Prehistoric human impacts on Rapa, French Polynesia.

Kenneth, Douglas ; Anderson, Atholl ; Prebble, Matthew 等

Introduction

With the world's population exceeding six billion, human-induced environmental change is an acute problem confronting our increasingly inter-dependent global community. Agricultural expansion, deforestation, soil depletion, and decreasing crop yields contribute to food scarcity and world hunger (Brown 1996). In coastal and island settings, where a large percentage of the world's population resides, fisheries are being decimated at an alarming rate (Pews Ocean Commission 2003). The local effects of food scarcity, which include social fragmentation, migration, conflict, and the overall destabilisation of political systems, have far-reaching consequences and archaeologists are well positioned to provide a historical perspective on social and political responses to anthropogenic environmental change (Crumley 1994; Lentz 2000; Jackson et al. 2001; Redman et al. 2004).

Remote islands provide well-bounded microcosms for studying the ecosystem effects of human colonisation, demographic expansion, and resource intensification, along with inter-related behavioural responses promoting sociopolitical integration or fragmentation (Kirch & Hunt 1997; Kirch 2004). In this paper we report work on the remote French Polynesian island of Rapa, located in East Polynesia equidistant between New Zealand and Easter Island, and 513km from its nearest neighbour (Raivavae) on the southeastern extremity of the Austral Group (Guillin 2001). The island is small (35[km.sup2]) and horseshoe-shaped; a breeched caldera that forms a natural amphitheatre surrounding Ha'urei Bay (Chubb 1927; Figure 1). At historic contact (AD 1791), an estimated 1500 people were living on the island in a series of heavily fortified hilltop communities distributed along the ridgeline surrounding Ha'urei Bay (Vancouver 1801 I: 214-5). Here we report on the earliest colonisation phase of the island and establish a chronology for demographic expansion, fortification, and human induced environmental change.

Age of colonisation

Opinions about the age of initial human entry to East Polynesia have varied considerably, but the recent trend has been toward younger estimates. Spriggs and Anderson (1993) suggested initial colonisation in the interval AD 300-600, but additional research on sites of the colonisation era (Anderson et al. 1999; Anderson & White 2001; Anderson & Sinoto 2002; Anderson et al. 2003; Rolett & Conte 1995; Rolett 1998; Steadman et al. 1994; Tuggle & Spriggs 2000; Weisler 1996) indicates a stronger probability of arrival later in the first millennium AD. This period is also consistent with recent evaluations of the initial age of anthropogenic affects upon vegetation change (Anderson 1995, 2002; Athens et al. 1999; Burney 2002; McGlone & Wilmshurst 1999). Weisler (1996) puts the beginning of occupation in the Pitcairn Island group at about AD 800, although the earliest date is not securely tied to cultural events, and the age of colonisation on Easter Island, best recorded by radiocarbon dates from Anakena associated with bones of extinct birds, is approximately AD 1000 (Steadman et al. 1994). In the south-eastern region of East Polynesia, settlement of the Gambier Islands began about AD 1100 (Anderson et al. 2003). It is worth noting, however, that Rapa is the southernmost island in East Polynesia and that all of South Polynesia, which lies to the south-west of it, was colonised later again, about AD 1200 (Anderson 1991,2000).

Our excavations on Rapa were divided between fortifications and coastal rockshelters, the latter being expected to yield the better evidence of initial habitation on the island because they were readily accessible for habitation to the earliest colonists. Rockshelters are scarce on the island and most of them are less than 10m in maximum dimension (see Figure 1). However, the Tangarutu rockshelter in Anarua Bay (Figure 2A), on the more sheltered western coast, is so conspicuous from the sea, and so capacious (80 x 40m) that it is likely to have been used from the earliest period of settlement. It is filled with dune sand which holds abundant archaeological remains. Small test excavations by Walczak (2001: 32) produced calibrated radiocarbon dates between AD 1400 and 1650 (Ly-8577 and 8578; Table 1). We augered the sands throughout the shelter, sampled all exposed sections and excavated 4[m.sup.2] of the deepest and richest deposit. This disclosed approximately 150cm of continuous cultural stratigraphy, which included shellfish, fish and bird bone, gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) fragments, remains of ovens, and artefacts that included basalt flakes, shell fish hooks, cordage, and plaited Pandanus and Freycinetia mat fragments. Smaller excavations at Akatanui, Angairao, and the upland shelters at Taga showed generally shallow stratigraphy and much less abundance and diversity of cultural material.

[FIGURES 1-2 OMITTED]

Radiocarbon dates on charcoal samples, unidentified to taxa, indicate that the base of the Tangarutu site dates to between AD 1150 and 1250 and the rockshelter continued to be used until c. AD 1550 (see Table 1 and Figure 3). The base of the Angairao rockshelter stratigraphy dates to c. AD 1400, which is essentially the same as the oldest age at Akatanui, while the upland rockshelter at Taga is slightly younger (c. AD 1400-1820). This sequence is consistent with our expectation that initial habitation would be represented in the prime coastal rockshelter, then in other coastal shelters and later again in upland areas as the overall pattern of settlement gravitated towards the use of fortified villages around the caldera ridgeline. Consistent with the recent assessment of the East and South Polynesian expansion, the AMS radiocarbon data thus far suggest that Rapa was first inhabited relatively late (c. AD 1200-1300). It lies well south of the main line of East Polynesian island which extends south-east from the Societies, through the Gambier and Pitcairn groups out to Easter Island, and its apparent late colonisation might reflect the operation of an early search strategy, which focused first on the main line of islands, discovering others later by offset voyages (Anderson 2003).

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

Demographic expansion and fortification

Competition for resources in the face of demographic expansion and environmental degradation is one of several driving forces in the development of social and political complexity and clearly played a role in the emergence of Pacific island chiefdoms (Kirch 1984). Fortified hilltop villages in East Polynesia provide the most obvious archaeological evidence for competition and warfare prior to European contact and indicate that intervillage conflict was an important component of social and political life (Best 1993; Burley 1998; Field 2004; Green 1967; Kirch 1984). The hyper-fortified nature of Rapa is often used as an example of Polynesian inter-village hostilities (Kirch 1984: 212). However, temporal trends in the establishment and expansion of fortifications on Rapa have not been identified until now.

In 1920-21, John Stokes, from the B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, documented 35 fortified and non-fortified hilltop sites (Stokes ms). Subsequent work by the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition (Ferdon 1965; Heyerdahl & Ferdon 1965; Mulloy 1965), and more recently by Walczak (2001), has focused on documenting and mapping the most prominent fortifications. The main forts were located on the principal ridge separating the Ha'urei Bay watershed from the smaller drainages and bays around the outer coast of the island. At least one fort was paired with each of the primary external drainages. Usually the highest available mountain crest was selected and each fortification was surrounded by steep slopes or cliffs. According to historical accounts these naturally defensive locations were augmented with a series of palisades (Vancouver 1801), and most of these sites have defensive ditches cut through ridgelines around and within their domestic sectors. The forts are prominent features on the landscape and appear in 1m resolution satellite imagery (IKONOS; Figure 4a).

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

Previous excavations at Morongo Uta by the Norwegian Archaeological expedition in the 1950s revealed hearths, stone filled cooking pits, pits interpreted as storage features, and tools including poi pounders and adzes (Ferdon 1965: 9-21; Mulloy 1965: 23-60). Our excavations at Ororangi, Potaketake, and Tevaitau revealed similar features and a survey of the remaining fortifications suggests that they are common. Although there has been some speculation that the forts were only ceremonial features (Walczak 2001), the evidence indicates residential settlement. Excavation and auger testing discloses dark soils imbedded with charcoal and domestic debris, including fish bone, mollusc shells and basalt adze flakes. Hearths and fire pits were commonly encountered during our excavations and some of these features were carved directly into the underlying basalt. There were also some unfortified domestic terraces that were closely associated with fortifications (Smith 1965). Determining the relationship between fortified and non-fortified terrace settlements awaits further study.

As temporally diagnostic artefacts were scarce, we have relied upon radiocarbon dating to determine the age of fortification. Twenty-two AMS radiocarbon dates were obtained from ten fortifications (Table 1). These dates were calibrated with Calib (version 5.0.1; Stuiver & Reimer 1993; Stuiver et al. 1998a, b) using the suggested southern hemisphere correction curve (McCormac et al. 2002). We have taken a conservative approach to calibration because many of these dates fall within an unstable portion of the calibration curve and have multiple intercepts or ranges. Two sigma ranges are shown in Figure 3 and the greatest area of probability is shaded in grey (McCormac et al. 2002). All date ranges after AD 1825 were excluded because the fortifications were abandoned when the missions arrived (Davies 1827; 1961).

Two fortifications, Morongo Uta and Ruatara (Figure 1, #5 & #11), have early date ranges between c. AD 1450 and 1550. The early dates from Morongo Uta are consistent with two dates acquired by the Norwegian Archaeological expedition from this site (AD 1560 [+ or -] 250 and AD 1620 [+ or -] 241), but the error range is significantly smaller. Two additional dates from Morongo Uta indicate settlement at this location just prior to the Mission Period (AD 1825) and dates from the related site of Tevaitau (Figure 1, #8) suggest relatively persistent settlement in the vicinity of Hiri Bay from AD 1450 to 1825. The late eighteenth-century date from Ruatara is also suggestive of persistent settlement, but this requires verification. The radiocarbon dates from the remaining eight fortifications all have multiple intercepts, but the relative area under the probability distribution suggests that they most likely fall between AD 1650 and 1825. Some of these sites were undoubtedly among the fortified communities observed by Vancouver in 1791. Overall, these data suggest that people started using hilltop fortifications 200-300 years after colonisation and that fortified settlements proliferated rapidly on the island during the eighteenth century prior to European contact and the collapse of island population in the wake of introduced European diseases (Hanson 1970).

Anthropogenic environmental change

Remnant dry stonewall terrace features line many of the alluvial valley-bottoms of the island and are indicative of the former extent of Colocasia esculenta (Taro) pondfields (Figure 4b). From oral traditions and other sources, Stokes (nd) and Hanson (1970) suggested that C. esculenta was the staple food from the time of initial settlement. The numerous stonewall features indicate that the level of corm production matched that of the better known Pacific production systems of the Hawaiian islands and New Caledonia. Some of the valleys are still used for cultivation but this represents only a small proportion of the total available arable land. Many of the abandoned or fallow terrace systems remain waterlogged and are now dominated by introduced agricultural grasses (e.g. Paspalum subjugatum), sedges (e.g. Carex spp.), rushes (e.g. Schoenoplectus subulatus subsp, subulatus) and adventive herbs (e.g. Commelina diffusa).

Sedimentary cores were taken from swamps located in the main embayments of Ha'urei, Hiri, Anarua, Angairao, Akatanui and Anatakuri in an attempt to locate materials spanning the pre- and post-colonisation era to document the nature and timing of human impact at each site (Prebble 2006). One of the longer and most representative sequences comes from the head of Ha'urei Bay in a swamp that lies next to the largest river delta and associated estuarine tidal flats (Tukou, Core 2; see Figure 1, #5; Figure 5). This 4m sediment core was located 60m from the interface between the swamp and estuary and 60m from an eroded embankment with abutting remnant stone-wall terraces. From the swamp surface down to 290cm, the core was sub-sampled at 10cm intervals for palynological analysis. The bottom 190cm of the sequence is located beneath the current spring high tide line and consists of silty sand imbedded with gastropod and mollusc shell debris overlying inorganic basal clays. Four pollen concentrate samples from a range of depths were directly AMS radiocarbon dated (Table 1). A Pandanus fruit located from a depth of 256-8cm (56cm below spring high tide level) was also directly dated to 2710-1210 BC, the earliest date obtained from the core.

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

A stratigraphic plot of the palynological data is presented in Figure 5. The pollen-based stratigraphy can be separated into three phases; a pre-human coastal forest phase (280-165cm; c. 2000 BC to AD 1200), a Polynesian agricultural phase (165-60cm; c. AD 1200 to 1825) and a post-European contact phase (above 60cm; AD 1825 to present). The base of the pre-human phase shows a dominance of fern spores representative of taxa now marginal in the lowlands (e.g. Cyathea tree ferns) as well as an increase in tree and shrub pollen consisting mostly of Pandanus (probably P. tectarius). The sediment stratigraphy of this phase is characterised by a loose organic horizon overlying mid-Holocene aged estuarine or marine sediments. Counts of foraminifera and dinoflagellates in samples at depths below 250cm suggest the site was inundated by the sea during this period of sediment deposition. The overlying organic horizon includes leaf and wood fragments, roots, seeds of Celtic insularis (a shrub now restricted to upland areas) and fruits of Pandanus, and coupled with the palynological record, suggest a dense coastal swamp forest canopy dominated by Pandanus. This coastal swamp forest was established on a formerly exposed shoreline, probably in response to maritime influences as late Holocene sea-level stabilised in the region by c. 1400 to 900 BC (Bard et al. 1996).

Sediments representing the Polynesian agricultural phase start at 140cm and are positioned just above a sedimentary hiatus that may be a product of rapid erosion associated with initial colonisation. This phase starts sometime before AD 1350 and probably as early as AD 1200 with initial settlement. Human impacts on the landscape at this time are signalled by increasing sedimentation rates and more evidence for burning, likely related to agricultural expansion, as indicated by larger charcoal concentrations in sediments above 140cm. The appearance of Calocasia esculenta pollen at 120cm (AD 1400), an unequivocal human introduction, is a clear indication of expansive agricultural activity by c. AD 1400. Pandanus tectarius pollen start to decline at AD 1350-1390 (130-2cm) as grass pollen and spores of seral fern taxa (Dicranapteris and Dryapteris) increase in conjunction with more colluvial sedimentation overlying the loose organic horizon of the pre-human phase. After AD 1400 tree and shrub pollen continued to decline in conjunction with further increases in grass (Poaceae) and sedge (Cyperaceae) pollen that far exceeded levels represented in the pre-human phase.

From the above evidence, we suggest that the sequence of agricultural development at Tukou and elsewhere on Rapa was relatively rapid, starting sometime before AD 1350, and paralleled the expanding use of coastal rockshelters and the establishment of the first fortified settlements AD 1450 and 1550. Deforestation of the swamp and surrounding environs resulted in extensive erosion of soil from the nearby hill-slopes and this process was rapid and largely complete by c. AD 1500.

Discussion and conclusions

Our research on Rapa has brought into focus results of a kind that are becoming familiar from research throughout East Polynesia, especially in the more isolated islands, such as Hawaii, Easter Island and New Zealand. They consist of: a chronological sequence that indicates relatively late colonisation (after AD 1000); demographic expansion, environmental change (plausibly anthropogenic in the main), which begins early in the settlement sequence and which involves substantial alteration of the environment including the establishment of extensive agricultural systems. Relatively late in the sequence is an efflorescence in construction of monumental structures. It would be premature to argue that these clusters of data result from similar processes, but there are several explanatory models which are plausible generally and which might be pertinent to the Rapan case.

One hypothesis is that the colonisation of remote islands was followed by population growth, reduction in mobility, settlement/agricultural expansion, and resource depression (Kennett et al. 2006). Rapa's remote position reduced opportunities for emigration and social interaction, i.e. the population was environmentally circumscribed (Carneiro 1970). Population expansion after colonisation might have favoured competition for resources and agricultural intensification leading to formalised territoriality. Deforestation, erosion, and sedimentation in valley bottoms would have created prime terrain for pond-field agriculture. Construction of pond-field terraces required substantial labour and it also concentrated agricultural productivity into clearly defined and defensible patches (c.f. Dyson-Hudson & Smith 1978). Competition for these patches would have favoured population growth/aggregation and fostered the strategic building of forts. Continued population increase and fissioning pushed newly established communities into increasingly marginal areas and caused more widespread environmental degradation.

An alternative hypothesis for the construction of massive earthworks and associated structures is that they operated as an energy sink or waste mechanism, diverting a significant proportion of energy away from reproductive and child-rearing behaviours. In turn, this optimised population growth and structure in relation to levels of uncertainty in resource productivity (e.g. Graves & Sweeney 1993; Hunt & Lipo 2001). Such an explanation is particularly plausible in the subtropical region, where agricultural products and maritime resources were less diverse than elsewhere in East Polynesia (Anderson 2001), and where, especially in south-eastern Polynesia, the impact of periodic climatic change, most notably through ENSO variation, was relatively high.

Of course, both hypotheses may be valid. As Dunnell (1999: 247) observes, the waste model of cultural elaboration is not inconsistent with others which might also have been operating in such circumstances, including competitive signalling between intervisible communities, or the creation of monumental structures for ritual purposes.

Our research, so far, shows that the basic sequence of cultural change expected by these model explanations can be observed. Evidence for early settlement (c. AD 1150 to 1250) is confined to Tangarutu, the most desirable coastal rockshelter on the island and then expands to less attractive locations (Akatanui, Angairao, and Taga) starting c. AD 1350-1450. The use of coastal rockshelters appears to decline after c. AD 1550 as pond-field agricultural systems reached their full production capacity in the prograded lowlands and settlement shifted to more defensible highland locations. One of the two early fortifications, Morongo Uta, is located overlooking the largest pond-field system (Hiri valley) of the exterior lowlands as well as others inside Ha'urei Bay itself. The coincident appearance of Ruatara, well-positioned to control areas on the north-eastern side of the island, suggests that these fortified communities developed within the context of intense competition for limited territory. It is within this social and political milieu that fortified communities proliferated on the island by c. AD 1700.

The environmental impacts associated with demographic expansion on Rapa are obvious and relevant to contemporary environmental issues. Dramatic environmental changes associated with population growth are well-documented on other Pacific islands and each provides a 'microcosm' of processes occurring today on a global-scale (Kirch 2004). Equally relevant should be the social responses to environmental change, anthropogenic or otherwise, and how these can further exacerbate environmental impacts. Our work on Rapa suggests that demographic expansion and environmental degradation under circumscribed conditions resulted in competition for territory and resources. The establishment of strategically placed fortifications suggests that inter-group warfare on Rapa occurred frequently enough to warrant large investments in defence. Victory in warfare is, in part, related to community size, and population concentration and growth were likely favoured under these conditions. The growth of communities ultimately resulted in intra-village competition, conflict, and fissioning into more marginal territories. Proliferation of fortified settlements on Rapa at c. AD 1700 demonstrates how changing social and political conditions impact demography and amplify the effects of environmental degradation.

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the National Geographic Society, the Australian National University and the University of Oregon. We would like to thank the people of Rapa for supporting this research and for providing the logistical support necessary for completing the project. A special thanks goes to Dale Krause and to the members of our field crew: Yann Doignan, Sarah McClure, Rosine Oitokaia, and Nathan Wilson.

Received: 4 October 2004; Accepted: 31 August 2005; Revised: 13 October 2005

References

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

--1995. Current approaches in East Polynesian colonization research. Journal of the Polynesian Society 104:110-32.

--2000. The advent chronology of south Polynesia, in P. Wallin & H. Martinsson-Wallin (ed.) Essays in honour of Arne Skjolsvold 75 years. Occasional Papers of the Kon-Tiki Musem 5: 73-82.

--2001. No meat on that beautiful shore: the prehistoric abandonment of subtropical Polynesian islands. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 11: 14-23.

--2002. Faunal collapse, landscape change and settlement history in Remote Oceania. World Archaeology 33: 375-90.

--2003. Entering uncharted waters: models of initial colonization in Polynesia, in M. Rockman & J. Steele (ed.) Colonization of Unfamiliar Landscapes: 169-89. London: Routledge.

ANDERSON, A.J. & Y.H. SINOTO. 2002. New radiocarbon ages of colonization sites in East Polynesia. Asian Perspectives 41: 242-57.

ANDERSON, A.J. & J.P. WHITE. (ed.) 2001. The Prehistoric Archaeology of Norfolk Island, Southwest Pacific. Records of the Australian Museum, Supplement 27.

ANDERSON, A.J., E. CONTE, G. CLARK, Y. SINOTO & F.J. PETCHEY. 1999. Renewed excavations at the Motu Paeao site, Maupiti Island, French Polynesia: preliminary results. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 21: 47-65.

ANDERSON, A.J., E. CONTE, P.V. KIRCH & M. WEISLER. 2003. Cultural chronology in Mangareva (Gambler Islands), French Polynesia: evidence from recent radiocarbon dating. Journal of the Polynesian Society 112: 119-40.

ATHENS, J.S., J.V. WARD, H.D. TOGGLE & D.J. WELCH. 1999. Environment, vegetation change and early human settlement on the 'Ewa plain: a cultural resource inventory of Naval Air Station, Barber's Point, O'ahu, Hawai'i. Part III: Paleoenvironmental investigations. Honolulu (HI): International Archaeological Research Institute Inc.

BARD, E., B. HAMELIN, M. ARNOLD, L. MONTAGGIONI, G. CABIOCH, G. FAURE & F. ROUGERIE. 1996. Sea level record from Tahiti corals and the timing of deglacial meltwater discharge. Nature 382:241-4.

BEST, S. 1993. At the halls of the mountain kings: Fijian and Samoan fortifications: Comparison and analysis. Journal of the Polynesian Society 102(4): 385-448.

BROWN, L.R. 1996. Tough Choices: Facing the Challenge of Food Scarcity. New York: W.W. Norton.

BURLEY, D.V. 1998. Tongan Archaeology and the Tongan Past, 2850-150 B.P. Journal of World Prehistory 12(3): 337-92.

BURNEY, D.A. 2002. Late Quaternary chronology and stratigraphy of twelve sites on Kaua'i. Radiocarbon 44: 13-44.

CARNEIRO, R.L. 1970. A theory of the origin of the state. Science 169: 733-8.

CHUBB, L.J. 1927. The geology of the Austral or Tubuai Islands (Southern Pacific). Quarterly Journal of Geological Sciences 83:291-318.

CRUMLEY, C.L. (ed.). 1994. Historical Ecology: Cultural Knowledge and Changing Landscapes. Santa Fe (NM): School of American Research Press.

DAVIES, J.R. 1827. Extracts from the journal of a visit to the islands of Rapa (or Oparo), Raivavai, and Tupuai (July and October, 1927). Quarterly Chronicle of Transactions of the London Missionary Society 3: 323-2, 353-61.

--1961. The History of the Tahitian Mission 1799-1830 (ed. C.W. Newbury). Cambridge: Hakluyt Society.

DUNNELL, R.C. 1999. The concept of waste in an evolutionary archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 18: 243-50.

DYSON-HUDSON, R. & E.A. SMITH. 1978. Human territoriality: an ecological reassessment. American Anthropologist 80: 21-41.

FERDON, E.N., JR. 1965. A Reconnaissance Survey of Three Fortified Hilltop Villages, in T. Heyerdahl & E.N. Ferdon (ed.) Reports of the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition to Easter Island and the East Pacific, volume 2, miscellaneous papers. Monographs of the School of American Research.

FIELD, J.S. 2004. Environmental and climatic considerations: a hypothesis for conflict and the emergence of social complexity in Fijian prehistory. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 23: 79-99.

GRAVES M.W. & M. SWEENEY. 1993. Ritual behaviour and ceremonial structures in eastern Polynesia: changing perspectives on archaeological variability, in M.W. Graves & R.C. Green (ed.) The Evolution and Social Organisation of Prehistoric Society in Polynesia: 102-21. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph 19.

GREEN, R.C. 1967. Fortification in Other Parts of Tropical Polynesia. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter 10: 96-113.

GUILLIN, J. 2001. L'Archipel des Australes. Editions A. Barthelemy & Le Motu.

HANSON, F.A. 1970. Rapan lifeways: society and history on a Polynesian island. Boston (MA): Little, Brown, and Company Ltd.

HEYERDAHL, T. & E.N. FERDON (ed.). 1965. Reports of the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition to Easter Island and the East Pacific, volume 2, miscellaneous papers. Monographs of the School of American Research. New York: Rand McNally & Company.

HUNT, T.L. & C.P. LIPO. 2001. Cultural elaboration and environmental uncertainty in Polynesia, in C.M. Stevenson, G. Lee & F.J. Morin (ed.) Pacific 2000: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Easter Island and the Pacific: 103-16. Los Osos: Easter Island Foundation.

JACKSON, J.B.C., M.X. KIRBY, W.H. BERGER, K.A. BJORNDAL, L.W. BOTSFORD, B.J. BOURQUE, R.H. BRADBURY, R. COOKE, J. ERLANDSON, T.P. HUGHES, S. KIDWELL, C.B. LANGE, H.S LENIHAN, J.M. PANDOLFI, C.H. PETERSON, R.S. STENECK, M.J. TEGNER & R.R. WARNER 2001. Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems. Science 293(5530): 561-748.

KENNETT, D.J., A.J. ANDERSON & B. WINTERHALDER. 2006. The Ideal Free Distribution, Food Production, and the Colonization of Oceania, in D.J. Kennett & B. Winterhalder (ed.) Human Behavioral Ecology and the Origins of Agriculture. Berkeley: University of California Press.

KIRCH, P.V. 1984. The Evolution of the Polynesian Chiefdoms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

--2004. Oceanic Islands: Microcosms of "Global Change", in C.L. Redman, S.R. James, P.R. Fish & J.D. Rogers (ed.) The Archaeology of Global Change: The Impact of Humans on Their Environment. Washington, De: Smithsonian.

KIRCH, P.V. & T.L. HUNT (ed.). 1997. Historical Ecology in the Pacific. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press.

LENTZ, D.L. (ed.). 2000. Imperfect Balance: Landscape Transformations in the Precolumbian Americas. New York (NY): Columbia University Press.

MCCORMAC, F.G., P.J. REIMER, A.G. HOGG, T.F.G. HIGHIM, M.G.L. BAILLIE, J. PALMER & M. STUIVER. 2002. Calibration of the Radiocarbon Time Scale for the Southern Hemisphere: AD 1850-950. Radiocarbon 44: 641-51.

MCGLONE, M.S. & J.M. WILMSHURST. 1999. Dating initial Maori environmental impact in New Zealand. Quaternary International 59: 5-16.

MULLOY, W. 1965. The Fortified Village of Morongo Uta, in T. Heyerdahl & E.N. Ferdon (ed.) Reports of the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition to Easter Island and the East Pacific, volume 2, miscellaneous papers. Monographs of the School of American Research.

Pews Oceans Commission. 2003. America's Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change. A Report to the Nation. Arlington (VA): Pew Oceans Commission.

PREBBLE, M. 2006. Islands' Floras and History: A Contribution to the Environmental History of the Austral Islands, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, The Australian National University.

REDMAN, C.L, S.R. JAMES, P.R. FISH & J.D. ROGERS. (ed.). 2004. The Archaeology of Global Change: The Impact of Humans on Their Environment. Washington, DC: Smithsonian.

ROLETT, B.V. 1998. Hanamiai: prehistoric colonization and cultural change in the Marquesas Islands (East Polynesia). New Haven (CT): Yale University Publications in Anthropology 81.

ROLETT, B.V. & E. CONTE. 1995. Renewed investigation of the Ha'atuatua Dune (Nuku Hiva, Marquesas Islands): a key site in Polynesian prehistory. Journal of the Polynesian Society 104: 195-228.

SMITH, C.S. 1965. Test excavations and surveys of miscellaneous sites on the island of Rapa Iti, in T. Heyerdahl & E.N. Ferdon (ed.) Reports of the Norwegian Archaeological Expedition to Easter Island and the East Pacific, volume 2, miscellaneous papers. Monographs of the School of American Research.

SPRIGGS, M. & A.J. ANDERSON. 1993. Late colonization of East Polynesia. Antiquity 67: 200-17.

STEADMAN, D., P. VARGAS & C. CRISTINO. 1994. Stratigraphy, chronology and cultural context of an early faunal assemblage from Easter Island. Asian Perspectives 33: 79-96.

STOKES, J.F.G. nd. Ethnology of Rapa, Manuscript on file in the Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu.

STUIVER, M. & P.J. REIMER. 1993. Extended [sup.14]C database and revised CALIB radiocarbon calibration program. Radiocarbon 35:215-30.

STUIVER, M., P.J. REIMER, E. BARD, J.W. BECK, G.S. BURR, K.A. HUGHEN, B. KROMER, F.G. MCCORMAC, J.V.D. PLICHT & M. SPURK. 1998a. INTCAL98 Radiocarbon age calibration 24,000-0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40: 1041-83.

STUIVER, M., P.J. REIMER & T.F. BRAZIUNAS. 1998b. High-precision radiocarbon age calibration for terrestrial and marine samples. Radiocarbon 40: 1127-151.

TUGGLE, H.D. & M. SPRINGS. 2000. The age of the Bellows dune site O18, O'ahu, Hawai'i, and the antiquity of Hawaiian colonization. Asian Perspectives 39: 165-88.

VANCOUVER, G. 1801. A Voyage of Discovery to the North Pacific Ocean (ed. J. Vancouver). London.

WALCZAK, J. 2001. Le peuplement de la Polynesie orientale: Une tentative d'approche historique par les exemples de Tahiti et de Rapa (Polynesie francaise). Unpublished Dissertation, University of Paris (Pantheon Sorbonne).

WEISLER, M.I. 1996. Taking the mystery out of the Polynesian 'mystery' islands: a case study from Mangareva and the Pitcairn group, in J. Davidson, G. Irwin, F. Leach, A. Pawley & D. Brown (ed.) Oceanic Culture History: essays in honour of Roger Green: 615-29. Dunedin: New Zealand Journal of Archaeology.

Douglas Kennett (1), Atholl Anderson (2), Matthew Prebble (2), Eric Conte (3) & John Southon (4)

(1) Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, USA

(2) Division of Archaeology and Natural History. The Australian National University, Australia

(3) Department of Archaeology, University of French Polynesia, French Polynesia

(4) Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Irvine, USA

Table 1. AMS radiocarbon dates from archaeological sites and a
sediment core on Rapa

Lab # Provenience Site Type

UCI-14769 Tangarutu E. Section, T1, 150cm Rockshelter
ANU-11848 Tangarutu, East E2, Spit 23-5 Rockshelter
ANU-11847 Tangarutu, base Rockshelter
UCI-14771 Tangarutu Weast Section, S3, 112cmbs Rockshelter
ANU-11849 Tangarutu, NS1, Base Layer Rockshelter
Ly-8577 Tangarutu, Unit 1, Walczak 2001 Rockshelter
UCI-14768 Tangarutu East, E2, 23-5cm Rockshelter
UCI-2197 Tangarutu, Unit E2, 123cm Rockshelter
ANU-11924 Tangarutu, East E2, Spit 2 Rockshelter
UCI-2325 Tangarutu, Unit E2, l0cm Rockshelter
UCI-14770 Tangarutu Section South, V1, 90cmbs Rockshelter
UCI-14772 Tangarutu, E1, Spit 11 Rockshelter
Ly-8578 Tangarutu, Unit 2, Walczak 2001 Rockshelter
UCI-14726 Tangarutu, E1, Spit 4 Rockshelter
UCI-14763 Akatanui, C1, Spit 4 Rockshelter
ANU-11925 Akatanui, Base Level Rockshelter
UCI-14765 Akatanui, Shelter 3, C1, A1, Spit 2 Rockshelter
ANU-11851 Angairao E, 2nd Oven, Spit 10 Rockshelter
UCI-14767 Angairao, Shelter E, 2nd oven, Spit 11 Rockshelter
UCI-14766 Angairao, Shelter E, 2nd oven, Spit 11 Rockshelter
ANU-11923 Taga, Test Pit A, Spit 2 Rockshelter
UCI-14755 Morongo Uta (R-1), West Wall Exp. 18cm Fortification
UCI-2178 Morongo Uta (R-1), Exp. 2, 1Ocm Fortification
UCI-2177 Morongo Uta (R-1), Exp. 1, 20cm Fortification
UCI-14773 Morongo Uta (R-1), West Terrace, 1Ocm Fortification
UCI-14762 Ruitara, Exp. 1, 14cmbs Fortification
UCI-14774 Ruatara, STP#2, 15cm, Terrace below tower Fortification
UCI-2184 Potaketake (R-2), Unit 1, Feature 4, 51cm Fortification
UCI-2188 Potaketake (R-2), Unit 1, Feature 3, 30cm Fortification
UCI-181 Potaketake (R-2), Unit 1, Feature 2, 1Ocm Fortification
UCI-14757 Kapitanga, Below Tower, Exp. 3, 33cmbs Fortification
UCI-14758 Kapitanga, Upper Terrace, Exp. 4, 35cmbs Fortification
UCI-14759 Pukutaketake, STP#2, 35cm Fortification
UCI-14760 Pukutaketake, STP#2, 19cm Fortification
UCI-2190 Ororangi (R-20), Unit 1, Feature 1, Fortification
 RC-3, 12cm
UCI-2182 Ororangi (R-20), Unit 1, RC-2, 60cm Fortification
UCI-2186 Tevaitau (R-18), Unit 1, Feature 1, Fortification
 20-30cm
UCI-2187 Tevaitau (R-18), Terrace E, Exp. 2, 22cm Fortification
UCI-14725 Vairu (R-3), Tower, Auger 7, 5-1Ocm Fortification
UCI-14761 Vairu (R-3), Exp 1, 25cm Fortification
UCI-2180 Tanga (R-4), Unit 1, Stratum I/II, S1, Fortification
 20cm
UCI-2179 Tanga (R-4), Unit 1, Feature 2, 35cm Fortification
UCI-14756 Noogurope, Exposure 1, 20cm Fortification
OZH-279 Tukou, Core 2, 90-2cm Core
UCI-17868 Tukou, Core 2, 130-2cm Core
UCI-17892 Tukou, Core 2, 180-2cm Core
UCI-14727 Tukou, Core 2, 200-2cm Core
ANU-12098 Tukou, Core 2, 256-8cm Core

Lab # Material 14C Error

UCI-14769 charcoal 905 20
ANU-11848 charcoal 710 70
ANU-11847 charcoal 650 100
UCI-14771 charcoal 600 15
ANU-11849 charcoal 570 70
Ly-8577 charcoal 495 40
UCI-14768 charcoal 475 20
UCI-2197 charcoal 465 25
ANU-11924 charcoal 440 60
UCI-2325 charcoal 380 25
UCI-14770 charcoal 350 15
UCI-14772 Aleurite 345 20
Ly-8578 charcoal 330 45
UCI-14726 Gourd 320 15
UCI-14763 charcoal 610 15
ANU-11925 charcoal 480 70
UCI-14765 Aleurite 385 15
ANU-11851 charcoal 500 50
UCI-14767 charcoal 375 15
UCI-14766 charcoal 220 20
ANU-11923 charcoal 370 150
UCI-14755 charcoal 380 20
UCI-2178 charcoal 350 20
UCI-2177 charcoal 145 20
UCI-14773 charcoal 130 20
UCI-14762 charcoal 345 15
UCI-14774 charcoal 210 15
UCI-2184 charcoal 240 20
UCI-2188 charcoal 240 25
UCI-181 charcoal 210 25
UCI-14757 charcoal 240 15
UCI-14758 charcoal 195 15
UCI-14759 charcoal 235 15
UCI-14760 charcoal 145 15
UCI-2190 charcoal 200 25
UCI-2182 charcoal 185 20
UCI-2186 charcoal 195 20
UCI-2187 charcoal 140 30
UCI-14725 charcoal 190 20
UCI-14761 charcoal 180 15
UCI-2180 charcoal 145 25
UCI-2179 charcoal 140 20
UCI-14756 charcoal 120 15
OZH-279 Pollen concentrate 575 40
UCI-17868 Pollen concentrate 710 25
UCI-17892 Pollen concentrate 2480 60
UCI-14727 Pollen concentrate 2235 20
ANU-12098 P. tectorius (fruit) 3620 300