Beyond Lapita Pt 2

Question 1

The Emory and Sinnott Model, ca. 1965-Proposed!

Answer 1

1. See Nov 1 notes
2. In general cultural literature like to look at these to refer to even though not correct
3. Radiocarbon dates from 1960s is where they got their dates and that was the start of it so not understood correctly
4. Chronology not right
   4.1 Since based on linguistics Hawaii from Marquesas then Marquesas had to come first (wrong)

Question 2

Evidence (ca. 1965)

Answer 2

1. Excavations in Marquesas found pottery
   1.1 Some late Fijian, 700 BP
   1.2 Some is Marquesan!
   1.3 Thought/quickly assumed that it was Lapita
   1.4 Actual pottery likely traded from Fiji to Marquesas
   1.5 Probably someone who was Fijian who knew how to make pottery who made/took it to Marquesas
2. Hawaiian language shows Marquesan roots
3. Fishhook forms
   3.1 Might be a problem because made it independently
   3.2 Really functional (If not work change way to make it; Not something you make arty)
4. C14 dates (not known to be erroneous)
   4.1 1700 BP, Hane Dune, Marquesas (Actually 800 years later; Dating driftwood logs which isn’t the same as burning of wood dates (dating old wood))
   4.2 1900 BP, Puu Ali, Hawaii (still say it in travel literature) (Actually 1100 years later)

Question 3

The Chronology Debate, ca. 1985

Answer 3

1. Which is correct?
2. Paleoenvironmental evidence (proof people arrived even though no sites)
   2.1 Increased erosion
   2.2 Charcoal (People getting to island but not settling there)
3. Colonization sites (assurance for it being colonized by people)
   3.1 Features, architecture (physical evidence like fire hearts, house foundations, house posts) (Settled and stayed there for awhile)
   3.2 Evidence for introduced commensals (Rat and chicken bones for sure, pig and dog iffy)
   3.3 Evidence for bird extinction (Because rats eat eggs and rats have huge impacts on birds; Lots more birds who couldn’t fly)

Question 4

Voyaging debates, ca. 1992

Answer 4

1. Sharp (1956) “accidental colonization”
2. Irwin (1993) “Purposive Colonization”
   2.1 Sailing into the wind (Easy to go back home; Not see people go north or south because not easy to go home)
   2.2 “Arcs” of safe exploration (If failed go back home)

Question 5

Irwin’s Proposal

Answer 5

1. Suggesting by 2300 BP get to here and 2700 BP here and 1700 BP for Easter Island
2. Model to try and get archaeologists to prove him wrong and they couldn’t

Question 6

Chronometric Hygiene

Answer 6

1. Spriggs and Anderson (1993)
2. Rejected early dates
   2.1 No clear cultural context
   2.2 Old wood
   2.3 Anomalous sequences
3. New “Short” Chronology
   3.1 Hawaii and Tahiti after 1400 BP
   3.2 Cook Islands after 1200 BP
   3.3 Marquesas after 1600 BP
   3.4 New Zealand after 1000 BP

Question 7

The “Short” Chronology, ca. 1993

Answer 7

1. Lapita 2200 BP go right to 1400 BP to Society Islands and then 1400 BP Hawaii and 1000 BP New Zealand
2. Rough model because islands in between and made nobody happy

Question 8

Wilmshurst et al’s model, 2010

Answer 8

1. Synthesis of 1434 radiocarbon dates
2. Only “target” events
   2.1 Cultural materials
   2.2 Commensals (rats only)
3. Only “reliable” materials
   3.1 Short lived plants (nuts)

Question 9

Estimates for Colonization

Answer 9

1. Run carbondates into how statistically it would likely happen

Question 10

Wilmshurst et al’s 2010 Chronology

Answer 10

1. Now accepted as most likely
2. Earliest colonization of Society Islands, ~900-1000 BP
3. Rest of E. Polynesia ~900-800 BP
4. Arguments
   4.1 Abundance of sites = flotillas of colonization
   4.2 Artifact similarity = same culture
5. See similarities in artifacts and culture they originally came from
6. Short window of time for radiocarbon dates and a lot can happen in short period of time

Question 11

Evidence for Voyages and Interaction, after 1000 BP

Answer 11

1. Stone adze sourcing
   1.1 Tutuila, Samoa to Mangaia
   1.2 Kahoolawe, Hawaii to Tuamotu Islands
2. Oven stones
   2.1 Mo’orea to Pitcairn (Rock on Pitcairn eroded and not good for retaining heat for cooking)
3. Pearl shell transport
   3.1 Aitutaki to Mangaia
4. Oral histories for this as well

Question 12

The final word on East Polynesian colonization

Answer 12

1. Like Lapita in the way it was colonized
   1.1 Once discovered, many came
   1.2 Took 1500 years after Lapita to find East Polynesia
2. All East Polynesia after 1000 BP
3. Hawaii, New Zealand…some debate, but probably 800-900 BP
   3.1 Radiocarbon dating not precise
   3.2 Problem with deposits
   3.3 Problem with agreement on what to date