WI America was first settled by the PIs?

Instead of American Indians, the colonists encountered these guys
images

as natives. What if the Pacific islanders explored East and discovered Hawaii and America and prospered?
 
Europeans DID conquer NZ, Hawaii, Tonga, and other Pacific Islands. Polynesians would have more diverse immune system than Native Americans, (if colonist only very small population then immune system might be as worse as NA) but long isolation would still make them susceptible to various Eurasian disease Europeans bought. And tech divergence (horses, Kingdom, guns, iron armour) would have been militarily similar.

So Europeans would conquer Americas.
 
Native American societies were already advanced so if we're still assuming that contact happens the same way, colonialism wouldn't change much.

Significant differences would be the lack of New World crops domesticated by Native Americans over thousands of years and the introduction of a smaller array of Old World crops by Polynesians. The Americas might be substantially less populated without maize although this depends on when the earlier settlement happened and how much time there was for the population to expand.
 
Polynesians from the islands itself or their proto-predecessors (Atayal and Kankana-ey) from Taiwan and northern Philippines?
 
Polynesians. I thought they would include Maori which would make conquest of the Americas a slight more tad difficult cause of warrior nature and never say die attitude.
 
I assume the time period is about the same, about 10,000 years ago. I don't see a significant difference between people migrating from the south to north as opposed to OTL (north to south). Sea level would rise, migration from the Old World would stop and the Americas would be populated much like OTL. There is no reason they could not have cultivated maize/corn.

Now, if the Polynesians maintained Pacific contact, that could make a difference.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I assume the time period is about the same, about 10,000 years ago. I don't see a significant difference between people migrating from the south to north as opposed to OTL (north to south). Sea level would rise, migration from the Old World would stop and the Americas would be populated much like OTL. There is no reason they could not have cultivated maize/corn.

Now, if the Polynesians maintained Pacific contact, that could make a difference.

We could actually have a dual migration. There seems to be some evidence of much earlier settlement in South America. Than original thought. One explanation could of been Polynesia settlemt that over time was incorporated or defeated by northern migration.

So what if the southern migration is as strong as northern and the Americas are settled by both.
 
Top