Editing Pre-Columbian transoceanic contact theories (section)

==== California canoes ====
[[File:Chumash Tomol 'Elye'wun paddlers, CINMS.jpg|thumb|right|''{{'}}Elye'wun'', a reconstructed Chumash [[tomol]]]]
Researchers including Kathryn Klar and Terry Jones have proposed a theory of contact between [[Native Hawaiians|Hawaiians]] and the [[Chumash people]] of [[Southern California]] between 400 and 800 CE. The sewn-plank canoes crafted by the Chumash and neighboring [[Tongva people|Tongva]] are unique among the indigenous peoples of North America, but similar in design to larger canoes used by Polynesians and Melanesians for deep-sea voyages. ''[[Tomol|Tomolo'o]]'', the [[Chumash language|Chumash]] word for such a craft, may derive from {{lang|haw|tumula{{okina}}au/kumula{{okina}}au}}, the Hawaiian term for the logs from which shipwrights carve planks to be sewn into canoes.<ref>{{Cite web |date=20 June 2005 |title=Did ancient Polynesians visit California? Maybe so. |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/06/20/MNG9GDBBLG1.DTL |access-date=31 January 2022 |publisher=San Francisco Chronicle}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Jones |first1=Terry L. |last2=Kathryn A. Klar |date=June 3, 2005 |title=Diffusionism Reconsidered: Linguistic and Archaeological Evidence for Prehistoric Polynesian Contact with Southern California |url=http://www.saa.org/publications/AmAntiq/70-3/Jones.html |url-status=dead |journal=American Antiquity |volume=70 |issue=3 |pages=457–484 |doi=10.2307/40035309 |jstor=40035309 |s2cid=161301055 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060927085144/http://www.saa.org/Publications/AmAntiq/70-3/Jones.html |archive-date=September 27, 2006 |access-date=March 6, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Adams |first1=James D. |last2=Cecilia Garcia |last3=Eric J. Lien |date=January 23, 2008 |title=A Comparison of Chinese and American Indian (Chumash) Medicine |journal=Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=219–25 |doi=10.1093/ecam/nem188 |pmc=2862936 |pmid=18955312 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>[http://cla.calpoly.edu/~tljones/ Terry Jones's homepage] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080511194439/http://cla.calpoly.edu/~tljones/ |date=May 11, 2008 }}, California Polytechnic State University.</ref> The analogous [[Tongva language|Tongva]] term, {{lang|xgf|tii'at}}, is unrelated. If it occurred, this contact left no genetic legacy in California or Hawaii. This theory has attracted limited media attention within California, but most archaeologists of the Tongva and Chumash cultures reject it on the grounds that the independent development of the sewn-plank canoe over several centuries is well-represented in the material record.<ref>For the argument against the Chumash—Polynesian contact theory, see {{Cite journal |last=Arnold |first=J.E. |year=2007 |title=Credit Where Credit is Due: The History of the Chumash Oceangoing Plank Canoe |journal=American Antiquity |volume=72 |issue=2 |pages=196–209 |doi=10.2307/40035811 |jstor=40035811 |s2cid=145274737}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=The Origins of a Pacific Coast Chiefdom: The Chumash of the Channel Islands |publisher=University of Utah Press |year=2001 |editor-last=Arnold |editor-first=Jeanne E. |location=Salt Lake City}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gamble |first=Lynn H. |year=2002 |title=Archaeological Evidence for the Origin of the Plank Canoe in North America |journal=American Antiquity |volume=67 |issue=2 |pages=301–315 |doi=10.2307/2694568 |jstor=2694568 |s2cid=163616908}}</ref>