Sources

Did the native Canary Islanders ever "island hop" in small boats? Even if they couldn't navigate the open seas or sail to Africa, did they at least have the technology to reach each other, or were the different islands just as foreign and far-flung as Africa and Europe?

It's amazing that their ancestors made it to the islands, bringing non-native domestic plants and animals with them, but then all of that knowledge and contact was lost.

Also, what are the sources for all of this information? While I'd assume early Spanish colonial records would be the case, which ones specifically? For example, how do we know what the names of the kings of Tenerife were, or the names of the pagan Gods? What's the source?

71.226.227.121 (talk) 20:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

2024 study by University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

There is a new study by the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2302924121 The chronology of the human colonization of the Canary Islands July 1, 2024. Only the abstract is freely available, and I do not have access to the main article. However, it is discussed in the Oct/Nov issue of Current World Archaeology, which says that there is archaeological evidence that the Romans were the first to colonise the islands, and that the people who were occupying the islands at the time of the Spanish conquest arrived around the 1st century AD, after the Romans had left. This is not reflected in this article. Sweet6970 (talk) 14:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)