Prehistoric stone monuments in the northern region of the Kula Ring.

Bickler, Simon H.

Introduction

During the twentieth century, explorers, ethnographers and geologists have recorded the presence of stone monuments in Papua New Guinea and hypothesised about their age, form and function (e.g. Riesenfeld 1950). However, in practice they have received very little detailed archaeological investigation. Those in the northern Massim area (Milne Bay) of Papua New Guinea (Figure 1), home of the famous Kula exchange system, have provoked a number of speculative papers seeking to establish their context and purpose (see e.g. Austen 1939; Damon 1979, 1983; Forth 1965). Underlying this interest are attempts to answer questions about the origins of settlement in the region, the presence of hereditary chieftainship in the Trobriands, and the development of the Kula.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

The Kula regional exchange system was described by Malinowski (1984 [1922]: 510) as 'a sociological mechanism of surpassing size and complexity'. As recorded in modern times, the Kula involves the exchange of shell necklaces and shell armbands, creating and breaking relationships between people who carry out a range of craft and agricultural specialisations. These specialisations include adze manufacture and food production as well as the exchanges of shell valuables that represent the most formal expression of the system (see e.g. papers in Leach & Leach 1983; Damon 2002). While much has been written on the workings of the Kula, the debates surrounding its origins, whether during prehistoric times (e.g. Egloff 1978) or in response to European colonisation (e.g. Macintyre 1994), have not yet reached a consensus.

There is almost no evidence of long-term occupation anywhere along the south-east Papua New Guinea (PNG) coastline or in the Massim earlier than 2000 BP. Pottery appears from 1900 BP along the southern coast and throughout the Massim (Bickler 1997), but this is more than 1500 years after the earliest appearance of pottery in the Lapita sites of the Bismarck Archipelago and other parts of Melanesia (see e.g. Kirch & Green 2001). However, Irwin (1983) has argued for a rapid adaptation of the area by migrants, probably speakers of Austronesian languages, in a fashion reminiscent of the Lapita settlement of Melanesia (see also Ross 1988, 1998 for more information on the linguistic models).

Various local ceramic traditions developed in the 800 years following 1900 BP along the south coast of PNG and throughout the Massim, where surface pottery scatters have characterised most sites (Bickler 1998; Egloff 1979). This has generally been referred to as the Early (Ceramic) Period (e.g. Allen 1977, 1984; Bulmer 1975; Irwin 1983, 1991). Major shifts in pottery styles and settlement patterns occur after this initial period. They start around the Port Moresby region at c. 1200 BP (Bickler 1997; Irwin 1983, 1991) and end in the western Massim around Woodlark Island about 600 BP (Bickler 1998).

The last few hundred years of prehistory in the area are characterised by the growth of specialised trade systems (e.g. Allen 1984, 1985; Irwin 1985). In the Amphletts the islanders became specialist potters, supplying their wares throughout the western Massim (Lauer 1974) and perhaps as far as Woodlark Island (Egloff 1979; Irwin 1991). On Woodlark itself, the regional speciality was its fine-grained stone, used for axe blades throughout the Massim (Bickler & Turner 2002). The value of this stone was immense, and in the Trobriands it was intricately entwined with notions of chieftainship (Irwin 1983). Intriguingly, the Woodlark Islanders most directly involved with the extraction of the stone and probably the production of the axes, occupied the lowest rung in the local, loosely defined, hierarchy of villages (Damon 1990). The rise of the specialist traders in the Massim is mirrored along the south coast (e.g. at Mailu (Irwin 1985) and Motupore (Allen 1984)).

Egloff (1978: 434) argues that the Kula probably came into existence no earlier than 500 BP and that 'it is reasonable to postulate that the kula once extended outside its present boundaries'. He locates its development to this context of specialisations and this fits with the ethnographic perspective. However, no direct evidence of Kula has been established prehistorically. Talking about the Kula without detailed data on the archaeological development of shell valuables is problematic, and none of these shell valuables have been identified in secure prehistoric contexts.

What archaeological evidence there is rests mostly on the production and exchange of pottery. There are two major contexts in which this pottery has been found on archaeological sites in the northern Massim. The first, and most common, context is in surface scatters found throughout the islands, probably relating to hamlets, villages and temporary occupation sites. The second context is provided by burials in pots, most commonly in caves, found throughout the Massim and dating to the later period (Bickler 1998; Egloff 1972). This was the preferred method of burial in the villages prior to the Christian missions. Secondary burials, including some with pots, have been described in the ethnographic literature and found in the stone monuments (see e.g. Seligmann 1910; Bickler 1998; Egloff 1972), and it is to these structures that we now turn.

The stone monuments

Charles Seligmann was amongst the earliest students of the stone monuments in the northern Massim (Seligmann & Strong 1906). He learnt little about them from local informants and in his day the sites apparently no longer performed any significant function. Malinowski (1965 [1935] I: 235, 342) hints at the presence of 'sacred stones', a large coral boulder or a heap of stones marking the 'village place' or emergence point for a particular sub-clan in various Trobriand villages. However, none of these appear to take the form of the more complex arrangements found elsewhere. Later visitors (e.g. Williams 1936) investigating these mysterious monuments added additional sites and more information regarding their internal organisation, and Austen (1939: 43) went so far as to suggest that they were burial sites, 'places of privileged burial' and observatories, constructed by Polynesians. Forth (1965) detailed some of the Woodlark stone arrangements around the northern village of Kaulay, but offered no additional interpretation beyond Austen's and Williams' suggestion that they might have functioned as observatories.

The most extensive survey was during the 1970s by geologists Ollier and colleagues, describing caves and stone monuments in northern Massim (e.g. Ollier & Pain 1978a, b; Ollier et al. 1970a, b, 1971a, b, 1973). They concluded: 'it is fairly certain that Trobriand megalithic structures were originally funerary monuments' (Oilier et al. 1973: 50). Like Austen (1939), this seems to be based mostly on the presence of secondary burial material found in the collapse of some of the larger monuments. Following up on some of the Woodlark data, Damon (1979, 1983) suggested possible ethnographic correlates between the modern cultures and the prehistoric people who built the structures. Damon's arguments were based on the strong spatial orientations that pervade the social organisation of groups living in the northern Massim. This is particularly evident in the analysis of the layout of villages and gardens. Damon (1979) showed that some of the larger monuments on Woodlark seemed to be organised in a similar way to the gardens, and he concluded that while more research was required, he was in little doubt that they were an indigenous development.

Local populations today generally have little knowledge of the monuments (apart from their location). Egloff (1979: 107), who excavated some test pits containing Early Period pottery near megaliths in the Trobriands, describes a comparable situation to the west: 'Contemporary Trobriand Islanders ascribe little importance to these massive monuments, nor do they consider their ancestors as having erected them'. This was the case on Woodlark and elsewhere during the fieldwork described below, although more detailed ethnographic research on some of the islands may modify the picture.

Distribution of the monuments

Our archaeological investigations have provided a new map of the monuments distributed over an extensive area, and a new interpretation of their date and social context. Archaeological survey in 1996 more than doubled the number of stone monuments recorded on Woodlark Island and identified others on nearby islands. The published data about the stone monuments from the Trobriand Islands including Kiriwina, Tuma, Kaileuna, Kuaio, Vakuta and Kitava, the Marshall Bennett Group including Gawa and Iwa, and eastwards to Woodlark Island could then be re-examined. There is no detailed information on date and context with the exception of Woodlark, where test excavations were carried out at a number of the larger sites. Most stones on the sites have collapsed and it is not always possible to accurately determine the original alignments. Despite such methodological limitations, this survey provides a useful starting point for future investigations of the sites.

The locations of stone monuments on Woodlark Island are shown in Figure 2. The more complex arrangements are concentrated around Kaulay Village in the north, one of the few good places with access to the sea along the northern coast. But Dikwayas Village, only two hours walk to the west, and also with some access to the sea at Waspimat Bay, has no recorded stone monument. Archaeological surveys carried out so far have concentrated on this area and in the south-east of the island where several less complex stone monuments were found, so there is some possible bias. Figure 3 shows a 3D reconstruction of one of the more complex sites, Bunmuyuw, near Kaulay.

[FIGURES 2-3 OMITTED]

Stone monuments are found on the Marshall Bennett Islands, neighbours to Woodlark (Figure 4). A stone arrangement was located on Iwa Island in the centre of Obomatu Village during a brief visit there in 1995. This monument was described as the 'anchor' of the village but otherwise did not seem to have any other obvious function. Damon (pers. comm.) also reports other stones on Iwa. Munn (1986: 28, 80, 286) mentioned the presence of several standing stones on nearby Gawa Island. Unlike at Woodlark, her ethnographic information identified the stones as central markers for hamlets, and also more commonly used as garden boundary markers. The stones are thought to relate to baloma or ancestral spirits. Recent observations by Damon (pers. comm.) on Gawa suggest that at least two of the arrangements are similar to those found on Woodlark.

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

Information on the stone monuments on the various Trobriand Islands has been collected throughout the twentieth century. The data are somewhat confusing and the published locations of the stone monuments sometimes contradictory. Only systematic survey of the islands is likely to resolve these problems, but recent excavations by the team led by Professor Goran Burenhult (Burenhult 2000) have started this process. The available data are summarised in Figure 4 and provides a useful comparison to Woodlark.

The most obvious observation to be made about the stone monuments in the Trobriands is the large number found on Kitava Island. In part, this probably relates both to the relative ease of exploring a more contained area and the relatively low present-day population enhancing preservation compared to Kiriwina. These caveats aside, the island is well-endowed with monuments and they include some of the largest recorded. There is an almost continuous line along the north-western coast, with small clusters around the old Kitavan village of Omarakana and on the south-east of the island.

In comparison to Kitava and Woodlark, the number of monuments recorded on Kiriwina, the main island in the Trobriands, is relatively small, but the high population density and intense gardening practices there may be responsible for their disappearance. Concentrations occur in the northern coast near some of the important sub-clan emergence holes or caves, and close to Omarakana, the village of the current Paramount Tabalu chiefs.

Stones are recorded on Vakuta, Kaileuna Island and smaller Kuaiao Island in the west. One possible arrangement was also recorded by the geologists Ollier, Holdworth & Heers (1973) on Tuma, the home of the baloma or souls of the people from Kiriwina to Woodlark (Damon 1989; Malinowski 1965 [1935] I: 115; Munn 1986: 300nl). As on Woodlark, the pattern in the northern Massim is (or was) that there is at least one monument in most areas.

Structure of the monuments

Having established the distribution of the monuments on the islands, the next stage was to look at the internal organisation of the stone arrangements themselves. The Woodlark stone monuments range from single stones to larger complex arrangements (for details see Bickler 1998; Bickler & Ivuyo 2002). Some of the stones are over 3m high and may have been moved several kilometres to their present location. The monuments fall into various categories:

* Single stones up to 1.5m tall.

* Small numbers of stones marking the corners of rectangles, but with the structure mostly 'open' (corners marked out) and only 1-2[m.sup.2] in size.

* Large open monuments constructed with larger stones over a bigger area (around 5-15m along each side).

* Simple enclosures made from stones laid to form the walls of a rectangle (from approximately 2m x 2m upwards).

* Large complex arrangements of a variety of large and small stones, usually with multiple internal 'rooms'. These covered areas of between 50m2-800[m.sup.2].

Initial examination of all the available plans suggested that the wall angles exhibited a full 360[degrees] range (cf. Holdsworth & Ollier 1973: 138). This makes it difficult to argue that any particular directional model was used in their construction. However, previous researchers have tended to regard these structures as the result of single building events. But re-use of the sites was evident from irregular patterns around central well-organised structures, along with the use of different stones, the presence of multiple burials (see below) and fragmentary burial material in many of the test pits. The plans from the largest of the sites, such as Bunmuyuw (Figure 3), show at least one large rectangle was built with other smaller arrangements attached to them. The reconstruction of Bunmuyuw also shows a large rectangular arrangement to the south of the main structure.

It is likely that many of the complex monuments were modified over a period of time, with new 'rooms' added and stones removed to reconstruct other structures. Although the pattern of reuse is a variable over which we have poor chronological control at this point, it is an important factor in interpreting these sites. Recognition of this usage pattern suggested that concentrating on the largest components of the arrangements, those parts of the structures requiring the most effort to organise, might be better at indicating the social specifications underpinning their construction. These larger components might not always be the oldest parts of the sites, but appear to be so in many cases.

Measurements of these larger components suggest that there is a tendency towards north-south and east-west axes (Figure 5). These are the cardinal directions used in the ethnographic description of the arrangement of many Woodlark villages and gardens (Damon 1990), but the small number of sites on Kiriwina with sufficient information, and a couple of larger sites on Kitava, also have these orientations. Whether the variability seen in the data relates to temporal changes or other factors such as social organisation, remains to be established. The most complete information from Kitava and Woodlark does indicate that the pattern between these two locations was similar and that they form part of a regional social landscape.

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

Examination of the construction materials in stone monuments indicates that coral blocks were used in most places (Figure 6). They were probably obtained from the nearby bush and dragged over relatively short distances. Other materials were also used, particularly on Woodlark. Bunmuyuw (Figure 3), for example, had at its centre a large rectangular arrangement made from beach or sandstone slabs, some as large as 3m x 3m blocks which were probably dragged through the bush up from the beach some 2-3km away. Other arrangements in the Kaulay Village area contained stones from around Mt Kabat, about 6km south of Kaulay.

[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]

More startling, perhaps, is that stones from Woodlark, probably from Mt Kabat, are found in the Kitava site of Bomasia (Oilier et al. 1973: 49) and on Kiriwina at Liluta Village. The external origins of these stones are recognised by local people (Damon pets. comm.) and remarkably, these stones must have been transported over distances between the islands of 150-200km by canoe.

Dating and functions

Prior to the 1996 research, the only information regarding the dating and use of the monuments was related to the small amount of 'Early Period' pottery found in test pits dug in the Trobriands by Egloff (1979). This suggested a rough date of between 2000 and 1000 years ago based on the known pottery sequences in the region. However, excavations in some of the more complex monuments on Woodlark revealed human burials, providing other material for dating (Bickler & Ivuyo 2002: Table 3). The oldest date obtained (1) is between 1300 and 1000 BE Two radiocarbon dates (2) from secondary pot burials found inside one of the megaliths fall between 800 and 600 BP and are likely to mark the end of the original use of the stone arrangements as primary burial monuments. A later date of 400-600 BP from a child's burial inside Bunmuyuw may indicate some continued use of the stone arrangements subsequent to a major change from primary to secondary burial. The skeletal remains found in the larger Woodlark complexes include men, women and children, and in one case, a human tooth necklace was also recovered near the skeletons (see Bickler 1998). The layout of the skeletons is patterned. Sixteen skeletons were exposed sufficiently to record alignments, and all had their heads pointing between 105[degrees]-190[degrees] from magnetic north, i.e. between east and south (Figure 7).

[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]

Eight skulls were exposed which showed signs of careful placing. Skeletons oriented roughly east-west had their skulls turned to face over their left shoulder towards the south. Those aligned approximately towards the south had skulls placed upright with the face aligned back to the north. At MUY-205 (Bickler & Ivuyo 2002) where skeletons of both orientations were excavated in the same area, a single skeleton laid out to the south overlay an earlier skeleton laid out with the head towards the east suggesting a possible chronological change. Unfortunately only six of the skeletons with clear orientation from the Woodlark sites have been dated so far and the results are not clear enough to ascertain to what the difference in orientation and positioning may relate.

The limited evidence from the Trobriand burial sites confirms the pattern of directional choice, although Odubekoya, the only contemporary site (radiocarbon dated between AD 950 and AD 1250) for which we have evidence so far, is not a 'megalith' arrangement. Of the five burial complexes containing sufficiently well preserved skeletons, nine out of 11 are laid out with the heads pointing to the south-east, with the remaining two laid out with the heads to the east (Larsson & Svensson 2000). So it is apparent that orientation and position are important factors in the burial practices in the northern Massim during this time, although the controlling organisational principles have yet to be established.

It is also worth noting that not all the stones need mark burials. The limited information from Gawa is suggestive of the use of single stones as garden and village markers, and it is possible that many of the stones were used in this way throughout prehistory. Malinowski (1965 [1935] I: 221-22) described the use of binabina stones in principal storehouses in the Trobriands. It should also not necessarily be assumed that the smaller single stones are contemporary with the larger complexes. However, on Woodlark at least, they may form part of an arrangement of stones and earthworks such as trenches (shown on Figure 2) perhaps reflecting a later, post-'megalith' reorganisation of the territories within each island.

Discussion

The results for Woodlark Island can be summarised as follows:

* The monuments date from around 1200 BP-600 BP (although neither boundary should be considered secure; earlier dates are possible).

* The larger sites were often surrounded by Early Period pottery debris and were probably originally located in villages.

* The more complex monuments were primary burial sites: many contained skeletons.

* Some stone monuments were later used for secondary pot burials. They then gradually fell out of favour as burial places.

The stone monuments represent some of the earliest known evidence of occupation in the northern Massim. While Polynesians are an unlikely source for the monuments, the similarity between some of the complex structures to marae-related structures in Polynesia has been recognised for some time (e.g. Austen 1939). Although both represent different strands of an Austronesian-speaking migration into the Pacific, the arrangements in the northern Massim pre-date the development of marae complexes in Polynesia (e.g. Green 1993). Furthermore, while marae appear to increase in complexity on most Polynesian islands, in the northern Massim the complex stone arrangements fall into disrepair, with only a few simple stone markers still apparently in use during the colonial period. It remains an intriguing question as to how the various Austronesian-speaking groups adopted different strategies in different parts of the Pacific (and beyond) in creating and recreating their social landscape as they adapted to a variety of different island environments.

Directionality, location and content appear to be factors in the construction and use of the stone complexes across the northern Massim. The distribution of recorded stone arrangements suggests that they are found almost everywhere in the northern Massim and are not evenly distributed across the landscape. Clusters of them occur on each of the large islands. Crucially, however, these arrangements formed part of a shared regional landscape prior to 600 BE Although we do not yet have dating information outside Woodlark, their form and functioning as primary burial monuments seems to be shared throughout the islands.

As monuments, the stone monuments would have required significant organisational skills and resources, because the stones were often large and were moved several kilometres through the bush, and at times by canoe. The sites served as a local focal point for the Early Period communities. This is probably the situation in the Trobriands (cf. Egloff 1979: 107) including Kitava, and remains the situation on Iwa (although the small size of the island is probably responsible for this 'conservatism'). The use of stones marking central village locations (baku) continued in some Trobriand villages (Malinowski 1965 [1935] h 342), but such stones do not appear to have the complexity or size of the earlier ones.

The concentration of monuments in particular parts of the islands probably indicates some pattern of hierarchy between different areas within each island group. Population density may be a factor but there is no concrete evidence to suggest that this was the case on the larger northern Massim islands such as Woodlark, Kiriwina and Kitava. Damon (1983: 106-7) described how the north-central area of Woodlark may have been an area of 'higher rank' and large population, but his information relates to a period around the early 1800s, well after the large stone arrangements had fallen into disrepair. The tantalising prospect that the stone monuments may be evidence of an early chieftainship in the Massim is hard to ignore, although more research will be required to substantiate it.

The movement of actual stones between the islands and the similarity in the pattern of concentration and distribution on each of the major island groups serves to highlight regional links (see also Damon 1990:261; Holdsworth & Oilier 1973). Malinowski (1965 [1935] h 221-22, II 82, 133) explained how Trobrianders distinguished between dakuna (describing dead coral stone), binabina (all volcanic stone from the D'Entrecasteaux Islands to the west) and kema (stone from Woodlark used for adzes and axes). It is beyond the scope of this paper to pursue these data further, but the importance of the imported stone sources in colonial period Trobriand society was immense. The physical scale on which the stone was utilised appears to have shrunk with the demise of the stone monuments, although the coral gardens themselves remain impressive.

Some time around 600-800 BP, this landscape changed. While changes in pottery decoration and sources have been used as evidence of changes along the south coast of mainland Papua New Guinea around 1000 BP (e.g. Allen 1984; Irwin 1991) in the northern Massim, the shift from primary to secondary pot burials indicates the occurrence of major regional changes. While the causes of these changes are not clear, the shift to secondary burials occurred on all the islands in the northern Massim, suggesting that links between them were maintained.

Conclusion

It is clear that megalithic building necessitated a spatially concentrated set of activities, resulting in a highly visible marker of relatively permanent regional relationships. Burying one's relatives inside a stone arrangement at the centre of one's village served as a potent reminder of these relationships. The rituals which had their origins in the secondary burial practices that followed dispersed these ancient relationships, both in moving the dead to the periphery, such as caves, and by producing potentially less enduring monuments. Their purpose was to pass productive resources from one generation to the next, in effect eclipsing the memory of the singular individuals over whom the rituals are performed (see Damon 1989: 17). It is shell valuables of the Kula which now extend relations through time, and by doing so, now interrelate varied productive processes through space. As mentioned earlier, no known Kula shell valuables have been found in dated archaeological contexts but a number of carved Conus shells have been found in the Massim (Mackay 1971; Monckton 1922; Poch 1907a, b; Seligmann & Joyce 1907; White 1970). Five were seen on Woodlark in 1995, and part of one (Figure 8) that had been re-crafted for use in the Kula was radiocarbon dated to c. 750 BP (Bickler 1998). Although shell valuables have a long history in Pacific archaeological contexts (see for example the discussion by Swadling 1994), the existence of these carved shells during a major period of transition in the northern Massim suggests the Kula itself developed from pre-existing regional links actively engaging local groups on the various islands.

[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]

Perhaps these carved shells are stores of value like the stone of the arrangements. They may also point to new ways Massim peoples located themselves in time and space. In the modern Kula, swapping shells moves the names of the living, thereby negotiating the precarious regional interdependencies of well-established Massim communities. The stone arrangements during the Early Period were used to provide a regional framework for the settlement of new communities perhaps led by some form of organised elite. They acted as final resting places for the bodies whose souls were returned to Tuma--a single source of 'people' for ancient northern Massim communities.

Acknowledgements

The article was written with the assistance of a grant from the Green Foundation for Polynesian Research. NSF Grant SBR-9501966 funded the fieldwork. I would like to thank the National Museum of Papua New Guinea, the Woodlark Islanders who assisted the project, and Baiva Ivuyo for his help during the fieldwork. I would also like to thank the anonymous referees and the editor for their comments. Professor Fred Damon's passion for the stone arrangements was essential to the work presented here. My thanks to Dorothy Brown for her editorial help and to Hamish Macdonald for the illustrations. I am also grateful to Thomas MacDiarmid for his work on the 3D reconstruction of Bunmuyuw.

Received: 25 April 2003; Accepted: 7 November 2003; Revised: 8 November 2004

References

ALLEN, J. 1977. Fishing for wallabies: trade as a mechanism for social interaction and elaboration on the central Papuan Coast, in J. Friedman & M.J. Rowlands (ed.) The evolution of social systems: 419-55. London: Duckworth.

--1984. Pots and poor princes: a multidimensional approach to the role of pottery trading in coastal Papua, in S.E. van der Leeuw & A.C. Pritchard (ed.) The many dimensions of pottery: ceramics in archaeology and anthropology: 407-63. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Prae- en Protohistorie, University of Amsterdam.

--1985. Comments on complexity and trade: a view from Melanesia. Archaeology in Oceania 20: 49-57.

AUSTEN, L. 1939. Megalithic structures in the Trobriand Islands. Oceania 10: 30-53.

BICKLER, S.H. 1997. Early pottery exchange along the south coast of Papua New Guinea. Archaeology in Oceania 32:11-22.

--1998. Eating stone and dying: archaeological survey on Woodlark Island, Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

BICKLER, S.H. & B. IVUYo. 2002. Megaliths of Muyuw (Woodlark Island), Milne Bay Province, PNG. Archaeology in Oceania 37: 22-36.

BICKLER, S.H. & M. TURNER. 2002. Food to stone: investigations at the Suloga stone tool manufacturing site, Woodlark Island, Papua New Guinea. Journal of the Polynesian Society 111 : 11-43.

BRONK RAMSEY, C. 1995. Radiocarbon calibration and analysis of stratigraphy: the OxCal Program. Radiocarbon 37: 425-30.

--2001. Development of the radiocarbon program OxCal. Radiocarbon 43: 355-63.

BULMER, S. 1975. Settlement and economy in prehistoric Papua New Guinea: a review of the archaeological evidence. Journal de la Societe des Oceanistes 31: 7-75.

BURENHULT, G. (ed.) 2000. The archaeology of the Trobriand Islands, Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. Excavation report. Gotland: Reports from Gotland University College 1/2000.

DAMON, F.H. 1979. Woodlark Island megalithic structures and trenches: towards an interpretation. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 14: 195-226.

--1983. Further notes on Woodlark megaliths and trenches. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 4: 100-13.

--1989. Introduction, in F. Damon & R. Wagner (ed.) Death rituals and life in the societies of the Kula ring:. 3-19. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.

--1990. From Muyuw to the Trobriands. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

--2002. Kula valuables, the problem of value and the production of names. L'Homme 162: 107-36.

EGLOFF, B.J. 1972. The sepulchral pottery of Nuamata Island, Papua. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 7: 146-63.

--1978. The Kula before Malinowski: a changing configuration. Mankind 11: 429-35.

--1979. Recent prehistory in southeast Papua. Terra Australis 4. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, RSPacS, Australian National University.

FORTH, R.L. 1965. Stone arrangements on Woodlark Island. Mankind 6: 257-63.

GREEN, R.C. 1993. Community-level organisation, power and elites in Polynesian settlement pattern studies, in M.W. Graves & R.C. Green (ed.) The evolution and organisation of prehistoric society in Polynesia: 9-12. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph 19.

HOLDSWORTH, D.K. & C.D. OLLIER. 1973. Magic stones and megaliths of the Trobriand Islands, Papua and New Guinea. Brisbane: Anthropology Museum Occasional Papers, University of Queensland, No. 2.

IRWIN, G.J. 1983. Chieftainship, kula, and trade in Massim prehistory, in J. Leach & E. Leach (ed.) The Kula: new perspectives on Massim exchange: 29-72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

--1985. The emergence of Mailu as a central place in coastal Papuan prehistory. Terra Australis 10. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, RSPacS, Australian National University.

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

KIRCH, P.V. & R.C. GREEN. 2001. Hawaiki, Ancestral Polynesia. An essay in historical anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

LARSSON, A.-C. & S. SVENSSON. 2000. The 1999 excavations in Labai and Mwatawa, in Burenhult (ed.): 53-132.

LAUER, P.K. 1974. Pottery traditions in the D'Entrecasteaux Islands of Papua. Occasional Papers in Anthropology 3. St Lucia (Queensland): Anthropology Museum, University of Queensland.

LEACH, J. & E. LEACH (ed.). 1983. The Kula: new perspectives on Massim exchange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

MACINTYRE, M. 1994. Too many chiefs? Leadership in the Massim in the colonial era. History and Anthropology 7:241-62.

MACKAY, R.D. 1971. An historic engraved shell from the Trobriand Islands--Milne Bay District. Records of the Papua & New Guinea Public Museums and Art Gallery 1:47-52.

MALINOWSKI, B. 1984 [1922]. Argonauts of the Western Pacific. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

--1965 [1935]. Coral gardens and their magic. Volumes I and II. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

MONCKTON, C.A.W. 1922. Last days in New Guinea. London: Bodley Head.

MUNN, N. 1986. The fame of Gawa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

OLLIER, C.D., D.K. HOLDSWORTH & G. HEERS. 1970a. Megaliths at Wagura, Vakuta, Trobriand Islands. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 5: 24-6.

--1970b. Megaliths of Kitava, Trobriand Islands. Records of the Papua New Guinea Museum 1: 5-15.

--1971a. Inakebu cave art at Kitava in the Trobriand Islands. Archaeology 24: 22-7.

-1971b. Further caves of Kitava, Trobriand Islands, Papua. Helictite 9: 61-70.

--1973. Megaliths, stones and Bwala on Kitava, Trobriand Islands. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 8: 41-50.

OLLIER, C.D. & C.F. PAIN. 1978a. Caves of Woodlark Island, Papua New Guinea. Helictite 16: 64-78.

--1978b. Some megaliths and cave burials: Woodlark Island (Murua), Papua New Guinea. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 13: 10-8.

POCH, R. 1907a. Einige bemerkenswerte ethnologika aus Neu-Guinea. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 37: 57-71.

--1907b. Ausgrabungen alter topfscherben in Wanigela (Collingwood-Bay). Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 37: 137-9.

RIESENFELD, A. 1950. The megalithic culture of Melanesia. Leiden: Brill.

Ross, M.D. 1988. Proto Oceanic and the Austronesian languages of Western Melanesia. Canberra: A.N.U. Printing Service.

--1998. Sequencing and dating linguistic events in Oceania: the linguistics/archaeology interface, in R. Blench & M. Spriggs (ed.) Archaeology and language II: correlating archaeological and linguistic hypotheses: 141-73. London: Routledge.

SELIGMANN, C.G. 1910. The Melanesians of British New Guinea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

SELIGMANN, C.G. & T.A. JOYCE. 1907. On prehistoric objects in British New Guinea, in W.H.R. Rivers, R.R. Marett & N.W. Thomas (ed.) Anthropological essays presented to Edward Burnett Tylor. 325-41. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

SELIGMANN, C.G. & W.M. STRONG. 1906. Anthropogeographical investigations in British New Guinea. The Geographical Journal 27: 225-42, 347-69.

STUIVER M., P.J. REIMER, E. BARD, J.W. BECK, G.S. BURR, K.A. HUGHEN, B. KROMER, G. McCORMAC, J. VAN DER PLICHT & M. SPURK. 1998. INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24000-0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40: 1041-83.

SWADLING, P. 1994. Changing shellfish resources and their exploitation for food and artifact production in Papua New Guinea. Man and Culture in Oceania 10: 127-50.

WHITE, J.P. 1970. Prehistoric Papuan engraving. Australian Natural History 16: 344-5.

WILLIAMS, F.E. 1936. Report on stone structures in the Trobriands--little Stonehenge. Pacific Islands Monthly (June).

(1) AA25108 1260 [+ or -] 50 b.p. calibrated at 2sd AD 690-990.

(2) AA25120 685 [+ or -] 55 b.p. calibrated at 2sd AD 1280-1440, AA25121 780 [+ or -] 55 b.p. at 2sd AD 1210-1410 calibrated by OxCal v3.8, Bronk Ramsey 1995, 2001; Stuiver et al. (1998).

Simon H. Bickler, Auckland, New Zealand (Email: archaeology@bickler.co.nz)