Colonisation, mobility and exchange in New Zealand prehistory.

Walter, Richard ; Jacomb, Chris ; Bowron-Muth, Sreymony 等

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Introduction

New Zealand was settled during the last phase of the Austronesian expansion that commenced around 3300 BP, when Lapita peoples moved down the coasts of New Guinea and into the Oceanic world beyond. In Papua New Guinea and the northern Solomon Islands these new groups interacted with communities whose ancestors had crossed the Wallace Line into the Pleistocene landmass of Sahul some 37 000-47 000 years earlier. Beyond the Solomon Islands the vast seascape of the Pacific was uninhabited until the arrival of Lapita settlers, bringing with them new sailing and colonisation strategies. In Polynesia the Lapita descendants pushed further east settling virtually every Polynesian island and arriving in New Zealand as the final stage of this migration at the end of the thirteenth century AD (Walter & Jacomb 2007) (Figure 1). Once settled, New Zealand lost contact with the tropical homelands and its prehistory proceeded with virtually no further involvement with the rest of the Oceanic world.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Because of its isolation New Zealand prehistory has been largely conceived in its own terms (Walter 2004). Interest in wider Pacific connections has been restricted to questions of origins, and the timing and technology of discovery. In this paper we look at similarities in colonising and exchange behaviour between New Zealand Maori and Austronesian colonists elsewhere in Oceania, making particular use of obsidian as a marker. We document distinctive patterns in New Zealand archaeology that reflect continuity in traditions of colonisation, mobility and exchange that were introduced into the Pacific 3000 years earlier in western Melanesia. We summarise these patterns before turning to New Zealand.

Obsidian exchange and colonisation in western Melanesia

There are several high quality obsidian sources in the Bismarck Archipelago and elsewhere in eastern Papua New Guinea. Amongst these, the Talasea source of West New Britain was used during the Pleistocene and rapidly adopted by the new Austronesian settlers. The early Austronesian sites display a distinctive pattern of obsidian movement associated with colonisation. In the post-colonisation phases a new pattern of obsidian exchange emerges associated with the development of trade networks.

Archaeologists have noted an early pulse in the use of imported obsidians in Lapita and other Austronesian regions of western Melanesia. These early assemblages contain larger pieces than in later periods as measured by weight, thickness and length of flakes and cores. Additionally there is a relatively greater number of large cortical blocks. These factors suggest direct access to source supplies, rather than down-the-line exchange. In the south-east Solomon Islands three Lapita sites have well-described obsidian assemblages. Nanggu (SZ-8) is located on Nendo (Santa Cruz) and was occupied for about 100 years from around 3300 BP while Nenumbo (RF-2) and Ngamanie (RF-6) in the Reef Islands were occupied for shorter periods between 3145-2825 BP and 2800-2300 BP respectively (Jones et al. 2007; Green & Jones 2008). Sheppard (1993) assigns 97 per cent of the obsidian from the three sites (n = 987) to Talasea more than 2000km to the west. An estimate of the quantity of obsidian and the weight per cubic metre of sediment is shown in Table 1 and indicates a high initial density of obsidian followed by a decline through time, with an increase in the relative importance of chert sourced from about 100km distant (Sheppard 1993). The amount of obsidian transported from Talasea would have required multiple canoe loads and, since there are no known Lapita sites between the south-east Solomons and the source zone, this would have involved direct procurement (Sheppard 1993).

Austronesian settlers arrived in south coast Papua about 2000 BP and exploited obsidian from sources on Fergusson Island 350km to the east. In the Early Period the obsidian pieces were again larger than ever; there were more cortical flakes and the obsidian was reduced less thoroughly. There was presumably less need to conserve raw material and again, the material is believed to have been obtained directly from source (Irwin & Holdaway 1996).

The Early Period sites demonstrate a more casual use of imported stone than would be predicted by economising models, where precious resources are used with care. In the ReefSanta Cruz Islands the obsidian shows little evidence of pre-processing to reduce transport costs and add value to the pieces. Core reduction relied on relatively wasteful freehand, hard-percussion methods with scant evidence for standardised core preparation and reduction strategies (Sheppard 1993). Furthermore 30 per cent of the cores were discarded before they were exhausted. In Early Period sites on Mailu Island on the Papuan coast cores had fewer flake scars than in later periods, indicating less complete reduction, and the flakes were larger. The obsidian assemblages in both regions provide no evidence for the type of economising behaviour one would expect with declining access to a valuable raw material and there appears to be no direct relationship between distance from source and reduction methods. The implication is that in these colonisation phase sites the value of obsidian '... was not that of a scarce utilitarian commodity" (Sheppard 1993: 135).

In all regions surveyed there is a reduction through time in the absolute and relative quantities of obsidian, an increase in the abundance of local chert, and a decline in cortical cores suggesting less direct or frequent access to the supply areas. This decline in importation coincided with the adoption of a more conservative approach to use and discard, reflected in a reduction in the mean weight, length and thickness of obsidian pieces, and in the size of discarded cores and flakes (Sheppard 1993; Irwin & Holdaway 1996). Along the Papuan coast Irwin (1991) and Irwin & Holdaway (1996) report a late period increase in the relative abundance of obsidians (Figure 2) coinciding with the emergence of formal trade networks involving down the line gifting and commodity transactions.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

'Coloniser mode' and 'trader mode' exchange

Observing differences between Early and Late Period obsidian movement on the Papuan coast, Irwin (1991) suggested that two different modes of exchange were represented. 'Coloniser mode' exchange involved a pulse of exotic imports during a sustained colonisation event. This material may have been incidental to frequent communication between related communities during a period of expansion, in which case the 'value' of the obsidian may not have been as a commodity item. In a later 'trader mode', obsidian was transported as a commodity through coastal trade networks.

The concept of 'coloniser mode' exchange was taken up by Specht (2002), who noted that if Mailu is a specific case of a more general Austronesian pattern, a pulse of obsidian should be observed in the earliest Lapita sites throughout the region. The pieces should be larger than in later periods and a '... distinction between sites with large or small pieces of obsidian might then allow recognition of some sites as part of a colonisation front' (Specht 2002: 39). Specht found six Lapita sites where the mean weight of obsidian was highest in the colonisation phase, supporting the pulse model, and also noted wasteful use practices regardless of distance to source confirming the absence of distance-dependent utilisation strategies (Specht 2002).

The New Zealand case

There is still debate about when the ancestral canoes arrived in New Zealand from tropical east Polynesia, but the general consensus is that colonisation commenced no earlier than the last half of the thirteenth century AD (Walter & Jacomb 2007). New Zealand is a large continental landmass spanning sub-tropical to sub-Antarctic latitudes. The colonists brought a tropical economy that fared poorly in New Zealand. Horticulture was restricted to the north (Figure 3) and based on a limited range of Polynesian cultigens, while pig and fowl, important Polynesian domesticates, were not successfully transferred. On the other hand New Zealand had, at least initially, abundant meat resources including ground-nesting marine birds, forest birds, flightless birds (including the giant moa) and sea mammals. Horticulture was established immediately but hunting was a big part of the earliest economy, especially in the south. The continental geology offered a diverse range of industrial stone including fine-grained argillites and basalts, flints, cherts, obsidians and nephrite.

Of the many suitable rock types, five had particular significance in the stone tool industry (Figure 4). Three of these were used to make flaked adzes: Tahanga basalt, metasomatised argillites from the northern South Island and argillites from the southern coast. Adzes were also made of nephrite from the western South Island using a cutting and abrading technology. Obsidian from Mayor Island in the Bay of Plenty is the most important of more than 20 obsidian sources located in the northern North Island (Sheppard 2004). These five sources are the highest quality tool-grade material available in the country and all are found in archaeological sites dating to the early fourteenth century. This attests to a period of extremely efficient exploration. Within a decade of the first sites appearing on the landscape, four of the five materials were circulating through inter-regional exchange networks. The fifth material, nephrite, had a more restricted range at that time but after about the sixteenth century became the most prized and widely moved resource in the country.

Dating has always been a problem in New Zealand. Factors include the short chronology, the limited number of stratified sites and the fact that New Zealand prehistory sits within a section of the radiocarbon calibration curve containing particularly large 'wiggles'. Here we divide the archaeological record into 'Early' and 'Late' periods with a dividing line at AD 1500. This division allows us to consider a maximum number of sites while maintaining confidence in the relative chronology. It is not an entirely arbitrary treatment since some of the main changes in the sequence occur about AD 1450-1500, including: changes in material culture and art forms, the appearance of fortified sites, the extinction of moa and the decline in big game hunting (Davidson 1984; Holdaway & Jacomb 2000; Walter & Jacomb 2007). Treated this way, the use and distribution of stone resources in New Zealand shows strong parallels with Lapita and Lapita-derived colonisations in Melanesia.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

Mayor Island obsidian

There are geochemical techniques for sourcing New Zealand obsidians (Sheppard 2004) but Mayor Island obsidian (MIO) has a distinctive olive-green colouration in transmitted light, and hand specimen identification is generally considered to be reasonably reliable (Moore 1988). Much of the data in this paper is based on hand specimen identification by the field archaeologists.

Figure 4 shows the distribution area of MIO in sites of the Early Period. The Kermadecs, Norfolk Island, Auckland Island and Chatham Island samples set the known limits for the prehistoric distribution of MIO (Leach 1973; Leach et al. 1986; Anderson & McFadgen 1990; Anderson et al. 1997; Anderson 2000, Anderson & O'Regan 2000). Within a century these islands lost all contact with mainland New Zealand until the arrival of European vessels in the nineteenth century.

Most early sites contain abundant flakes in other materials: porcellanite, silcrete and flint. Figure 5 shows the relative abundance of MIO in Early Period sites plotted against distance from source assuming shortest coastal routes. In fact, much movement was probably via inland routes (Walter 1988; Scott 2008) and the assumption of coastal travel will inflate distances, especially within 300km of source, but will not greatly affect relative distances. Figure 5 shows a decline in relative abundance with distance, but even 1500-2000km from the source MIO is present at up to 15 per cent of the flake assemblages. Figure 5 underrepresents the significance of MIO since a high proportion of the flakes in each assemblage are waste flakes from adze making. A more accurate picture would be to plot the relative abundance of MIO against locally available flake tool material. Unfortunately, there is not much known about the full range of sources available and the best we can do is focus on a small number of sites where we can be confident the alternative sources were obtained within about 150km (Figure 6). Figure 6 only includes sites located 500km or more from Mayor Island since 500km seems to be the local or 'supply zone' for MIO (see Figure 5).

In an earlier study of MIO distribution Seelenfreund-Hirsch (1985) demonstrated that, when the relative abundance of MIO is considered by weight, there is an apparent increase in relative abundance with distance. In an argument reminiscent of those raised later by Specht, Sheppard and Irwin in the Melanesian cases Seelenfreund-Hirsh noted that:

   '... it could be argued that the increased percentage of Mayor
   Island obsidian is related to its higher value in areas further
   removed from the source' (Seelenfreund-Hirsch 1985: 123).

Seelenfreund-Hirsch (1985) also pointed out that the general distance decay trend (e.g. Figure 5) is essentially linear and thus implies direct procurement from source. Again, a similar argument for direct procurement of obsidians over long distances during colonisation phases has been made for Lapita and south coast Papua.

An economising model would predict a more thrifty use of MIO at distance from source as artisans maximise value (Sheppard 1993; Holdaway 2004). The Kawatiri and Heaphy river sites show the opposite. The sites are located about 1200 and 1300km from Mayor Island respectively. Both sites are small, coastal settlements occupied for up to perhaps a few decades during the early fourteenth century (Jacomb et al. 2004). At Kawatiri an excavation of 88[m.sup.2] recovered 2823 stone flakes, including 277 flakes of MIO. In total 60 per cent of the MIO flakes had been discarded with no sign of use or edge modification. The Heaphy River Mouth site produced 670 flakes, including 116 pieces of MIO, in an excavation of 45[m.sup.2]. The proportion of used to unused flakes was nearly identical to Kawatiri with 61 per cent of the obsidian showing no evidence of use (Table 2). Most of the unused flakes at both sites are within a useable size range indicating a similar lack of economising behaviour demonstrated for the Reef-Santa Cruz sites (Sheppard 1993). A similar observation can be made in relation to the size of discarded cores in Early Period sites. An examination of core size shows little correlation with distance (r2 = 0.016) again suggesting that the value placed on MIO does not fit a simple cost-benefit model (Figure 7).

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]

Figure 8 shows the ratio of obsidian to other flake material in sites dating to the late period. Comparing this with Figure 5, it is apparent that a major contraction of the MIO distribution networks had occurred by AD 1500. This figure signals the effective removal of the South Island from the obsidian distribution network.

An increase in the efficiency of obsidian use has been documented in the post-colonisation phases in Oceania, which is taken as an indication of the increasing value of the resource as access to supplies changed. In New Zealand this is difficult to observe. Within a distance of 500km or so from the source, access to MIO remained approximately stable for the full duration of prehistory, so it is necessary to look at Early Period sites located further than 500km from Mayor Island. There are few early sites that are stratified and, given the span of the radiocarbon determinations, only a small number can be reliably sorted to relative age. Of these even fewer have quantitative data available on the obsidian assemblages. We have identified a small group of early sites or strata that can be identified as sequential and which provide quantitative data on changing obsidian use (Figure 9).

[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]

The mean size of obsidian flakes at the two South Island west coast sites of Kawatiri and Heaphy are statistically indistinguishable (t = -0.42, p = 0.679, df = 156) and have been treated as a single assemblage. The Purakaunui site is a small coastal settlement with a simple two phase stratigraphy, although the calibrated radiocarbon dates overlap at lsd (Latham 2005). The first occupation, Layer 4, commenced in the mid to late fourteenth century followed by a short period of abandonment. A second occupation occurred in the early to mid fifteenth century and the site was abandoned by AD 1500. Thus both layers fall into the Early Period. The analysed sub-set of 1172 flakes from Purakaunui included 199 pieces of MIO (Gay 2004). Mean flake length reduced by 34 per cent between the two layers, contrasting with a 7 per cent increase in the length of local material (chert and chalcedony). The mean weight of obsidian pieces dropped between layers from 0.5g to 0.1g. This decline in size is consistent with observations by Gillies (1981) who notes a highly significant difference in obsidian weight (t = 8.83, p = 0.002, df = 16) between the Tiwai Point and Long Beach sites (Layer 3). Both these early sites are located in southern New Zealand: Tiwai Point dates to the early to mid fourteenth century (Sutton & Marshall 1980) and Long Beach Layer 3 to the late fourteenth to early fifteenth century (Hamel & Leach 1980; Leach & Hamel 1981).

[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]

Changes in nephrite use

In New Zealand, coloniser mode exchange is evidenced by a pulse in long-distance obsidian movement which declined sharply within a few generations of colonisation. Following this period obsidian remained widely available within 500km from source, but never again matched the early distribution patterns. A second pulse of long-distance exchange in the late period is analogous to the 'trader mode' exchange of island Melanesia. This second event involved the long-distance movement of nephrite deriving from rivers in the south-western South Island where there were never major population levels (Adams et al. 2007). Nephrite was discovered during the first wave of exploration and used on a small scale from at least the early fourteenth century, although it was in limited circulation. By the eighteenth century, nephrite adzes were distributed in high numbers throughout the South Island and were in use in lesser frequencies throughout the North Island. Nephrite was not only a superior cutting tool, but by the early historical period it had taken on a ceremonial significance and ornaments in nephrite were passed between individuals and tribes in ritual exchange--as is still practised today. Nephrite ornaments were used on the east coast of the South Island by at least the sixteenth century and by the time of Captain Cook's arrival were observed as far north as the north of the North Island. By as early as the sixteenth century the working and distribution of nephrite artefacts appears to have been centred on the east coast of the South Island where a few sites, such as Hohoupounamu, may have been major manufacturing and distribution centres (Davidson 1984). By the late eighteenth century the South Island's Ngai Tahu tribe controlled nephrite production (Anderson 1998). Figure 10 shows the changing ratio of nephrite to non-nephrite adze material in a selection of South Island sites (see also Jacomb 1995). The sites are arranged approximately according to age with the earlier sites to the left and most recent to the right. Hohoupounamu dates from the early sixteenth century while Kaiapoia Pa was occupied into the first decades of the nineteenth century.

[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]

Discussion: from 'coloniser mode' to 'trader mode' exchange in New Zealand

The New Zealand data show evidence of a short, early pulse in the long-distance transport of MIO commencing, in radiocarbon terms, immediately upon settlement. The use patterns of MIO for the duration of this pulse have all the hallmarks of 'coloniser mode' exchange described by Irwin (1991) for coastal Papua New Guinea and as represented in early Lapita exchange systems elsewhere in western Melanesia. The pulse lasted about a century, during a period of population expansion, exploration and the acquisition of environmental knowledge. The key question is: what drives the establishment of 'coloniser mode' exchange in settler communities? Is it something to do with the perceived value (utilitarian or otherwise) of the materials that were transported, or is the movement of raw material ancillary to the social act of long-distance interaction itself? The New Zealand case provides some insights into this question.

The utilitarian value of MIO cannot be overlooked; it is the highest quality flake material in the country and remained the most important cutting tool within 500km of source until the arrival of iron. But the range of alternatives and the profligate manner of its early use suggests that more was involved in its transportation than its utilitarian value. A number of authors have suggested that the key factor in the early pulse of long-distance exchange was the maintenance of homeland connections (Green & Kirch 1997; Green & Anson 2000). This might have been about securing continued access to a valued material when colonising new environments with unknown resource bases. Kirch (1988) suggests that long-distance exchange during a formative period may have provided a 'lifeline' to the securely established communities of the homelands which could provide critical resources at times of environmental crisis, or suitable marriage partners to supplement demographically small and unstable groups on the frontiers of an expanding colonisation front. Perhaps, as Specht (2002: 44) argues, long-distance exchange in the colonisation phase may have been a conscious attempt to replicate the homelands including '... the social and ideological contexts within which obsidian and other goods were essential and valuable components'. Sheppard (1993) has suggested that Talasea obsidian may have had a symbolic association; the process of acquisition from the homelands, rather than its actual use, imbued the material with its highest value.

These explanations focus on the importance of a 'homeland' but this does not fit the New Zealand case. New Zealand was not colonised through rolling expansion or diffusion from a single zone (an internal homeland), but via a spatially discontinuous process of rapid coastal exploration and settlement. In the New Zealand case the key factor is not about connections to a homeland, but about maintaining interaction with related groups during a period of social and demographic establishment. This is an expression of a common Pacific migrant strategy used to maintain effective reproduction in small, fragile founder communities. In Tokelau during the historic period, for example, Green and Green (2007) discuss the demographic mechanisms involved in the repopulation of islands. They report:

   '... strategies of maintaining contact with communities of origin
   and association for a period after the founding of migrant
   settlements have pragmatic and evident effects in ensuring access
   to spouses of acceptable kin relationship distance within
   culturally affiliated populations' (Green & Green 2007:251).

Connections were not just with the homeland, but with communities of Tokelauans resident in Samoa, New Zealand and elsewhere. In the Reef-Santa Cruz Islands the nearest culturally and linguistically related peoples were located in the Bismarck Archipelago 2000kin to the west. In New Zealand, they were scattered around the coasts of the North and South Islands in small, often isolated, communities.

The importance of maintaining these links was not just to assure genetic reproduction and demographic stability, but to guarantee social reproduction--those mechanisms which perpetuate across generations aspects of social structure and tradition (Bourdieu & Passeron 1977). Successful social reproduction depends on the ability of communities to participate meaningfully in activities which serve to reproduce social order and institutions, as well as to structure and reinforce social and personal identity. Such acts include gifting and exchange, funerary rituals, rites of passage, marriage negotiations and various acts of competition and rivalry. This requires access to communities who are culturally related, but also sufficiently distant in social terms. We suggest that in New Zealand long-distance communication systems developed in the colonisation phase with the role of linking small, scattered settler communities into a viable social network that would provide the mechanisms for social reproduction including access to marriage partners of appropriate genealogical connection. The Bay of Plenty is highly accessible via either coastal or inland routes (Walter 1988) and, while mobility was high, materials of greatest technological value and high availability were passed through these networks. The apparent profligacy of MIO use was a reflection of availability--it could be gathered at a very low cost, and a great deal could be moved in a single canoe load.

In this model, the decline in the long-distance movement of MIO occurred at the point where there were sufficient numbers of stable communities in a region to assure demographic and social reproduction without recourse to long-distance networks. In Polynesia, founder communities have been described as possessing a high degree of potential fertility and of adopting a flexible range of demographic controls, including the importation of persons from appropriately affiliated communities. Annual population growth figures of 13 per cent have been reported during the first five years of settlement on Atafu and on Nukunonu 4.4 per cent annual growth was reported in the first two decades following population depletion by slavery (Maude 1981; Green & Green 2007). At this rate a founding population of as few as 60 people in New Zealand could result, through the budding off of daughter communities, in the emergence of local regions which were demographically and socially viable within four or five generations or well within a century and a half. This coincides with the duration of the early pulse in long-distance activities witnessed by the distribution patterns of MIO.

The collapse of the early long-distance networks occurred by AD 1500 and, from that time, adze production relied on locally available materials and the important, high quality stone sources of the earlier period were distributed across more restricted regional zones. The sole exception to this was nephrite which, after AD 1500, became increasingly important for tool and ornament production and acquired status and ceremonial associations. By late prehistory nephrite was circulating through national trade networks centred on manufacturing zones located on the east coast of the South Island. While other items were undoubtedly circulating in late period networks, nephrite is the only archaeological witness to the emergence of 'trader mode' exchange in late New Zealand prehistory.

Conclusion

In this paper we compared early exchange in New Zealand to the Melanesian record, pointing out that the short, early pulse in the long-distance movement of MIO is analogous to pulses that occur during colonisation phases in Lapita and other early Austronesian communities. This provides a useful insight into some recent revisions of the New Zealand sequence (e.g. Anderson 1991) which have advanced the date of first settlement from the mid ninth to the late thirteenth century AD (Walter & Jacomb 2007). In previous models the 'early' sites referred to in this paper were assigned to a 'moa hunting' or 'Archaic' phase lasting 500 years or more. It is now appropriate to see them as part of a short 'coloniser' phase of only a century or so involving rapid exploration and the establishment of small, spatially separated colonies linked by long-distance communication networks.

The New Zealand case also provides insight into early Oceanic archaeology. In particular, we argue that the importance of early long-distance interaction is not necessarily about maintaining links between colonies and homeland, but about securing social and biological reproduction for isolated communities on an expanding colonisation front. The similarity of colonisation strategies amongst the communities surveyed in this paper raises the question of whether 'colonisation mode' exchange derives from deep Austronesian traditions relating to kinship, ritual and social reproduction, or whether it is a more universal adaptive strategy of migrant groups.

Acknowledgements

A version of this paper was presented at the Fifth Lapita Conference in Nukualofa, Kingdom of Tonga in 2005. The authors acknowledge the useful comments from conference participants, especially Atholl Anderson. In addition we received invaluable feedback and advice from Roger Green, Thegn Ladefoged and Matthew Spriggs.

Received: 13 July 2009; Accepted: 25 September 2009; Revised: 7 December 2009

References

ADAMS, C.J., R.J. BECK & H.J. CAMPBELL. 2007. Characterisation and origin of New Zealand nephrite jade using its strontium isotopic signature. Lithos 97: 307-22.

ANDERSON, A.J. 1991. The chronology of colonisation in New Zealand. Antiquity 65: 767-95.

--1998. The welcome of strangers: an ethnohistory of southern Maori AD 1650-1850. Dunedin: Otago University Press.

--2000. Implications of prehistoric obsidian transfer in south Polynesia. Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association, Bulletin 20:117-23.

ANDERSON, A.J. & B. MCFADGEN. 1990. Prehistoric two-way voyaging between New Zealand and east Polynesia: Mayor Island obsidian on Raoul Island, and possible Raoul Island obsidian in New Zealand. Archaeology in Oceania 25: 37-42.

ANDERSON, A.J. & G. O'REGAN. 2000. To the final shore: prehistoric colonisation of the sub-antarctic islands in south Polynesia, in A.J. Anderson & T. Murray (ed.) Australian archaeologist: collected papers in honour of Jim Allen: 440-54. Canberra: Coombes Academic Publishing.

ANDERSON, A.J., W. AMBROSE, F. LEACH & M. WEISLER. 1997. Material sources of basalt and obsidian artefacts from a prehistoric site on Norfolk Island, South Pacific. Archaeology in Oceania 32: 39-46.

BOURDIEU, P. & J.C. PASSERON. 1977. Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage.

DAVIDSON, J.M. 1984. The prehistory of New Zealand. Auckland: Longman Paul.

GAY, J.W. 2004. Selected artefact assemblages from Purakaunui (144/21) excavated during 2001, 2002 and 2003. Unpublished BA (Hons) dissertation, University of Otago.

GILLIES, K. 1981. Prehistoric use of obsidian in Murihiku. Unpublished BA (Hons) dissertation, University of Otago.

GREEN, R. & D. ANSON. 2000. Excavations at Vunavaung (SDI), Rakival village, Watom Island, Papua New Guinea. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 20:95-118.

GREEN, R. & V. GREEN. 2007. An accent on atolls in approaches to population histories of Remote Oceania, in P. Kirch & J.L. Rallu (ed.) The growth and collapse of Pacific Island societies: archaeological and demographic perspectives: 232-56. Honolulu (HI): University of Hawai'i Press.

GREEN, R.C. & M. JONES. 2008. The absolute age of SE-RF-6 (Ngamanie) and its relation to SE-RF-2 (Nenumbo): two decorated Lapita sites in the south-east Solomon Islands. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 29: 5-18.

GREEN, R.C. & P.V. KIRCH. 1997. Lapita exchange systems and their Polynesian transformations: seeking explanatory models, in M.I. Weisler (ed.) Prehistoric long-distance interaction in Oceania: an interdisciplinary approach: 19-37. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association.

HAMEL, G.E. & H.M. LEACH. 1980. Radiocarbon dates from Long Beach, Otago, New Zealand. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter 22: 128.

HOLDAWAY, R. & C. JACOMB. 2000. Rapid extinction of the moas (Aves: Dinornithiformes): model, test and implications. Science 287: 2250-54.

HOLDAWAY, S. 2004. Continuity and change. Melbourne: La Trobe University.

IRWIN, G. 1991. Themes in the prehistory of coastal Papua and the Massim, in A. Pawley (ed.) Man and a half." essays in Pacific anthropology and ethnobiology in honour of Ralph Bulmer: 503-10. Auckland: The Polynesian Society.

IRWIN, G. & S. HOLDAWAY. 1996. Colonisation, trade and exchange: from Papua to Lapita, in J. Davidson, G. Irwin, B. Leach, A. Pawley & D. Brown (ed.) Oceanic culture history: essays in honour of Roger Green: 225-35. Dunedin: New Zealand Journal of Archaeology Special Publication.

JACOMB, C. 1995. Panau, periodisation, and northeast South Island prehistory. Unpublished MA dissertation, University of Otago.

JACOMB, C., B. TUCKER & R. WALTER. 2004. Excavations at the Buller River site (K29/8), January 2004. Archaeology in New Zealand 47:118-36.

JONES, M.D., F.J. PETCHEY, R.C. GREEN, P.J. SHEPPARD & M. PHELAN. 2007. The Marine AR for Nenumbo (Solomon Islands): a case study in calculating reservoir offsets from paired sample data. Radiocarbon 49: 95-102.

KIRCH, P.V. 1988. Long-distance exchange and island colonization: the Lapita case. Norwegian Archaeological Review 21: 103-17.

LATHAM, P.S.M. 2005. Investigating change over time in the prehistoric fish catch at Purakaunui. Unpublished MA dissertation, University of Otago.

LEACH, B.F. 1973. Obsidian in the Chatham Islands. New Zealand Archaeolgical Association Newsletter 16: 104-106.

LEACH, B.F., A. ANDERSON, D. SUTTON, R. BIRD, P. DUERDEN & E. CLAYTON. 1986. The origin of prehistoric obsidian artefacts from the Chatham and Kermadec Islands. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 8: 143-70.

LEACH, H.M. & G.E. HAMEL. 1981. Archaic and classic Maori relationships at Long Beach, Otago: the artefacts and activity areas. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 3: 109-41.

MAUDE, H.E. 1981. Slavers in paradise: the Peruvian slave trade in Polynesia, 1862-4. Stanford (CA): Stanford University Press.

MOORE, P.R. 1988. Physical characteristics of New Zealand obsidians and their uses in archaeological sourcing studies. Unpublished report prepared for the New Zealand Geological Survey, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.

SCOTT, C. 2008. A cost-surface analysis of the exchange of obsidian in prehistoric New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 29: 57-87.

SEELENFREUND-HIRSCH, A. 1985. The exploitation of Mayor Island obsidian in prehistoric New Zealand. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Otago.

SHEPPARD, P.J. 1993. Lapita lithics: trade/exchange and technology. A view from the Reefs/Santa Cruz. Archaeology in Oceania 28: 121-37.

--2004. Moving stones: comments on the archaeology of spatial interaction in New Zealand, in L. Furey & S. Holdaway (ed.) Change through time: 50 years of New Zealand archaeology (New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph 26): 147-68. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association.

SPECHT, J. 2002. Obsidian, colonizing and exchange, in S. Bedford, C. Sand & D. Burley (ed.) Fifty years in the field: essays in honour and celebration of Richard Shutler Jr's archaeological career: 37-49. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association.

SUTTON, D.G. & Y.M. MARSHALL. 1980. Coastal hunting in the subantarctic zone. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 2: 25-49.

WALTER, R. 1988. The development and use of communication networks in the prehistoric North Island of New Zealand. Archaeology in Oceania 23: 71-7.

--2004. New Zealand archaeology and its Polynesian connections, in L. Furey & S. Holdaway (ed.) Change through time: 50 years of New Zealand archaeology (New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph 26): 125-46. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association.

WALTER, R. & C. JACOMB. 2007. New Zealand, in D. Pearsall (ed.) Encyclopaedia of archaeology. Volume 3: 1738-47. New York: Academic Press.

Richard Walter (1), Chris Jacomb (1) & Sreymony Bowron-Muth (2)

(1) Anthropology Department, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand (Email: richard, walter@otago.ac.nz)

(2) Canterbury Museum, Rolleston Avenue, Christchurch 8013, New Zealand

Table 1. Estimated quantities of stone (in kg and kg/m' of sediment)
transported to the three Lapita sites. All figures from Sheppard
(1993).

            Obsidian                    Chert

Site   Weight   Weight/[m.sup.2]   Weight   Weight/[m.sup.2]

SZ-8   245.0          34.6         161.0          23.4
RF-2     9.5         17.36          12.6          23.1
RF-6    26.4          6.12          45.4          10.5

Table 2. Obsidian flakes from Kawatiri and Heaphy sites, west
coast of the South Island.

                   Quantity    %    length (mm)

Buller (un-used)     119      60%      22.9
Buller (used)         79      40%      34.6
Heaphy (un-used)      45      61%      21.5
Heaphy (used)         29      39%      33.7