Early cessation of ceramic production for ancestral Polynesian society in Tonga

Ancestral Polynesian society is the formative base for development of the Polynesian cultural template and proto-Polynesian linguistic stage. Emerging in western Polynesia ca 2700 cal BP, it is correlated in the archaeological record of Tonga with the Polynesian Plainware ceramic phase presently thought to be of approximately 800 years duration or longer. Here we re-establish the upper boundary for this phase to no more than 2350 cal BP employing a suite of 44 new and existing radiocarbon dates from 13 Polynesian Plainware site occupations across the extent of Tonga. The implications of this boundary, the abruptness of ceramic loss, and the shortening of duration to 350 years have substantive implications for archaeological interpretations in the ancestral Polynesian homeland.: Funding for this study was provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, www.crsh.ca, file 435-2013- 0566 and grant no. 435-2012-0194 to DVB, and an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant (AU), grant no. DP160103778 to GC

Early Cessation of Ceramic Production for Ancestral Polynesian Society in Tonga

Ancestral Polynesian society is the formative base for development of the Polynesian cultural template and proto-Polynesian linguistic stage. Emerging in western Polynesia ca 2700 cal BP, it is correlated in the archaeological record of Tonga with the Polynesian Plainware ceramic phase presently thought to be of approximately 800 years duration or longer. Here we re-establish the upper boundary for this phase to no more than 2350 cal BP employing a suite of 44 new and existing radiocarbon dates from 13 Polynesian Plainware site occupations across the extent of Tonga. The implications of this boundary, the abruptness of ceramic loss, and the shortening of duration to 350 years have substantive implications for archaeological interpretations in the ancestral Polynesian homeland

Tanamu 1: A 5000 year sequence from Caution Bay

[Extract] Archaeological sites across Caution Bay often contain distinctive artefactual horizons of varying ages, making it possible to investigate cultural trends at a range of spatial and temporal scales over extended periods of time. Tanamu 1 is a site of particular interest because of its three distinct major occupation horizons that start with the pre-ceramic, followed by Lapita, and end with post-Lapita. The aim of this chapter is to report details of the site, focusing on its chronostratigraphy, so that its various cultural materials (reported in detail in Chapters 3–7) can be examined in context

Emergence and Development of Ancestral Polynesian Society in Tonga

Patrick V. Kirch and Roger C. Green proposed that Polynesian cultures today emerged and developed in an ancestral homeland situated in western Polynesia, primarily Tonga and Sāmoa. The archaeological marker for the beginnings of cultural and linguistic divergence from a founding Eastern Lapita base is Polynesian Plainware pottery produced for nearly 1,100 years during the Polynesian Plainware phase. Kirch and Green believe this transition reflects social and economic changes that led to the development of an ancestral Polynesian society. An ongoing debate in Pacific anthropology is whether archaeologists can convincingly identify and explain the historical trajectory of an ancestral Polynesian society. My dissertation evaluates the development of an ancestral Polynesian society in Tonga by identifying three processes that shaped its trajectory: isolation, integration, and adaptation. By focusing largely on undecorated ceramics from several Tongan sites, comparisons can be made within Tonga and across the archipelagos of western Polynesia that have implications for understanding unique island histories. If Polynesian culture developed in western Polynesia then the evidence for social and economic change may potentially be reflected in an adequate assessment of the archaeological record from the end of the Lapita phase into the Polynesian Plainware phase. That includes not only ceramic data but non-ceramic data such as site distribution, settlement patterns, subsistence practices, demographic studies, and geochemical source data – all of which provide a more holistic view of early Polynesian culture in Tonga and aid considerably in how we as anthropologists perceive past Polynesian lifeways and development through time

First Lapita Settlement and its Chronology in Vava'u, Kingdom of Tonga

Beginning approximately cal 1400 BC, Austronesian-speaking Lapita peoples began a colonizing migration across Oceania from the Bismarck Archipelago to western Polynesia. The first point of entry into Polynesia occurred on the island of Tongatapu in Tonga with subsequent spread northward to Samoa along a natural sailing corridor. Radiocarbon measurements from recent excavations at 4 sites in the northern Vavau islands of Tonga provide a chronology for the final stage of this diaspora. These dates indicate that the northern expansion was almost immediate, that a paucity of Lapita sites to the north cannot be explained as a result of lag time in the settlement process, and that decorated Lapita ceramics disappeared rapidly after first landfalls.The Radiocarbon archives are made available by Radiocarbon and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform February 202

Map of islands within the ancestral, West Polynesian homeland.

<p>Two additional islands, Futuna and Alofi, are not included on the map being 300 km northwest of Niuafo’ou. The outliers of Niuafo’ou and Niuatoputapu are part of traditional and contemporary Tonga.</p

Sequential radiocarbon dates for Polynesian Plainware occupations from three excavation units in the Kingdom of Tonga.

<p>Sequential radiocarbon dates for Polynesian Plainware occupations from three excavation units in the Kingdom of Tonga.</p

Lapita on the south coast of Papua New Guinea: challenging new horizons in Pacific archaeology

We thank all the commentators for their thoughtful comments, and especially Jim Specht for initiating this stimulating Forum on the discovery of Lapita ceramics at Caution Bay on the south coast of mainland Papua New Guinea. All flag numerous important implications of these discoveries for Pacific archaeology. To make the most economical use of our limited space to respond, we address key Lapita-related criticisms and queries raised by the five commentators. We conclude by noting that, while our ultimate aim is to model the implications of the Caution Bay finds for broader-scaled occupation and interaction, we refrain from doing so until the site-specific and regional data are more fully analysed and presented