The Archaeology of Vanuatu Oxford Handbooks Online The Archaeology of Vanuatu: 3,000 Years of History across Islands of Ash and Coral Stuart Bedford and Matthew Spriggs The Oxford Handbook of Prehistoric Oceania (Forthcoming) Edited by Ethan Cochrane and Terry Hunt Online Publication Date: Oct 2014 Subject: Archaeology, Archaeology of Oceania DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199925070.013.015 Abstract and Keywords The more than 1,000-kilometer stretch of eighty-two inhabited islands comprising the Vanuatu archipelago is centrally situated in the southwest Pacific. These islands were first settled in the late Holocene by Lapita colonists as part of a rapid migratory event that travelled as far east as Tonga. Over three millennia Vanuatu has transformed into an extraordinarily diverse country both linguistically and culturally. The challenge to archaeology is to explain how such diversity has arisen. This chapter addresses a range of themes that are central to the definition and understanding of the timing and nature of initial settlement, levels of interconnectedness, cultural transformation and diversification, human impact on pristine environments, and impacts of natural hazards on resident populations. Vanuatu research contributes to regional debates on human colonization, patterns of social interaction, and the drivers of social change in island contexts. Keywords: Vanuatu, Lapita, cultural transformation, natural hazards, contact and interaction Introduction The Republic of Vanuatu, the former colonial entity known as the New Hebrides/Nouvelles-Hébrides, is located in the central southwestern Pacific. It comprises some eighty-two inhabited islands totaling just over 12,000 km2 spread over 1,100 km from north to south (Siméoni 2009) (Figure 1). In 2009 Vanuatu’s population was ca. 235,000 (VNSO 2009), which translates into a relatively low population density, but with significant variability across the archipelago (Siméoni and Lebot 2012). It is an extraordinarily diverse country both linguistically and culturally. With a minimum of eighty-one actively spoken languages and more than twenty recently extinct, Vanuatu is the most linguistically diverse country, per head of population, on earth (Lynch and Crowley 2001; Tryon 1996). The linguistic diversity is matched by cultural diversity, and the challenge to archaeology is to explain how such extreme diversity has arisen. Vanuatu’s geomorphological history and ongoing natural hazards along with its location have particularly influenced the 3,000-year history of human settlement. In terms of exposure to the range and frequency of natural hazards found across the Pacific, Vanuatu is the country most regularly affected by such things as volcanic activity, earthquakes, cyclones, tsunamis, and landslides (Siméoni 2009). These same environmental factors have heavily influenced post-depositional processes affecting archaeological sites, particularly in terms of their visibility, location, and preservation (Bedford 2006; Bedford and Spriggs 2008; Pineda and Galipaud 1998; Spriggs 1984). Archaeological research in Vanuatu can be broadly divided into two distinct periods. The first is associated with pioneering research that was undertaken before Independence in 1980 and up to the imposition of a governmental moratorium on humanities-based research in 1984 that lasted for ten years (Bolton 1999: 1). The ban effectively consigned archaeology in Vanuatu to languish in the pioneering phase, reliant on interpretations from the results of Page 1 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu a handful of influential projects that had been carried out through the 1960s and 1970s (Garanger 1972; Shutler, Shutler, and Bedford 2002; Spriggs 1981, 1986; Ward 1979). While significant research projects leading to major reinterpretations were being undertaken in other areas of the Pacific, in Vanuatu, right up to the mid-1990s, fundamental questions relating to initial colonization and settlement of the archipelago and succeeding cultural transformations were still largely unanswered. Much of the country in fact remained an archaeological terra incognita (Bedford 2006), despite the establishment in 1990 of the EU-funded Vanuatu Cultural and Historic Sites Survey (VCHSS), which carried out useful survey work ahead of development projects. The second period of research dates from the lifting of the moratorium in 1994, following the drafting of the Vanuatu Cultural Centre research policy, and has continued to the present. It must be emphasized that while the many projects postdating 1994 have transformed the understanding of the human history of the archipelago, and in a number of aspects the wider region, there still remain many islands where minimal or no archaeology has been undertaken. Certain phases or aspects of the archipelago’s archaeology have been studied in detail, but for many others there is at best only a vague comprehension. Research is, however, starting to move beyond necessary cultural sequence construction to consider wider questions. Click to view larger Figure 1 Vanuatu and sites mentioned in text. This chapter addresses a range of themes related to the timing and nature of initial settlement, levels of interconnectedness, cultural transformation and diversification, human impact on pristine environments, and impacts of natural hazards on resident populations. Study to date has contributed to a more detailed picture of inter- and intra-archipelago interaction, settlement pattern, subsistence, and cultural differentiation. This research contributes to regional debates on human colonization, patterns of social interaction, and the drivers of social change in island contexts. Page 2 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu First Settlement Despite the fact that Lapita ceramics (see Terrell’s essay for overview of Lapita) were first identified on two islands in Vanuatu in the 1960s, debate as to whether these were evidence of initial human arrival continued for decades. The poor chronological definition, the small number of Lapita sites, and the presence of ceramic traditions thought to date to a similar period all contributed to the confusion. The same issue was, of course, being debated across a number of regions of the then known Lapita distribution, particularly so in New Caledonia and to a lesser extent Fiji (see reviews in Bedford and Clark 2001; Bedford 2006). Discussion of the potential for pre-Lapita settlement in Remote Oceania became more focused from the mid-1980s when a series of Pleistocene sites were found across the Bismarck Archipelago and northern Solomon Islands. Questions of pre-Lapita settlement began to be addressed in Vanuatu by a number of archaeological research programs from 1994. More intensive surveys, particularly cognizant of landscape transformations associated with both geomorphological and human-induced processes, began to identify a series of Lapita sites located throughout the archipelago (Bedford 2006; Bedford and Spriggs 2008; Galipaud and Swete Kelly 2007). At the same time, caves and rock shelters on uplifted coasts were targeted for excavation to find evidence of pre-Lapita settlement (Bedford 2006; Bedford et al. 1998). None was forthcoming and the primacy of Lapita in Vanuatu has now been firmly established. The extensive collections of extinct faunal remains recently identified in association with Lapita sites in Vanuatu add considerable further weight to the argument that Lapita represents initial human arrival. The most striking example of this is the thousands of extinct land tortoise bones (Meiolania damelipi) that have been identified at Teouma on Efate and Vao, Malakula (White et al. 2010), and in lesser numbers at other sites. An extinct land crocodile (Mekosuchus kalpokasi), and a suite of extinct, often flightless, birds in early levels round out the species inventory of the first 200 years or so of human occupation. These are the sorts of species that are extremely vulnerable to human exploitation and would not have survived earlier colonization events. Lapita sites have now been found on many of the small and large islands of Vanuatu, from the Banks Islands in the north to Aneityum in the south (see Figure 1). Island size in Vanuatu did not influence Lapita colonization or settlement. It can be expected that many more sites will be found, but on some islands, such as Ambrym, Ambae, and Tanna, for example, the meters of recent volcanic ash deposits may have long buried colonization settlements. On other islands, human-induced landscape transformation has had a similar effect on low-lying coastal regions (Spriggs 1986). Over the last fifteen years, Vanuatu has gone from being once seen as an archipelago with marginal Lapita presence or interest, islands that some suggested had been essentially leapfrogged (Anderson 2006), to an archipelago that can now be seen as central to the success of Lapita exploration, colonization, and settlement of Remote Oceania. The Characteristics of Lapita in Vanuatu A number of features that for so long hindered the discovery of Lapita sites in Vanuatu have at the same time contributed in many situations to their remarkable preservation. Tectonic uplift and volcanic eruptions are the dominant post-depositional processes affecting archaeological sites, particularly their current location and visibility (Dickinson 2001; Quantin 1979). Lapita sites which were generally located near the sea are now, almost invariably, minimally 50 m or more from the coast as a result of island uplift (see Dickinson’s essay). In addition, over the last 3,000 years of human occupation regular and significant volcanic eruptions have occurred throughout Vanuatu (Cronin, Nemeth, and Neall 2008), which have spread ash of varying depths across many of the sites dating to the Lapita period. Cyclonic events have also contributed to the accumulation of overburden on coastal sites. Finally another major factor that has hindered site visibility on some islands is the large-scale human-induced erosion that has led to subsequent valley and foreshore infilling (Spriggs 1986). Thirty Lapita sites have now been located throughout the archipelago, confirming the widespread nature of Lapita settlement in Vanuatu. Many of the sites have been identified through limited test-pitting but a number of sites are particularly well-preserved and have been more extensively excavated and reported in some detail. These include Teouma on Efate, Uripiv and Vao on the northeast coast of Malakula, and Makue on Aore Island, south Santo. Chronology After many years of research on Lapita sites in Vanuatu and the wider region a much clearer picture of the chronology of initial Lapita colonization has emerged along with the duration of the distinctive dentate-stamped Page 3 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu Lapita ceramics, those associated with initial colonizing populations across all islands of Remote Oceania as far east as Tonga and Samoa. The phase of dentate-stamped Lapita appears to be an increasingly short-lived phenomenon as it moves toward the eastern extremities of its distribution. An important point to be emphasized, however, is that dates of the beginning and end of Lapita in Remote Oceania are associated with flat sections of the radiocarbon calibration curve and the suggested spans of dentate-stamping use may be too long. Finer definition of initial Lapita colonization and the duration of the dentate-stamped phase in various archipelagos remains a challenge also due to the fact that Lapita sites are often heavily disturbed. Some resolution to the issue may be found in focusing on alternative dating methods such as U/Th dating of branch coral artifacts (e.g., Burley, Weisler, and Zhao 2012). Refined seriation of Lapita pottery also has great dating potential but will only be further facilitated as more collections are analyzed and published in detail (Chiu 2011). As is the case with other Lapita sites in the region, dentate-stamping in Vanuatu, at the most, covers the period from initial arrival to several hundred years later, ca. 3,100‒2,700 B.P., although there appears to be some variation across the archipelago; specifically a longer duration in the north and shorter in the center and the south. The earliest reliable dates, calibrated to two standard deviations, for Vanuatu are those from the Makue site on Aore Island which span the period 3,100‒2,900 B.P. (Galipaud and Swete-Kelly 2007; Galipaud 2010). Dates for Lapita sites on Malakula are slightly later at 3,000‒2,700 B.P. (Bedford 2007), while at Teouma on Efate and Ifo on Erromango, Lapita appears at a similar time but lasts for a shorter period, ca. 3,000‒2,800 B.P. (Bedford 2006; Bedford et al. 2010), paralleling the chronology in New Caledonia (see Sand’s essay). The initial settlement of Vanuatu was associated with an explosive expansion out of the Bismarcks, occurring in a “radiocarbon instant,” where at two standard deviations it is difficult to distinguish the earliest dates from sites in the Reefs-Santa Cruz right across to Tonga (Sheppard 2010: 107). This has important implications for modeling Lapita colonization. For a long time researchers have postulated that there was a pause in the Bismarcks before movement further east and more recently some have suggested that the main Solomons was “leapfrogged” by early Lapita colonists (Sheppard and Walter 2006). While the recently accumulated Vanuatu data, including radiocarbon dates, pottery, and obsidian, does not resolve the question of avoidance of the Solomons, they do suggest that any lengthy pause in the Bismarcks is unlikely. They also indicate that the Lapita settlement of the Reef/Santa Cruz Islands was not as “unique” as has been argued (Sheppard and Walter 2006: 67) and that the discovery of easily accessible uninhabited landscapes stretching from the Reef/Santa Cruz Islands right across to Vanuatu may have acted as a significant driver for rapid Lapita colonization eastward. Subsistence Vanuatu at first European contact, like much of the Pacific, was noted for its varied gardening traditions and intensive agricultural systems. A range of root crops and a reliance on pig husbandry featured prominently in early descriptions and remain central today throughout the archipelago to both the contemporary population’s subsistence and ceremonial activities. The first colonizers initially relied heavily on the native fauna, both terrestrial and marine. Impacts on local fauna, leading to many extinctions, are now well documented (see above). Marine shell and animal bone from native fauna always comprise a substantial component of the earliest layers of Lapita middens. Dramatic human-induced landscape change is also in evidence (Spriggs 1986). Questions relating to Lapita subsistence have been debated for decades, the two extremes of the argument being whether these colonizers were either non-agricultural island-hoppers (“strandloopers,” as Groube [1971] called them) or fully agricultural communities who moved across the Pacific with a “transported landscape” consisting of a suite of introduced agricultural plants and animal domesticates (Kirch 1997: 217‒220). Variation across the Lapita distribution can be expected where hugely varying biogeographical regions were encountered, but more recent evidence from Vanuatu indicates that for this region at least, Lapita colonizers did indeed bring with them a suite of plants and animals. Microfossil evidence from archaeological sites for domesticated agricultural plants includes yam, taro, and banana (Horrocks, Bedford, and Spriggs 2009; Horrocks and Bedford 2010) and animal domesticates include both pig and chicken found in sites from the north to the south of Vanuatu from earliest settlement (Bedford 2006, 2007). Evidence for the presence of dog remains elusive. In those sites that are occupied both during and after the Lapita period, there is a dramatic change in the composition of midden deposits over time. Concentrated shell and bone in the earliest deposits give way to more frequent pottery sherds, smaller-sized and less frequent shell and bone, more frequent cooking stones, and a charcoal-rich Page 4 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu matrix. This change might be argued as being commensurate both with increasingly depleted natural resources and the firm establishment of agricultural gardens with a shift to more reliance on garden produce for daily subsistence (Bedford 2006; Spriggs and Bedford 2001).This has been argued elsewhere as a component of a general colonizing strategy (Anderson 1996). Lapita People Click to view larger Figure 2 Teouma burial and associated mortuary vessels. Source: Photo: Christophe Sand. Lapita pottery was first reported more than a hundred years ago, and while there have been more than 250 sites recorded across its distribution since that time, what has been glaringly absent from the record until very recently has been the recovery of any quantity of skeletal remains. Up until 2004, only eleven burials and bone assemblages were known throughout the Lapita distribution (Petchey et al. 2011). The discovery and excavation of the Teouma Lapita cemetery on Efate Island has radically changed this situation, albeit from a single site in Remote Oceania. Six seasons of excavation undertaken at the site have revealed sixty-six burial features representing about ninety-four individuals, providing a statistically robust sample of Lapita individuals for the first time (Figure 2). The Lapita cemetery, which encompasses an area of some 400m2 , is concentrated along a northeast to southwest trending zone, 10‒15 m wide adjacent and parallel to a former beach. Direct dating of human bone from forty-four individuals suggests that the site was used as a burial place for a generation or two, or even less, around 3,000 B.P. (authors’ unpublished data). The similarity of mortuary practice across the site and the very limited cases of intercutting or disturbance by subsequent burials confirm this relatively short period of use (Bedford et al. 2010; Valentin et al. 2010). Additionally, evidence of initial habitation, contemporary with use of the cemetery, was identified in the form of concentrated midden dumping, adjacent and east of the cemetery (Bedford et al. 2010). The remains are providing an opportunity for the first time to study a colonizing group of Lapita people, allowing insights into their ritual and mortuary practices. Evidence thus far demonstrates that the mortuary ceremony and associated ritual formed a multifaceted and lengthy process. Body and bone manipulation were a persistent feature. Following decomposition all skulls and many other upper body bones were removed. A range of grave goods were also associated with the burials. Pots or pieces of pots were regularly placed next to burials, as were unworked shells and Conus shell rings (Bedford et al 2010; Valentin et al. 2010). In many respects the rituals seen at Teouma were not dissimilar to European contact burial ritual in Vanuatu and other areas of the Pacific. Equally Page 5 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu pertinent is the fact that certain aspects of the burial practices at Teouma, such as the placement of skulls and other bones in pots and the use of pots in burial ceremony have close parallels with burial practices in Neolithic Island Southeast Asia during contemporary and slightly earlier periods (Bellwood 1997; Spriggs 2011). Information relating to the health, morphology, diet, and migratory patterns of this colonizing population has also been established. Findings indicate high levels of degenerative joint disease, poor dental health, and evidence of an erosive arthropathy. The individuals studied to date from Teouma comprise generally robust males and gracile females with high frequencies of dental and degenerative joint disease and pathology associated with physical activity (Buckley et al. 2008). These data suggest that although these populations were able to cope with a significant disease burden, the biological costs of colonization were not insignificant. At least some Teouma burials appear to have been initial colonizers. Isotopic analysis of the tooth enamel of seventeen individuals has shown that the majority were local residents who had at least spent their childhood near Teouma, but there were four individuals identified as immigrants to the island (Bentley et al. 2007). Other later non-Lapita burials, including the communal burial of Roi Mata, demonstrate an important diversification in mortuary practice throughout the archipelago within the last thousand years (Valentin et al. 2011). While we still lack robust chronological coverage over the full 3,000 year history of Vanuatu, and in some cases the samples are small, certain changes can be clearly identified. The complex mortuary practices of the colonizing Lapita communities, such as seen at Teouma, were associated with lengthy mortuary practices and ancestor rituals that likely served to promote social cohesion within small and widely separated colonizing groups (for further discussion and references, see Clark 2007: 297). These transform very quickly to a more simple and definitive burial protocol such as that seen at a later Lapita cemetery and individual burials at sites on northeast Malakula (Bedford et al. 2011a). Then over the last thousand years the frequency of ornamentation in association with the corpse increased considerably. During the same period, burials involving individuals killed to accompany important chiefs into the afterlife, become prominent in central and southern Vanuatu (Garanger 1972; Valentin et al. 2011). Lapita Pottery Most of the earliest Lapita sites in Vanuatu are characterized by Western or Middle Lapita-style pottery, so called as they occur after earlier sites in the Bismarck Archipelago (Anson 1983; Summerhayes 2000). They comprise a range of dentate-decorated vessel forms including flat-bottomed dishes, stands, carinated vessels, and incurving bowls. Dentate-stamping is the most distinctive and frequent decorative technique used alone, but it is also found in association on the same vessel with excising, applied relief, and in rare cases incision. Distinctive incised carinated vessels are also an important and regular component of these sites. At the Teouma site, they comprise a separate and contemporary component adjacent to the cemetery and associated with distinct activity areas. In the cemetery area of the site, dentate-stamped vessels dominate (Spriggs and Bedford, forthcoming). There are also plain carinated and globular vessels with outcurving rims, which are a standard feature of Middle and Late (ca. 3,000‒2,700 B.P.) Lapita sites (Kirch 1997; Summerhayes 2000). The vessel forms and many of the design motifs found in these Middle Lapita sites show direct parallels with material from the Reef/Santa Cruz Islands Lapita sites and even with sites further west such as in the Arawe Islands and Mussau Group of the Bismarck Archipelago (see Specht’s essay). Indeed, some pottery from the earliest Lapita site in Vanuatu at Makue indicates that distinctive vessel forms and decoration assigned to Early or Far Westernstyle pottery are also present in Vanuatu (Bedford and Galipaud 2010: figure 7). The high levels of similarity between Bismarck Archipelago Lapita and the earliest Vanuatu Lapita indicate very rapid movement into Remote Oceania from the “homeland” region, particularly as far east as Vanuatu and New Caledonia. For a brief period across the entire region, Lapita from the Bismarcks to Tonga was interlinked, and Vanuatu comprising a string of islands stretched across 1,000 km north to south and situated centrally between Near and Remote Oceania was a key archipelago both in terms of dispersal to the east and the sustaining of those wide-ranging links. From the period spanning Middle to Late Lapita in Vanuatu, those previously identified strong links become weakened, decoration overall becomes simpler, motifs less densely packed, the range of vessel forms much more restricted, and distinctive regional designs began to appear. Cylinder stands, pot stands, and flat dishes drop out, leaving only carinated and incurving globular vessel forms (Bedford and Galipaud 2010). On the other hand, shell impression and distinctive Lapita motifs such as expanded unbounded zigzags appear in the Late Lapita phase as they do across the wider Lapita distribution indicating some form of continued, albeit less-regular links. Page 6 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu Petrographic analysis of sherds has been undertaken across Lapita sites in Vanuatu, and it tells a similar story of changing production patterns over time (Dickinson, Bedford, and Spriggs, 2013). Although the vast majority of vessels from Middle and Late Lapita phases appear to be made locally, the earliest sites do demonstrate some contribution from further afield. At the Teouma site, there are twelve vessels which are exotic to the EfateShepherds region. Nine are sourced to New Caledonia, including a flat dish on a stand, decorated with a relatively simple design and a carinated vessel with a much more complex and finely executed anthropomorphic design. A further, very large carinated vessel, found placed upside down next to a burial, is potentially from Malakula, northern Vanuatu, or possibly much further afield to the northwest in the Solomon-Bismarcks region (Bedford et al. 2010). Regional Diversification and Evolving Identity The archaeological record in Vanuatu indicates that cultural diversification across the archipelago began soon after initial colonization, with a fundamental break in connections with archipelagos to the south and east occurring early in addition to rapidly diminishing contact with the Near Oceanic “homeland” to the northwest (Bedford and Spriggs 2008). The postulated drivers behind these transformations include a series of potentially interrelated factors, many of which have yet to be convincingly confirmed or tested archaeologically. They include trade system contraction, trade specialization, local adaptation, sociopolitical transformation, increased population density, and secondary migration (Green 2003; Green and Kirch 1997; Pawley 1981; Spriggs 1997). There is cessation of long-distance exchange and the development of more localized networks, decreasing hierarchy (as evidenced, for instance, in burial practices) and a major shift in settlement pattern at the intra- and inter-settlement levels (Bedford 2006; Bedford and Spriggs 2008; Reepmeyer 2009). One of the most visible manifestations that must be symptomatic of other major changes is the simplification of Lapita pottery in its design structure and application as its meaning begins to break down and the function of the pots changed (Summerhayes 2000). The highly ceremonial aspect of Lapita pottery, at least as display vessels and use as mortuary offerings or containers, disappears. The end of the dentate-stamped phase therefore, seems an appropriate point at which to mark the end of Lapita. The significance of this change and how it relates to regionalization and diversification has been noted by others (Kirch 1990: 128; Summerhayes 2000). Dentate decorated vessels were integral social and cultural components that linked populations during the Lapita colonizing period and “if dentate vessels were social markers, then their change over time and their disappearance reflects a greater social breakdown” (Summerhayes 2000: 235). Moreover, all non-dentate forms of decorative technique and the plainware vessels seen during the Lapita period are also found after the dentate phase. This suggests that those cultural traditions that followed, including pottery, were Lapita-derived. On the other hand, Lapita pottery includes a wider range of vessels, and presumably vessel functions, than ever seen again in Vanuatu in clay. Divergence in pottery sequences following the dentate-stamped phase is pronounced in Vanuatu and this seems to be similar to other regions (Bedford 2006; Bedford and Spriggs 2008). On the islands in the south of Vanuatu decoration immediately post-Lapita is dominated by fingernail impressed wares with a limited incised component. Pottery production ceases there by ca. 2,000 B.P. In the center of Vanuatu, from Efate to the Shepherds, immediately post-Lapita ceramics are completely dominated by incised decoration (Erueti-style), which later transforms into more complex motifs combining incised, punctate, and applied relief (Mangassi-style). Pottery was no longer made in central Vanuatu after around 1,200 B.P. To the north there is again evidence of regional divergence after Lapita. On the island of Malakula, there are no parallels with the post-Lapita sequences further south. Pottery continued to be made on Malakula until European contact, ultimately developing a range of very distinct forms, decorative motifs, and functions (Bedford 2006). Further north, on Santo and in the Banks Islands, pottery sequences again show regional diversity. Pots are still produced today at a single village on the West Coast of Santo. In addition to pottery, a range of other artifacts, mostly shell ornaments, also demonstrate regional distinctiveness soon after Lapita (Bedford 2006; Bedford and Spriggs 2008: 106). As already noted burial ritual was another cultural practice that appears to change rapidly both during and immediately after the Lapita period (Bedford et al. 2011a; Valentin et al. 2011). Adaptation and Change in Catastrophic Environments Page 7 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu While Vanuatu today is marketed like much of the Pacific as an idyllic tropical holiday destination, it has another much less publicized side, that of being the archipelago most frequently affected by a range of natural catastrophes including volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, cyclones, tsunamis, droughts, and landslides. This situation has affected ni-Vanuatu (indigenous) populations throughout their history and such natural hazards have at various times influenced social and cultural change, settlement pattern, and the configuration of social networks. The most constant threat in Vanuatu is that of volcanic activity and over generations a range of coping mechanisms has been developed to deal with ever-present threats (e.g., Cronin, Nemeth, and Neall 2008). Currently active volcanoes are present in the north, center, and south of the archipelago (Siméoni 2009), but archaeological research carried out across Vanuatu indicates that ash-fall, both catastrophic and more benign, features regularly in the stratigraphy of sites on most islands (Bedford 2006, 2007; Bedford and Spriggs 2008). This has important implications for the interpretation of contemporary topography and social relationships across space, often falsely assumed to be long-established but in fact may in many cases have only been relatively recently generated and heavily influenced by volcanic activity. Click to view larger Figure 3 “From a sea voyage, Malekula canoes on their way to Ambrym to trade in pigs, c. 1900”. Source: (P-S3-25) Archives Research Centre, Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand. The effects of volcanic eruptions in Vanuatu can range from the extremely hazardous to highly beneficial. Two of the more catastrophic eruptions and among the largest anywhere over the last 10,000 years were those of Ambrym and Kuwae at around 1,800 and 400 B.P., respectively (Eissen, Monzier, and Robin 1994; Robin, Monzier, and Eissen 1993). These eruptions would have devastated nearby landscapes, necessitating evacuation and rendering them uninhabitable for some period of time. Temporary and longer term refuge would have been sought among neighboring islands and communities before a return to the former home was possible. This scenario, of population abandonment and return, is seen regularly in the archaeological, contemporary, and historic record (Torrence, Neall, and Boyd 2009). The strength of these social networks, in some cases developed as a survival mechanism during times of catastrophe, are demonstrated throughout the archipelago with all islands showing high levels of interconnectedness both to islands nearby and often to some further afield (Figure 3) (Bedford and Spriggs 2008; Huffman 1996). The flip side, of course, to the catastrophic aspect of volcanic eruptions is the hugely beneficial role they have played in contributing to soil accumulation and fertility across the archipelago (Quantin 1979; Siméoni 2009; Siméoni and Lebot 2012). Without such eruptions, many of the recently uplifted coral islands and uplifted coastal terraces of Vanuatu where much of the country’s population is concentrated would exhibit minimal soil development and impoverished fertility. Volcanic ash in many regions has facilitated greatly increased and sustained horticultural productivity, stimulated population growth, and supported high population density and associated settlement across broader landscapes. Emergence of the Ethnographic Present It has been primarily through archaeological research that the foundations and first 2000 years of Vanuatu’s history have been established. When dealing with the history of the last 1,000 years we have added input from rich oral traditions and the equally rich ethnographic record. The latter provides various “snapshots” or a series of Page 8 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu ethnographic endpoints from which to work back into the deeper past (Spriggs 1986; Conte 2006). However, when extrapolating back in time from ethnography one must consider the impact of the earliest European visits and longer term contact on the populations of various areas. The historically recorded cultural patterns of Vanuatu cannot be understood without knowledge of recent population history and indigenous adaptations to sustained European contact (Kirch 2000; Spriggs 2008). This is in many respects another phase or continuation of the interarchipelagic interaction that is seen from initial Lapita settlement through to the recent past in Vanuatu that has been a fundamental driver in contributing to the ethnographic makeup of the country (Bedford and Spriggs 2008: 108). External Connections There is empirical archaeological and linguistic evidence and a range of specialized cultural practices that indicate Vanuatu’s connections with both adjacent archipelagos and those further afield over the last millennium. Clear connections with islands to the northwest include Banks Islands’ obsidian in the late archaeological record of Tikopia (Kirch and Yen 1982; Spriggs, Bird, and Ambrose 2010). The late prehistoric and historic coil-made bulletshaped pottery vessels of northern Vanuatu find parallels in manufacturing technique, form, and motif design with the modern forms recorded by Specht (2007: 130) from Buka, in the northern Solomons. The rare cultural practices of head binding and the production of full-circle pig tusks found in northern Vanuatu are also found further west in southern New Britain in the Bismarck Archipelago (Figure 4). Click to view larger Click to view larger Figure 4 Evidence of late interaction includes items such as full circle pig’s tusk collected from Malakula, Vanuatu, in the nineteenth century and a jade pendant, Tanna, Vanuatu. Source: Pig’s tusk: Australian Museum, Registration number E81623, photo: Carl Bento © Australian Museum, Sydney. Donated by B. Symons, 1988; jade pendant: Jennifer West collection, photo: Ty Mason. Page 9 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu There are intriguing parallels with aspects of ceremonial activity and material culture from the late ceremonial sites known as Naga, located in the interior of Western Viti Levu in Fiji, with those of northern Vanuatu. These sites have yet to be investigated in detail, but they are recognized as being relatively late, with stone structures unlike any others found in Fiji (Field 2006). The pottery associated with these sites, elongated with pointed bases, finds few parallels among any other Fijian material and is again reminiscent of pottery from northern Vanuatu. The sites were associated with “secret society” activity including male initiation ceremonies. At the beginning of these ceremonies initiates had their heads shaved, which according to one record “presented a curious appearance … owing to the remarkable shape of their heads, which are narrowed by lateral pressure during infancy” (Fison 1885: 20). It seems highly unlikely that the very distinct cultural practice of cranial deformation would have developed independently in New Britain, Malakula in northern Vanuatu, and in western Fiji within the last millennium. The record of full-circle pig tusks being produced and used as items of adornment in the same three areas further strengthens potential links and even indicates some level of population movement. Evidence for Polynesian influence in Vanuatu has been commented on since the visit of James Cook in 1774 (Beaglehole 1969) and has been highlighted through a range of sources including oral traditions, ethnographic observations, linguistics, and archaeology. The primary archaeological evidence for this contact comes from a range of artifact forms, such as lenticular cross-section adzes, dated to the last 1,000 years, thus far restricted to the center and south of Vanuatu, and principally derived from burials (Garanger 1972; Shutler, Shutler, and Bedford 2002; Spriggs 1997: 207‒218). The nature of Polynesian contact clearly varied from place to place, but neither conquest nor major migratory events need necessarily be invoked to explain conscious or unconscious processes of imitation, adaptation, or inclusion of exotic cultural practices and material culture. Polynesian connections in southern Vanuatu appear to coincide with evidence for a more general increase in archipelagic interaction across the Western Pacific in general (Bedford and Clark 2001: 71; Kirch 2000: 129; Spriggs 1997: 187‒222), a much wider phenomenon that was not solely Polynesian-driven or inspired. Strong connections between the Loyalty Islands of New Caledonia and southern Vanuatu are also well documented and include linguistic influences, origin stories, and trade items (Dubois 1996). One artifact form recorded in 1774 (Beaglehole 1969: 505) and subsequently noted throughout most of the southern islands was the jade pendant (see Figure 4), the source of which is the Grand Terre of New Caledonia (Aubert de la Rüe 1938), but which seems likely to have arrived in southern Vanuatu via the Loyalty Islands. European Contact Initial European contact occurred in 1606, in the northern islands of Vanuatu, with the visit of a Spanish expedition led by Quiros. It was quite some time before other Europeans arrived, the next recorded contact being Bougainville’s voyage in 1768 (see Spriggs 1997: chapter 8). Increased European activity and more sustained contact began soon after the visit of James Cook in 1774 and particularly so after Peter Dillon’s announcement in 1825 that sandalwood was present on the southern islands (Shineburg 1967). More than fifty ships were recorded as having visited Port Resolution in Tanna alone during a ten-year period through the 1840s (Adams 1984). Missionary activity from the late 1840s and labor recruitment from the 1860s radically affected ni-Vanuatu society at all levels. It was a period of substantial change, most dramatically demonstrated in the records of massive depopulation and transformation (Spriggs 1997: 255‒263; Spriggs 2007). Historical records for this period are varied in terms of their focus, coverage, and detail. Initial contacts and subsequent interaction between ni-Vanuatu and the new arrivals varied tremendously across the archipelago, and consequently the levels of impact, change, and adaptation were equally variable and often unpredictable. There are numerous cases of underlying indigenous social and political institutions being strengthened or further exaggerated through increased contacts, particularly with European traders. Bearing all this in mind one has to approach the written and oral historical record with a degree of caution, particularly if assigning any time depth to observed social, economic, and cultural behavior. Many features pertaining to the exchange networks, settlement patterns, and the range of material culture recorded in Vanuatu in the mid- to late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries may in fact be related to responses to changing circumstances brought about by European intrusion. These high impact events or processes could have happened over a relatively short period and are often very difficult to identify in the archaeological record in deflated, generally shallow and often mixed near-surface contexts (Bedford and Spriggs 2008: 112). To date archaeological research focusing specifically on the historic period in Vanuatu has been relatively limited, Page 10 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu although the value of incorporating and using historical archaeology to interpret the earlier archaeological record was long ago demonstrated with pioneering work on Aneityum. The extensive and detailed missionary records of Aneityum were used to establish an ethnographic baseline and endpoint for the island’s 3,000-year sequence (Spriggs 1986). Mission records and the mission period have again more recently become a focus with the commencement of new projects concentrating on the archaeology of Christian Missions on Tanna, Erromango and Aneityum in southern Vanuatu, reflecting on the missionary-indigenous-colonial dynamic at both a local and more Pacific and global level (Flexner 2012; authors’ data). Archaeology and the Wider Public in Vanuatu The practice of archaeological research in Vanuatu over the last eighteen years has been guided by Vanuatu Cultural Centre (VCC) research policy. The research policy document that had been developed over a number of years and was released in 1994 has a distinctive ni-Vanuatu perspective, style, and approach (Regenvanu et al. 1992; Roe et al. 1994). The policy explicitly requires that all research is conducted through the VCC and by extension through the Cultural Centre volunteer fieldworkers (filwokas) who are community-nominated volunteers spread throughout the islands (Bolton 1999; Tryon 1999). Training of ni-Vanuatu and the dissemination of information across the wider community are also specific requirements. Soon after the research policy was introduced a series of archaeological research and training workshops were initiated to broaden the skills-base and understanding of VCC staff and fieldworkers throughout the archipelago where ultimately some eighty fieldworkers passed through the program (Bedford et al. 2011b). Direct participation in excavations carried out during the training workshops was fundamental in facilitating a basic understanding of archaeology and its wider relevance and importance. The VCC fieldworkers on returning to their respective home islands greatly facilitated the much wider dissemination of archaeological information and general awareness. At the same time recent archaeological discoveries were further disseminated through TV, radio, newspapers, websites, educational manuals, pamphlets, comic books, and exhibitions at the National Museum. The widest possible range of the ni-Vanuatu public has been exposed to archaeology and cultural heritage issues through these various media (Shing, forthcoming). Vanuatu might now arguably claim to have the most knowledgeable population at a grassroots level in relation to archaeology anywhere in the Pacific. Pre-existing networks and the small size of the population have also been instrumental in this success. Archaeology’s acceptance and importance are likely to be further strengthened with the inclusion of substantial information about the archaeology of Vanuatu in the three volume bi-lingual Histri Blong Yumi Long Vanuatu (Lightner and Naupa 2005), which is currently being introduced into the Vanuatu high school history curriculum. Another obvious and immediate major benefit of the research and training workshops, certainly in archaeological terms, is in the reporting across the archipelago of archaeological deposits or materials being recognized by knowledgeable and informed ni-Vanuatu. However, a more long-term benefit is archaeology’s contribution to a developing sense of identity for the population of what is a still comparatively young nation (Bedford et al. 2011b; Lydon 2006: 297). The VCC has also been instrumental in promoting recognition of the country’s cultural heritage well beyond its own shores. The worldwide significance and global appeal of the archaeological heritage of Vanuatu has been exemplified by the recent inscribing of the Chief Roy Mata Domain on the UNESCO World Heritage List and the international exhibition “Lapita: Oceanic Ancestors,” held at the Musée du Quai Branly in Paris in 2010/2011, which was inspired by discoveries at the Teouma Lapita site and comprised a substantial component of Vanuatu material (Sand and Bedford 2010). Conclusion The increased pace of archaeological research in Vanuatu over the last eighteen years has transformed the knowledge and perceptions of the archipelago’s deep history. It has provided a vastly more robust data set from which the archaeology can be assessed and situated in wider Pacific context. At the same time the sustained management of the research agenda by the VCC, the involvement of their staff and their network of fieldworkers, along with their outreach initiatives in collaboration with foreign researchers, have all provided a platform for the broader acceptance, awareness, and appeal of archaeology for ni-Vanuatu in general. The focus and intensity of archaeological research in Vanuatu to date has been very varied. Whole islands remain Page 11 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu largely unknown, small test excavations of large sites have predominated, and certain phases have been much more thoroughly investigated. This is not unique to Vanuatu. A similar pattern is found across much of the Pacific and particularly in the Melanesian region, “but perhaps the most significant problem with the Melanesian sequences is the almost complete lack of information about the post-Lapita phases of prehistory” (Walter and Sheppard 2006: 139). It is, of course, in this period and particularly the last 1,000 years that the rich and culturally diverse landscape found today has developed across this region. However, when assessing the timing and scale of such cultural diversification and the dynamics and nature of culture change, we are often required to compare archaeological data, which may date to several thousand years before the present, with the ethnographic record. A high research priority in Vanuatu (and in Melanesia in general) must be targeting the archaeology of the last millennium if we are to get any closer to understanding the historical complexity of the western Pacific. References Adams, R. 1984. In the Land of Strangers: A Century of European Contact with Tanna, 1774‒1874. Pacific Research Monograph No. 9. Canberra: Australian National University. Anderson, A. 1996. “Adaptive voyaging and subsistence strategies in the early settlement of east Polynesia.” Pp. 359–374 in Prehistoric Dispersal of Mongoloids, ed. T. Akazawa and E. Szathmary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Anderson, A. 2006. “Crossing the Luzon Strait: Archaeological chronology in the Batanes Islands, Philippines and the regional sequence of Neolithic dispersal.” Journal of Austronesian Studies 1(2): 25–44. Anson, Dimitri. 1983. “Lapita Pottery of the Bismarck Archipelago and its Affinities.” PhD thesis. University of Sydney, Australia. Aubert de la Rüe, Edgar. 1938. “Sur la nature et l’origine probable des pierres portées en pendentifs à l’îles Tanna (Nouvelles Hébrides).” L’Anthropologie 48: 249–260. Beaglehole, John C. (ed.) 1969. The Journals of Captain James Cook on his Voyages of Discovery, Edited from the Original Manuscripts. Vol. 2,The Voyage of the Resolution and Adventure 1772‒1775. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press for the Hakluyt Society. Bedford, Stuart. 2006. Pieces of the Vanuatu Puzzle: Archaeology of the North, South and Centre. Terra Australis 23. Canberra: Pandanus Press. Bedford, Stuart. 2007. “Crucial first steps into Remote Oceania: Lapita in the Vanuatu archipelago.” Pp. 185–213 in From Southeast Asia to the Pacific: Archaeological Perspectives on the Austronesian Expansion and the Lapita Cultural Complex, ed. C. Chiu and C. Sand. Taipei: Academia Sinica. Bedford, Stuart, and Geoffrey Clark. 2001. “The Rise and Rise of the Incised and Applied Relief Tradition: a review and reassessment.” Pp. 61–74 in The Archaeology of Lapita Dispersal in Oceania, ed. G. Clark, A. Anderson, and T. Sorovi-Vunidilo. Terra Australis 17. Canberra: Australian National University. Bedford, Stuart, and Jean-Christophe Galipaud. 2010. “Chaînes d’îles: Les Occupation Lapita du nord-Vanuatu/ Chain of Islands: Lapita occupation of Northern Vanuatu.” Pp. 122–137 in Lapita: Ancêtres océaniens/Oceanic Ancestors, ed. C. Sand and S. Bedford. Paris: Museé du quai Branly/Somogy. Bedford, Stuart, and Matthew Spriggs. 2008. “Northern Vanuatu as a Pacific crossroads: The archaeology of discovery, interaction and the emergence of the ‘ethnographic present.’” Asian Perspectives 47(1): 95–120. Bedford, Stuart, Matthew Spriggs, Ralph Regenvanu, and Salkon Yona. 2011b. “Olfala histri wea i stap andanit long graon: Archaeological training workshops in Vanuatu; a profile, the benefits, spin-offs and extraordinary discoveries.” Pp. 191–213 in Working Together: Vanuatu Research Histories, Collaborations, Projects and Reflections, ed. N. Thieberger, and J. Taylor. Canberra: ANU E-Press. Bedford, Stuart, Matthew Spriggs, Meredith Wilson, and Ralph Regenvanu. 1998. “The Australian National Page 12 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu University-National Museum of Vanuatu Archaeology Project, 1994‒7: A preliminary report on the establishment of cultural sequences and rock art research.” Asian Perspectives 37(2): 165–193. Bedford, Stuart, Hallie Buckley, Frédérique Valentin, Nancy Tayles, and Numa Longga. 2011a. “Lapita burials, a new Lapita cemetery and post-Lapita burials from Malakula, Northern Vanuatu, Southwest Pacific.” Journal of Pacific Archaeology 2(2): 26–48. Bedford, Stuart, Matthew Spriggs, Hallie Buckley, Frédérique Valentin, Ralph Regenvanu, and Marcelin Abong. 2010. “Un cimetière de premier peuplement: Le Site de Teouma, sud d’Efate, Vanuatu/ A cemetery of first settlement: Teouma, South Efate, Vanuatu.” Pp. 140–161 in Lapita: Ancêtres océaniens/Oceanic Ancestors, ed. C. Sand and S. Bedford. Paris: Museé du quai Branly/Somogy. Bellwood, Peter. 1997. Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Bentley, A., H. Buckley, M. Spriggs, S. Bedford, C. Ottley, G. Nowell, C. Macpherson, and D. Pearson. 2007. “Lapita migrants in the Pacific’s oldest cemetery: Isotopic analysis at Teouma, Vanuatu.” American Antiquity 72(4): 645– 656. Bolton, Lissant. 1999. “Introduction.” Oceania 70: 1–8. Buckley, Hallie, Nancy Tayles, M. Spriggs, and Stuart Bedford. 2008. “A preliminary report on health and disease in early Lapita skeletons: Possible biological costs of colonization.” Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 3(1): 87–114. Burley, David, Marshall Weisler, and Jian-xin Zhao. 2012. “High precision U/Th dating of first Polynesian settlement.” PLoS ONE 7(11): e48769. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048769 Chiu, Scarlett. 2011. “Lapita-scape: Research possibilities using the digital database of Lapita pottery.” People and Culture in Oceania 27: 39–63. Clark, G. 2007. “Specialisation, standardisation and Lapita ceramics.” Pp. 289–299 in Oceanic Explorations: Lapita and Western Pacific Settlement, ed, S. Bedford, C. Sand, and S. P. Connaughton. Terra Australis 26. Canberra: ANU E-Press. Conte, E., 2006. “Ethnoarchaeology in Polynesia.” Pp. 240–258 in Archaeology of Oceania: Australia and the Pacific Islands, ed. I. Lilley. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Cronin, Shane, Karoly Nemeth, and Vince Neall. 2008. “Volcanism and Archaeology.” Pp. 2185–2196 in Encyclopedia of Archaeology, ed. D. Pearsall. New York: Academic Press. Dickinson, William. 2001. “Petrography and geologic provenance of Sand Tempers in Prehistoric potsherds from Fiji and Vanuatu, South Pacific.” Geoarchaeology 16(3): 275–322. Dickinson, William, S. Bedford, and M. Spriggs.2013. “Petrography of temper sands in 112 reconstructed Lapita pottery vessels from Teouma (Efate): Archaeological implications and relations to other Vanuatu tempers.” Journal of Pacific Archaeology 4:1–20. Dubois, Marie-Joseph. 1996. “Vanuatu seen from Maré.” Pp. 79–82 in Arts of Vanuatu, ed. J. Bonnemaison, K. Huffman, C. Kaufmann, and D. Tryon. Bathurst: Crawford House Press. Eissen, Jean-Philippe, Michel Monzier, and Claude Robin. 1994. “Kuwae, l’eruption volcanique oubliée.” La Recherche 270: 1200–1202. Field, Julie. 2006. “The prehistory of the interior of Vitilevu.” Domodomo 19: 7–19. Fison, Lorimer. 1885. “The Nanga, or sacred stone enclosure of Wainimala, Fiji.” Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 14: 14–31. Flexner, James. 2012. “Mission Archaeology in Vanuatu: Report of the 2011 Preliminary Field Season on Erromango and Tanna.” Report on file at the Vanuatu Cultural Centre, Port Vila. Page 13 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu Galipaud, Jean-Christophe. 2010. “Makue and Shokraon: Earliest arrivals and cultural transformations in Northern Vanuatu.” Pp. 138–140 in Lapita: Ancêtres océaniens/Oceanic Ancestors, ed. C. Sand and S. Bedford. Paris: Museé du quai Branly/Somogy. Galipaud, Jean-Christophe, and Mary-Clare Swete Kelly. 2007. “Makué (Aore Island, Santo, Vanuatu): A new Lapita site in the ambit of New Britain obsidian distribution.” Pp. 151–162 in Oceanic Explorations: Lapita and Western Pacific Settlement, ed. S. Bedford, C. Sand, and S. Connaughton. Terra Australis 26. Canberra: ANU E-Press. Garanger, José. 1972. Archéologie des Nouvelles-Hébrides: Contribution á la connaissance des îles du centre. Publications de la Société des Océanistes, No. 30. Paris: ORSTOM. Green, Roger. 2003. “The Lapita horizon and traditions—Signature for one set of oceanic migrations.” Pp. 95–120 in Pacific Archaeology: Assessments and Prospects, ed. C. Sand. Noumea: Les Cahiers de l’archeologie en Nouvelle-Calédonie 15. Green, Roger, and Patrick Kirch. 1997. “Lapita exchange systems and their Polynesian transformations: Seeking explanatory models.” Pp. 19–37 in Prehistoric Long-Distance Interaction in Oceania: An Interdisciplinary Approach, ed. M. Weisler. NZAA Monograph 21. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association. Groube, Leslie. 1971. “Tonga, Lapita pottery and Polynesian origins.” Journal of the Polynesian Society 80: 278– 316. Horrocks, Mark, and Stuart Bedford. 2010. “Introduced Dioscorea spp. starch in Lapita and later deposits, Vao Island, Vanuatu.” New Zealand Journal of Botany 48(3): 179–183. Horrocks, Mark, Stuart Bedford, and Matthew Spriggs. 2009. “A short note on banana (Musa) phytoliths in Lapita, immediately post-Lapita and modern period archaeological deposits from Vanuatu.” Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 2048–2054. Huffman, Kirk. 1996. “Trading, cultural exchange and copyright: Important aspects of Vanuatu arts.” Pp. 182–194 in Arts of Vanuatu, ed. J. Bonnemaison, K. Huffman, C. Kaufmann, and D. Tryon. Bathurst: Crawford House Press. Kirch, Patrick V. 1990. “Specialization and exchange in the Lapita complex of Oceania (1600‒500 B.C.).” Asian Perspectives 29: 117–133. Kirch, Patrick V. 1997. The Lapita Peoples. Cambridge: Blackwell. Kirch, Patrick V. 2000. On the Road of the Winds: An Archaeological History of the Pacific Islands before European Contact. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kirch, Patrick V., and Douglas E. Yen. 1982. Tikopia: The Prehistory and Ecology of a Polynesian Outlier. B. P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 238. Honolulu. Lightner, Sara, and Anna Naupa. 2005. Histri Blong Yumi Long Vanuatu. 3 vols. plus teacher’s guide. Port Vila: Vanuatu Cultural Centre. Lydon, J. 2006. “Pacific encounters, or beyond the islands of history.” Pp. 293–312 in Historical Archaeology, ed. M. Hall and S. W. Silliman. Oxford: Blackwell. Lynch, John, and Terry Crowley. 2001. Languages of Vanuatu: A New Survey and Bibliography. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. Pawley, Andrew. 1981. “Melanesian diversity and Polynesian homogeneity: A unified explanation for language.” Pp. 269–309 in Studies in Pacific Languages and Cultures in Honour of Bruce Biggs, ed. J. Hollyman and A. Pawley. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand. Petchey, Fiona, Matthew Spriggs, Foss Leach, Mike Seed, Christophe Sand, Mike Pietrusewsky, and Kath Anderson. 2011. “Testing the human factor: Radiocarbon dating the first peoples of the South Pacific.” Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 29–44. Page 14 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu Pineda, Rufino, and Jean-Christophe Galipaud. 1998. “Evidences archéologiques d’une surrection différentielle de l’île de Malo (archipel du Vanuatu) au cours de l’Holocène récent.” C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la terre et des planètes 327: 777–779. Quantin, Paul. 1979. Archipel des Nouvelles Hébrides: Atlas des Sols. Paris: ORSTOM. Reepmeyer, Christian. 2009. “The Obsidian Sources and Distribution Systems Emanating from Gaua and Vanua Lava in the Banks Islands of Vanuatu.” PhD thesis. Australian National University, Canberra. Regenvanu, Ralph, Peter Kolmas, Martha Yamsiu, David Roe, and Jean-Christophe Galipaud. 1992. Wokabaot Blong Olgeta Blong VCHSS. Port Vila: Vanuatu Cultural and Historic Sites Survey. Robin, Claude, Michel Monzier, and Jean-Philippe Eissen. 1993. “Giant tuff cone and 12 km-wide associated caldera at Ambrym Volcano (Vanuatu, New Hebrides Arc.).” Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 55: 225– 228. Roe, David, Ralph Regenvanu, Francois Wadra, and Nick Araho. 1994. “Working with cultural landscapes in Melanesia: Some problems and approaches in the formulation of cultural policies.” Pp. 115–130 in Developing Cultural Policy in Melanesia: Culture-Kastom-Tradition, ed. L. Lindstrom and G. White. Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies. Sand, Christophe, and Stuart Bedford. 2010. Lapita: Oceanic Ancestors, ed. C. Sand and S. Bedford. Paris: Somogy/musée du quai Branly. Sheppard, Peter. 2010. “Into the great ocean: Lapita movement into Remote Oceania.” Pp. 105–117 in Lapita: Oceanic Ancestors, ed. C. Sand and S. Bedford. Paris: Somogy/musée du quai Branly. Sheppard, Peter, and R. Walter 2006. “A Revised Model of Solomon Islands Culture History.” Journal of the Polynesian Society 115(1): 47–76. Shineburg, D. 1967. They Came for Sandalwood: A Study of the Sandalwood Trade in the South West Pacific, 1830‒1865. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. Shing, Richard. 2013. “Spreading the word: Archaeological awareness and the wider public in Vanuatu.” Pp. 189– 197 in Pacific Archaeology: Documenting the Past 50,000 Years, ed. G. Summerhayes and H. Buckley. University of Otago Studies in Archaeology No. 25. Dunedin: Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Otago. Shutler, Mary Elizabeth, Richard Shutler, Jr., and Stuart Bedford. 2002. “Further detail on the archaeological explorations in the Southern New Hebrides, 1963‒1964.” Pp. 189–206 in Fifty Years in the Field: Essays in Honour and Celebration of Richard Shutler Jr’s Archaeological Career, ed. S. Bedford, C. Sand, and D. Burley. NZAA Monograph 25. Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association. Siméoni, Patricia. 2009. Atlas du Vanouatou (Vanuatu). Port Vila: Éditions Géo-consulte. Siméoni, Patricia, and Lebot, Vincent. 2012. “Spatial representation of land use and population density: Integrated layers of data contribute to environmental planning in Vanuatu.” Human Ecology 40:541–555. DOI 10.1007/s10745012-9487-2. Specht, Jim. 2007. “Small islands in the big picture: The formative period of Lapita in the Bismarck Archipelago.” Pp. 51–70 in Oceanic Explorations: Lapita and Western Pacific Settlement, ed. S. Bedford, C. Sand, and S. Connaughton. Terra Australis 26. Canberra: ANU E-Press. Spriggs, M. 1981. “Vegetable Kingdoms: Taro Irrigation and Pacific Prehistory.” PhD thesis. Australian National University, Canberra. Spriggs, M. 1984. “The Lapita cultural complex: Origins, distribution, contemporaries and successors.” Journal of Pacific History 19(4): 202–223. Spriggs, Matthew. 1986. “Landscape, land use, and political transformation in southern Melanesia.” Pp. 6–19 in Page 15 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu Island Societies: Archaeological Approaches to Evolution and Transformation, ed. P. V. Kirch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Spriggs, Matthew. 1997. The Island Melanesians. Oxford: Blackwell. Spriggs, Matthew. 2007. “Population in a vegetable kingdom: Aneityum Island (Vanuatu) at European contact in 1830.” Pp. 278–305 in The Growth and Collapse of Island Societies, ed. J.-L. Rallu and P. V. Kirch. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Spriggs, Matthew. 2008. “Ethnographic parallels and the denial of history.” World Archaeology 40(4): 538–552. Spriggs, Matthew. 2011. “Archaeology and the Austronesian expansion: Where are we now?” Antiquity 85: 510– 528. Spriggs, Matthew, and Stuart Bedford. 2001. “Arapus: A Lapita site at Mangaasi in Central Vanuatu?” Pp. 93–104 in The Archaeology of Lapita Dispersal in Oceania, ed. G. R. Clark, A. J. Anderson, and T. Vunidilo. Terra Australis 17. Canberra: Pandanus Books. Spriggs, Matthew, and Stuart Bedford. 2013. “Is there an Incised Lapita Phase after dentate-stamped pottery ends? Data from Teouma, Efate Island, Vanuatu.” Pp. 148–156 in Pacific Archaeology: Documenting the Past 50,000 Years, ed. G. Summerhayes and H. Buckley. University of Otago Studies in Archaeology No. 25. Dunedin: Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Otago. Spriggs, Matthew, Roger Bird, and Wallace Ambrose. 2010. “A reanalysis of the Tikopia Obsidians.” Archaeology in Oceania 45(1): 31–38. Summerhayes, Glenn. 2000. Lapita Interaction. Terra Australis 15. Canberra: Australian National University. Torrence, R., V. Neall, and B. Boyd. 2009. “Volcanism and Historical Ecology on the Willaumez Peninsula, Papua New Guinea.” Pacific Science 63: 507–535. Tryon, Darrell. 1996. “Dialect chaining and the use of geographical space.” Pp. 170–181 in Arts of Vanuatu, ed. J. Bonnemaison, K. Huffman, C. Kaufmann, and D. Tryon. Bathurst: Crawford House Press. Tryon, D. 1999. “Ni-Vanuatu Research and Researchers.” Oceania 70: 9–15. Valentin, Frédérique, Stuart Bedford, Hallie Buckley, and Matthew Spriggs. 2010. “Lapita burial practices: Evidence for complex body and bone treatment at the Teouma cemetery, Vanuatu, Southwest Pacific.” Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 5(1): 1–24. Valentin, Frédérique, Matthew Spriggs, Stuart Bedford, and Hallie Buckley. 2011. “Vanuatu mortuary practices over three millennia: Lapita to the early European contact period.” Journal of Pacific Archaeology 2(2): 49–65. VNSO 2009. Vanuatu National Statistics Office 2009 Census Reports. http://www.vnso.gov.vu. Walter, Richard, and Peter Sheppard. 2006. “Archaeology in Melanesia: A case study from the Western Province of the Solomon Islands.” Pp. 137–159 in Archaeology of Oceania: Australia and the Pacific Islands, ed. I. Lilley. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Ward, Graeme. 1979. “Prehistoric Settlement and Economy of a Tropical Small Island Environment: The Banks Islands, Insular Melanesia.” PhD thesis. Australian National University, Canberra. White, Arthur, Trevor Worthy, Stuart Hawkins, Stuart Bedford, and Matthew Spriggs. 2010. “Megafaunal meiolaniid horned turtles survived until early human settlement in Vanuatu, Southwest Pacific.” PNAS 107: 15512–15516. Stuart Bedford Stuart Bedford, Australian National University. Matthew Spriggs Matthew Spriggs, Australian National University. Page 16 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015 The Archaeology of Vanuatu Page 17 of 17 PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy). Subscriber: Oxford University Press - Master Gratis Access; date: 25 February 2015