Book of Mormon Connection to Polynesia

The results of a new study reported in Nature by Alexander G. Ioannidis and Javier Blanco-Portillo, and a score of other scientists, all claim that the Native American gene flow into Polynesia occurred quite early in the islands’ history. In fact, this interaction was mostly between Native American and Polynesian populations, that has been the subject of a lot of debate in the scientific world. This study analyzed genome-wide variation in individuals from islands across eastern Polynesia and their connection to the mainland of Western South America—namely, Ecuador, Peru and Chile (Alexander G. Ioannidis and Javier Blanco-Portillo, et al., “Native American gene flow into Polynesia predating Easter Island settlement,” Nature, Springer Nature Group, July 8 2020, pp572-577 (583).

The study was reported in both the New York Times (July 8, 2020) with the title “Some Polynesians Carry DNA of Ancient Native Americans, New Study Finds,” while Science News used “South Americans may have traveled to Polynesia 800 years ago: DNA suggests people from the Americas had a role in the peopling of Pacific islands.” 

According to Archaeologist Paul Wallin (left) of Uppsala University in Sweden, and as well as Linda Koch, Chief Editor of Nature Review Genetics, there is now evidence of admixture (the presence of DNA in a group of individuals from a distantly-related population that had been genetically isolated and developed unique gene pools) with Native Americans related to Indigenous inhabitants of north-western South America.

The study found “conclusive evidence for prehistoric contact of Polynesian individuals with Native American individuals that was contemporaneous with the settlement of remote Oceania. As stated in the study, “Our analyses suggest strongly that a single contact event occurred in eastern Polynesia, before the settlement of Rapa Nui on Easter Island.”

Considering that any scientific research dealing with DNA and ancient population migrations is limited to sample availability and data interpretation, this work supports the plausibility of gene flow (and therefore human contacts) from the American continents to Polynesia.

This contact, between Polynesian individuals and a Native American group most closely related to the indigenous inhabitants of present-day South America. The authors included publicly available genotype data and newly generated SNP array data for 807 (predominantly modern) individuals from 14 Polynesian island populations and 15 Pacific coastal Native American populations.

In addition to a large Polynesian component, many islanders harbored genomic regions of European ancestries, likely resulting from colonial admixture. Strikingly, the four easternmost Polynesian islands (Palliser, Marquesas, Mangareva and Rapa Nui) showed two ancestry components characteristic of both modern and ancient central and southern Native American populations. This finding suggests that it arrived independently of any European component. 

Linda Koch                  Lizzie Wade

Moreover, little variation of the central Native American component across different Rapanui individuals is suggestive of an older admixture event, before the arrival of Europeans in the Pacific region (Paul Wallin, “Native South Americans were early inhabitants of Polynesia,” National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, July 20, 2020; Linda Koch, “An Odyssey to Oceana,” Nature, September 21 2020; Lizzie Wade, “Polynesians, Native Americans met and mingled long ago,” Science, vol.369, Iss.6500, July 10 2020, p128).

Much has been claimed about Hagoth’s ships and where they went. In addition, there is Mormon’s comment that “And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not” (Alma 63:8). So where did this unknown ship sail?

Earlier, Mormon states that at least two ships went “northward to a land which was northward” (Alma 63:6). This first ship returned and sailed again (Alma 63:7). Consequently, if ships sailed northward of which the Nephites knew and recorded, and since sailing southward after the people traveled northward from Zarahemla (Alma 63:4) seems most unlikely, that leaves only west. And a westward travel would take them to unknown areas as Mormon stated, it seems most likely this third ship sailed out into the ocean west of the Land of Promise.

It should be noted that sailing west from Mesoamerica would end up in the vicinity of the Philippines clear across the Pacific, and west across Lake Erie in the Great Lakes of North America, a distance of only 57 miles, and 241 miles in length, would hardly suggest a cause to take a ship.

Again, so to where did this third ship sail? 

Hagoth's shipyard in the Land of Promise

Perhaps there is an answer in the drift voyage of non-LDS Norwegian archaeologist and explorer Thor Heyerdahl, who sailed west from Peru and ended up in Polynesia. His vessel was a raft, which he dubbed Kon-Tiki after the name of an early Peruvian term for God, and was totally subjected to the ocean currents.

Earlier, Heyerdahl had been outspoken about his belief that early, pre-historic man from coastal South America had settled the eastern Polynesian Islands, and especially Easter Island or Rapa Nui. His suggestion as an archaeologist was ridiculed and he defamed—no “real” archaeologist paid any attention to Heyerdahl’s suggestion, so he set about to prove his point in a “drift voyage” hypothesis.

 The building of Thor Heyerdahl's Kon-Tiki

He gathered a crew of adventurers and constructed the raft out of balsa logs and other native materials in an indigenous style as recorded in illustrations by Spanish conquistadores. He intended to prove that early prehistoric South American populations had an important role in the settlement of east Polynesia. Even though his voyage was a huge success, the “established archaeologist community” paid little or no attention to Heyerdahl’s achievement. In fact, throughout the remainder of his life, the archaeologist community shunned Heyerdahl and refused to consider his proof that early Peruvians could have reached Polynesia in the simplest of sailing rafts—think what they could have done in Hagoth’s ship.

One Comment from a reader of an earlier similar post states: “I would add that we need to have the same attitudes about Book of Mormon “data.” When the Book of Mormon says two ships were lost (Alma 63:7–8), the idea that those were the ancestors of Polynesian people is a hypothesis.

It is an hypothesis, though a logical one, and certainly the best one yet formulated, but the error does not lie in the belief, but in the statement above: “When the Book of Mormon says two ships were lost (Alma 63:7–8),”since Mormon does not say that. His words show that only one ship possibly was lost: “And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward. And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not” (Alma 63:7-8, emphasis added). It should also be understood that we do not know that this ship sunk with all hand—it just might not have returned for other reasons, like all hands decided to stay in this new land.

Another Reader points out that: “Another possibility, as this new DNA data suggests, is that people could have traveled from the Americas to Polynesia later, even after the Book of Mormon record ends. The later travelers could also be Lehite descendants.”

It seems prudent to suggest that anything is possible. However, on this point, such a suggestion is not consistent with the statement being quoted. Mormon writes about an event that took place around 55 BC, when he states: “And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships” (Alma 63:7A). The first ship that sailed to “a land which was northward,” Mormon writes: “And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward. And it came to pass that they were never heard of more” (Alma 63:7B-8), This is followed by “And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not (Alma 63:8). It should be clear that these events took place around 55 BC, not after the demise of the Nephites, and the movement to Polynesia was done by Lamanites.