Waihou journeys: the archaeology of 400 years of Maori settlement.

Waihou journeys: the archaeology of 400 years of Maori settlement. CAROLINE PHILLIPS. Waihou journeys: the archaeology of 400 years ofMaori settlement. xiv+194 pages, 113 figures & tables. 2000.Auckland: Auckland University Press; 1-86940-222-7 paperback $39.95. The Pacific is one of the world's archaeological growthpoints, the increasing sophistication so��phis��ti��cate?v. so��phis��ti��cat��ed, so��phis��ti��cat��ing, so��phis��ti��catesv.tr.1. To cause to become less natural, especially to make less naive and more worldly.2. in publishing its resultsevidenced, whatever differences in detail, in both these books.Moreover, Roger Green, Emeritus Professor of Prehistory prehistory,period of human evolution before writing was invented and records kept. The term was coined by Daniel Wilson in 1851. It is followed by protohistory, the period for which we have some records but must still rely largely on archaeological evidence to at AucklandUniversity, supervised part of Caroline Phillips' Ph.D thesis, ofwhich Waihou Journeys is the outcome, and, earlier in his career, workedin the area of New Zealand's North Island that Phillips has nowexamined in detail -- of which more below. Hawaiki is precisely an essay in historical anthropology; aformidably documented and challenging work, its flowingly clear prosevibrantly optimistic (if occasionally somewhat repetitive) in its claimsthat the state of research now makes possible the writing of thehistorical anthropology of what Polynesians perceive as their homeland.Patrick Kirch (Professor of Anthropology at Berkeley) and Green employwhat they call `triangulation triangulation:see geodesy. The use of two known coordinates to determine the location of a third. Used by ship captains for centuries to navigate on the high seas, triangulation is employed in GPS receivers to pinpoint their current location on earth. methodology' (a term derived fromsuveyors' usage) to bring `independent lines of evidence (fromarchaeology, comparative ethnography, biological anthropology Biological anthropology, or physical anthropology is a branch of anthropology that studies the mechanisms of biological evolution, genetic inheritance, human adaptability and variation, primatology, primate morphology, and the fossil record of human evolution. ,linguistics, comparative oral narrative, etc.) to bear on thereconstruction of some aspect of cultural history' (pp. 315-16),i.e. ancestral Polynesia. This weighty combination of disciplines isinvoked in order to reduce the potential `triangle of error' oftheir endeavour. To this end, Kirch & Green set out impressivequalifications. Together notching up `seven decades of continuous effortin the Polynesian field', between them they have worked in at least13 Polynesian societies and speak, or `have made significant effortsassembling vocabularies' (p. xiv) of, nine Polynesian languages Polynesian languages:see Malayo-Polynesian languages. . To proclaim such credentials at the onset is sensible. Thosefamiliar with the literature in this field, covering not only LapitaCulture Lapita cultureCultural complex of what were presumably the original human settlers of Melanesia, much of Polynesia, and parts of Micronesia. The Lapita people were originally from New Guinea or some other region of Austronesia. origins and antecedents, but also the relevance of historicallinguistics historical linguisticsn. (used with a sing. verb)The study of linguistic change over time in language or in a particular language or language family, sometimes including the reconstruction of unattested forms of earlier stages of a language. to `the reconstruction of the world of the AncestralPolynesian homeland' (p. 8), will not be surprised that the authorsanticipate `contention' when they `engage in dialogue acrossingrained scholarly traditions' (p. 9). In their emphasis oncultural reconstruction Kirch & Green see Proto-Polynesian (PPN PPN - Project-Programmer Number.A user-ID under TOPS-10 and its various mutant progeny at SAIL, BBN, CompuServe and elsewhere. Old-time hackers from the PDP-10 era sometimes use this to refer to user IDs on other systems as well. ) astheir key tool, a procedure unacceptable to those scholars who regardthe entire project of relating archaeology and historical linguisticsbereft of texts as approaching academic fantasy. The book's organization is simple. In Part I, the authorsexplain the theory and method of their phylogenetic phy��lo��ge��net��icadj.1. Of or relating to phylogeny or phylogenetics.2. Relating to or based on evolutionary development or history. model, defined as `agenealogical history of a group, usually graphed as a tree or as acladogram, which maps ancestor-descendant relationships' (p. 314),in order to chart Polynesian history satisfactorily, the anthropologicaland archaeological evidence each invoked independently by triangulation.Part II applies the phylogenetic model to portray in six chapters the`domain of Ancestral Polynesian culture' (p. 97). These cover thearchaic homeland's physical world and flora and fauna, itspeoples' economic life, `culinary complex' (a nice term),technology and material culture, social and political organization and`the spiritual world-view and ritual practices which structured theseasonal round' (p. 97). In each instance, though with varyingimpact, `strands of evidence -- linguistic, comparative ethnographic,and archaeological -- can be brought to bear through triangulation ...In every case, the comparative ethnographic corpus is essential forrobust [a favourite word] semantic reconstruction' (p. 97). Where, then, lay the Ancestral Polynesian homeland? Simply stated,it comprised central west Polynesia, the homeland of PPN speakers. Theevidence for the latter's language is based on PPN lexicalreconstructions derived from the POLLEX pollex/pol��lex/ (pol��eks) pl. pol��lices ? [L.] the thumb.pollex val��gus? deviation of the thumb toward the ulnar side. database, now containing `morethan 2,300 specific PPN reconstructions' (p. 46), this achievementlargely due to the work of Professor Bruce Biggs of Auckland University,sadly recently deceased. It is important to understand that Kirch & Green see theirreliance on lexical reconstruction as the initial stage of a continuinganalysis involving semantic reconstruction, mindful of 'the manycases in which the varied glosses for the modern cognates do not closelyagree in meaning' (p. 48). To this end they turn toPolynesia's `rich ethnographic corpus' (p. 48) where, herealso, aware of shortcomings in the ethnohistorical sources, they canoften cite recent research providing corrective historical insights (forexamples, see pp. 49-51). These comments are relevant to criticism Kirch & Green havereceived concerning their previous work. They note, but do notattribute, `chronic alienation' and `mutual contempt' (p. 290)as examples of assessments of attempts to correlate archaeological andlinguistic methods in this field. They also refer (p. 292) to the chargeof `the nonutility of language-based models in Melanesia', citingother scholars' refutations of these criticisms. By contrast, inits philosophy, research design and execution, Hawaiki is non-parochialin vision, standing firmly within the tradition of broad-based Pacificanthropology stretching back to Burrows, Emory, Haddon, Rivers andbeyond. Particularly because of the contentious implications of itsmethodology, it should be read (and, I think, welcomed) as a beginningof a new chapter in research on Polynesian and, more broadly, Oceanic,culture histories generically perceived, its emphasiscross-disciplinary, its scholastic arguments and alignments holistic anddialectically interrelated. `In anthropology, as in any science', Kirch and Greenmaintain, `history matters' (p. 284). In Waihou journeys CarolinePhillips, too, is concerned with history; with a historicalunderstanding of a small but significant region of Maori New Zealand New Zealand(zē`lənd), island country (2005 est. pop. 4,035,000), 104,454 sq mi (270,534 sq km), in the S Pacific Ocean, over 1,000 mi (1,600 km) SE of Australia. The capital is Wellington; the largest city and leading port is Auckland. .She has made `both a series of physical journeys and a journey ofdiscovery' (p. xii), exploring the past dwellers astride a��stride?adv.1. With a leg on each side: riding astride.2. With the legs wide apart.prep.1. On or over and with a leg on each side of.2. the WaihouRiver, adjacent to the Coromandel Peninsula. Known for many years inarchaeological and museum circles for the extraordinarily artefact-rich,and consequently much fossicked, site of Oruarangi Pa, by energeticfieldwork, building also on the labours of others, Phillips has producedan admirable account of four centuries of occupation, from initialfood-gathering forays from the Coromandel Cor`o`man´deln. 1. (Geol.) The west coast, or a portion of the west coast, of the Bay of Bengal.Coromandel gooseberrySee Carambola.Coromandel woodCalamander wood. , through periods ofincreasingly intense settlement to the radically changed economic andpolitical environment of 19th-century European colonization. Phillipsemploys four main forms of evidence: rich palaeoenvironmental data;detailed analyses of archaeological site surveys; information from19th-century Maori Land Court records (particularly well argued toprovide valuable dated ethnographic material) and European settlementaccounts; and results from limited archaeological excavations. Theresult is convincing history, perhaps providing, among other things, alikely model for similar work elsewhere in New Zealand, especially atother once swamp-prone regions. Time depth was short. By about the early 17th century, `a decisionwas made to stay' (p. 161), where, at some locations, living floorswere raised by at least 40 cm above flood levels, mainly by quarryingsubfossil shell from nearby natural shell banks. As settlementsincreased in number and size, especially at each end of the HaurakiPlains, some were fortified fortified (fôrt´fīd),adj containing additives more potent than the principal ingredient. (pa). One can envisage groups of settlersestablishing mana when ua (political and spiritual authority in theland), where chieftainship chief��tain?n.The leader or head of a group, especially of a clan or tribe.[Middle English cheftain, from Old French chevetain, from Late Latin and warfare emerged together, with invasionby other groups anxious to profit from successful flax-growing (theleaves had many uses, not least in weaving and plaiting) andeel-harvesting in season. Phillips gives a picture of much settlementmobility. Garden plots could last only two or three years due to soilexhaustion. Pa may have been occupied only briefly; `although 49fortifications have been located along the river, no more than five mayhave been inhabited at any one time' (p. 163) but, on excavationevidence, houses `do not seem to have changed in form significantlythroughout the 140-year period from 1690 to 1830' (p. 148). The author argues for increasing concentrations of power by a smallnumber of leaders (ariki) in the 18th century, when a few pa (e.g.Oruarangi) became very rich, not only in artefacts, eventually to beeclipsed, however, by Ngapuhi invaders from the north. In 1821 thiscaused a temporary evacuation of the Hauraki people south to theWaikato. On their return in 1830, living patterns began to changebecause of European arrivals, with increasing involvement in commercialfood and other production, settlements located `either close to thescattered gardens or the trading establishments' (p. 165). Europeangoods became much desired. Disease and the attractions of other areasreduced population numbers, while pa greatly declined in size. The oldorder was over. Phillips' account is well detailed and excellentlyillustrated, particularly her maps, though the absence of artefact See artifact. illustration is somewhat surprising. Of wider issues she raises, Iconfess some uncertainties. Although she rightly questions thelong-enduring polarized model in New Zealand prehistory between Archaicand Classic Maori, I cannot see that in this respect her study does muchmore than exemplify the sequence of phases up to and within the ClassicMaori phase, as argued in the 1960s by Green and Wilfred Shawcross --with, one could maintain, broader (stadial?) issues still open todebate. Phillips is surely right, however, to `challenge others in NewZealand and the Pacific to look for the small-scale culturaldevelopments which may lead to identification of the mechanisms ofchange' and to call for `the better understanding of the indigenousconcepts relating to settlement, social and political organisation'leading to `better interpretation of the archaeological data of thepost-contact, immediate pre-contact and beyond' (p. 170). Thisinvocation of such concepts, equally voiced in Hawaiki, is a usefulreminder that Pacific archaeology really does deal with people nowseeking not only more understanding of, but also more control over,their own history, and of the means whereby it is acquired. PETER GATHERCOLE, Darwin College, Cambridge CB3 9EU, England.p.gathercole@virgin.net