Ko whakapaukorero te maunga Ko Tarawera te awa Ko Ngati Awa te iwi Ko Mataatua te waka Ko Te Kohika te pa Ko Tupai, Ko Tutarakauika, Ko Te Rangihiiria, Ko Tuara nga taniwha Ko Matataketake me Tiki nga mauri kohatu Ko Te Awa o Te Atua te kotore Ko Otamaroroa te papa whenua Ko Tamarau te kaitiaki wairua Ko Te Kaokaoroa te akua Ko Waimea, Ko Waitepuru, Ko Awatarariki, Ko Awaitipaku, Ko Awaiti, Ko Omehue, Ko Awakaponga, Ko Te Waikamihi, Ko Mangaone nga awa Ko Te Otaramuturangi, Ko Tiepataua, Ko Te Awakaponga, Ko Te Ahikokoai, Ko Awatarerehika, Ko Te Umuhika nga urupa.
Ngati Awa pepeha

Whakapaukorero is the mountain Tarawera is the river Ngati Awa is the tribe Mataatua is the canoe Te Kohika is the pa Tupai, Tutarakauika, Te Rangihiiria, and Tuara are the guardians Matataketake and Tiki are the talismans Te Awa o Te Atua is the estuary Otamaroroa is the locality Tamarau is the spirit guide Te Kaokaoroa is the coastline Waimea, Waitepuru, Awatarariki, Awaitipaku, Awaiti, Omehue, Awakaponga, Te Waikamihi and Mangaone are the streams Te Otaramuturangi, Tiepataua, Te Awakaponga, Te Ahikokoai, Awatarerehika and Te Umuhika are the cemeteries.
Ngati Awa proverbial saying

The archaeology of a late Maori lake village in the Ngati Awa rohe, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand

Edited by Geoffrey Irwin

Auckland University Press

First published 2004 Auckland University Press University of Auckland Private Bag 92019 Auckland, New Zealand www.auckland.ac.nz/aup © the authors 2004 ISBN 1 86940 315 0 This book is Memoir 9 of the Whakatane and District Historical Society, which has provided assistance with its publication.

National Library of New Zealand Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Kohika : the archaeology of a late Ma ¯ori lake village in the Nga ¯ti Awa rohe, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand / edited by Geoffrey Irwin. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-86940-315-0 1. Ngati Awa (New Zealand people)—Antiquities. 2. Excavations (Archaeology)—New Zealand—Kohika (Rangitaiki Plains) 3. Kohika Site (N.Z.) I. Irwin, Geoffrey. 993.4201—dc 22

This book is copyright. Apart from fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism, or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without the prior permission of the publisher. Designed and typeset by Amy Tansell Printed by Printlink Ltd, Wellington

Artefacts of bone.L.J. Smith 45 76 83 122 149 160 168 177 198 13. tooth. Faunal remains from Kohika G. pollen. Irwin and R. Irwin. McGlone and K.J. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 217 G.S. Jones 4. Williams. The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution S. McGlone and S. G.D.W. Irwin and M.Contents List of tables List of figures List of plates Acknowledgements 1.L. Irwin. H. R. I. Moore 11. The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 20 M. M. Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village G. Wallace and G.J. T. Wallace. Houses. Nichol. Taylor. Kohika in the geomorphological context of the Rangitaiki Plains G.T.T.G.A.J. Sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts P.T.K.J. Jones 6. Holdaway 12. Nichol 14. Horrocks. The wooden artefacts from Kohika R.S.G. Worthy and I.J. Irwin vi vii ix xiii 1 11 3. Neich 8.J.J. Law. M. pumice and pounamu G.J. Irwin. Irwin Appendix Inventory of wooden and fibre items R.H. McAra 9.R. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika R. phytoliths.J. Evidence for diet. M.J. An introduction to Kohika in historical and archaeological context G. Kohika fibrework S. Ngaropo 2. Excavations and site history at Kohika G. Irwin 10.J.J. Irwin 7. Lawlor and P. Site chronology G. Irwin Index 239 249 260 . L. R.J. parasites. Wallace and G. Irwin 5. Hall.

roundness and sphericity of Kohika obsidian pebbles XRF analyses of obsidian samples from Kohika and Maketu Complete flake mean dimensions (and standard deviation) by exterior scar direction for all areas in the university excavation.2 vi Frequency of sites by type in the Rangitaiki Plains and surrounding area Radiocarbon dates.5 Table 8.2 Table 6.4 Table 8. Mayor Island obsidian Maximum dimension for proximal.8 Table 11.2 Table 8.1 Table 8.17 Table 11. flakes and cores by area. Mayor Island obsidian Frequency of edge-modified pieces. Mayor Island obsidian Number and weight of flakes and flake fragments of maximum dimension less than 10 mm by area.14 Table 11. Phase 2 end and Phase 2 duration Characteristics of the bird spear fragments Comb dimensions (mm) Estimated dimensions of excavated houses and pataka Single spiral-wrapped bundles of harakeke (1SWB) Two-ply spiral-wrapped bundles of harakeke (2PSW) Three-ply cordage Three-ply braid variants Plaited twill with narrow strips Plaited check with broad strips Netting and component parts Other pieces: fragments whose technique is unclear Contents of boxes (KOH number and technique) Artefacts from Kohika Size.1 Table 8. Mayor Island obsidian Mean dimensions (and standard deviation) for pieces with macroscopic edge modification by type for all areas excavated by the university. Mayor Island obsidian Minimum number of individual mammals Human bone by excavation area .1 Table 5.1 Table 6.16 Table 11.15 Table 11.6 Table 8. Mayor Island obsidian Mean dimensions for complete flakes of length greater than 23 mm. Mayor Island obsidian Mean dimensions (and standard deviations) of complete tools compared with complete flakes for all areas in the university excavations.10 Table 11.18 Table 12. Mayor Island obsidian Frequency of complete and fragmented tools by type of edge modification and area Length of notched area of edge modification for all notched tools by region Maketu and Taupo obsidian technological types Proportion of cortex on flakes and edge-modified pieces from all areas. Mayor Island obsidian Mean length (and standard deviation) of complete flakes with length > 23 mm by exterior scar morphology and area.5 Table 11.12 Table 11. Mayor Island obsidian Mean dimensions (and standard deviation) for complete tools from the Historical Society assemblage by edge modification type.11 Table 11.2 Table 7.List of tables Table 1.4 Table 11.3 Table 8.1 Table 10. Kohika pollen site (Square D17) Chronometric data used in the current analysis Summary posterior distributions for Phase 2 start. Mayor Island obsidian Complete flake mean dimensions (and standard deviation) from the Historical Society assemblage by exterior scar pattern.1 Table 11.1 Table 3. Mayor Island obsidian Mean dimensions for complete platform rejuvenation flakes from all areas in the university excavation.2 Table 11.9 Table 9.8 Table 8.1 Table 5.3 Table 11.13 Table 11. medial and distal fragments by exterior scar pattern. Mayor Island obsidian Frequency of complete and fragmented flakes of length > 23 mm by area.1 Table 12. Mayor Island obsidian Maximum dimension of cores by scar pattern for all areas in the university excavation.1 Table 10.7 Table 8. Mayor Island obsidian Complete flakes with length > 23 mm from the university excavations compared with those excavated by the Whakatane Historical Society.7 Table 11.6 Table 11. by exterior scar direction from all areas in the university excavation.9 Table 11.2 Table 11.

4b Figure 3. Hunia 1977) Archaeological sites recorded in the area of the Rangitaiki Plains The geomorphology of the Rangitaiki Plains Former shorelines and river courses on the Rangitaiki Plains Soils of the Rangitaiki Plains in the vicinity of Kohika (after Pullar 1985) The Bay of Plenty lowlands with pollen sites underlined Pollen site stratigraphy: Kohika pollen site (excavation Square D17).6a Figure 3.8 Figure 4.2 Figure 4. north section Area D.1 Table 13. all sections vii . the layout of excavation units Squares D1 and D2. south section Square B1. north section Square B1. west section Square C1. percentage pollen diagram Tunapahore B.2 Figure 2.4a Figure 3.10 Figure 4.5 Figure 3.7 Dog body parts by excavation area Taphonomic variables for identified dog bone by excavated area Estimated ages of dogs at death Avian taxa represented among identifiable elements in the Kohika assemblage with data from all squares and layers amalgamated Frequencies of fish species.3b Figure 3.6 Table 12. percentage pollen diagram Tunapahore A.1 Figure 4.19 List of figures Figure 1.1 Figure 3.7 Figure 4.8 Table 12.7 Table 12.2 Figure 2.12 Table 12.1 Figure 2. weights and percentages Incidence of fish body parts in Kohika coprolites Seeds from Kohika coprolites Percentages of inorganic material Variation in coprolite no.3 Figure 3.13 Table 13. percentage pollen diagram Thornton-Atkinson complex. percentage pollen diagram Kohika.11 Figure 4.11 Table 12. Area D Shellfish from Kohika Shell samples from the White House.5 Table 12.14 The former river courses of the Rangitaiki Plains and communication routes recorded in early maps (Gibbons 1990. percentage pollen diagram Kohika. percentage pollen diagram A contour map of Kohika showing the location of the excavations Some representative section drawings from Area A A plan of the excavated features in Area A Square B1. Area D Shell samples from the Bright Yellow floor.3 Table 12.6 Figure 4.12 Figure 4.5 Table 13.Table 12. east section Square B4.9 Table 12.4 Figure 4. plan of features at the base of the excavation Square B3.3a Figure 3.2 Figure 3. Area D Shell samples from the Yellow House.4 Table 13.3 Table 13. by area Fish species frequencies by layer. percentage pollen diagram Tunapahore B. west section Square C7. Tunapahore archaeological site complex and Thornton-Atkinson archaeological site Kohika. Area D Bone class frequencies for jack mackerel.6b Figure 4. south section Square C10.10 Table 12.6 Table 13. percentage pollen diagram Thornton-Atkinson complex.2 Table 13.4 Table 12. south section Square C1.5 Figure 4.3 Figure 4.13 Figure 4. percentage pollen diagram Kohika.3c Figure 3.3d Figure 3. Area D Samples included in coprolite analyses Physical attributes of coprolites analysed Components of coprolites.9 Figure 4.1 Figure 1.

25 Figure 6. Squares D12–15. one bulkhead and eight other fittings Canoe bailers Six heru or hair combs Six darts or javelins Seven potaka or spinning tops An adze handle rough-out A chisel handle and a chisel socket A section of a putorino (flute) Two net gauges Two thread reels Fibre-.4 Figure 6.5 Figure 7. the Bright Yellow horizon Area D.15 Figure 4. the Yellow House horizon (stakeholes less than 10 cm deep are not shown) Area D. Drawing of two-ply spiral-wrapped bunches of harakeke (2PSW) Diagram of technique for making 2PSW Bone hei tiki pendant.21 Figure 6.13 Figure 6.2 viii Area D.24 Figure 6. the White House horizon Area D.15 Figure 6.17 Figure 6. and four handles of composite digging tools Seven complete detachable digging-tool blades.11 Figure 7.7 Figure 6. based on rafter dimensions Two parts of pataka from Area D. end Phase 2.1 Figure 9. start Phase 2. Area D A reconstruction of the pataka from Area D Types of lashing holes on house planks Poupou and other vertical house elements from the HS Area Door or window parts from the HS Area Tumatahuki battens from the HS Area Possible fragments of pataka from the HS Area Dressed slabs split from pukatea tree trunks. HS Area and Area B Timbers recovered from Area D The three rafters from Area D Detail of rafter tenon joints Parameters used to estimate the width of a building in Area D.Figure 4.1a Figure 8.and rope-working tools Ladder Wood-splitting wedges Pegs Items of unidentified function A reconstruction of the carved house from the Historical Society (HS) Area A reconstruction of the pole and thatch house from the Yellow House floor.10 Figure 6. plus two indeterminate items (KOH30 and 31) Detail of the internal and external framing of a superior house KOH298. one rough-out and one fragment Part of a carving on a ceremonial ko Seven broken shafts with terminal knobs.11 Figure 6.1 Figure 7.3 Figure 7.1b Figure 9.16 Figure 4. tooth pendant.14 Figure 6.9 Figure 6.18 Figure 6.3 Figure 5.1 Figure 5.6 Figure 7.5 Figure 6. bone toggle Pounamu adze .19 Figure 6.3 Figure 6.12 Figure 6.23 Figure 6. a one-piece spade.4 Figure 7.9 Figure 7.17 Figure 4. net.2 Figure 5.20 Figure 6.2 Figure 6.19 Figure 5.22 Figure 6. duration Bird spear point made from tree-fern trunk Twelve digging sticks and one ko footrest A weeder blade.1 Posterior distribution for Phase 2.16 Figure 6.15 Figure 8.13 Figure 7.7 Figure 7.6 Figure 6. trench Historical Society investigations (with some of their notes) Summary of the calibrated distributions for the chronometric data given in Table 5.10 Figure 7. possibly handles from composite tools Fifteen beaters and beater fragments Four bowls and bowl fragments A steering paddle rough-out Canoe paddle and paddle fragments Canoe hull pieces Three canoe seats.14 Figure 7.1 Figure 6.12 Figure 7.8 Figure 6.8 Figure 7.4 Figure 6.18 Figure 4.2 Figure 7.26 Figure 7.

Area D Figure 12. f (2878). The University of Auckland excavations of Area D during the season of January.7 Platform preparation flakes and flakes with two interior surfaces: a (2882). b (96). h (2490). b (2163). The roofed pit and two small covered bins in the bottom right were actually found in Area A. List of plates Plate 1. Kohika was an inconspicuous.3 Percentage phytolith diagram for Kohika coprolite samples Figure 13. c (2128).3 Plate 1.1 Plate 1. Area D Figure 13.2 Percentage pollen diagram for Kohika coprolite samples Figure 13. After the discovery of artefacts.4 Relative proportions of ‘grey pebble-type’ and ‘other grey’ obsidian from Kohika Figure 11.3 Quadrants for assessing scar orientation.1 Terms used to describe flake fragments.2 Rb-Sr plots for analysed obsidian artefacts from Kohika (solid symbols) and source samples from Maketu and Taupo Figure 10. multiple platform. radial Figure 11. of the Ratana. The palisade follows the topography around the lake. d (1145). e (1687).Figure 9. heavy. b (1747). Anglican. light.6 Core shapes: a (1525). percentages by weight Figure 13. nets and racks on the right represent the artefacts and building timbers found in the Historical Society Area.3 Size frequency distributions of pipi and tuatua. ix Plate 1.2 In 1975. c (1589). canoes. i and j (1822). The identification numbers are given in brackets: a (1703).2 Flakes with different exterior scar patterns.3 Pumice kumara god Figure 10. sub-radial. The spoil in the background was removed from the drain by a digging machine. In this 1976 photograph are (from left) Dave White. flax and cabbage trees with patches of kahikatea and kanuka scrub is based on the pollen record.1 Components of Kohika coprolite samples.3 Zr-Rb plots for analysed obsidian artefacts from Kohika (solid symbols) and source samples from Maketu and Taupo Figure 10. the first investigations were undertaken by members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society.1 Size frequency distributions of snapper.4 Typology for edge modification: a (2617).4 . The lakeshore vegetation of raupo. kahawai and jack mackerel. pebble. d (2875). and medial flakes lack a platform or a termination Figure 11.1 Dimensions of obsidian pebbles from Kohika. distal flakes have a termination.5 Dimensions of a complete flake Figure 11. low-lying grassed mound in an area of agricultural swamp drainage. The kaumatua placed the site and the artefacts into the interim care of the University of Auckland. b (2491). bifacial. c (2248). radial Figure 11.8 Large flakes from Historical Society: a (94).2 Size frequency distributions of jack mackerel by layer. Proximal flakes include a platform. e (1893). e (3179). Catholic. 1976. Harry Reneti and Albert Te Rere. d (1752) and e (1588) Figure 11. g (1850).4 Percentage diatom diagram for Kohika coprolite samples Figure 14. b (1637). notch Figure 11. A whakanoa ceremony was conducted by Jack Fox. Ringatu and Presbyterian churches respectively. c (1907). uni-directional. c (150).1 A schematic view northwards over Area D across the lake to the dunes and the sea. Area D Figure 12. k (1635). flake. f (1688). Maketu and Otamarakau Figure 10. In the left foreground is a reconstruction of Area D during the Yellow House horizon. Ken Moore and the late Anton van der Wouden. The flake is orientated with the platform at quadrant 1 (the figure is based on artefact 161) Figure 11. Romana Kingi. e (98) and f (158) Figure 12. bi-directional. d (1735). The houses. f (2175). d (161). Mike Mason.

The archaeological excavation can be seen at the end of the farmer’s cattle-race. Squares C1 and C12 reveal a deposit of alluvium. visible in Square B3. lay to the right of the entrance and flowed west to Matata. Square D5. The site perimeter in Area D.19 Plate 4. a late meander channel in the Upper Peat can be seen in the baulk. Square D4.7 Plate 4. The drain section in Area B shows a flood deposit of reworked tephra alluvium outside the site.4 Plate 4. Square D1. which results from their varied composition. where a later meander channel. Canal 109 runs inland from the Awaiti past the remains of Lake Kohika. Kohika in January 1976. January 1976.6 Plate 4. The pukatea board in Square B4 consolidated prior to removal. The defended edge of the site was sharply defined in Square B4. with horizontal light wooden battens flexed and pegged between them. a canal and stopbank now separate Lake Kohika from the archaeological lake village. Area D. has cut into its surface. The spoil heaps are of different colour. Square D2. A degraded pukatea board in the upper peat of Square B4. Area D. Wooden items from the peat below the flood deposit in Square B3 are triple-bagged in plastic. with superimposed house floors visible in the south section.Plate 2. the flood alluvium of sand and silt. firescoops in the White House horizon.14 Plate 4. showing a palisade post. Fine silt lies around the palisade posts. which carried the combined waters of the two rivers. An oval-ended pit in Square A1 Ext.8 Plate 4. The site itself is located on a remnant of sand-dune that dates from the coastline of 2000 years ago.2 Plate 4.15 Plate 4. The edge of the site reveals the effect of the flood in Square B4. This photograph shows the pump being primed in 1975 at the start of a day’s work. Palisade posts were exposed in the side of the agricultural drain visible in the background and Square B3 lies on the other side of it. Square B1 during excavation. pre-flood deposits that built up during occupation. the White House floor. Work is in progress in Areas A. Excavating a swamp in wet weather can have its difficulties.13 Plate 4. south section. while below the alluvium is the culture-bearing Lower Peat.23 Plate 4. marks the edge of an artificial floor of silt. A charcoal sample for C14 dating was taken from underneath the large pumice boulder found in the pit fill. Above this. Square C10 contained a complex succession of fire-pits and hangi with occupational debris and fills composed of material quarried elsewhere. The current road bridge is on the Kaharoa shoreline. reworked Kaharoa alluvium lies outside the site.16 Plate 4.2 Plate 4.11 Plate 4. the Kaharoa Tephra and sedge peat below. A cross-section of a bin structure in Square A3 dug into the former sand-dune. Also showing a test excavation of the lacustrine silt.10 Plate 4. interrupted by a later rectangular pit lying at right angles to it. A line of standing posts. The former course of the Rangitaiki River is at the left of the entrance and the former Te Awa o te Atua estuary.17 Plate 4. and a short distance upstream is the junction of the Tarawera and the Awaiti Stream.21 Plate 4.20 Plate 4.18 Plate 4.1 Plate 4. Inside the line of posts were artificial house floors. outside many associated waterlogged artefacts were found preserved in peat. B and D.3 Plate 4. west section. Looking seawards. Square B4. which formerly lay on its southwestern shore.24 x The new mouth of the Tarawera River.1 Plate 2. Part of a small bin surrounded by surface stakeholes in Square A3.12 Plate 4. Excavations in Square A1 Extension. Square B1 near the base of the excavation showing in situ posts.5 Plate 4. . and post-flood sediments that are culturally sterile. packed with water-rolled greywacke pebbles.22 Plate 4. and the two are separated by the wave-lapped shore. Square D2.9 Plate 4. exposing the extent of the Yellow House horizon.

2 KOH303.4 KOH18.1b KOH300. showing condition of fibres.1a KOH298.1c KOH298. Dante Bonica and Wiremu Puke. Historical Society Area. Fragment of elaborate carving. wooden spear and coil of vine.7 KOH1.1. Short braided fragments. Plate 4. whale vertebra. while the baulks are composed of backfilled spoil.1 Thirteen sections of bird spear and one spear point. Plate 9.3.10 and 11). Plate 8.10 KOH7.4b Fishhook point (dog tooth).33 Square D14.5 KOH44.6a KOH297.31 Square D7. Plate 4.5c Bone awl (bird).4 KOH305. Plate 7.3 KOH17.8b Pounamu adze flake. Plate 7. showing the curvature in the plaiting.27 Square DD. Plate 9. Poupou base.14 KOH174. Poupou base.5a Bone needle (bird). Plate 9.3a–c One-piece bone fishhooks (human). Plate 6. Plate 9. Historical Society Area.1.2 KOH16. Plate 7. Plate 4.8–11. dug previously. Fragment of elaborate carving. Fine twill close-up. A Grommet with netting still attached. Plate 7. Plate 8.8 and 9) and an X and a Y braid (KOH303.6a Bone awl (seal). Historical Society Area. Plate 7.Area D.6b Bone chisel (dog).6b KOH297. Historical Society Area. Plate 7. Plate 7. Plate 4. Plate 9. Fragment of elaborate carving.4. Broad checked plaiting. Poupou base. Plate 8. Plate 9.6 KOH53. Plate 8. Plate 9. canoe bow in peat.1 KOH14. Plate 7. xi Plate 4. Area D. Small fragment of mesh. Plate 4. Fragment of single spiral-wrapped bunches of harakeke (1SWB) resembling a handle. Fragment of 1SWB resembling one half of a pair of two-ply spiralwrapped bunches (2PSW) of harakeke. Plate 8. Plate 8. Plate 8.29 Square D2.1b Greenstone chisel pendant. Plate 7. showing two straight examples (KOH303.11 KOH2. A larger piece of fine twill.30 Square D2. Plate 8.13 KOH4. Plate 7.9 KOH345.8a Pounamu chisel.1. Short fragment of two-ply spiral-wrapped bundles of harakeke (2PSW). Plate 4. Intruding into the square is the corner of Square D2. Area D. and modern replica carved by Paki Harrison. Plate 6. log at base of excavation. Plate 4.4a Bone fishhook blank (human). some details of the excavation of the Yellow House floor. Historical Society Area. Area D.32 Square D13.7 Pounamu adze. Historical Society Area. Area D. north section.5b Bone needle (dog).25 Plate 4. Plate 7. Plate 9.1a Greenstone kuru pendant. Plate 9. Plate 9.2 Two coils of rata vine. Plate 8. Historical Society Area. Area D.8 KOH3. Poutokomanawa figure.3 KOH304. Plate 7. Historical Society Area. Plate 7. Plate 9. laid bracken-fern stems below an artificial house floor.12 KOH6. Poupou base. adzed log and length of rope. Carved handle of bailer.5.26 . Plate 9.2 Bone tiki pendant (human). Pare fragment. showing one folded-back strip (at lower part of image). Poutahuhu base. Plate 9. Plate 9. Part of carving. Historical Society Area. Historical Society Area. Fragment of carving. Fragment of spiral from carving. Square DD during excavation of the Yellow House horizon. gourd shell.5 KOH303.28 Square D2. Plate 7.

A sawn section of human cranium.3 Plate 12. Fishbone extracted from coprolite no. showing characteristic pitting of the shell.9b Plate 12. Knife-cut marks on a human femur.4 Plate 13. Dog-tooth marks on snapper bones and barracouta jaw.2 Plate 13.6 Plate 13. Egg of Toxocara canis.1 Plate 13.3 Plate 13. xii .9a Plate 9.1 Plate 12. Dog cranium with cut marks on nasal bone.5 Plate 13.6 Sandstone file. Pumice pigment bowl. Egg of Capillaria hepatica.5 Plate 12. Dog cranium with crushed parietal. Examples of coprolites from Kohika.4 Plate 12. Dog mandible with ventral margin removed. Charcoal extracted from coprolite no.24.19. Egg of Toxocara canis.Plate 9.2 Plate 12.

Caroline Phillips. Linda Burnett. Members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society who first worked at Kohika and then gave generous support to the University of Auckland team included Tiena Jordan. as described in the book. Clare Fawsett. Ian Lawlor. who carefully xiii . Garry Law. Warner Haldane. Gary Barnett. helped arrange the return of the artefacts to Whakatane. At Kohika. Mike Mason. Professor Hirini Mead. Richard Cassels. Technical staff at the university made a magnificent contribution over the years: they include Karel Peters. and to many institutions. Neighbouring farmers. Doug Sutton. Bernadine Naus. Julie Stretton. Alan Walmsley. Phil Jessop. A number of anthropology students carried out preliminary study for research essays and theses. Ken Burnett. helped to house the excavators and made gifts of food. Anne Geelen. Peter Pearce. Steve Mangan. Roger Green. Bill Shaw. The whakanoa ceremony at the site was conducted by Jack Fox. Mary Newman. The Rangitaiki Plains Dairy Company provided us with showers and evening meals during one winter season. some of whom have now passed on. Karel Peters. John Coster. Mark Bellingham. Joanna Boileau. University of Auckland. and the New Zealand Historic Places Trust. Les and Graeme Brownlee. A later director. Tony Walton and Lynnette Williams. Those friends. Dave White. Jack Moller.Acknowledgements For over 30 years this project has accumulated a huge debt to many individuals. Rod Wallace and Dilys Johns for conservation. Pouroto Ngaropo and Ngahuia Rawson of Te Runanga o Ngati Awa provided guidance for the return of the Kohika artefacts and for their future. Dorothy Brown. Reg Nichol. Sandra Dreifus. Gabrielle Johnston. Terry Hunt. Helen Charters. the farmer. Joan Hunter. The quality of this book has been greatly improved by Janet Davidson. Pamela Raspe. David Stowe. and Tim Mackrell and Hamish MacDonald for photography. Graeme Ward. Jill Irwin. and the sharemilkers. Tia Negerevich. Jennifer Leighton. All of the scholars who contributed to the analysis of archaeological material are named in the list of contents of the book. Barry Baquie. Pamela Russell. Nola Arthur. Apologies to anyone who has been overlooked. who was also director of the Whakatane District Museum and Gallery. Errol Westgate and Anton van der Wouden. Don Hanson. Institutional support and funding was provided by the Department of Anthropology. Peter Russell. Joan Lawrence. Simon Best. Steve Black. Harry Reneti and Albert Te Rere. Romana Kingi. Mark de Courcy. Michelle Phillips. the Lotteries Board of the Department of Internal Affairs. Makiuti Tongia. could not have been more obliging. especially Tony Pansier. Marlene Deans. colleagues and students who took part in the excavations at Kohika include Harry Allen. Jan Stowe. the University of Auckland Research Committee. Ken Moore. Caroline Phillips and Seline McNamee for illustrations.

and Andrew Mason who edited the text. Katrina Duncan and Amy Tansell. Geoffrey Irwin xiv . Sarah and Kate kept watch on the spoil heaps to see that nothing of value was carelessly thrown away.read and commented on earlier drafts. I am grateful to Elizabeth Caffin and the staff of Auckland University Press including Annie Irving. The project would not have been possible without the support of the Irwin family. Jill made sure the excavation was fed. and Tom took his first steps at Kohika. Diane Lowther compiled the index.

A little further downstream the Rangitaiki River formerly joined the Tarawera to form Te Awa o Te Atua. It takes its name from the adjoining Lake Kohika. 1. I. Kirch and Green (2001:199–200) estimate that about 20 per cent of material objects were archaeologically durable and the remaining 80 per cent perishable.J.’ However. . Although there have been previous excavations of wetland sites in New Zealand. floodplain and coast. which lies in the fork of the Tarawera River and Awaiti Stream (Fig.1 An introduction to Kohika in historical and archaeological context G. represent a technological. These include all kinds of wooden artefacts. . wetlands have continued to produce archaeological evidence unobtainable from any other environment save the most extreme. food remains. the wetlands of the world have continued to yield new and often surprising information about the past . a river estuary that ran three kilometres further westwards behind the coastal dunes to flow into the sea near the present settlement of Matata. 1 . . It is in such a context that this 30-year archaeological wetland study reaches publication. In their published Rhind Lectures for 1995. Law. These circumstances apply generally to New Zealand.G. Irwin. together with its contents. considerable analytical sophistication and resources are needed to investigate and preserve them. At some time around AD 1700. Coles wrote (1996:133): ‘. and also by river and track to the interior of the North Island. none has produced as much rich and varied material as Kohika and had the benefit of such a range of modern specialist analysis. Ngaropo Archaeological sites in wetlands are unusually rich because they can preserve organic materials that rarely survive elsewhere.1). The site is of fairly short duration and provides an archaeological snapshot of Maori material culture and the way of life that had developed in the North Island prior to the arrival and influence of Europeans. as such. while wet sites offer huge opportunities for research. economic and cultural entity. . The site was excavated during the late 1970s and produced a rare and comprehensive inventory of waterlogged remains that are in close association with one another and. Kohika is located in the west of the Rangitaiki Plains in what was formerly a great swamp. and B. such sites are increasingly rare as wetlands are drained. Kohika was a palisaded village on a small island in the swamp beside the lake. For Polynesia. except in unusual circumstances. It is just a few hundred metres east of the Tarawera River and two kilometres inland from the sea. J. The site had good access to the resources of swamp. fabrics. However. This is based on ethnographic inventories of material culture and lexical reconstructions of the names for artefacts. R. It was strategically located for coastal communication by canoe. and microfossils that indicate former environments. there is evidence for travel and trade in both directions. It was rediscovered during agricultural drainage in 1974. a Maori lake village called Kohika in the Bay of Plenty was abandoned after a flood and fortuitously preserved in peat swamp. Lawlor and P.

including housing. followed by a general review of the evidence. artefacts of bone. The site has archaeological evidence for a broad range of domestic and social activities. pumice and pounamu. faunal remains and coprolite analysis. a large assemblage of flaked obsidian and some miscellaneous artefacts of other materials. Hunia 1977) which was larger then than now. food production. and the various chapters deal with geomorphology. This book contains contributions from 20 scholars. fibre work. defence and outside communication.2 Kohika Figure 1. art and religion. including the remains of what is currently the oldest-known carved house in New Zealand. personal status.1 The former river courses of the Rangitaiki Plains and communication routes recorded in early maps (Gibbons 1990. The remains reveal many aspects of life. plus cooking shelters and semi-subterranean storage pits and bins. obsidian sourcing. Preserved in the swamp are organic remains that give detailed information about former environments and diet. There is evidence for music. In addition to the remarkable inventory of wooden artefacts. houses and pataka. craft activities. There were raised pataka storehouses that have long been elusive in prehistory. canoe transport. vegetation history. play. cordage and netting. obsidian flake technology. There were houses of varied construction. The rest of this chapter includes a brief account of . chronology. excavation. wooden artefacts. there are fibre plaiting.

lived on Rarotonga. We have found only two specific references to Kohika. Burt. see also London 1960). and the Orini River (connecting the Awa-a-te-Atua with Whakatane Harbour) and by the labyrinth of reed-fringed waterways. . is now in the rohe of Ngati Awa but its traditional history is complex (Best 1925:690. the wider Rangitaiki floodplain was the land of Ngati Awa and sections of Te Arawa and Tuwharetoa. provided access to Rotorua and the central North Island.’ (Hunia 1977:x). Kohika in history and tradition According to Ngati Awa oral tradition. Grace refers in his diaries to connections between Maori he met in the Rangitaiki Swamp and Lake Taupo (Grace 1928:132.S. . and negotiations that vested ownership of the artefacts with Ngati Awa.S. navigable in small canoes. MS 1898–1922). on the west bank of the Tarawera. who was descended from Toi and his wife Te Kuraimonoa. One description of conditions and communications in the swamp is by Cowan (1923:96): This Rangitaiki Swamp . Grace 1959:90–1. the Rangitaiki. Grace built a storehouse and landing-stage to service his inland mission to Taupo. Tarawera and Whakatane. Grace MS 1850–73. who for many years farmed the Matapihi Block at Matata: ‘The natives tell me when they were spearing eels near the Kohika Lake they came across the remains of an old . the Awaiti-Paku. a man called Waitahaarikikore. which he sailed via the Kermadecs to the Bay of Plenty. was then accessible only by the tracks along the seaward sandhills. the other tribes have ‘historical and land affiliations to the area . It concludes with a brief history of the archaeological project since 1975. While the area is generally recognised as being Ngati Awa. said: ‘Te ko hika tera’. where he quotes Mr F. Waitahaarikikore claimed mana whenua over the place now called Kohika (Anon. Lawlor 1979:17–22).G. T. the latter being where the Rev. The tribal history has fluid relationships and the missionary T. and a review of archaeological site distribution in this part of the Bay of Plenty. plus foot trails.An introduction to Kohika in historical and archaeological context 3 traditional and historical records of Kohika. Europeans came late to the Rangitaiki Plains and included traders. he buried the canoe there and. 1867). The location of Kohika. The village of Matata was sketched in 1865 by H. 2000:2). Kohika was a prehistoric forerunner to these musket pa. looking southwards across the swamplands. He lived for a time near the mouth of the Tarawera River at a place now called Te Otaramuturangi. not simply as a fort but as a site of substantial settlement. Feb. missionaries and soldiers (Lawlor 1979:22–8. . ‘Over there is the place I shall light my fires’. More recently. winding among the islets that rose above the water a few feet and made camping-grounds for eelfishers and wild fowl hunters. or by canoe along the Tarawera River. The three rivers crossing the plain. 1. Robley (MS 1858–87:14. It was then on the east bank of the Tarawera at its junction with the Rangitaiki River (Fig. Two historic pa close to Kohika were Oheu and Te Matapihi. He built a canoe using the maihi (barge-boards) from his meeting house and called the waka Te Paepae ki Rarotonga. near Matata. One is in a note at the end of Cowan’s chapter on military operations at Matata. Cowan speaks of palisaded ‘island-like forts in the great swamp’ during the military operations of the 1860s (Cowan 1923:96).1) but shifted to its present location after the land confiscations. By lighting his fires. Gudgeon 1970:8. Before moving on. .

2 Archaeological sites recorded in the area of the Rangitaiki Plains pa. Together with its fisheries and forests. Then. moist climate and fertile soils ideal for horticulture. Archaeological site distribution in the area of the Rangitaiki Plains The Bay of Plenty enjoys a warm. The experience of the first Europeans to settle in the Rangitaiki Swamp gives a useful insight into the conditions in prehistoric times. The first drainage board was formed in 1894. T. it offered ideal conditions for Maori settlement. the Rangitaiki Plains became highly suited to dairy farming. so there was evidently one between Oheu and the Kohika’ (Cowan 1923:105). and many settlers abandoned the area (Gibbons 1990:vii. a flood filled the swamp with water and it looked like an inland lake behind the coastal sandhills for several years.4 Kohika Figure 1. the record of a misadventure in the swamp by the Rev. in 1892. the Rangitaiki was diverted to its new mouth in 1914 and the Tarawera in 1924 (Pullar 1985:8). Grace around 1860 indicates that Lake Kohika could be reached from the main streams (Grace 1928:133). . In addition. 10–11).S. Once drained. Government survey for settlement began in 1890 and allotments were taken up.

Terraces are the most common site type and are concentrated in the vicinity of Kawerau and Ohiwa. Surveying in the Whakatane and Waimana river areas was done by the New Zealand Historic Places Trust in the early 1980s. The number of sites in Figure 1. 1984.2 plots the recorded Maori sites in the area in the New Zealand Archaeological Association Site Recording Scheme. which was blanketed by tephra from the 1886 Tarawera eruption that filled many pits on terrace sites (Lawlor 1983a:220). 1983b. • Other sites are those coded as Maori. Rua. Jones 1983. Pa are concentrated on higher ground along the coast. The following account provides an archaeological context for discussing the location of Kohika. The site type in this field is not necessarily the same as on the site record form but represents a more consistent approach to setting a site type than is often found on the form. Moutohora and Kawerau (Hayward et al. An unusual site is a large grinding stone at Matata (Fulton 1921). Kohika (V15/80) is the only site recorded as a swamp pa in the area.2 is shown in Table 1. They may also be sites with middens. Moore 1973. This low frequency may result . For this plot the sites were extracted in a hierarchical manner from the Computerised Index of New Zealand Archaeological Sites (CINZAS). However. but not pa or terraces. etc. 1986. while known from excavations. • Rua are sites with cave pits in their description. pits. Figure 1. 1974. although this could be partly the result of surveys being more thorough there than elsewhere. • Middens do not include any of the categories above.1 Site type Frequency of sites by type in the Rangitaiki Plains and surrounding area Number in area 288 410 120 1 175 4 6 6 38 1048 Pa Terrace sites Pit sites Rua Middens Spot finds Ovens Cultivated soil Other Total Notes: • Pa are sites with that site description. 1980b.An introduction to Kohika in historical and archaeological context 5 Table 1. • Terrace sites are those with terraces in their description that are not pa. Phillips 1996). 1987. 1980a. Recording of Maori archaeological sites in the area began in the 1960s and was carried on for the next two decades principally by Kawerau resident Ken Moore. The site distribution in Figure 1. using the site description field. unlike further west in the Bay of Plenty. as at February 2002.1 using the same system for classification.2. • Pit sites are those with pits in their description. Lawlor 1983a. but not the above. Pit sites may be underrepresented in the southwestern part of Figure 1.2 shows the broad patterns of Maori settlement. 1991. are rare as field recorded sites. around Ohiwa Harbour and on the ridges at the periphery of the Rangitaiki Plains and Whakatane River. They may also be sites with middens. etc. and the other pa shown on the plains close by belong to the historic period. in the Other category there are sites cautiously described as ‘depressions’ which may be collapsed rua. Other contributions have come from forestry surveys and research and heritage management work at Ohiwa.

underrecording may be an issue. Local investigations have certainly revealed middens (Jones 1991. Middens are few along the coast west of Matata. sites are concentrated on soils attractive to Maori horticulturalists and areas enjoying both defensible uplands and access to rivers. especially near harbours. A series of major excavations took place in May 1975. Waterlogged artefacts were put into temporary tanks while a conservation laboratory was built and equipped in the new Human . and the Tarawera Tephra and outwash will have buried some sites. and various wooden and other artefacts were thrown out with the spoil. which can be attributed to the fact that few soft shore species live in a high-energy beach environment. The fieldwork gradually came to terms with the complex geomorphology and site stratigraphy and. Away from the coast. The New Zealand Historic Places Trust became involved. Again. December 1977 and April 1978. the site distribution shows the preference of Maori to live along the coast. who had previously worked at swamp pa in the Waikato excavated by staff of the University of Auckland (Bellwood 1978. A large-capacity pumping system was developed together with on-site conservation. even though there are more estuaries and the beach environment is more conducive to sandy shore species. Kohika is unusual in the context of the larger sample of sites. Shawcross 1965) and the apparent scarcity could be corrected by further recording. Moore 1975). January 1976. and further fieldwork to resolve particular issues was done in 1979 and 1981 (see Plates 1. During the summer of 1974–75. records of cultivation soils are few. being a prehistoric lowland swamp pa in an area with a very low density of recorded sites. A number of lowland sites have produced wooden artefacts (Mead 1984:200).1–4). A digging machine exposed a palisade of kanuka posts in the side of a drain on the eastern side of the site. size or significance. However.6 Kohika from the inability of the local natural soils to sustain open rua. as indicated by the growth of peat. in comparison with the western Bay of Plenty. Along the coast of the Rangitaiki Plains the records are still few. Irwin. the research design became interdisciplinary. increasingly. Only raised areas in the swamp would have been attractive for Maori settlement. but there was no conservation infrastructure waiting to receive them. members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society investigated quite a large area of swamp on the northern side of the site by probing. and the site was visited in early 1975 by Auckland archaeologists. Much of the seaward part of the plains was swamp in the early 19th century and had clearly been so for centuries. and Jones (1991) recorded cultivation sites on the beach ridges left stranded by the prograding coastline. In general. Shawcross 1968). At this time there was little understanding of the site’s complexity. as well as on the better-drained river fans in the southern part of the plains. Jessop of Sutherlands Rd. the Rangitaiki Plains have a low site density compared with surrounding areas. A brief history of the investigations since 1975 The site was discovered in November 1974 during drainage operations near Lake Kohika at the swampy northern end of the farm of Mr P. They dug up many valuable wooden artefacts which were placed in water for safekeeping. It was agreed that G. Large quantities of archaeological material and other samples were taken to Auckland (in a railway wagon after the 1976 season). In general. would direct an excavation as a University of Auckland project with a grant from the Golden Kiwi Lottery Board (Irwin 1975.

Plate 1. Ringatu and Presbyterian churches respectively. The kaumatua placed the site and the artefacts into the interim care of the University of Auckland. Catholic. Romana Kingi.2 A whakanoa ceremony was conducted by Jack Fox. Mike Mason. low-lying grassed mound in an area of agricultural swamp drainage.1 In 1975. . Plate 1. Kohika was an inconspicuous. Harry Reneti and Albert Te Rere. Anglican. of the Ratana.

4 The University of Auckland excavations of Area D during the season of January 1976. The spoil in the background was removed from the drain by a digging machine. Ken Moore and the late Anton van der Wouden. . Plate 1. In this 1976 photograph are (from left) Dave White. the first investigations were undertaken by members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society.3 After the discovery of artefacts.Plate 1.

. E. Grace.. . Cowan.11. The final artefact. Matata. References Anon. Mission work Taupo and Tauranga. T. J. J.W. Grace. Fulton. P. G. Enlarging the past: the contribution of wetland archaeology. Brittan. Several specialist studies were carried out in the late 1990s. W. Edited by S. MS Papers 191.. the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. 53:471–2. Grace.. Ngaropo.H. Wellington: Reed. After its return. and this full report was written from 2000. Coles. 1850–73. Te H. 1996. Government Printer. Palmerston North: Bennett. Tuwharetoa: the history of the Maori people in the Taupo district. 1978.. 1968–1970. The analysis (and re-analysis) of archaeological materials followed and many researchers were involved. comprising a majority of Ngati Awa representatives as well as a representative each from Ngati Tuwharetoa ki Kawerau and the Whakatane and District Historical Society. New Plymouth: The Polynesian Society. Transactions of the New Zealand Institute. the Whakatane and District Historical Society and the Whakatane and District Museum and Gallery. In June and July 2000. representing a Ngati Awa hapu closely connected with Kohika. before being formally welcomed in Whakatane by representatives of the several iwi of the region.J. Ngaropo in 1999.S. Pamphlet prepared for the exhibition at Whakatane and District Museum and Gallery.V.. 1890–1990: settlement and drainage on the Rangitaiki.S. J. Best. Tuhoe. 1923. in recognition of their associations with the collection. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland Monograph Series No. a pounamu adze. 1990. T. the artefacts excavated by its members. 2000. The issues were resolved by the appointment of a board of trustees to manage the collection. as described in the following chapters. accompanied by P. and B. 2000. 1921. 1928. an exhibition entitled Kohika: a glimpse of life in a wetland pa near Matata. II.An introduction to Kohika in historical and archaeological context 9 Sciences Building at the University of Auckland. Coles. 1925. R. C. The Kohika Collection presented some complex ownership issues. Initially the landowner. 1 June–16 July. Jessop. Te Whare Taonga o te Rohe o Whakatane. Whakatane: Whakatane and District Historical Society. ownership of the collection was negotiated between Ngati Awa and the Whakatane and District Historical Society. The New Zealand Wars: a history of the Maori campaigns and the pioneering period.E. Waikato. The Rangitaiki. 1959. Owen. Irwin returned the Kohika artefacts to the Bay of Plenty in May 1998. is to be presented to Ngati Awa together with a copy of this book. The few remaining artefacts were returned to Whakatane in the care of P. The taonga were first acknowledged at Te Umuhika Marae. When the Department of Anthropology at the University of Auckland took over direction of the project in 1975. G. Vol. The trustees have placed the Kohika Collection on loan to the Whakatane District Museum and Gallery. Exeter: Short Run Press. Wellington: R.F. and A. P. An account of a supposed Maori sharpening stone. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No. Gibbons. the whole collection was placed in its interim care at a whakanoa ceremony by kaumatua representing local iwi and religious denominations. Conservation took many years.9. A pioneer missionary among the Maoris 1850–1879: being letters and journals of Thomas Samuel Grace.. Alexander Turnbull Library. Bellwood. gave to the Whakatane and District Historical Society.S. was held at Whakatane museum. Archaeological research at Lake Mangakaware. the children of the mist.. who had been responsible for recovering the early part of the collection. Grace... Te Kohika: a glimpse of life in a wetland pa near Matata during the 1600s AD.

Bay of Plenty: a preliminary report. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. Moore. Bay of Plenty. Bay of Plenty.W. 1980a.J. The Kohika site. 1979. Historical Review. 23:101–4. pp. Historical Review. Palaeoenvironment analysis: an appraisal of the prehistoric environment of the Kohika swamp pa (N68/140). Maori settlement and horticulture on Rangitaiki Plains. 1996. New Zealand. Law and D. 8:5–31. 1960. H.. 1984. Te heke o Rangihouhiri. the early people of Te Teko. K. Shawcross. W. Historical Review.L.. K.W. K.. G.L. Maruka investigations.. P. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. Unpublished MA thesis. Rua Kumara o Kawerau. Shawcross. Moore. Mead.. The Ngaroto site. 1898–1922. Archaeology at Whakatane. Department of Anthropology. H. N..A.. F. Part 1. Robley. etc.W. 23:60–1. Robley. New Zealand.10 Kohika Gudgeon. Hunia. . W. Bulmer. F. 1985. 32:73–86. I... Irwin. Pullar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lawlor.W. Report on archaeological investigations at Thornton. North Island. K. Unpublished MA thesis. Sutton (eds). Bay of Plenty. In S. Moore. B. London. Jones. Pa in two western segments of the Waiotahi and Whakatane Valleys. Alexander Turnbull Library. L. Hayward..W. 1987. Moore and P.V.G. G. P. 1968. 13:143–75.. 1983a.. Bay of Plenty. 1975. Hawaiki. 26:165–73. Kohika site.. 1973.L.. 21:113–22. University of Auckland. Alexander Turnbull Library. K. Historical Review. 28:68–71. Place names of the Te Teko district.Te A. Historical Review. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. Whakatane. Lower Hutt: New Zealand Soil Bureau... Polynesian settlement and horticulture in two river catchments of the eastern North Island. 1980b. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No. Kirch. 1983. The archaeology of the eastern Bay of Plenty. Soils and land use of the Rangitaiki Plains. 1977. K.212–48.Z. Letters Robley to Mair. 27:109–18. Unpublished MA thesis. 1858–87.M. Lawlor. Historical Review.. MS. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. sketches.Z.C. N.. Tangi Putauaki: a Maori history of the Rangitaiki.. 13:186–92.L. 22:50–63. 1974. 1983b. 28:63–7. Prehistoric archaeological sites on Whale Island (Motuhora). Archaeology at Whakatane. Jones. K. Bay of Plenty: Final Report for Stage IV. Bay of Plenty. 1970. 1965. 1975. Lawlor. and R.R. Jones. H. Moore.W. Historical Review. Tane..D. 1986.. Ancestral Polynesia: an essay in historical anthropology. I.. Archaeological investigations in Waiotahi Valley. Green. 2000. November 1981.W. K. New Zealand.W. MS Notebook. Bain...G. K. Whakatane: Whakatane and District Historical Society. Bay of Plenty. University of Auckland. Auckland: Heinemann. Historical Review. K. N68/140. Kawerau. University of Auckland. University of Auckland.14. 11:2–29. 1984. Te tangata whenua.. Bay of Plenty. 8:109–14. A field day at Matata. Moore. A lot of spadework to be done: essays in honour of Lady Aileen Fox. Jones. 1991. S. I.E. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. Te Maori: Maori art from New Zealand collections. Part 2. Phillips.

It appears that faulting has occurred independently at Matata and Edgecumbe. 2. it transpired that this earthquake occurred during 11 . 2. mainly of volcanic origin. 1988). volcanic eruption and flood. the plain has subsided and the surrounding hills have risen.J.1). that is on the western and eastern sides of the graben respectively (Fig.AD 150 and the Kaharoa eruption. Whakatane Graben The Rangitaiki Plains are a lowland some 340 square kilometres in area. The plains are part of the Whakatane Graben. and also from the Taupo and Okataina volcanic centres to the south. Tarawera and Whakatane rivers. Mesozoic basement rocks have downfaulted and the resulting basin infilled by Quaternary volcanics and sediments. 1988). In fact. The 1987 earthquake also moved at three new surface traces that were presumed to overlie faults that had been concealed by sediments from both the Taupo eruption of c. As they have dropped. Irwin The Rangitaiki Plains are geologically active and the inhabitants of Kohika lived in a landscape of frequent earthquake. that form the modern ground surface. which suggests that the Rangitaiki Plains may experience moderate to severe shaking more often than if the two graben margins were to move at the same time (Ota et al. Within the graben. The rate of subsidence is estimated to be 2–3 mm per year over the last 5000 years. which is bounded by north–south fault lines (Fig. The study of a trench excavation across a fault at Matata revealed that the most recent earthquake occurred there after the Kaharoa Tephra and possibly during the last 250 years. the plains have filled with sediments from the three large river catchments of the Rangitaiki. The 1987 Edgecumbe earthquake occurred along two known pre-existing faults that had previously moved at some time after the AD 1350 Kaharoa eruption (Nairn and Beanland 1989).1). Uplifting and tilting of the graben margins has accompanied subsidence of its floor (Nairn and Beanland 1989). according to radiocarbon dating (Ota et al. Faulting and earthquakes Geological evidence of recent surface faulting has been largely obscured by the very young sediments.2 Kohika in the geomorphological context of the Rangitaiki Plains G. which is located where the Taupo Volcanic Zone reaches the Bay of Plenty coast and intersects with the north–south-trending North Island Shear Belt (Nairn and Beanland 1989). To put this in strict geological terms. They stretch 22 kilometres along the Bay of Plenty coast between Matata and Whakatane and extend inland for a similar distance.

From time to time the Bay of Plenty has been showered by volcanic tephra. whereas the position where sea-rafted pumice boulders occur is a probable shoreline.1 The geomorphology of the Rangitaiki Plains the human occupation of Kohika. as younger beds overlap the older. where its secondary faulting offsets could be more closely dated. A series of identified tephra has fallen on the plains over the last 5000 years or more and. Since then it has prograded about 10 kilometres as the lowland has formed. Coastal progradation evidently occurred in fits and starts and was rapid after each volcanic eruption. tephra occurs both in airfall bands and as reworked alluvial sediments. Awakeri. . Pullar and Selby (1971:419) have ingeniously found that ‘a succession of possible shorelines of decreasing age could be plotted at successive points where each older ash disappears’. and the plains have been formed largely from outwash of tephra by the Rangitaiki. Te Teko and Onepu (Pullar 1985). They regard the position on the ground where an airfall ash bed cuts out as a possible shoreline. Thus. Volcanic eruptions and coastal progradation About 7000 years ago the shoreline probably lay along the cliffs at Whakatane. on the plains.12 Kohika Figure 2. Tarawera and Whakatane rivers (Pullar and Selby 1971).

Over time. plains and swamp Three major rivers cross the plains. and stranded ones lie generally parallel to the coast (Fig. the Kaharoa Tephra of cal. The three younger of these ashes have been identified at Kohika and the following descriptions of them as they occur on the plains are based on the extensive observations of Alan Pullar (Pullar and Selby 1971:423). In peat swamps the bed is white ash (5Y 8/1) and is finely shower-bedded. The destruction of vegetation following human settlement evidently caused the coastal dunes to be eroded and wind-blown during the 500 years bracketed between the Kaharoa and and Tarawera tephra (Pullar and Selby 1971). the rivers have changed their courses and these can be traced from palaeo-channels across the floodplains. The Tarawera Tephra is often 2–7 cm thick but may be up to 12 cm in dune swales. 1998). The various dunes are dated by the particular tephra that lies on them.2). parallel to the existing coast and higher in elevation. Several considerable streams join them as tributaries and these have formed fans where they emerge from the surrounding hills. The system has formed over some 7000 years as the coast has prograded. natural levee systems of rivers and streams. In peat swamps the colour is pale olive (5Y 6/3) becoming brownish-yellow where the swamp is drained (10YR 6/6). The rivers have also cut the stranded marine dunes that now . The Taupo Ash is 10–13 cm thick. Kohika was built on a remnant of the pre-Taupo shoreline that dates to approximately 2000 BP.5Y 4/2). In peat swamps the Tarawera is very dark greyish-brown (10YR 3/2). and floodplains of largely mixed pumiceous alluvium with minor greywacke alluvium. The dune system is well developed only at the Whakatane end of the plains and near Matata in the west. and the Tarawera Tephra of AD 1886. Near Kawerau. dunes reach a height of about 30 m above sea level but elsewhere. ‘a light yellowish-brown colour [with] coarse irregular gas cavities. Much of the dune sand came from the ash beds that still mantle the uplands drained by the three rivers. Kaharoa and Tarawera shorelines lie closer to the sea than Kohika.5Y 6/4). the Taupo Pumice of c. and the lower 10 cm is darker (10YR 4/4). On dunes the bed is brown in colour (10YR 4/3).1850 years BP (Froggatt and Lowe 1990. on dune ridges it is dark greyish-brown (2.5500 years BP. It is easily broken and can be crushed in the hand’ (McFadgen 1994:196). Rivers. becoming darker in the swales.AD 150 also occurs at Kohika and is of unique appearance for Holocene times. The grade is coarse ash and small vesicular lapilli. The sea-rafted Taupo Pumice of c. 2. due to subsidence. except at Matata where they are higher. Dunes The dunes are linear. On dune ridges the ash bed is masked by black topsoil and is difficult to identify. The Kaharoa Tephra is usually 10–15 cm thick. Those of the Taupo shoreline sometimes occur near sea level or they may be exposed up to 3–4. In dune swales the upper 5 cm is light yellowish-brown fine ash (2. Nairn and Beanland 1989). 600 BP (Lowe et al. have been found buried under peat some 3 m below sea level. Landforms of the Rangitaiki Plains These comprise coastal and inland dunes. back-swamp lowlands and peat swamps. while the dune surfaces have been created by long-shore drift from west to east (Pullar and Selby 1971).5 m above sea level.Kohika in the geomorphological context of the Rangitaiki Plains 13 Volcanic ashes The main tephra are the Whakatane Ash of c.

2). Awaiti Paku. on ash from the Kaharoa and Tarawera eruptions. over time there have been frequent flood episodes that have locally redeposited pumiceous alluvium around the swamp. but was altered in modern times when direct cuts were made to the sea (Plates 2.1 are of Taupo Pumice alluvium. which entered the sea at what is now the western end of Matata (Gibbons 1990). The Awaiti Stream was another main distributary of the Rangitaiki. closely associated with the Rangitaiki River and deposited after AD 150. the Orini Stream. resulting in complex interbedding. The Rangitaiki and Tarawera rivers flow through floodplains built up by their own deposits of silt and tephra. Rangitaiki and Tarawera were called Te Awa o te Atua.1 and 2. peat horizons formed on Taupo Pumice over much of the plains and again. and Kaharoa alluvium deposited after AD 1350. The youngest deposits of the Rangitaiki Plains .AD 1350 until swamp drainage began early in the 20th century is shown in Figure 2. The general pattern of rivers and streams that existed from the time of the Kaharoa eruption c. In addition. in places. Further areas of Tarawera Ash alluvium have been deposited since AD 1886.2. In the past they frequently overflowed their banks and inundated surrounding land. The combined waters of the Awaiti. Two main deposits shown in Figure 2. while the Rangitaiki itself ran west behind the coastal sand dunes. a distributary stream of the Tarawera. flowed east to join the Whakatane River at its mouth.2 Former shorelines and river courses on the Rangitaiki Plains sometimes survive as discontinuous strips parallel to the coast and were sometimes islands in prehistory. In the back-swamp lowlands. it flowed west towards Matata and joined the Awaiti Paku. This common river mouth and estuary was influenced by a tidal regime.14 Kohika Figure 2. The Rangitaiki had no mouth of its own and a major distributary. on the way. These are extensive areas over the surface of the plains (Nairn and Beanland 1989).

The archaeological excavation can be seen at the end of the farmer’s cattle-race. a canal and stopbank now separate Lake Kohika from the archaeological lake village. The former course of the Rangitaiki River is at the left of the entrance and the former Te Awa o te Atua estuary. The current road bridge is on the Kaharoa shoreline.Plate 2. . which carried the combined waters of the two rivers. lay to the right of the entrance and flowed west to Matata. Canal 109 runs inland from the Awaiti past the remains of Lake Kohika.2 Looking seawards.1 The new mouth of the Tarawera River. which formerly lay on its southwestern shore. and a short distance upstream is the junction of the Tarawera and the Awaiti Stream. Plate 2. The site itself is located on a remnant of sand-dune that dates from the coastline of 2000 years ago.

3 was deposited during floods in 1964. Soils of the present floodplains Ran (Rangitaiki) soils consist of rapidly accumulating pumiceous alluvium deposited in former meander troughs of streams. The final episode has been the near-complete drainage of the swamp in the early part of last century to create the rich agricultural landscape of today. The Kohika site has a natural core of Taupo-age dune. back-swamps and floodplain deposits interfinger near the coast where rivers and streams converge and shallow freshwater lakes have formed.3 describes the soils in the vicinity of Kohika as taxonomic and physiographic units.16 Kohika are coastal sand dunes. Soils of the former tidal flats Muw (Muriwai) silt loams are weakly saline soils derived from mixed pumiceous and greywacke alluvium on former tidal flats now cut off from river estuaries. The area of Ran shown in Figure 2. on a sub-surface of sand and gravels and with occasional thin layers of diatomaceous earth. alluvial infilling. swamp growth. and the formation of shallow freshwater lakes and ponds. land subsidence. In summary. the landscape of the Rangitaiki Plains has been formed by continuing processes of coastal progradation. All of these have been supplemented intermittently by airborne showers of tephra. and affected by frequent flooding. Soils of the former floodplains Ats (Awaiti) sandy loam is a recent soil with a thin cover of Tarawera Tephra on pumiceous alluvium derived from Kaharoa Tephra. Koe (Kopeopeo) soils are further inland on older stranded dunes and have Taupo and Kaharoa tephra (both rhyolitic) on wind-blown sand. Onc (Omehue) coarse sandy loam is another poorly drained gley soil with a thin cover of Tarawera Tephra over layered pumiceous Kaharoa alluvium (reworked tephra). Soils of the dunes Pki (Pikowai) sand occurs as recent wind-blown sands on the current foredunes with a very thin cover of Tarawera ash. with a thin cover of Tarawera (basaltic) tephra. levees and meander sediments associated with very recently or currently active floodplains (Nairn and Beanland 1989). Ou (Opouriao) and Ori (Orini) fine sandy loams are from slowly accumulating pumiceous alluvium and found on the levees of rivers and their distributaries. . Several of these units were encountered during archaeological excavations at Kohika. Soils and stratigraphy around the Kohika site Dunes. and by earthquakes. Figure 2. as mapped and described in detail by A. and it is necessary to take account of the others to follow the geomorphological history of the area immediately surrounding the site. Pullar on the basis of a large number of cores and examined sections (Pullar 1985). Ome (Omehue) sandy loam and Omp (Omehue) sandy loam on peat are poorly drained gley soils from fine pumiceous alluvium derived from Kaharoa Tephra with a thin cover of Tarawera Tephra.

peat and pumice alluvium. There are patches of diatomaceous earth. pumiceous alluvium underlain by (dune) sand derived from Taupo Pumice. Figure 2. silts. which can form during the open-water stage of bog development. Shallow freshwater lakes were a feature of the floodplain around the site. with a very thin cover of Tarawera Tephra. Pr (Paroa) silt loam and Prp (Paroa) silt loam on peat are poorly drained gley soils from very fine pumiceous alluvium. peat. Diatoms increase markedly following rhyolitic volcanic eruptions such as the Kaharoa (Pullar 1985:36). Mtk (Matuku) silt loam is a poorly drained gley soil consisting of layered materials. Soils of the peaty swamps Awi (Awakeri) sandy loam on peat is a poorly drained gley soil with a clearly layered profile of Tarawera and Kaharoa tephra.Kohika in the geomorphological context of the Rangitaiki Plains 17 Soils of the back-swamp lowlands Ag (Awakaponga) silt loam and Agp (Awakaponga) silt loam on peat are recent soils from silty pumiceous rhyolitic alluvium. Soil profiles in the Rangitaiki Plain show that there was rapid infilling immediately after the Kaharoa eruption and there are no buried soil horizons from this time. intermittent infilling since about 400 years BP is indicated by buried palaeosols. There are sharp discontinuities. The peat that has grown near Kohika is mainly sedge formed from Baumea spp. and have been identified at Kohika. Aro (Awaroa) soils are organic and formed from peat with a thin cover of basaltic ash. including diatomaceous earth which has formed in freshwater lakes.3 Soils of the Rangitaiki Plains in the vicinity of Kohika (after Pullar 1985) Summary of the geological situation of Kohika • The site is on a low island remnant of the 2000 BP shoreline dune that rises above . However.

the climate was certainly favourable. the peat above the cultural deposit was sterile. • Neither the Taupo nor the Kaharoa tephra remains intact on the mound itself. there is evidence that an earthquake occurred while people were living at Kohika and that this event relates to the Matata Fault nearby (Ota et al. between 1948 and 1975 the earliest frost day recorded at Whakatane was 5 May and the latest 10 September. Other rainfall follows the usual pattern of frontal passages.0 mm averages ten per month from May to October and eight per month from November to April. The complex interplay of natural and cultural stratigraphy will be unravelled in Chapter 4. 1988). and in the upper deposits by palaeosols.5 degrees Celsius at Kawerau and 25.2). Plant growing days above 10 and 15 degrees Celsius show the area to be warmer than much of the North Island. Climate The following information is compiled from Aldridge (1985). AD 1350 and the Tarawera Tephra of AD 1886. Jones (1991) and the New Zealand Meteorological Service (n. The mean annual rainfall is 1304 mm on the coast at Whakatane. Whatever differences may exist between the present and the time when people were living at Kohika. which includes three distinctive tephra beds separated by silts. Frost-free days (screen frosts) average 328 per year. While frosts are expected every year. The number of days with rainfall equal to or greater than 1. peat and diatomaceous earth. Archaeological correlations of stratigraphy between different areas of excavation around the edge of the mound are supported by the natural swamp stratigraphy. The average yearly incidence of ground frost is 24 at Te Teko on the plains away from the Rangitaiki River levee. Pullar and the University of Auckland. show that the lake was more extensive than today (Lawlor 1979. This is also true of the Tarawera Ash which lies like a continuous tidemark around the mound but which. although each forms components of the soil there. The Rangitaiki Plains are today noted for their sunny climate.1 and 3. A greater depth of peat lay below the archaeological site than above it. Heavy rainfall is associated with the passage of cyclonic systems from the north and northeast in summer.d. and 15 at Whakatane (Jones 1991). has been mixed into the soil. • Core samples around Lake Kohika. Moreover. This will be supported by radiocarbon evidence in Chapter 5.). • Evidence for substantial occupation ends with the arrival of bands of pumiceous alluvium and silt. Parts of the shallow lake edge suddenly filled and it was no longer easy to reach the island by canoe. everywhere above this. indicating the absence of occupation for a period prior to the Tarawera Tephra. . • Finally. 24 at Edgecumbe on the Rangitaiki levee. this has to be seen as the result of modern drainage as well as prehistoric infilling. • A band of cultural material occurs in the peat between the Kaharoa Tephra of cal. The duration of sunshine hours is among the highest in the North Island and the mean daily maximum temperature in January is 25. Figs 3. This account has described mainly the natural stratigraphy. both by A.3 degrees at Te Teko. However. derived mainly from reworked Kaharoa Tephra. Further soils developed in the swamp above the Tarawera. indicating that occupation was in the later part of the deposit.18 Kohika lake level. Evidently the dune at Kohika was gardened both before the lake village was occupied and after it was abandoned. which represent a local flood around parts of the site exposed to floodwaters from the Tarawera River.

R.A. Radiocarbon age of the Kaharoa Tephra. W.. 1985. On the coastal dunes there was manuka. Maori settlement and horticulture on the Rangitaiki Plains. Summaries of climatological observations to 1980. Lawlor. The Matata Fault: active faulting at the north-western margin of the Whakatane Graben. New Zealand. Berryman and I. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics..G. Jones. New Zealand. and S.9–10.A. this landscape was transformed by Maori and influenced by volcanic eruption. 32:1–13. Some waterlogged tree-trunks survive in the dune at Kohika.. New Zealand Meteorological Service. 13:143–75. 1890–1990: settlement and drainage on the Rangitaiki. Lower Hutt: New Zealand Soil Bureau.. The Rangitaiki.L. 1988. Coastal stratigraphic evidence for human settlement.177. Selby. Ota. distribution. Nairn. New Zealand. 1990. Auckland: Auckland University Press.195–207. titoki. 1991. eastern Bay of Plenty. P. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. B.). Geological setting of the 1987 Edgecumbe earthquake. A detailed account of vegetation history follows in the next chapter. 1985.C.G. New Zealand Journal of Science. K.A. Climate. nomenclature. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics. Froggatt. 8:487–95. A. 1990. Unpublished MA thesis. 1998. 1989.A.C. In W. P. The Holocene. W. and M. Coastal progradation of Rangitaiki Plains.A. pp. 1979. Palaeoenvironment analysis: an appraisal of the prehistoric environment of the Kohika swamp pa (N68/140).. bracken fern and mingimingi while small teatree and cabbage trees grew on the inland dunes. Cabbage trees flourished on natural levees of rivers and streams with kahikatea. S..A. Nairn. B. Gibbons. and D. New Zealand.G.J. n. D. Beanland. Nairn. K. Lowe. In D.R. I.F. Lower Hutt: New Zealand Soil Bureau. volume. Pullar. A review of late Quaternary silicic and some other tephra formations from New Zealand: their stratigraphy.. The origins of the first New Zealanders.. New Zealand Meteorological Service Miscellaneous Publication No. North Island. Pullar. W. New Zealand Geological Survey Record.H. a key marker for late-Holocene stratigraphy and archaeology in New Zealand. 35:6–13. and age..d. at the time of European settlement swampland west of the Rangitaiki River was densely covered with raupo and rushes. T. Buried stumps show that totara grew in the Omeheu locality (inland from Kohika) before the Kaharoa eruption and soil profiles on inland dunes suggest that podocarp forest flourished before the Taupo eruption. 1971. Pullar.G. Lowe.Kohika in the geomorphological context of the Rangitaiki Plains 19 A brief historical observation about vegetation According to Pullar (1985:6). Whakatane: Whakatane and District Historical Society. Bay of Plenty. Soils and land use of the Rangitaiki Plains. Hogg. Sutton (ed. 1994. I. 14:419–34. McFadgen. pp. North Island.G. Beanland. Y. Higham. New Zealand. . University of Auckland.J. Clearly. 33:89–109. McFadgen. Soils and land use of the Rangitaiki Plains. Froggatt and I. Bay of Plenty. toetoe and flax on the back-swamp lowlands.J. References Aldridge.

This chapter looks in detail at the vegetation history of the Kohika swamp. as in the steep coastal country of the eastern Bay of Plenty (Nicholls 20 . The Bay of Plenty coast is therefore central to our understanding of the settlement process. McGlone and K. mild. It enjoys a warm. to date the beginning of human influences. Only where rugged hill country comes down to the coast does substantial undisturbed vegetation remain. Jones Figure 3. creating a natural landfall for voyagers from the tropics (Fig. fertile soils.S. ideal for horticulture. 3. in order to reconstruct the original vegetation that would have confronted those first settlers. opening north and northeast towards the central Pacific. and to chart the profound effects of Maori settlement on the local environments. Intense human use has destroyed or disrupted nearly all of the original vegetation cover in the lowland coastal Bay of Plenty and similar areas throughout the country.1 The Bay of Plenty lowlands with pollen sites underlined The coastline of the Bay of Plenty forms a great bight.1). Migrants from northern latitudes in prehistoric times are likely to have established some of their first settlements in this region.3 The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty M.L. as traditions about canoe landing-places at Whangaparaoa imply. moist climate and has light. and some other sites in the surrounding region.

Methods Most pollen samples were taken directly from cleaned faces of excavation units.1 and 3. In this chapter we present the full pollen analysis of the Kohika pa site (abbreviated versions have been published previously). acetolysis. 1998). Palaeoecological investigations are therefore an essential aspect of archaeological studies in which reconstruction of original vegetation is important. 1991): disaggregation in potassium hydroxide. permit construction of detailed vegetation histories. Pollen results are presented as relative percentages of varying pollen sums. McGlone and Wilmshurst 1999. thus providing an excellent chronology for palynology. although the lower section of the Kohika site was sampled with a Hiller corer. bleach where needed to remove resistant lignin fragments. Kaharoa and Taupo – are commonly found in the upper sediments of deposits throughout the region. stratigraphy and chronology Rangitaiki Plains: Kohika Pa archaeological site (Figs 3. These tephra falls have also had a profound impact on the vegetation. and discuss the environmental history of the Bay of Plenty coastal zone in relation to Maori settlement. Counts are expressed as percentages of the terrestrial pollen sum. Charcoal counts were made by a grid point technique (Clark 1982) in which eleven points per field of view are scored for presence or absence of charcoal at the same time as the pollen count. the timing of the Polynesian environmental impact.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 21 1971). wet sieving. swampland to the west of the Rangitaiki River was densely covered with raupo and rushes (Pullar 1985). Site locations. Ti . The Bay of Plenty lies in a major zone of active volcanism. Three tephra layers – the Tarawera.2) As the Rangitaiki Plains are intensively farmed. Analysis of the pollen and spore content of peats and muds in wetland profiles from throughout New Zealand has given comprehensive insights into the unmodified environment. they are often themselves modified (Jones and Moore 1985) and unlikely to represent the full range of original coastal communities. which is treated as a shrub because of its ecological behaviour). Note that Leptospermum type (Leptospermum scoparium and Kunzea ericoides) is not included as a terrestrial pollen type. and the subsequent changes to vegetation resulting from settlement (McGlone 1983a. Tree ferns are expressed as a percentage of a terrestrial pollen sum that includes tree ferns. While remnant stands of coastal vegetation give some picture of previous vegetation cover. At the time of first European settlement. Newnham et al. menziesii. which excludes tree ferns and all ground ferns (except for bracken. Organic sediments formed over thousands of years in wetlands preserve abundant pollen and spores which. Wetland and aquatic taxa are expressed as a percentage of total pollen and spores. and mounting in glycerine jelly. as it has poorly dispersed pollen and is likely to have been derived mainly from manuka (Leptospermum scoparium) growing on peaty wetland soils. when extracted and characterised. digestion in 40 per cent hydrofluoric acid. with the exception of N. new analyses of two other lowland coastal Bay of Plenty wetland sites (Thornton and Tunapahore). A terrestrial pollen sum is used for all dryland plants. Nothofagus subgenus Fuscospora includes all Nothofagus spp. no unmodified natural vegetation remains. Sufficient flax (Phormium tenax) was present in this area to support a flax mill at Matata. Standard palynological preparation techniques were used (Moore et al.

The location of the pollen site (Square D17) is shown in Figure 4. and NZ4803 (678 ± 75 BP) on a diatomaceous organic silt immediately above it. 22 cm . Subsurface diatomaceous earth – mainly immediately postdating the Kaharoa Tephra – occurs on the floodplains of the Rangitaiki and Tarawera rivers between Thornton and Matata.2) relies for its chronology on the three included tephra layers and seven radiocarbon dates (Table 3.5 m square to a depth of 2. The three radiocarbon dates from this site bracketing the Kaharoa Tephra have a reversed stratigraphy.22 Kohika Figure 3. The site is capped by the Tarawera Tephra of AD 1886. The pollen site stratigraphy (Fig.1). Bracken (Pteridium esculentum). NZ4804 (656 ± 57 BP) is from organic muds immediately below the Kaharoa. and kahikatea (Dacrycarpus dacrydioides). mingimingi (Leucopogon fasciculatus) and manuka grew on the coastal dunes. titoki (Alectryon excelsus).3 m to the underlying sand dune. fresh water (Pullar 1985). The peat was sampled by digging a hole 1.3 m. Two radiocarbon dates in the underlying peat of 353 ± 57 BP and 535 ± 57 BP indicate typical swamp accumulation rates of 1–2 mm per year.) persist close to Kohika. 3. largely inorganic fine silt. Several small lagoons ringed by raupo (Typha orientalis) and willow (Salix spp. Tunapahore archaeological site complex and ThorntonAtkinson archaeological site (Cordyline australis) and manuka (Leptospermum scoparium) grew on the natural river and stream levees. NZ4802 (729 ± 58 BP) is from a grey. Total sediment depth from the base of the Tarawera Ash (datum for all measurements) to the surface of the buried sand dune is 3. toetoe (Cortaderia) and flax on back-swamps.2 m and then coring with a Hiller peat corer a further 1.2 Pollen site stratigraphy: Kohika pollen site (excavation Square D17). indicating the presence of shallow lakes of clear.13 (below).

1). The site consisted of a surface scatter of shell and blackened soils underlain by pits cut through the ash soils of the crest of the dune.AD 1350 when calibrated. 3. as there is a high probability that NZ4803 and NZ4802 are based on sediments contaminated with old organic material incorporated during deposition. However. they will be ignored in subsequent discussion.in the years leading up to the Kaharoa Tephra eruption. and it is clear from NZ4801 that there was very rapid accumulation (c. 3. based on 22 screened dates over its entire distribution (Lowe and Hogg 1992) and is almost certainly correct. but postdates the Taupo Tephra. On the basis of NZ4805 and NZ4806.1). NZ4804 is no more than 10 radiocarbon years different from the established age of the Kaharoa Tephra of 665 ± 17 BP. A C14 date for shell in one of the pits has a date of 595 ± 50 yrs BP (NZ7543) with a marine calibration of cal.1 Radiocarbon dates. 3. or c. some ten kilometres west of Whakatane (Fig. Therefore. organic sedimentation was a moderate 1–2 mm per year.5 mm year).5 mm per year) of silt-rich sediments after the deposition of the Kaharoa Tephra. swamps are particularly prone to contamination by old organic material washed in to the lakes after forest clearance (McGlone and Wilmshurst 1999). The sediment profile (Fig. but still within one standard error. Hawai Bay: Tunapahore archaeological site complex Hawai Bay lies 20 kilometres east of Opotoki (Fig. The crests of these dunes are mantled with ash soils that are easily disturbed. The pre-European settlement vegetation at this site was similar to that at Kohika. Tephra within the profile is lensed with sand and has therefore been reworked from tephra deposits within the dune sand.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 23 above the Kaharoa Tephra. The coastal lowlands are only 800 m wide and consist of partly dissected tephra-covered uplifted marine terraces backed by steep hills. Kohika pollen site (Square D17) C14 age (conventional) 353 ± 57 535 ± 57 729 ± 58 678 ± 75 656 ± 57 1365 ± 75 1605 ± 65 Depth below datum (cm) 45–50 65–69 105–110 130–132 (immediately above Kaharoa Tephra) 145–146 (immediately below Kaharoa Tephra) 180–182 220–222 Material peat peat weakly organic silt diatomaceous silt lake mud fine peat fine peat Radiocarbon number NZ4800 NZ4801 NZ4802 NZ4803 NZ4804 NZ4805 NZ4806 Rangitaiki Plains: Thornton-Atkinson archaeological site complex The Thornton-Atkinson archaeological site (W15/121) is on the inland side of a preTaupo sand dune on the Rangitaiki flood plain. AD 1553–1860 at the 2 sigma limit (Jones 1991:153–9). mobilising loose sand that can drift down the dune faces. The area was heavily used by Maori in pre-European times and there are at least ten pa around the bay.2) is undated. but rapid in the silt-rich sediments following the Taupo Tephra (c. . The two dates bracketing the Kaharoa Tephra are statistically indistinguishable. The pollen profile is in a section in a drainage ditch south of the dune crest and close to the Rangitaiki River cut. Immediately west of the two pollen profiles is an area of terraces. Table 3. NZ4802 is 63 years older than NZ4804.

Tunapahore A is from a drainage ditch through a swampy area immediately inland of the beach ridge and 150 m from high-water mark. Pollen stratigraphy The pollen diagrams are zoned on the basis of changes in pollen and spore occurrences. Two discrete lenses of silt at this location above the Taupo Tephra are accompanied by high levels of microscopic charcoal fragments of Fuscospora (Nothofagus subgenus Fuscospora. 200 m distant.2). both peaking in the second silt. macroscopic charcoal fragments occur in a grey silt matrix and probably derive from reworking from the slopes of the nearby terraces. including all but N. Bracken spores increase during the first silt episode. propinqua). The Rangitaiki River headwaters drain the beech-clad (Nothofagus) axial ranges of the east central North Island. hookerianus (pokaka). 3.3a–d) Zone KO-1: immediately before Taupo Tephra. Coprosma (probably small-leaved shrubs such as C. Tunapahore B is at the toe of the slope of a terrace and is close to a now-destroyed swamp pa (X15/105). The first lens of silt has much higher levels of these elements than the second. Wood fragments within the sandy peat at this level indicate that shrubs were growing directly on the site. divaricata and Elaeocarpus cf. 1850 yrs BP This zone is dominated by local swamp shrubs and trees. A date of 1252 ± 87 BP (NZA3485) on a grey pumice-rich silt immediately above the tephra confirms the identification. trichomanoides (probably tanekaha) and increasing Metrosideros (rata type) point to the presence of a coastal forest. and decline abruptly above the second silt. Phyllocladus cf. Grass and tutu (Coriaria spp. scoparium.) percentages rise between the two silts. A discrete lens of grey tephra at the 60 cm level surrounded by charcoal-rich silt dating to 781 ± 69 yrs BP (NZA3479) gives a maximum age for the start of charcoal influx. The most likely interpretation is that the Fuscospora charcoal . for convenience of description and discussion. It is apparent that charcoal associated with the deposition of Taupo Tephra has been reworked into the profile at a much later date. Zone KO-2: 1850–1600 yrs BP Interpretation of this zone is complicated by the eruption of the Taupo Tephra and subsequent in-wash of pumice from the Rangitaiki River system. Tunapahore B has water-laid Taupo Tephra (absent in Tunapahore A) at the base overlying a yellow-brown pumice-rich soil (Whakatane Hill Soil). most notably Leptospermum cf. Tunapahore A contains airfall Kaharoa Tephra but is otherwise undated because of the unsuitable weakly organic clay silts that make up most of the section. Kohika Pa (Figs 3.24 Kohika Two sites were sampled for pollen (Fig. peak between the silts. The base of a mottled dark grey silt at 40 cm yielded a date of 1824 ± 142 yrs BP (NZA3484) that is nearly identical with the standard date of 1850 ± 20 BP for the Taupo Tephra (Froggatt and Lowe 1990). It is at the extreme inland margin of the same gleyed silt and peat deposit as Tunapahore A. with grass continuing on in significant amounts to the end of the zone. Myrsine cf. an area partly covered with Taupo ignimbrite deposits and totally blanketed with thick volcanic tephra fall (Wilson and Walker 1985). There are indications of well-drained sandy soils within the developing swamp/dune complex: Paesia scaberula (hard fern) characterises open dryland sites and is abundant in this zone. From the 65 cm level in the profile. menziesii of the New Zealand species) and Cyathea smithii-type tree-fern spores.

The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 25 Figure 3.3a Kohika. percentage pollen diagram .

26 Kohika Figure 3. percentage pollen diagram .3b Kohika.

The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 27 Figure 3.3c Kohika. percentage pollen diagram .

percentage pollen diagram .28 Kohika Figure 3.3d Kohika.

suggesting that they are mainly contemporaneous with the tephra rather than reworked from older soils. pukatea (Laurelia novae-zelandiae). Grass pollen is consistently present in low amounts. suggesting higher water levels in the swamp. suggesting a reversion to flax swamp or shrubland. interfingered with manuka and Coprosma shrubland. Therefore. and the aquatics Myriophyllum and Potamogeton peak with them immediately after the second silt. The local swamp flora reacted to the influx of silt during this zone. and the tephra-derived sediments of this zone are in-wash from the Tarawera River catchment. The influx of Taupo Formation sediments was probably accompanied by further progradation of the coast and rapid shifts in the courses of the Tarawera and Rangitaiki river distributaries.). The increase in these scrubby dryland elements suggests that the influx of silt provided a suitable substrate for a limited time. was affected by the Taupo eruption. Kahikatea. flax and the swamp fern kiokio (Blechnum novae-zelandiae type). Rubus and Leucopogon fasciculatus are common also in the basal silty sediments. raupo and tall sedges. occupied the site. raupo. There is little convincing evidence that the extra-local pollen rain. Raupo and sedge increase throughout the silty bottom half of the zone. rewarewa (Knightia excelsa). peaking immediately beneath the Kaharoa Tephra. rata trees and vines (Metrosideros spp. as does bracken at three per cent of the pollen sum.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 29 and Cyathea smithii-type spores have in-washed with the silt. The wetland types within it undergo a distinct succession . Coprosma. The fine structureless peats which include a band of lacustrine organic silt in these two zones are typical of sediments laid down under open water. largely from tree conifers growing on the floodplain and the surrounding hills. Pittosporum and pokaka (Elaeocarpus hookerianus) all have pollen percentages that are consistent with their being present in the swamp complex. Bracken covered extensive areas of the central North Island after the Taupo Tephra eruption (Wilmshurst and McGlone 1996). while flooding and nutrientenrichment through silt deposition favoured aquatics. other than changes resulting from higher water levels. but there is no charcoal. Zone KO-3: 1600–1300 yrs BP This zone represents a period of prolonged stability during which a flax-dominated swamp. ground ferns (monolete fern spores) and Myriophyllum all peak or are more common within this zone than in the last. while wetland shrubs are less common. Dune ridges and levees throughout the swamp complex must have had forest cover. there is only slight evidence for disturbance. tanekaha (Phyllocladus trichomanoides). pahautea (Libocedrus plumosa). Zone KO-5: 660–615 yrs BP The Kaharoa Tephra erupted from the Okataina complex 40 kilometres to the west and fell at the site. totara (Podocarpus totara). Zone KO-4: 1300–660 yrs BP Closely spaced sampling of the profile was carried out in this and the next zone in order to locate the first signs of possible disturbance to the vegetation. and it is not clear whether the bracken is derived from this source or from local stands induced by damage to the forest through airfall tephra and alluvium deposition. The zone is estimated from accumulation rates to be 45 years or more in duration. Neither the Fuscospora charcoal nor the Cyathea spores are highly corroded. The zone terminates with increased levels of manuka. Sedge. Muehlenbeckia. and most probably came from the extensive Taupo Formation pumice deposits in the Rangitaiki River headwaters.

Swamp shrubs manuka and Coprosma clearly played a less important role. stone. this is not so with tall swamp scrub and trees. The swamp vegetation indicates wetter conditions. Maori presence is indicated late in this zone by the presence of dog bones. While swamp herb successions can occur within a few years or less. Nowhere else in the 120 square metres of excavations in Area D were cultural materials found at this level. . bracken fibre. aquatics Myriophyllum and Potamogeton are abundant. However. not from the floor. The sequences immediately following the Kaharoa Tephra reflect the response of the swamp community to flooding and the increased nutrient influx in the first few years following the tephra deposition. While it is possible that they were trodden down in prehistory – because this part of the soft lakeshore was a busy place – it is almost certain that most of the treadage occurred during the pollen sampling itself. gourds. Boards to protect the soft deposit were not used. In the sample immediately below the Tarawera Tephra.50 per cent at the top. This pattern of decline and recovery of scrub and slow-growing trees suggests that at least 50 years elapsed between the Kaharoa Tephra and the beginning of full-scale deforestation. it is important to note that the samples for pollen. Major fire impact therefore probably occurred at around 600 BP. Most affected are totara. Flax is less well represented in the pollen rain but. then recovery of the woody swamp vegetation.30 Kohika in which raupo is followed by sedges. wooden implements. and their integrity is not in question. [Editorial note. A similar pattern is seen in the trees rata. kahikatea. which suggests that fires swept through the lowland forest. pahautea. maire (Nestegis spp.] Zone KO-7: 350 yrs BP–1886 AD The sediment changes to raupo peat and the wetland pollen are dominated by raupo. Zone KO-6: 615–350 yrs BP This zone documents the full impact of fire on the Kohika wetlands. but rise abruptly towards the upper boundary. increasing throughout the zone. and any items in the peat would be carried down underfoot. Seral woody plants including wineberry (Aristotelia serrata) and Hebe are present throughout. raupo and sedges.5 m pit of D17 was the only part of Area D not excavated archaeologically. oioi (Leptocarpus similis). and rewarewa (Knightia excelsa) and kamahi (Weinmannia racemosa) are consistently recorded. they were consistently higher. tanekaha and pahautea. sediment and C14 were taken from the sides of D17. as it is normally greatly underrepresented in the pollen rain. suggesting that the pa was abandoned during this zone. shell and wood chips. Swamp scrub taxa are at very low levels and bracken percentages fall steeply. ground ferns and swamp kiokio. but were still present as substantial stands close to the site. and then recover by the zone end. kauri (Agathis australis). it would still have been important in the swamp vegetation. No Maori artefacts or midden material were recovered from the raupo-rich peat above the 35 cm level.) and hutu (Ascarina lucida). Charcoal levels rise steeply. but decline gradually to c. as are the tall jointed rush. At this point all tree types plunge to low levels. all of which would have been discarded into the surrounding swamp by the inhabitants. mainly as a consequence of increasing grass and tutu percentages. Charcoal and bracken are not at high levels initially. decline. The wetland scrub types manuka and Myrsine follow a U-shaped pattern in that they are abundant in the first sample immediately above the Kaharoa. The 1. introduced plants including willow appear. Bracken percentages peak at over 80 per cent of the terrestrial pollen sum at the beginning of the zone. Sand and silt bands occur immediately above this level.

Tunapahore A (Fig. Dodonaea viscosa. rimu (Dacrydium cupressinum) and tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa). showing increased fire pressure. grass. but with more kahikatea and totara than previously. while the range and abundance of tree types decline. bracken and charcoal fragments. At 60 cm there is a further disruption through fire that did not affect the forest as severely. tanekaha. Zone TH-2 Coprosma and manuka decline. along with hutu. 1850 BP This zone has a close resemblance to Tunapahore A. Charcoal associated with the tephra layer dates to c. Zone TB-2: 1850 BP to beginning of Maori clearance All forest and scrub pollen types are at very low percentages in the sample immediately overlying the Taupo Tephra. The tephra fall was presumably accompanied by extensive damage to the coastal forest and subsequent fire that resulted in dense bracken. tree ferns and hutu more abundant and Fuscospora much less common. Tunapahore B (Figs 3. but induced reworking of tephra into the swamp and was accompanied by flooding and a temporary abundance of raupo. the presence of sedge and peat and the low occurrences of tree types all indicate a fire-affected. Rarely recorded pollen types.780 BP. High percentages of Fuscospora and podocarp trees reflect pollen transport from the steep surrounding hills that are in forests of beech.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 31 Thornton-Atkinson archaeological complex (Figs 3. The uppermost sample in the zone shows undisturbed forest once more. tutu and charcoal fragments are abundant. except that ngaio and kohekohe are absent. ngaio (Myoporum laetum) and kohekohe (Dysoxylum spectabile). podocarp trees. but this must be taken as a maximum age as there is a likelihood of the charcoal being derived from wood decades to centuries older. The pollen profile is probably late (after 400 BP) in the pre-European sequence. Haloragis and corroded tree-fern spores and charcoalrich silts all indicate that the swamp was subject to continuing in-wash of alluvial material after fire and in-wash as a consequence of human activities. bracken. The sediments higher in the sequence show progressive recovery through a hutu–Dodonea seral phase to a forest type similar to that before the eruption. Myrsine and rata. place the site in scrubby coastal forest.4a–b) Zone TH-1 High percentages of manuka. which suggests that there may have been some temporary damage to coastal forest. Sporadic high percentages of Potamogeton. but no major disruption. and bracken. including disturbance of neighbouring dune soils. The silty sediments and high levels of Myriophyllum show this to have been a pond or very wet swamp behind a recently formed (possibly post-Taupo Tephra) dune crest. Rata and kahikatea fall to low levels and tanekaha and tree ferns increase after the fall of the Kaharoa Tephra. it is likely to have been beyond the coastal scrub-forest zone and within the margin of taller coastal conifer-dominant forest.5) There is insufficient significant change to zone this site. scrub-covered swamp in a largely deforested bracken-covered landscape. Coprosma. grass and tutu increase. grass and tutu on the coastal strip (Wilmshurst and McGlone 1996). As the site is closer to the terrace scarp and at the edge of the swamp. .6a–b) Zone TB-1: before and during the Taupo Tephra deposition. 3. with the exception of Fuscospora.

4a Thornton-Atkinson complex.32 Kohika Figure 3. percentage pollen diagram .

percentage pollen diagram .The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 33 Figure 3.4b Thornton-Atkinson complex.

Figure 3. percentage pollen diagram .5 Tunapahore A.

The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 35 Figure 3. percentage pollen diagram .6a Tunapahore B.

36 Kohika Figure 3. percentage pollen diagram .6b Tunapahore B.

kahikatea and totara suggests that a diverse scrub and forest grew on levees and sand-dunes within the swamp complex. (1999) and Newnham et al. and identification of pukatea and kahikatea macro-remains from peats further inland on the southeastern Rangitaiki plains (Campbell et al. Within a few kilometres of the coast a number of tree and shrub species became more prominent. The nearest extant occurrences of kauri are on the Mamaku Plateau. 1989) and in the northern Bay of Plenty (Newnham et al. including kohekohe. rewarewa. grass and charcoal fragment percentages are high. 1995). indicating destruction of forest in the coastal strip. maire.0 per cent. pukatea. and migrating sand-dunes associated with episodic coastal progradation created a dynamic. 80 kilometres northwards along the coast (Giles et al. raupo and toetoe. Kohika differs from other lowland Bay of Plenty sites in having a significant presence of kauri and pahautea pollen. From extant western forest tracts and the pollen results presented here and in Giles et al. Movement of alluvium in river channels and river levees. nearly always in association with a manuka shrubby cover (Campbell et al. wirerush (Empodisma minus) and Sporodanthus. pukatea. 1995). kauri pollen is recorded at 20–40 per cent in pre-Kaharoa sediments on Matakana Island. the abundance of tanekaha. manuka. At Kohika. Prehistoric vegetation of the Bay of Plenty coast The natural vegetation of the lowland Bay of Plenty has been removed from a wide crescent extending from Waihi in the northwest to the Motu River in the east. The swamp areas at Tunapahore represent poorly drained clearings within dense coastal forest and appear to have had a scrub/sedge cover. Wetlands covered much of the Rangitaiki Plains and the Maketu Basin (Campbell et al. Kauri pollen is consistently present throughout zones KO-2 to KO-5. rimu. 1973) confirms their local presence. Raised bogs were common and dominated by jointed rushes. Drier peats tended to be formed by Gleichenia fern and manuka. hinau (Elaeocarpus dentatus).5–4. kahikawaka. The date of first Maori clearance is problematic. tanekaha. These percentages are similar to those for kauri from lakes in the Hamilton Basin (Newnham et al. On the other hand. 1974b). Only west of the Motu River do largely unmodified forests extend nearly to the coast. 1973. at levels of 0. The range of some species appears to have changed markedly since human occupation. A large range of broad-leaved trees and shrubs also occurred in these forests. 1999). ngaio and Dodonaea viscosa. pohutukawa (Metrosideros excelsa). miro (Prumnopitys ferruginea) and kahikatea formed a conifer overstorey above a canopy of tawa. kamahi and northern rata (Metrosideros robusta). Increased flooding and nutrient enrichment of the swamp are shown by high levels of raupo. rewarewa. both areas within its current range.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 37 Zone TB-3: Maori clearance (maximum age: 780 BP) All forest and scrub pollen types are at low percentages in these two samples and bracken. diverse topography. In the western and central Bay of Plenty the forest that remains has been extensively logged and much is second-growth broad-leaved bush (Nicholls 1974a. (1995). as discussed below. just north of Lake Rotorua (60 kilometres distant). 1973). Where the forest structure was disturbed. Swampy wetlands were characterised by the tall sedge Baumea complanata. kanuka and kamahi often formed a low forest as part of the pathway back to tall conifer forest. flax. and Te Puke (40 kilometres distant) (Nicholls 1974a). and up to 20 kilometres from the coast. Metrosideros. It . Tree ferns were abundant throughout. Coprosma. the prehistoric lowland forest consisted for the large part of conifer/broad-leaved associations in which matai (Prumnopitys taxifolia). Newnham et al.

shows an extreme reaction. Of the forest types. Newnham et al. Newnham et al. Volcanic disturbance and fire The Taupo Pumice and the Kaharoa Tephra occur in sites throughout the Bay of Plenty. The Maketu catchment (Papamoa). At Papamoa and the Rangitaiki sites. but. at Tunapahore the levels of hutu encountered (up to 15 per cent) indicate local occurrence. McGlone 1983b. the vegetation shows little discernible reaction to the deposition of the Taupo Pumice. although wind transport of pollen from the north cannot be definitively ruled out. Nevertheless. however. despite lying at the very edge of the major depositional area of the Taupo Tephra (less than 10 cm thickness). 1999. but this appears to be a gross overstatement. 1973) and Tunapahore. tree-fern spores and charcoal. Hutu is now rare in the Bay of Plenty. the most rapidly accumulating site. Inland. Pahautea is now sporadic in the Bay of Plenty and its pollen is absent at all other Bay of Plenty pollen sites (Giles et al.38 Kohika is likely that stands of kauri forest grew south of its current range within the Tarawera River catchment close to the Kohika site. 1995). Waihi Beach Swamp in the western Bay of Plenty (Newnham et al. Giles et al. and at Fermah Rd (Waihi) no alluvium flooded onto the site. 1995). this pollen could derive from long-distance dispersal. 1999. while at Papamoa Bog. 1995) and inland at Holdens Bay (McGlone 1983b). The direct impact of the Taupo Tephra on the vegetation at Kohika was over within 200 years. bracken and grass do not increase until after the first alluvial silt deposit following the Taupo. would have had no alluvial flooding. Hutu is consistently recorded at low percentages in the western Bay of Plenty (Giles et al. The mild. The most likely explan- . Tunapahore. but probably large areas of forest devastation and tephra plains occurred in the modern Kawerau–Edgecumbe district associated with flooding by tephric alluvium. on the Rangitaiki Plains (Campbell et al. being recorded at only a few sites in forest-covered broken hill country behind Whakatane and Opotoki at altitudes between 150 and 650 m. However. drought-free conditions most favoured by this species (McGlone and Moar 1977) were evidently best met in sheltered coastal sites backed closely by hills. suggesting the later spread of bracken and grass. and possibly a local response to direct tephra damage to forest and scrub by providing fresh alluvial surfaces for them to pioneer on (Wilmshurst and McGlone 1996). it was once an important component of the lowland floodplain forest community at Kohika. Tunapahore. However. At Kohika. 1973. This appears to represent both a delayed successional response in the hinterland to volcanic devastation. as this small tree is wind-pollinated. In the most northern of the Bay of Plenty sites. suggesting that there was a direct effect of tephra-fall on the surrounding dryland vegetation that led to some temporary replacement of forest or scrub with bracken. there was a variable but marked disruption of the vegetation. Newnham et al. only kahikatea and tanekaha decline. suggesting that the major effect at Kohika was flooding due to the choking of waterways with Taupo Tephra alluvium. It has been often claimed that the Taupo eruption permanently altered the vegetation of the central North Island. the Taupo Tephra was followed by increased bracken. close to the eruptive centre. the Rangitaiki Plains and western Bay of Plenty sites (Campbell et al. bracken still showed an increase. there was widespread destruction of forest by ignimbrite flows and an extensive halo of forest disruption to the east (Wilmshurst and McGlone 1996). They do not peak with Fuscospora. 1995). including Kohika. The Bay of Plenty was beyond the reach of the ignimbrite flows. Maketu Basin (Newnham et al. 1995) and at Kohika. 1999.

there is no clear record of natural fire. At Waihi Beach Swamp. At Papamoa Bog. 1995). (1973) recorded charred wood. aside from the charcoal associated with the Taupo Tephra. The Papamoa and Waihi Beach sites also have a long record of microscopic charcoal (Newnham et al. the first human impact may have occurred at Kohika around 750 BP. In all likelihood. Campbell et al. At Waihi Beach Swamp. if the presence of bracken is equated with human intervention. there is no indication of disturbance immediately before or after the Kaharoa Tephra. but no charcoal. Newnham et al. the forest rapidly and completely recovered. charcoal increases immediately below the tephra. as suggested by McGlone (1981). Evidence for anthropogenic burning before the Kaharoa Tephra in lowland Bay of Plenty is equivocal. dated at 781 BP. accompanied by a brief pulse of charcoal influx and bracken. probably because of consistently high water-levels and. The impact of the Kaharoa Tephra is complicated by the fact that Maori settlers were almost certainly in the region at the time it fell. the 5 cm-thick tephra is followed immediately by bracken and charcoal. the temporary influx of tephric silt and charcoal accompanied by bracken and grass. Consistent influxes of charcoal and permanent conversion to bracken and grass of landscapes previously covered with forest or scrub are the best palynological criteria for inferring human presence (McGlone 1983a. Detailed sampling at Kohika revealed consistent but low levels of bracken in the 6 cm directly below the Kaharoa Tephra. tanekaha and swamp shrubs all decline after the eruption and then recover. 1995). At the Papamoa site. as there are no distinctive markers to distinguish anthropogenic burning from natural burning. McGlone et al. against a background of intermittent natural fire. However. as estimated from the total New Zealand set of . but it is very near the surface of the bog and the Polynesian and European records are blended. The previously dominant kauri declined after the Kaharoa Tephra fall at Matakana Island. Giles et al. 1998). suggesting that either the tephra directly affected the vegetation. nor did a 10 cm fall at Tunapahore. On the basis of accumulation rates. so it is impossible to tell whether there was a direct effect (Newnham et al. or that Maori took advantage of tephra-damaged vegetation to do some initial clearance. However. the 4 cm-thick Kaharoa Tephra seems not to have caused any forest destruction (Newnham et al. Anthropogenic fire and timing of first settlement Most peat deposits in the Bay of Plenty show evidence of having been burnt in prePolynesian times. Metrosideros. is only a little outside the range for first major environmental impact. peat and charcoal throughout late Holocene deposits at Maketu and on the Rangitaiki Plains.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 39 ation is that the coastal bush was vulnerable to acidic ash-fall. and there is no bracken or grass. and widespread dieback resulted in fires lit by lightning that opened up ground for bracken and grass (Wilmshurst and McGlone 1996). (1999) are unsure whether this decline was induced volcanically or by humans. but the decline coincides with the first appearance of charcoal and bracken. these fires were confined mainly to the swamps and bogs. As at the sites further west. At Tunapahore. it is difficult to pinpoint exactly when the first Polynesian burning began. and the surrounding dryland vegetation suffered only infrequent fire. the Kaharoa Tephra ranges from 10 to 15 cm thick (Pullar 1973) and may have had an effect independent of Maori burning. On the Rangitaiki Plains near Kohika. 1995). 1994. charcoal abundance immediately below the Kaharoa Tephra is no different from that deeper in the profile. but not bracken or grass. The Kohika site seems to have been less vulnerable to fire.

covered the extensive wetlands of the Rangitaiki Plains. The earliest ages for archaeological sites in the Bay of Plenty support the interpretation from the pollen profiles that major human impact did not begin until after the deposition of the Kaharoa Tephra. jointed sedges and flax. When calibrated. Despite its convenient location for settlement. ti (Cordyline) and tutu. and those that lengthened the frost-free season (cold air drainage and proximity to the coast). there is no evidence that the Bay of Plenty was settled earlier than any other district in New Zealand. Once the easily harvested forest birds had been depleted. which increased sunlight and warmth. Plant remains recovered from the archaeological site (Lawlor 1979). there are relatively early dates for the archaeological site of Kauri Point swamp of between 629 ± 60 (NZ593) and 533 ± 82 yrs BP (NZ813) (O’Keeffe 1991:128. such as north-facing slopes. tangled vegetation of lowland swamps and surrounding slopes would have been difficult to penetrate. comm. these radiocarbon dates in the range 550–650 BP enter an area of ambiguity.40 Kohika palynological sites (McGlone and Wilmshurst 1999). scrub and tall sedges. it was inimical to human settlement. Continuous traces of bracken recorded immediately below the Kaharoa Tephra might indicate small-scale burning as Maori exploration of the central North Island began. 1996). all of which yielded highly valued carbohydrate foods. eels. Dense vegetation. Destruction of forest therefore increased the potential of the Kohika area to support humans. a charcoal sample giving a maximum age for a gravel-added soil on the Opouriao Plains has an age of 540 ± 67 (NZ6838). Obsidian hydration dates for the Tokitoki site. indicate that there was continuing use of the remaining forest patches. because of the problem of dating silts with reworked charcoal inclusions. The densely wooded. including complex mosaics of swamp forest. Patches of suitable soils occurred throughout the coastal area. other fish and water birds were also highly important. species-rich. and the increased influx of bracken spores indicates that fern was a major vegetation cover. Choices were based on soil type (light. we cannot be sure when. the inbuilt age of the wood and charcoal is not known. giving calibrated ages of between the calendar years AD 1250 and 1450. The Tunapahore area was not permanently settled until after the Kaharoa eruption but. thus further encouraging widespread burning. Freshwater swamp resources such as flax. However. consistent with the age of the Kaharoa Tephra on which the site was laid down (McGovern-Wilson pers. and these were increased and made more accessible through burning. raupo. benign climates and fertile soils. conifer/broadleaved forests in the years before Maori settlement. In the western Bay of Plenty. Analysis of gardening patterns in the Whakatane catchment (Jones 1986) shows that a range of sites was used for cultivation. 171–4). The densely . Decline in all tall-tree pollen reflects widespread deforestation. Use and impact of fire during the Maori settlement phase Lowland coastal Bay of Plenty was largely covered in tall. In the Whakatane district. While this vegetation cover supported a large variety of plants and animals. and may possibly represent an early temporary clearance. Burning of the forest and swamp forests created easier access to the hinterland along valley bottoms and ridge crests. free-draining soils were preferred) and microclimatic factors. the primary forests would yield little aside from berries and some minor vegetable foods. and encouraged the spread of bracken. Ohiwa Harbour are in the range 650–690 BP. There are many pa in this area which are likely to have been established from AD 1500. including seeds of titoki and hinau.

Jones and Moore (1985) found coastal forest at Whangara on the East Coast to have been replaced early in the occupation sequence by repeatedly burnt shrublands and open mobile dunelands. Eutrophication of the swamp with the arrival of stock and later the introduction of fertilisers may account for the raupo increase. while rewarewa pollen continued to be well represented. Maori settlement pervasively altered this natural setting through systematic and repeated firing of the vegetation. we can only infer that they played an important role in the post-settlement vegetation. sporadic before the Kaharoa Tephra. swamp forests and wooded wetlands were replaced with scrub/fernland. as attested to by the continuing dominance of bracken and grass. with only small patches of forest surviving. Clearance of the surrounding landscape and the wetland vegetation itself may have led to faster run-off from the catchment. There was a constant low level of input of forest-type pollen. regularly flooded. and easy access to the hinterland through cleared valleys and ridges. interspersed with cultivations on fertile and climatically favoured patches of lowland alluvium soils. probably associated with the introduction of European-style agriculture consequent on intensive European colonisation of the region from the 1850s onwards. Both processes would tend to make the low-lying areas wetter. was continuously represented afterwards. However. some indicating long-distance transport from the forested hinterland and others the nature of the local remnant forest patches. herbaceous flax and raupo associations such as those which came to predominate around the Kohika pa site. However. Conclusions The pre-human lowland Bay of Plenty was densely forested and even wetland areas were predominantly covered with tall swamp forest and scrub. and therefore greater flooding and less interception and re-evaporation of rainfall by the vegetation cover (McGlone 1983b). More navigable networks of streams and lagoons. and this suggests that the current situation of remnant forest patches surrounded by regenerating forest and scrub was established early in the course of Maori settlement. raupo-. dryland vegetation change was relatively slight after the major burn-off at Kohika. sedge. Air-fall deposition of tephra after volcanic eruptions caused marked but temporary declines and altered the forest and wetland cover through the direct influence of tephra and through flooding of volcanic alluvium down rivers. and forest stands. Once begun. reed-. disappearance of Maori cultural material and influx of sand and silt argues for major change in local land use. Maori . Dense forests. Kamahi pollen. and this was probably the same as near the coast on the Rangitaiki Plains. firing continued regularly. would have increased the effective size of the resource catchment available to the inhabitants. The upper sediments at Thornton-Atkinson also have high levels of kamahi. most scrub species and broad-leaved trees are poorly represented in the pollen rain and. Kamahi and rewarewa are prominent in regenerating forest in the Bay of Plenty (Nicholls 1991). Continuous forest was confined to hilly areas.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 41 wooded landscape gave way to one in which most of the suitable soils were either under cultivation or in some sort of fire-induced vegetation.and fern-covered wetlands and lagoons. wet organic soils and regularly flooded areas had a mainly herbaceous vegetation. although even here fire burnt up steep faces and was used to clear tracks along ridges and other natural pathways. The upsurge of raupo in Zone KO-7. It seems likely that the rather monotonous background of generic pollen types conceals a more varied vegetation history. at most sites. Only deep. replacing bog forest and scrub with tall.

followed by sustained settlement relatively late in the pre-European sequence compared with elsewhere in the Bay of Plenty. 1998). they are better viewed as landscapes maintained by repeated firing at certain stages in a seral succession from bracken. In addition. benign climate within which kumara cultivation was possible and an abundance of fruits and birds of the diverse lowland forest available. The subsequent ecological history of Maori settlement in the Bay of Plenty after the . with some suggestions being made of early human impact before 1000 BP. an ‘orthodox’ model of settlement at about 1000 BP (e. with the implication that early contact must have taken place (Holdaway 1996). Continuous traces of bracken recorded immediately below the Kaharoa Tephra at a number of locations in the central North Island (Newnham et al. In inland districts and Tunapahore. sporadic settlement may have occurred early on. 2001.g. scrub and grassland to forest. The timing of permanent Maori settlement is still not entirely certain. McGlone and Wilmshurst (1999) concluded from a survey of deforestation dates that Maori environmental impact was first experienced somewhere between 750 and 550 calendar years BP. but major settlement can have occurred only after that date. 1998) might therefore indicate small-scale burning as Maori exploration began. as it is improbable that such a favoured area in climate and resources. In seasonally dry areas and on fragile dune lands. as the observations made by James Cook at Tolaga Bay suggest. On balance. there are an ‘early’ model proposing first settlement at around 2000 BP (Sutton 1987). in turn. transient populations much earlier. and that suggestions that this impact occurred earlier is a result of misinterpretation of the significance of charcoal and bracken spore traces. kiore bones have been dated to as early as around 2000 BP. followed by mass settlement and rapid population growth fuelled by the initial plentiful wild resources and productive soils of the region. and a debate on this continues. Some minor destruction may have occurred between c. The Bay of Plenty palaeoecological data suggests that permanent occupation may have been as late as 750–700 BP. East Coast and Hawkes Bay. Currently. Palynological research has been undertaken specifically to help distinguish between the settlement models (e.42 Kohika settlement coincides largely with tawa-dominant forest and. would be neglected for hundreds of years after first settlement. The archaeological and environmental evidence clearly cannot rule out the presence of small. Elliot and Neall 1995. the Kaharoa tephra-fall may have had a considerable impact. not overly wet. The relatively late occupation of an area that could be confidently predicted to be a prime focus for Maori activity (Jones 1989) raises questions about when New Zealand was settled. if uncertainty over dating is taken into account. On the eastern Bay of Plenty terrace lands.g. However. Within this climatic zone areas with easy access from the coast and rivers were heavily settled. However. Newnham et al.800 BP and the Kaharoa eruption at 665 BP. combined with reliance on inherently risky sites for dating. but some recovery ensued over one or two centuries. Davidson 1984) and a ‘late’ model of settlement at c. only to succumb to widespread burning. Tunapahore and Whangara could be described as ‘degraded’ landscapes. as have been described for eastern Polynesia in the period of human settlement (Kirch 1984:139–46). Horrocks et al. Throughout the period of sustained settlement. The Bay of Plenty palaeoecological data strongly support the late model. strategically placed at the heart of the intensively settled region of the New Zealand archipelago. sustained forest clearance occurred. indicates a mild. the Rangitaiki Plains.700 BP (Anderson 1991). The process of destroying the original forest appears to have been as follows. we favour an interpretation in which a limited amount of exploratory activity and transient settlement occurred in the Bay of Plenty just before the eruption of the Kaharoa Tephra.

fern.L.. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. In C. D.. 1999. Forest fire following Holocene tephra fall. J.600 year BP Kaharoa Tephra: implications for Polynesian settlement of Great Barrier Island. J. 28:153–68...S. Nichol and D. New Zealand Journal of Botany. 8:5–32. Bay of Plenty. Froggatt P. Pollen et Spores.J. Arrival of rats in New Zealand. Munro. Holdaway. An ecological approach to the . October 1769. Holdaway. 161:11–26. Cullen (eds). Heine and W.V. Lowe. M. An archaeological survey and environmental interpretation of the Whangara dunes. and A. North Island. Bay of Plenty.L. 13:53–65.. New Zealand. McGlone. Lake Rotorua.81A.R. 98:49–75. and V.C. Davidson.M. 65:767–95. Quaternary International. University of Auckland. Sutton. scrub and swamp. Department of Geology Publication. 1994. New Zealand.N. New Zealand.. Pullar. Archaeology in Oceania. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. The chronology of colonization in New Zealand. 1991.V. K.S.S. Froggatt. Lawlor. Journal of Archaeological Science.O. Volcanoes in the Quaternary. Deng. S. 24:523–35. Horrocks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 28:81–101. The Prehistory of New Zealand. within which all the requirements for sustaining the relatively dense network of settlements could be found. 1984. McGuire (eds).D. Point count estimation of charcoal in pollen preparations and thin sections. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. New Zealand. forest.J. North Island. D. Neall. Proceedings of Tephra Workshop. M. Journal of the Polynesian Society. Impact of tephra fall and environmental change: a 1000 year record from Matakana Island. “In much greater affluence”: productivity and welfare in Maori gardening at Anaura Bay.R. Y.S. Identification of plant fragments and pollen from peat deposits in Rangitaiki Plains and Maketu Basin.L. 33:89–109. High spatial resolution of pollen and charcoal in relation to the c. The Evolution of the Polynesian Chiefdoms. 1990. Giles.. B. P.20.L. Howarth. and P. volume and age. East Coast. Hauraki Gulf. 2001. Lowe and A. E. Ogden. 1973.J. 1983a.. McGlone. North Island.A.J. Newnham. Unpublished MA thesis. C.N. Anderson and R.. Miscellaneous Publication No. Lowe. London: Geological Society. 1982. M. Elliot. distribution. Holocene pollen diagrams. K.G. 1991. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. R. A twelve hundred year history of deforestation and a new age for the Rangitoto Ash from Motutapu Island. Bay of Plenty. 1979. 13/14:135–42. Auckland: Longman Paul. Polynesian deforestation of New Zealand: a preliminary synthesis. Polynesian settlement and horticulture in two river catchments of the eastern North Island. Application of new technology liquid scintillation spectrometry to radiocarbon dating of tephra deposits. 1989. New Zealand. Alloway. J. Campbell. Antiquity. Hogg.. T. References Anderson. Frith and W. 384:225–6. Vucetich and J. 1984.J. Maori settlement and horticulture on the Rangitaiki Plains. 1986. 1996.G.M. Nature.The impact of Polynesian settlement on the vegetation of the coastal Bay of Plenty 43 major clearance of forest reveals no further major alterations to the vegetation cover until European settlement. K. 1983b. 1995. A. R. A review of late Quaternary silicic and some other tephra formations from New Zealand: their stratigraphy.E.C. Palaeoenvironment analysis: an appraisal of the prehistoric environment of the Kohika swamp pa (N68/140). I. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics.L.. northern New Zealand... M. No. Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.L. Kirch. McGlone. nomenclature. and D.G.C. 18:11–25. Jones. 1992...J. Moore.80–6. M. In R. K. Regular burning maintained a matrix of cultivable ground. 1985. Jones. M. McGlone. Clark. Special Publications. Geological Society of New Zealand. New Zealand. 13:143–75. 11:317–30. R. P. Jones.. M.J. Jones. A. pp. 1981.

Late Holocene palynology and palaeovegetation of tephra-bearing mires at Papamoa and Waihi Beach. 1991.136–63.D. 15:485–9. Urewera Forest Class Map. Lower Hutt: New Zealand Soil Bureau. Sheet 7.).A. following the 1850 BP Taupo eruption. Green. Forest disturbance in the central North Island. New Zealand. Ecroyd (eds)..E. 1977.G.M. 1973. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. New Zealand.M. New Zealand. McGlone. University of Auckland. Newnham. Rotorua: Forest Research Institute.J. Webb. Wilson. Native Forests.A. D.S.A. 19:127–50.M.L. Wigley. A paradigmatic shift in Polynesian prehistory: implications for New Zealand. Prehistoric settlement in the western Bay of Plenty. Rotorua Forest Class Map. 9:135–55. and N. Soils and land use of the Rangitaiki Plains. M. D. Lowe. Quaternary International.G...L. M. A314:199–228. O’Keeffe. Walker. J. 25:533–44. The Taupo Eruption. Wellington: New Zealand Forest Service. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. New Zealand Soil Bureau Maps 133/1–7.P. 59:17–26. Newnham. M. and M.S. R. Wellington: New Zealand Forest Service. Lowe and G.S. Sutton (ed. western Bay of Plenty. New Zealand.T. Nicholls. Clarkson.. 1985. 1989. Higham. Wilmshurst. North Island.E. Palynology. P. The Origins of the First New Zealanders.15–22. McGlone.L. New Zealand. R.G. J. London. Wilmshurst. Pullar. . Botany of Rotorua.C. 1996.44 Kohika Polynesian settlement of New Zealand. In D. Isopachs of tephra. New Zealand Journal of Botany. D. 1995. 1991. and M.D. Smale and C. J.31. J. Sheet 6. New Zealand. Lowe and J.F. 1974b. New Zealand Soil Survey Report No. and J. Raukumara Forest Class Map. Pullar. Moore.000.000. North Island.. 25:283– 300. McGlone. D. 1991. pp. The Kaharoa Tephra as a critical datum for earliest human impact in northern New Zealand. J.M.S. and G.A. Scale 1:1. M.. vegetation and climate of the Waikato lowlands. General aspects. Forest Service Mapping Series 6.M...N. Sheet 5.M.L. Nicholls.. Journal of Archaeological Science. 1974a. Sutton.D.P. pp. Forest Service Mapping Series 6. 1971.. I. In B.J.18. R. Collinson. Oxford: Blackwell. Pollen analysis. Forest Service Mapping Series 6.J. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 6:399–411.. The Ascarina decline and post-glacial climatic change in New Zealand. 1985. 1999. The Holocene. North Island. J. 1998. Auckland: Auckland University Press.L. Newnham.N. Nicholls. Moar. Wilmshurst and T. J. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. 1987. Unpublished MLitt thesis. McGlone. Central North Island.J. W. C.000 years ago. Dating initial Maori environmental impact in New Zealand. W.. Nicholls. since c. Wellington: New Zealand Forest Service. M.

is one of these and.1 is an aerial photograph taken during the season of January 1976. North of the stopbank is what remains of Lake Kohika.3). During our fieldwork the freshwater level to the north of Figure 4.4 Excavations and site history at Kohika G. followed by an account of the Whakatane and District Historical Society investigations. at the time of occupation. Kohika. and it is now time to consider the structure of this remarkable site. B. 2. Figure 4.J.1 is a contour map showing several areas of excavation and Plate 4. Irwin An archaeological and environmental context for Kohika has been established in Chapters 1–3. was a small island that stood in freshwater lake and swamp.1 shows a Regional Council stopbank and canal to the north of the site.1 A contour map of Kohika showing the location of the excavations 45 . Site V15/80. C and D. The contours in Figure 4. running east–west to join Canal 109. This chapter describes and interprets the excavations in the University Areas A. Figure 4. and immediately to the south is an east–west belt of remnants of pre-Taupo age dune that extends on both sides of the Tarawera River. which runs northwards alongside Sutherlands Road (shown in Fig.1 are at 10 cm intervals and show heights above sea level (mean high-water springs) as measured from a Regional Council benchmark on the stopbank beside Canal 109.

Rich waterlogged remains included houses and their contents. In 1977 and 1978 excavation dealt with particular problems that remained: • Square DD was dug in Area D on a different orientation to the previous grid to investigate the lowest level. and it was in this area where members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society concentrated their efforts (Fig. Artefacts could be found much more easily by probing and digging in the peat here than where it was covered by floodwash. In 1975 Squares D1 and D2 discovered a number of superimposed artificial living floors and these were pursued horizontally in 1976 in Squares D1 to D11. which were found to interdigitate with the swamp deposits at the margins. 4. 3. it expanded laterally with the spread of occupation debris and artificially laid floors. were placed on higher ground to the south. Excavation began in 1975 and continued in 1976. and it threw out various waterlogged artefacts that were found in the spoil heaps. It later transpired that this cultural material came from peat lying below a thick band of alluvium composed of reworked tephra. is that it was at the 2000 BP shoreline and has a core of dune sand. Squares C1 and C12 were dug adjacent to the Historical Society area at the edge of the swamp. silts and diatomaceous earth that formed in swamp and freshwater lake. 1. It exposed a palisade of kanuka posts that were rotted off at the water table. and D16. a pataka storehouse. In Area C in 1975. where they are interstratified with peats. that was redeposited during a local flood event when the Tarawera River overflowed its banks. Other soil types lay close by. and the water table in the swamp around the site lay typically between the 40 cm and 60 cm contours. Artefacts thrown out with the ditch spoil included hair combs and a greenstone pendant and chisel. Also in the immediate area of the site is the band of reworked Kaharoa Tephra alluvium.1). mentioned above. The dynamic geology of the Rangitaiki Plains has been described in Chapter 2. leaving the zig-zag to be seen in Figure 4. in summary.1. cooking shelters and canoes. All three tephras have been mixed into the soil of the dune but survive intact as beds in the surrounding swamp. The excavations of each season followed the developing knowledge of the site. with final investigations in 1978. When drains were dug on Mr Jessop’s farm in 1974 the machine skirted the eastern edge of the mound. Area B lay at the eastern palisade. and two further squares. C7 and C10. The geomorphological setting of Kohika. Area A was in a high and dry part of the site with evidence for intercutting storage pits and bins with a later episode of cooking structures. laid by floodwaters from the Tarawera River that flowed northwards around the eastern side of the site. Kaharoa and Tarawera tephras are present. The Taupo. No further work was done in later years. and in 1976 Square B3 was dug outside the palisade while Square B4 straddled it. In 1975 Squares B1 and B2 were dug inside the palisade. 5. Area D lay marginal to the water table on the northern side of the site at the former lakeshore. After the site was abandoned there were late intrusive burials. . Thus Kohika was not entirely artificial. 4. as are some swamp sites in the North Island. 2. This flood deposit was much less in evidence in the sides of the drain along the northern side of Kohika which lay in the shelter of the mound. Its sand core was natural but. plus the Taupo sea-rafted pumice. as will be shown. As described in Chapter 2. All of the layers and stratigraphical events at Kohika have both natural and cultural dimensions and it is not possible to explain the prehistoric occupation without close attention to both.46 Kohika the stopbank varied with tide and weather. and the exposed sections of the drain offered a key to site structure. in Pullar’s (1985) scheme the dune sand is Koe and the diverse soil types immediately adjacent to Kohika conform to his Mtk and Onc categories.

Lawlor inspected the agricultural drain sections near Kohika as part of his thesis research (Lawlor 1979). A continuous area of more than 70 square metres was investigated. and another 10 in association with M. The account is based on their brief notes and sketches made at the time. 6. McGlone in 1978. Whether this was due to Maori gardening or recent conversion of the land to pasture is not known. The University of Auckland team made some 20 cores both within and close to Kohika in 1976. In the same year. it did not reach very deep. and the burial and retrieval of thermal cells for obsidian hydration calibration. In 1967 A. If the upper part of the deposit was mixed by machine. but this was to be expected because it is generally masked by black topsoil on the dune ridges of the Rangitaiki Plains and difficult to identify (Pullar 1985). He visited Kohika during the excavations in 1975 and 1976 and made a further 27 cores. the upper layers in Area A also have the appearance of a mixed deposit. because several late intrusive burials in the site. • Square D17 was dug to collect samples of pollen and sediment. An extensive survey of stratigraphic cores was made in the vicinity of Kohika. some discussions with this author and also on information extrapolated from the university investigations. we found them to be in generally poor condition. the bed of Tarawera Ash that lay undisturbed in the swamp was also missing on the mound and has been mixed into the soil since AD 1886. However. Henceforth it is referred to as the HS Area. Excavations in Area A Area A was on the dry part of Kohika and expected to produce different evidence from the swampy margins of the mound. due to exposure to severe weathering. • Other miscellaneous tasks included making a contour map. This chapter concludes with a discussion of the area. were not badly smashed up. Volcanic ash and disturbance on the mound Excavations revealed only a few small patches of intact Taupo Ash on the dune itself. • An effort was made to locate the palisade on the western side of the site. Cultural items were mostly hand-picked but samples were taken regularly for sieving and flotation. establishing elevation in relation to the tidal data. the information is shown in Figure 2. very rich in waterlogged artefacts.3. previously dug by Whakatane and District Historical Society members. We know that the inland dunes of the plains were favoured for gardening in prehistory and can be confident that this took place at Kohika. which were the highest cultural features.Excavations and site history at Kohika 47 • Squares D12–15 were dug as a discontinuous trench to establish the stratigraphic relations between Area A at the top of the mound and Area D at its edge. However. Moreover. I. Soil samples were collected from every layer and further bulk samples were returned to the laboratory . No intact Kaharoa Tephra was found either. Stratigraphy Excavation followed the natural stratigraphy in 5 cm spits. Pullar of the Soil Bureau made 11 cores in this part of the Rangitaiki Plains.

lower down in the deposit. B1 and B2. there is variability in the layer – as shown. Notwithstanding the mixing. the charcoal has a different origin and more integrity. Plate 4. These normally ranged in size up to about 10 cm but some large pumice boulders were discovered.3. Pieces of pumice up to about 1 cm in diameter occur in the airborne Taupo Ash at Kohika while larger pieces were sea-rafted. Layer B was usually divided into upper and lower levels. At the Layer B/C interface was a few centimetres’ depth of mottled material resulting from the interaction of the layers by natural soil processes. for example. but all shared a basic composition similar to the material of lower Layer B. Layer A consisted of currently grassed black topsoil. Layer C consisted of the brown sterile sand of the former dune without the pumice that arrived some time after its formation. but clearly they were not all of the same age.2.2 shows the excavation in Square A1 Extension in progress.48 Kohika Figure 4. too. Much of the charcoal scattered through Layer B is likely to result from burning of vegetation and tillage of the soil. It is likely that much of the obsidian and the scattered small cooking stones in Layer B are out of primary context. While they were similar in texture and composition. the top of Layer C. Three means of inferring relative chronology were (1) the . Layer B was a mixed sandy subsoil with pumice dispersed throughout. Most of these were found at essentially the one level. by lenses of denser pumice in some places.2 Some representative section drawings from Area A for processing (Lawlor 1979). Features and chronology A plan of excavated features is shown in Figure 4. However. The fills of these features showed some variation in colour and texture. and especially where associated with features. B1 was commonly more brown in colour and B2 rather more stained grey with charcoal. This was also the zone in which excavation detected many features and some disturbances that were dug into Layer C. Some representative section drawings in Squares A1 and A5 are shown in Figure 4.

Bins There were five bins more than 1 m long in the excavated area. none of the bins cut any earlier feature. Of these only the intersection of features was reliable.3 A plan of the excavated features in Area A .4.Excavations and site history at Kohika 49 evidence of stratigraphy and the intercutting of features. but the other evidence did not contradict it. at different times Figure 4. Pits There were seven pits. An example from Square A3 is shown in Plate 4. all distinguished from bins by being clearly larger. Alignments of the pits suggest some contemporaneity among them. as known from other sites. A number of feature types were found. The bins do not appear to be part of other larger structures. and a cross-section of the same structure at a later stage of excavation in Plate 4. (2) the tentative evidence of different fills of features. In age. At least three of these had small stakeholes around them that probably supported light roofs. They included both round-ended and rectangular plans and there is nothing remarkable about them. and (3) the pattern of features in plan.3.

Further. a physical anthropologist. a supposed hut or house that included the two would be implausibly narrow and the line of just three slots is too short. which supports a young age. Barnett. This was the preference of both Maori elders consulted and the director. Area A sequence To summarise. Excavations in swamp sites in the Waikato and in other parts of Kohika have shown that standing planks in bedding slots was one form of house construction in prehistoric New Zealand.5 (only one did not). They were not interrupted by any other feature. but this probably indicates that the two were sometimes contemporary. The burials were flexed and primary and the bones had been in articulation at the time of interment. Obviously.3 might suggest structures. We cannot tell the time relations of pits and bins because of their mutually exclusive distribution. 4. Ovens and firescoops cut into the fills of pits and they also overlay one another. but what it was is by no means clear. As we know what houses look like elsewhere at Kohika. ovens were younger than both pits and bins. In Area A there is no unambiguous floor plan as outlined by the remains of walls. Ovens and firepits There were more than 20 of these and some of the stratigraphically younger ones still contained cooking stones. in the northern one of which were the remains of a split plank. it should be remembered that Kohika was quite large enough to accommodate . but there is no current evidence for it. it seems certain that the burials were late and intrusive and occurred after Kohika had been abandoned as a settlement.3 there is a line of three slots in Square A4. any remains that had been moved were reburied at the end of the excavation exactly where they had been found. Indeed. However. while the wooden parts of houses themselves were recovered from the adjacent swamp. the sequence of major activity in Area A was storage followed by cooking (however. pits did not cut any other kind of feature. However. all these kinds of evidence for housing were found in Area D at Kohika. Burials Five late burials were found in the top of the mound in Area A. however.3). A second single slot with the surviving butt of a plank was found 1. to keep the bottoms of pits as far as possible above the water table. Other above-ground structures? One might expect people to have built houses on top of Kohika so as to be as high as possible above the water.40 m to the east of the first one. There is no physical floor and there is no distribution of artefacts or debris to imply one. whereas most pits were found to intersect with other pits. While observations and notes were made in the field by G. running roughly east–west across Squares A1 and A2 is an alignment of postholes that was possibly a shelter for a similar alignment of fireplaces just to the south. However. Where any relevant evidence exists. there is no reason to propose any for Area A. as shown in Plate 4. some minor aboveground structure stood there. Various alignments of postholes shown in Figure 4.50 Kohika (Fig. Thus we may conclude that both bins and pits were generally earlier than other kinds of structure. it was sensible to use the top of the mound for storage. in Square A3. In Figure 4. but there was no indication of the time interval between them. earlier ones had been raked out. These were the shallowest features and were generally picked up within Layer B. For example.

and Figure 4. While it was still inside the site.5 show. Figures 4. which indicates that the two were broadly contemporaneous. No living surfaces were found in the 20 square metres excavated in Area B. people returned to bury their dead in what was to them. 4. an ancestral site. Square B3 was dug east of the agricultural drain to investigate the area that lay clearly outside the site. The flood could not reach it here. Site structure and history at Square B1 Square B1 encountered a new kind of deposit. clearly.4 and 4.6 is a plan of features at the base of the excavated square. However. Then came abandonment. . Square B4 was carefully located to straddle the perimeter of the site along the line of the palisade. then followed by peat.7 shows some detail at the base of the cultural deposit. both the sterile lower peat and the upper part of the pale olive silt below were stained by the cultural material above. it was in an area where the mound was artificially expanded but had not yet reached the palisade that separated dry land from lake. perhaps. none of the structures characteristic of Area A was found in B. Nevertheless. Moreover. indicating that there had been a considerable time of peat growth after the Kaharoa event and before occupation of the site. the general pattern conforms to what is understood about other parts of the site. Also absent were artificial floors (of largely sterile dune sand or reworked tephra quarried from elsewhere). beyond the palisade. although they interacted with it in different ways. It follows that the mound had spread sideways over these natural sediments of shallow lake and swamp during occupation. The source of the sediment in the cultural layers of Square B1 was sand from the dune itself together with other occupational debris. unlike the situation in Squares B3 and B4 (see below).6 shows excavation in progress and Plate 4. although that might be elusive anyway. so this approach is taken in the following discussion. there was no flood alluvium in B1 because at the time of the flood the perimeter of the site already lay beyond the excavated square. although there are indications of a house nearby that was not found (see below).1) but B2 was abandoned at a depth of about 30 cm. Area B was selected for excavation because of the interesting material thrown out by the drain digger. inside the site. Much of the activity that related to the lateral expansion of the site in Area B took place a little further inland towards Area A.5). Afterwards. There is no evidence for any considerable duration of settlement in Area A but. there was no in situ dune sand. Squares B1 and B2 were located inside the defended site perimeter (Fig. such as occur in Area D. the north and south sections of Square B1. Plate 4. Instead. the superimposition of structures shows some elapsed time.Excavations and site history at Kohika 51 the spatial variation of activities). Excavations in Area B One basic feature shared by Areas B. Cultural material was found only from the upper part of the peat. 4. Nor is there evidence for any interval during occupation. that underlies the cultural deposit (Fig. The first essential point to note about the bottom of Square B1 is the natural sequence of the bed of airfall Kaharoa Tephra overlain by lacustrine silt. respectively. Experience has shown that comparisons between areas can assist the interpretation of each. C and D is that they all made contact with the same natural swamp stratigraphy. Although Area B was contiguous with Area A.

The plan of the excavation (Fig.5 Square B1.52 Figure 4. Two of these can be seen in Plate 4.7.6) shows the three posts in the northern part of the square set in wider holes originally dug for them to stand in. north section Kohika Figure 4. all more than 20 cm in diameter. Thus there is evidence for some . It is probable that these holes formerly held posts that were drawn.4 Square B1. 4. and two of them can be seen in Plate 4.7 while the third was still to be excavated at that stage. south section The cultural deposit in Square B1 accumulated around three substantial standing posts. because otherwise the timber would still survive below the water table. Also shown in the southern part of the square are three similar large holes that do not hold posts.

The composition of the cultural layers was unremarkable.5) show that the original topsoil of Square B1 was covered by some depth of overburden from the modern ditch. The section drawings (Figs 4.6 Square B1. The occupation soil in Square B1 was a deposit of mixed sediment and cultural material derived mainly from the sand dune nearby. probably too far away to be part of a raised defensive stage or entrance. Every sixth bucket of Figure 4. The remaining posts are large and capable of supporting a considerable load. clearly. The several valuable artefacts found in the vicinity could suggest a raised storehouse on the posts.Excavations and site history at Kohika 53 substantial construction in Square B1 and also for change. A small greenstone chisel from the ditch was found in this spoil in Square B1 and a fine greenstone pendant was found at the same level in Square B2. but there was no building at ground level for there is no trace of a floor. plan of features at the base of the excavation . flecked with orange. Currently the posts lie inside the line of lighter kanuka posts that form the palisade.4 and 4. The absence of intact airfall Tarawera Ash below the topsoil conforms to the situation over the whole mound above the swamp. and there could be others beyond the excavated area. An upper layer of brown soil. had virtually no cultural component and is interpreted as a soil profile that formed after the abandonment of Kohika but was within reach of more recent disturbance from the surface. they both came from the agricultural ditch.

Below the topsoil in the upper deposit. The growth of peat between the alluvium and the Tarawera indicates an interval of time.00 Tarawera Ash topsoil upper peat 2. grading to more silty and moist. 4.00 S silt lenses pumiceous alluvium with silt lenses silt lens grey pumice sand white pumice grey pumice lower peat 1 sedge peat silty peat lower peat 2 . An external sump/test pit was dug to protect fragile deposits in the square. There were scatters of pumice sand and sporadic pumice chunks. which made it difficult to excavate. Filling this meander channel was an Upper Peat (see below) in which lay the bed of airfall Tarawera Tephra. The posthole fill low in the deposit (Fig.54 Kohika material was wet-sieved through a 5 mm screen and was found to contain scattered charcoal. east section B3 East Section N 1. It lay close to the drainage ditch (Plate 4. a post-flood meander channel can be seen in Plate 4.5) was derived from occupation sediment above but was turning to peat. with increasing depth. acting as an aquifer. freshwater mussel epidermis. and then peaty. The matrix of the deposit was sandy.8 cutting into the top of the tephra alluvium below. occasional cooking stones. When both Squares B3 and B4 nearby were getting down to the water table. The fine lens of pumiceous sand shown at the interface of the sterile lower peat and the diatomaceous silt below arrived by natural agency. flakes of obsidian.7 Square B3. because drain water flowed through the bed of airfall Kaharoa Tephra. Site structure and history of Square B3 Square B3 was outside the site and the lake bed was covered by alluvium from a flood that happened while people were living at Kohika.8). the main sludge pump was moved across from Area D to keep the water level under control in both excavations while they were finished and recorded.9 shows a late stage of excavation and the bagging of waterlogged remains. In the base of this peat some fragments of Figure 4.7 records the stratigraphy of B3 and Plate 4. bone. Figure 4. Above it there was further peat growth in the interval after the village was abandoned. wood chips and some flecks of ochre.

The arrival of half a metre or more of fill around the lakeshore meant it was no longer normally possible to reach parts of the site by canoe. The distribution of this type is shown in Figure 2. They give the appearance of having been laid together at the wet margins of the site with the intention of retrieving and using them later. The lakeshore in Square B3 at the time of occupation was evidently shallow water and reeds with various flotsam and jetsam. Clearly. Cultural material was found down to the interface between them. However. the amount of cultural evidence is minimal and much of that can be attributed to later disturbance of the upper deposit. A dramatic flood Life at Kohika was interrupted by the sudden arrival of a deep deposit of alluvium. Typically. particularly when the tides are high. For example. The stratigraphic sections at this part of Kohika correspond to a variant of Pullar’s (1985) soil type Onc (Omehue Coarse Sandy Loam). fragments of bracken and miscellaneous sticks. and a lower layer of more silty peat. a poorly drained gley soil with a thin cover of Tarawera Ash over pumiceous Kaharoa alluvium. 2. There were pieces of gourd shell. coils of rata vine. rather than to post-flood activity. the alluvium arrived as a local but sudden event and it appears to have been similar to modern floods. probably during a single period of bad weather. it was more serious to the people of Kohika. Strong on-shore northeasterly winds back up the floodwaters. It seems that one extra dimension to the use of the swampy . The alluvium also contained odd bits of debris.3). with no ends in view. Below the alluvium two natural layers of peat divided into an upper layer of sedge peat with rushes. even though some hundreds of metres of drain and excavated section in the locality have been carefully examined (Lawlor 1979). there was an important exception in three long adze-dressed wooden posts that were found lying across the northern part of the square. in every excavated area. In 1964 the Tarawera River overflowed its banks not far upstream from Kohika during just such an event. the area of Pullar’s Ran soil type shows the distribution of alluvium deposited in the flood of 1964 (Fig. there was some variation in the energy of floodwaters during the event as silty lenses formed among the bands of pumice sand. the ones in B3 were of smaller diameter. the passage of a cyclonic weather system across the Bay of Plenty is accompanied by high rainfall in the catchment of the rivers that cross the plains. The prehistoric flood deposit at Kohika was laid down in a short time. It included scattered wood chips. At the very bottom of the alluvium were pieces of pumice up to 4 cm in diameter and waterworn greywacke stones up to 6–7 cm. on a sub-surface of sand and gravels and with occasional thin layers of diatomaceous earth. Alluvial sediments consisting mainly of Kaharoa-derived materials that were already in the swamp were carried by the floodwater and redeposited mainly in the meander channels that crossed the swamp at that time. Lying above the posts in the Square B3 peat was a long dressed totara plank that protruded from the northern baulk. such as water-rolled charcoal and pieces of stick.Excavations and site history at Kohika 55 unworked wood and a flake of obsidian could relate to the flood event itself. While these posts were found close to the three empty postholes in the peat at the bottom of Square B1 from which three posts were evidently removed. A wooden hair comb at the interface of the two peats was a valuable find. From this time on. and at Kohika there were lower peats and silts as well.3 (above). But no cultural material or peat growth or palaeosol has been found in this deposit. that had been gathered up in the floodwaters. There were bands of reworked tephra in which the sediments were size-graded. Clearly. cooking stones and a few patches of dumped ash and fishbone. While this would have been of only minor significance in the context of wider swamp history.

Square B4 was a 2. a deep external sump that doubled as a test pit was dug outside the west section at the northern end. long before the site was occupied. Into this was placed a metal drum with perforated holes to allow water to flow but to reduce erosion of fragile sediments. A narrow drain that went down with excavation led from a small seepage sump inside the excavation through the baulk to the sump outside. a transect of posthole bores between them found the actual edge of the site and the location for Square B4. a drawing of the west section of the square. lay a peat that is separated into two bands in Figure 4. Below the Tarawera Tephra. Below the topsoil the edge of the mound was perfectly defined by the presence of Tarawera Tephra outside the site and its absence inside.8 Square B4. the ash varied in thickness and had gone down in pockets under the weight of cattle hooves. Site structure and history in Square B4 With both interior and exterior strata established.10–14 show stages of the excavation and Figure 4.8. although it stopped some 30–40 cm short of the end of the ash as the square became drier. which explains why the topsoil became more moist and peaty in the lower end of the square.5 x 2 m unit that crossed transversely from the flat area of the swamp to the rising incline of the mound.8. Plates 4. This Upper Peat. In B4. as we have called it. provides relevant stratigraphic information. To control drainage while digging below the water table. The information it provides is striking. and the more frequent storage of vine in water to keep it supple. Since it fell in AD 1886. west section .56 Kohika margins of Kohika was the occasional storage of wooden items. Water was then pumped from this drum. A point of stratigraphic interest is that this sump was the only place in Area B where the original pre-Taupo sand-dune surface was encountered as it sloped down under the swamp sediments that formed above it. the tephra has been mixed into the soil everywhere on the dry part of the site and now lies around it like a tide-mark. was found generally in the swamp Figure 4.

8. Prior to the arrival of the floodwash. Below the peat.14 and Figure 4. as can be seen in Figure 4. cultural material was found only in its upper part because the lower part had grown before people lived at Kohika. The pre-flood sediment was stained with charcoal and its matrix graded from sandy silt to peat with increasing depth and moisture. 1976). Every sixth bucket of this soil was wet-sieved through a 5 mm screen. the soil became increasingly sterile. As in Square B1. Immediately below the pumice alluvium was a bed of rushes that grew at the base of the palisade at the time of the flood. Plate 4. or grey-black. Stratigraphically below this again was the same Lower Peat as defined in both Squares B1 and B3 (and also Areas C and D).1). The same inference arises as before: there is little evidence for continuing occupation of substance at Kohika following the flood. The distinguished soil scientist A. and also shows the rippled effect that the water had at the shoreline. 4. Squares C1 and C12 were placed near the Historical Society dig to investigate the deposit that had produced such a wealth of waterlogged wooden items (Fig. some here was washed away from the shore. all surrounded by a homogeneous layer of grey alluvial silt. While some silt was evidently borne by the flood. Pullar saw this section on one of his visits to Kohika and observed that the deposition of the pumice and formation of the lapped shoreline could have taken place within a day during the flooding of a braided river channel (pers. The further purpose of Squares C7 and C10 was to extend the sample to the high and dry area of the site. Sealed under it in the southwestern corner of Square B4 was a wooden board in poor condition as a result of periodic drying of the upper deposits (Plate 4.12 shows the sharp division between the dark cultural interior and the clean white pumice exterior as one sights along the agricultural drain that closely follows the former palisade. The flood deposit itself is nowhere revealed more starkly than in Square B4. This was the same deposit as we have seen already in Square B1 and consists of occupation debris that spread laterally from the exposed sand-dune nearby. discarded cooking stones and flakes of obsidian. One further feature of the Lower Peat in Square B4 was that the layer became more sterile as one followed the deposit from the outside to the inside of the site. was a post-flood deposit and the ground surface that existed at the time of the flood can be traced inland. .10). the dry land that built up inside the palisade in this part of Area B overlay lake-bed sediments that had formed during an earlier time when the edge of the site was further inshore. an occupation soil was forming inside the kanuka palisade post shown in Figure 4.8. It was found to contain virtually no cultural material (apart from scattered charcoal) and. scattered shellfish remains including freshwater mussel. This soil was a greybrown.13 shows the detail of half a dozen kanuka posts in the palisade. It was reinforced in a wooden frame prior to being lifted (Plate 4. as the deposit sloped down across the square.Excavations and site history at Kohika 57 around the mound in both Areas B and C and indicates former freshwater stands. comm. a few dog coprolites. The zone where sand and silt interdigitate is complex and delicate. As elsewhere.11).8 show how the floodwater washed tephra sand between the palisade posts into the site. Excavations in Area C Area C was excavated in 1975 only. Plate 4. gritty mixture of sand with scattered seeds and lenses and lumps of pumice. Sieved components include wood fragments that were often partly burnt. Plate 4.

Cultural deposition Sparse cultural material occurred through the 6–7 cm depth of Lower Peat 1. west section . They include the topsoil and Upper Peats 1 and 2 containing Tarawera Ash. It contained adzed wood chips. and intruded into the top 2–3 cm of Lower Peat 2. The main stratigraphic units will now be familiar after the discussion of Area B.15 is a general view of the same squares during excavation.58 Kohika Site structure and history at Squares C1 and C12 Figures 4.10 are drawings of the south and west sections of Square C1 and Plate 4.9 Square C1. Under the floodwash.10 Square C1. a light scatter of charcoal and some fragments of gourd Figure 4. scraps of worked wood up to 40 cm in length. A natural interface separated the two peaty layers in Area C. which was a brown sedge peat with rushes.10 is lacustrine silt that overlay the bed of airfall Kaharoa Tephra.9 and 4. Lower Peat 2 was a dark brown peaty silt followed by the Lower Peat 1. at the interface. south section Figure 4. Much of the wood showed signs of burning. and the number and order of interleaved bands of pumice sand and silt were very similar to those in Squares B3 and B4. a few fire-cracked stones. and odd broken sticks. Below this came the deposit of alluvial tephra. The lowest layer shown in Figures 4.9 and 4. In Square C12 there were also six obsidian flakes.

The channel removed some of the upper alluvium but peat continued to grow.11 Square C7. which had an extremely soft consistency.Excavations and site history at Kohika 59 shell. The items found were the waste from woodworking and other activities on higher ground nearby. south section . No finished wooden artefacts floated into Area C from the HS Area or from the University Area D. Site history after abandonment Plate 4. Under the turf the deposit had a dark brown peaty layer mixed with Tarawera Tephra. Both Squares C7 and C10 represent substantial cooking activity although their features differ in detail. The sediments here were diatomaceous and indicate freshwater stands. It appears that the log was present in the site before occupation and does not represent woodworking. these could have been separated in time from the cultural material below the floodwash by the flood event itself. The soils here derive from dune sand with tephra mixed by gardening and occupational debris. This interpretation is supported by the generally pristine surface of the underlying silt. and below this again were numerous fireplaces and lenses of diverse materials. Two long parallel features with dark fill had cut into a log lying in the dune sand. Reeds and raupo growing at the lakeshore probably prevented that. and on the upper surface of the floodwash. were some fragments of plaited flax and a broken wooden weeder. Figure 4. a little further away. which implies that the Historical Society’s adjacent excavation could have been located on an outlying part of the dune. However. Our interpretation is that these were fire-pits extended horizontally with re-use and that the log was intruded on by burning. At Kohika Figure 4.11 is a drawing of the south section of Square C7.15 shows that a late meander channel formed in the swamp around this northeastern part of the mound and crossed both squares on their long axis. Lying below Upper Peats 1 and 2 at the bottom of the meander channel. People did not actually live in this part of the site because it was shallow lake at the time. including pumice sand (quarried from elsewhere). dune sand and charcoal-rich soils. Site history at Squares C7 and C10 Squares C7 and C10 were located on the mound in the northeastern part of the site inside the palisade.

The most recent of these still had cooking stones in place. In 1975 Squares D1 and D2 established vertical stratigraphy in this low-lying part of the site and revealed several superimposed living horizons. . indicating that forest trees once grew here on the Taupo-age shoreline. as described in Chapter 3. Finally.13). In general. remade and sometimes plugged with sand.12 Square C10. In all.5 square metres of the dry part of Area C is an insufficient sample to reveal wider patterns of settlement. while D3–11 and D16 were opened to expose the horizontal dimensions. DD.12 is a drawing of the north section of Square C10. but it was too disturbed to tell. as distinct from other high parts of the site that have indicated different functions. A further square. to investigate the lowest level. approximately 120 square metres were excavated in Area D.1 and 4. Then in 1977 and 1978 excavation units D12–15 formed a discontinuous trench that was dug to establish stratigraphic continuity between Area D and Area A on the top of the mound. an excavated area of only 12. Large buried stumps have also been found on dunes further inland. which overlay a stratigraphic tangle of hangi structures that had been made. but on a different alignment. In the lower deposit was a squarish feature 1. However. with a raised edge and associated postholes (Plate 16). Figure 4.60 Kohika Figure 4.5 m across made of imported yellow sand. was dug over the southeastern corner of D2 and the northern part of D5. At the top of the deposit were the recent remains of two cabbage tree stumps. these two squares represent continuous activity and especially food preparation. Excavations in Area D Area D was located in an embayment on the northern side of the old dune where pasture met raupo swamp (Figs 4. suggesting that podocarp forest once flourished there (Pullar 1985). In 1976 Squares D1 and D2 were completed. Square D17 was used to sample the palynological history of the swamp. north section some substantial tree trunks have survived at or below the water table on the dune. One might guess that it was part of a cooking shelter.

As excavation proceeded. Perforated cans and drums.Excavations and site history at Kohika 61 Excavation methods Area D was marginal to the water table and. test pits within excavation units doubled as sumps for drainage.17). were used to collect water in sumps while retaining the deposit. when there were high volumes of water. drains were led out of the excavation to exterior sumps that were kept deeper than the level of excavation. They were 0.5 m wide and protected by planking. it caused erosion. and bulk samples of all layers were taken for later analysis in the laboratory (Lawlor 1979). Baulks also provided long straight sections for recording and facilitated the removal of spoil. such as Square D1. Wooden items were washed and treated with a polyethyleneglycol solution as they came out of the ground and then triple-bagged in plastic. which was done occasionally. Rolls of plastic tubing were kept for this purpose on site.13 Area D. in two units. The flow of water was found to be of benefit insofar as it continuously washed the deposit as it was excavated. However. One remedy was to step baulks. . This was a new discovery for soils of the Rangitaiki Plains (Pullar 1985). In some places. Baulks were used to divide the excavation area into pumping units. The topsoil was a black sandy silt loam. so interim storage was used until a new laboratory was fitted out. Also within this layer of peaty silt was a continuous bed of airfall Tarawera Tephra of AD 1886. At the end of the 1976 season a railway truck was needed to bring all the material back to Auckland. Also. after prolonged rain. To complicate matters. Figure 4. the layout of excavation units Stratigraphy and interpretation The vertical stratigraphy will be considered first. and samples collected by A. water began to flow out of the lowest holes (Plate 4. baulks were progressively removed where possible. Samples of soil were wet-sieved regularly during excavation as a check on the quality of data collection. Figure 4. Pullar and analysed at the New Zealand Soil Bureau contained diatoms (McGlone and Pullar 1976). We began in 1975 with a single pump but from 1976 had a large-capacity pump that could control water in four excavation units at once or. The upper layers were found to cover the whole excavation unit. at this time no suitable conservation laboratory was available to receive it. but it caused no surprise in this location on the shores of Lake Kohika. which made for excellent visibility. Below this was a layer of brown peaty silt. where the flow was strong or the baulks fragile. then the horizontal disposition of the layers. mainly in grass.14 is a drawing of all four sections of Squares D1 and D2. The wet deposit was fragile and excavators worked on boards to protect it.

62 Kohika Figure 4. all sections .14 Squares D1 and D2.

It had an actual house floor and adjacent areas of cooking and dumping. and consisted of 5–10 cm depth of the clean Kaharoa tephra alluvium that was readily available in the swamp nearby.15 m. the lower division. Inside the site perimeter was a layer of black sandy silt loam that has two divisions. However. The Yellow House floor varied in thickness up to 20 cm. The differences also followed the amount of shelter found progressively around the eastern to northern sides of the mound from the flood that came from the Tarawera River. Thus layers of different material were found to be contemporary with one another at. indicates that this layer corresponded to the alluvial tephra already found in Areas B and C. Plate 4. named the White House horizon during the excavation. Elsewhere in the sections can be seen a black sandy occupation layer that built up during the life of the Yellow House horizon. In some places it lay almost directly below the White House. The alluvium was deepest in the former meander channels and in some areas did not occur at all.14 show where the various layers began and ended. there is no indication of any interval of time between the Yellow and White horizons when this part of the site remained unoccupied. This event provided a definitive stratigraphic link between the three areas and marked the simultaneous end of occupation. A sharp boundary between the upper and lower black loams was observed during excavation and confirmed in the field by A. nevertheless.Excavations and site history at Kohika 63 Below the upper 20 cm of deposit. The spatial pattern will be discussed further below. which also extended outside the posts. a fine horizon of the same gritty material could be traced outside the posts over the whole of the excavation of Squares D1 and D2. The section drawings in Figure 4. was an occupation surface containing cultural material such as wood. together with an extensive pattern of cores.5 m deep and it was shallowest in Area D. Below the alluvium lay the lower division of the black sandy silt loam that covered the whole of Squares D1 and D2. charcoal and cooking stones. This line marks an important boundary for all the layers below. contained rich cultural materials. which consisted of a laid floor of yellow-grey dune sand that could have been obtained from quarrying in a higher part of the site. In Area B it was 0. in Area C 0. the tops of standing wooden posts began to be uncovered where they had rotted off at the water table. The upper one represents a buried topsoil (McGlone and Pullar 1976) and was substantially free of cultural material. and beyond.7 m deep. this boundary. this surface was made up of two different materials that met edge-on at a further line of posts running towards the inside of the site at right angles to the posts marking the outer edge of the White and . Under the White House on the same alignment was the Yellow House horizon. typically about 0. or near. Examination of the sections of the modern agricultural drains that surround Kohika. Outside the perimeter fence was a layer of clean white pumice sand derived from alluvial Kaharoa Tephra.19). Pullar (McGlone and Pullar 1976). It was first one and then the other. While the laid floor itself was confined to the area inside the line of standing posts. Whereas the upper division of this loam inside the line of posts was a buried topsoil. The distribution of the deposit varied around the site insofar as it related to the idiosyncratic nature of the flood. Below the Yellow House floor lay another artificial horizon that followed much the same alignment across Squares D1 and D2. This occupation surface formed above the highest of three artificial floors in Area D (Plate 4. separated by an interface only a few centimetres deep. However. distinguishing between an inside area associated with structures and an outside area associated with the swampy margins of the site which.18 shows they formed a line that crossed the excavation obliquely from the southeast of Square D1 to the northeast of D2.

the site of Ngaroto had revealed some fault-like features (Shawcross 1968). It can be seen in the south section of Square D2 (Fig. A question of faulting It was clear during the excavation of Square D2 that faulting had occurred in the artificial floors.14 shows that the Yellow House and the underlying white silt and stone floor both faulted at the same place and time. have been described by Ota et al. located just a few hundred metres from Kohika. the White House floor did not drop.14 shows a layer of peat containing cultural material down to a band of dense in situ vegetable material at its base. Recent geological research has provided a more likely explanation. excavation some 50 cm deeper into the sedge peat that pre-dated the Kaharoa provided no evidence for a human presence. but that case was very different because there was a large number of floors. In the floor it appeared to have been laid in basketfuls and packed with stones. (1998). much thicker floors resting directly on swamp deposits that never dried out during prehistory. A radiocarbon date for the most recent event has given an age of less . again. the bed of airfall Kaharoa Tephra locally some 10 cm deep. They lay above sedge peat and silt that had formed previously in the swamp. The existence of many of these was unsuspected because the surface evidence was concealed beneath recent alluvium on the flood plains. However. The ash acted as an aquifer and exposing it produced a considerable inflow of water. The situation was very different from Area D of Kohika. The faults at Matata. laid over several metres of cultural deposit that was above the water table and therefore able to dry out from time to time and to move. They were available locally as gravels associated with the pre-Taupo shoreline of which the stranded sand-dune of Kohika is a remnant.1. Figure 4.64 Kohika Yellow floors above.14) and. again. Below the artificial floors the stratigraphy corresponds broadly to that described already for Areas B and C. thereby extending the dry land. and it would surely have done so had it existed at the time. Excavation below the brown peaty silt is shown in Plate 4. many just 2–3 cm thick. Nevertheless. Also. 4. The white silt is the same lacustrine silt sediment widely available in the swamp around Kohika. Figure 4. where there were only three. and geological research since the Edgecumbe earthquake of 1987 has raised a significant issue. as illustrated in Figure 2. At the same level to the east of the new posts was a contemporaneous floor consisting of white silt and smooth water-rolled pebbles varying in diameter from 5–10 cm (Plate 4.21. To the west of this new post alignment was the Bright Yellow floor. Cultural debris lay in peat outside the perimeter fence beyond the floors. These three levels of artificial floor were built out from the former edge of the mound.20). Next came a layer of sterile peaty silt. At the time of excavation the faulting was thought to be an event peculiar to Kohika as diatomaceous sediments are known to be unstable. because it was made of fragile sandy tephra with no support other than the layers below. A series of faults lies on both sides of the Whakatane Graben (Nairn and Beanland 1987). This consideration provides an age for the event. and a sample of this from Square D2 was found to contain diatoms (McGlone and Pullar 1976). This left a gap in the Yellow House floor that was evidently patched (see below). First came the same layer of pale olive lacustrine silt as elsewhere and beneath this. it reached the line of posts diagonally crossing the excavation. The stones are greywacke and derive ultimately from the catchment of the Rangitaiki River that formerly flowed nearby.

Then. more than a dozen wooden posts survived along the two side walls of a large house some 7. as at other swamp pa. Yellow House horizon The Yellow House floor was made of reworked local dune sand and was more extensive than the White House floor. occupation of the site was ended by flood just as the major flood of 1892 wiped out the first attempts of Europeans to settle on the Rangitaiki Plains (Gibbons 1990). Occupation had damaged and removed parts of the . and corroborates the interpretations already given for Areas A. Again.16 and Plate 4. a wider horizon could be traced by the spread of its sediment surface beyond the perimeter posts.15 shows a house floor on the White House horizon measuring 5. where firescoops were found. As described above. the dating of the occupation at Kohika can provide a more precise date for the geological event at Matata than is currently available. People there experienced an earthquake that foreshadowed the one of 1987. it is significant that it did not penetrate over the house floor itself (Fig. The most recent contained cooking stones but others had been raked out and there was dispersed midden and other debris. whose intact distribution marks the water level in 1976 (Figure 4.22). Diatomaceous peaty silt formed above the floodwash and buried topsoil and. cooking took place at the southern side of the house. some with cooking stones in situ and scattered food waste. The chronology is about right – in fact. There were many cooking structures. The purpose of the laid floors was to provide clean living surfaces and to raise the ground above water level. White House horizon Figure 4. 1998). cooking took place in D4 (Plate 4. Because it was lower in relation to the water table. Moreover.15 shows what remains. although the extent of the floor was distinct.24.15). lay the Tarawera Tephra. there is a distinction between the clean interior of the house and the stained and more damaged contemporary surface outside.25 x 5.35 m. the horizon was covered by a shallow occupation surface of black sandy silt loam.Excavations and site history at Kohika 65 than 250 years (Ota et al. Further. Outside the site at the same level was the white alluvium. As in the case of the White House horizon.15). B and C that the site was occupied until the flood and then evidence for occupation virtually ends. Much of the house itself was in Squares D2 and D5 (Plate 4. the same loam matrix continued above it but without cultural material and was identified as a buried topsoil. One end of the house was aligned to the posts crossing Squares D1 and D2 that evidently formed the perimeter fence of the site. built directly on top.23) and a large number of discrete rubbish-dumping events were identified in the adjoining Square D3. within it. The wider horizon extended beyond the house with a clear distinction between the clean floor of the house and the stained area outside it.65 m orientated with its long axis approximately east–west. While in places this washed between the perimeter posts. It seems that living at Kohika during late prehistory had its moments of drama. inside the posts only. The pumice floor had been damaged by use and Figure 4. Its long axis was east–west and the western end was aligned to the same perimeter posts as the White House. This means that a standing house kept the flood deposit out.40 x 3. 4. The spatial evidence from Area D Wooden artefacts from the peat in Area D indicate houses and pataka. This was probably the cause of the faulting at Kohika. The distribution of yellow-grey sand is shown in Figure 4.

although no . records were kept of the characteristics of the posthole fills.15 Area D. 4.25).16). Much of the area outside the house was probably uncovered. During the excavation. the White House horizon yellow sand floor to reveal a black sandy layer below. The east section of Square D2 (Fig. but some stakes in Square D3 probably relate to a simple shelter. To the north of the house in Square D6. However. an area of laid but stained yellow sand extended inside the palisade. This part of the shore would have been a suitable landing-place and several canoe parts were found in both Area D and the HS Area nearby. In some places the yellow-grey floor was repaired by patches of clean sand as revealed by lenses of black below them (Plate 4.14) shows this to be precisely where some yellow-grey floor faulted and dropped. The plan drawing shows the sand to be missing and the gap filled with a miscellaneous assortment of waste timber that relevelled the floor. apparently as a deliberate patch. and recovered timbers support this (see below).66 Kohika Figure 4. Apart from the typical wear and tear of the Yellow House floor. there is some particular and interesting damage in the northern extension of Square D5 and the southern extension of Square D6 (Figure 4. but it was difficult to distinguish postholes that belonged to this period of occupation from those that intruded later from above. there is no such doubt about the remains of the actual posts found along the sides of the house.

This event probably dates the most recent earthquake at the Matata Fault. freshly adzed wood chips and a number of obsidian flakes. Beyond the houses. together with a section of the eastern wall.16 Area D. a layer of stained sand up to 10 cm deep had formed during the Yellow House occupation. marked by an extensive scatter of small. It did not burn down either because. as described above. The interface between White and Yellow horizons The interface between the two laid house floors consisted of a lens of dark sand perhaps 2–3 cm deep. although there was a scatter of very small pieces of charcoal at the interface. the Yellow House horizon (stakeholes less than 10 cm deep are not shown) additional yellow sand was laid on top. The lens of wood chips was undisturbed and there was no sign of any interval of time.Excavations and site history at Kohika 67 Figure 4. Only a small part of the house floor was affected. One can only guess at the amount of damage caused to the house that was standing at the time. there was not the ash or . Evidently the Yellow House did not collapse or rot slowly.

the Bright Yellow horizon . Another issue that directed attention to this part of the site was the large number of coprolites found in the southeastern corner of Square D2. one could expect damage to the floor to result. and with no archaeological sign of a delay. smaller one built in its place in precisely the same spot. That is the logical order of events because. Figure 4. one house was removed and another. but this did not happen. At all events. The suggestion that an earthquake happened while the Yellow House stood may be the explanation. at which time they were outside the site perimeter. which lay on a different orientation. if the floor had been laid before the house was built. It is possible that the Yellow House was dismantled.68 Kohika debris one would expect on the basis of evidence from other sites. Bright Yellow floor A small part of a third level of artificial floors was found in Squares D1 and D2 in 1975 and 1976 and later investigated in Square DD. and these were then covered and protected from subsequent disturbance by the laying of the White House floor immediately after the new house itself was built. and the evidence from the house parts found in the swamp nearby shows that the houses at Kohika were eminently suited to simple construction and dismantling. although it was later established that these were dog faeces that lay in peat below the artificial floors. The scatter of wood chips and flakes at the interface may indeed be the result of building the new house.17 Area D. Details are shown in Figure 4.17.

and dog faeces were abundant. Originally they met at the new east–west line of posts but the Bright Yellow sand had been removed in places by later disturbance (Fig. yet they contained similar material in the corresponding peat layer. peat or significant cultural debris. waste worked and unworked wood of all sizes and many wood chips. In stratigraphic terms the three superimposed structures in Area D were built without appreciable interval. There were coils of unused lashing vine. this is conjecture. and a broken bailer with a carved handle.28 shows the bow of a composite canoe. In Square D3.17). .Excavations and site history at Kohika 69 As with the floors above. The two floors of sand and silt were formerly part of the same surface. Squares D7. There were scattered mammal and bird bones. Stratigraphic correlations show that all excavated areas of the site were contemporaneous. patches of charcoal and ash with fish bones and scales. various large adzed timbers and poles. the conclusion is the same as that derived independently from the evidence of Areas A.20 and 4. While each of the floors and its associated structures may have remained in use for some time. B and C: the duration of Area D was about a few decades. There were waterlogged artefacts. D16 produced a spear. and D17 a paddle with a broken blade. This had been done with some care. as seen in Plate 4. East of the line of posts was the artificially laid layer of white silt with water-rolled greywacke pebbles (both available in the swamp nearby). but an additional line of posts crossed Squares D2 and DD inside the site at right angles to it. It is probable that one or other of the two adjoining floors was roofed. Evidence from the peat The stratigraphy of Squares D1 and D2 outside the area of laid floors is typical of Area D (Fig. The battens separated the two sides of the floor. a few worked tree trunks and segments of tree-fern trunks apparently dumped for consolidation. Amongst the rubbish were some woven fibre artefacts including lengths of rope and sections of net. There is evidence for on-going deposition of material by fairly random dumping in the peat outside the perimeter.26. Bands of midden and other debris can be seen in Figure 4. for the stems were aligned and no roots were to be seen. seams of dumped marine and freshwater mussel shell. typically 3 cm thick. this horizon ended at the north–south alignment of perimeter posts. at the western side of Area D at a contemporary level. As for the cultural material. Woven along the line of posts were long wooden battens. but. This new sand layer could have been quarried from the top of Kohika itself. there were patches of woodworking debris and shell midden.14) and is already familiar. 4. pieces of gourd. To the west was a layer of Bright Yellow dune sand underlying the yellow-grey sand of the Yellow House horizon. 4. Details can be seen in Plates 4. occasional large pieces of pumice. as described above. Plate 4. Directly underneath the lowest laid floor was a widespread but discontinuous lens of bracken fern that had been deliberately laid as a foundation on the peat. and the soft matrix would have been subject to constant interference by people and dogs. It consisted of a band of sedge peat containing cultural material as far down as a natural layer of flattened reeds that were growing at the time of first occupation. Below this was sterile brown peaty silt.27. there were cooking stones. without a larger expanse of floor plan to go on.14 spilling away from the edges of the sand floors into the peat. a wooden beater and a weeding tool. The author’s opinion during excavation was that it was the Bright Yellow rather than the silt and stone floor. flexed between the standing posts and also held in place by wooden pegs. and canoes were drawn up at this part of the lakeshore. D16 and D17 were located clearly beyond the artificial floors. This was collected and recorded by square-metre unit. There was no palaeosol.

Squares D12–15: a substantive trench Towards the end of the excavations at Kohika. Squares D12–15. the layer of peat contained cultural material similar to the peat outside the site perimeter elsewhere in Area D.31 a whale vertebra. at the base of the peat was a lens of reeds that had grown in situ and patches of bracken fern had been laid. wood chips. As in Square DD nearby. Below the cultural deposit was the same sterile brown silt and white lacustrine silt that overlay the airfall . flakes of obsidian and scattered midden shell and bone.30 part of an adzed log and a long piece of plaited rope. At the lower northern end of the section. Plate 4. The southern end of the Yellow House floor was found in the northern end of Square D12 and the stratigraphy is essentially the same as for Area D. In the lower part of the excavation.18 Area D. Seven posthole bores helped to locate four test excavations. although the material in Square D12 belongs to a time when the site perimeter was closer to the former mound. D12–15.29 the top of a gourd. charcoal. A black occupation soil in upper Square D12 had a sandy matrix and contained oven stones. whose locations are shown in Figure 4.70 Kohika Figure 4. trench Plate 4.1 and section drawings in Figure 4.18. a spear and a coil of vine. Square D12 can be seen partly to underlap Square D9. which was excavated in a previous year although no deeper than the Yellow House floor. and Plate 4. the stratigraphic relations between Areas A and D were investigated.

except at the bottom. A log was found lying sideways across the excavation. and lowest was a clean floor of white silt similar to the one at the base of Area D. . silty sand. it would be too much to suggest that they were both blown down during a single storm. an additional dark charcoal-rich sand that seemed to be the local result of particular burning activity and not the result of any systematic difference in soil process. they occurred at a stratigraphically equivalent level and were composed of the same three distinctive materials. Square D15 exhibited similar stratigraphy to that found already in Area A. In this northern part of the mound in Square D15 it was a pale silty sand. resting on the white silty sand of the former dune surface. next came a yellow-grey dune sand comparable to the Yellow House floor. It could have been brought in or even floated to this part of the site. both at the top and the bottom of the section. This could not have floated into the site and is interpreted as a tree that grew on the former sand-dune prior to occupation. wood chips and so on.32). we had reached the top of the buried part of the former dune. There was the same deposit of mixed sandy subsoil with dispersed pumice in upper and lower divisions. was found on a different orientation. and it is probable that the floors in Square D13 were contemporary with the ones some metres away to the north. only a small deposit of peat remained at this higher elevation. but it was not possible to tell whether it had grown there. so evidently there was some minor variation in the natural stratigraphy of the mound. This situation is unlikely to have occurred by chance. Thus the three different materials were found in the same order as they had been in Area D.33). Evidently. However. Artificial build-up in Square D14 was in the form of a thick floor of yellow sand quarried from the dune nearby. whereas in Area A it had been a brown sand. Under the floors was the typical occupation debris in the peat that overlies the brown silt. The composition of the natural basement material was different. too. especially as the log in Square D12. While these trunks lay on the same general orientation. There was still an upper black sandy layer containing charcoal.Excavations and site history at Kohika 71 Kaharoa Tephra elsewhere. Three substantial artificial floors were laid as phases in the on-going use of the same raised area (Plate 4. below that. 4. The sterile brown silt of Area D as well as the white lacustrine silt had lensed out at this higher elevation along the D12– 15 trench. Lying lengthwise in the bottom of Square D14 was a substantial tree trunk with no surviving evidence of having been worked (Plate 4. as in Square D13. the stratigraphy differed in detail from that typical of Area A. this area can be interpreted as open space in front of the houses in Area D. Square D13 presented a similar situation to Square D12. Below the topsoil in Square D15 was a version of the brown silty soil found along the length of the D12–15 trench at this level and. at the top of the D12–15 section. cooking stones. but there were a few formal artefacts and a large number of obsidian flakes. Square D15 was some 20 m away from the Area A excavation. Finally. which may or may not have grown in situ. While these were not continuous with the floors already found to the north in Area D. However. and like that described already for Square C7. Near the base of the excavation. midden. Highest was a white reworked tephra similar to the White House floor. Square D14 was still higher on the mound along the D12–15 section (Fig. at the base of the excavation there was a difference from the rest of Area D: the lacustrine silt gave way to a pale. In the absence of evidence for surface buildings.18). as represented by Layers B1 and B2 in Area A.

Nor could we exclude the real possibility that the evidence had already been removed when willow trees were bulldozed from the western side of the site. 4. at the northwestern edge of the site a line of small test holes was dug along a transect (Fig. but in this low-lying and fairly flat part of the site these two distinctive deposits did not end on the same line. such as the Tarawera Ash and the white reworked tephra floodwash. Also. Here the Tarawera Ash stopped as expected and it was possible to ascertain where the charcoal-stained cultural deposit ended.1. It is clear that the waterlogged artefacts were preserved in peaty deposits lying between the Tarawera and Kaharoa tephras.19. Square 0. Parts of the HS Area were among the richest at Kohika. Reeds and raupo growing around the site could explain the lack of lateral movement. Further. One of the reasons may be that the changes in elevation there were gradual and the precise edge of the site was not conspicuous. Some 20 m further around the western side there was a more distinct edge.19. We next tried a line of posthole bores in the vicinity. Generally. Artefacts were found in the drain or were located by probing with a gum spear and then dug out. (Squares 2 to 4 were further sub-divided into irregular sections numbered 1–10. as we would expect if they could have floated from the HS Squares 1 and 2 nearby.1) but without the desired result. looking for distinctive natural layers that marked the border of the site elsewhere. there was no substantial removal of spoil during excavation. University Area D.1) but produced no posts. 4. It was possibly also in the area investigated by the Historical Society (see below). Finally. University Squares C1 and C12 lay to the south of HS Squares 1 and 2. No precise stratigraphic information is available. society members inspected the newly exposed drain sides and dug extensively in the area shown in Figure 4. A trench was dug in the southwestern part of the site (Fig. the area seems to have been stratigraphically variable but similar to. as in Figure 4. Only a few pa are known to lack a continuous defended perimeter but.) Another unit. and the issue did not warrant such an effort. which follows from its sheltered northerly location. Whakatane and District Historical Society excavations When the site was discovered in November 1974. but this can be extrapolated from the drain section and from adjoining parts of the University Areas C and D. Five units 10 metres square were marked out along the southern side of a new drain running east–west at the northern side of the site. this peat was not sealed by pumice floodwash. Evidently. and there was no firm substrate or artificial sand floor to support occupation there. as shown in Figure 4. The basic difficulty was that there was quite a broad area where the palisades might run. 4.72 Kohika Chasing the line of the western palisades A palisade was found in Areas B and D and exposed in the side of the drain along the eastern side of the site. which is based on their summary field notes and a sketch.19). assuming that a palisade encircled Kohika. Investigations also extended a few metres beyond the northern drain towards the stopbank with vehicle track on top (Fig. no wooden artefacts were found in the peat in Squares C1 and C12. It would have taken an area excavation to find palisades in the swamp. and contemporary with. The former lay off the mound in an area of soft peat. lay on the eastern side of a drain running north to join the first. but no white alluvium was found outside. and this consideration reinforces the conclusion that items found in HS Squares 1 and 2 were . The flood deposit was intermittent on this side of the site and occurred only in pre-existing meander channels in the peat. therefore. it proved to be elusive along the western sides of the site.

Excavations and site history at Kohika 73 Figure 4.19 Historical Society investigations (with some of their notes) .

and the mixing of Tarawera Ash into the dune after 1886 indicates that it was gardened afterwards. and a fragment of folded matting (the positions of items shown in Figure 4. five late intrusive burials in Area A do tell us that people did eventually return to Kohika from time to time. in Squares 1 and 2 were many parts of what is currently the earliestknown carved house in New Zealand. and also for canoes being drawn up on the lakeshore. Another difference between University Squares C1 and C12 and HS Squares 1 and 2 is that the former had a substantial deposit of pumice flood alluvium. some ‘human bone’ tied with flax rope. To the west of the house in Square 2. This was an in situ household stunningly preserved until 1974. but pumice occurs widely in the dune and derives from sea-rafted pumice associated with the Taupo eruption. some of which are reproduced in Figure 4. However. passed through the area and burnt off the tops. including chunks up to 20 cm thick (not all of which were recovered). which indicates that the underlying deposits consisted of dune sand or artificially laid sand such as encountered in Area D. While the field notes are few. There were various pumice chunks in Squares 2 and 3. There was a lesser concentration of wooden items in Square 4 and the so-called ‘tramp layer’ continued through it. a fire. they do record a ‘hard tramp’ layer and the nature of the material found provides evidence for living on the spot. Most of the house had already collapsed before the fire. A few had been made into artefacts. while they were still standing upright in the ground. there was broken gourd shell.74 Kohika substantially in situ. because only the pieces still standing were burnt while the rest survived in the swamp. Much of the HS Area was evidently still on the dune or dry enough to live on. In fact. Field notes suggest that flood alluvium reappeared in the drain section around Square 5. and can only speculate about why people did not come back to recover the carvings later. and this is plausible given that a section of palisade passed through Area D heading in this general direction at about the same contour. many other artefacts of value were also left behind. charcoal and cooking stones were found at the bottom of the drain and this level was the ‘hard tramp’ layer. A pounamu adze was found in the drain in Square 4. together with many diverse household items that are described in other chapters. That people did not return could imply something about the political circumstances of late prehistory. including more than one canoe that could have been used to carry them away. like Area D. . Finally. Posts described as from a possible ‘palisade’ occurred in the drain in Square 5. These were incomplete. show that in Square 0 charred wood. or series of scrub fires. Near this house were considerable quantities of obsidian. The society’s notes.19. and several parts of canoes (including an unfinished bow) and paddles were found. with most of the bottoms rotted off and all the tops burnt off. was an area of densely scattered wood chips.19 are approximate). We already know that occupation was suddenly interrupted by a major flood. Canoe-making is one likely source for the wood chips. The obsidian and the wood chip scatters were separate but contemporary distributions. which generally matches the Area D stratigraphy. which was not generally the case for the HS Area. and extending through Squares 3 and 4. Remarkably. To leave behind carved house parts might seem rather drastic. It seems that. In Square 1 sticks and spears protruded from the drain side. some evidence from the poupou (house wall planks) found in Square 2 may tell us something about the abandonment of Kohika. evidently the result of adzing. with peat and then the ‘hard tramp’ layer below it.

. Lawlor. Historical Review. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics. W. 11:2–29. 14:110–3. Ota. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. Beanland.A.. New Zealand. Berryman and I. New Zealand. Whakatane: Whakatane and District Historical Society.Excavations and site history at Kohika 75 References Gibbons.S. 1989. Beanland. 1985. and S. 32:1–13.. Shawcross. More about the Kohika site. 1988. S. North Island. I.A. 1979. and W. W.H. McGlone. New Zealand Geological Survey Record. Bay of Plenty: soil stratigraphy and pollen analysis (a preliminary report). The Matata Fault: active faulting at the north-western margin of the Whakatane Graben. The Rangitaiki. Geological setting of the 1987 Edgecumbe earthquake. Y. Pullar.A. Bay of Plenty. Nairn. F. 1990. K. I. 1968. Pullar. eastern Bay of Plenty.A. M. Nairn.. The Ngaroto site. 1976. Unpublished MA thesis. Palaeoenvironment analysis: an appraisal of the prehistoric environment of the Kohika swamp pa (N68/140).R. Soils and land use of the Rangitaiki Plains.W. 35:6–13... University of Auckland. Lower Hutt: New Zealand Soil Bureau. 1890–1990: settlement and drainage on the Rangitaiki.

which results from their varied composition.1 Kohika in January 1976.Plate 4.2 Excavations in Square A1 Extension. The spoil heaps are of different colour. B and D. . Plate 4. Work is in progress in Areas A.

4 A cross-section of a bin structure in Square A3 dug into the former sand-dune. Plate 4.Plate 4. A charcoal sample for C14 dating was taken from underneath the large pumice boulder found in the pit fill. .5 An oval-ended pit in Square A1 Ext. interrupted by a later rectangular pit lying at right angles to it.3 Part of a small bin surrounded by surface stakeholes in Square A3. Plate 4.

Plate 4.6 Square B1 during excavation.7 Square B1 near the base of the excavation showing in situ posts.Plate 4. .

Plate 4.8 The drain section in Area B shows a flood deposit of reworked tephra alluvium outside the site, where a later meander channel, visible in Square B3, has cut into its surface. Plate 4.9 Wooden items from the peat below the flood deposit in Square B3 are triple-bagged in plastic.

Plate 4.10 A degraded pukatea board in the upper peat of Square B4. Plate 4.11 The pukatea board in Square B4 consolidated prior to removal.

Plate 4.12 The defended edge of the site was sharply defined in Square B4. Palisade posts were exposed in the side of the agricultural drain visible in the background and Square B3 lies on the other side of it. Plate 4.13 The edge of the site reveals the effect of the flood in Square B4. Fine silt lies around the palisade posts, reworked Kaharoa alluvium lies outside the site, and the two are separated by the wave-lapped shore.

Plate 4.14 Square B4, west section, showing a palisade post, pre-flood deposits that built up during occupation, the flood alluvium of sand and silt, and post-flood sediments that are culturally sterile. Plate 4.15 Squares C1 and C12 reveal a deposit of alluvium. Above this, a late meander channel in the Upper Peat can be seen in the baulk, while below the alluvium is the culture-bearing Lower Peat. This photograph shows the pump being primed in 1975 at the start of a day’s work.

Plate 4.16 Square C10 contained a complex succession of fire-pits and hangi with occupational debris and fills composed of material quarried elsewhere. Plate 4.17 Excavating a swamp in wet weather can have its difficulties. Area D.

18 The site perimeter in Area D. Plate 4. Inside the line of posts were artificial house floors. outside many associated waterlogged artefacts were found preserved in peat. with superimposed house floors visible in the south section.19 Square D2. .Plate 4.

. with horizontal light wooden battens flexed and pegged between them. Also showing a test excavation of the lacustrine silt.20 Square D2. A line of standing posts. south section.Plate 4.21 Square D1. marks the edge of an artificial floor of silt. packed with water-rolled greywacke pebbles. the Kaharoa Tephra and sedge peat below. Plate 4.

the White House floor. Plate 4.22 Square D5.23 Square D4. firescoops in the White House horizon.Plate 4. .

Plate 4. exposing the extent of the Yellow House horizon.24 Area D. some details of the excavation of the Yellow House floor.25 Area D. .Plate 4. January 1976.

26 Area D. . Square DD during excavation of the Yellow House horizon. dug previously.Plate 4. laid bracken-fern stems below an artificial house floor. Plate 4.27 Square DD. while the baulks are composed of backfilled spoil. Intruding into the square is the corner of Square D2.

28 Square D2. . canoe bow in peat. gourd shell.29 Square D2.Plate 4. Plate 4.

adzed log and length of rope.Plate 4.30 Square D2. . whale vertebra. wooden spear and coil of vine. Plate 4.31 Square D7.

log at base of excavation. Plate 4.32 Square D13. . north section.33 Square D14.Plate 4.

• The alluvial deposition of reworked Kaharoa Tephra around the shores of Kohika during a flood marked the simultaneous end to occupation in the excavated Areas B. as well. 1988). together with a Bayesian analysis of the radiocarbon results by Jones. which places the occupation in the latter part of the period. D (and the rest of C) at the margins. we note that: • Areas B. C and D were all at the swampy margin of the site and there is a strong stratigraphic and sedimentary correlation between them. • The generally narrow band of cultural material in the swamp sediments indicates a restricted period of occupation. which demonstrates that an interval of time elapsed between abandonment and the Tarawera Tephra. Two natural events have implications for the chronology: • Evidence for faulting in Area D during the Yellow House horizon was probably associated with an earthquake centred on the nearby Matata Fault (Ota et al. which argues for contemporaneity. • Area A (and parts of C) lie on top of the Kohika dune and have a lesser stratigraphic correlation with Areas B. However. The evidence of geomorphology and archaeology The natural stratigraphy of the swamp shows that the occupation of Kohika occurred between the Kaharoa Tephra of cal. With regard to the relative ages of the different excavated areas. Irwin and M. These conclusions arise from a number of strands of geomorphological and archaeological data drawn together by Irwin. but culturally complementary. C and D.5 Site chronology G. and that settlement was substantially continuous. The mutually exclusive distribution of different aspects of settlement supports contemporaneity. • The peat above the archaeological deposit was sterile. 76 . Jones This chapter concludes that Kohika was probably occupied for quite a short period of one or two human generations in the late 17th century. AD 1350 and the Tarawera Tephra of AD 1886.J. the source of sediments in the expanding margins of the site during the occupation of Area B was the dune itself. • The four separate areas excavated by the University and that excavated by the Historical Society were found to be functionally different. • The field notes of the Historical Society excavations and evidence extrapolated from the university excavations argues for a stratigraphic association between Area D and the HS Area. that all of the excavated areas were contemporary.D. We note that: • A greater depth of peat lay below the archaeological site than above it.

suggesting an interval of time between them.Site chronology 77 With regard to the chronological implications of cultural constituents of the site. All were found to be rather young and of similar age.3. the (then) Radiocarbon Archaeological Committee deemed it unnecessary to date the remaining five samples. The results provide a consistent series and the site can be regarded as securely and quite tightly dated. animal or plant to contest its prehistoric status. and its successor built immediately afterwards. The samples for radiocarbon dating were taken from a range of structural contexts from Areas A. The evidence is consistent with the Yellow House being dismantled (possibly following earthquake damage). Only after the site was abandoned as a settlement was it used for burial. as shown in Figure 4. Six of these samples were dated. Radiocarbon evidence There have been fifteen radiocarbon dates from Kohika. • Area D was occupied long enough for the White House to be rebuilt directly on top of the Yellow House on the same alignment and sharing a common wall. On the basis of these results. as described in European times. we have so far found no remains of any European artefact. supports the hypothesis that Kohika was occupied for an uninterrupted period of only one to two human generations in late prehistory and also that it was probably abandoned by around AD 1700. or not very long afterwards. the indications are that the duration was quite short. After the area was no longer used for storage (but with no perceptible delay). NZ6599. Seven of the C14 samples were collected from Square D17 and were used to date the pollen and sedimentary core. With regard to structural evidence for site duration. kumara storage pits were built at different times and interrupted one another. two further samples were dated in 2001 by the Waikato University Radiocarbon Laboratory. Square A1 This sample consisted of charcoal from short-lived species collected from beneath a pumice boulder in the fill of a pit in Square A1 Extension. the many firescoops show it was used for cooking. C and D. Eleven further samples that did relate to the village occupation were submitted to the Institute of Nuclear Sciences by G. The chronological hypothesis All of the above information. including Ngati Awa. Details of the samples and their conventional radiocarbon ages (CRA) are presented below. we note that: • In Area A. bringing the total for the site occupation to eight and confirming the age of the site. However. • R. Neich’s analysis of woodcarvings (Chapter 7) indicates a lack of stylistic continuity between the carvings of Kohika and the carving styles of local iwi. Both were of pole and thatch construction (see Chapter 7). . we note that: • The artefact style is generally that of Classic Maori (only a vague indicator of chronology). in combination. • In the huge archaeological database. • Until further evidence is forthcoming from elsewhere in the site. All of these dates are earlier than the time of occupation of the lake village itself. as described in Chapter 3. Irwin in 1984. B.

78 Kohika This pit was deliberately filled at the time of construction of a later intersecting pit. These were two contemporary parts of the same Bright Yellow horizon. NZ6583. Thus it was a sample from outside the palisade in Area B and expected to give a similar result to NZ6583. This palisade was found to have abutted the northern ends of two successive houses that stood in Area D at the Yellow House and White House levels. NZ6619. Thus the age of the sample relates to the pit sequence of Area A. This was a zone of cooking and midden scatter on the mound. NZ6580. Square B3 This was a similar small-diameter worked kanuka post found lying in the peat below the flood alluvium at the base of Square B3 (Fig. The age of the sample could be expected to be equivalent to NZ6618 and 6619. Square B4 The sample was a standing palisade post of small-diameter kanuka.7). Square C7 This consisted of tuatua shell (Paphies subtriangulata) collected from shell midden some 75 cm beneath the surface. tutu. Square D1 This was a small-diameter post from the palisade in Square D1. as shown in Figure 4. Square D1 This sample consisted of charcoal of kanuka. NZ6611. It represents the burning of secondary growth at the edge of the mound in Area D. It is shown in the drawing of the west section of Square B4 (Fig. Square DD This consisted of laid bracken fern stems (Plate 4. 4. Bayesian calibration of the radiocarbon data A Bayesian analysis of the available radiocarbon results was performed to assess how well they support the chronological observations outlined above. hebe and fernroot and was collected from the peat in the swamp outside the palisade in the same excavated square. WK10292.17). with bark.8). . as shown in Figures 4. The sample does not have the same structural integrity as the other three samples from Area D but should be equivalent in age. The palisade stood while deposits built up inside it and then was enveloped by the alluvial flood deposit. Square DD This sample was a small-diameter post from a line of standing posts that separated a yellow sand floor from one composed of white silt packed with greywacke river stones. We seek to determine when this phase of activity took place and for how long. WK10293. 4.27) from below the floor of clay silt and stones of the same Bright Yellow horizon and is stratigraphically equivalent to NZ6618. coprosma.15 and 4.11. Here we describe the observed archaeological record as a single general phase of activity of unknown duration.16. which represented an early stage in the sequence of laid floors and houses in Area D (Figs 4. NZ6618. or very slightly earlier.14 and 4. both dates relating to the floors and houses of Area D.

Phase 2 comprises the cultural layer from which eight CRA determinations have been obtained.Յ ␺2Յ ␪2. No chronometric determinations are associated with this phase.2 M 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 Phase N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 Reservoir Terrestrial Marine Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial For further discussion of the model applied in the current analysis it is useful to define the following notation.1. the posterior distribution of ␺ and ␪ conditional on the observed dates y (with density h (␺.73 -24.7 -1. Two suitable determinations are available for this phase.Site chronology 79 Analysis The Bayesian calibration applied in this analysis follows the phase model described by Nicholls and Jones (1998.Յ␺1Յ ␺0ՅA} Where P=600 and A=66 on the basis of tephrochronology. abutting series temporally bounded by the Kaharoa and Tarawera Tephras.2Յ ␪3. Following the standard Bayesian inferential framework..P Յ␺3Յ ␪3.␪). ␪ | y)) is defined in terms of an unnormalised prior density f (␺. Let P and A.1 -26. This represents the basic structure of the post-Kaharoa geomorphological sequence described in Chapters 2 and 3.␪) satisfying the stratigraphic constraints.n be a calibrated date for the n’th specimen measured in the m’th phase. Let ␪m. P Յ A be given termini. Here all dates are treated as coming from one of three phases that occur in a single.1 Chronometric data used in the current analysis Date NZ6599 NZ6580 NZ6583 NZ6611 NZ6618 NZ6619 WK10292 WK10293 NZ4800 NZ4801 CRA 159 596 212 157 221 190 204 270 352 534 Error 42 32 32 32 32 39 54 38 56 56 ␦13C -25. The distribution of the parameters ␺1 and ␺2 provide estimates for the chronology of the Kohika archaeological record. ␪). In the current analysis we have: – ⍀– – {(␺. Phase 2 end (␺1).1 below. and on the basis of stratigraphic superposition these are constrained temporally so that NZ4801 is of greater age than NZ4800.89 -24. and likelihood L (y | ␪). Within this phase we cannot a priori apply any constraints on the relative age of the dates. Phase 2 start (␺2) and Phase 3 start (␺3). In addition. The purpose of the current analysis is to provide age estimates for these temporal parameters based on the measured CRA data and phase associations given in Table 5. and assumed to equal the context date associated with the (m. with units calendar years AD.␪) take some value in a parameter space ⍀.7 -26. as . 2001). place (R – – Table 5. Thus the chronology of this phase sequence is defined by the unknown temporal parameters Phase 1 end (␺0). Possible parameter sets (␺. Phase 1 is an upper layer of sedge peat that overlies the cultural layer and is bounded by the Tarawera Tephra.n)’th specimen.97 -24. we wish to estimate the total duration over which cultural activity has taken – ␺1 – ␺2). Phase 3 corresponds to the layer of peat lying between the cultural deposit and the Kaharoa Tephra. setting lower and upper bounds on the dated sequence. Let ␺m denote the (unknown and undated) boundary date at the lower boundary of phase m.35 -25. which is simply the set of all states (␺.

Results Marginal posteriors for the ␺ parameters were computed using an implementation of the rejection sampler described by Nicholls and Jones (1998. 1991).80 Kohika h (␪. 1998) and a marine reservoir offset of -27 ± 15 (Higham and Hogg 1995) have been applied.1. Under the assumptions described above and the chronometric data given in Table 5. Here we use the ‘Neutral’ prior f (␺. ␺ 2 and R are summarised in Table 5. Table 5. Summaries of the likelihood distributions (calibrated distributions) for chronometric data given in Table 5. Additionally. In the current analysis the INTERCAL98 calibration data (Stuiver et al. ␪) defined by Nicholls and Jones (2001) and the standard definition of the radiocarbon likelihood for L (y | ␪) (e. 2001) through DateLab 1. ␺ | y) = L (y | ␪) ϫ f (␺. The posterior distributions for ␺1. 1998) were used.2 Summary posterior distributions for Phase 2 start.1 below.g.1 are presented in Figure 5. Phase 2 end and Phase 2 duration Parameter Phase 2 start (␺2) Phase 2 end (␺1) Phase 2 duration (R) 95% HPD 1610–1690 1680–1810 5–165 68% HPD 1660–1680 1680–1700 5–50 Figure 5.1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 NZ4800 WK10292 WK10292 NZ6599 NZ6580 NZ6583 NZ6618 NZ6619 NZ6611 NZ4801 Years BP Determination .2–4 below.2 and Figures 5. these results indicate that the cultural phase sequence corresponds to activity spanning 5–165 years starting some time in the interval AD 1610–1690.1 Summary of the calibrated distributions for the chronometric data given in Table 5. a terrestrial reservoir offset of 25 ± 5 (McCormac et al. Buck et al. ␪).2 (Jones and Nicholls 2002). In this case correlated reservoir offsets have been used (Jones and Nicholls 2001).

25 Likelihood 0.15 0.3 Phase 2 end (␺1) 0.05 0.0803 0.1 0.2 Posterior distribution for Phase 2 start (␺2) 0.0146 0.35 Figure 5.051 1 0.Site chronology 81 Figure 5.35 0.3 0.2 0.25 Likelihood 0.1 0.0 68% HPD 95% HPD 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 Years AD 0.0 0 68%HPD 50 100 150 95%HPD 200 250 300 350 400 Span (years) .0 68% HPD 95% HPD 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 Years AD 0.05 0.2 0.15 0.073 0.0292 0.0657 0.0584 Figure 5.0073 0.0876 0.3 0.4 Phase 2 duration (R) Likelihood 0.0219 0.0365 0.0438 0.

Higham.D.S. 65:808–21. J. Spurk. Kenworthy. P.000–0 cal. Berryman and I.K. 1998.J. Smith. Nairn.. and M. 2001. Radiocarbon dating with temporal order constraints. we would conclude that Kohika was occupied during the latter half of the 17th century. References Buck.T. 1998. F.auckland.K. DateLab manual. However. McCormac. J. 43:119–24.R. K.G. Higham. M. Plicht and M.g. 1998.K. F. University of Auckland. and G. Burr. . J.nz/~nicholls. Beck. 1995. No. L. and A. Radiocarbon.F. Xiong. the analysis does show that the occupation was certainly less than 160 years and probably less than 70–80 years. Nicholls. Bard.G. G.G. A. Radiocarbon. 2002. Radiocarbon. Ota.G. BP. M. Combining archaeological and radiocarbon information: a Bayesian approach to calibration. Nicholls.. Kromer.D.ac. M. Brown and S.W. E. Jones. Antiquity. D. and M. McCormac. 24.82 Kohika Conclusions The Bayesian analysis presented here suggests that the cultural deposits in the Kohika archaeological record correspond to a period of occupation in the late 17th century. Technical Report.F. Nicholls.F. INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration.E. M. 37:409–16. Jones.D. Jones. New Zealand. the bimodality in Figure 5. G. The archaeological and geomorphological data enable us to narrow down the range of chronological options presented by the Bayesian analysis of the C14 results. Beanland.G. The Matata Fault: active faulting at the north-western margin of the Whakatane Graben. S. and to support the chronological hypothesis stated above. http://www.B. G. Reservoir offset models for radiocarbon calibration. 40:1041–83. C. J. Hogg. Hogg. eastern Bay of Plenty. 1988. New Zealand Geological Survey Record.L.C. C. Mathematics Department.K. On this basis.S. Auckland University. Y. Reimer. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Baillie. J. 40:1153. 50:503–21. K. T. Pilcher. Hoper. Jones. Radiocarbon. Radiocarbon dating of prehistoric shell from New Zealand and calculation of the dr value using fish otoliths. Palmer.A.G. Nicholls. Series C. B. 2001. 35:6–13.3). T. Variations of radiocarbon in tree-rings: southern hemisphere offset preliminary results. These raise the possibility of a longer occupation.M. Hughen.math. Litton and A.D.. and G. Stuiver. This analysis is to some extent confounded by multiple perturbations in the calibration curve at this period (e.R. Radiocarbon dating with temporal order constraints.G. 1991.D..407.

replaced him. music and play. some palisade posts were dried out and only those of sound wood survived largely intact. The excavation of Kohika and the development of this laboratory facility were among the reasons for the creation of a doctoral fellowship funded by the Department of Internal Affairs to conduct research on the conservation of wooden artefacts in New Zealand (Wallace 1985). for defence and for outside contacts and trade. stored most of the wooden artefacts they found in water. Some of the artefacts are finely made and reflect social value but others were casually made for day-to-day use. In the field each artefact was washed and painted with a 50 per cent solution of polyethylene glycol (PEG) 400 to aid dimensional stability. disinfected. Wallace. including ornamentation and art. The artefacts also throw light on social aspects of life. which completes the waterlogged assemblage. religion. then a student in the Anthropology Department. Wallace and G. With the needs of waterlogged wood conservation in mind. Irwin The waterlogged deposits of this small lake village produced a rare and comprehensive inventory of wooden artefacts that were in close association with one another. including collecting and preparing diverse foods from a varied environment. personal status. who carried out the initial digging. Each was labelled and bagged in three layers of clear flexible polythene tube. This chapter includes all wooden artefacts except houses and pataka. On her return 83 . Peters designed the Conservation Laboratory in the new building and assembled the equipment needed to carry out the process. labelled and stored in temporary purpose-built tanks containing water and biocide prior to conservation treatment. After May 1975. completed an MA on waterlogged wood conservation and undertook postgraduate training in conservation in Italy and Canada. the innermost layer closely around the artefacts and the outermost one airfilled to cushion it during transport. which are described separately in Chapter 7. the University of Auckland took responsibility for conservation and study. when the Anthropology Department moved into the Human Sciences Building. the tools used for domestic and craft activities. the importance of canoe transport. However. Fibre and woven fabric are covered in Chapter 8. The artefacts bear on many aspects of life.J. the holder of that fellowship.T. In the following years he undertook specialist training and was awarded a Churchill Fellowship to travel to waterlogged wood conservation laboratories in Scandinavia and the Netherlands. Field treatment and laboratory conservation Members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society. R. K.6 The wooden artefacts from Kohika R. On arrival at the university the artefacts were washed. D. When Peters left the department in 1983. Johns. They were stored in this way until 1979.

The possible function of each artefact was suggested by comparing its form and wood composition with those either recorded in the ethnographic literature or extant in museum collections. He also employed a solvent/wax impregnation method on some small. together with the descriptions of each artefact. After his departure in 1983. except for a few originally highly degraded items that were left with an excessive PEG 400 content. artefact reassembly and identification The field catalogue consisted of a duplicate manifold book with a numbered list of all items recovered from the site. which involved removal of the PEG 400 and reimpregnation with the higher molecular weight PEG 3350 followed by non-vacuum freeze-drying in a large blast freezer. Kauri no longer grows in the Kohika area (but it occurs in the prehistoric pollen record). The wood species composition of each item was identified using transmitted and incident light microscopy. The body of this chapter consists of descriptions of the wooden artefacts recovered from Kohika. valuable artefacts with very acceptable results.or three-word description of the object and recorded provenance to square and layer. The results were satisfactory. In addition. two further kauri beaters in a degraded state were recognised. the majority of the artefacts were still in tanks containing 12 per cent PEG 400. The initial conservation work on the collection was carried out by Peters. Neich and D. In most cases this gave a two. the artefact was reclassified. and there were two well-preserved beaters made from kauri in the collection. an artefact previously and incorrectly recorded as a roughly made beater turned out to be made from mahoe (Melicytus ramiflorus) but. and R. Wallace completed the work. current and former Ethnologists at Auckland Museum. All items were drawn. One example is fern-root beaters. which is now an internationally recognised facility and the only one in the country able to carry out this type of work. Drawing was part of the process of description and required very thorough . photographed and measured as part of the analysis. a new catalogue was made with all relevant information and items grouped by artefact type. This was intended to prepare them for freeze-drying. and this information was extremely useful in carrying out later analysis. P. The collection was laid out with all items of the same wood species placed together. Peters’ work included drying out some very sound artefacts without any conservation treatment. By 1984. These items were subsequently reconserved by Johns using a method now preferred for conserving artefacts of this type. Simmons. contributed valuable suggestions. Wood identification. and this allowed broken parts of the same artefact to be easily rejoined. as this wood is too soft and light to be suitable for the purpose. The starting-point on this topic was a preliminary research paper by an MA student. which was carried out in 1986. J. Any errors in suggesting a function must remain the responsibility of the authors. In contrast. but must always remain somewhat speculative. the wood type used sometimes suggested the function of an artefact. Harrison. Subsequently. A later laboratory book recorded the items accompanied by rough sketches and measurements. a master carver. Boileau (1978). Previous research by Wallace (1989:225) had shown that heart kauri branch wood was used almost exclusively for making these beaters in the areas of New Zealand where the species grew. D. When conservation was completed. with some assistance from Johns towards the end of the process. an expert in traditional Maori material culture. Bonica. The attributed functions are recorded in this chapter. When the wood identification was completed.84 Kohika she took over the running of the Conservation Laboratory. however.

The working drawings were redrawn by J. The items listed in the Appendix are identified by KOH (Kohika) numbers. width mm 12. width mm 17 18 17 14 18 16 18 16 17 14 19 18. but closer inspection showed that the shafts had been made from wood of medium-sized trees that had been painstakingly split out and thinned down to less than 20 mm thick. only short broken sections of spears were recovered at Kohika. Details of all pieces recovered are contained in an artefact catalogue.1) as well as one spear point (Fig. Three have squared or rounded-off ends and may have been butt ends of the spears.1 Characteristics of the bird spear fragments Artefact KOH125 KOH126 KOH127 KOH128 KOH129 KOH130 KOH131 KOH132 KOH133 KOH134 KOH135 KOH136 KOH137 KOH138 KOH139 Length mm 680 895 1390 510 1175 375 620 595 137 820 285 730 265 700 167 Max. Many artefacts were merely fragments and are not described in the text.5 7 Min. The other seven are sections of shaft with both ends broken. former photographer at the department.1.5 0 14 0 18 16 18 10 17 14 15 18 0 10 3 End A Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Broken Complete End B Broken Blunt butt Broken Sharp point Blunt butt Broken Broken Broken Blunt butt Blunt butt Broken Lap joint? Point Blunt butt Tip broken Wood type Comments Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Kanuka Maire Rimu Rimu Rimu Ponga Spear section Spear tip? Spear section Spear tip? Spear butt? Spear section Spiral binding Spear section Spear butt? Spear butt? Spear section Lap joint? Spear tip? Spear butt? Barbed point Comments The fourteen broken sections of bird spear range in length from 1390 mm to 137 mm. All had been carefully formed from the trunk wood of three species of tree that produce very hard wood.5 9 16. Fourteen of these were found (Plate 6. The photographs are by H. and additional AU or WM numbers indicate whether the items were collected by the University of Auckland or by the Whakatane and District Historical Society. Three have pointed ends and appear to have been from the front where the barbed spear tip was lashed. the Appendix. Due to their great original length. Table 6. MacDonald. 6. One (KOH136) has a chamfered end that would have allowed a lap joint to be formed in the middle section of the spear.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 85 observation. Lawrence. KOH131 has a shadow left by a strip of binding wrapped in a spiral along its length. The blanks must first have . illustrator at the Anthropology Department. Bird Spears Maori bird spears were slim rods of wood 6–12 m long fitted with a barbed point and used to impale birds in trees by a thrusting rather than throwing action (Best 1977:153– 63).1). The attributes of each artefact are listed in Table 6. Superficially they were difficult to distinguish from naturally formed sticks. as are dimensions not provided in the formal description sections below. University of Auckland.

known as M-ar-a. . The fourteen fragments could theoretically have come from a minimum of four spears.1 Bird spear point made from treefern trunk . been split from a felled tree trunk then thinned down to less than 20 mm thick.86 Kohika Plate 6. a tall and straight young tree was selected. under favourable conditions. .1 Thirteen sections of bird spear and one spear point. The first named. . although that does not seem to have occurred at Kohika. and this was thinned down Figure 6. kopuka and kahikatoa will. 1891. accurately following the run of the wood grain to prevent the shaft splitting in two. Ten sections are made from kanuka. the other species not being suitable for the purpose. Colenso 1868. Downes 1928. but it is much more likely that there were more. one from maire and three from exceptionally resinous rimu heartwood. develop a straight-barrelled. [and] less liable to break. . two of kanuka and one each of maire and rimu. Ranapiri 1895) record all three of these species as having been used for bird spears but they also suggest that tawa was often used. In the case of kanuka: The spear maker who used manuka as a material fashioned his instrument from the species known to our scientists as Leptospermum ericoides. These spears were more rigid than those fashioned from tawa so were easier to manipulate . straight-grained and comely trunk that lends itself to free riving . ‘white manuka’ of ordinary nomenclature. Oral traditions reported in the ethnographic literature (Best 1977. (Best 1977:157) Maire is also recorded: ‘when fashioned from maire.

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 87 to the desired thickness’ (Downes 1928:10). It is made from the hard. This artefact has been badly burnt. The lap joint suggested for KOH137 has been recorded for kanuka bird spears (Matthews 1910:604) but Best vigorously denied the possibility of such a thing: ‘A spear-shaft composed of two pieces would not. 6. as the occurrence at Kohika of a maire bird spear proves. moderately straight kanuka stem. KOH201 is a light ko made from a rather crooked stem of manuka. While he was referring to the notorious hardness and toughness of this wood his doubts were misplaced. KOH199 is a large ko made from a whole. The top has been broken off. declaring only man spears were made from this wood. a ketu (weeder) blade. . 6. I feel assured. a hotu (one-piece spade) and four handles (Fig. giving Cyathea dealbata as the species. The artefacts are described individually below and then the nature of the class as a whole is summarised.5).2). highly lignified material from inside a tree-fern trunk. KOH207 is a kanuka ko tip also bevelled to a chisel point. doubted the existence of rimu bird spears. and nine blades for composite digging tools (Fig. It has four barbs and is slightly C-shaped in cross-section (Fig. 6. Also described here is a piece of an elaborate carving probably from the top of a ceremonial ko (Fig. KOH202 is a medium-sized ko made from a very straight stem of manuka. Its top has also been broken off. Its cross-section is sub-rectangular where it narrows to a needle-shaped point. KOH203 is the top of a light ko made from a crooked stem of manuka. Rimu is recorded from Northland: ‘The best being made of “Kapara”. Colenso (1891:50). Best also records this substance being used. traditional for many ko. It is bevelled to a chisel point and has its top broken off. 6. one teka or ko footrest (Fig.1). It is about half the size of one made from the same substance recorded by Matthews (1910:604). 6. It has been sharpened to a bevelled point and its top shaped into a simple knob.4). It is sharpened to needle points at both ends. It is has a very long bevel running down one face to the chisel-shaped tip. KOH198 is a large ko made from a moderately straight manuka stem. The top has been carved into a new-moon shape. KOH206 is a manuka ko tip bevelled to a chisel point. His scepticism was clearly misplaced in this case. commend itself to the Maori of yore as they were used with branch rests they would not work so easily’ (Best 1977:157). KOH205 is a double-ended ko made from a crooked stick of manuka. KOH139 is a barbed bird-spear point 167 mm long. KOH200 is a large ko made from a gently curved length of trunk-wood maire. in contrast.3). Best comments that ‘if this was so then the woodsmen certainly had a trying task’ (Best 1977:159). Digging tools The Kohika site yielded parts of thirteen ko or digging sticks. The bottom end has been sharpened to a laterally flattened point and the top carved into a leaf shape. the gum-preserved core found in some decayed kahikatea and rimu trees after the sapwood had rotted away’ (Matthews 1910:604). and says that on the East Coast it was regarded as producing inferior points (1977:159). KOH204 is the top of a ko made from a crooked stem of kanuka with the tip carved into the same leaf shape as found on KOH198.

2 Twelve digging sticks and one ko footrest .88 Kohika Figure 6.

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 89 Figure 6. a one-piece spade. and four handles of composite digging tools .3 A weeder blade.

one rough-out and one fragment .4 Seven complete detachable digging-tool blades.90 Kohika Figure 6.

unlike paddles it is made from manuka. The end where the blade would have been attached has been bevelled. a spatulate ko or a one-piece spade. KOH224 is a composite blade in the process of manufacture. It has one end bevelled while the other narrows to a point. a much stronger timber than the tawa used for the Kohika paddles. KOH214 appears to be a handle for a composite digging tool designed to be fitted to one of the detachable blades found at Kohika (see below). 76. It is strongly reminiscent of the tops of elaborate ceremonial ko illustrated in Best (1976:69. KOH8 is a fragment of a carving in the form of a three-fingered hand (Fig. Like KOH214 it has an end bevelled to fit a blade and a simple knob on top. the tip of which has broken off. KOH339 is also a probable composite digging tool shaft made of manuka. KOH218 is a complete blade from a composite digging tool made from rata or pohutukawa. KOH209 is a manuka ko tip sharpened to a point and with bevels on both sides of the shaft. KOH216 is probably from a composite digging tool shaft. Also. KOH211 is a plain teka (ko footrest) made from a naturally L-shaped stem of mahoe. 6. The vertical part has a bevelled flat surface designed to fit flush with the ko shaft. KOH221 is similar to KOH219 but is made from mapara.5). It is made from manuka and the tip has substantial use wear. It is rather similar in shape to a canoe paddle.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 91 KOH208 is a manuka ko tip with a needle-shaped point. KOH8 is almost certainly a fragment of one of these artefacts. (rata or pohutukawa) and has an end bevelled to fit a blade and a knob at the top. It is made from a rather crooked stem of Metrosideros spp. KOH220 is the same as KOH219. KOH217 is a complex and well-finished blade from a composite digging tool made of manuka. KOH212 is the blade of a ketu that has been snapped from its handle. KOH213 is a digging tool with a very broad blade. Plate 53.5 Part of a carving on a ceremonial ko . Item 152). It could be described as a very long-handled ketu. It is made of manuka. Its edge had been Figure 6. 78) and in the Oldman catalogue (Oldman 1946. The top has an ornamental end with a knob formed from a natural knot in the wood. KOH215 appears to be a shaft for a composite digging tool made from a crooked branch of mahoe. which is resinous rimu heartwood. KOH223 is similar to KOH221 in all respects. The horizontal part is worn from use and has a knob on its end. except that its blade is about a quarter the size needed for one. KOH219 is almost identical to KOH218 in all respects. KOH222 is similar to KOH221 in all respects.

like many of them. four of kanuka. Handles made from such terminals are often found on digging tools such as composite spade handles (Wallace 1989:227). KOH225 is from a shaft of trunk-wood matai 27 mm in diameter that first narrows as it nears the top then sharply widens to form a plain knob. three heavy ko. four of Metrosideros spp. in fact. have been used as hand tools without attached handles.6). KOH355 appears to be the edge of a detachable digging tool blade made from rata or pohutukawa. KOH226 is also made from matai trunk-wood and is very similar to the above but with a shorter knob. KOH227 is a carefully made knob of phallic form.. was carried out on the site and most probably on other stranded sand-dunes in the Rangitaiki Swamp. Patu aruhe (fern-root beaters) Fifteen items were identified as beaters. and eight composite spade blades in a range of sizes. However. KOH347 is a figure-of-eight-shaped knob at the end of a puriri shaft. the digging tools at Kohika indicate that a wide range of activities. Some are clearly carefully made to reproduce a specific tool form and decorated with knobs and terminal motifs. Dried fern root was soaked in water and roasted on coals. part of the handle of one of the nearly . Summary The digging implements from Kohika are strikingly diverse in form. two (somewhat different) ketu. one teka. two of maire. KOH230 is a natural stem of kanuka in the process of being made into a shaft similar to KOH229. Shaft knobs The end sections of seven broken shafts each with a terminal knob were found in the site (Fig.92 Kohika formed but the top not completed when the wood split and work was abandoned. KOH228 is a very carefully made shaft of kanuka with a flared end. one medium and seven light ko. a one-piece spade/spatulate ko/ketu. There is one ceremonial ko. 6. Thirteen beaters were whole or nearly complete while three were merely knobs. In general. cunninghamii?). Others are quite casually constructed. it broke at this point due to the presence of a knot and was discarded. four rather different composite digging tool shafts. many of them presumably for fern root (Purdue 2002) although flax is another possibility. Strong tough woods were used with thirteen of manuka. Some spade blades might. then pounded to separate the tough outer covering and coarse fibres from the starchy edible component (Best 1977:70–86). one double-ended ko. on occasion. It is made from maire. two of mahoe and one totara (the ceremonial ko top). made from maire (Nestegis spp. After the knobs were placed with the complete beaters it was realised that one of them was. including gardening and gathering fern-root. The lower part of the shaft is nearly perfectly round in cross-section while the knob itself is sub-rectangular. The latter were tentatively identified as being from fern-root beaters on the basis that they were identical to ones on the ends of the handles of complete beaters and. KOH229 is a natural stem of kanuka with a knobbed end. It is made from trunk-wood rata or pohutukawa. three of mapara (rimu).

possibly handles from composite tools .6 Seven broken shafts with terminal knobs.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 93 Figure 6.

and is made of trunk-wood maire. It is round in cross-section and is made from trunk-wood maire. It is made of trunk-wood maire and is rectangular in cross-section with all four striking surfaces well worn. . mostly due to the extremely high resin content. The Kohika site is currently outside the natural range of the kauri and it was initially thought that this artefact. Its knob is burnt and it has heavy use wear all around the circumference of its striking surface. KOH192 is a complete beater that is round in cross-section. It is sub-rectangular in cross-section and is made from the same type of kauri as the above two. being rather roughly made from a whole stem of kanuka (Kunzea ericoides). it is made from the resinous heart of kauri branch wood. beautifully made beater that shows little sign of wear. Their identification is based on their basic form and the fact that they were made from this special wood type used by the pre-European Maori specifically for beaters and mallets. Where kauri is readily available. As with KOH190. The beaters are illustrated in Figure 6. Round in cross-section. It has two severely worn surfaces on opposite sides of its rectangular cross-sectioned blade and is made from a half-section of a branch of maire. It is in a very poor state of preservation. perhaps from the Coromandel peninsula. KOH183 is a complete beater of rather irregular outline with a hollow worn on one striking surface. These last two items are so weathered that they were hard to recognise as beaters. KOH189 is a fragment of a beater comprising a half-section of the handle and most of the blade. KOH197 is a fragment of beater blade even more weathered than KOH196. It is round in cross-section and is made from trunk-wood maire. with only the blade of the beater surviving. It is round in cross-section and is made from a branch of rata (Metrosideros spp. fern-root beaters appear to be made exclusively from this wood (Wallace 1989:225). this handle is oval in cross-section and is made from trunk-wood maire. KOH191 is the knob and part of the handle of a beater. However.7. and possibly traded some distance from its sources to the north for this reason. They were put back together in the laboratory to form a nearly complete beater. This timber is very heavy. KOH190 is the knob and part of the handle of a beater. It is oval in cross-section and is made from a quarter-section of a branch of maire. It is circular in cross-section and made from the same type of kauri. having been dried out prior to conservation treatment. was imported from further north. KOH193 is a complete small beater that shows little evidence of wear.94 Kohika complete beaters. the discovery of kauri pollen in the swamp sediments at Kohika shows that some stands of kauri were growing closer to hand in the Bay of Plenty. KOH195 is a complete but very weathered beater. KOH188 is a complete beater worn on three of its four potential striking surfaces. This handle is oval in cross-section and made from trunk-wood maire. It is made from the same type of kauri as KOH194. KOH187 is a beater with most of its blade missing. It is oval in cross-section and is made from trunk-wood maire. These have been rejoined and are now treated as one item (which reduces the number of single knobs to two while the whole beaters remain at thirteen). KOH184 is a complete beater of more regular form than KOH183. KOH196 is even more weathered than KOH195. KOH186 is a complete beater with a well-worn striking surface around its circumference. KOH185a and KOH185b were found in separate places in the excavation and were evidently broken before deposition. or at least the wood from which it is made. KOH194 is a complete. probably robusta).

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 95 Figure 6.7 Fifteen beaters and beater fragments .

narrow bowl. domestic item. perhaps oil or berry juice. they were such a ubiquitous and utilitarian item that many were quite casually constructed and discarded when broken. is softer but heavier and much more resinous than normal trunk-wood. but is accompanied by other hard tough woods such as rata (Wallace 1989). spout or ornamentation and may have been a simple. found on the underside of branches or in trees exposed to strong winds. only two of these being reasonably complete.10) were found. Each is described in turn below.9) and ten canoe paddles (Fig. KOH180 is a rim section from a long.96 Kohika Summary Nine of the fifteen beaters are made from maire. It is made from heart totara. It is reasonable to assume that this bowl was used for some special food preparation involving pouring a liquid. It is not illustrated. followed by a general discussion of the artefact type at Kohika. though beaters could be carefully made. adding weight to the suggestion that kauri was harder to obtain. The first three were found near one another in the site and recognised as being part of . KOH161 (a–e) consists of five fragments that are parts of a large steering paddle. All fragments of this species were then re-examined to see whether they could be fitted to the existing artefacts. and many fragments not previously recognised as being parts of these artefacts were rejoined. heavy. The impression gained is that. KOH176 is about half of a medium-sized bowl. one each from kanuka and rata and four from kauri. if well-made. some of which were scattered pieces that were only recognised and reassembled later. The bowl was canoe-shaped with a pointed end. 6. It is made of matai. 6. This process was very successful. the maire is more common than kauri. It is clear that the original was a thin-walled bowl generally similar in form to KOH175. Four of these are illustrated in Figure 6. it was found that all Kohika paddles were made from tawa. When wood species were identified during analysis. The first three species are broadleaf woods (angiosperms) that produce the very hard. Some are very carefully made and finished while others are quite rough. Bowls Kohika has yielded five items identified as bowls or bowl fragments.8. Kohika shows both traditions of wood use in action. Only some have knobs at the end of their handles. The dense resinous wood in kauri branches was so desirable for beaters that it was used exclusively where available. It is made from normal trunk-wood totara. This special type of wood. tough woods needed for these artefacts. They were assembled from 23 separate fragments. It is made from heart totara. It is made from totara compression wood. KOH181 is a fragment from the angle between the side and the base of a thinwalled bowl similar to KOH180 and KOH175. Maire is the species most commonly used where kauri is not available. KOH182 is a small fragment from the end of a quite thick-walled bowl. Canoe paddles Fragments of a large steering paddle (Fig. Some are rectangular in crosssection but most are round or irregular. The beaters show a range of forms and quality of manufacture. oval in outline and semi-circular in cross-section. It has no handle. KOH175 is the only complete bowl found. It is long and narrow with a pouring spout at one end.

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 97 Figure 6. Two further pieces were located during laboratory analysis and the result is an unfinished paddle. It has the distinctive form shared by all paddles from Kohika. The blade had split in half and the two pieces were found separately in the site. This paddle was the only one from Kohika with decorative carving in the thickened area where the handle joins the blade. The wood has been cut from a quite small-diameter tawa trunk. it too is circular in cross-section at the top but becomes rectangular further down towards the distinct thickened area that had joined it to the blade.73 m long and resulted in a very straight steering paddle or oar. the slightly thickened area where the handle joined the blade had been left plain.8 Four bowls and bowl fragments the same piece. as discussed below. The final product would have been 2. KOH165 is also a paddle handle that had snapped off just short of where it joined its blade. KOH164 is a paddle handle similar to KOH163. This ornamentation and the lack of wear on its tip suggest it may have been a ceremonial paddle rather than regularly used. The top of the handle is thickened and has a simple double spiral pattern incised on it. Snapped off at the junction with its blade. KOH166 is a paddle blade and part of the handle. Unlike the previous example. KOH163 is a paddle handle that had snapped where it joined its blade. It is almost perfectly circular in cross-section along its length. Like the others it has a distinct thickening at the point where the handle joins the blade KOH167 is most of the blade of a paddle that had snapped off below the junction . at the stage of manufacture when a slab of wood split from a tree trunk had been adzed into general shape. It was reassembled in the laboratory to form a nearly complete canoe paddle. KOH162 (a–d) was found as four pieces in the site. The handle is circular in cross-section near the top but becomes sub-rectangular nearer the blade.

rata. Comments Apart from the long steering paddle. a study of 41 other Maori paddles from four museums (Wallace 1989: 224) has shown that the majority were made from kanuka with just a few from manuka. Elsdon Best (1925:158) records a preference for very hard strong woods for paddles. In his account of the Maori canoe. However. KOH168 is a small paddle blade fragment. 703). maire. puriri and kowhai. This means that the blade follows slightly behind the handle when it is stroked through the water rather than being in the same line. which have a slight kink where the handle joins the blade. The tradition of using tawa for paddles is therefore not much mentioned previously. manuka. D23. . heart pukatea and occasionally tawa. The only paddle made from tawa was an unprovenanced item from Otago Museum (Accession No. as saying that on the East Coast preferred timbers were matai. all of which are very hard. all the approximately 300 paddles in the Auckland Museum collection were examined. A few examples from the southern South Island were made from totara. This does not seem to have been a problem with tough. heavy. strong woods. Figs 111 and 113). although he quotes an informant. This clearly establishes that a local tradition of paddle-making existed that is quite distinct from the one typically seen in museum storerooms in this country. there is only one almost complete example in this collection. this bend would also create a physical weakness between the handle and blade if the grain of the wood was straight and partially ran out at the kink. wavy-grained woods such as kanuka. but the fragments provide sufficient information to define the form of the Kohika paddles.9 A steering paddle roughout with the handle. Without exception all were of the form well illustrated by Best (1925. The lower end is heavily rounded off by wear. KOH169 is the very worn tip of a paddle and KOH170 (not illustrated) is a smaller fragment from the middle of its blade. KOH171 is a fragment split from the side of a paddle blade. allowing a secure association of the two pieces. This property makes it easier to prevent the handle from rotating in the paddler’s hand even when loosely gripped. The form of the Kohika paddles also seems to be distinctive. in terms of both the shape of the paddle and the wood used. KOH172 is the side and tip of a paddle blade reassembled from four pieces. Tuta Nihoniho. While the two cannot be directly joined. To confirm this impression. as little difficulty would be found in selecting a piece where the grain followed the curves of the paddle shape. their colour and surface texture are identical on both sides. All the Kohika paddles were made from tawa (Beilschmiedia tawa). However.98 Kohika Figure 6.

10 Canoe paddle and paddle fragments And. in fact. The physical characteristics of tawa may account for some of the distinctiveness in the Kohika paddle form. Tawa. nor do they have ornamental carving at this point. is usually straight grained and . while moderately hard.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 99 Figure 6. the junctions of handle and blade are not heavily thickened in any of the Auckland Museum examples.

100 Kohika free splitting. Canoe hull pieces Kohika was an island in a large swamp. In general. One further feature of KOH162 is that the pointed end of the blade would control the water dripping from it between strokes and make it less noisy. then the artists on Cook’s expeditions or those contributing to the publications associated with them may have used the collected paddles as models rather than drawing from life when drafting illustrations. Examples of these are illustrated in the catalogue of Cambridge University’s Oldman Collection (Oldman 1946. It may then have been replaced by a new style at the beginning of the historic era. Figs 24–34). no provision has been . In a recent publication on the art of Cook’s voyages (Joppien and Smith 1984) some 28 of the paddles figured can be ascribed to one or other style. If so. Any kink at the junction of blade and handle would be fatal when the paddle faced heavy use. The only paddle of the Kohika form seen by R. always a weak point. Alternatively. Moreover. These features are shown very clearly in the Kohika paddles illustrated in Figure 6. was strengthened by a thickened section. especially KOH162. where Cook’s party may have collected most of their paddles. one of which was not recovered. Wallace in a New Zealand museum collection is the Otago example mentioned above. all the scenes sketched by Cook’s illustrator Sydney Parkinson in which paddles appear seem to show the Kohika style in universal use. the Kohika style may have been regional. then it is odd that an illustration from Abel Tasman’s earlier voyage (Best 1925:7) shows the typical modern kinked Maori paddle form. Unlike KOH141 described below. It is made from a large-diameter hollowed totara trunk and designed to attach to a hull by lashings that passed through four large chiselled holes along the edge of a simple vertical butt joint. the only collections where paddles of the Kohika form are typical are those made during Captain Cook’s voyages or in the early 19th century. by the mechanical digger that uncovered it in the agricultural drain. Two of these are complete (or nearly so) bow or stern parts while the other four are merely fragments of hull.11. Plate 63. Canoe transport would have been essential and six pieces of canoe hull were found there. Furthermore. Only four of these paddles are portrayed in detail and these are clearly elaborate. It was broken into five pieces. The Kohika style may have been dominant in pre-European New Zealand where it was collected and illustrated by early voyagers. perhaps occurring only in the Bay of Plenty/East Cape area. KOH140 (a–d) is pieces of a large canoe bow or stern made as a separate item to attach to the open end of a canoe hull. If the latter were so. So tawa paddles had to be very straight with the grain running cleanly from one end to the other. though no painted patterns are preserved on that one. with only one clearly of the kinked form. Twenty-seven are of the straight Kohika style. Five of the six items are illustrated in Figure 6. useful when stealth was required.10. The abundance of the Kohika-style paddles in 18th-century illustrations and their rarity in modern New Zealand museum collections may be explained in two ways. Neich has suggested that most of these came from the Poverty Bay area (1993:59–64). This also explains why the junction of the blade with the handle. it appears that the Kohika paddle style may have been a local East Coast and Bay of Plenty tradition that has not survived into the modern era. ceremonial forms of the Kohika type. These are strikingly like the Kohika examples. This thickened part also provided a field to be ornamented by decorative carving in the case of KOH162. Item 52) of material gathered during Cook’s first voyage (Shawcross 1970) and in the extensive study of painted paddles by Neich (1993.

11 Canoe hull pieces .The wooden artefacts from Kohika 101 Figure 6.

It is made of trunk-wood kauri. Canoe fittings In this category are one possible canoe bulkhead. It is not illustrated in Figure 6. with one lashing hole on its upper edge. It has a D-shaped outline and six irregularly distributed lashing holes around its edge. a fishing trip. Each gunwale has four holes to take lashings for extra pieces set above. It has three lashing holes along its upper edge and is made of trunk totara. They are rather casually made from natural sticks by notching their ends. It is made from totara. The outer surface of the hull is flattened where these holes emerge to allow the batten that would have covered the joint to form a close contact. Partly for this reason. They were not necessarily permanent fittings and may have been produced casually when a canoe was being outfitted for a specific purpose – for example. In addition to the above items.102 Kohika made to recess the lashings into grooves in the hull to prevent damage when the canoe was beached. KOH152 is a very similar seat made from a peeled manuka stem. having been cut to fit the irregular shape of an existing hull. presumably for the attachment of a bow or stern piece or strake plank above it. The remaining twelve artefacts are tentatively identified as canoe seats. KOH143 appears to be a fragment of gunwale from near the bow or stern of a canoe. all of which have grooves running out to the junction with the hull in which lashings could be recessed to avoid abrasion. It is made from a dressed totara plank and is identical in shape to a canoe seat in Auckland Museum. The edge has two lashing holes for a strake or other attachments. where kauri is abundant. KOH151 is a canoe seat made from an unpeeled stem of tawa with deep notches chiselled in each end to allow it to be lashed across the gunwales of the canoe. This canoe may have been imported from further north. The gunwale on one side is intact and has three lashing holes distributed evenly along it. Four are whole but the remaining eight are broken-off ends made from the stems of six different species of broadleaf shrub and tree. . Six attachment holes. It may have formed a partition in the canoe to aid bailing by preventing water from moving freely along the inside of the hull. KOH345 was very tentatively identified as a fragment of spiral fretwork from a carved bow or stern carving. It is a 12 mm thick plank made from rata or pohutukawa. KOH141 is a smaller detachable canoe bow of rather more sophisticated design. it appears to be unfinished. The joint it would form with the main section of the hull is irregular.11. KOH145 (a and b) are pieces of an artefact identified as a possible canoe bulkhead. are present along the joint. perhaps from the Coromandel peninsula. KOH142 is a fragment of canoe hull 120 mm thick. The bulkhead. three each side. a piece of canoe hull gunwale from near the bow or stern. KOH144 is similar to KOH143. three definite canoe thwarts (seats) and twelve other artefacts of which several are also likely to have been seats but others less certainly so. the three seats and eight of the other fittings are illustrated in Figure 6. It includes a portion of the angled midline keel. The oblique way in which the grain runs through the piece suggests it was from where the gunwale curves in towards the point of the bow. but more because of the rough adzed surface of the piece.12. KOH146 is half of a carefully made canoe seat. This bow piece is also made from a hollowed totara trunk. KOH335 is also similar to KOH143.

one bulkhead and eight other fittings The wide variety in the quality of workmanship of these fittings suggests that a range of different river and sea canoes was present at the site.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 103 Figure 6. .12 Three canoe seats.

KOH178 is a burnt and broken fragment of the side and end of a bowl-like container. The side wall is 10 mm thick and the end wall up to 35 mm. KOH174 is a bailer with one side of its scoop missing. It is made of totara with an unusual tightly waved grain. The side wall is about 10 mm thick but the end wall is up to 55 mm thick. however. Made from matai. possibly selected to yield an item less liable to split.13. and may have been a detached fragment of this or a similar artefact. and three are illustrated in Figure 6.13 Canoe bailers Four items were found that may have been parts of canoe bailers. It has a simple chiselled perforation in the side wall near its broken edge that seems to have been part of an attempted repair. below). It matches the structure of the side of KOH174. Just below the knob a hole has been chiselled sideways through the handle for a cord to tie onto some part of the canoe to prevent it being washed overboard when it was urgently needed.104 Kohika Bailers Figure 6. The terminal knob on the handle has been carved in the form of a stylised human face (Plate 7. KOH177 may have been part of the side rim of a bailer. It too is made of heart totara. this artefact may have been part of either a bowl or a bailer. KOH179 appears to be the side of a bailer scoop and is rather similar to KOH177. It suffered minor scorching in a fire after being broken. . This artefact is made from heart totara. but ultimately it did not escape this fate. The fragment is too small to be sure of its origin and it is not illustrated.14.

By the middle of the 19th century. with most of one side missing. Both side-bars are present for part of their length. and composite combs which consist of separate wooden teeth bound together by fine thread (Fisher 1962:47). Cook’s surgeon on the first voyage (1768–71). and are illustrated in Figure 6. but it is also the most fragmentary. KOH102 is the largest comb. KOH105 is badly damaged. Combs were frequently collected and described in Cook’s time and seem to have been in common use (Joppien and Smith 1984). KOH104 is the second-smallest comb and is fairly complete. Seven of the remaining thirteen teeth are present for their full length. They can be separated into three distinct types: those made from a single piece of bone. their width and the groove width are difficult to measure.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 105 Heru (hair combs) Heru were ornamental hair combs worn by men of rank to adorn their koukou or topknot and. the tooth very long: some were made of wood. as is one side-bar. The second large collection is from caves and rock shelters on the west coast of the Waitakere Ranges in Auckland (Lawrence 1989). KOH101 is a comb with a complete frame but its teeth are broken 40–70 mm from their bases. The first is from Kauri Point in the western Bay of Plenty. with the longest and the widest frame. Six detached teeth were found with this comb but these have missing tips. where a total of 334 large fragments and over 1000 detached teeth representing some 187 individual combs were excavated from an area of wet ground adjacent to a pa (Shawcross 1964. KOH106 is the smallest comb in the collection. the one-piece wooden comb. During its life a sidebar and up to two teeth had broken off and the split edge was then rounded and smoothed to allow continued use. objects of considerable tapu. with all of its teeth detached and the ends of both sidebars missing. KOH103 is the most complete comb in the collection and only half of the twelve teeth and the ends of the two side-bars are missing. explorers. wrote: ‘But how great was our surprise to see combs in their hair! They were about two inches broad. One of the side-bars has also been lost and the break smoothed off. The curvature of the top of the frame suggests it was originally 45–50 mm wide. All the teeth have been broken off between 10 and 50 mm from their junction with the frame and only two found with the artefact. all minus tips.14. apparently as part of the ritual disposal of tapu objects associated with the head or hair of high-status individuals. As only the butts of the teeth survive. those made from a single piece of wood. Most had been deliberately broken before being placed in a structure in the swamp. however. Unlike the other combs the frame is the same length as the teeth rather than being shorter. It was the second-largest comb in the collection. others of bone – these combs appeared to be more fitted for ornament than use.’ (Beaglehole 1974:573). Only two collections of prehistoric combs are available for direct comparison with the Kohika examples. Early European visitors to New Zealand give many accounts of one-piece wooden combs. The total length of the comb cannot be determined but is somewhat more than 122 mm. The top of the frame is badly worn rather than broken and all but the base of the ornamental boss has been lost. Monkhouse. were found. It is near median size for this collection but has the fewest teeth and the widest gaps between each of them. Five fragments of teeth. The six Kohika combs are all of the second type. 1976). as a consequence. and their manufacture and use had been largely discontinued (Gardner 1985:48). Its thirteen teeth are the thickest and have the second-narrowest space between them of any of the combs in the collection. and the length of the teeth is . missionaries and travellers mentioned combs as things of the past.

Only ten teeth remain and these are represented by short stumps. This damage appears recent and is probably associated with its discovery by mechanical digger.106 Figure 6.14 Six heru or hair combs Kohika unknown. but the frame width indicates that a minimum of eighteen teeth were originally present. .

6 105.25 1.5+ An examination of the literature on heru (Fisher 1962.7 1.8 71+ 13 3.3 120+ 18+ 4. Frame width.8 110+ 15+ 4. Some of the values are minimums and are recorded with a + sign after.54 0.44 213.59 0.0 3.2 5. frame depth. these are necessary to protect the fine teeth from damage during use and are almost identical in form to those of modern plastic • the side-bars have four degrees of taper • all are made from mapara.1 75.65 0.8 7. the resinous heart of rimu. the values are the average of two measurements.45 0.0 5.70 0.3 6. in the three combs where both bars are present.05 1.5 4.2. like many of the Waitakere examples but unlike any of the Kauri Point combs. As an assemblage they have a degree of coherence of form and style that suggests a single local manufacturing tradition or even a single maker.52 225 105 51.5 times) and more closely set (4. frame length.1 103+ 5. Tooth depth and width are averages of at least 30 separate measurements taken mainly on detached tooth fragments.40 277+ Average 46+ 5.6 157+ 7.8 1.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 107 The condition of the remaining parts of the frame suggests the comb had less wear than any of the others when discarded.5–1. in marked contrast to the Kauri Point situation where all the combs appeared to have been ritually broken before being discarded in a specific place. Shawcross 1964.2 Comb dimensions (mm) KOH number Frame width Frame thickness Frame length Side-bar width Tooth length Tooth number Tooth thickness Tooth width Groove width Total length Summary 106 40 3.4 159+ 15 6. tooth length and total length are the maximum dimensions. Table 6.6 1.6 51.9 per centimetre) than the very finest in the Kauri Point collection • have side-bars.2 5. Gardner 1985. as the frame may represent a human head the knob is the nose • have a variable frame length that ranges from the average Kauri Point length to 20 per cent greater than the longest comb in that very large collection • have a relatively standard frame width and thickness that are very similar to the Kauri Point ones • have teeth that are very much finer (1.5 132+ 18 5.60 115.6 119. .6 0.38 151 103 42.5 12 4. as are all the Kauri Point combs (Wallace 1989:229) and eleven of twelve Auckland Museum combs identified by this author (Lawrence 1989) • none of the combs appears to have been deliberately damaged. Lawrence 1989.6 1.43 275+ 102 52+ 5. The attributes of this comb style are: • all are round-topped and comparable with Type A as defined by Shawcross (1964:388) • belong to the end of the prehistoric sequence • have no ornamentation apart from the knob • have the knob placed near the top of the frame rather than further down the side (as with most Kauri Point combs).40 231+ 101 51. Side-bar width was measured where it was attached to the frame and. longer (up to 1. 1976) shows the Kohika examples to be well within the known range of forms.1 99.5 6.3 76.7 mm wide). Comb measurements are shown in Table 6.3 1.6 0.52 122+ 104 40+ 4.0 13+ 3.

A fine-edged flake was struck and a bite taken out at one end of the cutting edge to form a sharp corner or point. The Kauri Point combs change over time from being ‘square topped’ to ‘round topped’ and show an increase in size. the whip-cord was released. A small amount of oil run into the groove speeded the process greatly.15) from Kohika are identified as darts or javelins as described by Best (1924:94). Some skill was necessary to make this exactly parallel with and the correct distance from the previous groove. another matching one was made from the opposite side until it nearly met the first. Several things were learned quite quickly. This compressed wood material partially rebounds when wet. No two are identical in any of the collections but Kohika shows the most consistent style. some replication experiments were attempted by R. and the wood selected had perfectly straight grain to allow parallel teeth to be cut. Such missiles were produced in bulk and stored on fighting stages and in pits in fortified pa to be rained down on attackers or propelled with the aid of a whip into a pa from the outside. The hardest part in making combs was getting the grooves exactly regular and parallel. The Kohika combs are all large and round topped. when the dart was whipped out. creating a groove significantly narrower than the tool used to make it. Javelins/darts Six artefacts (Fig. Groove cutting tools tried were a rat (Rattus exulans) incisor and modified flakes of obsidian and chert. a process that must be avoided when cutting teeth that follow the grain exactly. Manufacturing method A detailed examination of the combs gives some idea of the methods used to make them. This was essential as a sharp edge can more readily cut wood across the grain. is closer to the one seen in several of the Waitakere examples (Lawrence 1989). In the latter case they were placed butt first in the ground and the end of a whip looped around just below the pointed end in such a way that. and the great skill of the prehistoric craftsmen is reflected in the extremely neat finish of the Kohika combs. The most difficult part of the process would seem to be cutting the teeth. It was also found that a variety of fine-grained rock and some shells could be employed to make scribers and that the main requirements for their successful use were strong fingers coupled with great care and manual dexterity. The sharp edge was then deliberately blunted. with variation being mainly in frame and tooth length. These artefacts . The tool that was developed could be called a scriber. The technique created remarkably fine grooves and with some practice it was possible to make teeth as fine as those of the Kohika combs.Wallace. Close examination of detached teeth of the original combs showed they had been made by cutting grooves from both sides that met at the centre. The grooves were not cut but rather dented or compressed into the surface with very little material being removed. When the groove penetrated halfway through the blank. 6. The first step in cutting was to start the groove by gently drawing a line along the grain of the wood with the point of the scribing tool. In order to understand how this might have been achieved. The scriber was then drawn up and down the deepening groove with increasing pressure.108 Kohika The Kohika comb style. though similar to that of the upper levels of the Kauri Point site (Shawcross 1976. A new tooth could be split off and the scriber run up and down in the gap to remove any excess wood. Fig. Chert flakes were the most successful because rat incisors and obsidian were too brittle to have been ideal for the purpose. 4).

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 109

could also have been made as toys designed to foster martial skills in children. The Kohika darts illustrated in Figure 6.15 are all manuka sticks with a ‘bulrush shaped’ section behind the point or, in one case, a barbed end. This thickening would allow the cord of the whip to be looped behind it and would add weight to the front of the dart to make it fly better (Best 1924). Auckland Museum holds a bundle of almost identical artefacts found together in Lake Rotoaira and these show the same diverse range of tip forms. KOH119 is the only complete dart in the collection. KOH120 is the barbed point of a dart, the only such point found in this site. It is almost identical to two found at the Kauri Point swamp site by Shawcross (1976: 292–93). KOH121 has the ‘bulrush’ thickened part carved in a simple ornamental form. KOH122 is another dart fragment, including the thickened part. KOH123 is similar to KOH122 but the thickening is in two sections separated by a narrow gap. KOH124 has a simple thickening near the point.

Potaka (spinning tops)

There are seven spinning tops in the Kohika collection (Fig. 6.16). An eighth one, not described here, was irresponsibly removed from the site by a visitor during the excavation (S. Webster, pers. comm. 2003). Tops were common items in Maori material culture and their manufacture and use continued into living memory (P. Harrison and M. Penfold, pers. comm.). They are small cones of wood that were set in motion by a length of fibre wrapped around the top and whipped away by the stick to which it was attached. More whipping kept it spinning. Different types of top were made and used in a variety of children’s games and, occasionally, in more serious situations (Best 1976:153–63). The Kohika examples are of two forms, a short broad one and a tall slim one. The latter are said to be jumping tops that could be made to leap into the air (P. Harrison, pers. comm.). All the Kohika examples appear to be rather casually made toys and all are made from manuka except KOH112, which is made from a heavy, resinous type

Figure 6.15 Six darts or javelins



of totara. It is the most carefully produced top with a depression in its upper surface. It is identified by Dr Paki Harrison as a humming top, the sound being produced by the hollow in the top and by the slightly squared sides. KOH113 has been identified as a jumping top, being tall and slim with a groove around its circumference to accommodate the wound string. KOH114 is a plain broad top. KOH115 is similar in shape to KOH114 but somewhat smaller. KOH116 is similar but smaller again. KOH117 is a tall slim jumping top. KOH118 is the smallest top.

Adze and chisel handles

Figure 6.16 Seven potaka or spinning tops

Three artefacts in the Kohika collection fall into this category. One is an adze haft still in the process of manufacture, another is a finely made handle for a very small stone chisel head, and the last a socket for a composite haft of a small chisel, conceivably for tattooing. KOH109 is an unfinished adze handle. It is made from a small branch of rimu cut to include its junction with a larger one (Fig. 6.17). KOH110 is a finely made chisel handle made from heart kanuka (Fig. 6.18). The chisel head it was designed to hold must have been small, as its butt sat in a tapered socket 25 mm long widening to a maximum of 11 mm. Just such a blade of greenstone is described in Chapter 9. KOH111 appears to be a miniature version of an adze socket (Fig. 6.18), designed as the wooden butt extension for an adze (Wallace 1982). One end has a socket that appears to be for the butt of a small chisel. The other end has another socket to take the head of a handle. Such a composite handle and socket has previously been recorded only for full-sized woodworking adzes. Its size, however, suggests only a very small woodworking chisel or even a tattooing chisel that was hafted. Tattooing chisel handles of this form have been reported by Robley (1987:48) and if this socket was for a composite tattooing handle then it is a unique prehistoric artefact. It is made from puriri.

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 111 Figure 6.17 An adze handle rough-out

Figure 6.18 A chisel handle and a chisel socket


KOH107 is part of one side of a flute or putorino (Fig. 6.19). Such instruments were made in two half sections that were then bound together. It is smaller than most of those in museum collections (M. McLean, pers. comm.) and is made from mapara. It is unornamented but very finely finished.

Net gauges

KOH241 is a very carefully finished tab of totara slightly tapered at the end with a finely drilled hole near one corner (Fig. 6.20). This artefact is identical to one of a set of net gauges from Tikopia held in Auckland Museum (D. Bonica, pers. comm.). These gauges were used to standardise the mesh of nets during manufacture and repair. If

112 Figure 6.19 A section of a putorino (flute)


KOH241 is accurately identified, then its circumference would generate a mesh with an aperture of 15 mm. The hole in one corner would allow a string to hold together a set of different-sized gauges. KOH243 is a flat piece of rimu (Fig. 6.20) very similar in thickness, general appearance and finish to KOH241. It too could have been a net gauge.

Thread reels

Figure 6.20 Two net gauges

Two items, KOH239 and KOH240, are small strips of heart totara with broad notches along each side (Fig. 6.21). They were identified as reels for fine thread (P. Harrison, pers. comm.). The notches are to prevent the thread from sliding and becoming tangled, and such tools are made for Maori weavers to this day.

Fibre working tools

Figure 6.21 Two thread reels

Eighteen Kohika artefacts are tentatively identified as fibre working tools (Fig. 6.22). They are short pieces of wood, eight of which have spatulate points and ten needle points. It is suggested here that they were used for a variety of purposes related to weaving, net making, rope working and so on. All are illustrated in Figure 6.22 but only three of the better-made and more distinctive are described here. KOH261 is a very beautifully made kaui, or weaving tool. It is a leaf-shaped piece of heart totara wood with a 13 mm long point at one end. Unlike the others in this category, it is beautifully finished and may have been a high-status object used for the finest weaving. KOH251 is a cone-shaped piece of totara identical in form and probable function to a marlinspike – a tool for loosening knots and strands in ropes and cordage. KOH254 is a carefully made artefact shaped from a stick of manuka that tapers to a slight knob at the top and has a steep bevel at the other end, leading to a projecting tongue.

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 113 Figure 6.22 Fibre-, net- and rope-working tools

Wakahuia lid?

KOH108 is a flat plain slab of totara with rounded, tapered edges. It could have been a lid for a simple wakahuia, or treasure box. This item is not illustrated.

It has a groove cut around its top. All had been split out of small to medium-sized trees. They have the expected acute triangle profile and most show evidence of hammering on their butts or breakage at the other end. matai. They are not illustrated here. The original function of these items is not known but they must have been a component of a larger artefact associated with the White House level (Square D7). Only one (KOH263) is a complete section of stem and had been made into a post or stake 1360 mm long. KOH232 is a wedge carefully made from maire trunk-wood. Bevelled strips KOH242 is a set of eight strips of totara 14–20 mm wide by 3–4 mm thick.23 Ladder Posts A sample of sixteen has been identified as being manufactured stakes or posts but. pukatea. they are too fragmentary to be ascribed to the main defensive palisade. frequently having the outer surface of the tree trunk (minus bark) as one face. They are rather casually made from a variety of species and quite robust. Figure 6. and its tip has broken.25). . Pegs Seven items are identified as pegs in this collection (Fig. We believe it was for a pataka in Area D.114 Kohika Ladder KOH231 is a ladder with four notched steps (Fig. presumably to take a binding to reduce splitting. rimu and totara. 6. Wedges Six items have been identified with varying degrees of confidence as wood-splitting wedges (Fig. The other items are merely split pieces of wood of similar cross-section. The wood identifications of these artefacts include tawa.23). in general. They are not illustrated. It is made from a small trunk of mahoe 1205 mm long and has a hole piercing the bottom end to allow it to be lashed to something. broken into sections 25–150 mm long. The others are less clearly wedges but most have some degree of battering on their tops.24). 6. 6. The edges of one face have been bevelled.

The wooden artefacts from Kohika 115 Figure 6.24 Wood-splitting wedges .

25 Pegs Kohika .116 Figure 6.

26 Items of unidentified function .The wooden artefacts from Kohika 117 Figure 6.

suggesting they had been stored in water at the swampy margins of the site to keep them in a usable state. KOH271 to KOH282. if stored dry. and a preliminary discussion can be found in Boileau (1978). show extensive adze marks on some of their surfaces and preserve evidence of careful use of a stone adze. Many coils of lashing vine were found at Kohika and a sample of nineteen was collected from eleven different locations. Two coils are shown in Plate 6. A total of 140 m of vine is present in these coils. coiled on the spot and transported to the site by canoe. would have required several days’ soaking before use. Nine are manuka and one is mahoe.26. These were collected to investigate woodworking technology. Some may have been fittings associated with houses or canoes. vines would have been used. Wood chips were abundant in the site and a sample of more than 200 . such as palisades.118 Kohika Sharpened sticks/stakes Ten stems cut off at one end and adzed into sharpened ends at the other were brought back to the laboratory while numerous other examples were discarded in the field. and larger ones with 5–22 m of vine measuring about 220 mm across. They may have been parts of various above-ground structures. Most pre-European Maori structures were lashed together. Superior houses could have employed manufactured twine but for most work. The coils are of two types: smaller ones 1–3 m long wound into a coil some 175 mm across. They are very flexible when green but become stiff when dry and. including low fences separating activity areas within the site.2 Two coils of rata vine. The Kohika coils were all found in peaty deposits. Lashing vines Plate 6. Miscellaneous items Five very carefully made items with no obvious function are illustrated in Figure 6. These could have been collected in the bush.2. Wood chips KOH308–334 and KOH351– 354 are chips of wood produced as waste during adze working. Adzed fragments Twelve items. All are 3–7 mm in vine thickness and probably of white rata (Metrosideros albiflora).

it is interesting that one activity where splitting is not normally possible is hollowing out logs during the manufacture of canoes or very large bowls. Wood chips resulting from shallow-angle dressing of timber are less common in the sample. Food acquisition and preparation are reflected in the fifteen fragments of bird spears. Artefact manufacture involving woodworking is represented by an adze handle. Housing is discussed in Chapter 7. An overview of the Kohika wooden assemblage The artefacts described in this chapter are the result of activities associated with built structures. Several of the flake scars are deep enough to suggest that the adze blade was driven up to 50 mm into the wood in a single heavy blow. a wedge and a lever. Evidence of yet another type of adzing is seen on sharpened stakes and stems where the sapwood had been cut off. food acquisition and preparation. The adze marks on the artefacts suggest the removal of long narrow shavings by multiple short adze blows. Such chips were not included in the sample and may also have not survived burial in quantity. The low frequency of such dressing chips is surprising considering the abundance of adze-marked timbers. It follows that many of the wood chips could derive from canoe building. the six knobbed ends of shafts (probable digging tool shaft fragments). This indicates three forms of adzing: steep-angle chopping used to sever trunks or stems. All of these are of totara and most can be placed into one of three sub-categories. the fifteen beaters and the six bowls. First are those with one end chopped off at a steep angle and the other end smashed off at right angles. including fibre and manufacturing waste. These artefacts reflect active exploitation of forest birds. The ratio between these types is close to 1:4:1 in the sample. The steep-angle chopping was done at an angle of up to 30 degrees and indicates very vigorous adze work. Second. Each wood chip has a single split surface on its lower face and remnants of several scars on its upper face where several flakes had previously been split off. a process that continued until the splinter ran out or the end of the log was reached.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 119 was retained for analysis. However. Totara is a very free-splitting wood and it should normally be possible to split it into blanks of the correct size with little need for such a rough reduction process as indicated by these wood splinters. These are mostly about 1 mm thick and have one side with several shallowangle adze scars and the other with a single scar or merely a single split surface where the adze had cleaved a piece rather than cut it. one after another. . the 28 pieces of digging and horticultural implements. The second and commonest type of wood chip resulted from rapid reduction of a wood surface. Third. The adze was then driven under the newly broken end to lever off another strip. transport. those smashed off at both ends. rapid reduction of surfaces by levering off large chunks. These wood chips were clearly produced by driving an adze into an exposed end grain and levering up a strip of wood until it broke across the grain. those smashed off at one end and the other thinning out to a point or edge where the grain ran out. defence and the working of other materials. vigorous horticultural activity and a strong emphasis on fern root as a food source. These are large splinters and strips of wood with one or both ends broken off across the grain. but the sample returned to the laboratory is not considered to be representative. and shallow-angle adzing to dress surfaces to a smooth finish. The necessity of preserving a watertight hull in one piece meant that wood had to be levered and smashed out rather than wedged and split off. In this case the adze was being used as a cross between a cutting tool.

The Maori Canoe. art and play are relatively well represented. Volume I: The Voyage of . W. The Art of Captain Cook’s Voyages. this wooden artefact collection might be seen as typical of a late period... ornamentation. Volume I: The Voyage of the Endeavour 1768–1772. The overall picture is of a lightly defended horticultural. Wellington: Government Printer. these artefacts show that many of the items found were actually made on the site. R.. nineteen weaving and rope-working implements and the two net gauges. Dominion Museum Bulletin No. there are six ornamental hair combs. fishing and fowling lake village occupied by a community practising a wide variety of economic. traders and early settlers to the study of combs in an archaeological context? Unpublished MA research essay. Wood from Kohika: a study of timber exploitation and woodworking technology. One of the canoe fragments is made from kauri and could imply that the site was part of a network of waterborne communications wider than the local area.W. The abundance of such artefacts is expected in a swamp site located within a network of rivers.. The fibre-working tools include two reels for fine thread. Unpublished MA research essay. 5:47–50. The palisade posts and coils of lashing vine that were used to bind them certainly reflect defence.. W. Forest Lore of the Maori. University of Auckland. Bird snaring on the Wanganui River. Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute. On the geographic and economic botany of the North Island of New Zealand. University of Auckland. Together with the wood chips and wedges. Colenso. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. as reflected in exotic materials. deeds and sayings of the ancient Maori. seven spinning tops and part of a flute. 1974. E. E. Colenso. The Maori. What value and use are the records of explorers. The people participated in exchange networks. I. Best. Apart from the elaborately carved house parts discussed later. and we may note the contemporary existence of many fortified sites in the hills around the swamp. 1978. Best. religion. There is a notable absence of some of the wooden weapons of Classic Maori culture. and B. 1962. Such artefacts imply the presence of people who practised the more sophisticated Maori arts. 1977. Wellington: Government Printer. Gardner. J. 1868. Downes. 1891.C. V.. J. Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute. One of the great benefits of wetland archaeology is that items of status. but clearly before European arrival.9. Dominion Museum Bulletin No. Best. Fisher.. The only possible ones are the six javelins or darts.. social and cultural activities and with some time for leisure. In short. Maori Agriculture. The heru or Maori comb. Best.F. The nineteen paddles. E. Joppien. six canoe parts. three or four bailers and thirteen possible canoe seats and fittings reflect the importance of transport technology.14.120 Kohika one chisel handle and one socket for a composite hafted chisel. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. missionaries. Vestiges: Reminiscences: Memorabilia of works. 1925. but these may have been toys. 1984. Smith. industrial. 1976. 1924. Wellington: Government Printer Boileau. 1:233–83. 1985. References Beaglehole. Journal of the Polynesian Society.. Vol. One must also bear in mind the evidence for contact further along the coast.. E.. T. Dominion Museum Bulletin No. Wellington: The Polynesian Society. 24:445–67. J.7. streams and lakes where canoes would have been the primary means of transport. 1928. The Journals of Captain James Cook. 37:1–30.

O. made on Captain Cook’s first voyage...). Volume II: The Voyage of the Resolution and the Adventure 1772–1775. 1895. 43:598–605. 1964. 1987. Auckland: Auckland University Press. Wilson (eds).G. Unpublished MA thesis. Ancient methods of bird snaring amongst the Maoris..E.G. The Cambridge University Collection of Maori artefacts.H. Woods used in the manufacture of Maori adze helves and composite helve sockets. In G. 4:132–52. de G. Moko. 1989. 73:305–48. F. Purdue. Wellington: New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No. Painted Histories. Skilled handwork of the Maori: being the Oldman Collection of Maori artefacts illustrated and described. University of Waikato.T. A preliminary study of wood types used in pre-European Maori wooden artefacts.. 1946.17.. T. Wellington: The Polynesian Society Memoir No. J. 4:170–84. 1976. Kauri Point Swamp: the ethnographic interpretation of a prehistoric site. Saying so doesn’t make it so. University of Auckland. Longworth and K. In D. . Shawcross.T. Shawcross. 2002.. Robley. Reminiscences of Maori life fifty years ago. R. Unpublished MA thesis. Journal of the Polynesian Society. W. 1993. Matthews. F. C. 1970. 1989. Papakura: Southern Reprints.T. Wallace. Journal of the Polynesian Society. H. I. R. Maori tattooing.W. Ranapiri. An archaeological assemblage of Maori combs. Wallace.14.The wooden artefacts from Kohika 121 the Endeavour 1768–1771.. 1985. Wallace.. Oldman. Problems in Economic and Social Archaeology.. 1982.W. Shawcross. The Archaeology of the Waitakere Ranges.. R.H. London: Duckworth.201–20. F.W. Neich. Sutton (ed. or. Unpublished PhD thesis. What is a fern-root beater? the correlation of museum artefacts and ethnohistorical descriptions. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute.. Studies in the conservation of waterlogged wood in New Zealand. 1910. pp. Journal of the Polynesian Society. University of Otago. Sieveking. 73:382–98. Lawrence. R... R. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

The chapter briefly reviews the literature on traditional Maori buildings and describes the parts found at Kohika. The result is that the house tells us much about the details of construction of a superior house but not much about its dimensions. size and decoration. pole and thatch construction. which are interpreted in the context of archaeological and ethnographic information from elsewhere. Irwin and R. they were of a less formal. are described also.2 is the house that stood on the excavated Yellow House horizon. stood directly above this house on the White House horizon and probably reused some of the parts. There are general discussions of both the buildings and the carving styles. There are indications that yet a third building in Area D may have stood underneath both these two on the Bright Yellow level. In an earlier report Wallace and Irwin (1999) described a generic Kohika house but this chapter describes the individual buildings.T. A smaller house of the same construction. It had at least four carved poupou that were set in the ground. G. 122 .15–17. not illustrated here.J. The combined evidence gives us a view of an assemblage of houses and pataka of varied form. A number of carvings. but they did no formal excavation and found no floor plan. Area D also supplied timbers from a possible third house and pataka for which we have no floor plans. It stood close to the houses in Area D but the precise location is unknown because the supporting posts did not survive in situ. plus a carved human figure on a post (poutokomanawa) that supported the ridgepole (tahuhu). although these houses were substantial. In Area D.3 is a pataka that has been reconstructed from several distinctive components (including the ladder described in Chapter 6). However.1 is a reconstruction of the house in the HS Area. All of the carvings were the work of one artist. Wallace. with their floor plans revealed by postholes and post butts. the university team excavated a sequence of artificial floors and found two houses. Figure 7. The evidence consists of surviving timbers and excavated floor plans. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika R.7 Houses. and this chapter reconstructs the buildings that stood there. Neich Kohika pa adds to the knowledge of traditional Maori architecture. Figure 7. The remains of a pataka (raised storehouse) were found in the same area. a carved figure on a board (poutahuhu) that possibly faced into the interior of the house. mainly from buildings. The buildings The Whakatane and District Historical Society team collected many dressed timbers from a carved house. The details of the three excavated floors were shown in Figures 4. Figure 7. shown without its facing boards at the gables and wall ends (maihi and amo). Minor decorations and carvings were associated with this house.

00 m minimum 2. The exceptions have been isolated finds.8 m2 19.50 m (1. The body proportions of the human figures in the surviving parts of the poupou indicate that it had a wall height of 1.0–1.3 m2 10.1. but other dimensions could vary while wall height stayed the same.85 m 2. except for the carved house in Figure 7. the ones most comparable with Kohika being two swamp sites at Lake Mangakaware near Te .1 Estimated dimensions of excavated houses and pataka Building Yellow House White House Bright Yellow House Pataka Area D Width 5. such as the spectacular carvings found near Waitara in Taranaki (Duff 1961).1 A reconstruction of the carved house from the Historical Society (HS) Area The estimated dimensions of the buildings are shown in Table 7.00 m 1.35 m 3.1 m2 A brief review of Maori architecture Archaeology rarely discovers the actual remains of above-ground buildings.30 m 2. Systematic excavations of wet sites have been few. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 123 Figure 7.5 x width) 3.60 m Length 7.40 m 4. The dimensions of the White and Yellow houses were based on floor plans and of the Bright Yellow House and pataka on the size of surviving timbers.2 m.65 m 3.Houses.7 m2 13. we would not expect the carved house to have been smaller than the houses in Area D.5 x width) Height at ridgepole 2. However.1.90 m (1.24 m 5. Table 7.80 m Floor area 38.

Underground evidence of the floor plans of buildings survives in dry sites as features such as patterns of postholes. when Maori architecture was progressively adopting European construction techniques and materials. Many historic and ethnographic descriptions of traditional Maori buildings are available but. The last descriptions of houses built by traditional methods were made in the 1920s (Firth 1926). a form that has continued to evolve and develop up to the present day (Neich 1993:89–121). Most accounts date to the 19th century. Whare Prickett (1982:111–12) has shown that the Maori house (whare) was a conservative cultural form that persisted through much of New Zealand prehistory and well into the European era.124 Kohika Figure 7.’ (Buck 1949:117). unfortunately. hearths and scatters of artefacts and other debris (Davidson 1984:151–63).2 A reconstruction of the pole and thatch house from the Yellow House floor. Modern Maori architecture is focused on the whare whakairo or communal meeting house. All of these sources of information provide a context for the review of the Kohika houses and pataka. An explanation for this is provided in this chapter. construction details are usually quite superficially treated. Knowledge of construction methods was lost and by 1949 Sir Peter Buck (Te Rangi Hiroa) wrote: ‘No detailed description of the framework of the common Maori house is available to me and my memory cannot supply details which were never noted despite frequent contact with them. Area D Awamutu (Bellwood 1978). As a consequence. in some aspects. none written by someone who had actually built one. Traditional Maori houses were constructed using a system fundamentally different from modern building methods and. to ones described as traditional .

3 A reconstruction of the pataka from Area D in parts of tropical Polynesia.1 can be taken as a model of a house constructed from dressed timbers. In the following account the main sources used are Prickett (1974. painted and woven decoration. Phillips (1952). and smaller. 1982) for traditional houses. the house can be seen as being built from the top down. Best (1924). Additional information is from Bellwood (1978). privately occupied sleeping houses. the most basic distinction. As this formed the primary structural support. The Kohika house illustrated in Figure 7. 1979. Construction began by setting up a line of centre posts spanned by a ridgepole (tahuhu) that projected at the front. with or without embellishment’ and those made from pole and thatch. Scholars have classified Maori houses in various ways. Each poupou had a slot in the top to take the tongue (teremu) of a rafter (heke) forming a mortise and tenon joint. being between what Best (1924:559) called ‘carefully fitted houses constructed of wrought timbers. and Anon. poupou at the sides and epa at the ends.Houses. Buck (1949) and Prickett (1982). or large communally owned structures often embellished with carved. The walls were then formed by setting vertical boards in the ground. How rafters joined at the ridgepole . Williams (1896) for contact-period houses. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 125 Figure 7. according to Prickett (1982:116). The former can be divided into meeting houses. Makereti (1986) and Firth (1926) for 19th-century and early 20th-century houses. (1988) for the modern carved house.

on the outside near their tops. Firth 1926) are either vague or relate to large late 19th-century houses (Makereti 1986:307–8). 7. as in the case of modern meeting houses. it is clear their function was to support the thatching so it projected well clear of the walls of the house. 101. Makereki 1986:299). Inside superior houses. as in the Kohika house shown in Figure 7. A cable (tauwhenua) ran up each poupou. Such accounts are sketchy and not entirely logical. mataaho or matapihi) in the front wall. Lashed to this element were vertical battens (tumatahuki) placed between poupou. 106 and 131). This held the joints of the structure together under compression (Best 1924:565. would have been constructed of a framework of undressed poles with all joints lashed together where elements crossed.1. This cable is said to have attached to a buttress (pou matua) set up outside each poupou. Houses could be finished off with facing boards placed above the door (pare). Such houses were not necessarily smaller than ones made from dressed timber and the difference would have been visible mainly from the inside. These elements were made from thin sticks or even the cane-like supplejack (Rhipogonum scandens). The latter appears to have been normal during prehistory. window (korupe).2. 11. Figs 69. Purlins or stringers (kaho) ran across the rafters. poupou would occur in matched pairs on either side of the house. along the top of the rafters and down to the opposite poupou. Makereti 1986:299). Most whare. Figs 97. however. If they met end on. as the pollen record demonstrates an abundance of the species around the site. The above account relates to superior houses made from dressed timbers. 102 and 103).1). A plank set on edge (paepae) could be placed along the front of the porch (Fig. This primary structure was then reinforced by lighter vertical and horizontal elements. . There was a single door (tatau. wall insulation between poupou was covered by an ornamental latticework (tukutuku panels) supported by the tumatahuki. Raupo was set vertically on the walls and the roof and lashed in place to light horizontal elements (Neich 2001.2. a necessity in such large houses in the absence of projecting rafters. This form has been used in Figure 7. often closed by solid slabs of wood that sat in grooves in sills and lintels and slid sideways into cavities in the wall insulation.1 and 7. The primary load-bearing structure of the house was thus a ridgepole spanning two or more posts supporting a series of arches whose joints were held together under compression by a cable.1.126 Kohika is not clearly described. because the load-bearing structure formed the internal surface and the insulation was placed against the outside. While photos of 19th-century houses sometimes show a line of light posts outside the walls (Neich 1993. If rafters crossed at the ridgeline and were lashed together. These disappeared as soon as corrugatediron roofing and steel gutters were adopted. leaving unclear the question of how the ends of the tauwhenua were anchored. One of the best insulation materials was the bulrush raupo (Typha augustifolia).5). The tops of the end wall posts were connected to a pair of special rafters (heke ripi). the gables (maihi) and ends of the side walls (amo). Accounts of how lintel and sill plates were fitted (Williams 1896. Figs 7. 1984. as can be seen by posthole patterns excavated by archaeologists (Davidson. each poupou would be systematically offset from its matching one on the opposite side of the house. kuaha or whatitoka) and window (pihunga. It was used in the house reconstructions in Figures 7. The roof insulation was usually further topped off by a more durable thatch such as toitoi leaves (Cordateria conspicusa) held in place by poles or cables. A horizontal batten (kaho-paetara) ran the length of the side walls. Lines of postholes outside and parallel to house walls were not found at Kohika and are rare in other sites. either lashed to the rafters or held in place by having the tauwhenua looped around them (Best 1924:565.

This view is supported by a recent study of the numerous carvings recovered from swamps in north Taranaki (Day 2001). Waterlogged deposits containing parts of the superstructure of storehouses from chronologically secure contexts offer the best hope of demonstrating the antiquity of pataka. the above records all lack good chronological provenance. In New Zealand. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 127 Pataka There is a well-attested concept of raised platforms in Polynesia. paint and feathers. During the century. The evidence consists of structural . There are the well-known Te Kaha pataka carvings in Auckland Museum whose history is reported to date from as early as 1780 (Geelen 1974:32). sometimes including human remains. Earle 1966). open storage platforms called whata and enclosed storehouses built on raised platforms supported by posts. This includes part of a doorway recovered during excavations at Oruarangi. either open or enclosed. Best 1974. Most New Zealand and many international museums have examples of elaborately carved and ornamented pataka in their collections. is rumoured to have been buried in pre-European times (Lysnar 1915:57). A pataka paepae recovered from waterlogged soils at Chartwell in Hamilton (Edson. assembled from sections of old canoes (Best 1974. and the larger and more elaborate ones were similar in appearance to small houses.Houses. communal meeting houses grew in size and elaboration and assumed their current role as the main vehicle of group prestige (Neich 1993) and. Phillips 1952). Teviotdale and Skinner 1947:343). The set of pataka carvings recovered at Miranda in the late 19th century. other belongings or even corpses (Geelen 1974). were notable features of 19th-century Maori culture. Unfortunately. Geelen (1974:32–3) lists further potential examples of contact-period or older pataka. a site not inhabited after the 1820s (Green and Green 1963:33. At Kohika we have found evidence for probable pataka in three of the excavated areas and can date these to the late 17th century. Such influences may have included steel carving tools and the need to relocate property (other than root crops requiring the controlled temperatures of underground storage) out of reach of newly introduced rats and pigs. This led Groube (1965:56) to suggest that highly carved pataka. and leave unclear the extent to which raised storehouses were features of pre-European Maori culture. arose as a result of European influences. clothing or tapu items. The author concludes: ‘Probably one of the most obvious facts is that the prestigious architectural structures in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries for the northern part of Te Tai Hauauru ki Taranaki were pataka. Different types were built to store food. which are loosely dated to the late 18th and early 19th centuries. along with much else in 19th-century Maori culture.) may also be early. as it may consist of little more than a few postholes. in the case of smaller ones. evidence of raised storage platforms and storehouses is usually ephemeral in the prehistoric Maori archaeological record. Unfortunately. pers. These are generally referred to as fata or pafata from the Proto-Polynesian *fata (Walsh and Biggs 1966). They varied greatly in size and construction. with some being of dressed timbers. conversely. comm.g. others of pole and thatch or even. usually called pataka.’ (Day 2001:117) Evidence exists of other pataka from potentially pre-European and certainly early contact-period contexts. gifts. pataka were described as the most notable buildings in early 19th-century villages (Cruise 1974). pataka declined in importance. However. Pataka are shown in many depictions of 19th-century Maori settlements (e. for the storage or display of food. Earle 1966. They and the early European eye-witness accounts relate mainly to the 19th century. Pataka were frequently ornamented with carvings. Geelen 1974.

Finally. and can be distinguished from those of houses by details of form and by smaller dimensions. as illustrated in Figure 7. This had removed only the upper parts of timbers that had originally been set upright in the ground. D and the HS Area could as easily have been kept in storehouses as in houses.128 Kohika timbers that match those of ethnographically recorded storehouses.3 does the same for a plank-built pataka. with valuable artefacts present but no house in the immediate vicinity. but integrated households. their lower parts having been protected from fire damage by moisture from the saturated ground. Many items found in the peat of Areas B.1 illustrates the essential features of a dressed-timber whare while Figure 7. A feature found only in this area was that some had been partly consumed by fire. There are significant differences between pataka and whare made from carefully dressed timbers. The absence of charring on other timbers strongly implies that the buildings had been abandoned for a period prior to the fires. a standardised nomenclature has been adopted for the way boards were cut from tree trunks and the types of lashing holes cut into them. Description of the parts of buildings at Kohika In order to facilitate description of the timbers recovered. In this Figure 7. which also included storehouses and other less formal structures such as cooking shelters for which there are both floor plans and suitable timbers. The last point is relevant as we have good data on whare dimensions at Kohika. Timbers from the Historical Society Area The society team recovered a large number of dressed timbers from their Squares 1 and 2. Also. Figure 7. pataka dimensions overlap with those of whare only at the upper end of their range. Unlike whare.4 Types of lashing holes on house planks . Pataka walls were formed from planks lashed to a raised platform whereas whare planks or posts were set in the earth. Pataka walls had a single thickness of planks sewn edge to edge with a batten covering the joint while whare walls were formed by a line of well-separated posts with insulation attached to the outside. in Square B1 there were standing posts consistent with a raised pataka.4. The structural timbers from Kohika strongly support the presence of pataka. The argument will be developed that at Kohika there were not just houses. pataka often had side walls of horizontal planks and never had windows.

leaving only the tops of standing posts dry enough to burn. All had their tops burnt off and were damaged by decay at ground level. KOH17 and KOH18. or flashing over a door. all timbers had one side more weathered than the other. the structure would have disintegrated and its timbers lain in contact with the saturated ground prior to the fires. Historical Society Area. Such posts often had the same type of carving as poupou. Part of the base of KOH16 was still partially intact and shows they had chisel ends that allowed them to be driven into the ground. KOH44 (Plate 7.1 KOH14. .Houses. scenario. Stylistic analysis is provided below. Historical Society Area. Afterwards. Poupou base. KOH16. All of these items were made from totara and. KOH53 (Plate 7.1– 4). The poupou. Poupou base. They had clearly been parts of a whare whakairo or carved house.6) is the corner broken from a very elaborately carved pare.2 KOH16. Plate 7.5) is notably thicker at 85 mm than the others and is interpreted as a poutahuhu. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 129 Plate 7. When recovered. the surviving bottom halves remained standing until they rotted off at ground level. Four poupou with carved ornamentation on one surface were recovered (Plates 7. were a matched set. indicating that they had lain exposed for an extended period before being incorporated into waterlogged deposits. on the basis of the carving style (see below).1). are very similar in size. Analysis of the carving style is given later in this chapter. a post set in the centre of the front wall of the house supporting the ridgepole and with its carving facing into the interior (Figure 7. Extrapolation from the proportions of the carved human figures indicates that the poupou were once approximately a metre tall. KOH14. 205–280 mm wide and 30–40 mm thick.

KOH3 and KOH345 (Plates 7. necessarily. This could have been either a poupou or an epa.7–9) are fragments broken off elaborately carved slabs.10). Kohika KOH1.5). Poupou base. It is likely that KOH1 and KOH3 are from the whare whakairo. The base is flat and it sat on the ground rather than being set into it. Paki Harrison.3 KOH17. The surface ornamentation is. It has two . Historical Society Area. Poupou base. 7. Dante Bonica and Wiremu Puke carved a figure as close to the original as they could achieve (Plate 7. Using only stone tools. Some had also been partly burnt but most had remained untouched. KOH12 is a 155 mm-wide wall slab (Fig. KOH7 (Plate 7. KOH9 is a nearly complete 765 mm-long poupou (Fig.130 Plate 7. It is interpreted as a poutokomanawa or central house post supporting the ridgepole. An attempt was made to reconstruct it. probably for holding the tauwhenua cable in place. All other house timbers found in this area were without carved ornamentation. 7. but it is not burnt. burnt off square at the top and rotted off at ground level. The base has rotted off at ground level. but it is quite possible that KOH345 is from a carving on a canoe. These items are too small to allow discussion of the function of the timbers they came from.4 KOH18.10) is a large (1030 mm tall) stylised human figure executed in the round. Historical Society Area. Plate 7. KOH345 is a small (35 mm) fragment of spiral fretwork. It is in a very weathered state but the top is broken in a way that shows it once had a post extending upwards from it.5). conjectural. The intact top has a square notch cut to take the tongue on the lower end of a rafter. It has a face-type eyelet just below this notch.

Houses.1.6 KOH53. edge eyelets opposite each other that would have allowed a horizontal structural element to have been attached without the lashings being visible from inside the house. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 131 Plate 7. it could have been an amo (Fig. Historical Society Area. Historical Society Area. 7. . Poutahuhu base. Pare fragment. Plate 7. As such.1) cut to match the inward slope of the side walls. 7. The two lashing holes at the base could have been used to connect it to the wall behind or to a paepae.5 KOH44.5) is another slab burnt and rotted off in a similar way to KOH12 that has just one edge eyelet. which implies that it was leaning 10 degrees to one side when part of a structure. KOH13 (Figure 7.5) whose base and burnt-off top form an angle of 80 degrees to its edge. KOH15 is a plank (Fig. Such horizontal elements can be located on Figure 7.

. Fragment of carving. Historical Society Area.7 KOH1. Historical Society Area.9 KOH345.8 KOH3. Fragment of spiral from carving. Historical Society Area. Part of carving. Plate 7.132 Plate 7. Kohika Plate 7.

pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 133 Plate 7. Poutokomanawa figure. and modern replica carved by Paki Harrison. .Houses. Historical Society Area. Dante Bonica and Wiremu Puke.10 KOH7.

5) is a rather roughly made poupou that could have come from a more casually constructed building. It is a slab of totara 575 mm by 135 mm with a zigzag outline on its upper margin. 7. KOH57 (Fig. It is similar to a pare from a Maori house at Waipa (Angas 1979:36) and to a smaller item (KOH54. most probably the whare whakairo. They are vertical elements from a very carefully made house.5 Poupou and other vertical house elements from the HS Area Kohika The timbers described above have been adze-dressed on all four faces and have neatly made lashing holes chiselled through them. In contrast. It has been split from the outer surface of a pukatea (Laurelia novae-zelandiae) trunk with only the split surfaces dressed.6) is identified here as a nearly finished pare (flashing board over a door) or korupe (over a window). 7.6) is a slab of totara 488 mm long by 108 mm with a deep Ushaped hollow down its length. The wood has been adzed relatively smooth but no lashing holes had yet been cut. One end has a deep square notch and the other the remains of a square tongue. The three lashing holes down the length of the board are casually chiselled and unevenly placed. KOH10 (Fig.134 Figure 7. This artefact fits the description of a door sill (Williams . 7. KOH55 (Fig. described below) found in Area D.

but there is a matched door sill and lintel in Auckland Museum collected from Oruarangi that would fit into a jamb of this form. They range from 1135 mm to 1005 mm long.The square notch would have fitted around a solid jamb or epa at one side. The tongue at the other end would have been inserted between a two-piece jamb that allowed the door slab to slide into the wall cavity. The way it could have operated in a house is illustrated in Figure 7. 7. The larger six (KOH42–48) are clearly from the same house.7). 7. a variation to be expected as house walls often rose in height from back to front (Firth 1926). It is nearly identical to a door jamb described by Bellwood (1978. Three smaller battens (KOH49–51) were also recovered from Squares 1 and 2. Unlike . the lashings rotted and the battens fell onto the wet ground and escaped fire. when the house was abandoned. and a simple hole chiselled near the very top. A further batten (KOH52) of a different type was found in the same area.Houses. Tumatahuki typically support tukutuku panels with their tops lashed to the kaho-paetara. It is a board 1230 mm by 535 mm with two large square holes cut through it and the remains of three edge eyelet-type lashing holes along one edge (Fig. the top half adzedressed.6 Door or window parts from the HS Area 1896:148).6). Nine artefacts from Squares 1 and 2 meet the definition of tumatahuki or vertical house wall battens (Fig. They were split from heart totara. Although identical in form to those described above. 11). pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 135 Figure 7. KOH58 is identified as a door jamb.1. These battens are all in an excellent state of preservation and have no evidence of rot at their bases. We could not find a source for Bellwood’s ascription. Clearly. Fig. they are only 705 mm to 560 mm long.

7. trimming around doors and windows. KOH22 (Fig.7. it has a hole in both ends and may have had a different function. and holding insulation onto the front wall. These have lashing holes enabling them to have been sewn edge to edge. KOH71–74 and KOH40 are board fragments with lashing holes that imply they may have been from sewn plank structures.7 Tumatahuki battens from the HS Area the others.3). Several timber planks that were probably parts of pataka were found in the Society area.136 Kohika Figure 7. There are many possible functions for such an item in the house construction. It is slightly tapered and snapped off at one end. Whatever structures they were from must have been relatively low in status but high enough to have allowed people to stand up. KOH11 and KOH21 (Fig. . They could have been walls of cooking shelters.7). 7. 7. and KOH29 (not illustrated). They are rather casually made and dressed on the split face. such as to hold the front wall insulation in place (Fig.9). KOH11 has three simple lashing holes along one edge and two on the other. The only intact one is 1827 mm tall and has a base bevelled to allow it to be driven into the ground. are slabs split from the surface of pukatea trunks with simple lashing holes at their tops.8) are probably from pataka epa on the front wall (see Fig. KOH23–25 (Fig. including covering the junction between two planks. KOH21 is a burnt-off fragment with two simple lashing points along its remaining intact edge. KOH59 is a slat 1545 mm long and 40 mm wide (not illustrated). as their tops are cut at 45–55 degrees from the vertical. 7. It is the only burnt fragment in the collection that was not the base of a post set in the ground.8) is a plank originally 720 mm by 155 mm with simple lashing holes at each corner. Four items.

KOH5 is a small slab of wood with an incised line drawing on one side that could have been either a doodle or a preparatory sketch for a carving (Fig.Houses. 7. The postholes and intact butts of these houses demonstrate that they were constructed of pole and thatch and used the palisade as their back wall. a probable pataka and some other informal structures. The dressed timbers recovered from this area appear to have come from a number of structures that stood in the immediate area.13). HS Area and Area B . 7. It could have been a korupe (window facing board) or a pare of a house or pataka. 7.9 Dressed slabs split from pukatea tree trunks. the evidence from Area D allows the clear possibility that they were attached to pole and thatch houses and that there was. perhaps including cooking shelters.8 Possible fragments of pataka from the HS Area Figure 7. more diversity in house status and decoration than has been envisaged. therefore.15–17). KOH54 is a complete artefact recovered from the Yellow House level (Fig. and with deep U-shaped recesses cut in each end (Fig. KOH6 (Plate 7. Timbers from Area D Excavation of this area found a sequence of house floors with an adjacent cooking area set against a palisade (Figs 4. KOH4 is a long (459 mm). U-shaped in cross-section. timbers were found that demonstrate the presence in this area of plank-built buildings including a definite whare whakairo.12) is a weathered knotty fragment recovered from the White House level that has incised carving on its surface.10). Undressed poles are difficult to attribute to specific buildings when found as scattered pieces. KOH2 is a fragment of a board (Plate 7. It could have been a lintel plate for Figure 7. KOH56 is a carefully made item 398 mm long. Six items have incised or relief ornamentation. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 137 In summary. It is 350 mm by 95 mm with a zigzag upper margin and four lashing holes. While such items could relate to structures of status marked out as different from domestic ones by ornamentation. narrow (32 mm) fragment detached from a plank with an incised pattern on one face (Plate 7.11) from the Yellow House level that is elaborately carved on both sides.10).10).

as illustrated in Figure 7. suggesting it was a normal rafter. A roof pitch of 110 degrees and walls sloping outward by five degrees give a building approximately 2.3. In this case the door would be only 325 mm wide. Fragment of elaborate carving. as illustrated in Figures 7.12).11) appear to be a matched set of heke ripi rafters that abutted the end wall. Plate 7. the small door of a pataka. KOH36 has only three face eyelets.50 m wide at the .13 KOH4. Three rafters from a small plank-built house or pataka were recovered in Square D2 just outside the palisade line. Area D. Kohika Plate 7. KOH34 and KOH35 (Fig. Fragment of elaborate carving. These rafters were carefully made and provide intricate details of their construction and the design of their joints (Fig. 7. or tensioning cable. 7.138 Plate 7.12 KOH6. In contrast. From their lengths we can estimate the width of the building from which they came. The purpose of the face eyelets seems to have been to hold a tauwhenua. five cut from the upper and lower surfaces respectively. Area D. where it is shown trimming the epa over the door opening and with the recesses at its ends fitting around the epa at each side.11 KOH2. KOH35 has ten edge eyelets.3. Fragment of elaborate carving. Area D. KOH34 has five plain lashing holes cut through one edge and three face eyelets on the upper surface.1 and 7. Each has holes along only one side so it could be lashed to the tops of epa. in place along the length of the rafter. not attached to an end wall.

11 (top right) The three rafters from Area D Figure 7.10 (top left) Timbers recovered from Area D Figure 7. based on rafter dimensions . pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 139 Figure 7.13 Parameters used to estimate the width of a building in Area D.12 Detail of rafter tenon joints Figure 7.Houses.

matai.14). 7. All were either natural stems or had been split from small to medium-sized trees. too. Therefore. plus two indeterminate items (KOH30 and 31) base (Fig. Only three further plank fragments were found in this area. 7. in general. it could well be that these rafters are from that structure too.14). They were so numerous and of such a variety of wood species (kauri. KOH32 is a board. rimu. KOH30 is a thick slab 700 mm by 200 mm with a triangular cross-section (Fig. The function of this item is uncertain. It could be the end epa of a small pataka cut to accommodate the inward slope of the side wall. rimu. In addition. Furthermore. semi-circular in cross-section. 7. pukatea and totara. KOH60 is a slat bevelled at each end. 23 other fragments of dressed plank recovered in Area D were. KOH39 is a short batten with one end bevelled. triangular in outline.9) is a possible poupou. The species include manuka. KOH37 and KOH38 (not illustrated) are pieces of one plank well over 2 metres long with an L-shaped cross-section. 1480 mm long. The thinner edge is mostly broken away. . kahikatea and pukatea) that we could suggest that other buildings made from dressed planks existed in this area of the site. that was recovered still attached to KOH19. which ranged from three to five metres wide. A large number of comparable items were not analysed. an adzed totara slab 450 mm long with its ends bevelled on alternate sides (Fig. too small to associate with particular structures. posts or palisades.13).14). 7. 7. These items are clearly from the wall of a very carefully finished pataka made from dressed planks set edge to edge. leaving two of the original five or six smaller holes intact. It has three large simple lashing holes along its thick edge. tawa. Posts and palisade timbers Sixteen items were identified as fragments of stakes. Also of uncertain purpose is KOH31. matai. Timbers from Area B Area B lay near the eastern palisade and very few dressed wooden timbers were recovered here. totara. the side wall posts of the latter were narrower than the rafters and could not have formed joints with them. As the two items described next are clearly from a pataka. with seven holes piercing it (Fig. Its function. we are dealing with parts of another building altogether. This is narrower than the pole and thatch house floors in Area D. 7. kanuka. KOH26 (Fig.140 Kohika Figure 7.14 Two parts of pataka from Area D. KOH19 is a pataka epa fragment with five neatly chiselled holes along its edge.14). KOH20 is a flashing strip. is not clear. the remains of lashings being still present (Fig. of dressed pukatea with a chisel end.

but at Kohika parts of the superstructures of Maori houses were recovered. In contrast. The question arises why the New Zealand Maori developed this approach. This deliberate masking of construction details goes some way to explaining gaps in the ethnographic literature on house construction. the dressed planks recovered yielded considerable information concerning houses and other structures. the internal timber surfaces of the houses remained unimpeded and ‘clean’. one difference is that. A notable feature of the analysis of the houses is the way in which the assemblage of timber relates to the floor plans. for instance. visible or accessible only during house construction or repair. it is established that houses and pataka occurred in households on low-lying ground close to the lakeshore. In contrast. This was achieved by mortise and tenon joints and the extensive use of face and edge eyelets in preference to simple holes that passed directly through the planks. even when their floor plans were not found. Peter Buck may have had no memory of the details simply because they were constructed so as to be almost completely hidden from sight. this seems quite possible. Houses and other domestic structures constructed from pole and thatch are visible archaeologically only by their floor plans and a relatively small number of distinctive timber elements and minor decorations. However. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 141 Discussion of the buildings It is clear that one whare whakairo and possibly other dressed-plank houses stood at Kohika pa as well as numerous sleeping houses more simply constructed from pole and thatch. lashings. by a simple carving over the door. in parts. The use of facing boards on the front elevation of the house seems to continue this principle. Assembling such timbers into structures requires different techniques from those employed in tropical Polynesia on houses constructed of poles. Therefore it is unlikely that any of the waterlogged timbers from Kohika belonged to roofed storage pits. well-insulated walls in the superior Maori house types was met by using squared timbers and planks obtained from available large-diameter trees. in particular how dressed timbers were joined together. There were also less formal structures – probably cooking shelters. This aspect is illustrated in Figure 7. An exception is the tukutuku panelling. and often ornamental. given that houses of pole and thatch construction did have modest decorations. whose exposed lashings were artistic patterns. even if they constituted a majority of the buildings. while canoes . These provide details of construction not otherwise available to us. However. Maori practice was to avoid this. On the basis of current evidence. The result may have been a transfer of technology from canoe to house construction in the context of the very different environment in New Zealand. Indeed. and we are unable to tell whether any were decorated.15. the systems described by Buck (1938:277) from tropical Polynesia have open scaffolding-like frames secured by visible. Also present were plank-built pataka. pits would have been restricted to high areas of the site to keep their floors above the water table. ecological and technological. However. Maori adopted techniques for connecting planks that resemble those used in canoe building. A striking feature is how much trouble was taken to ensure the lashings were not visible. Despite having had repeated contact with such houses. environmental.Houses. Early Maori already had such techniques in their voyaging repertoire. storage pits were found only on top of the mound in Area A. The answer may be. The need to adapt to a colder climate by constructing thick. Most of their remains could not be recognised. Archaeological sites normally supply only floor plans. With lashings exposed mainly on the outside of the frame. Canoes were made from planks fitted together with watertight joints to form hull surfaces that had no lashings exposed to abrasion when landing.

the persistence of the meeting house into modern times. The adoption of European building methods inevitably radically altered its appearance. . Thus the cultural continuity of buildings of central importance to the community was assured.15 Detail of the internal and external framing of a superior house Kohika had their lashings recessed from outside. The Maori house conceals its construction methods so that the inward and outward appearance of the meeting house was retained in a highly recognisable way despite the adoption of European materials and construction methods. In tropical Polynesia.142 Figure 7. superior houses had theirs concealed from inside. the form of a building is influenced by the visible techniques of construction. The deliberate masking of construction methods may have contributed to another feature of Maori architecture.

The surviving carving depicts the lower portion of a figure. KOH44: poutahuhu base with burnt-off top.1). General comments on the poupou and poutahuhu Some general compositional features can be discerned from the carving that survives on these fragments. with a shallow sulcus separating the stomach from the hip. the length (or rather the height) of each poupou is arbitrary. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 143 Woodcarvings from Kohika Items from Kohika bearing carved embellishments include architectural components of houses: namely poupou. Between its legs was a small supplementary figure.2). 345 long by 205 wide by 30 mm thick (Plate 7. open mouth with straight tongue. outlined in carving that pierces the poupou plank and displays some shaping even on the rear of the poupou. a paddle and a canoe bailer. A large plain spiral covers the hip and there may have been a supplementary figure overlying the body. However. which has a plain surface. All of these were made of totara. perhaps with a lower arm ending in a hand on the body. In the curve between the body and the hip there is a supplementary male figure with its feet on the hip.3). The surviving carving depicts a portion of a torso with a large plain spiral on the shoulder and a shallow sulcus separating the body from the upper leg. In the space beside the body and standing on the curve of the hip is a small supplementary figure with a round elongated face. almost certainly the work of one individual carver. There is no surface decoration. Within the outline of the main . There is no surface decoration. His work is characterised by the deployment of large plain spirals on shoulders and hips of the main poupou figure. Carved parts of house: poupou Because the tops were burnt off. KOH14: poupou base with burnt-off top. The surviving carving seems to depict a lower portion of a figure with its hip curving out at a marked angle from the body.5). All of the carving has been executed in the same style.Houses. poutahuhu. hands to hips. possibly without an obvious head. with the remains of a small supplementary figure between its legs. 290 by 175 by 85 mm (Plate 7. which is the only surface decoration pattern used. KOH17: poupou base with burnt-off top. The surviving carving possibly depicts a wide leg and foot of the main figure. there is no surface decoration. his large plain spirals and supplementary figures overlying the main figure show that he had good control of his two layers of relief. He placed small supplementary figures on the body of the main figure. Apart from the shoulder spiral. standing on the hip in the curve of the main figure outline and between its legs. He marked the outlines of his main poupou figures with a deep smooth curving cut and left the body of the main figure in fairly flat low relief. KOH16: poupou base with burnt-off top and chisel-ended base. no surface decoration is present. There is also a small supplementary figure standing on the curve of the hip. which was tawa. The surviving carving consists of a lower leg and foot with projecting toes of the main figure on the poupou. 460 by 240 by 40 mm (Plate 7. pare and poutokomanawa. A deep curving cut outlines the edge of the figure.4). 365 by 220 by 37 mm (Plate 7. This panel is notable for the depth of the timber and the consequent deep cut outlining the leg. Overlying the body is a small contorted supplementary figure with a hand to its mouth. apart from the paddle. KOH18: poupou base with burnt-off top. Apart from the spiral on the hip. making it more likely to have been a poutahuhu rather than a poupou. 425 by 280 by 35 mm (Plate 7.

Its left hand reaches up the lower jaw while the right is placed on the middle of the chest. In the wider field. most notably the Patetonga pare in Auckland Museum. The mouth is wide open with four teeth indicated and the lips are carved as two parallel raumoa ridges crossed at intervals by ritorito ridges. Carved parts of house: pare KOH53: pare fragment very elaborately carved. This Waioeka poupou indicates a side wall height of about 80 cm. This surface patterning forms a double spiral with pointed ends.144 Kohika figure. intended to stand as part of a central post supporting the ridgepole. now in Auckland Museum. The legs are wide apart. A wheku-type face projects at an oblique angle from the upper edge of the pare.6). Many small houses had only one poutokomanawa. usually in the interior. later 19th-century houses often have two or even more interior poutokomanawa and some elaborate houses also have a comparable figure. much of the carving is pierced right through the panel. he separated its body from its legs with a wide shallow sulcus. Carved parts of house: poutokomanawa figure KOH7: human figure executed in the round. An instructive comparison can be made with the complete small early poupou found near Waioeka. Judging by the size and period of this Kohika house. Early contact-period accounts of houses indicate that the pare and the small interior poutokomanawa figure were symbolically the two most important carvings of the house. Some of the ridges have nicked notching along the apex. the brows are slightly curved and are the same width as the mouth. 265 by 65 by 25 mm (Plate 7. creating the motif known as puwerewere. now in the Museum of New Zealand. Surface decoration over the rest of the fragment consists of the same double raumoa ridges crossed by angular groups of three or four ritorito. Closely constricted within the original dimensions of the post.10). with a flat back. Although deeply eroded and therefore lacking any evidence of surface decoration. and the supplementary figure between the legs has its head carved in low relief on the lower torso of the main figure. but in size and constructional form. near Kohika. 11030 by 280 by 155 mm (Plate 7. with a supplementary figure between having its head carved in low relief on the lower torso of the main . the Newman pare in Whanganui Museum. this stocky. This form of figure between the legs is reminiscent of the figure on KOH16 and may also be compared with the figure between the legs of the pataka doorway figure from Thornton swamp. which are nearly all stone-tooled and date from pre-European times. This pierced openwork portion of a pare is carved on the front only. this figure is probably the only poutokomanawa from the house. presumably from the interior. these affinities would extend into the full range of the western and northern sinuous styles. Most of the stylistic affinities of this pare are to be found in stone-tooled carvings from the Hauraki area. not so much in carving style. a practice seen in other pre-European examples. which is different. It is very definitely a poutokomanawa figure. a wheku-type face with large open mouth and slightly protruding tongue. There are limited indications that he may have pierced his carving right through the poupou. central house post. Larger. A continuous double ridge runs down over the forehead to the nose and each nostril is well defined. at the exterior central front of the porch. tokoihi. This face has bulbous eyes not intended to take shell inserts. shortbodied figure has narrow sloping shoulders. most of the compositional features of this carving can still be determined. and the Miranda pataka doorway in the Museum of New Zealand.

The other side shows very shallow incised curving lines.11). but no definite form can be discerned. the carving at the loom has been badly eroded but it would seem to have been a complex pattern of raised taratara-a-kai. Carved boards and slabs KOH1: board fragment. though of uncertain form. The carving on the Kohika paddle seems to have been a different composition. they almost all featured a manaia head with a long curved jaw.9). Unfortunately. These lines may have been huahua drawing for later carving.Houses.7). On the back it has been adzed flat. The notching above this curved facet could be the remains of rauponga surface decoration.10). This is a narrow strip split off a larger plank. This fragment is too small for any specific function to be determined. 435 by 120 by 43 mm (Plate 7. whereas the carved head on the early Poverty Bay-style paddles protrudes markedly from the rest of the paddle surface. The surface decoration consists of an early form of raised taratara-a-kai in linear and spiral arrangements. This is a fragment from a larger composition of uncertain purpose. often with kowhaiwhai painted on the blades. collected by Captain Cook in 1769 and later explorers in the Poverty Bay area (Neich 1993:59–73). but the surface has been adzed and polished flat. KOH2: board fragment. elaborately carved on both sides. One side is plain with shallow adzing marks. It is a fair assumption that this figure represents a major named ancestor of the person or group owning the house. suggesting that these lines might be just idle markings. It may be a portion of a poupou but none of the other definite poupou have taratara-a-kai surface decoration. 325 by 70 by 65 mm (Plate 7. This piece shows only minimal incising with no definite pattern. pierced and elaborately carved on both sides. 459 by 32 by 18 mm (Plate 7. This fragment is shaped out with matching pierced carving on both sides but only one side has raised taratara-a-kai surface decoration. narrow plank fragment with incised pattern visible. it can be attributed to the hand of the same person who carved the poupou for this house. It could perhaps be part of a pare of a previously unrecorded form. It has a curved facet worn smooth below that suggests abrasion against a moving surface. elaborately carved on both sides. Stylistically. KOH3: board fragment. KOH6: weathered fragment with incised carving visible. 6. pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 145 figure. The spirals are double with a ‘looped’ centre. This suggests affinities with the paddles.8). However. but the carving on both sides probably precludes this. its identification must remain undetermined. It could be part of a pare. KOH345: fragment from elaborate carving possibly broken from spiral fretwork (Plate 7.13). 100 by 85 by 30 mm (Plate 7. absent from the .10). This could possibly be part of a pare. although now beyond determination. with incised line drawing on one side (Figure 7. KOH5: slab of wood. Paddle KOH162: parts of nearly complete canoe paddle with decorative carving on loom where handle joins base. Its being pierced and carved on both sides may suggest a portion of a canoe prow or stern. 172 by 45 by 43 mm (Plate 7. It is also carved deeper into the surface of the loom and is separated from the blade by a definite deeper curved edge. This is a flat slab split off a larger piece. perhaps forming outlines of carving patterns.12). 1670 by 306 by 40 mm (Fig. while these Poverty Bay paddles were also carved in raised taratara-a-kai. On the front it bears raised taratara-a-kai surface decoration. as in an entryway. The bases of broken connectives remain in the central plane of the fragment. At this stage. Many of the Poverty Bay paddles also feature a manaia head at the butt of the handle. KOH4: long.

such as small items like flutes. as on this Kohika piece where the wheku-type face projects downward. Probably most noticeable in this respect is the occurrence of an early form of raised taratara-a-kai surface decoration at Kohika. Several have a simple face mask carved on the butt of the handle. It was applied to a range of objects of the types documented ethnographically from early post-European Maori culture.14 KOH174. their pierced carving. Known examples of this form are from Coromandel. Plate 7.14). The round bulbous forehead is wider than the open mouth. Consequently.146 Plate 7. which is usually left plain compared with the elaborately carved and more common war-canoe bailers. Kohika Kohika paddle. the semi-subterranean storehouse doorway from Omarumutu (in Canterbury Museum). especially the flattened nose. Hauraki. their plain spirals on shoulders and hips. the small doorway carvings from Thornton (in Whakatane Museum). close to the raised taratara-a-kai present on many early carvings usually attributed to the East Coast and possibly an earlier form than that seen on some of the above Bay of Plenty carvings. Among the most important would be the Waioeka poupou. and the supplementary figure between the legs with its head on the lower . knob with carved human face. The handle shows signs of wear and the face may have been altered by abrasion. and no surface decoration. Rotorua and Taupo. the Mokoia Island poupou in Tamatekapua house at Ohinemutu. the storehouse doorway from Thornton (in the Museum of New Zealand). the Kohika paddle must represent a parallel but different tradition of prestigious paddles bearing elaborate carving at the loom. There are indications that this plain form was used in smaller uncarved river and swamp canoes. the Te Kaha pataka and the Mokoia Island storehouse carving (all in Auckland Museum). none of these shows any close stylistic relationship to the Kohika carvings.13. Stylistically. 6. Discussion of the Kohika carving styles The people of Kohika obviously possessed a rich and varied tradition of woodcarving expressed in stone-tool carving. and a stone-tooled poupou collected by Cook’s first expedition from Tolaga Bay (recently rediscovered in the Tuebingen University Museum) gives a wall height of 92 cm. these Ngati Porou poupou add to our understanding and appreciation of the Kohika poupou especially in terms of their size. For other comparisons it was necessary to look further afield. Area D. this bailer is of the less common form. damaged (Fig. Carved handle of bailer. including early stonetooled carvings from the Hauraki area. a stone-tooled poupou from Whangara (now in Auckland Museum) gives a wall height of 112 cm. although some important carved elements that might have been expected are absent. Apart from the comparison made with the Waioeka poupou above. there is a deep straight cut above each eyebrow. The rounded rectangular section of the Kohika paddle handle contrasts with the round section of Poverty Bay paddle handles. Very few prehistoric or early contact stone-tooled carvings are documented to the Bay of Plenty. Similarly. Bailer KOH174: bailer with projecting handle. With its handle projecting back from the scoop. and the Puwhakaoho poupou in Houmaitawhiti house at Otaramarae.

P. The top of his taratara-a-kai ridges are often completely flat and he does not use the ridge apex notching seen in the work of Carver B. Wellington: The Polynesian Society. 17.. Bellwood. Carver B This carver was responsible for the pare fragment (KOH53). 18). pataka and woodcarving at Kohika 147 torso of the main figure. His work is characterised by a fine detailed touch with careful attention to surface decoration.. . His carving style is very consistent and distinctive but. Philadelphia: Lippicott. Wellington: Maori Purposes Trust Board. 1974. Carver D favoured a round double spiral in taratara-a-kai with looped centre. Within the Kohika carving assemblage. This small pare would have been portable from the Hauraki area but could also have been carved on the site. 1988. it cannot be closely linked to any other known early styles.. Cruise. 1924. which suggests that he had connections with the Hauraki area. Waikato. Since these were parts of a house built at Kohika.F. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No. This may suggest that the generally recognised specific tribal styles of the Bay of Plenty are a more recent development. characterised by his use of deep relief pierced carving and high raised tarataraa-kai surface decoration with limited pakura spirals. R. 1949. 1938. Vikings of the sunrise. Wellington: Reed.. Carver C His work is limited to the face on the bailer (KOH174). E..9. this lack of comparable pieces limits the insight to be gained from wider comparisons but points up the supreme importance of the carved assemblage from Kohika. while Carver B produced an angular pointed spiral in raumoa and ritorito. the work of at least four individual carvers can be distinguished: Carver A His work includes all the poupou (KOH14. whether from Ngati Awa or wider afield. on the basis of the other early Bay of Plenty and East Coast carvings described above. 1978. Government Printer. Early paintings of the Maori. Best. Thus the carvings from Kohika. P. II. Best. E. Maori storehouses and kindred structures. the poutahuhu (KOH44) and the poutokomanawa figure (KOH7) and is characterised by the features described above. Tane-Nui-A-Rangi. it is a fair assumption that he was a local man.H. with their range of individual styles linking to different areas of the country. Vol. The coming of the Maori. Carver D His hand can be recognised on carved fragments KOH1 and KOH3 and perhaps KOH2. 2nd Edition. Anon.A. The Maori. 1979. where the differences from the face on the pare by Carver B are very obvious.. Archaeological research at Lake Mangakaware. 16.. G.Houses. Nevertheless. Buck. P. Auckland: University of Auckland.. Christchurch: Capper Press. 1974. References Angas. suggest that this might have been a diverse community with wide external connections to people from other areas.H. 1968–70. Illustrated and described by George French Angas. Journal of a ten months’ residence in New Zealand. Wellington: Shearer. Buck.

The Maori whare: notes on the construction of a Maori house. 1999.. In B. Green. 5:145–54. 1974.. ..J.S. Wharepuni: a few remaining Maori dwellings of the old style. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand... 1974. 26:54–9. 1984. N.J. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. Groube L. and K. and B. University of Otago. R. Prehistoric occupation in the Moikau Valley.W.J. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. F..F.C. 21:67–86. Narrative of a residence in New Zealand. Houses and house life in prehistoric New Zealand. Carved Histories: Rotorua Ngati Tarawhai woodcarving. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter.A. Records of the Canterbury Museum. R. 2001. 1961. University of Auckland. Leach and H.. Biggs. Journal of the Polynesian Society. The old-time Maori. Auckland: Reed.. Journal of the Polynesian Society. Prickett. the dear old Maori land. 1947. W. 1966. Leach (eds). 1952. Palliser Bay. Raised storage structures in New Zealand prehistory. Skinner. D.. An archaeologists’ guide to the Maori dwelling.8. Wallace.X.. N.J. Neich. 1926. Walsh. Painted Histories: early Maori figurative painting. University of Otago. Neich. 1986. Geelen de Kabath.21. New Zealand. R. Unpublished research essay. Teviotdale. R. Settlement patterns in New Zealand prehistory. 1979. Maori houses and food stores. 56:357–63. Prickett. Auckland: New Women’s Press. Green. 1982. Oruarangi Pa. Auckland: Auckland University Press. N. H. D. 4:111–47.. Man.W.B. Earle. Auckland: Auckland University Press.148 Kohika Davidson.M. M. Dominion Museum Bulletin No. Auckland: Brett. Irwin.M. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1896.29–47. Unpublished MA thesis. Classic and early European sites on the Hauraki Plains. Lysnar. 6:27–34. National Museum Bulletin No. Williams. and G. R. J. 1915. R.H. 1993. Day. K. 1965. 7:303–26. 1966... The prehistory of New Zealand. and D. Prehistoric man in Palliser Bay.. Dunedin: Anthropology Department. pp.. A. Duff. Firth. Wellington: Government Printer. Waitara Swamp search.J. 2001.M. Phillips. A Kohika wharepuni: house construction methods of the late pre-contact Maori. Maori wood carving of the Taranaki region. 1963. Proto-Polynesian word list I. Makereti. Auckland: Longman Paul. Prickett.

but outside in the peat that formed in the former shallow lakeshore. checked and twilled fabric plaitwork. Lawrence (1989) describes pieces found in caves in the Waitakere Ranges dating to c. There is a small literature about fibre from specific excavations. KOH340. and netting. All items appear to be made using strips of raw harakeke (New Zealand flax. midden was dumped and people and dogs were active.g.g. There are several fragments of twill plaiting. Buck 1926a. cordage and several plaited items (KOH302–307. and the distribution of fibre artefacts supports this. and the remains of a net.8 Kohika fibrework S. This was an active area of disturbance and treadage. fibre remains (KOH295). 341) were found in the vicinity. which had fallen into disuse. the remains of woven fabrics. rope and netting were extremely fragile and presented problems for excavation and conservation. Hopa 1971. For example. With regard to terminology. not within the house. The archaeological finds. As with wetland archaeological excavations world-wide. and possibly also in Area B. (1991) describe fibre material retrieved from Fiordland. A few pieces are too matted and decayed to clearly identify the technique. In Area B. provide information about both recorded and hitherto undocumented fibre-working techniques. Lander (1992) draws on her skills as a fibre artist to describe pieces of c. in the context of a cultural renaissance. Few Maori archaeological sites have yielded fibre artefacts.and two-ply spiralwrapped cordage.1820 fibrework from Raupa on the Hauraki Plains. Pendergrast 1986. Similarly. some ‘how-to’ books have emerged (e. were found outside the palisade. Connor’s (1983) classification system 149 . while Anderson et al. A range of Maori fibre-working techniques was recorded during the early 20th century (e.AD 1750–1850. in the HS Area. McAra This chapter completes the description of the waterlogged assemblage from Kohika. netting and a few plaited items (KOH296– 301) were found in association with the Yellow House horizon. particularly in the initial excavation by the Historical Society. McAra (2001) describes several portions of well-preserved harakeke nets measuring between 20 and 40 metres long from a Banks Peninsula cave. cordage. In Area D. The Maori ropemaking technique which is here termed ‘two-ply spiral-wrapped’ appears to be previously unrecorded. 1926b) and more recently. Phormium tenax). The techniques represented by the fibre remains include one. In a recent paper. The Kohika plant fibre collection consists of fragments representing several kinds of fibre-working technique. including numerous pieces of raw harakeke worked into cordage and knots. The accumulating evidence suggests the existence of households near the lake in Area D and the HS Area. Puketapu-Hetet 1989). three-ply braiding. and many of the surviving examples are in poor condition. however. but some fine matting probably came from inside the carved house itself. probably of rope (see Appendix ). canoes landed. They are primarily short lengths of cordage that divide into the categories of two-plied and braided.

suggesting the imprint of a lost counterpart such as KOH300. or boiling it.g. Perhaps it was used differently. In comparison. each comprising ‘bunches’ of harakeke strips. as the spiral wrap leaves fewer gaps (Plate 8. a technique practised with dried coconut fronds in Samoa (Pendergrast. R.1b) and KOH300. Softening the leaf prevents shrinkage. Significantly. Whakatane and District Historical Society members glued much of the collection to sheets of cardboard. It is likely that the 1SWB examples are simply the component parts of 2PSW cordage. The condition of old harakeke artefacts depends on whether they were preserved dry or wet. The 2PSW pieces consist of two elements. which are soaked and then partially redried.1a and 8.1b). Some of the 1SWB examples show kinks along the length. strips are used. while in a swamp it is the most waterproof part of the harakeke and will last longest. as being harakeke. Cordage Single ‘spiral-wrapped’ bunches of strips and ‘two-ply spiral-wrapped’ cordage fragments The author could discover no Maori name for the two variant techniques observed in the Kohika cordage fragments. further limiting the amount of investigation possible.1a). 2002) affirms that both wet and dry conditions retard decay. Table 8. drawing it over embers to make the leaf ‘sweat’. so two descriptive terms are used. Some of them are in poor condition and it is not possible . although in some parts the imprint of the fibre is visible as dark lines on the cuticle. In both cases. but in a dry cave the waxy cuticle may curl and flake off. twisted anti-clockwise (Z-twist) into two-ply rope (see Table 8. each ‘bunch’ of strips is cylindrical and contains about ten strips. comm. one from a representative sample of each technique. Harakeke can be softened in several different ways (McAra 2001): by scraping its shiny side (e. with the flat edge of a mussel shell).1a and 8. Conservator D. comm. The fishing net in the Canterbury Museum. where possible.13. Johns (pers. the Kohika pieces have lost much of the fibre. 2002). KOH298. taken from a dry cave. The cordage fragments are too short for it to be possible to specify the uses to which they were put. Wallace identified small fragments of cuticle. before working with them while they still retain some moisture. The author has also successfully used dried leaves.1 gives details of 1SWB pieces.1c. made by splitting the softened leaf. Figs 8.150 Kohika for describing fibres is followed here. The first is the ‘single spiral-wrapped bunches’ (1SWB) of raw harakeke (Plates 8. none of the pieces described in this paper is made from muka (dressed fibre). The fragments of cordage are too short for joins to be visible where one of these wrapping strands runs out and another is added in – presumably the new strip would have to be knotted to the previous one. but it was not possible to identify particular cultivars. has several areas where the cuticle has flaked off leaving the muka fibre intact (McAra 2001). leaving gaps through which the inner strips are clearly visible. pers. by smoking the material or rubbing oil or tree gum into the fibres.2). each approximately 2–3 mm wide.1b) and the second is the ‘two-ply spiral-wrapped’ (2PSW) bunches of raw harakeke (Plate 8. The distinguishing feature of 1SWB and 2PSW cordage is that the strips in each bunch are contained by a wider ‘wrapping strip’ 7–10 mm wide which spirals around the bunch. in places leaving only the cuticle.3 (Plate 8. or perhaps the spiral wrap was wound more tightly. Instead. It may also depend on measures taken by the makers to prolong the lifespan – for example.5 looks different from the other 1SWB pieces. leaving the fibre intact.

Kohika fibrework 151 Plate 8.1a KOH298.5. Fragment of single spiralwrapped bunches of harakeke (1SWB) resembling a handle.

Plate 8.1b KOH300.3. Fragment of 1SWB resembling one half of a pair of two-ply spiral-wrapped bunches (2PSW) of harakeke.

Plate 8.1c KOH298.1. Short fragment of two-ply spiral-wrapped bundles of harakeke (2PSW).

to identify the spiral wrapping. It seems more likely that this is due to decay than to a variant technique, because other 2PSW fragments show traces of the wrapping strip.
Table 8.1 Single spiral-wrapped bunches of harakeke (1SWB)

Spiral wrap leaves fewer gaps than on other pieces. 300.3; 300.13 210, 120 8 8–12 Both pieces appear to be from a 2PSW rope 302a & 302b Fragment appears to be 1SWB tied in a knot; b is a 50mm length of 1SWB. * All measurements in this chapter are approximate.

Length of KOH number fragment (mm)* 298.5 190

Approximate width of wrapping strip (mm) 5

Approximate number of raw strands per element 7–10


Plate no. 8.1a


152 Kohika Figure 8.1a KOH298. Drawing of twoply spiralwrapped bunches of harakeke (2PSW)

Figure 8.1b Diagram of technique for making 2PSW

Table 8.2

Two-ply spiral-wrapped bunches of harakeke (2PSW)

KOH number 298.1 298.2–4 299.1 299.2–3 299.4–5 300.7 300.9; 300.10–12; 300.14–15 341

Length (mm) 140 140 210

Number of twists 6 4 6

270 250–70 7 290 13 120–220 5–10



Comments Diagram (Figs 8.1a and 8.1b) based on this piece Some are partly unravelled – fibres appear crushed in places Thickness c.15–20 mm; spiral wrap in poor condition; c.5 mm wide where visible These two are knotted or tangled pieces Little remaining of spiral wrap No spiral wrap Thickness c.10–15 mm; spiral wrap c.10 mm wide; spiral wrap absent on some pieces (decay?); quite loose and unravelled pieces Little remaining of spiral wrap; 2nd longest piece

Plate no. 8.1c – –

– – –

Three-ply braids (whiri)

A range of styles of braided ropes was used widely by Maori, from small items such as sandals and kete (handles, carrying straps [kawe]) to large items such as the ropes for long nets. Four-ply braids are cylindrical, while three-ply braids are flatter. Thickness and width vary depending on the quantity of strands in each ply as well as the tension used in the braiding. Three-ply cordage is the only kind of braiding represented in this collection. The Kohika braids vary in width and thickness and all are neatly made, holding

Kohika fibrework 153 Plate 8.2 KOH303.8–11. Short braided fragments, showing two straight examples (KOH303.8 and 9) and an X and a Y braid (KOH 303.10 and 11).

together tightly except where the fibre has decayed. Some visibly diminish in width as the fibres decrease down the braid. Most are fat braids, tightly worked with thick strands. Most of the fragments are short, single sections of braid, but a few of them start as two braids, converging into one in a ‘Y’ shape (e.g. KOH303.11), and there is also an ‘X’ shaped braid (e.g. KOH303.10, KOH340), which has two wider braids and two narrower ones (Plate 8.2). None of the surviving fragments shows a commencement or finishing knot. All of the fragments must have come from a longer rope or ropes because they are too short to be useful (Tables 8.3 and 8.4). The ends of each are broken, rather than being frayed or having come unravelled, possibly a result of decay processes rather than use wear.
Table 8.3 Three-ply cordage

KOH number 298.6–7 300.1 300.2 300.4–6

Length (mm) 110 each 90 120 50 each

Width (mm) 7 14 14 5

Thickness (mm) 3 4 5 3

Number of twists 12–13 8 11 4–5

Comments Probably both part of one longer braid Probably both part of one longer braid

Plate no. – –

Probably part of longer – braid 300.8 420 20 13 36 Tightly braided and thick; – longest piece in collection 300.4–6 Each piece approx. 70 mm long, thin, and 3–5 twists; probably part of one – longer braid; similar to 298.6, 208.7 303.6–9 70–180 9–13 2– 3 6–15 8.2 306.3–5 100–130 10 3– 6 5–9 – 340.1–3 80–130 9–15 5– 7 8–10 340.2 has a folded-back – fragment of 3 twists 340.5–10 80–210 7–12 4– 7 7–12 Lengths of braiding, – varying thickness and condition 340.12 180 – Width of braids varies along length, so separate fragments of different widths are not necessarily from separate original braids.

154 Kohika

Table 8.4

Three-ply braid variants

KOH number 298.8

Length of fragment (mm) 170

Length of components (X is point where braid parts intersect) A–X X–B X –C X–D 60 110 70 –

Comments 3-ply braid in Y-fragment shape; in many places fibre is lost and only epidermis remains Pair of thin braids forming X shape, 7–10 mm wide Pair of thick braids meeting to form a thicker single braid (Y shape), 19 mm wide 3-ply braid in Y-fragment shape, 10 mm wide, 5 mm thick X braid – piece C–X is thinnest; X–B thickest

Plate no. –

303.10 303.11

200 260

60 80

30 180

40 70

160 –

– 8.2












Plaitwork (raranga) fragments

These fabric fragments come from the main body of plaiting (raranga). The starting and finishing points of the plaiting are missing, making it difficult to establish the direction of plaiting or to show which strips were the dextrals and which the sinistrals. Further, the plaiting has degraded even within the surviving pieces to the extent that it is not possible to be certain whether irregularities are due to intentional shaping, errors or the loss of fibres through disintegration. The function of the original objects can only be surmised. There are several pieces of plaitwork, with two styles in evidence. The first is fine twill work (Plates 8.3 and 8.4), and the second is 1/1 plaiting using wider strips (Plate 8.5). KOH301a and 301b are the smallest fragments, so it is difficult to identify any plaiting pattern. It appears that, in these two fragments, the strips lie 2/1 in the rows in one direction, and 1/1 along the other. The rest of the plaited twill pieces are 2/2 on both the dextrals and the sinistrals. Variations in plaiting technique are conventionally employed to create patterns or to shape an item (e.g. to tailor the shape of a cloak to the body, or control the finished shape of a basket or kete). There appear to be variations in the Kohika plaiting but they are difficult to detect because of the condition and small size of the fabric fragments. However, there are wear lines on some of the fragments, suggesting folds in the fabric, and others have an edge which may have been created by a break along a wear line during the decay process. Such a folded piece was found by members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society in Square 1. The possible uses of such plaitwork are many (e.g. a kete, cloak or mat) and cannot be ascertained here, but the fineness of the work indicates that they must have been time-consuming to make. The plaited check pieces are wider, and KOH306.1 shows folded-over edges resembling the edge on a rourou (a basket in which food is served). Similarly, one strip is also folded back on the piece shown in Plate 8.5. Such items take only a few minutes for an experienced weaver to make and are often used only once. Plaited items are listed in Tables 8.5 and 8.6.

Kohika fibrework 155 Plate 8.3 KOH304.1. Fine twill close-up, showing condition of fibres.

Plate 8.4 KOH305.1. A larger piece of fine twill, showing the curvature in the plaiting.

Netting (taa kupenga)

One tray of the Kohika collection contains the remains of a small net with braids and grommet or ring (KOH297, and 297A–C; Plates 8.6a and 8.6b, Table 8.7). These items use the same technique of net-making that is described in Buck (1926b), with the direction of netting switching for alternate rows in what Buck calls a ‘boustrophedon manner’ (a row-reversal method that is also used in knitting). Similar netting has also

Small fragment of mesh. showing one folded-back strip (at lower part of image). Plate 8.6a (bottom left) KOH297.6b (bottom right) KOH297.156 Kohika Plate 8.4. . Plate 8. A grommet with netting still attached. Broad checked plaiting.5 KOH303.

and vary from 4 to 11 twists long. Plate 8.2.1–3 2/2 3 fragments around 40 x 120 – 105 x 110 mm – 304.6a shows the grommet with a small fragment of netting attached. formed into a tight ring and spiral-wrapped with another strand. mesh direction: boustrophedon. near braids B6 and B7.6 Plaited check with broad strips KOH number Strip width Type Comments 303. This probably held the narrow end of the net in place.4 306. 7 mm.1–3 2/2 3 fragments fine twill 8. Strip width approx. 7 strips 2/1 survive. – 7–8 strips 1/1 survive 301b 2/1? Horizontal rows.g. The grommet is made from strands of harakeke. Plate no. Piece is made in boustrophedon manner [297A]* Grommet: a circular loop made out of harakeke (?) strips. and 3-ply [297C]* Mesh fragments. 8. The circle is about 30 mm in diameter. and spiral-wrapped with a strip in which a knot is visible [297B]* Braid fragments number B1–B7.7 Netting and component parts Plate no.1–8 2/2 fragments around 60 x 120 – 90 x 120 mm 8. add-in knots visible in places. Horizontal* rows. but in top right corner.5 Plaited twill with narrow strips Plate Comments no. 4 strips 2/1 survive.6b 8.1 & 2 2/2 fine twill – *Horizontal and vertical in relation to the writing of the KOH numbers on the card to which the items are attached. 307. Most have broken into individual knots. but this picture was taken before the author had seen the Kohika fibre fragments. but with the netting no longer attached to it. .1 15–20 1/1 Bends on one edge* similar to upper edge of rourou * This edge is the ‘lower’ edge in relation to the card to which the items are attached.6a – – been recovered in other archaeological excavations (e. vertical* rows. next to or incorporated into mesh knots) * The author has assigned the number KOH297 to match the fragment shown in Plate 8. knot size about 10 mm high. 8.4–5 15–20 1/1 2 fragments of check 306. all are of same width/thickness. Because the pieces are so fragmented.3 305. McFadgen and Sheppard 1984).6b. a shape found in several kinds of net (see Buck 1926b).5 – KOH number 297 Comments Fragment of mesh with approx. KOH number 301a Type 2/1? Table 8. the grommet now sits with the netting fragments (here termed 297B and 297C).Kohika fibrework 157 Table 8. vertical rows. Table 8. it is not possible to identify sinistrals and dextrals. a bunch of mesh survives (characteristics: 10 mm gauge. – 4 strips 2/1 survive 303. 14 visible mesh diamonds (more bunched up at top) attached to card upside down. The netting was probably shaped into a cone.

8 Other pieces: fragments whose technique is unclear KOH number 295 296. technique unclear 2 fibre fragments. so we cannot be certain whether they were intended for use as short lengths only.10–15 297A–C 303–308 299. The most unusual cordage in the Kohika collection is the two-ply. 302b Description and comment 1 fibre fragment. if this were the only reason. On the other hand. technique unclear Two separate fragments.1–2 302a. comm. comm. 1926b. Enquiries to the four main New Zealand museums have yielded no further examples. spiral-wrapped fragments. one of which appears to be tied into a loose knot or crushed in a coiled-up position Table 8. as would be the case if these braids had formed the edge or base of a kete-like article. Nor has she been able to find a published description of this particular cordage technique. 1949). all other examples of two-ply cordage the author has seen are made from processed muka. However. This kind of cordage was perhaps useful. that three-ply braids would be easier to make.158 Kohika Table 8. 1926a. There is no evidence of fibres emerging at regular intervals from each twist along one side of the braid. Connor (1983) or Crosby (1966).1–8 340.1–5 340. Further experimental research could explore techniques for making the two-ply twist from raw harakeke. It is possible that this technique was common in the past but of no interest to collectors of the time (Pendergrast. or when the muka was particularly difficult to extract.1–9 301–302 295–297a 300. such as would be used for tying and binding. perhaps it was made for specialised uses and certain conditions.11–12 341 Contents Cordage (various) Cordage (various) Raranga Cordage (various) Netting with braids and grommet Raranga (1/1. The longest piece is 380 mm. 2002). These are the only examples of twisted (as opposed to braided) cordage made with unscutched harakeke leaves and distinctive spiral-wrapping that the author has been able to locate.9 Contents of boxes (KOH number and technique) BOX Box 1 Box 2 Box 3 Box 4 Box 5 Box 6 Numbers 298. pers. 2/2) 3 x 3-ply braids Cordage (various) Discussion and conclusions The Kohika fibre pieces were found in the swamp beside the site. for making thick. or for greater lengths. such as handles. It is not described in Buck (1921. near former houses and pataka and in the same areas as numerous wooden artefacts (G. after experimenting with the technique. strong rope when the only harakeke cultivars available lacked sufficient muka. Irwin. on the one hand. the author believes. 2002).1–10 300. as the waxy cuticle may have given the fibre some protection against the elements. pers. . The cordage remnants (including the braids) consist of short lengths. so that unscutched leaf strips had to be used.

Buck. Sheppard. Auckland: Pitman. Lake Te Anau. P.. Te mahi kete: Maori basketry for beginners. Unpublished MA thesis.18. Maori plaited basketry and plait work: 1.B. Maori fishing gear: a study of the development of Maori fishing gear.. S.. P.. The art of piupiu making: an instructional manual setting out the materials.H. Lawrence. Goulding and M.G. Fibre fragments from the Raupa site. Maori fishing nets in the Canterbury Museum. Pendergrast. Buck. 1986. the uses for this technique remain speculative.9 shows the location of items by KOH number. References Anderson. Ruahihi Pa: a prehistoric defended settlement in the south-western Bay of Plenty. Transactions of the New Zealand Institute. Transactions of the New Zealand Institute. The coming of the Maori. McGovern-Wilson (eds). Beech forest hunters: the archaeology of Maori rockshelter sites on Lee Island. J. twining. Journal of the Polynesian Society.. Table 8.8 lists other miscellaneous fragments of fibre and Table 8. Unpublished MA thesis. 1989. and R. J. central item of Maori costume. 1949. A descriptive classification of Maori fabrics: cordage. 1992. Puketapu-Hetet. 1983. 1921. Records of the Canterbury Museum. Maori weaving with Erenora Puketapu-Hetet. 56:597–646. Maori food supplies of Lake Rotorua. University of Auckland... windmill knotting. correct tension. baskets and burdencarriers. Hauraki Plains. Wellington: Reed..Kohika fibrework 159 It would be easier to make the two-ply using the twist-and-wrap technique with two people. Hopa. 53:433–51.A. 1926b. Anderson and R.H.K. 29:7–23. Buck. Wellington: National Museum of New Zealand. B. 15:83–99. 1926a. White. as they were packed in boxes for return to Ngati Awa. in southern New Zealand. 54:705–42. 1989. E. 2001. McFadgen.. In A. N. 1966. A. Auckland: Reed.. M. pp.43–55. looping and netting. The Maori craft of netting. unless further information comes to light. while performing the twisting action with even. mats. 1984. Transactions of the New Zealand Institute. However. University of Auckland. 92:189–213. design and assembly of the Maori skirt. Buck.. because it takes two hands to maintain one set of bunched strips and wrapping strip. 1991.V. P. The archaeology of the Waitakere Ranges. Christchurch: Whitcombe and Tombs. P.H. plaiting. particularly in the North Island. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. Bark and fibre artefacts. Connor. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No.H. M. . Lander. 1971. McAra. J. Crosby..

Furey 1996:47). This item might have begun its life as a chisel and then become an ornament. pumice and pounamu G. There is also some evidence suggesting a third household in the vicinity of Area B. Irwin The excavations at Kohika and the analysis of its waterlogged remains have established the presence of lakeside households in Area D and the Historical Society (HS) Area. which was also close to the lake. is more typical of many dryland sites in being neither large nor remarkable in its composition. The head is broken but it retains the bottom of an eye and an open mouth. However. 160 . tooth.1. The curvature of a human long bone has been used to create the torso. Area A. Drilled human and dog teeth were commonly seen by Cook and his party in 1769. unlike the waterlogged one. The main aim of this chapter is to investigate further the developing picture of Kohika by describing the nature and distribution of artefacts of more durable materials. has provided evidence for cooking and for roofed storage pits and bins that could not have been built on low-lying land near the lakeshore without flooding.J. and comparisons with other sites help to define Maori material culture in the Bay of Plenty as it was not long before the arrival of Europeans. and the genital area conforms to a hei tiki.1a) and the other a chisel pendant (Plate 9. The latter has a rounded cross-section and a suspension hole drilled at the end opposite the bevel. Bone A fine bone pendant in the style of a tiki is shown in Figure 9. The edges of an earlier. worn singly or in groups. and the associated wooden and fibre artefacts cover the whole spectrum of domestic life.1b). pataka and other more casual buildings.1). including bone. greenstone (pounamu) and pumice (Table 9. tooth. the artefacts are known to fall within a short interval of time. broken suspension hole can been seen beyond it.2. Pendants Pounamu There are two greenstone pendants from Kohika and both are similar to examples from Oruarangi illustrated by Furey (1996:39).1 and Plate 9. or it could have had a dual function. suspended from an earlobe or sometimes from the neck (Davidson 1984. This assemblage. In contrast. There is evidence for houses.9 Artefacts of bone. which is located on the higher and drier part of Kohika. Tooth A drilled human incisor is shown in Figure 9. One is a kuru pendant (Plate 9.

2.9a – Plate 9.1b Plate 9.5a Plate 9.5b Plate 9.9b Fig. Taylor identified the bone by species.5c Plate 9.8a Plate 9.1 Bone hei tiki pendant. 9. and the toggle is otherwise plain.1.1a Plate 9. bone toggle . White House Square B1. Yellow House Square B1. white pumice Square B4. Toggles can be taken as an indication that breast pendants were present. Fig. Yellow House HS Area Square B1. Layer B HS Area Square D3. 104). Yellow House Square B4. tooth pendant. Yellow House Square D10. drain spoil Square A1 Ext.7 Plate 9. Toggles Bone A toggle made of bone from a mollymawk or albatross is shown in Figure 9. upper black sand HS Area HS Area Illustration Plate 9. white pumice Square D3.6 Plate 9. Plate 9. brown silt layer Square D6.1 Artefacts from Kohika Artefact type Pendant (kuru) Pendant (chisel) Tiki pendant Tooth pendant Toggle Fishhook Fishhook Fishhook Fishhook blank Fishhook point Needle Needle Awl Awl Awl Chisel Chisel Adze Chisel Adze chip File Pigment bowl Pigment bowl carved Kumara god Material greenstone greenstone human bone human incisor bird bone human bone human bone human bone human bone dog tooth bird bone dog mandible bird bone seal scapula dog humerus dog tibia dog tibia greenstone greenstone greenstone sandstone pumice pumice pumice Provenance Square B2. which is the same as a toggle illustrated from Oruarangi (Furey 1996. drain spoil Square D14.1 Plate 9. pumice and pounamu 161 Table 9.4b Plate 9. Figure 9. The Kohika example is broken. drain spoil Square D6. but the edge of a hole remains that would have held a threaded cord.2. Yellow House Square D13.3 Note: M. drain spoil Square D13. pre-flood layer Square B4.. 9. tooth. 9.3b Plate 9. One end is notched and the other not. Fig 9.6b – – Fig.1 Fig. even when not found (Davidson 1984:87).3a Plate 9.1 Fig.Artefacts of bone.3c Plate 9.4a Plate 9. 9. brown silt layer Square B4.8b Plate 9. Yellow House HS Area Square D3. brown silt layer Square D5.

2 Bone tiki pendant (human). . Plate 9. Kohika Plate 9.1a (right) Greenstone kuru pendant.1b (far right) Greenstone chisel pendant.162 Plate 9.

A fishhook blank of human bone.4b (left) Fishhook point (dog tooth). Plate 9. pp.Artefacts of bone.4a. It is finely shaped and could be an ornament as well. Two of the hooks also have a decorative projection for the attachment of bait string. The Kohika fishhooks are of a widespread form and very similar to ones from Kauri Point Pa (Davidson 1984.67–68). and provide a close date for the use of this type of hook in the Bay of Plenty. . Plate 9.4b.3a–c One-piece bone fishhooks (human). shown in Plate 9. pumice and pounamu 163 Fishhooks Bone Three one-piece fishhooks made of human bone are illustrated in Plates 9. Plate 9. the third being incomplete. 50. is also from the White House. Tooth A dog-tooth point of a two-piece fishhook is shown in Plate 9. and the third with a white pumice floor in Square D13 at a level equivalent to the White House. Two were associated with the Yellow House horizon in Area D. tooth. Fig.3a–c. All three have straight shanks and two have very incurved points.4a (far left) Bone fishhook blank (human).

and some unfinished items. we have an insight into the wooden artefacts and manufacturing waste that must have disappeared from dryland sites where adzes have been found. while another has no perforation (Plate 9. We can assume that the people of Kohika owned other stone tools and. Like examples from Oruarangi (Furey 1996. a wooden adze handle was found along with a chisel handle and a socket. Plate 9.6a and b. both made to hold small stone heads.5c (below right) Bone awl (bird). if it was intended as a needle. In addition. from a layer similar in age to the White House horizon. including carvings. Plate 9.5b).164 Kohika Needles Bone One complete bone needle is made of bird bone (Plate 9. Yet only two stone tools are associated with all this activity – one stone adze and one chisel.5c. no bone tattooing chisels were found at Kohika. The unfinished item was ground and polished and. Awls made from a seal scapula and a dog humerus are shown in Plates 9. while a large number of wood chips and shavings indicates considerable woodworking on site. Perhaps surprisingly. were made from dog tibia. Adzes and chisels There were hundreds of pieces of worked wood of all kinds among the waterlogged remains.5a (below left) Bone needle (bird). conversely. Figs 271 and 272). the eye had not yet been drilled. Plate 9. This item came from Square D13. Awls/chisels Bone A hollow-sectioned awl of bird bone is illustrated in Plate 9.5b (below centre) Bone needle (dog). The situation is a striking reminder of the bias of archaeological sampling. Plate 9. Plate 9. Two other chisels. .6b (far right) Bone chisel (dog). minus ventral surfaces. The latter is shaped from the lower edge of a dog mandible and three of these. were found in Area B. but the explanation may lie in the relatively small number of bone tools found in the excavations.6a (right) Bone awl (seal).5a). not illustrated. the shaft of a long bone has been sliced diagonally at one end and sharpened to a point.

2 Pounamu adze Plate 9.7. there was a chip from the corner of an adze (Plate 9. pumice and pounamu 165 Pounamu A greenstone adze of Duff-type 2B form is illustrated in Figure 9. among the artefacts of greenstone. Figure 9. .7 Pounamu adze. with the haft tapped with a wooden mallet.8b). It seems likely that such a tool was used for fine work. Such an adze would have been suitable for dressing timber. quadrangular crosssectioned miniature greenstone chisel. A finely made.2 and Plate 9. only 12 mm long.8a. a defined bevel chin and a quadrangular cross-section with the front slightly wider than the back. There is a scarfing groove on the back. and there is abundant evidence for this in the site.Artefacts of bone. including carving. It has a wide blade. is shown in Plate 9. a width greater than twice its length. tooth. Finally.

Distribution of the artefacts and implications for functional areas The artefacts described in this chapter were generally associated with houses. Kohika Plate 9.8a (right) Pounamu chisel. but none was found in Area A. Plate 9. Pumice figure A remarkable carved pumice figure of a kind commonly called a kumara god is shown in Figure 9.9a.9b Pumice pigment bowl. Plate 9.8b (far right) Pounamu adze flake.166 Plate 9. Pumice containers There were two small bowls of a kind often called pigment pots (Furey 1996:42).9a Sandstone file. for working bone rather than wood. Stone file A small sandstone file with an oval cross-section and flattened abrading surfaces is shown in Plate 9. which suggests that they were used here. as often assumed for earlier sites. 2002) notes that it is interesting that only one stone file was found. J.3. comm.9b has a stylised face on the back. and the broken one illustrated in Plate 9. Davidson (pers. which was used for pit storage and then cooking during the .

These items are consistent with the presence of a high-status household. Figure 9.1) came from one of two late burials which date from after the village was abandoned. It is likely that a house was nearby. tooth. greenstone pendant (Square B2) and dogjaw needle (Square B4). 1984.1).17. Layer B (Table 9. but the area of archaeological excavation was too small to find it. pumice and pounamu 167 occupation. 4. Nor was any artefact found in Area C. a pumice bowl and a greenstone adze. Auckland: Longman Paul. In the vicinity of the carved house in the HS Area was a tiki pendant of human bone. In addition. The pattern of evidence is consistent with another lakeside household in Area B that was only partly excavated. pumice pigment bowl. L. which lay partly in swamp beyond the perimeter of the site and partly in a cooking area. Oruarangi: the archaeology and material culture of a Hauraki pa. 1996. found by members of the Historical Society. The absence of artefacts adds weight to the view that people did not reside in these areas. J. a bird-bone toggle. and three substantial posts standing in B1 (Fig..3 Pumice kumara god References Davidson. There were wooden timbers from at least one surface building. Some valuable items were thrown out with the spoil from the agricultural drain.. a pumice kumara god. These all indicate rich deposits where the agricultural drain skirted the palisade. The excavation of undisturbed deposits yielded numerous bone artefacts. drilled human-tooth pendant and chip from a greenstone adze (Table 9.1). including a dog-tooth fishhook point..M. By contrast. There was also a bird-bone awl. The prehistory of New Zealand. three dog mandibles with detached ventral margin were recovered. together with a sandstone file that would have been suitable for bone working (Table 9. Bulletin of the Auckland Institute and Museum No. The situation in Area B is not so clear. plus the fishhook blank. dog-bone awl and chisel.4) probably supported a raised storehouse. These artefacts are consistent with people living in this part of the site. Area D has striking evidence for buildings and a wide range of other evidence. All three one-piece fishhooks came from here. The greenstone pendant of chisel form in Square A1 Ext. Others found later by the university were a greenstone chisel (Square B1). and these included two wooden hair combs. bird-bone needle and seal-bone awl. dog-bone chisel.Artefacts of bone. . Furey.

and direct comparisons were then made between pieces from each Kohika group and reference samples from various geological sources. Generally. and a further 1040 smaller pieces of shatter. to test the reliability of source indications from physical characteristics. chemical analyses have been used to determine the original geological sources. 168 . Only two or three pieces could not be readily placed into either group on this basis. nine samples were selected for chemical (XRF) analysis. could identify likely sources. Potential sources of the two groups of grey obsidian were considered by reference to the descriptions of geological sources given by Moore (1988). both physical characteristics and chemical (X-ray fluorescence or XRF) analyses were used to establish the sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts.R. The general characteristics of the obsidian in these two groups – here referred to as the ‘pebble-type grey’ and ‘other grey’ – were then documented. and only one flake (1040). tools and cores with a maximum dimension greater than 10 mm. This procedure resulted in the identification of the most likely sources. First. All the obsidian of both grey types was weighed and pebbles were also measured. ‘green’ and ‘grey’. An alternative method was developed by Moore (1988). However. In this study. Methods The excavations at Kohika produced over 2400 obsidian flakes. and flakes generally lacking water-worn cortex. Lastly. being transferred to the first group. which resulted in some flakes in the second group. The grey obsidian could be further subdivided into: pebbles and part-pebbles with smooth water-worn cortex. flow banding and lustre were then considered. Other characteristics such as translucency. based on their colour in transmitted light. the entire obsidian assemblage was separated into two groups. in the past. and flakes with similar cortex. and these were later examined more closely. Moore The analysis of obsidian artefacts can provide useful information about trade networks and wider cultural relationships by establishing where the obsidian came from. lacking cortex. such as colour. in which a range of physical characteristics. translucency and flow banding. Physical characteristics Green obsidian The bulk of the Kohika obsidian assemblage consists of flakes. pieces and cores that have a distinctive olive-green colour in transmitted light.10 Sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts P. to determine similarities and differences in physical characteristics. this has rarely been applied to large assemblages.

Many also have a smoky tinge in transmitted light. In addition. Vesicles (gas bubbles) were identified in two pebbles. but some is greyish-black and one flake is dark grey in colour. Crystal inclusions are rare. with perhaps fewer than 20 per cent having poor translucency. could not be confidently assigned to this group. and some are slightly colour-banded. Strong flow banding is evident in only one flake and colour banding is very rare. Most of the obsidian is black in reflected light. In general this cortex is very smooth and differs from that of the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian. although a few show a slight streakiness (as described above). In transmitted light the colour is a slightly different shade of grey from that seen in the ‘other grey’ group. Only a few pieces show strong flow banding. is of better quality overall. water-worn cortex were identified in the collection. Spherulites are present in about 30 per cent of flakes and are common in some. In contrast to the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian. a further eight flakes.Sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts 169 grey in colour and greenish-grey in transmitted light. and nineteen flakes with a small portion of cortex remaining. The majority of flakes. . It may have been produced by slight weathering of natural fracture faces (at the source) rather than by water rolling. One other feature of note is the streaky appearance of some material. it is evident from the types of cortex present on some pieces that the obsidian was obtained from several different localities on Mayor Island. which results in the obsidian having a dull or less vitreous lustre. ‘Pebble-type grey’ Thirty-five pieces of obsidian with smooth. although at least four flakes were clearly derived from water-worn pebbles or cobbles. This included three almost complete pebbles. The ‘pebble-type grey’ obsidian is mostly greyish-black to black in colour. There is little doubt that all of the green obsidian originated from Mayor Island. but not water-worn cortex. A distinctive feature of the assemblage is that the majority of flakes have moderate to good translucency. Many pieces also show weak flow banding. thirteen part or broken pebbles (many representing cores). in some cases. lacked cortex and some of these may have been struck from blocks obtained from obsidian quarries on the island. The majority of flakes show weak flow banding which. however. therefore. Although this very large assemblage was not examined in detail during the sourcing study. the main factor that distinguishes the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian (apart from cortex) is its generally poor translucency. probably collected from a beach environment. were assigned to this group. or with only a small portion of cortex. Abundant microscopic gas bubbles are the probable cause. At least eight of the flakes had been removed from water-rolled cobbles or boulders. but some is medium to dark grey (Rock Colour Chart). and could have come from colluvial deposits. which is commonly vague or wispy. ‘Other grey’ This grouping consisted of 42 flakes without cortex. making a total of 43. and usually very small. Spherulites are generally rare – only about 20 per cent of the assemblage contains spherulites – although they are common in some individual pieces. flakes in this assemblage tend to have a more vitreous lustre. Several other pieces contained portions of rough. mostly lacking cortex but otherwise having similar characteristics to the above. This obsidian. is vague or wispy. However. Crystal inclusions (phenocrysts) are also rare. About 25 per cent of the flakes have some cortex present.

1).1). ‘Pebble-type grey’ It is evident that the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian came from a source that consisted primarily of rounded to well-rounded. water-worn pebbles. and proportion of spherulites. although many can be ruled out on the basis of one or more criteria. Two well-rounded obsidian pebbles collected from the ocean beach at Otamarakau. The size and shape of the pebbles may provide a clue as to the type of environment they came from. of which at least seventeen consist of grey obsidian (Moore 1988). Useful comparisons can therefore be made in terms of the size and shape of the pebbles. One possibility is that the pebbles were obtained from the Tarawera River. although there is a slight but distinct difference in colour in transmitted light. have come from almost any of these sources. or on the beach at Matata just to the north. 10. weak flow banding and very vitreous lustre. The Kohika obsidian also shows a superficial resemblance to some of the Waihi material. which is almost identical to the mean value obtained for the five Kohika pebbles. The Kohika grey obsidian could.1).8. it contains abundant crystal inclusions and lacks flow banding. Most are also slightly elongated. For example. flow banding (and minor colour banding). No obsidian pebbles were found at the mouth of the Tarawera River. However. the shape of the pebbles can be better expressed by calculating their sphericity. Although adequate measurements could be obtained for only five Kohika pebbles and part-pebbles.170 Kohika Potential sources There are about twenty known obsidian sources. but these are predominantly sub-angular to sub-rounded and not well-rounded like many of the Kohika pebbles. which is very similar to the proportion (about 20 per cent) for the entire assemblage of ‘pebble-type’ obsidian. which flows past Kohika. Other characteristics of the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian closely match those of the Maketu material. where rounding occurred either over a considerable period of time or as a result of rapid transportation by water over a considerable distance. notably in flow banding and the poor translucency. with a mean of 0.7 to 0. particularly the poor translucency.74. which ranges from about 0.69 to 0. There. or source areas. Their sphericity ranges from 0. these are clearly small to medium-sized. which lies between Kohika and Maketu.82 with a mean of 0. were also included for comparison (Fig. ‘Other grey’ The main features that distinguish this group are the moderate to good translucency and smoky tinge in transmitted light.75 and 0. Such pebbles are likely to be found only on beaches (coastal or lake) or in rivers. Virtually all of the Tarawera River obsidian is also perlitic and not of flake quality.1). The size range of twelve rounded to well-rounded pebbles from Maketu is very similar to that of the Kohika pebbles and most of them also show only slight elongation (Fig. with the largest being close to the upper size limit for pebbles (Fig. These are both relatively flat in shape and have sphericities of 0. A sphere has a sphericity of 1. which lies about 35 kilometres northwest of the Kohika site. . Fluvial gravel deposits exposed along the river upstream from Kawerau contain common obsidian pebbles.78 (Table 10. only two (17 per cent) contain spherulites. potentially. some of which are well-rounded. in New Zealand. all of the obsidian is in the form of pebbles.66 respectively. and differs in many other respects from the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian. and this is considered now. An alternative source for the pebbles is Maketu. 10. Of the twelve measured pebbles from Maketu. 10.

78 0.7 (min. .5 2. Some of these sources.) 2. Te Ahumata (Great Barrier).7 2.4 1.2 6. very vitreous lustre and shows weak flow banding. roundness and sphericity of Kohika obsidian pebbles Number 1525 1529 1683 2434 3202–5 Roundness# Well-rounded Rounded Well-rounded Rounded Well-rounded? Length (cm) 3.69 # Based on standard roundness scale. Whakamaru (common to abundant crystal inclusions.79 0. Typical Te Ahumata obsidian has moderate to good translucency and a slight smoky tinge. and crystal inclusions are rare.3 2. Maketu and Otamarakau Length (cm) 4 Pebble 3 2 1 Granule 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Width (cm) Based on these criteria alone.2 5.Sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts 171 Table 10.4 Sphericity* 0.0 2. Hahei.1 Dimensions of obsidian pebbles from Kohika. Spherulites are generally sparse (although common in some pieces). poor fracture) and Whakarewarewa (poor fracture). potential sources would include Otoroa (Northland). Cooks Beach. Hahei or Whangamata deposits.9 1.8 4. Fanal Island.5 Thickness (cm) 1. can virtually be eliminated on other criteria: Otoroa and Fanal (abundant crystal inclusions. Whakarewarewa. Overall.81 0. The type of cortex present on some of the flakes also does not match that seen on most material from Cooks Beach. 7 Cobble Kohika 6 Maketu Otamarakau 5 Figure 10. * Sphericity = 3Ί LWT/L3.82 0. no spherulites). Whakamaru and Ben Lomond (Moore 1988).3 2.1 Size. That effectively leaves Te Ahumata (Great Barrier) and Ben Lomond (Taupo) as the most likely sources.3 4.3 Width (cm) 3. Whangamata. however.

172 Kohika there would appear to be a good match. and two of them (2281. They also have very similar values to an earlier ‘bulk’ analysis of Maketu obsidian (MK-1) obtained in 1987. Analytical data XRF analyses of the nine Kohika samples and one obsidian pebble from Maketu (MK1A). that the bulk of this obsidian originated from Ben Lomond. Flow banding varied from weak to strong and three of the pebbles showed slight colour banding. with almost identical values for many trace elements.2 and 10. although the Ba concentration for 3201 is unusually high. Of the four from the ‘pebble-type’ group. which represents the approximate average composition (Moore. The close similarity of the ‘pebble-type’ analyses to those of Maketu obsidian is clearly illustrated in Figures 10. the proportion of spherulites and phenocrysts. were carried out by J. Sources The ‘pebble-type’ samples from Kohika have an almost identical composition to the pebble from Maketu (MK1A). V. University of Auckland in 2002. The results are provided in Table 10.2. 3201) were probably derived from waterworn cobbles. Flakes from the ‘other grey’ group also have a remarkably similar composition.3. however. Fortunately. or below. This meant that for the ‘pebble-type’ group only four pebbles or part-pebbles were of suitable size.) Plots of selected trace elements are presented in Figures 10. From Table 10. Minor differences in some major . although the type of cortex on Te Ahumata material (finely to coarsely pitted) is not the same as that seen on the Kohika flakes. significant differences between the two groups for most major elements and some trace elements (notably Rb and Zr).2 and 10. and one (2281) contained common spherulites. The ‘other grey’ samples have a very similar composition to obsidian from the Ben Lomond (Taupo) source. Cr. unpublished data). It seems very likely. There are. therefore. although this cannot be entirely ruled out. although a few flakes – notably those with remnants of water-worn cortex – may have been derived from another source. The selected samples showed some variation in physical characteristics. with only minor variation in the values for most elements. All showed weak flow banding and had moderate or poor translucency. Ben Lomond obsidian also has a smoky tinge in transmitted light.3). and for the ‘other grey’ group only five larger flakes could be used. (Values for Sc. and there is little doubt that they were derived from different sources. and flow banding. the latter were either from different parts of the site or from different squares. Chemical analyses Sample selection The selection of samples for XRF was largely dictated by the amount of material (minimum 10 g) required for analysis. four were black and one (3201) greyish-black in colour. particularly Rb.2 and 10. Ni and Cu were mostly at. Of the five ‘other grey’ flakes. Wilmshurst of the Geology Department. thus reducing the risk that they had come from the same core. and have been excluded from the table. two were black.3. Three flakes had remnants of cortex.2 it is evident that all the ‘pebble-type’ samples have a very similar composition. the limit of determination. Y and Zr (Figs 10. Sr. one greyish-black and one medium to dark grey in colour. Direct comparison of the ‘other grey’ flakes with source material from Ben Lomond revealed that many have very strong similarities in translucency.

1 0.06 K2O 4.11 4.09 0.19 1.02 0.02 0.79 0.42 1.4 0.09 0.76 12.Sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts 173 Table 10.58 76.88 99.05 0.45 1.46 0.88 100.1 0.12 4.66 99.75 12.1 3.18 0.05 (LOI) 0.04 0.04 0.77 76.83 3.04 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.95 0.47 1.42 Fe2O3 1.79 3.42 12.09 0.14 4.09 TiO2 0.19 1.3 99.69 76.23 99.46 1.68 0.18 12.38 1.82 3.05 0.2 1.02 0.02 0.74 12.01 0.31 (Total) 99.12 1.18 12. unpublished report).72 76.02 0.44 3.05 0.41 0.1 0.2 and Moore (1988.2 XRF analyses of obsidian samples from Kohika and Maketu Pebble type Maketu Number wt (%) 1525 1529 1683 2434 MK1A 1429 SiO2 76.41 MnO 0.1 0.83 99.05 0.79 123 87 25 160 7 1141 24 52 14 11 32 13 LOD* (ppm) 177 26 116 14 8 61 42 73 14 16 3 2 2 2 2 16 10 26 6 4 4 4 * LOD = Limit of determination Rb-Sr 150 Pebble type Maketu 140 Other grey Rb (ppm) Taupo 130 Figure 10.97 0.2 0.04 0.02 (H2O) 0.34 0.05 0.05 3.18 12.55 0.91 3.1 0.63 122 86 24 155 6 680 23 43 16 13 28 13 3201 77.12 Na2O 3.69 12.24 99.38 1.38 1.09 77.95 0.04 0.44 P2O5 0.49 0.01 0.04 0.48 0.41 1.02 0.18 Al2O3 12.2 CaO 0.09 0.83 4.07 3.38 1.16 3.67 12.02 0.84 ppm Rb Sr Y Zr Nb Ba La Ce Pb Th Zn Ga 142 81 29 113 9 767 26 50 19 16 38 14 142 80 28 111 9 751 29 52 20 17 32 15 143 80 29 112 9 749 24 54 20 13 33 14 144 82 29 115 9 751 26 50 20 16 36 15 144 81 29 116 9 759 26 44 19 14 35 14 120 87 24 157 7 676 22 36 25 10 31 14 Other grey 1834 2281 77.03 122 87 25 158 7 681 23 31 36 11 30 14 124 86 24 158 7 689 25 34 16 13 32 13 2812 77.42 0. .18 4.2 Rb-Sr plots for analysed obsidian artefacts from Kohika (solid symbols) and source samples from Maketu and Taupo 120 110 50 60 70 80 90 100 Sr (ppm) Note: Data from Table 10.05 0.04 0.81 99.42 0.1 4.03 0.09 0.05 4.74 77.07 0.48 0.02 0.68 99.05 MgO 0.95 0.14 4.95 1.02 0.12 4.02 0.

unpublished data). Proportions of obsidian The relative proportions of the different obsidians may reflect their desirability and availability. It is possible. while the Kohika samples had similar values for certain elements. other central North Island sources cannot be entirely excluded since the compositional data available for those sources are at present very limited. most other element concentrations are very similar to those of the other flakes and source sample. (1994).174 Figure 10.3 Zr-Rb plots for analysed obsidian artefacts from Kohika (solid symbols) and source samples from Maketu and Taupo Kohika Zr-Rb 170 150 Zr (ppm) 130 Pebble type 110 Maketu Other grey 90 110 120 130 140 150 Rb (ppm) element concentrations (notably Mg and Fe. values for sample 3201 appear anomalously high. in 1987 (Moore. which indicates that Te Ahumata obsidian has significantly different values for Rb. Maketu lies on the way to Mayor Island. which could indicate that it came from a different deposit within the source area. This flake had a slightly different colour and partly waterworn cortex. that. The presence of Taupo obsidian is more interesting. these may still lie within the compositional range of the Taupo obsidian. because it shows longer- . a small proportion of the flakes in this group could have been obtained from other sources. there were significant differences in many others. and also Ba) may be due partly to the fact that the Taupo sample was analysed on a different XRF machine. therefore. Mayor Island was the major source and the two grey obsidians were of minor significance. However. Although the Ba. Comparisons with compositional plots for all the Coromandel Peninsula sources revealed that. but the Zr/Rb ratios are very different. and possibly Ce. Sr and Zr. For example. the Rb/Sr ratios of the ‘other grey’ flakes are similar to those of Cooks Beach and Tairua obsidian. so the appearance of obsidian from there may be no surprise and its low frequency a measure of its perceived value. Te Ahumata can probably also be ruled out as a source for the ‘other grey’ flakes based on the PIXE data provided by Neve et al. while the bulk of the ‘other grey’ obsidian was almost certainly derived from the Taupo source. Waihi can certainly be excluded as a source for the ‘pebbletype’ obsidian on the basis of Rb/Sr ratios alone.

although the variation in physical characteristics demonstrates that the flakes came from several different cores. In contrast. One. Figure 10. 10. the quantity of grey obsidian in Areas A. One could conclude that relatively fewer and smaller flakes were produced from the Maketu pebbles. All of the 175 g of ‘other grey’ flakes could have been produced from the equivalent of just one handsized piece. Certainly.4 shows the relative proportions of each grey obsidian group by both weight and number. while the bulk of the obsidian undoubtedly originated from Mayor Island. a very small proportion – all grey in transmitted light – was obtained from other sources. was derived from water-worn pebbles and characterised in particular by poor translucency. the higher-quality Taupo obsidian yielded a very high proportion of flakes and there were no cores (see Chapter 11).4 Relative proportions of ‘grey pebbletype’ and ‘other grey’ obsidian from Kohika 100 90 Pebble type Other grey Relative Proportion (percent) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Total weight Flakes only (weight) Total number of flakes distance contact and the possibility of political relations between the central North Island and the Bay of Plenty coast in late prehistory. Considering only the flakes.Sources of the Kohika obsidian artefacts 175 Figure 10. Holdaway (in Chapter 11). the other. as shown by S. and what has been found may not be representative of the site as a whole. Little can be said about the relative proportions of the two grey obsidians because the samples are so small. Two different groups of grey obsidian were identified on the basis of various physical characteristics.4). The ‘pebble-type’ constitutes approximately 250 g (60 per cent) of this. Conclusions Analysis of the large obsidian artefact assemblage recovered from Kohika has shown that. was distinguished . which would be equivalent to perhaps ten or twelve average-sized pebbles (Fig. ‘pebble-type’. The total weight of grey obsidian recovered from the site is only about 425 g. ‘other grey’. B and D is variable.

1994. References Moore.. Sheppard. S.R. from where the overwhelming bulk of the Kohika obsidian came.176 Kohika mainly by the lack of water-worn cortex and predominantly moderate to good translucency. while the bulk (and possibly all) of the ‘other grey’ obsidian came from the Taupo (Ben Lomond) source. Obsidian sourcing by PIXE analysis at AURA 2. This provides the first definite evidence for prehistoric exploitation of the Maketu source.J. Also. of course. Consideration of the range of physical characteristics and direct comparisons with reference samples from potential sources suggested that the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian was probably derived from Maketu. Physical characteristics of the ‘other grey’ obsidian suggested that it was obtained largely from either Te Ahumata (Great Barrier Island) or Ben Lomond (Taupo).H. Neve. it was obtained less often than the Maketu pebbles. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. P. 26:93–121 . Unpublished report. 35 kilometres to the northeast. Barker. This was supported by comparison of the size and shape (sphericity) of pebbles from Kohika and Maketu. Physical characteristics of New Zealand obsidians and their use in archaeological sourcing studies.R. although the ‘other grey’ (Taupo) obsidian was of better quality and easier to work. P. One might suggest (very tentatively on present data) that slightly more ‘pebbletype’ was present at Kohika but fewer flakes were produced from it. Holroyd and P. 1988. which reflects the difficulty in flaking well-rounded pebbles. Chemical (XRF) analyses of nine samples clearly demonstrated that the ‘pebbletype’ and ‘other grey’ groups had very different compositions and were therefore derived from different sources. Comparisons with analyses of source samples showed that the ‘pebble-type’ obsidian was obtained from Maketu.. is on the coast between Kohika and Mayor Island. S. Maketu.

The aim of this chapter is to develop an understanding of the way obsidian was used as a resource at Kohika at three levels: first. For instance. Kohika would seem an ideal location from which to investigate an expedient technology. and. on the other hand.11 The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution S. Moore in Chapter 10. Although not the largest assemblage of obsidian artefacts excavated from a New Zealand site. tools and cores with a maximum dimension greater than 10 mm. the stress associated with food acquisition is different. third. The attribution of the obsidian to geological sources was described by P. and expedient to describe instances where the need to have material on hand to work is given more weight. since there can be little doubt that the economy of the people who occupied the site included horticulture and the obsidian was definitely imported into the site. in relation to other sites in New Zealand with obsidian assemblages. the way stone artefact production and use was organised in prehistoric Maori society reflects the overall economic system. two phases of excavation occurred at Kohika. Among some hunter-gatherers the opportunities to capture prey are limited. Holdaway The excavations at Kohika produced over 2400 obsidian flakes. and a further 1040 smaller pieces of shatter. Like other technologies. at the level of the artisans who worked the stone into usable flakes. The lithic assemblage obtained by the Whakatane and District Historical Society is dominated by large flakes.g. The methods of excavation are relevant. Among horticulturalists. it is useful to consider the economics of procuring obsidian. second. Artefact maintenance will therefore be scheduled.J. its use and abandonment. The significance of this observation is considered at the end of the chapter. and the artefacts themselves may be designed to minimise the chance of failure through careful design. the complexity of stone artefact technology and the permanency of settlement (e. This chapter presents the results of a study of the morphology of the artefacts. Archaeologists sometimes use the term curated to describe artefact technologies where the design of items is emphasised. in terms of the various activities undertaken in different areas of the site. a relationship exists between the time invested in stone artefact production. From a theoretical perspective. while the assemblage produced by the university excavation is more numerous and has much higher proportions of small flakes and flake fragments. It may be more important to invest time in ensuring a ready supply of raw material by stockpiling flakes or cores than in the over-design of particular artefacts. Torrence (1992) argues that there is a close relationship between the design of stone artefacts and the amount of time available to modify the artefact during use. Some of the difference results from the different 177 . Parry and Kelley 1987). and the results used to separate artefacts derived from different sources in the analyses presented below. As described elsewhere. it is certainly one of the more numerous and therefore has the potential to add to our understanding of how obsidian was processed in the past.

g. Broken flakes represent the proximal. with a number of negative flake scars covering the flake interior surface. and in the way pieces were modified as a result of use. with both an exterior and interior surface.1) or a core (with only exterior surfaces). it is unlikely that the work of any individual will be identifiable. and the presence of a striking platform or distal termination. While there were genuinely more large obsidian artefacts in the HS Area. More care was given to the artefacts recovered from the university excavation. Kamminga 1982:10). These trends allow the identification of the general reduction sequence – that is. meaning that comparisons between the two assemblages must be made with caution. individual pieces were frequently wrapped in paper to prevent damage. as shown in Figure 11. Occasionally a flake was used as a core. but trends in the way blocks of stone were worked can be investigated in the assemblage as a whole. and are divided into complete and broken fragments using the same criteria as flakes. At the narrowest level. occurred afterwards (e.178 Kohika excavation methods used. For each artefact two further sets of variables are recorded. distal or both). The first set records aspects of morphology that give insights into the way the artefacts were produced from a block of stone. comparisons can be drawn between the Kohika obsidian artefacts and those found in other sites in New Zealand. While much of the breakage probably occurred at the time of deposition. the way blocks of obsidian were worked to form useful products. some of the damage.e. Cores are defined as either complete or broken. However. and a large proportion of the artefacts from both assemblages is broken. each artefact may be placed in a group depending on whether it is complete or broken. Different types of information are relevant to each level. Such pieces are grouped with the cores for the purposes of this study. Analytical approaches The methods adopted to study a collection of stone artefacts depend very much on the nature of the research questions. Many of the flake edges on pieces from the society’s assemblage have been chipped. At a still broader level. Although artefacts were stored together in the same bag. medial or distal fragments of a flake defined on the position of the break (either proximal. depending on the presence of a snap. Finally. the level of damage for the society’s assemblage is considerably higher than for the university’s assemblage. Tools are identified by the presence of small flake scars concentrated along an edge. and to the form of the block that was brought to the site. and these patterns correlated with those identified from the study of other types of evidence. It is perhaps easiest to visualise these questions in terms of a series of different levels of behaviour by the people who lived at Kohika. the ways blocks of stone were worked or used at separate locations in the site may be investigated. The . no doubt as a result of friction during storage. the assemblage may be studied from the viewpoint of the artisans faced with working blocks of obsidian into useful products. Complete flakes have both a striking platform and a flake termination. consideration can be given to how. particularly from the society’s assemblage. As will be demonstrated below. the obsidian was obtained. whether it has evidence of macroscopic retouch. Given the density of occupation at the site. Minimally. and from where. Obsidian is a hard yet brittle material and extremely prone to damage after it is discarded. the absence of smaller pieces in this assemblage reflects the excavation method employed. and whether it is a flake (i. there is good evidence that some of the edge damage is a product of tool function in prehistory rather than post-excavation modification. At a wider level.

In the case of broken .2). or from three or more directions. uni-directional. radial pattern of scars on the exterior surface of the artefact indicates the way flakes were removed from a core (Fig. 11. f (1688). distal flakes have a termination. The identification numbers are given in brackets: a (1703). Flake scars that come from directions at right angles to each other.2 Flakes with different exterior scar patterns.1 Terms used to describe flake fragments. d (1735). 11. e (1893).The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 179 Figure 11.3). Scar direction is then determined in terms of flake scars originating from one of the four quadrants. These are termed uni-directional and bi-directional patterns respectively. subradial. Scar direction can be assessed by orientating the flake relative to the platform (Fig. Scars that all originate from one direction or two opposed directions suggest that the core was worked by striking flakes from one platform or two opposed platforms. The first group is called sub-radial and the second radial. b (1637). and defining four arbitrary directions. c (1907). Proximal flakes include a platform. suggest that cores were worked from a number of platforms by turning the core. and medial flakes lack a platform or a termination Figure 11. bi-directional.

4 Typology for edge modification: a (2617). b (2163). heavy. c (2128). e (1687).3 Quadrants for assessing scar orientation.180 Figure 11. light. g (1850). h (2490). bifacial. The flake is orientated with the platform at quadrant 1 (the figure is based on artefact 161) Kohika Figure 11. notch . k (1635). f (2175). i and j (1822). d (1145).

As Fredericksen (1987) comments. Differentiating tools that were deliberately shaped through edge modification is generally achieved by comparing tools of similar morphology among many sites. Clearly. a wide range of scraping and cutting functions for shell tools is documented in the ethnographic literature (see Harsant 1983 for a review). while less invasive retouch is associated with lighter scraping and cutting. since larger blocks will produce proportionally fewer cortical flakes. more invasive retouch results from scraping. Kamminga 1982:8. flake removals along one or more flake edges. or secondary.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 181 fragments that lack a platform (medial and distal pieces). The proportion of cortical to non-cortical flakes gives an impression of the size of the obsidian block. in terms of the analysis presented here. so it would be difficult to argue that they were being deliberately shaped into a particular form. Fredericksen 1987.4).g. in practice this is not the case (e. a simple typology was developed based on the slope and invasiveness (how far it extends across the body of the tool blank) of the edge modification (Fig. But regularities in both the invasiveness of the edge modification and its shape do exist on tools from the assemblage (see below). a flake edge may be modified to change the characteristics of the edge itself. so it should not be expected that a simple relationship existed between tool form and function. additional variables are used to describe the location and form of the modification. flakes with a high proportion of cortex were removed when the block was first worked.g. While it may appear conceptually easy to differentiate tools produced by these three processes. may not be particularly important. Morwood 1974). This may involve blunting a naturally sharp edge. cutting or scraping a flake of obsidian across a hard surface. that tanged flakes found in New Zealand sites were modified by retouch to form types similar to the Easter Island mataa (Jones 1981). First. For the pieces with macroscopic. although no one-to-one correlation between form and function has been found (e. edges may be modified to produce a tool of a particular shape. so exterior scar morphology cannot be recorded. The general consensus seems to be that steeper. for instance. In many cases this is not possible. What is of interest is how blocks of obsidian brought to Kohika were worked into products that were subsequently used and abandoned. Second. particularly of wood. Investigating how edge-modified artefacts vary in relation to the rest of the Kohika collection allows behavioural inferences to be drawn at each of the levels discussed above. The problem is that stone tools can also achieve a uniform shape through processes like resharpening and even consistent use. None of the obsidian tools found at Kohika has traces of extensive edge modification. Previous studies of New Zealand obsidian assemblages have related patterns based on more or less invasive modification to different functions. thereby removing miniature chips. 11. Third. may modify the edge. It is likely that stone was used for a similar range of functions. exterior scar direction can be assessed only when the orientation of the piece can be reconstructed on the basis of ripple marks on the interior surface. Other variables that may be used to reconstruct the core reduction sequence include the proportion of cortex on the flake. Jones 1972. For the Kohika assemblage. a second . A flake edge is modified by three processes. In addition to a set of variables that describe the morphology of the flakes. Whether these types are the result of deliberate shaping of an edge or of tool use is difficult to say and. Some of the obsidian brought into Kohika was used in ways that resulted in edge modification. There are suggestions. In this study the patterns of edge modification found within the assemblages were used to develop a morphological typology for the Kohika tools. or perhaps resharpening an edge that has become clogged with material through use. Leach 1979). Leach 1979.



set of variables is used to measure flake size. The conventions for recording the basic dimensions (length, width and thickness) for complete pieces are displayed in Figure 11.5. For broken pieces, these attributes are replaced by maximum length, the maximum dimension of the piece irrespective of the orientation. Likewise, for cores a maximum dimension is taken together with the length of the longest flake scar. These measures of flake size are combined with the attributes that describe flake morphology in the analyses presented below. As these progress from the narrowest to the broadest level of behavioural information, additional data concerning the spatial distribution of artefacts are introduced. In most cases, groups of artefacts defined on the basis of shared similarities in morphological attributes (the independent variables) are compared on the basis of measures of flake size (the dependent variables). Statistical tests (mainly t-tests, analysis of variance [ANOVA] and chi-square) are used to establish whether an inter-group distinction is significant. Most of the obsidian is sourced to Mayor Island, with a distinctive green colour in transmitted light. Most of the analyses presented below are limited to the material from this source. Moore (Chapter 10) also identified two groups of grey obsidian, one coming from the Maketu source and the other from Taupo. Less than 100 artefacts are from these sources and they have been excluded from most of the technological analyses. However, they are considered at the end of the chapter when raw material provisioning at Kohika is discussed. In summary, the analytical tests presented below are aimed at demonstrating the way the prehistoric inhabitants of Kohika exploited obsidian at three behavioural levels. To do this, two broad classes of attributes are recorded for each artefact. First, observations are made that relate to the technology of flake production and to modification of the artefact through use. A second set of attributes is taken as a measure of artefact size. Groups of artefacts combined on the basis of similarities in technological variables are then compared on the basis of artefact dimensions.

Core reduction sequence
Complete flakes and cores

To begin at the narrowest behavioural level, the way the obsidian blocks were flaked at the site is investigated. As discussed above, the exterior scar morphology of each piece preserves a record of the flakes that were removed at an earlier stage in the reduction process. Flakes can be broken into groups based on their exterior scar patterns and comparisons made between groups in terms of their mean dimensions. Flakes with the same exterior scar pattern, which are on average larger than those belonging to other groups, were probably produced at an earlier stage in the core reduction sequence, while smaller flakes are likely to have been produced when the core was nearing exhaustion. Thus, a general idea of the core reduction strategy can be achieved simply by comparing the size of flakes with different scar patterns. Table 11.1 presents the results of a comparison of flake length, width and thickness for non-retouched flakes from Kohika according to exterior scar direction. Dividing the flakes into four groups, those with uni-directional, bi-directional, radial and subradial patterns, produces significant results. Radial flakes are the largest, followed by bi-directional and sub-radial flakes, with those having uni-directional flake scars being the smallest. This suggests that cores were rotated frequently during the first stages of reduction, leading to the production of radial flakes. As the cores became smaller, fewer platforms were worked, producing flakes with sub-radial and bidirectional patterns. Finally, flakes were removed from platforms in such a way that

The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 183

Table 11.1

Complete flake mean dimensions (and standard deviation) by exterior scar direction for all areas in the university excavation, Mayor Island obsidian

Radial N=21 Bi-directional, N=26 Sub-radial N=113 Uni-directional N=257

Length 32.5 (12.4) 29.2 (10.8) 27.3 (10.8) 24.1 (9.2)

Width 26.2 (9.9) 19.1 (6.4) 19.6 (7.4) 17.8 (6.9)

Thickness 7.8 (3.6) 6.0 (2.9) 5.8 (3.1) 4.4 (2.3)

Figure 11.5 Dimensions of a complete flake

Length F=6.5, df 3,413, p<0.001 Width F=9.5, df 3,413, p<0.001 Thickness F=17.0, df 3,413, p<0.001
Table 11.2 Maximum dimension of cores by scar pattern for all areas in the university excavation, Mayor Island obsidian

Radial Multi-directional Uni-directional Bi-directional

Mean maximum dimension 39.3 33.6 32.7 34.1

Standard deviation 13.4 10.9 8.0 9.3

N 32 25 11 19

Maximum dimension F=3.7, df, 3,83, p=0.17

they did not intersect with flake removals from other platforms, producing flakes with uni-directional scars. This interpretation is supported to some extent by analysis of the cores. If cores are divided into groups based on the pattern of flake scars, and then compared according to maximum dimension, those cores with a radial pattern of flake removal are the largest, although the difference is not significant (Table 11.2 and Fig. 11.6). Cores with uni- or bi-directional flake removal, and those where flakes were removed from many platforms with no consistent pattern, have smaller mean maximum dimensions. This suggests that the radial cores were abandoned relatively early in the reduction sequence, while cores with other scar patterns were reduced further, the multi-directional cores representing small cube-like blocks that have been worked from every available surface. Flakes removed from these multi-directional cores would tend to have unidirectional exterior scars since these cores rarely have more than one platform on

184 Figure 11.6 Core shapes: a (1525), pebble; b (1747), c (2248), multiple platform; d (2875), e (3179), flake; f (2878), radial


each core surface. Finally, the same general pattern is evident among broken flakes where the direction of flake scars can be determined. Taking all fragments together, those with radial, sub-radial or bi-directional flake scars are significantly larger than those with uni-directional flake scars or where scar direction could not be determined (Table 11.3). A similar pattern is suggested by the comparison of complete flakes from the Historical Society assemblage, grouped according to exterior scar pattern (Table 11.4). Although fewer individual flakes are involved, radial flakes have a longer average length than bi-directional and sub-radial flakes, while uni-directional and plain flakes are the smallest.

The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 185

Table 11.3 Maximum dimension for proximal, medial and distal fragments by exterior scar pattern, Mayor Island obsidian

Sub-radial Bi-directional Radial Uni-directional No clear direction Plain

Mean maximum dimension 29.9 30.1 28.2 24.8 24.4 23.4

Standard deviation 11.2 9.9 9.3 8.7 9.8 9.7

N 81 24 8 266 255 30

Maximum dimension F=5.5, df 5,658, p<0.001 No clear direction refers to those pieces too fragmentary to determine scar pattern. Plain refers to fragmentary cortical fragments.
Table 11.4 Complete flake mean dimensions (and standard deviation) from the Historical Society assemblage by exterior scar pattern, Mayor Island obsidian

Bi-directional N=9 Plain N=7 Radial N=7 Sub-radial N=39 Uni-directional N=39

Length 48.9 (16.9) 46.2 (21.0) 62.1 (21.3) 51.0 (21.3) 41.6 (18.3)

Width 34.5 (16.2) 38.8 (17.1) 42.8 (17.2) 40.8 (14.0) 33.1 (17.9)

Thickness 11.1 (6.0) 6.5 (1.8) 12.8 (6.1) 11.3 (5.5) 9.6 (8.0)


The analysis suggests that the blocks of obsidian brought to Kohika were reduced according to a coherent pattern related to the size of the core being worked. The products of this core reduction were a series of flakes of varying size that were then available for use in various tasks. It is well known, however, that the working of cores produces many flakes as a by-product of knapping. It is likely, for instance, that flakes were removed during the shaping of the core as a prelude to flake removal. Other flakes and flake fragments were produced when flakes shattered under the impact of the hammer stone (particularly common with a brittle material like obsidian). These flakes are referred to as debitage and fall into three groups. First are what might be called technologically special flakes: those with evidence of core platform preparation produced as a by-product of reworking the core to prepare new platforms for flake removals (Fig. 11.7). At Kohika these were limited to a few flakes with evidence of core platform remnants on their exterior surfaces, and unusual flakes that have remnants of an old interior surface on their exterior (in other words they have two interior surfaces). Table 11.5 gives the mean dimensions of the platform rejuvenation flakes, and it is interesting to note that these are relatively large, particularly when compared with the mean length, width and thickness of complete flakes. The large size of these platform rejuvenation flakes may indicate that the artisans attempted to control the shape of the platform when the core was fresh, but this became less critical as the core was reduced in size. The flakes with two interior surfaces are interesting because they suggest that large flakes were bifacially worked as cores. Flakes removed from the

186 Figure 11.7 Platform preparation flakes and flakes with two interior surfaces: a (2882), b (2491), c (1589), d (1752) and e (1588)


Table 11.5 Mean dimensions for complete platform rejuvenation flakes from all areas in the university excavation, Mayor Island obsidian

Mean Standard deviation

Length 33.2 10.5

Width 20.7 3.6

Thickness 7.3 2.5

interior surface of a flake core would preserve a portion of the flake core bulb on their exterior surfaces. The second group of debitage flakes consists of small flakes and chips that are less than 10 mm in maximum dimension. These flakes are too small to measure easily, but for this analysis they were counted and weighed. Their distribution in different regions of the site is potentially informative, since they are produced in large numbers during the working of stone. They are considered in detail below in the section dealing with intra-site spatial differences. The third group consists of small flakes of normal morphology that are produced as debitage during core shaping. Larger than the small chips, they are virtually impossible to separate from the usable products of core reduction on the basis of morphology alone. One way to separate them, however, is to use the size of the negative scars on the cores. On every core the length of the largest flake scar can be thought of as a measure of the size of the last flake removed before the core was discarded. The mean length of these scars represents an average minimum length for flakes below which there is a good chance that the flake was not an intended product, but should be considered as debitage. In the case of Kohika, all cores can be treated together since the length of the largest scar (mean length = 23 mm, standard deviation = 7.9) is not statistically distinguishable among groups of cores with different scar patterns. If flakes with a length below 23 mm are removed, and size comparisons made between groups of flakes defined on the basis of exterior scar morphology, radial flakes continue to be larger than bi-directional and sub-radial flakes, and these in turn are larger than uni-directional flakes (see Table 11.6). Thus, we can conclude that blocks of obsidian were flaked at Kohika to produce flakes with a length in the range 23 to 42 mm. Flakes produced at an early stage in the reduction strategy tended to be significantly longer, wider and thicker than those produced at a later point. In addition to these products, a large number of smaller flakes was produced as debitage.

wider and thicker when compared with all complete flakes without retouch. where the outline of the flake edge has changed.8 (10.7.6 Mean dimensions for complete flakes of length greater than 23 mm by exterior scar direction from all areas in the university excavation.2) 29.8 (10. p=0. If it is accepted that flakes less than 23 mm long represent the debitage produced during core reduction. p<0. some of the flakes from Kohika were either modified by secondary retouch or used in such a way that produced this retouch. Among these pieces a typology of edge form can be recognised.106 Tools with edge modification As discussed above.2 (10.6 (7.2 (7. df 582.1 (5.1. depending on the shape and invasiveness of the edge modification.0 (7.008 Thickness F=6. df 582.1 (3. Mayor Island obsidian Complete flake N=547 Complete tool N=52 Length 25. df 582.9) Length t=3.6 (10. p<0.1 (2.205.3. then in most cases only the flake products of core reduction received edge modification.6) Length F=3. The significance of these pieces can be considered at the same range of levels as proposed for the nonretouched component.4. Those pieces where the . df 3.033 Width F=4.0 (3. df 298.001 Flakes with a length less than the mean length of the largest scar on the cores have been deleted. Pieces categorised as having edge damage have regular retouch along one or more flake edges that acts to blunt the edge without altering the morphology of the flake.001 Width t=3.5 (9. At the level of the individual artisan. p=0. Table 11.205.7 (2. although none of these comparisons is significant when pieces less than 23 mm long are excluded (Table 11. see text for an explanation.8) 6.0) (8. Mayor Island obsidian Radial N=15 Bi-directional N=16 Sub-radial N=62 Uni-directional N=116 Length 37.6.5) Thickness 8.6 (7.5 (3.7) 35.8) 23. it is clear that secondary edge modification was made on flakes that are among the biggest in the assemblage. Flakes with more invasive modification.2) 22.1. df 3. df 298.6 (8.671 Width t=1.258 Thickness t=1.5) 5. Four types are apparent within the assemblage as a whole. p=0.0.2) 32. Pieces with retouch are significantly longer.29. p=0.001 Thickness t=4.2) Thickness 5. df 3.3) 22.9) 7.7).2) Width 28.9) 34. p=0.001 Tests for complete flakes and tools with length >=23 mm Length t=0.8 (2. are described as heavily retouched. p<0. p=0.7 Mean dimensions (and standard deviations) of complete tools compared with complete flakes for all areas in the university excavations.3) 21.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 187 Table 11. df 298.0) Width 18.

What is of interest is whether these types can be used to demonstrate interesting patterns within the assemblage. but few flakes were used in a way that produced modification. The low number of tools involved means that the differences in mean length do not attain statistical significance (Table 11. The products of this reduction strategy can be differentiated from the debitage on the basis of flake size relative to the mean length of scars on the core. B and D. were selected for use that produced macroscopic edge modification. B. but rotation became less frequent as the blocks of material became smaller. width and thickness than those with edge damage or notching. Four main areas of excavation produced sufficiently large assemblages of obsidian to enable comparisons (Table 11.9). Here pieces with scraper modification have a greater mean length. Whether these four types were recognised by the inhabitants of Kohika is immaterial. In sum. comparisons can be made for both the size of flakes produced at different stages in the reduction sequence and their proportions among Areas A. pieces with heavy and bifacial retouch have larger mean maximum dimensions than those with edge damage or notches. While there are too few complete flakes with radial or bi-directional flake scars to make comparisons. the products of core reduction rather than debitage. There is also some evidence that more invasive edge modification was applied to the largest flakes. and that among these pieces the largest flakes were selected for the most intensive use. Area C produced only twelve pieces and a further thirteen came from post hole core samples and have no spatial significance (shown as P in Table 11. those with notched retouch have greater mean length. Blocks of material were frequently rotated during the initial period of core reduction. the Kohika assemblage allows a series of inferences to be drawn concerning the way obsidian was worked at the site. although in this case the notched pieces have the smallest mean dimensions. These are labelled as bifacial.10): Areas A. Larger flakes. although there are insufficient complete flakes with heavy or bifacial retouch. Thus.8). There is some support for this interpretation from analysis of the Historical Society assemblage. Using the core reduction sequence developed above. the evidence from flakes with edge modification does suggest that larger flakes were being selected for retouch in general. While the statistical tests are not conclusive. there are sufficient flakes with sub-radial and uni-directional exterior flake scars for comparison of the size of . The low number of edge-modified tools from Kohika compared with the large numbers of non-retouched flake products and debitage suggests that large amounts of obsidian were available for use at the site. some pieces show bifacial retouch (flake scars originating from both the interior and exterior surfaces) along one or more edges. width and thickness measurements than the equivalent measurements for complete tools with edge damage. D and the HS Area. Finally. Intra-site spatial differences The next level of behaviour to be investigated concerns differences in the way the obsidian was worked within the site.188 Kohika retouch is limited to a restricted region with a concave shape are described as notches. If tools with different types of edge modification are compared by size. although once again these differences are not significant (probably due to the small numbers of some types – see Table 11. there is some evidence to suggest that more intensive types of modification were applied to larger flakes.10). For fragmented tools. The significance of this finding will be considered in relation to other sites below.

4) 35.11). p=0.10 Frequency of edge-modified pieces.8 Mean dimensions (and standard deviation) for pieces with macroscopic edge modification by type for all areas excavated by the university.7.4 (9.6 (12.71.2) Width 42.8 (15. flakes and cores by area.1) Width 22.379 Width t=0.6) Thickness 7.5) 20.500 Thickness F=0.9) 44. p=0. . Thus sub-radial flakes are larger in Area A than in B and D.7 (7.2) Maximum dimension F=1.115. df 49.9 (14.6.4) 10.4 (22.7) 39. p=0.3 (18.5.9) Length t=0.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 189 Table 11.6) 52.5) 30. Comparing these two types of flake distributed among the three regions reveals a pattern of size differences within each technological group. Mayor Island obsidian Complete pieces Notched N=23 Edge-damage N=28 Length 30.1) 29.136 Fragmented pieces Heavy N=10 Bifacial N=7 Notch N=46 Edge-damage N=57 Maximum dimension 36.71 p=0.4 (5. df 2.5 (4. p=0. df 2.71.0) 10.9 Mean dimensions (and standard deviation) for complete tools from the Historical Society assemblage by edge modification type.7 (8.2 (9. although Area A has more flakes greater than 23 mm long (the mean of the largest flake scars on the cores).406 Thickness t=1.211 Width F=0.4.2 (4. Mayor Island obsidian Heavy N=10 Edge damage N=32 Notch N=13 Length 56.4) Thickness 12. All three have similar proportions of complete to broken flakes. df 49. p=0. although in neither case do these differences reach statistical significance (Table 11.6. df 2.200 Table 11.7) 27. df 3. df 49.0 (2.6 (8.9 (10. p=0.9.4) 36.7 (14.2 (13.3 (3. Mayor Island obsidian Area A Area B Area C Area D Area HS Area P Edge-modified pieces 58 56 1 63 115 0 Flakes 396 624 11 622 234 13 Cores 31 24 0 27 28 0 flakes between different areas.9 (12.1) 6.3) Length F=1. while flakes with unidirectional scars are slightly larger in Areas A and B than in D.8. A similar pattern is reflected in flake proportions among the different regions.440 Table 11.

190 Kohika Table 11.7) N=19 Uni-directional 32.7 (9.112 Table 11.2) N=37 Sub-radial F=1.16 Frequency of flake fragments of maximum dimension > 23 mm and flake fragments of maximum dimension < 23 mm by area. These results suggest that there are significant differences in the . Mayor Island obsidian Area A Area B Area D Total Complete 73 93 89 255 Fragments 160 221 194 575 Total 233 314 283 830 Pearson chi-square 0. p=0. Mayor Island obsidian Area A Area B Area D Number 144 404 449 Weight (g) 25.7 91. p=0. Mayor Island obsidian Area A Area B Area D Sub-radial 37.848 Table 11.7) N=53 31.58 p=0.5 (7.222 Uni-directional F=0. than either B or D. Finally. p=0.3 df 2 p=0.001.9 75. df 2.2.0 df 2.13 Number and weight of flakes and flake fragments of maximum dimension less than 10 mm by area. Mayor Island obsidian > 23mm < 23mm TOTAL Area A 160 105 265 Area B 221 214 435 Area D 194 230 424 TOTAL 575 549 1124 Pearson chi-square 14.12 Frequency of complete and fragmented flakes of length > 23 mm by area.12).7 (6.112. df 2.5 (7.6) N=25 32. then Area A has proportionally more flake fragments with a maximum dimension greater than 23 mm than either Area B or D (Table 11.2 (9. if the cut-off point of 23 mm is applied to broken flakes.1 compared with flakes less than 23 mm long.7. Mayor Island obsidian > 23mm < 23mm Total Area A 73 58 101 Area B 93 96 189 Area D 89 109 198 Total 255 263 518 Pearson chi-square 3.8) N=24 32.11 Mean length (and standard deviation) of complete flakes with length > 23 mm by exterior scar morphology and area. phi=0.5 (7.5) N=18 33.5.865 Frequency of complete flakes > 23 mm length and complete flakes < 23 mm in length by area. df 2.

b (96). Area D has the smallest proportion of large flakes. particularly the failure to include smaller flakes in the HS assemblage. 11. both Areas B and D have over three times the number of small flake fragments than A. This would suggest that it came from a region in the site where some large blocks of obsidian were initially reduced. Other activities are represented in this area. This interpretation is supported by the differences in the number of small flake fragments (with a maximum dimension less than 10 mm) among the three areas. Small fragments like these are produced in abundance during the production of flakes. this assemblage included some very large flakes. A similar pattern is suggested by the distribution of cores.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 191 way blocks of obsidian were worked in different areas at Kohika. however. as evidenced by the 28 cores in this assemblage. it would seem likely that Area D witnessed considerably more flake production than Area A.13. so their large numbers in Areas B and D would seem to confirm that these areas were the primary sites for obsidian flake manufacture.14). The complete flakes from the Historical Society assemblage are considerably larger than similar pieces from any of the areas excavated by the university (Table 11. compared with Areas B and D. As summarised in Table 11. Some of this size difference is no doubt due to excavation bias. c (150).8 Large flakes from Historical Society: a (94). Still.8). with Area B in the middle. up to 111 mm long (Fig. whereas A may have been a primary site for flake use. Given that high proportions of small debitage are produced during the working of cores. d (161). e (98) and f (158) . with Area D having the most (36) while Area A produced 31 and Area B 24. Area A has a greater proportion of large flakes. both broken and complete. or that these large flakes represent a cache of pieces intended for later use as cores. Figure 11.

356.0 (8.140 Complete tools Area A Area B Area D Edge-damage 7 10 11 Notch 10 6 8 Heavy 3 0 2 Pearson chi-square 4. Mayor Island obsidian Area A N=72 Area B N=75 Area D N=89 Historical Society N=106 Length 33.8.5 2.8) 21.8 N 22 26 21 Intra-site regional differences for tools with edge modification are much less apparent.8) 6.8) Thickness 6.0 (8. It should be added.4 8.0) 39. the only intra-site pattern that is suggested among the edge modification pieces is for those with concave notches.192 Kohika Table 11. possibly owing to the smaller numbers of artefacts involved. that the small number of artefacts involved may be masking patterns of intra-site spatial variability that are below the resolution imposed by the statistical tests used. If the mean length of the notched area (irrespective of whether more than one notch occurs on the artefact) is compared by region.1 (15.14 Complete flakes with length > 23 mm from the university excavations compared with those excavated by the Historical Society.0 (7. p<0. p<001 Table 11. In fact.001 Thickness F=28.5) 33.0 (6. Neither complete pieces nor tool fragments show any significant difference in frequency among the three areas when divided by edge modification type (Table 11. p=0.380 Table 11. df 3.6) 33. it did not significantly vary among the three areas.16).7.356. those from Areas A and B have mean lengths slightly longer than those from Area D.9) 6. however.15). differences in the size and proportions of flakes among the areas . whatever behaviour was responsible for the application of secondary edge modification.356.8 Standard deviation 3. p=0.6 (8. df 2. although the statistical test comparing these means is not significant (Table 11.0 (18.262 Mean 9.3 3.0) 23.1) Width 23.7 (2.16 Length of notched area of edge modification for all notched tools by region Area A Area B Area D F=1.001 Width F=63.5) Length F=47.66.15 Frequency of complete and fragmented tools by type of edge modification and area Fragmented tools Area A Area B Area D Edge-damage 21 11 24 Notch 13 20 13 Heavy 3 3 4 Pearson chi-square 6. Nor are there significant differences when the total length of the retouched edge is considered.2 df 4.4 (2. p=0. df 3. p<0.5) 11. To summarise.2 (6. it must be concluded that. df 3.0) 50.6 10.9 df 4.4.6 (8.5 (3. On the basis of these results.0.

but there are differences in the frequency of cores and tools. while higher proportions of large obsidian flakes were deposited in Area A.17 Maketu and Taupo obsidian technological types Complete flake Complete tool Core Core fragment Distal flake Distal tool Medial flake Medial tool Proximal flake Taupo 11 5 0 1 10 1 4 2 8 Maketu 13 0 12 2 8 0 6 0 5 Area D 7 5 1 1 1 2 Area D 4 1 1 2 Area HS 5 2 Area P 1 Maketu obsidian technological types by area Area A Area B Complete flake 4 Core 2 Core fragment Distal flake 4 Medial flake 1 1 Proximal flake 1 Taupo obsidian technological types by area Area A Area B Complete flake 2 5 Complete tool 1 3 Core fragment Distal flake 5 2 Distal tool 1 Medial flake 4 Medial tool 2 Proximal flake 1 5 Area HS 1 2 . Complete and fragmented flakes occur in similar numbers from the two sources. and the source of the raw material. In Chapter 10.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 193 investigated. The products of core reduction were used in all regions of the site in such a way that little difference can be found in the size and distribution of edge-modified tools. The large size of the flakes from the HS Area suggests that this region saw the initial working of large obsidian blocks into cores. Regional interactions Behaviour at a regional level can be inferred by considering both the nature of the original obsidian blocks brought into Kohika. Moore showed that almost all of it has the characteristics of Mayor Island sources. Table 11. He also identified a small number of grey obsidian pieces from Maketu and Taupo and this section reports on the technology and distribution of these artefacts. cores and tools for both sources of grey obsidian.17 presents a breakdown of the numbers of flakes. P. Fourteen cores or core fragments of Maketu obsidian are present but there is Table 11. perhaps suggesting that they were used more often at this location. allow a strong case to be made that blocks of obsidian were worked primarily in Areas D and B.

in Area B than they did in other parts of Kohika. In addition. As discussed by Moore. do not seem to have been introduced to the site as raw material. Tools consist of a single artefact with bifacial retouch. fewer than 20 per cent of the artefacts retain cortex. Taupo obsidian is most frequent in Area B. with a mean length of 20 mm (standard deviation 4. Table 11. only the core fragments manufactured from this material lack cortex.0% 31 3.4% 8 5. Complete flakes of Maketu obsidian are smaller than the equivalent flakes from Mayor Island obsidian. complete flakes manufactured from Taupo obsidian have a mean length of 25. Instead. On the other hand. the Taupo artefacts may represent the discarded remnants of tool kits carried by individuals as they journeyed from the central North Island to Kohika.7% 91–100% 14 2. for all technological artefact classes. The Taupo obsidian artefacts. Mayor Island sources Table 11. slightly longer than the uni-directional complete Mayor Island obsidian flakes. they are smaller than the smallest of the Mayor Island obsidian flakes with uni-directional flake scars (Table 11.18 Proportion of cortex on flakes and edge-modified pieces from all areas. three notches and four pieces with edge damage. only one of the thirteen complete flakes lacks at least some cortex.6% 127 80. rather than retrieved as boulders. cortex will also vary in relation to the size of the boulder.9% 849 84. the obsidian from Maketu occurs as small pebbles and. Finally. with smaller numbers of artefacts in Area B. and so will produce fewer cortical flakes for an equivalent amount of knapping compared with smaller cobbles. with smaller numbers of artefacts in Areas A and D and only a single piece recovered from the HS Area. Proportionally.7% 116 85.2% 7 5.7% 16 10.2% Total 638 135 1004 157 .18 provides frequencies and proportions of complete and fragmentary flakes and tools by proportion of cortex for Mayor Island obsidian. The Maketu material was introduced to the site as pebbles. If this interpretation is correct. In any assemblage the proportion of cortical artefacts will vary in response to several factors. however. these people spent more time. In contrast. In contrast.7% 5 3.1).7 mm (standard deviation 8. will often not retain any cortex.9% 77 7. and the HS Area. Rock that is quarried. or picked up from eroded flows.9% 1–40% 47 7. three have less than 10 per cent cortex and only two have more than 60 per cent cortex.7). Mayor Island obsidian Complete flakes Complete edge-modified pieces Fragmentary flakes Fragmentary edge-modified pieces 0% 553 86. Maketu obsidian is concentrated in Area D.8% 4 3. or at least abandoned more artefacts.2% 41–90% 24 3.6). cortical cobbles may be partially worked at the source to remove cortex. of the cores. Of the twelve complete flakes.2% 47 4. It is clear that. Larger cobbles have a smaller surface area relative to their volume. half have no cortex. particularly if cortical flakes are thought to be less useful than their decortified equivalents.1% 9 5.194 Kohika only a single core fragment from Taupo obsidian. all of the grey obsidian artefacts with macroscopic retouch are manufactured from Taupo obsidian.

It seems likely. for instance. the full potential of assigning value to items like obsidian artefacts will come from comparing the results of technological analyses of assemblages from a number of sites occupied at different times in the past. some artefacts were worked intensively while others were abandoned well before they were exhausted. suitable for transport that would not necessarily retain cortex in the normal sense.0 mm (standard deviation 11. comm. in general. obsidian was important enough to warrant maintaining a regular supply through the curation of large flakes. following Torrence (1992). While the inhabitants of Kohika clearly had good access to Mayor Island obsidian.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 195 If cortical cobbles are introduced to a site and subsequently knapped to remove cortex. Fracturing these boulders would produce pieces. p=0.1 mm (standard deviation 10. and rough cortex that may have come from colluvial deposits. This difference suggests various reasons for abandonment.848).19. df 505. This is more than twice to nearly five times the mean length of complete flakes with uni-directional scars from Areas A. They may. Large flakes in the HS Area The flakes. be the source of the large flakes recovered from the Historical Society excavation. As discussed above. or obsidian was valued beyond immediate utilitarian needs. Complete Mayor Island obsidian flakes without cortex from Areas A. either flakes or cores. B and D. The results of recent surveys on Mayor Island report the presence of tabular boulders of obsidian littering some beaches and inland locations (Sheppard. The largest flakes abandoned in the HS Area. P.3).1). . pers. or obsidian was obtained from the island in a decortified state. Some pieces were no doubt abandoned because they were of no further use. Either it was important to maintain a ready supply of obsidian to fulfil a variety of purposes at Kohika itself. that some Mayor Island obsidian was decortified before it was brought to Kohika. such behaviour provides some insight into the economic significance of obsidian to the people who occupied Kohika. Despite the relative proximity of Kohika to Mayor Island. B and D have a mean length of 25. In fact. are more than 60 mm long ranging in one case up to 111 mm. that some obsidian artefacts. and this difference is not significant (t=0. 2002). B and D suggests that cortical cobbles were not the major form in which Mayor Island obsidian was introduced into the site. It is possible that some obsidian with a weathered fracture surface – not strictly speaking cortex at all – was produced by the exposure of obsidian flows on the surface. were retained rather than abandoned. These pieces may well be the form in which Mayor Island obsidian was transported to Kohika. cores and tools abandoned at Kohika vary considerably in size. core reduction leads to the production of progressively smaller flakes. and efficient use through intensive core reduction at several locations within the site. but others may have been deposited with the intention of further use later – an intention that was never realised. While of interest in interpreting the nature of occupation at Kohika itself. particularly the larger flakes. It is possible. and suggests that they derive from blocks that were quarried on Mayor Island. for instance. therefore. naturally fractured surfaces. That this pattern does not hold for complete Mayor Island obsidian flakes from Areas A. therefore. He also notes that most artefacts from Kohika do not retain cortex. flakes with cortex should be larger than those without cortex since. Moore (in Chapter 10) notes the presence of at least two types of cortex on Mayor Island obsidian artefacts: cortex from water-worn cobbles or boulders. while those with cortex have a length of 26. most of the cortex identified on the Mayor Island obsidian appears to reflect weathered.

The large flakes recovered by the Whakatane Historical Society may evidence an area where large blocks . Whitipirorua (Furey 1990) and Houhora (Best 1975:22. In the most extensive comparative study of New Zealand obsidian assemblages to date. first through a process involving much core rotation that changed as the cores became smaller.4).196 Kohika Comparisons with other sites The most striking aspect of the Kohika assemblage is its size in comparison with other New Zealand archaeological obsidian assemblages. Unfortunately. non-cortical flakes and cores. the only assemblages of similar size or larger are those from Kauri Point (Shawcross 1964). Calculating the mean weight for all complete flakes from Areas A. He compared this with the much lower values obtained from assemblages from Houhora and Great Barrier Island. However. Raupa (Prickett 1990. a pattern similar to assemblages from sites like Great Barrier and Houhora. in the middle of the range of mean weights for secondary flakes (those without cortex) provided by Seelenfreund-Hirsch. Although calculating a ratio of retouched to non-retouched flakes has been criticised by Leach (1979) on the basis of inconsistency among observers. It would be interesting to determine whether this low proportion reflects the production of large numbers of unmodified flakes in excess of those required by the inhabitants of Kohika. at present there are insufficient studies of obsidian technology to provide the type of data that might answer this question. but these were distributed among many sites and were mainly composed of very small pieces (Prickett 1975). make it very difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from these figures. 1992). The large and well-studied assemblages from Palliser Bay numbered over 4000 pieces. the large standard deviation from Kohika. but that large flakes may have been used more frequently in Area A. suggesting that the material was primarily worked in Areas B and D. and the large standard deviations recorded for the assemblages studied by Seelenfreund-Hirsch. In an early study. Morwood (1974) showed that the majority of obsidian flakes from the site of Tokoroa showed evidence of secondary edge modification. While there is little evidence that flakes were subsequently shaped to produce particular tool forms. Within the site.5 grams (Harsant 1985). Conclusion The reduction strategy reconstructed for the Kohika obsidian assemblage suggests that obsidian was reduced in a systematic manner. Thus by New Zealand standards Kohika stands out as a large assemblage by containing many large flakes. Bolong 1983). with only 534 of the 3376 flakes weighing more than 0. In fact. compared with sites like Great Barrier. the Kohika assemblages have low proportions of edge-modified pieces in relation to the unmodified component. As noted above. suggest that these ratios reflect important differences in the intensity with which obsidian was used. Seelenfreund-Hirsch (1985) analysed obsidian sourced to Mayor Island from a number of North and South Island sites. the separate areas display different concentrations of obsidian flakes and debitage. the substantial differences in the proportions of modified to unmodified flakes in sites like Tokoroa and that shown by her own study.9 grams (standard deviation 5. B and D at Kohika gives a value of 3. The large assemblage from Hahei was also dominated by small pieces. but only obsidian sourced to Mayor Island is considered. giving rise to macroscopic edge damage. Mean weights are given as an estimate of flake size by assemblage for cortical flakes. larger flakes tended to be used more frequently. Other studies have focused on the proportion of flakes with secondary retouch in assemblages from different sites.

Lapita et peuplement.. rocks and men. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. University of Otago. R. S. Jones.E. particularly large flakes. Expedient core technology and sedentism.12. 1992. There are several other collections from New Zealand archaeological sites of comparable size to that from Kohika.285–304.). The artefact collection from Whitipirorua (T12/16). C. 1:139–51. Leach.L. 1983. pp.G. Archaeological excavations at Raupa: the 1987 season. A lot of spadework to be done.. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. Coromandel Peninsula. 1964. Given the large amount of obsidian. 1974. Boulder: Westview Press. Unpublished research essay. Unpublished MA thesis. Kelly.111–26. 1985. The Hahei (N44/97) assemblage of Archaic artefacts. L. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. 1987. Archaeological excavations at Raupa: the 1988 season. New Zealand mataa from Marlborough. Galipaud (ed. What is Lapita about obsidian? a view from the Talasea sources. 27:19–60... and the Chatham Islands. H.. Law and D. Torrence. 3:89–107. Bulmer.The Kohika obsidian artefacts: technology and distribution 197 of obsidian were initially worked. W.K. Prickett. and there is certainly the potential to make interesting inter-site comparisons. or may represent a cache of large flakes introduced into the site. Morwood. 1990. University of Otago. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 7:5–37. Johnson and C. 1985.. Shawcross. Bolong. N. An analysis of an open-air workshop in Palliser Bay. Inhabitants of Kohika either had direct access to Mayor Island or were in close contact with the island’s resident populations. and R. Furey.G. Journal of the Polynesian Society. Stone flake industries in New Zealand.J. Prickett. N. K. Prehistoric Polynesian stone technology: a study of usage and flaking technique with special reference to assemblages of stone flake debitage of New Zealand Archaic cultural provenance. 1992.L. W. 1987. St Lucia: University of Queensland. and the low proportion of flakes with macroscopic edge damage. Nelson. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. University of Auckland. References Best. Fredericksen.. Unpublished MA thesis.A. W. In S. Kamminga. the lack of technological studies in New Zealand means that few such comparisons are possible at this time.. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. University of Auckland. 1975. Occasional Papers in Anthropology No. 11:77–99. Morrow (eds). University of Otago. R. Unpublished PhD thesis.. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No. A. M. Adzes. A functional analysis of obsidian flakes from three archaeological sites on Great Barrier Island and one at Tokoroa. Over the edge: functional analysis of Australian stone tools.. Historical evidence for the use of unmodified shell tools in New Zealand. K. ORSTOM: Noumea. Harsant. Stone tools and cultural diversity: the analysis of stone tool assemblage variability in New Zealand archaeology. The organization of core technology. 1981. Unfortunately. The prehistoric exploitation and knowledge of geological resources in southern Wairarapa. 1975.C.. Harsant. Jones. pp.149–83. Seelenfreund-Hirsch. In J.14.L. it seems reasonable to conclude that residents at the site had few problems in gaining access to raw material. 1982. Prickett. 1979. Poterie. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. K. pp.M. 73:7–25... 1990. In J. 1983. The exploitation of Mayor Island obsidian in prehistoric New Zealand. C.. Parry. 1972. J. Automated isoprobe analysis of New Zealand and Oceanic volcanic glasses. Unpublished MA thesis. W.. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Otago. 29:25–101. Sutton (eds). abandoned at the site. . 27:73–153.

J. clearly after the abandonment of Kohika. burning. The assemblage dates from late prehistory. The bones were examined individually under direct illumination for cultural and taphonomic modifications. Five intrusive crouched burials were encountered during the excavation of Area A. Taylor. M.12 Faunal remains from Kohika G. Smith. Taylor and identified from reference material held at the Anthropology Department. 198 Common name Human Dog NZ fur seal Whale MNI 4 16 1 1 . B and D. considering body side. These included breaking.G. fish and shellfish from Kohika that represent food waste (bone used for artefacts was described in Chapter 9). Parasites from rat intestines found in dog faeces provide further evidence for the presence of rats. drilling. fish and shellfish by R. Table 12. Area A was subject to regular wetting and drying. R. Dogs. and sawing (Taylor 1984). cutting.W. Worthy and I. G. Worthy. and detailed comments were made by I.K. birds by T. Most of the material was recovered during the university excavations.A. seal and possibly humans were eaten as food and their bones used to make artefacts. Smith This chapter describes the remains of mammals.H. The burials were shallow and exposed and the bones showed advanced weathering. University of Auckland. The MNI was calculated taking the whole site as a single assemblage. which was well preserved. The minimum number of individuals (MNI) present was calculated by determining the minimum number of each element (MNE) and then taking the most frequently counted element. At some time. The spatial distribution of the remains is described by reference to the structural units detailed in the excavation report in Chapter 4. although none of their bones were recovered from the excavations. Taylor. Irwin. people returned to bury some of their dead. The bones were examined by M. Nichol. chiselling.1 Minimum number of individual mammals Species Homo sapiens Canis familiaris Arctocephalus forsteri Cetacean sp. gnawing by dogs and rats. a whale. Mammals Bone was recovered from Areas A. The dogs were kept and eaten at Kohika. T. There are clear indications that bone refuse was gnawed by dogs and rats. Nichol. Irwin directed the excavations and compiled this report. age and element portion as relevant. but some was found previously by the Whakatane and District Historical Society. Mammals were analysed by M. These were left undisturbed or reinterred and were not included in this analysis. birds. in marked contrast to the rest of the assemblage. but not C. Much of it was found in peat and is unusual for its good preservation.

The bones were probably deposited in a fresh state. that were absent from the site could have been eaten by dogs. knife cut marks near the ends of the long bones are consistent with the disarticulation of limbs during butchering (Plate 12.2). pelvis and rib could have been food waste because these bones are not so useful for tools.2 Human bone by excavation area Element Cranial piece Distal humerus Proximal femur Distal femur Proximal ulna Patella Calcaneus Pelvis Ribs Digits Unidentified fragments Area D occupation level Dirty White Yellow pumice House House 1 2 2 1 1 1 Area B Bright Yellow 2 1 HS Area Total 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 Chopping. The size is consistent with a medium-sized baleen whale such as a Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni). plus another fragment not identified to body part. could suggest that human long bones were not food remains. breaking and sawing were observed on more than half of the long bone fragments. Only half of the spinous and articular processes of the vertebra survived and the remainder had been gnawed by dogs. the fragments of patella. Long bones useful for artefacts must have been kept away from dogs. the shafts were used for artefacts after the ends had been removed. The scapula had been made into an awl while the ulna had the anterior margin Plate 12. the rim of the vertebra body and the epiphyseal plate had no trace of gnawing.2). when it was present on a high proportion of those from other taxa. such as vertebrae. However. as they disarticulate quickly. However. Other cancellous body parts.1). Evidently. The absence of dog gnawing on these bones. One piece of human rib had dogtooth marks. These were identified as possibly three women and one young adult male. Table 12. A lumbar vertebra in articulation with an epiphyseal plate came from the Yellow House horizon of Area D. A second intact and ungnawed epiphyseal plate in the peat associated with the White House was possibly derived from the same whale. Marine mammal bone The remains of a whale were found at Kohika. not counting the late intrusive burials in Area A described above.Faunal remains from Kokiha 199 Human bone Four individuals were represented (Table 12.1 A sawn section of human cranium. In addition. and it is only when these bones remain as part of a larger articulated segment that dogs cannot gain access to them (Taylor 1984). Three of the four cranial fragments showed evidence for sawing (Plate 12. These occur today in some numbers in the Bay of Plenty (Gaskin 1967:14). ulna and lower lumbar vertebra. A sub-adult fur seal was represented by a scapula. .

which would have provided a sliver of compact bone useful as a point or a heavy needle. and the body part frequencies are presented in Table 12. where they were also killed. as implied by the extent of gnawing on the surviving elements in Table 12. the observed pattern may also represent the sharing of dog carcasses (Smith 1981:98–9). The estimated ages of the dogs at death. Clark (1995) described the dog remains from Kohika as the most complete and best-preserved collection from any site in the country. The spinous process of the vertebra showed clear evidence of dog attrition. Some hundreds of dog coprolites showed that dogs were kept at the site.200 Kohika removed by sawing. In a metrical study of the bones of the extinct Maori kuri. Assessment of age is possible for fifteen of the sixteen dogs.4. butchered and eaten and some of their bones used for artefacts. are presented in Table 12. Dog bone Plate 12. and by the use of bones for industrial purposes. based on tooth eruption and fusion of epiphyseal centres. A minimum number of sixteen dogs was identified from the crania.2 Knife-cut marks on a human femur.3 by excavation area.5. Table 12. While a relative absence of limb and other bones might be partly explained by their consumption by other dogs. showing clearly that most were killed after reaching maturity.3 Dog body parts by excavation area (MNE) Element Area B Area D occupation level Dirty White Yellow pumice House House 1 10 9 1 1 2 1 2 3 8 4 6 3 1 8 HS Area Bright Yellow Floor 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total D Total Crania Mandibles Vertebrae Ribs Scapulae Humeri Radii Ulnae Pelves Femora Tibiae Metapodials Phalanges Fragments Total 2 4 7 3 1 5 2 1 4 2 4 12 11 2 4 3 9 8 7 5 2 8 2 12 3 6 4 3 6 6 8 9 1 4 64 6 41 15 86 16 27 9 7 7 20 14 11 15 10 20 9 1 25 191 . skinned.

6% Table 12. The method of killing three dogs was indicated on two of the crania by holes in the left parietal bone with inwardly crushed margins (Plate 12.9% 3 3.5% 2 2.9% 2 3. and observed that many were struck on the right side of the head.3 Dog cranium with crushed parietal.6% Total 55 28.7% 3 3. in Area B.6% 9 4. and some other method of slaughter must have been used.3% 21 11.6% 4 6. The two Kohika examples with holes on the left side might suggest left-handed butchery.8% 12 6.4% 4 4. Houses have been found in both Area D and the HS Area.5 Estimated ages of dogs at death (MNE) Element Crania Mandibles Humeri Femora Radii Tibiae Juvenile 1 2 1 1 1 Adolescent 2 4 2 2 3 2 Adult 12 15 7 5 7 10 Not assessed 1 6 10 3 3 7 Total 16 27 20 10 14 20 Dog bone was recovered from two areas excavated by the university. Areas B and D.3% HS Area 17 26.1% 3 4.5% 4 9.7% 5 2. indicating a heavy blow to the side of the head.0% 24 12.Faunal remains from Kokiha 201 Table 12.3).3% 2 4. although they were not excavated. A third cranium had holes on both sides. Allo Bay-Petersen (1979:171) described this method as commonly used on Maori dogs. and probably existed.3% 14 21.4 Taphonomic variables for identified dog bone by excavated area (MNE) Attrition Dog gnawed Rat gnawed Weathered Knife cut Sawn Burnt Area B 17 41. Plate 12.7% 1 1.8% 4 9. The remaining crania showed no such damage. Two of these crania were found in the Yellow House horizon in Area D and the third in the HS Area.5% 18 20.8% 3 7. . and also from the HS Area.8% 4 9.9% Area D 21 24. probably with a stone. if we could be sure where the butcher stood.

where they were observed on New Zealand fur-seal mandibles (Taylor 1984). They show that dog gnawing was more prevalent in Area B than elsewhere. Two cases were from the Yellow House level of Area D. pelves and ribs. that knife cuts were highest in Area D. Five crania had numerous transverse cut marks on the nasal bone (Plate 12. Commonly among prehistoric kuri the brain was extracted by the removal of the posterior part of the cranium.4 Dog cranium with cut marks on nasal bone.5 Dog mandible with ventral margin removed. A dog mandible with its ventral margin removed to provide material for a tool is shown in Plate 12. and also by the recovery of a cranium complete with both mandibles and atlas and axis vertebrae from the Bright Yellow-level midden. possibly as the result of farming disturbance.3. Skinning marks were also recorded on nine mandibles that exhibited between two and 30 cuts on their lateral surfaces. although some on the mid-shafts of the ulna and the distal tibia may be from skinning. The marks could be from the disarticulation of limbs during butchering. Some heavy cuts on the nasal bones could result from the head being skinned after the animal was cool. Plate 12.4 are based on the frequency of body parts in Table 12. mandibles. when skinning was more difficult. Similar cut marks on both lateral and medial surfaces have been recorded from the Twilight Beach assemblage. and such marks are often interpreted as a result of cutting out the animal’s tongue to eat (Binford 1981).202 Kohika Plate 12. Knife cuts were observed on all principal dog long bones except radii. again in the region of the molar teeth.5. one from Area B and two from the HS Area. Finally. The percentages of the various kinds of bone attrition shown in Table 12. and that more bones were weathered in the HS Area. Evidently. the brains of dogs were not eaten at this site. most commonly near the ventral margin below the molars. a suggestion that dog heads including mandibles were probably not cooked at Kohika is supported by the high survival rate of intact crania. Four mandibles also had cuts on their medial surfaces. . but none in the Kohika assemblage exhibited such damage – most were intact. indicating that the face was skinned.4). Further traces of skinning and butchering were observed on crania.

6). with only 27 identifiable elements representing fourteen individuals. such as the brains not being eaten. There appear to be no significant differences in species distribution. this number of bones seems unusually high in relation to the total sample of identifiable bones. Worthy 1999. It remains possible. for food. which is as expected considering the site location. as this taxon is not known in prehuman sites in New Zealand nor in early sites dominated by moa (Holdaway et al. other features of the assemblage were more unusual. However. Banded rail is relatively rare in archaeological sites. or more than. and the pattern of evidence matches many of the general observations made in previous studies (Allo 1970. either by square or by layer. The nearby islands of Tokata. or in an unexcavated part of the site. partly because of the small size of its bones and also because of problems with identification (Worthy 1999). Avifauna The avifauna from Kohika is small. However. Dogs were unusually common at Kohika. The albatross bones were very fragmented and several pieces showed evidence of working. The analysis of the mammal bone. Smith 1981). or possibly seven. has produced some interesting conclusions concerning the use of dogs. 2001). The recovery of a small number of other fragments may indicate that butchering took place elsewhere. While only six. and the skinning of the facial region argues for the value placed on the pelt. They may represent beach-wrecked birds that were not used for food at all. The whale (and possibly the seal) was probably found beached and its exploitation was opportunistic (see Smith 1996). notably of the fragile yet intact dog crania and whale vertebral plates. Rurima. so all data are amalgamated into a single assemblage (Table 12. most of the dogs were slaughtered after maturity and the long bones. kaka. that flesh was consumed at the site. Moutoki and Motuhora would all be potential colony sites. sea mammals and possibly humans for meat and tools by the people of Kohika. The banded rail bone was previously identified as godwit Limosa lapponica by Nichol (1988). but uncertain. which suggests that their presence may have been for tool manufacture as much as. brown teal. follows from its deposition in a stable wet environment. Allo Bay-Petersen 1979. The rest of the terrestrial birds (kiwi. The excellent survival. Human long bones were used for artefact manufacture at the site. with its emphasis on the observation of taphonomic features and cultural modifications. so the latter is now known from only three archaeological sites (Haulashore Island. Clark 1995. harrier) are common in prehistoric sites. Worthy with reference to modern specimens in either his own or the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa collections. The largest faunal component is wetland birds (pukeko. Their skins were removed. The presence of pukeko supports the late prehistoric age of the site. albatross bones were identified to taxon. The bones were identified by T. and we have already noted Kohika’s location on river routes to the inland North Island. Ponui Island and Warrington. so it may be that the birds were taken from a colony near the site. grey duck). unpublished data). Some of the bones could have been intended for trade. mandibles and canine teeth used for making artefacts.Faunal remains from Kokiha 203 Comments on the mammal bone The recovery of a large sample of well-preserved bone from an archaeological excavation is rare in a North Island Classic Maori site. scaup. banded rail. a number of shaft fragments are most probably from one or another albatross species. . As in some other Classic assemblages.

sanfordi. The great albatrosses include four taxa with similar sized bones: wandering D. exulans. either of the first two listed taxa is a possibility. Comments on taxon identifications The lesser albatrosses.6 are those most likely to be encountered on current distributional data. Therefore. Of these. d. quadrate. femur. the six partial bones indicate a minimum of four individual albatross in this small sample. mand. The white-capped or shy albatross (formerly D. hum. tarsometatarsus. chionoptera. but neither could have been taken from a colony as all these species breed much further south. p. or mollymawks. cauta Albatross. Great albatross Totals Elements 1R quad. Albatrosses the size of Thalassarche bulleri include yellow-nosed albatross T. 1R hum 1R cor. size of Buller’s albatross Thalassarche spp. size of Salvin’s albatross Thalassarche spp. size T. salvini Albatross. left. juvenile Brown kiwi Kaka Scaup Brown teal Grey duck Australasian harrier Banded rail Albatross. tt. 1p+sR 1dL tmt 1dL tt 1L tt 1dR tt. eremita. humerus. northern royal D. Apteryx mantelli Nestor meridionalis Aythya novaeseelandiae Anas chlorotis Anas superciliosa Circus approximans Gallirallus philippensis Thalassarche spp. chlororhynchos and grey-headed albatross T. The specimen identified as similar to the white-capped albatross is larger than the Salvin’s albatross bones examined and. cauta) have recently been separated into several taxa: white-capped Thalassarche cauta. as it duplicates elements of bones attributed to that taxon.6 Avian taxa represented among identifiable elements in the Kohika assemblage with data from all squares and layers amalgamated Species Porphyrio melanotus Apteryx spp.204 Kohika Table 12. right. have species complexes in three main size groupings within which post-cranial elements are generally not distinguishable. 1L radius 1L1dR ulna 1dR ulna Part shaft radius 1sL ulna MNE 6 1 1 4 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 27 MNI 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 Abbreviations: R. proximal. shaft. ant stern. 2sR fem. quad. epomophora. snowy D. distal. salvini. cor. tibiotarsus. indet. coracoid. chryostoma. size T. L. size T. and Chatham Island albatross T. Thalassarche bulleri currently breeds at the Three Kings Islands and yellow-nosed albatross are relatively common in the Bay of Plenty in winter. 1d+sR ulna. must indicate another individual. Salvin’s T. mandible. 1R scap. anterior sternum. southern royal D. size of white-capped albatross ?Thalassarche spp. The species listed in Table 12. s. tmt. ?Albatross Diomedea spp. Both Salvins and white-capped albatrosses are common in northern coastal waters at present. . 1L1sR hum 1R cor. bulleri Common name Pukeko Kiwi spp. mand. fem. 1 ant stern 1 ant stern 1sR ulna 1R tt 1L hum.

8. The table also includes a number of small samples that could not be reliably associated .5 1 + 0. However.5 0.5 2 4 109 22 11. the top of the dune was subject to continual wetting and drying and the state of the late human burials indicates the poor conditions for preservation.Faunal remains from Kokiha 205 Fish The fishbone analysis was by R. The fishbone contents of four superimposed levels are shown in Table 12.5 0. the frequency of the species was taken to be the average of the frequencies of the two sides. of which considerably less was excavated. The dirty pumice was the upper depositional component of the White House horizon. The five main elements of the jaw apparatus (premaxilla. Nichol.5 + 1 13 5 Preservation of fishbone was good in the peaty margins of the site but none was recovered from the HS Area. Jack mackerel Cleithra Arripis trutta Kahawai Dentaries Chrysophrys auratus Snapper Premaxillae Nemadactylus macroterus Tarakihi Premaxillae Pseudolabrus spp. maxilla. dorsal spines. Labrids Articular quadrate Parapercis colias Blue cod Premaxillae Leptoscopus macropygus Estuarine stargazer Articular Thyrsites atun Barracouta Dentaries Scomber australasicus Blue mackerel Dentaries Parika scaber Leatherjacket 1st dorsal spine Totals *figures in brackets are numbers of vertebrae found + represents a fragment Common name Area B Area C (3)* Area D (27) 5. By far the biggest sample came from Area D. set out in Table 12. It considered the methods and seasons of fishing. Thus the figures in the table are a version of MNI that could be called ANI (average number of individuals). operculae. Initially. but many crests. which was an area of housing and cooking. and underneath that again was the Bright Yellow floor. environments exploited. all the fishbone from the site was searched for elements that could be identified as coming from particular taxa. where there was evidence for the cooking of food. articular and quadrate) were the most useful. vertebrae.7 Frequencies of fish species from Kohika. These elements are listed in the results.7. scutes and cleithra were also identified. as was usually the case.5 0.5 + (1) 1 5 0. by area Numbers of Individuals Species Most common element Shark/ray Vertebrae Zeus faber John dory Premaxillae Chelidonichthys kumu Red gurnard Operculae Polyprion oxygeneios Hapuku Vertebra Caranx georgianus Trevally Crests Trachurus spp. Below this came the Yellow House.5 + 0. butchering patterns and aspects of the taphonomy. This was an area of housing and living activity and the absence of fishbone can only be a result of the excavation methods. with associated rubbish scatters. This averaging explains the occasional occurrence of ‘half fish’ in the results. One feature of this method is that counts of ANI in separate excavation areas can be added together without running the risk that the pair of elements in a single animal could be counted twice (Nichol 1988). Table 12.5 + 2 9 2 173 0. Quantification was by counts of the most numerous element present for each of the species represented in the material. Where this was a paired element. dentary. Nor was any fishbone recovered from Area A.

6 mm).5 + White House (1) 2 15.5 + 66 1 0. The blue mackerel were generally from 35 to 50 cm in body length (average meat weight around 1 kg). would produce some. summer could be expected to be the season when most fishing was done. One shark vertebra was so small (diameter 2.5 In the case of the snapper. Algorithms based on the more recent study of larger samples were not available to us at the time (Leach and Boocock 1995.5 + 0.5 0. and these have been grouped together as ‘Other’.5 4. One species that deserves mention because of its absence is eel.5 kg meat weight (Morphett 1984). Season of occupation Inferences of seasonality from faunal remains usually depend on the animals being available for only part of the year. surrounded by streams and lake. 1996.5 + 0. Little can be said about the stability of the fish catch on the basis of these samples and it is unlikely that there was much change in the resource during the few decades in late prehistory when Kohika was occupied.1 and 12. Estimates of size for other species were less reliable because of scarcer available reference material and smaller archaeological samples. Clearly. estimates of fish size were made using calculations from Nichol (1988). barracouta are apparently somewhat migratory. the barracouta ranged from around 75 to 100 cm in body length. Though finds of eel bones in New Zealand sites are rare. eels were available locally and survival conditions for their bones were excellent had they been eaten and their bones disposed of in the same way as other fish.2. 1996). In general.5 Dirty pumice (6) 1 0. although this must be tempered by their very low frequency in the site. First. it might have been expected that Kohika. it could have come from a foetal shark. and the resulting size–frequency distributions are presented in Figures 12.5 to perhaps 3. Leach et al. and close examination of the material reveals no trace of their very distinctive bones. Area D Species Shark (verts) John dory Red gurnard Trevally Jack mackerel Kahawai Snapper Tarakihi Labrid Blue cod Stargazer Barracouta Blue mackerel Leatherjacket Yellow floor (1) + 0.5 Yellow House (1) 2 0. but winter fishing could have been done in the sheltered estuary of the combined Tarawera and Rangitaiki rivers.5 2 11 4 4.5 Other (18) 0.5 8 2. and the john dory were all large fish. This has proved not to be the case. The second possible winter . however. Leach et al.206 Kohika with any of the four major units. around 50 cm in body length. or about 1. with most catches in the Bay of Plenty being made between June and September (Nichol 1988:164). Two species in the Kohika assemblage suggest the possibility of winter fishing.5 2 2 0. Table 12.8 Fish species frequencies by layer. kahawai and jack mackerel. Te Awa o te Atua.5 2 12 7 2 0.5 + + 9 + + 1 2 0. and it is a serious difficulty with fish bones that most fish resident in an area are there more or less permanently (Nichol 1988).

Their apparent rarity is caused by their feeding habits. and Reece (1975) does not mention them in his survey of line fishing in Auckland. kahawai and jack mackerel.Faunal remains from Kokiha 207 Figure 12. where they are more accessible and from where they can be chased ashore (Doogue and Moreland 1973:211) or even strand themselves (Doak 1972:24). these fish are not often hooked.1 Size frequency distributions of snapper. According to Doogue and Moreland (1973:211). Ayling and Cox 1982:180). This means that fishermen would have to drop their lines rather close to john dory for them to take the bait. In winter. however. . They are midwater stalkers that slowly approach their prey before suddenly seizing it in their telescopic jaws. Area D indicator is john dory. the fish seem to move into shallow water (Doak 1972:24.

were taken at sea. Bradstock 1985). although this may reflect their greater availability (Crossland 1976). It is very probable that people sometimes fished for snapper in the open waters of the bay and took specimens of several other species on those trips. however. such as gurnard. Graham 1974. Blue mackerel can be taken on the surface close inshore (Ayling and Cox 1982). that the snapper and most of the relatively scarce species. most fishing could have been done in the estuary.2 Size frequency distributions of jack mackerel by layer.208 Figure 12. Apart from snapper. It seems likely. it seems significant that almost all can be taken in estuaries. trevally (Bradstock 1985). However. Bradstock 1985) and stargazer (McDowell 1978). relevant species include jack mackerel (Doogue and Moreland 1973. blue cod and terakihi. Area D Kohika Environments exploited Although some of the Kohika fish could be caught in a wide range of environments. these are all the common species present and in total they represent about 80 per cent of the assemblage. Snapper are usually the most abundant fish in archaeological sites in northern New Zealand and. they were also sought after (Nichol 1988). While they can also be caught in the open sea. kahawai (McDowell 1978. . in this case Te Awa o te Atua.

• Head bones were the most common for every species except jack mackerel. barracouta and blue mackerel imply trolling while snapper strongly suggests line fishing. Taphonomic issues and butchering patterns Nichol considered these issues in detail in his 1988 study of the Kohika fishbone assemblage. Nets would have been useful to catch small jack mackerel in the confines of the estuary or in beach seining. . Dogtooth marks appear on several surviving snapper bones and on one barracouta jaw (Plate 12. where they were fed on scraps and scavenged. • Dogs were kept on the small island site.Faunal remains from Kokiha 209 Methods of capture Although many species can be caught by different methods. where they were outnumbered by cleithra and the case could be complicated by a possible Plate 12.6 Dog-tooth marks on snapper bones and barracouta jaw. • Fishbone did not survive in Area A on top of the sand dune. However. 2003. but was not collected. but no trolling hooks. in terms of their feeding habits. it is sufficient for the present purpose to list only the following observations. It could be expected that body part frequencies were distorted by dogs eating the bones. It must have been present. it seems that. with the stargazer being the only incidental catch. although it was well preserved where it had been deposited in the peaty lake edge in Areas B. kahawai.6). C and D. from the HS Area. see also Chapter 13 of this volume). There are the remains of nets from the site. Some 300 of their faeces were found and there were fishbones in every one of those inspected (Horrocks et al. so that the few schooling species available there were caught in considerable numbers. along with a small number of bait hooks.

It is assumed on distributional grounds that the tuatua is Paphies . Foster (1980). which in practice meant tuatua and. Some attention is given to patterns of exploitation and possible signs of environmental impact. In the case of jack mackerel. and also for the different stratigraphic horizons of Area D. The snapper remains show that people were exploiting the open sea. Investigation by Nichol (1988:174–9) indicates that probably only one species of jack mackerel. Trachurus novaezelandiae. but most of the fish could have been taken in the sheltered estuary of the two rivers. dominates in later layers of Area D. The relative frequency of heads and bodies could be complicated by the feeding of scraps to dogs. while this explanation of differential attrition may apply in some other sites (Nichol and Wild 1984). Data collected at that time included species identifications. (The same argument could be made for the relative frequency of premaxillae over dentaries. Summary On the evidence of the surviving fishbones from Kohika. has the bony nodules on cleithra while Trachurus declivis does not. Nichol involves combining many samples into fewer but larger ones for each of the excavated areas A to D. the cleithra line the rear surface of the gill slit and so belong with vertebrae as body bones. In a discussion of the data. pipi. and measurement of lengths of individual shells from the most common species. All that remains at Kohika of most of the delicate cleithra are bony nodules close to the ventral end of the bone. while bait hooks can account for most of the remainder. a portion of the cleithrum.210 Kohika decline in the relative frequency of heads to cleithra over time in Area D (Table 12. it does not fit the good survival conditions at Kohika. it is possible that fishing occurred throughout the year. the data presented here are those previously tabulated by Foster. Many fish could have been taken in nets. in two cases. His alternative explanation is that many of the jaws of jack mackerel simply decayed in the ground and the rate of attrition was highest in the upper deposit.9 Bone class frequencies for jack mackerel. Table 12. Area D Dirty pumice White House Yellow House Bright Yellow floor Numbers of bones Dentaries Premaxillae 27 4 14 7 24 6 9 4 Cleithra 132 31 12 5 Vertebrae 30 102 39 35 In fish. which should probably be interpreted as evidence that the species was often headed at the time of capture to retain flesh quality. although vertebrae of all common species were present. Shellfish A preliminary analysis of the shellfish from Kohika was made by R. Most species remains were dominated by jawbones. With regard to the identifications.) However. The present study by R. weights and numbers of shells by species in each sample.9). Nichol (1988) suggests that most of the heads of jack mackerel were discarded at the time of capture to improve the eating. The analysis presents species counts by sample and some of the shell length data as graphs. behind the gillslit.

All four areas of the university excavation produced shellfish remains. just a few traces of freshwater mussel remained in the firepits of Square A5. a value in a table of. earlier than the flood alluvium. Samples associated with the White House came . as well as a fifth rather more substantial sample of midden. and are lumped together in this report. ‘5++’ means that five shells were counted in one sample and the presence of the species concerned was noted in more than one other sample. found below the pumice layer at a depth of 75 cm. Square C7 was located in a cooking area with continual disturbance and reworking of the deposit. Therefore. Species identified by Foster (1980) as merely ‘present’ are marked ‘+’ in the tables.Faunal remains from Kokiha 211 subtriangulata and not the very similar southern tuatua. though in very different quantities. and Square B4 produced six small samples. rounded up in each case. where the shell contributed to a build-up of the ground surface during lateral expansion of the site. say. is represented by many fragments of skin or periostracum. In each case the counts given are numbers of individuals.10) listing all nineteen species (whether or not all species were present in the sample). where conditions for preservation were poor. (Note that the samples shown in the tables are made up of many smaller excavated samples combined. or ‘++’ if appearing in more than one sample. but shells of the species are absent. Because the range of species identified from the site is so limited – only ten gastropods and nine bivalves – the contents of each of the areas are considered within a standard table format (Table 12. In Area A. No shell was collected from the Historical Society excavations. It contained four very small samples. Therefore. All samples from Area B were of much the same age. donacina. Freshwater mussel. The great bulk of the shell came from Area D. P.) Table 12.) Triangle shell (Spisula aequilatera) Pipi (Paphies australis) Tuatua (Paphies subtriangulata) Ringed venus shell (Dosinia anus) Cockle (Austrovenus stutchburyi) B1 / B4 1 1 95 1 C7 1 1 ? 1 + + 1 ++ 1 3 13 ++ 1 167 D 2+ 119 3+ 3 10+ 1 25 4 2 1+ 14+ 3 9+ 613 2307 2+ 2+ Note: Foster recorded that the ostrich foot shells from B4 were juvenile. Square B1 produced three samples containing a very restricted range and quantity of shells.10 Shellfish from Kohika (MNI) A5 Paua (Haliotis iris) Catseye (Turbo smaragdus) Cook’s turban (Cookia sulcata) Black nerita (Nerita atramentosa) Ostrich foot (Struthiolaria papulosa) White slipper shell (Crepidula monoxyla) White rock shell (Dicathais orbita) Knobbed whelk (Austrofuscus glans) Volute (Alchithoe arabica) Mudsnail (Amphibola crenata) Green mussel (Perna canaliculus) Queen scallop (Pecten novaezelandiae) Freshwater mussel (Hyridella menziesi) Trough shell (Mactra spp. the few numbers given are significant underestimates. For bivalves this was half the number of valves recorded. In Area C. where most samples can be related to one or other of the living horizons. presumably Hyridella menziesi. all from inside the palisade.

11. Area D D3 Paua Catseye Cook’s turban Black nerita Ostrich foot White slipper shell White rock shell Knobbed whelk Volute Mudsnail Green mussel Queen scallop Freshwater mussel Trough shell Triangle shell Pipi Tuatua Ringed venus shell Cockle 8 ++ 1 ++ 3 D4 ++ 5 D10 + 19 D11 22 4 1 1 1 Totals ++ 54 ++ 1 4+ 1 5 + ++ + + 22 + + + ++ + 2 3 291 490 + + ++ 2+ 3+ 292+ 526 + + 3 1 11 Note: Foster recorded that most of the pipi in D11 were small or juvenile shells Table 12. Samples associated with the Yellow House came from Squares D1.12. D10. and this material is summarised in Table 12.212 Kohika from Squares D3.11 Shell samples from the White House. D3.12 Shell samples from the Yellow House. D8 and D9 Ext. D6. and the contents are summarised in Table 12. Area D Paua Catseye Cook’s turban Black nerita Ostrich foot White slipper shell White rock shell Knobbed whelk Volute Mudsnail Green mussel Queen scallop Freshwater mussel Trough shell Triangle shell Pipi Tuatua Ringed venus shell Cockle D1 2 35 1 1 1 15 2 1+ 2+ 1+ 10 1004 1 D2 + 4 D3 1 D6 D8 21 D9 2 + 1 + 3 1 1 + 1 Totals 2+ 63 1+ 1 5+ 17 1 2 1+ + 8+ 3 2 126 + 309 111 2+ + 12+ 4+ 321 1264 1 1+ 8 15 1+ . D2.13. Table 12. D11 and D11 Ext. Several samples associated with the Bright Yellow floor were found in Square D8 and in small quantities in Square DD. and the material is summarised in Table 12.

These have been converted to size–frequency distributions for pipi from the White and Yellow houses. Foster (1980) observed that most of the pipi shells in Square D. . Area D D8 Paua Catseye Cook’s turban Black nerita Ostrich foot White slipper shell White rock shell Knobbed whelk Volute Mudsnail Green mussel Queen scallop Freshwater mussel Trough shell Triangle shell Pipi Tuatua Ringed venus shell Cockle Interpretation DD + Totals 2++ 1 1 1 3 3 2++ 1juv 1 1 3 3 + ++ 3 2 511 1 1 + + ++ 3 2 517 1 1 6 Comparison of Tables 12. one associated with the White House and another from the Yellow House. but are extremely sparse or absent elsewhere. and the soft-shore carnivores Struthiolaria and Alcithoe. However. The assemblage is dominated by tuatua. These could have been obtained from streams and lakes. The rocky-shore species could have been collected from the coast to the west of Matata. and for tuatua from the White. which is sparse except in Square B4. where juveniles are present. The other exception is ostrich foot. Small species such as Nerita and slipper shell might have arrived as passengers on paua or mussels.11–13 shows that. the contents of the various assemblages remain similar through time and across the whole site. were probably collected incidentally to the taking of tuatua in bulk around the low-tide mark. There is also a range of rocky-shore species.3. a species of the open coast. it appears that there was a decline in the size of pipi shells between the Yellow House and the White House. and the presence of numbers of pipi suggests that areas of sheltered soft shore were available. Freshwater mussels appear in most deposits. though the numbers of shells cannot be estimated. with Lake Kohika the nearest. with two exceptions. which appear in high concentrations in two deposits in Area D. while there are small numbers of paua. probably around stream mouths.13 Shell samples from the Bright Yellow floor.Faunal remains from Kokiha 213 Table 12. while the occasional specimens of other bivalves such as scallop. white rock shell and green mussel. The earlier study by Foster (1980) produced lists of shell sizes within each sample. Cook’s turban. Mactra and cockle suggest the exploitation of limited areas of mudflat. Spisula and Dosinia.11. Catseye is consistently by far the most abundant of these.3). The isolated shells of mudsnail. From these it appears that the size of the tuatua hardly changed during the occupation of the site. 12. One exception is pipi. and this impression is strengthened by an examination of Foster’s summary statistics from other samples not included in Figure 12. Yellow and Bright Yellow levels (Fig.

were small or juvenile.3. . and most could not be measured because of damage to the shells. there was a more restricted area of sheltered shore near Kohika where they could have been more exposed to over-exploitation.214 Figure 12.3 Size frequency distributions of pipi and tuatua. Area D Kohika which are associated with the White House. The consistency in the size of tuatua could also result from their being gathered from beds over very wide stretches of coast. The site was occupied for such a short time that one would not expect marine resources to change very much. the pipi samples could also have been subject to other sources of behavioural and sampling variation. However. So the decline in the size of pipi in the samples could have been greater than that shown by Figure 12. In the case of pipi.

W.d.B. patterns of exploitation and possible signs of change through time. Crossland. Ayling. which were all recorded as having been reduced to fragments.J. New York: Academic Press.. while it is clear that people fished at sea. Auckland: Collins. 1981. may have been used as necklace units. Anderson (ed.10). J. Their bones represent food and. Between the tides: shore and estuary life in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research. Doak. 1976. approximately 80 per cent of the catch could have been taken in Te Awa o te Atua. Moreland. L. 1982.L. estuary and open coast environments. Birds of a Feather. Binford. Fishes of the New Zealand region.165–81.. Bradstock. Collins guide to the sea fishes of New Zealand. New Zealand sea anglers guide. University of Otago. The bird species represent forest.R.. J. and both have been found in the site. Pieces of them could have been used in fishhook manufacture (Law 1984). Summary The Kohika faunal assemblage belongs to a narrow period of late prehistory.. 1967. the numbers and size of individuals. swamp. University of Auckland. Fisheries Technical Report No. . 1979. a whale. Nets and bait hooks could account for most of the fish caught. mudflat. butchering patterns and the weathering of remains.. Unpublished MA thesis. sheltered softshore and lake environments. It is not remarkable except for its large sample of dogs. R. Fish trapping experiments in northern New Zealand waters. The role of the dog in the economy of the New Zealand Maori.. G.L.R. D. The kuri in prehistory: a skeletal analysis of the extinct Maori dog. and G. Unpublished ms. Eel bones were anomalously absent. ecology. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph No. Gaskin. Auckland: Reed Methuen. The bone preservation was generally excellent apart from gnawing by both dogs and rats. 1995. The Maori dog: a study of the Polynesian dog of New Zealand. is that the numbers of juvenile Struthiolaria in Area B. 10:511–16. Unpublished MA thesis. 1985. pp. Wellington: Reed. A study of the fishbone considered fishing methods. a seal. Some fifteen species were identified and. the estuary of the combined Rangitaiki and Tarawera rivers. A study of shellfish included species identification. Doogue. Department of Anthropology. there is the question of the use of shells as implements or ornaments.. The contents of the various collections remained fairly constant through time and across the site. Clark. Kohika midden analysis – shells.Faunal remains from Kokiha 215 Finally. Foster. R. Allo Bay-Petersen. Bones: ancient men and modern myths. References Allo. Auckland: Hodder and Stoughton. In A.E. M. University of Auckland. seasonality. One obvious possibility is the Cook’s turban shells. tools and possibly trade.. The mammal bones show that dogs. 1972. T.). J. Another possibility.M.11 and BAR International Series 62. Some nineteen species of gastropods and bivalves represented open coast. where other shells are distinctly uncommon (Table 12. and possibly humans were eaten and their bones made into tools. n. not previously recorded. 1973. Cox.. 1970.16. Wellington: New Zealand Marine Department. especially in the case of albatross. and J. [1980]. The whaling potential of the New Zealand sub-region.

Pagrus auratus.F. G. R. New Zealand. A treasury of New Zealand fishes. M. 1984. Historical documents. The estimation of live fish size from archaeological cranial bones of the New Zealand barracouta Thyrsites atun. Tuhinga: Records of the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. Smith. Nichol. Bone refuse from Twilight Beach... A working list of breeding bird species of the New Zealand region at first human contact. L. McDowell. D. W. Boocock. I. Irwin. .675–88. 1995. Anderson.N. archaeology and 18th century seal hunting in New Zealand.. Law. 1984. M. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. Horrocks. Reece. 6:5–21.. Leach. Fish galore. 1988. Worthy. [1984].A. Unpublished MA thesis. Holdaway. 7:1–20. 1999. L. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. Taylor. New Zealand freshwater fishes. Williams. R. M. New Zealand Journal of Zoology. T. In J. L. B. 1975. 1984. Wellington: Reed. Mammalian fauna from an Archaic site on Motutapu Island. Morphett.J.M.F.. R. New Zealand. 1996.M. J. Fish length and meat weight from bone size for barracouta (Thyrsites atun). I. Leach.. Department of Anthropology essay.K. Journal of Archaeological Science.. Worthy and A. 2001. Tipping the feather against a scale: archaeozoology from the tail of a fish. Horwood and A.. University of Auckland.Mallon.F. pp. G. Nichol and L. B.J.. and C. 11:35–51. G. 30:13–20. P.M. 19 (1997):125–60. Tuhinga: Records of the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. University of Auckland. McGlone. Journal of Archaeological Science. T.M. Shell points of Maori two-piece fishhooks from northern New Zealand. Leach.. 1996. Bay of Plenty.M. PhD thesis. 1978. 1974. R.J. Pawley (eds). What was on the menu? Avian extinctions in New Zealand.d. Pollen. 18:95–105. Auckland: Heinemann. Davidson.F. Irwin.H. 2003. Dunedin: New Zealand Journal of Archaeology.. University of Auckland. Leach.M. B.G. 3:1–28.M. Nichol. 1981. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology. phytoliths and diatoms in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika. and A.216 Kohika Graham... Estimating live fish catches from archaeological bone fragments of snapper. Numbers of individuals in faunal analysis: the decay of fish bones in archaeological sites. Oceanic culture history: essays in honour of Roger Green. The estimation of live fish size from archaeological cranial bones of the New Zealand kahawai Arripis trutta. D.K. Wild. Davidson.H.M. 28:119–87. J. 1996. B. Brown and A. Smith. 6:1–25. Auckland: Jason. Tuhinga: Records of the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. n. Davidson.J. Tennyson. M. Horwood and S..J.

Horrocks et al. parasites. Werner 1977) and. M. phytoliths and diatoms are among the more likely types of microfossil to be preserved in coprolites. Parasites. starch grains. Williams (1980) as an MA research essay. The walls of pollen grains and spores of ferns and fern allies are composed of sporopollenin. Initially. plus the likelihood that dogs ate human faeces. and of diatoms by S. Hall. 1990.J. Irwin. 1972. and this chapter presents the complete results of that. like phytoliths. There has been little research into microfossils. Roe 1969. Stapleton 1969. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika G.L. that a freshwater lake lay adjacent to the site and that some coprolites were deposited during summer. means that these dog coprolites provide insights into human diet. pollen. although a study by Byrne (1973) included the analysis of parasite eggs. She investigated the macroscopic constituents of diet and their canine origin. Horrocks. 217 . further microfossil analyses of additional coprolite samples from Kohika include the study of pollen.J. McGlone and S. Hall for parasitological analysis. A study by McGill (1989) considered biochemical methods to identify the source of coprolites.L. Nichol (Horrocks et al. The results of a battery of tests argue that they are the preserved excrement of Maori dogs rather than humans.13 Evidence for diet. Further sub-samples were analysed by M. a sample of specimens was analysed by L. M. phytoliths. Williams. Williams 1980). The overlap in the diets of people and dogs. 2003. in press). as described in ethnographic times. a durable organic substance (Faegri and Iversen 1989). Nichol The excavation of Kohika yielded a large sample of faecal material or coprolites. and opal phytoliths are silica bodies found in some plant tissue (Piperno 1988). The palaeoenvironmental evidence confirms that the coprolites are of prehistoric age but follow large-scale deforestation. Dogs were fed on scraps but eaten by people. the presence of bracken-fern starch and high values for the pollen of puha (Sonchus type) and raupo (Typha) provide direct evidence that these were used as food by Maori. ponds.S. H. pollen. Subsequently. as they could not have made their own way through kilometres of river and swamp. Horrocks. spores. their preserved remains are composed of silica. The microfossil evidence. Diatoms are microscopic aquatic and sub-aquatic algae common in a range of environments. lakes and estuaries (Round et al. specifically mid-summer. in particular.J. The archaeological study of coprolites in New Zealand and Polynesia has been confined mainly to macrofossil contents such as bones and plant fibres (Bellwood 1971. sub-samples of all specimens analysed by Williams were sent to H.J. Recently. including streams. given their innate resistance to decay. L. McGlone for pollen. Domestic dogs (kuri) were evidently taken to the island by canoe. In the matter of diet. phytoliths and bracken-fern starch by M. shows that prehistoric dog coprolites are virtual time-capsules of palaeoenvironmental and epidemiological evidence.

Samples were then passed through screens of 2000. there has been relatively little research on phytoliths and diatoms in coprolites (Bryant 1974b. Those for macrofossil analysis were broken down by a combination of soaking in a solution of trisodium phosphate. Macroscopic analysis Methods Specimens were cleaned. C and D. where conditions were less suited to their survival. Thirty-three came from Square B4. They were then cut open for extraction of samples for various analyses.1 shows which samples were included in the various aspects of analysis. measured. marine shell. However. charcoal. Martin and Sharrock 1964. where the site had spread sideways beyond its marine sand core with the continuing deposit of occupational debris. 600 and 210 microns and the residue and liquid retained. At the time of excavation it was thought that this might have been a latrine. Not all of these were analysed. although a concentration of some 130 coprolites was found in Square DD. and ultrasonic agitation. and also in the occurrence of additional ones. 2003. Generally. supplemented by physical disintegration by hand and instrument. Bryant and Williams-Dean 1975. 40 coprolites were selected for study. Riskind 1970. Bryant and Larson 1968. weighed. even though their diets overlap with humans. 19 and 20 from D1. quantified and the results were tabulated (Williams 1980). 24 from D5. Initially. Schoenwetter 1974. Horrocks et al. seeds and hair. Table 13. Gremillion and Sobolik 1996. More recently studied were sample D1E4 from Square D1 and sample DD from Square DD. Only a few coprolites were found inside the palisade of Area D between the living floors of artificially laid sand. 25–30 from D3 and 31–40 from B4. All contained fish bone. comprising sample numbers 1–18 from Square DD. where midden from house floors had spread into swamp outside the palisade. Coprolite pollen analysis has been used extensively in North America to provide information on diet and seasonality (Bryant 1974a.1) and their physical attributes described (Table 13. None were found in Area A. but later it became clear that dogs were sometimes restrained outside the palisade in this part of the site. photographed (Plate 13. Results A notable feature of the coprolites is that they were all found to be generally similar. Kondo et al. The bulk of them came from Area D. Just a few coprolites were found in Area C.2). although their absence could also reflect a functional difference. and the use of pollen and phytoliths by Pearsall (1989) and Piperno (1988) respectively. Williams-Dean and Bryant 1975). Weights and percentages of the components are shown in Table 13. their distribution was scattered and suggested dogs rather than humans. However.3 and a graph . sorted. where occupation had been slight. grit and plant material as the main components. 21–23 from D6. The Kohika coprolites At Kohika. 1994) and also relatively little study of the coprolites of domestic dogs. Material retained by the screens was dried. there were differences in the relative proportions of these components.218 Kohika The analysis of coprolites is described in detail by Rheinhard and Bryant (1992). identified. including fish teeth. more than 300 coprolites were recovered near the swampy margins of the site in Areas B.

2 per cent by weight of specimen no. In ten out of nineteen specimens analysed by Williams (1980).35.Evidence for diet.1.4 only three. Table 13. Plate 13. Head parts were found in ten and fish teeth with fragments of jaw in two. Vertebrae occurred in eleven of nineteen coprolites and spines and rays in almost all. and several pieces were arguably larger and sharper than a person would swallow. . diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 219 Table 13. splintered and chewed. no. Nine specimens contained cycloid scales Plate 13.1 Examples of coprolites from Kohika. parasites. 1 2 3 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 19 20 22 24 25 31 34 35 37 D1E4 DD Macroscopic x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Combustion x x x x x x Parasites x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Pollen x Phytoliths Diatoms Starch x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x of the percentages in Figure 13. The teeth were not identifiable as to species but were unlikely to be snapper. Fish bone This was present in all samples and ranged from 86.1 Samples included in coprolite analyses Sample no. fish bone made up more than 50 per cent of components by weight (Fig.1).4 indicates the body parts of fish represented by bones for which identification was possible.2 shows that much of the bone was fragmentary.5 contained at least fourteen teeth and no. pollen.14 to 12. having been broken.4 per cent of no. Issues of quantification are discussed by Williams (1980:62–7). 13. phytoliths.

concave at other but broken.7 4. Flat at one end. Curved.5Y 7/3 6/3 10YR 6/3 4. Poor surface.70 0 10 9. One end narrows quickly into hooked point.5Y 7/2 2.5Y 4/1 2. Crumbs only received in laboratory. Slight convolutions. Incomplete.8 1. Ovoid but curved back on itself.77 14.30 0 24 7. Poor surface. Good surface.33 2 slightly sweet none 37 4. Concave at one end.43 1 14 17 5. triangular at other.Table 13.6 (4. Oval at one end. Good surface.0 10YR 7/3 2.5Y 7/3 2. Smooth. Very irregular.5Y 7/4 2. Very hard to cut open.7 2. Good surface.0 (2. Smooth. Convolutions.9 4.52 1 Comments Blunt at smaller end.5Y 7/3 2.5Y 2.66 2 3 15.5Y 7/3 2. Smooth. O = oval. Convolutions.6 2.5Y 7/3 mixed mixed mixed 2.14 0 34 57.5Y 8/3 – 2. blunt at one end. Convoluted. Surface good. concave at other.06 1 slightly musty slightly musty slightly faecal none 13 6.5Y 7/3 2. Dimensions of malformed stools given in brackets 3. Slightly curved lengthwise. Smooth. Bullet-shaped.5 (3. Good surface.5Y 10YR 6/3 2.36 1 12 20.5Y 7/2 2.5Y 7/3 Crosssection shape 3 O 220 2 7.5) 2.2 3.5Y 7/3 2. Good surface. Curved. 11 6.82 2 Kohika 5 6 7.5Y 7/3 2. Good surface. Poor surface.7 2.8 2. otherwise bullet shaped. T = rounded triangle .5Y 8/2 very fine 10YR 2.5Y 8/3 2. 1 Length (cm) 2 5.5Y 7/2 coarse 2.4 2.8 3.10 2 20 14.8 2. Convoluted. hint of convolutions.1) 4.7 3. Concave at one end. an amorphous lump. Very smooth.5Y 7/2 2. C = circular.9) 2.5Y 7/3 2. Good surface.40 2 slightly faecal none 22 6. Two pellets pressed together. Irregular.5Y 7/3 3.5Y7/2 2. Could be squashed stool or piece of large one.5Y 7/3 2.5 2. Tapered into hook at one end. Slight convolutions. hard to break open.77 2 2. Poor surface.86 16.41 2 1 19 13. Excavator’s description: large ovoid but squashed.5Y 7/3 35 16. Blunt at one end. I = irregular.5 2. Convoluted.5Y 7/3 2.2 Physical attributes of the coprolites analysed Coprolite no.4 2Y 7/3 2.5Y 7/3 2.0 2.5Y 8/3 2. Graded according to number of intact ends 2. Good surface. Sharply curved. poss.67 0 0 7 27.9) – (5. Notes: 1. no surface.5Y 6/3 2.7 4.9) – (7.1 2. Convoluted.5Y 6/3 2. Good surface.5Y 7/3 coarse 10YR 6/3 2. Very hard to cut open. Concave end. slight convolutions.7 4.5Y 7/3 10R 6/2 2.2 5.0 Weight Com(g) pleteness 1 24. Varying diameter. Good surface.0 3. Poor surface. Poor surface.65 1 Curved lengthwise. squashed in middle.9 3.5 Internal texture mixed Smell none none C-O O O O-T O O C O T O O O O none mixed mixed coarse coarse none – – I C none C none musty none mixed fine mixed mixed mixed medium mixed mixed none none none 4.5Y 6/3 7/3 7/3 2. tapers to bent point at one end. Concave at one end.40 1 Maximum diameter External Internal (cm) 2 colour colour 3.6) 10.8 (3. Flat at one end.3 5.5Y 7/4 2.

3 2 3 5 6 7 10 11 % wt 61.006 1.3 0.6 0.455 100.2 wt 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.3 4.4 0.0 0.731 % 48.3 0.4 0.1 0. 14 wt % 0.0 10.152 33.2 0.0 68.6 0.3 + 21.5 wt 0.031 6.6 51.3 0.0 0.014 4.1 wt % 0.305 100.182 0.9 0.005 0.118 0. Table 5) 13 % 76.9 wt 0.0 . pollen.091 10.623 32.0 0.8 2. phytoliths.1 + + + wt % 0.0 Coprolite no.611 0.069 % 78.276 56.015 0.1 11.2 0.3 0.077 14.097 29.083 40.119 1.250 100.359 100.4 0.442 100.0 0.014 12.0 37 % wt 12.2 0.489 100.1 45.338 100.2 0.186 0.210 0.7 12.0 0.056 + % 82.008 2.012 23.8 0.100 0.059 3.321 72.0 0.4 wt 0.005 0.594 100.6 0.1 0.085 25.007 1.6 1.7 0.077 0.0 1.489 99.7 0.035 7.328 20 % 36.0 0.010 0.005 63.134 0.607 0.4 0.5 0.Table 13.006 % 27.0 0.049 0.030 0.487 0.019 0.8 0.3 0.522 % wt 29.030 54.7 + Fish bone Fish teeth Plant Charcoal Grit Shell Hair Other Total components 0.0 0.231 68.153 1.2 0.005 3.9 1.035 7. parasites.001 1.336 100.2 0.150 33.1 0.146 % wt 38.1 wt % 0.901 100.011 0.6 22.476 100.1 0.2 Evidence for diet.8 99.1 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.005 0.010 0.1 0.002 10.2 0.4 0.771 0.050 1.957 8.1 3.5 30.8 19 wt 0.020 1.904 100.014 0.6 5.026 0.720 0.1 0.9 Coprolite no.9 0.224 64.7 0.2 0.051 10.5 wt 1.011 22.0 0.001 2.154 0.022 2.1 22 24 % 24.687 100.2 0.122 26.2 1.139 100.4 0.0 0.059 13.6 0.007 0.3 0.4 wt % 0. weights and percentages (Williams 1980.4 0.713 100. 1 wt % 1.008 14.038 + 0.4 19.020 1.8 wt 1.2 0.071 + 12 Components of coprolites.207 0.0 35 % wt 68.027 6.4 0. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 221 Fish bone Fish teeth Plant Charcoal Grit Shell Hair Other Total components 0.997 100.084 1.0 0.382 100.082 0.1 + 0.456 17 34 % wt 76.121 24.8 0.333 0.779 86.0 14.283 5.

percentages by weight Kohika Plate 13. In general. However. the fish bone looked like scraps fed by people to dogs. the latter could have come from a variety of species such as yellowtail. and six placoid ones.222 Figure 13. .1 Components of Kohika coprolite samples. some bone of very small fish less likely to have been eaten by people may indicate that dogs ate fish guts.24. trevally or mackerel.2 Fishbone extracted from coprolite no.

5 Seeds from Kohika coprolites Coprolite no. Five specimens (numbers 2. Mt Albert. Lawlor (1979) found remains of all of the same species in his study of the peat swamp adjacent to the site. Species Carex secta Coriaria arborea Cyperus ustulatus Eleocharis acuta Polygonum decipiens Solanum nodiflorum Sonchus littoralis Unidentified a Unidentified b Total Other plant material 2 6 10 11 19 22 24 1 34 37 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 Other plant material was present in all 19 coprolites. Many of the coprolites contained other unidentified woody tissue.5 by number. parasites. Because the seeds have negligible weight. Table 13. mostly pieces of leaf and stem. 17.1). 13. which were identified by means of a reference collection compiled by I. Lawlor (1979) with the assistance of L. Eleocharis acuta (spike rush) and Polygonom decipiens (swamp willow weed) all grow in wet or periodically inundated habitats (Lawlor 1979. Thus these plants were probably growing near or on the site itself.20 to 0. they are quantified in Table 13. DSIR.1.4 Incidence of fish body parts in Kohika coprolites Coprolite no.Evidence for diet. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 223 Table 13. Scott of the former Botany Division. Sonchus littoralis (thistle or puha) and Solanum nodiflorum (small flowered nightshade) all grow in disturbed areas (Eagle 1978).7 per cent in no.4 per cent in no.5 per cent by weight of the components . Coriaria arborea (tutu). Auckland. but in just four specimens was it more than 5 per cent by weight of total components. with the average being 9. phytoliths. some of which were charred. pollen. The use of puha and tutu as food plants is discussed below. Cyperus ustulatus (giant toetoe). some had what was probably bark and some the remains of nut shell. Mason 1976). 19. The material is represented by fragments of tissue. Carex secta (nigger-head). 22 and 35) contained bracken (Pteridium esculentum) leaf and stem fragments. Head Pelvic girdle Vertebrae Rays/spines Scales Placoid Cycloid Teeth Seeds 1 x x x x x x 2 3 x x x x x 5 x 6 7 10 11 x x x x x x x x x x 12 x x x x x 13 14 x x 17 19 20 x x x x 22 24 34 35 x 37 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Nine of nineteen coprolites contained seeds. and in seven there was less than 1 per cent plant material (Fig. Charcoal The percentage of charcoal in the specimens ranged from 33.

6 and one of the pieces in no. and of those all four pieces in no. Because of the small size of the fragments. Grit Grit was found in all specimens. ranging from 6. Mostly it is burnt woody tissue and represents fuel remains rather than burnt food remains. but in one sample a hair was found that was not .9 per cent by weight.1). a natural component of the local sediments.19. numbers 6.224 Plate 13. The simplest explanation for the considerable amounts of grit is dogs eating off the ground. 13. Again.3). Lawlor (1979) and was found to be generally consistent with the presence of marine sand of the former dune and reworked tephra. these figures represent considerable amounts of charcoal in the coprolites and some pieces were quite substantial (Plate 13. the average was 33. In five samples. Considering how light charcoal is for its bulk. none was identified as to species. The grit was compared with samples of sediments collected from around the Kohika site by I. this indicates ingestion by dogs rather than people. All samples except numbers 2 and 12 also contained small pieces of water-rolled obsidian.3 Charcoal extracted from coprolite no. which is common in the Kohika middens. 11 and 24.11 had been burnt. Kohika (Fig.6 is probably bivalve similar to tuatua (Paphies subtriangulata). although the shell in no. Shell Three coprolites.2 per cent. Hair Several hairs and other fibres found in the coprolites were probably the result of contamination during analysis.1 per cent to 68. contained fragments of marine shell. grit comprised more than 50 per cent.

3963 2.5 7.0 weight 0. and the results are shown in Table 13. parasites. and it could be inferred that specimens with low values for grit contained larger amounts of inorganic material of finer grain size.199 x x 1.2. Fish bone Plant Charcoal Grit Seeds Fly pupa case Total components weight 0.3610 Inorganic % 77.5 x 100.4583 0. This hair could have been from rat or dog only.326 0. Two samples of the same weight.130 0. The samples were selected according to apparent variations in coprolite texture.44 85.078 0.1.5685 Combusted weight 0. Further discussion of the test is available in Williams (1980:80–81). pollen.7 32.411 0.34 80.7 and a possible fly pupa case from no.980 19b % 31. Organic component loss-by-ignition tests Eight coprolites were tested to determine the proportions of the organic and inorganic components. Table 13. Insects In four coprolites were the remains of insects. Table 13.95 Variability within coprolites It is established that coprolites can contain residues from more than one meal and vary in content. including a thorax from no.2 13.9 per cent by weight.2075 Weight lost 0. were taken from each end of the coprolite. as it was a wellformed.4714 1.19 Sample no.6 x 100.19 was selected to test the possibility.2352 0.2738 0. However.306 0.6 Percentages of inorganic material Sample no.4632 1.3).46 84.28 83. such as silt.6095 1. long stool that could be expected to exhibit such variation. but comparison with reference samples did not find a match.7404 2.0 26. Specimen no.38 84.Evidence for diet.2647 0. Further tests for variability in specimens are described in the analysis for pollen (below).8833 1.6173 0.0821 0. The weights and percentages of the identified components are shown in Table 13.5986 1.6. a possible antenna from no.7 Variation in coprolite no.014 19a % 40.19. Additional analysis such as DNA characterisation could take the matter further.4 per cent to 85. some chitinous material from no.4999 0. While the results are basically similar.0 .5860 1.28 85. The percentages of inorganic material are higher and less variable than those for grit (Table 13. 19a and 19b.3142 2.32 79.3 29. if it were of sufficient interest.2821 2. the characteristics of dog hair can vary from one part of the body to another (Coutts and Jurisich 1973:74).2 19. 2 5 6 7 17 19 34 35 Dry weight (g) 0.1354 0.7. This shows that the inorganic component ranges from 77. the proportions of the components in different parts of a single coprolite can vary perhaps as much as different coprolites (from the same context) vary from one another.1146 0.284 0.3004 0.260 x 0. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 225 (Williams 1980:82–3).9177 0. phytoliths.

75 x 65 microns).226 Kohika Parasite eggs in Kohika coprolites An initial study by H. Hall in formalin solution. cati. Five microslides for each of the nineteen specimens were prepared and systematically searched with a Leitz SM-Lux laboratory microscope using appropriate lenses. The Kohika specimen exhibited the characteristic pitting of the shell (Plate 13. Methods Samples of all nineteen specimens analysed by L.J. The egg is ovoidal and measures 80 x 70 microns (Plate 13. as cats were not present in prehistoric New Zealand. while those belonging to the ascarid of cats. T. cati. . an ascarid of dogs that is cosmopolitan in distribution (Faust et al. The eggs of this parasite measure (on average) 85 x 75 microns. are a little smaller (on average. No ova concentration techniques were used. Selected samples were photographed.1) yielded one ascarid egg. The faecal sediment was sampled at various depths using a pipette and the material transferred to glass microslides. One coprolite (no. another ascarid found in dogs and cats (Chandler and Read 1961:456). and most closely resembles Toxocara canis. which contains numerous species that parasitise a wide range of vertebrates. Ascarid: Toxocara canis Specimen no.1 yielded one parasite egg whose morphology places it within the nematode family Ascaridoidea. Williams (1980) were received by H. Results Two types of parasitic helminth eggs were identified. cati but is not found in Toxocaris. We can eliminate the possibility of T.J.5) that is shared by both T.4).4 Egg of Toxocara canis. Hall has recently reviewed that study and the complete results are presented here. Plate 13. Hall was included as an appendix in Williams (1980). Two other specimens (numbers 5 and 14) contained eggs of the genus Capillaria hepatica. canis and T. 1968:235).

phytoliths. pollen. In the last case. or by prenatal infection (Faust et al. eggs swallowed by a pregnant bitch travel to the intestines of foetuses.5 Egg of Toxocara canis. often causing the death of the pups. parasites. by eating paranetic hosts. 1968:235). diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 227 Infection by T. Plate 13. Plate 13.6 Egg of Capillaria hepatica. showing characteristic pitting of the shell. by ingesting larvae passed in the faeces of unweaned pups.Evidence for diet. its presence argues most strongly that dogs deposited the coprolites. canis is acquired by ingesting infective eggs in soil. . which is very likely. If the egg recovered from the Kohika material does belong to Toxocara canis.

the presence of Capillaria hepatica means that it is most likely the coprolites are dog. The other belongs to an ascarid and most closely resembles Toxocara canis. the most likely host would have been the rat. or when the liver is eaten by a carnivore or scavenger and the eggs passed out in faeces (Faust et al. an intestinal roundworm of dogs. rats were used as food by Maori and have been recovered from New Zealand archaeological sites (Matisoo-Smith et al. Summary Two taxa of parasitic helminths are represented by eggs in the Kohika coprolites. Eggs are deposited in the host’s liver and are liberated only when the host dies. the eggs hatch and the larvae travel to the liver. However. 1957). However. The eggs on average measured 59 x 30 microns. Wright 1961). hepatica. since eggs of some other Capillaria species resemble those of this species (Skjrabin et al.14 were identical in morphology. lagomorphs and primates. Of the above three mammals at Kohika. However. Waddell 1969. most probably C. insectivores. dogs would be unlikely to wait long enough for the eggs to reach the infective stage. Certainly. including humans (Beck and Beverley-Burton 1968. has been recovered from a wide range of vertebrates. although the range varied from 56 to 63 microns long by 28 to 32 microns wide. Furthermore. One is a species of Capillaria. The eggs must be exposed to the air for four to six weeks before development of the infective stage. points to a canine origin for the coprolites. If. Skrjabin et al. the eggs would be found in human faeces. Although both identifications should be treated with caution until further evidence from similar studies is found in prehis- . where they mature into adult worms. given the triangular human–dog–rat relationship in the Maori way of life. The conclusion is that. The presence of both in this material. hepatica when they came to New Zealand. eggs ingested before the infective stage is reached can pass through the gut without causing infection. carnivores. General morphology places them within the group of primitive aphasmid nematodes of the order Trichuridea (Yamaguti 1961). Thus they are released either when the host dies and the liver decomposes. and in this case. If. The species occasionally infects dogs (Stokes 1973) and very rarely has been reported in humans (Cochrane et al. Capillaria hepatica has an unusual life-cycle. on the one hand. This species. Once ingested. Dogs could become infected with the parasite by ingesting the faeces of other dogs that had eaten dog livers (or infected rat livers).5 yielded large numbers (more than five per slide) of barrel-shaped eggs with opercula at both poles whose shells exhibited radial striations (Plate 13. a common parasite of rats. hepatica. 1968:225). Four others recovered from Sample no. 1957). in the New Zealand context. it remains the most likely proposition given both the morphological detail and the New Zealand context. 1957). the eggs of this worm would be expected to show up in examinations of dog faeces. although chiefly a parasite of rats. one would still expect to find the eggs in dog faeces because dogs scavenge human ones. given the life-cycle of the parasite. dogs ate rat offal. Polynesian rats were probably infected with C. including rodents. its host was probably the rat. it is cosmopolitan in distribution. on the other hand. hepatica in the Kohika specimens cannot be made with absolute certainty. Mammals become infected only after ingesting embryonated ova that have developed in soil for a period of weeks. 1998).228 Kohika Capillaria hepatica Sample no.6). Although the case for C. Details identify them as the genus Capillaria and possibly the species C. humans ate rat livers. but its most common hosts are rats and other rodents (Smit 1960.

phytoliths. pollen. Results The two coprolites analysed for phytoliths (D1E4 and DD) are generally similar in their phytolith assemblages (Fig. The discovery may in future prove to be of value in outlining the etiology and epidemiology of infection by these species throughout the Pacific and Southeast Asian regions. less raupo pollen and no Coprosma or puha-type pollen found in 12a. Sponge spicules were recorded with phytoliths but are excluded from the phytolith sum. parasites. Brassicaceae pollen was found in small amounts in half of the samples. the result is significant. they are extracted using the same process. raupo (Typha orientalis) pollen and bracken (Pteridium esculentum) spores. The pollen counts in sub-samples 7a and 7b. Pollen analysis Methods Sixteen coprolites were sampled for pollen analysis.Evidence for diet. 13. In samples DD and D1E4. Phytolith analysis Methods Phytolith and diatom samples (DD and D1E4 only) were prepared for analysis by a combination of methods given in Pearsall (1989). and the phytoliths and diatoms density-separated with sodium polytungstate. Results In Figure 13. the <5 ␮m fraction removed by gravity sedimentation. sedge (Cyperaceae) pollen. and two more (12a and 12b) were taken from either end of another relatively long (5. Puha-type and raupo occur in extremely high numbers in some samples. As phytoliths and diatom remains are both composed of silica. 1991). To investigate intra-coprolite pollen variation. it greatly aids the assessment of coprolite origin. Myriophyllum pollen and Anthoceros spores were found in Samples DD and D1E4. Pollen samples were prepared for analysis by the standard acetylation and hydrofluoric acid method (Moore et al. One or more of four specific pollen types tend to dominate in each sample: puha (Sonchus) type pollen. these fragments included tracheids (a type of wood cell) of manuka (Leptospermum) type.2. Horrocks the remaining two (DD and D1E4). with minor differences including more manuka-type pollen. are in close agreement. Tutu (Coriaria) pollen was also found in significant amounts in several samples.7 cm) coprolite. Not only does it represent the first recorded cases of these parasites in a prehistoric context. agree to a lesser extent. The coprolites are generally similar to one another in their pollen assemblages. McGlone analysed fourteen samples (1–37) and M.3). This is discussed below. from adjacent to one another in the same coprolite. The pollen counts in sub-samples 12a and 12b. All samples contained microscopic charcoal fragments. from opposite ends of another coprolite. The phytolith sum is dominated by spherical . the number of each pollen type counted within each sample is given as a percentage of the total in the pollen diagram. two sub-samples (7a and 7b) were taken adjacent to each other from one coprolite. M. Organic matter is removed with nitric acid and potassium chlorate. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 229 toric New Zealand samples.

230 Kohika Figure 13.2 Percentage pollen diagram for Kohika coprolite samples .

Evidence for diet. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 231 Figure 13. parasites. phytoliths.3 Percentage phytolith diagram for Kohika coprolite samples Figure 13.4 Percentage diatom diagram for Kohika coprolite samples . pollen.

euplanktonic. while the identified components from . It is commonly found in underground rhizomes and tubers. was present in Sample DD only. Results The two coprolites analysed for diatoms (D1E4 and DD) are generally similar in their diatom assemblages (Fig. Bracken fern has figured largely in theoretical discussions of prehistoric Maori subsistence but this is direct evidence for its use as food. benthic and euplanktonic species have low values. as follows: benthic. epontic. 13. the three sheet element types) and sponge spicules present only in D1E4 differentiate the two samples. diatoms that live firmly attached to a hard substrate such as a plant. Horrocks carried out starch and xylem extraction by density-separation for two coprolite samples. using the method described in Horrocks et al. diatoms that complete their entire life-cycle in the water column. Except for the benthic diatom Nitzschia hungarica in Sample D1E4. Discussion of microfossil results Intra-coprolite variation It is established that coprolites contain the residues from more than one meal and that there will be variation between coprolites and even between the different ends of the same ones. less firmly identified instance of fern root from a latrine at Otakanini pa was reported by Bellwood (1971:71). This is discussed below. Starch and xylem analysis Starch is a complex insoluble carbohydrate and is the main substance for food storage for plants. another epontic diatom found in significant numbers. Diatom analysis Methods These were extracted as for phytolith analysis. meaning diatoms that live on the floor of an aquatic environment such as a lake or stream bed. rock or sand grain. An earlier. Phytolithic fragments of fern tissue are present in both samples. The diatom sum in both samples is dominated by Melosira italica (a tychoplanktonic diatom of benthic origin) and the epontic diatoms Nitzschia amphibia and Cocconeis placentula. comprising species that are recognised as freshwater (oligohalobous) types commonly found in lakes and streams of the North Island of New Zealand (Foged 1979). D1E4 and DD.e. Achnanthes hungarica. diatoms that readily occur in the water column but derive from other habitats.4). No other starch or xylem types were found in the Kohika coprolites. Xylem consists of vascular tissue through which water and minerals are conducted. Five diatom groups are defined according to life habit after Denys (1991).232 Kohika verrucose (from trees). tychoplanktonic. (in press). elongate (from grasses) and unknown type 1 phytoliths. The macroscopic analysis found that. and those of unknown life habit. Starch grains from bracken fern were found in both samples. M. Also present were xylem tracheids matching those of reference bracken rhizomes. Several types of grass phytolith (i.

and grooming themselves with their tongues. and there is a much greater range on the ground because the pollen of animal-pollinated plants settles mostly within a few metres of parent plants. and so does the pollen. As grass pollen is normally produced in abundance and widely dispersed. so the minor differences found may not be meaningful. Faegri and Iversen 1989). puha. their relative proportions varied as much as those of different coprolites from Kohika. these two sub-samples have low total pollen counts (58 and 145) relative to most other coprolites. With regard to the pollen study. would seem to preclude accidental ingestion as background pollen. Some difference might be expected between the pollen assemblages from either end of a coprolite. and dogs were more likely than people to eat grass (Crowe 1981. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 233 the two ends of coprolite no. The relative lack of background pollen from forest trees in Kohika coprolites matches the upper part of the pollen sequence from Square D17 described in Chapter 3. Pollen in the air is restricted largely to wind-pollinated types. and bearing in mind that the sample size was small. but the extremely high values for raupo pollen in sample numbers 1 and 6. Crowe 1981. tutu (petals and juice of petals) and bracken (rhizomes and young fronds). the close similarity of adjacent sub-samples from coprolite no. percentages for all pollen types from the entire coprolite assemblage are in close agreement with the pollen diagram of the sedimentary core from Square D17 – with one major exception. produce coprolites that are treasure chests of pollen and other microfossils. People ingest pollen almost exclusively from the air they breathe or the food and water they consume. The age of the coprolites The absence of European pollen. and indicates that they followed widespread deforestation. Aspects of diet indicated by the coprolites Some of the more abundant taxa in the coprolites were used as food by prehistoric Maori (Best 1925. and especially the abundantly produced and widely dispersed pine Pinus and narrow-leaved plantain Plantago lanceolata types (Tauber 1965. widely dispersed pollen that could be expected to have been ingested by dogs had it been present. low values for this pollen type suggest that grasses were not a major component of the local vegetation. as do low values for grass (Poaceae) pollen (which is shown only for samples DD and D1E4).7 suggests that pollen variation within the same area of a coprolite is negligible. parasites. However. questions arise about deliberate as against accidental ingestion and the interaction between humans and dogs. raupo (eaten as young shoots. phytoliths. Furthermore. obviously supports a pre-European age. A dog origin for the coprolites The macrofossil and parasite evidence pointed to dogs. However. and for puha-type pollen in sample numbers 19 and 25. Riley 1988). The fact that neither of these two pollen types is well dispersed strengthens this supposition. This type comprises . Dogs. Low values for grass pollen in the samples combined with high values for a type of grass phytolith (elongate) provide further evidence for dog origin. roots and pollen).Evidence for diet. and the minor differences between samples 12a and 12b may indicate that this is the case. Riley 1988). Several common forest trees. especially beech Fuscospora and rimu Dacrydium cupressinum (McGlone 1988) produce abundant. pollen. Both raupo and puha pollen are produced naturally in abundance.19 were generally alike. including puha (eaten as leaves and young shoots). The high values for grass phytoliths may indicate deliberate ingestion of grass leaves. by constantly sniffing the ground and eating off it.

the likely candidate is poniu (marsh cress) Rorripa palustris. Puha plants release their pollen from late winter to autumn. The contention that bracken fronds were ingested as food could be supported by the presence. which is released seasonally – at all times of the year. in the two coprolites analysed. A puha Sonchus littoralis seed was found in sample no. The presence of traces of Brassicaceae pollen in half of the coprolite samples may indicate that plants of this family were part of the local diet. phytoliths may sometimes comprise as much as 50 per cent of topsoil volume. 17. or August to April (Allan 1961). which do not figure significantly in Maori diet. According to Piperno (1988). (1994). so it is likely . As this plant is insect-pollinated and produces relatively small amounts of pollen that is not well dispersed in the atmosphere. The microfossil evidence for ingestion of particular plants at Kohika is supported by macrofossil evidence (Williams 1980). However. As with the pollen. none of which figure in Maori diet. In addition. fragments of bracken leaf and stem were found in numbers 2. spherical verrucose. but whether the fronds were eaten by people. and the manuka-type tracheids present in the charcoal of Samples DD and D1E4 suggest the use of this shrub or small tree as fuel. or only by dogs. We take the discovery of bracken-fern starch grains and bracken-fern xylem tissue as evidence for human preparation and consumption of fern root followed by recycling by dogs. is an open question. It is possible that some of the raupo pollen may have been consumed incidentally by dogs drinking swamp water. albeit in small amounts. because bracken forms extensive stands after repeated burning (McGlone 1983) and produces abundant spores that are well dispersed in the atmosphere (McGlone 1988). This is supported by the coinciding presence of swampderived diatoms and the pollen of Myriophyllum (an aquatic plant) and sedge. According to Kondo et al. lending weight to our suggestion that its high frequency in the coprolites is a result of eating puha plants and/or human faeces. there is a strong likelihood that some of the bracken spores in the coprolites were ingested as background pollen. but only 1 per cent of that in the swamp. the phytolith evidence from the Kohika coprolites is more difficult to interpret. so the potential for them to become wind-borne dust is high. Seasonality of the coprolites Coprolites can be considered as snapshots of periods of time no longer than a few days and they provide evidence for the season of site occupation. As the phytolith flora of New Zealand and elsewhere (Pearsall 1989) has been little researched compared with the pollen flora. Thus they could be expected to be ingested as background phytoliths by dogs in greater amounts than pollen and – unlike pollen.19. 6 and 10. an uncertain but probably greater proportion of the phytoliths in the coprolites may be background phytoliths. This is probably the case for one of the more abundant phytolith types. If this was the case. 19. of fern phytoliths in the two coprolites analysed for this. and in the rushes Empodisma minus and Leptocarpus similis. the leaves of which were eaten all year by prehistoric Maori (Crowe 1981). spherical verrucose is found in New Zealand in the leaves and wood of beech (Fuscospora) and rewarewa Knightia excelsa. The charcoal fragments in the coprolites are most likely a result of eating food cooked over an open fire. The presence of sponge spicules in Sample D1E4 reflects the close proximity of the site to the sea. and tutu Coriaria arborea seeds in sample numbers 2. The larger pieces of charcoal are surely the result of dog scavenging. its presence as only a trace if ingested along with parent plants would not be unexpected.234 Kohika 31 per cent of the total pollen content of the coprolites. 22 and 35.

The presence of significant proportions of tutu pollen in some samples may narrow this down to spring–summer. There is microfossil evidence for bracken fern. Second. Significant amounts of raupo. cannot be ruled out entirely. raupo and marsh cress. or October to March (Allan 1961). suggesting that they were deposited in mid-summer. or December and January (Allan 1961). as various parts of puha and raupo plants were eaten all year by Maori (Crowe 1981. the dominance of the freshwater tychoplanktonic taxon Melosira italica indicates alkaliphilous (or base-rich) to circumneutral waters with a pH range of 7–8 (Denys 1991). Riley 1988). However. it is likely that the water source was vegetated by aquatic plants (a notion supported by the coinciding presence of Myriophyllum pollen) and possibly had a sandy substrate. At Kohika the macrofossil evidence indicates that fish and certain gathered plants were part of the regular diet. sand grains or rocks. and the presence of raupo pollen constrains this further. the dogs were effectively marooned for most of the time. The close agreement of the percentages of each pollen type (except puha) in the entire coprolite sample with the general pollen diagram from Square D17 indicates that dog coprolites are potentially valuable in providing detailed evidence of palaeoenvironmental conditions. Cocconeis placentula and Achnanthes hungarica. the possibility that some of the coprolites were deposited in winter. season of occupation and health. pollen. In the American southwest. However. It is now known that dogs in New Zealand prehistory suffered . Both marine sand deriving from a former shoreline and sandy tephra are locally abundant. Summary It is clear that analysis of dog coprolites can provide evidence that bears on prehistoric human diet. sedge and Myriophyllum pollen in the Kohika coprolites indicate that wetlands containing these taxa were within the habitat range of the individuals who deposited them. So does the presence of Anthoceros (a hornwort) spores. puha. parasites. chronology. site environment. However. The paucity of tree pollen and the abundance of bracken spores suggest a deforested landscape. are also known to prefer alkaliphilous waters (Denys 1991). The assemblages are characterised by two life-habit groups that signal a common pH level for the local water source. First. the Kohika swamp was probably weakly alkaline. Nitzschia amphibia. phytoliths. Because these groups comprise a major proportion of the diatom sum. As these species also indicate algal growth on firm surfaces such as plants. Diatoms provide further clues as to the nature of the swamp system. because this taxon typically colonises freshly exposed soils. This was most likely the swamp directly adjacent to Kohika. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 235 that the coprolites studied belong to this rather broad span. Indications for the local environment Rheinhard and Bryant (1992) suggest caution when looking for palaeoenvironmental signals in pollen assemblages in human coprolites because humans are highly mobile and selective. and suggested that some of it could have come from eating fresh cattail heads or from eating pollen in pure form.Evidence for diet. on the island of Kohika. Williams-Dean and Bryant (1975) found bulrush pollen of the same genus as raupo (cattail Typha latifolia) in human coprolites from the site of Antelope House. the dominant taxa within the epontic group. it is possible that pollen of these taxa adhering to parent plants would have been ingested if the plants were eaten after the flowering period. when forest trees and many other types of plant would not have been releasing pollen.

Opal phytoliths of New Zealand. Animal agents and vectors of human disease. Wellington: Dominion Museum Bulletin No. Excavations at Otakanini Pa.C. E.G. A check-list of the diatoms in the Holocene deposits of the western Belgian coastal plain with a survey of their ecological requirements. G. 47. Antelope House: a paleoscatological perspective. Denys. K. Sobolik.S.. Beverley-Burton.. Iversen. 31:751–5.C. Cramer. Bibliotheca Phycologica. No.P. H. Williams-Dean. 1978.M. Bryant. M. P.C. Faegri. P. V. Horrocks. References Allan. The Devil’s Mouth Site: the third season. 37:56–95. Prehistoric coprolites.M. 1968. 1925. Vaduz: J. Bryant. V. A. Many of the coprolites belonged to summer and some of these to mid-summer. Journal of Archaeological Science. G.S. Journal of Archaeological Science.. Read. South Africa Medical Journal. Unpublished MA thesis. Capillaria and Trichinella Infections.G. McGlone. 2:259–91. and G. By the time of occupation of Kohika. Hall. Irwin. D.C. 1968. Jurisich. Diatoms in New Zealand. South Kaipara Harbour. Pollen... Helminthological Abstracts. Prehistoric diet in southwest Texas: the coprolite evidence. Jr. K..M.. p.. and D. J. Eagle’s 100 shrubs and climbers of New Zealand. University of Auckland. 1973. Wilcocks. Bryant. Chandler.57–70. 2003. University of Chicago. L. C. Introduction to parasitology. M. Sorrow (ed. M.C. 1996. Bryant. A. and M..). Val Verde County. In P.. Best.. R. Gremillion. Cochrane. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.. New York: Academic Press. 1981. 1974a. Lincoln: Manaaki Whenua Press. and J.. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger. Austin: Papers of the Texas Archaeological Salvage Project. S. Kentucky. Archeology of the Mammoth Cave area. Jr. 1972.9. and C. 1989.R. 1991. Faust.. Kondo. Jr. M. Beaver and R. Auckland: Collins. Wellington: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.14. Sutton.J. The pathology of Trichuris. Professional Paper 1991/2. and M. In B. Byrne. Atkinson. Pollen analysis of prehistoric human feces from Mammoth Cave. Jones and D. Bay of Plenty. 1957. 30:13–20. I. V. Fortifications and economy in prehistoric New Zealand.W. P.236 Kohika infestations of an identified round worm.D. A. Pollen analysis of the Devil’s Mouth Site. 1974b. 232:100–9. P. 5:2– 85. Childs and I. Bellwood. 1994. Bellwood. Vol. V...M.. J. Texbook of pollen analysis.J. Williams. N. 1978. Jr. Coutts. Sagorin and M. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. and K. 1975. pp. Irwin..246. Crowe. Foged.. 1973. in press. Service Géologique de Belgique. The coprolites of man. 37:529–39. Nichol and L. A field guide to the native edible plants of New Zealand. 1961. much of the forest had been cleared and there was lake and swamp in the immediate vicinity.J. Unpublished PhD thesis. 1971. Horrocks. American Antiquity. 1968. Starch grains and xylem of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) and bracken (Pteridium esculentum) in archaeological deposits from northern New Zealand. Capillaria hepatica infection in man. New Zealand. New York: John Wiley. the North Island. Watson (ed. L.J. Current Anthropology. 37:1–26. 1961. . E. Flora of New Zealand. Beck. Larson. phytoliths and diatoms in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika. 39:407–20. Canine passengers in Maori canoes. Maori agriculture. and the rat was host to another specific parasite. Texas. H. Chichester: John Wiley. Auckland: Collins. Jung.203–9.L. World Archaeology.).H. 1979. pp. Eagle. Scientific American. Dietary variability among prehistoric foragerfarmers of eastern North America.

N. McGlone. N.G. Bryant Jr... 49:109. R. The biology of diatoms. 1991. Texas. The identity of defecators in prehistoric coprolite studies: towards a solution by biochemical research. Pearsall. A. 1969.I. J. Jerusalem). Smit. D. H. No. Pollen analysis. F. 1969. and J. New Zealand. Unpublished MA research essay.. Stokes.M. Australian Veterinary Journal. Martin. L. Sharrock.H.).. phytoliths.. K. Healy (ed. E. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 1974. McGlone. D. Crawford and D. 1988. Shikhobalova and I.H. IV. VI. Penny and D. 1998. Schiffer (ed. parasites. American Antiquity. University of Auckland. Palaeoenvironment analysis: an appraisal of the prehistoric environment of the Kohika Swamp Pa (N68/140).A. C. McGill.J. . Rheinhard. Collinson.R. J.M. Maori vegetable cooking: traditional and modern methods. D.). Mason...D.).. 28:473–8. University of Auckland. 1979. pp. Archaeological investigations.. Paleoethnobotany: a handbook of procedures. New Zealand Journal of Botany (Suppl. Alexander (ed. Archaeological excavations at Parida Cave. 1965. and F.M. Flora of New Zealand.). I.. K.. P.S. Essentials of nematodology. USA. San Diego: Academic Press.245–88. Pollen analysis of human coprolites from Parida Cave. 1957. 1990. Berkeley: University of California Press. Riskind. M.. D. Schoenwetter.89–101. Unpublished MA thesis. Riley. 95:15145–50. Series 89.). pollen. 63:63–5. Matisoo-Smith. 1989. Webb. D. In M. J. 1991.P.J. G. Tauber. 1969.M. Phytolith analysis: an archaeological and geological perspective. Wellington: SIR Publishing. Austin: Papers of the Archaeological Salvage Project. Pollen analysis of prehistoric human feces from Salts Cave. 30:168–80. San Diego: Academic Press.557–99. The diatom: biology and morphology of the genera. 1980. Methyridine in the treatment of experimental Capillaria hepatica infection in the rat.B. Birran for Israel Program for Scientific Translation. Patterns of prehistoric human mobility in Polynesia indicated by mitochondrial DNA from the Pacific rat.. Kentucky. W. Garnock-Jones. In K. Braggins. pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Christchurch: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. 1988.. 1960. diatoms and starch grains in prehistoric coprolites from Kohika 237 Large.E. In B.. Capillaria hepatica in a dog.A. Paraparaumu: Viking Sevenseas NZ. In P.S. Unpublished MA thesis.V. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Huntley and T.19. Skrjabin (ed. Lawlor. Skrjabin.. In J.G. 1976. Stapleton.. Capillaria hepatica infestation in a dog. Val Verde County. New York: Academic Press. 1983.F. University of Otago. Webb and M. Moore.R.S. 18:1–10. Sykes and P. A.. M.E.. Vol. Onderdestepoort Journal of Veterinary Research. Bay of Plenty. Polynesian deforestation of New Zealand: a preliminary synthesis. Mann. Coprolite analysis: a biological perspective on Archaeology. Round... Kohika coprolites. Identification of weeds and clovers. pp. Wellington: Editorial Services.J. Roberts. R. Lambert. Webb (eds). Archaeology of Oceania. Waddell. Piperno.203–9. Archeology of the Mammoth Cave area. 1964.Evidence for diet. The survival of organic residues after human consumption. M. Pollen analysis of prehistoric human feces: a new approach to ethnobotany. Differential pollen dispersion and the interpretation of pollen diagrams.E. M.S. Werner.J. Geological Survey of Denmark II. Orlov. and V.M. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology. pp. 1992. 1977. Vol. 1989. Roe. Trichocephalidae and Capillariidae of animals and man and the diseases caused by them.). Archaeological method and theory. Unpublished MA thesis. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR (translated from Russian in 1970 by A. 1988. P. Allen.. London: Blackwell. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. Spore atlas of New Zealand ferns and fern allies. Irwin.M. University of Auckland. Aquatic weeds. Unpublished research essay... University of Otago. In B. Williams.I. 1973.W.D. R. 1970. C.. 1988. Watson (ed. J. Vegetation history. R.

1985. Bryant Jr. K. and V.A.. Parts 1 and 2. Archaeology of Oceania. 1961.238 Kohika Williams-Dean. . 20:90–97. G. S. 41:97–111. New York: Interscience. 1975.. an early agricultural site in Papua New Guinea. Vol. Canadian Journal of Zoology. Wilson. Wright. S. Phytolith analysis at Kuk.M. 1961. Systema Helminthum. The Kiva. 38:167–82. Observations on the life cycle of Capillaria hepatica (Bancroft 1893) with a description of the adult. Pollen analysis of human coprolites from Antelope House..III: The Nematodes of Vertebrates.M. Yamaguti.

were also important. such as bracken fern. Mt Tarawera erupted in 1886. and lay near the junction of the Tarawera and Rangitaiki rivers. There was an earthquake centred on the nearby Matata Fault while people lived at Kohika. Vegetation history shows that the pre-human Bay of Plenty lowland was densely forested. Environment Kohika was conveniently located for coastal travel by canoe. alluvial infilling. This chapter reviews information about environment. economy. levee systems of rivers and floodplains of alluvium.J. puha. the dunes and the fans of the rivers and streams flowing on to the plains.14 Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village G. reed. Irwin The excavations at Kohika make an important contribution to our understanding of late prehistoric Maori culture in the North Island. plant remains recovered from the archaeological site indicate continuing use of remaining forest patches. site stratigraphy. and diverse scrub and forest grew on the levees and sand dunes of the Rangitaiki Plains. land subsidence. Destruction of forest improved access to the hinterland and assisted the spread of valued carbohydrate foods. sedge and fern. lakes. In the short span of recorded history. backswamp lowlands and peat swamps. It had ready access to the diverse foods of coastal and inland dunes. Freshwater swamp resources. Sudden events included occasional tephra showers and earthquakes. and they abandoned the village following a flood. and frequent floods. because of the great diversity of evidence recovered from a wetland environment and the amount of specialist analysis done on the material. However. repeated Maori burning changed the natural vegetation to scrub and fernland. Long before Kohika was settled. The people of Kohika lived in an environment of hazards that gave no warning. the estuary of the combined Tarawera and Rangitaiki rivers. Geomorphology shows that this landscape was formed over millennia by continuing processes of coastal progradation. cultivation took place on fertile lowland soils. material culture. and many of the fish species found at the site could have been caught in Te Awa o Te Atua. With a favourable climate. and the Edgecumbe earthquake occurred in 1987. and wetlands covered with raupo. such as flax. swamp growth and the formation of shallow freshwater lakes. ti and tutu. European settlers were driven from the plains by the 1892 flood. household structure and site function. 239 . settlement pattern. The aim is to present an integrated picture of Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village in the Bay of Plenty. and some of these were increased and made more accessible by continued burning. which were at the start of routes inland. raupo. fish and water birds. Marine resources were available on the adjacent coast.

Site stratigraphy and age Excavation involved unravelling natural sediments and cultural deposits. digging and weeding tools. Initial investigations by members of the Whakatane and District Historical Society were followed by University of Auckland excavations of Areas A–D. which enabled close stratigraphic integration. there cannot have been many others. A Bayesian analysis of the radiocarbon dates shows that Kohika was probably occupied during the second half of the 17th century. and the remainder on the mound. This ended when a band of alluvium was carried in by a local flood. complete with thwarts. where people never lived. The Taupo. However. Wooden artefacts These provide insights into several aspects of life. where it was similar to Area A. geomorphological and archaeological data suggest a more restricted period of one to two human generations. all in close association and from a restricted period of time. were the means of transport. and Kohika is the only recorded site of its kind. Material culture The comprehensive range of artefacts found. Our reconstruction for the HS Area suggests a similar situation to Area D. and that house was replaced immediately by another. The collection of food is indicated by bird spears. C. These had been mixed into the soil of the dune but survived intact as beds in the surrounding swamp. In the peat around the site. plus the Taupo sea-rafted pumice. Canoes. Areas B. or at inland sites with good gardening soil. This has implications for other parts of the North Island. The later house was still standing at the time of the flood. Area A was on top of the mound. Only a small number of sites is known in the interior of the Rangitaiki Plains (including pa dating from the musket wars). a layer of cultural material occurred between the Kaharoa and Tarawera tephras in the upper part of the deposit. paddles and bailers.240 Kohika Settlement pattern The distribution of archaeological sites in this part of the Bay of Plenty shows that Maori generally preferred to live on the coast. Area B had encroached over the natural swamp stratigraphy by the spread of sediment and occupation debris from around Area A. defensible uplands and access to rivers. and the preparation of food by beaters and bowls. including thread reels and net gauges. Kaharoa and Tarawera tephras were present. silts and diatomaceous earth. with houses and other buildings on them. Area D was low-lying and had three superimposed artificial floors. especially near harbours. on the White House floor. provides a detailed picture of late Maori culture in the Bay of Plenty. Part of Area C was located in the swamp. where they were interstratified with peats. There were many fibre-working tools. Woodworking is represented by adze and chisel handles. D and the HS Area all reached the swamp edge. Certainly. Some artefacts were finely made and reflect social value but others were casually made for day-to-day use. Weapons were . wedges and wood chips show that many wooden items were made on the site. The floor of a house built on the Yellow House horizon faulted during an earthquake. What is unusual about Kohika is its setting. Kohika was a remnant of the 2000 BP shoreline and had a core of dune sand.

it cannot be closely linked to any other known early styles from the Bay of Plenty and East Coast. The timbers from the site reveal the concealed methods by which superior houses were assembled and lashed together. Items of status. The masking of construction details by adopting techniques that resemble those used in canoe-building may have contributed to the persistence of the traditional meeting house into modern times. tooth. but palisade posts and coils of lashing vine reflect defence. spinning tops and a flute. although dryland archaeological sites are unlikely to produce the evidence. as well as art. Miscellaneous artefacts A small assemblage of artefacts made of bone. the work of at least four individual carvers can be distinguished.Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village 241 absent. One piece of fretwork carving. a poutahuhu and poutokomanawa. This may suggest that the specific tribal styles of the Bay of Plenty are a more recent development. but the people of Kohika possessed a rich and varied tradition of woodcarving. but the timbers from this dry part of the site did not survive. It is also considered likely that some of the roofed storage pits in Area A had carvings over the doorways. apart from javelins or darts. One other carver may have had connections with the Hauraki area. the relative isolation of regions and communities probably encouraged regional divergence of carving styles. but this is possible. Very few prehistoric or early contact-period stone-tooled carvings are documented for the Bay of Plenty. They may have existed at comparable settlements. the geographically variable stimulus of European contact would lead to other changes. Obsidian Most of the obsidian came from Mayor Island and people at Kohika had either direct . Kohika had only a narrow range of forms confined to a relatively short period of time. Houses and pataka There was one elaborately carved house made of dressed planks as well as other more simply constructed pole-and-thatch sleeping houses with minor decoration. whether from Ngati Awa or further afield. pumice and pounamu provides useful comparisons with other late sites in the Bay of Plenty and elsewhere. and a carved paddle was found in the same (HS) area. Yet. We are unable to tell whether any of the carved timbers from the swamp (excluding the six by the single carver mentioned above) came from pataka. The discovery of a prehistoric house with four poupou. Moreover. could be from a canoe. art and play were represented by carved house parts. The New Zealand climate and the availability of suitable trees seem to have favoured the development of well-insulated houses sometimes built of squared timbers and planks. Later on. Woven items included both fine twill work and wider plaiting. KOH345. hair combs. all carved by the one artist. ornamentation. religion. A rope-making technique identified as ‘two-ply spiral-wrapped’ appears to be unrecorded elsewhere. they were present at Kohika. Within the assemblage. Woodcarving and carving styles Carving signifies religion and world-view. While the prehistoric status of pataka has been uncertain. both two-plied and braided. It seems likely that the concept of carved houses was widespread in late prehistory. is exciting. Fibre The waterlogged assemblage included nets and cordage. which helps explain gaps in the ethnographic literature. while his carving style was distinctive.

with a few pieces in Area B. a whale. The distribution of obsidian in the site presents us with the further possibility that one of the Kohika households was more involved in obsidian trade than the others. They were most frequent in Area B. suggesting that the material was worked primarily in Areas B and D. and just a single piece found in the HS Area.S. but more probably were intended for trade. apart from gnawing by both dogs and rats. 2. Mammal bones show that dogs. Maketu pebbles could have been picked up on the way to or from Mayor Island. it is likely that the absence of weapons was genuine and not the result of sampling error. Some nineteen . the people of Area B at Kohika) and Taupo. and both have been found in the site. and their bones made into tools.19 kg from the HS Area containing the carved house. some 80 per cent of the catch could have been taken in the river estuary. and some unworked (and unweighed) blocks were souvenired by visitors. possibly trade. Grace. A total of approximately 20. Dogs would also have supplied teeth and skins.76 kg from Area D and 12. Faunal remains The faunal assemblage is not remarkable except for its large sample of dogs. The preservation was generally excellent. This may indicate late prehistoric social relationships between people in the Rangitaiki Plains (specifically. giving rise to macroscopic edge-damage. Weapons The only class of portable artefacts not found at Kohika was weapons. The bird bones represent food waste. The waterlogged artefact assemblage provides rich evidence for food procurement and preparation. 0. The economy The resources of the environment provide the context for the study of diet. Nets and bait hooks could account for most of the fish caught. a seal and possibly humans were eaten. but appear to be tools discarded or lost by individuals. Most of the fish could have been taken all year round. The large Kohika assemblage suggests that obsidian was reduced in a systematic manner. Many of the largest flakes came from around the carved house. while it is clear that people fished at sea. larger flakes tended to be used more frequently. Only a very small quantity of grey obsidian came from Maketu and Taupo. as reported in historic times by the missionary T. in the case of albatross. occasional artefacts and. Given the scale of excavation and artefact recovery. The Taupo artefacts do not seem to have been introduced to the site as raw material. Some fifteen species of fish were identified and.63 kg from Area A. The number of adzes found also seems anomalously low.242 Kohika access to the island or close contact with its residents.5 kg of obsidian was recovered from the site: 2. The separate areas of the university excavations display different concentrations of flakes and debitage. and the estuary would have been sheltered in winter. The abundant large flakes in the HS area indicate where large blocks of obsidian were initially worked. While there is little evidence that flakes were subsequently shaped to produce particular tool forms. and that a higher proportion of large flakes was used in Area A. Eel bones were anomalously absent. They may represent a cache of large flakes stored at the site. seeds and coprolites.74 kg from Area B. and were found mainly in Area A. 2. The wetland conditions at Kohika allowed the survival of food remains such as gourd shell.01 kg from Area C. with smaller numbers in Areas A and D.

and there were two small islets of relict dune in the lake adjacent to Area B.g. no artefacts. an elevated central part of the site. There are indications that much of the forest had been cleared and that there was lake and swamp in the immediate vicinity. were found in Area A. 4. KOH19 and 20 an epa tied to a flashing. which was swamp at the time. Kirch and Green 2001). and the remains were fairly constant through time. although they could have existed in areas not investigated. but not households. raupo and marsh cress.Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village 243 species of shellfish found represented open coast. although any in the southwestern area. The one activity not found in these low-lying areas was underground storage. The excavation of Area B intruded on part of a third one. Pataka were represented only by timbers: KOH231 was a ladder. which are archaeological units that clearly had a social dimension (e. In the HS Area an irregular shoreline useful for canoe landing was indicated by the excavations of Squares C1 and C12. Many of the coprolites belonged to summer. mudflat. The macrofossil evidence indicates that dogs ate scraps and that fish and gathered plants were part of the regular human diet. although this was not properly understood until later. There were floor plans and timbers from cooking shelters that stood beside the houses. could not have been approached by canoe except along meander channels. site environment. No buildings were found on top of the mound. The excavated plans of this household are shown in Figures 4. The household in Area D The floor plans and timber remains of two successive pole and thatch houses with minor decoration (six items) were found in Area D. There was room for other households on the site. season of occupation and health.1 is a general schematic reconstruction of the layout of Areas D and HS. which reduces the likelihood that households were located there. However. puha. One was found in Area D and fully exposed by areal stripping. and KOH34–36 three rafters much too short for the house floors. Figure 14. because any pits would have been flooded. and the rat was host to another parasite. KOH32 a possible epa. The excavations elsewhere documented other aspects of occupation.1). drawn by R. There is microfossil evidence for bracken fern. Pits and bins were found in Area A. where there was also extensive cooking activity with possible fences for shelter. sheltered soft-shore and lake environments. Drawing the strands of other evidence together makes a compelling case for the existence of households. The three known households were set some distance apart around the northern and eastern sides of Kohika. Members of the Historical Society encountered another in their Squares 1 and 2. Area D was located in a small natural embayment that provided shelter for moored and beached canoes (Fig. Wallace and based on the excavated evidence. Davidson 1984. and some of these to mid-summer. apart from obsidian pieces. In the foreground is Area . Household layout and composition Some of the most striking remains were houses. where the lake reached the former dune and canoes could land. Coprolites Various analyses of dog coprolites provide evidence for human diet.15 and 4. one house having been rebuilt immediately above the other without delay (there may have been an earlier building as well). It is now known that dogs in New Zealand prehistory suffered infestations of a roundworm.16.

flax and cabbage trees with patches of kahikatea and kanuka scrub is based on the pollen record.244 Kohika Figure 14. The palisade follows the topography around the lake. .1 A schematic view northwards over Area D across the lake to the dunes and the sea. nets and racks on the right represent the artefacts and building timbers found in the Historical Society Area. In the left foreground is a reconstruction of Area D during the Yellow House horizon. The lakeshore vegetation of raupo. The roofed pit and two small covered bins in the bottom right were actually found in Area A. The houses. canoes.

a ko footrest. two other digging tools and a shaft-end knob. the three found here included the only barbed or carved ones (KOH120 and 121). both inside and outside the palisade. Much obsidian-working and woodworking. three have no provenance and one was found in Square 4. The Historical Society’s notes record ‘barrowloads’ of wood chips in the squares further from the house. with no evidence for buildings. very possibly including canoe-building. Fibre-working tools. and not in D. and with ritual significance as implied by ethnohistorical literature.1 were actually located in Area A. two wooden hair combs and a possible plain wakahuia lid.) The actual location of the pataka in Area D is unknown and in Figure 14. three one-piece fishhooks and a blank of human bone. Toys included spinning tops. Bowls and fern-root pounders reveal food preparation. spades and weeders indicate gardening. Canoes and canoe parts were found in the area. and showing the Yellow House with its back to the lakeshore and against the palisade. including one two metres long. Among the valuable items from the same area as the house were a hei tiki pendant of human bone. finely plaited mat.1 is simply a matter of guesswork. The decorated front of the house faces an open space. Many of the contents were of fine quality and the context implies occupants of substance and rank. However. As with Area D. Gardening tools included a ko. Craft items included three fibre-working tools and a folded. with the palisade running approximately north–south. a bird-bone awl. two dog-bone chisels/awls and a chip from the corner of a pounamu adze. took place on the artificial sand floors of Area D. Of the six darts found at Kohika. . Beside the house at the lakeshore (in Squares 1 and 2) were parts of two canoes. and a fern-root beater. Historical Society Area Our reconstruction of the Historical Society data suggests that the carved house stood in the vicinity of Squares 1 and 2. that did not survive intact. as well as for several metres in front. At the swampy edge of the household there were food and other organic remains.Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village 245 D. Three timbers identified as being from pataka came from Square 1. (Note that the roofed pits and bins at the right of Figure 14. and there was most likely an entrance in the palisade. Also found in the vicinity of the carved house in Squares 1 and 2 were the largest pieces of obsidian on the site. Sheltered from the lake on the southern side of the house were cooking ovens and the remains of huts. thread reels and net gauges show that craft activities took place in the household and among the fibre items were the remains of kits. fishing nets and ropes. The house faces east and its artificially laid sand floor extends on both sides. its presence in the vicinity is indicated by distinctive wooden parts. while spears show hunting. a bailer and lengths of rope. There was a carved pumice kumara god. Domestic items included two wooden bowls. There were a very finely made canoe bow. the inventory of personal and domestic items provides evidence for art. two from Square 2. Spinning tops and possibly darts show leisure activities and where there were toys there were presumably children and families. Among the wooden artefacts various ko. craft and leisure. which suggests that someone living in the house had an important role in its acquisition and trade. possibly in or near the house. the carved top of a possible ceremonial ko. numerous canoe seats. and a zone of woodworking nearby. paddles. Hunting tools were represented by many pieces of bird spear. Other artefacts in Area D included a pendant made from a human tooth. one with a pouring spout. Thus there was a basic separation of obsidian storage and working. Concentrations of dog faeces in particular places outside the palisade suggest that dogs sometimes gathered or were restrained there.

It was not a settlement of low status. a fern-root pounder and digging tools. They were not buried as votive offerings. and waterlogged items including a bird spear fragment. Paddles were found in both of these squares. No evidence for food debris was reported. an awl (seal bone). two fibre-working tools. including the only carved example (KOH162). the artefacts thrown out with the spoil included wooden hair combs found by the Historical Society. We can suppose that many of the same artefacts existed at dryland sites and it is only their survival that is unusual. However. and its smoke from all over the plains during the day. a bailer (Square 4).246 Kohika one an unfinished bow section. The university excavated a small greenstone chisel and pendant. all from the modern agricultural drain. as in a small number of cases in New Zealand (Phillips et al. and various canoe fittings in Squares 0 and 2. Unprovenanced items from the HS Area were a flute. coprolites and in the use of obsidian. wedges and wood chips. Timbers found included plank fragments and an epa or poupou (KOH26). or for storage. 2002). Also in the area was a pumice bowl with a face carved in the back. a fibre-working tool. as seems likely. three standing posts excavated in Square B1 were very possibly the remains of another pataka. sharpened posts and a bird spear. cultural items were more scattered and at lower density. Further support for the likely presence of a household in Area B is to be found in similarities with Area D. Area B The deposit here was quite rich but the area of excavation too small to demonstrate that a house was present. and there was evidence of people of rank. two needles (of bird bone and dog bone). but this was not located. another spinning top. While it could have been difficult for strangers to navigate through the waterways of the swamp. two paddles (Squares 3 and 4). for it had fine artefacts. Kohika was not a temporary camp. Issues of site function and location Kohika was a settlement. parts of bowls or bailers and more digging sticks. as its light palisade would have been defence against a sudden attack but not a sustained one. as shown by wooden items . The rare wood and fibre artefacts found were incidental to occupation. including carvings. There were two more fragments of canoe (Square 4). Further away from the house. it was very accessible by canoe for those who knew where it was. as in many wet sites in northwestern Europe (Coles and Coles 1996). various possible canoe seats and fittings (Squares 4 and 5) and miscellaneous rope. a bone toggle. Artefacts of other materials included a dog-tooth fishhook point. However. various pegs. and pieces of rope. When the modern agricultural drain was dug. Kohika was part of a wider sphere of communication. they included a greenstone adze. because its fires could have been seen at night from the hills near Matata. a chisel (dog bone) and a sandstone file. although it was surely present. Nor was it a stronghold. a wooden chisel handle. Pointed posts were consistent with a palisade being in the vicinity. in terms of the patterns of faunal remains. Coils of vine were stored in the lake to keep them supple. in Squares 3–5. because it had substantial buildings and evidence for diverse activities. Outside the palisade in the swampy lake edge were a large unfinished steering paddle (KOH161) and a small but neat stack of long kanuka posts. The site was not a refuge hidden in the swamp for security.

the amount of obsidian at Kohika far exceeded domestic needs. their carvings and their contents. unusually rich though it is. Cargoes of food and industrial materials could be brought to the shores of Kohika that would have to be carried to the sites in the hills around Matata. However. identified by a range of buildings. was conducted along the rivers leading to the central North Island. More obviously. Individuals of rangatira class occupied the carved house and were leaders of the community. and had time for leisure. paddles and fittings were found in the households of Area D and the HS Area. but ease of travel and. questions about the mobility of the village population and the permanence of occupation are not answered by the archaeological evidence. Such a paddle could not have been used for normal paddling. Carving styles suggest external connections to people from other areas. diverse domestic and personal equipment. social and cultural activities. All of the elements required for permanent settlement. The evidence that the household in the HS Area played a dominant role in trade in Mayor Island obsidian is plain. There was further intrasite differentiation. One might be misled into thinking that the people of Kohika chose to forgo more usual kinds of site location for access to the resources of the swamp itself. It would seem that trade in obsidian was organised at the level of the household and not at the level of the community. and gardening. with very small amounts from Maketu and Lake Taupo. It is hoped that more detailed oral history will become available in the future to shed more light on the identity of the residents of this village. The evidence to hand indicates open. Coastal items such as the albatross/mollymawk bones found at the site could have been moving inland. woodworking. It was more plausibly intended for steering a canoe under sail on the coast. more particularly. Canoes. possibly communal land used for storage and cooking on top of the mound. Evidence for craft and industrial activities included obsidian knapping. The fine twill plaiting which our reconstruction of the HS Area places in the carved house could have been sailcloth as easily as matting or bedding. The households in Areas D and HS show clear status differentiation in the quality of the buildings. ease of canoe transport meant that they retained access to most of the resources of dryland sites. The site has clear evidence of functional and social differences. and the abundant and large pieces from Mayor Island could have been taken inland. both material and social. nor for poling in the shallow waters of the swamp. gathering shellfish and plant foods. The presence of Taupo obsidian demonstrates movement from the interior of the North Island. fowling. the distribution of Maketu and Taupo obsidian in the site may suggest diverse external social relationships for different households. although this was a permanent village.73 metres long was found in Area B. most probably family units. house-building and canoe-making. The community practised a wide variety of industrial. However. Closer to the lake were households. Most of it was from Mayor Island. especially obsidian. craft. . The woodcarvings have a range of individual styles linking to different areas of the North Island. Trade in coastal produce. Summer occupation is indicated but year-round occupation was entirely possible. Summary The general picture that emerges from the evidence is a lightly defended lake village with a diverse economy based on fishing.Kohika as a late northern Maori lake village 247 made of kauri (a canoe hull and fern-root beaters) that had probably grown north of the Bay of Plenty. existed at Kohika. An unfinished paddle measuring 2.

Kohika demonstrates the special value of wetland archaeology.11.248 Kohika Risks faced by the community are to be seen in the palisade defences and in the hazards of the natural environment. ancestral Polynesia: an essay in historical anthropology. they evidently took their weapons. and R. and the tops of the timbers left standing were burnt off by fire passing through. Auckland: Longman Paul. Kohika was probably occupied late in the 17th century. Coles. Floods must have been fairly common. The prehistory of New Zealand. stream and river. Kirch. J. P. Davidson. Phillips. even though the carved house collapsed gradually. 2002. D. 1996. The site is now regaining its mana and cultural heritage value. A major excavation. It could also be a sign of political stress that no one retrieved the wooden carvings. Allen. Its occupation ended suddenly around AD 1700 and its remains were fortuitously preserved in wetland.. Green. Johns and H. . References Coles. Enlarging the past: the contribution of wetland archaeology. Why did Maori bury artefacts in the wetlands of pre-contact New Zealand? Journal of Wetland Archaeology. J. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. C. which cut off direct canoe access to lake. 1984.V. settlement and society. Exeter: Short Run Press. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland Monograph Series No. Hawaiki. conservation and a series of specialist analyses of diverse materials now make a new and important contribution to our understanding of late prehistoric Maori subsistence.C. and B. 2:39–60. When people left. the people recovered from an earthquake but they left after a flood. Evidently. Without this the site was untenable.. 2001. People returned in prehistory to bury their dead. The abandonment was caused not so much by the flood itself as by its consequences. but on this occasion the lake around the shore filled with alluvium. but then the site was virtually forgotten until rediscovered in late 1974.

with notched top and three plain lashing holes along one side. (Fig. (Fig. Board fragment.11). Totara. 32/WM [Square 1. and associated with the White House and Yellow House horizons.T.1). (Fig. Carved poupou base with burnt-off top. 425 by 280 by 35 mm.8). Those with a WM suffix (e. Board fragment. Wallace and G. (Plate 7. 29/WM Carved poupou base with burnt-off top. north]. Nearly complete poupou with bottom rotted off. Note that some WM items have no detailed recorded provenance. 27/WM Carved poupou base with burnt-off top and chisel-ended base. roughly constructed slab from the outer surface of tree dressed on sides and the inner surface. (Plate 7. Totara. or the late addition or deletion of a small number of items. Board fragment. 970 by 146 by 39 mm. north]. elaborately carved on both sides. 7. 11030 by 280 by 155 mm. elaborately carved on both sides. 435 by 120 by 43 mm. Long. a square notch in the upper end and a face eyelet below. (Plate 7.50 degrees from the horizontal and with three 249 . Carved pieces of houses KOH1 KOH2 KOH3 KOH4 KOH5 KOH6 KOH7 KOH14 KOH44 KOH16 KOH17 KOH18 88/WM [Square 2].J. probably central house post.Appendix Inventory of wooden and fibre items found at Kohika R. 25/WM Carved poupou base with burnt-off top. 223/AU [D1 Yellow House].10).4). Totara. Carved poutahuhu base with burnt-off top.5). Totara. 7. KOH10 37/WM Poupou or poutahuhu.7).g. Provenance details are shown in square brackets.10). 79/WM [Square 1. elaborately carved on both sides. 365 by 220 by 37 mm. 765 by 165 by 24 mm. 136/AU [D1 White House]. 7. Note that departures from serial order in the Appendix result from reclassification of items by functional category.13). 460 by 240 by 40 mm. 88/WM) denote items from the Whakatane and District Historical Society excavation area.3). Totara. Totara.g. (Plate 7. (Plate 7. (Plate 7. narrow plank fragment with incised pattern visible. Totara. 459 by 32 by 18 mm. 172 by 45 by 43 mm. Totara. (Plate 7.10). Other numbers are present. (Plate 7. 7. Totara. 223/AU) denote items from the Auckland University excavations.2). (Plate 7. KOH11 41/WM [Square 1].5). 325 by 70 by 65 mm. top cut at c. 148/AU [D2 White House]. 290 by 175 by 85 mm. 100 by 85 by 30 mm. (Plate 7. Kauri. KOH120). Human poutokomanawa figure executed in the round. Those with an AU suffix (e. 481/AU Slab of wood with incised line drawing on one side. Totara. (Fig. All AU items with no further provenance shown are from the peat swamp in Area D. 214(b)/WM [Square 5]. Totara. 345 by 205 by 30 mm. Epa.g.5). Weathered fragment with incised carving visible. 214(a)/WM [Square 1]. Irwin The main inventory numbers have a KOH prefix (e. House boards KOH9 34/WM [Square 1]. Totara. Totara.

Epa fragment possibly of pataka with five neatly chiselled holes along its edge. 344/AU [B3 peat below alluvium].14).14). Totara. 26/WM House wall slab fragment with burnt-off top. 7. 310 by 85 by 25 mm. (Fig. 7. 500 by 155 by 32 mm. Maihi plank with L-shaped cross-section (part of KOH37). tenon joint one end. tenon joint one end. (Fig. 1420 by 70 by 35 mm. (Fig. (Fig. 1033 x 140 x 27 mm. Plank in fragments with curved outline. Kahikatea. (Fig. 1/WM Epa or poupou split from outside of tree trunk.9). (Fig. (Fig. KOH31 524/AU Slab with ends bevelled on alternate sides. (Fig. 7. 855 by 200 by 35 mm. rotted-off base. 214/WM [Square 3?]. (Fig. bevelled on other.5 by 8 mm. tenon joint one end.11). Kahikatea. 7. 7. 23/WM Epa or poupou split from outside of tree trunk with chisel end. (Fig. 720 by 155 by 25 mm. (Fig. Pukatea. Epa or poupou split from outside of tree trunk with chisel end. (Fig. 2/WM Epa or poupou split from outside of tree trunk.11). Pukatea. 555 by 15. Totara. bevelled end on other. a single edge eyelet lashing hole at one edge. Totara.9). 7. KOH32 511/AU Epa from end of wall? Triangular board with seven holes. Totara. KOH33 463/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 1480 x 172 x 49 mm. 7. Pukatea. Pukatea. 92/WM [Square 1]. poupou or epa with top burnt off square and two edge eyelets opposite each other near top. 86/WM [Square 1]. (Fig.14). 501/AU Epa or poupou plank split from outside of tree trunk. (Fig. Maihi plank with L-shaped cross-section in five fragments. Pukatea. 450 by 130 by 33 mm. 7. 1420 x 166 x 43 mm. 7. Totara. Pukatea. 7. (Fig. Formerly attached to KOH19. north].5). Pukatea. 700 by 200 by 30 mm. 7. 930 by 115 by 25 mm. Wall slab. Rafter with three face eyelets. Totara. Totara. 502/AU Epa or poupou fragment split from outside of tree trunk. 2160 mm long. (Fig. 675 by 295 by 100 mm. Totara. KOH36 529/AU Rafter with three eyelets. KOH38 530/AU [D1 Bright Yellow floor]. (Fig. Pukatea. 7. . Pukatea.9). Amo. 7. 560 by 225 by 40 mm.14).8). 461(2)AU [Area D]. 7. Maihi? KOH37 531/AU [D1 Bright Yellow floor]. five holes along edge. 440 mm long. 70 by 280 by 41 mm.5).8). 2160 mm long. 7. 461(1)/AU [Area D]. 33/WM [Square 1.8). 562 by 76 by 20 mm.11).14). Poupou split from the outer surface of trunk with square hole in top. Totara. 1827 x 226 x 60 mm. Epa? fragment with two simple lashing holes. 7. 600 x 180 x 53 mm. Totara. Rafters KOH34 135/AU [D2 White House]. 63/WM [Square 1]. Miscellaneous house pieces KOH30 512/AU House plank with three large and two small holes. 1455 by 70 by 30 mm.5). Pukatea. 1420 by 85 by 35 mm.9). Plank in three pieces with simple lashing holes at each surviving corner.250 Kohika KOH12 KOH13 KOH15 KOH19 KOH20 KOH21 KOH22 KOH23 KOH24 KOH25 KOH26 KOH27 KOH28 KOH29 simple lashing holes along one edge and two along the other. KOH35 528/AU Rafter with ten eyelet holes. Totara. Pataka epa flashing strip semi-circular in cross-section. (Fig. Totara. 7. 7. other end bevelled.

unfinished. 100/WM Plank fragment. Totara. 62/WM Wall batten with a hole in both ends (or canoe seat?). 860 by 50 by 10 mm. Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. Plank fragments KOH61 KOH62 KOH63 KOH64 KOH65 KOH66 KOH67 KOH68 KOH69 KOH70 KOH71 KOH72 KOH73 KOH74 513/AU Plank fragment. 82/WM [Square 4].7). Plank fragment.7). Totara. 7. 7. Totara. Rimu.10). Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. north]. Totara. (Fig. Pukatea. (Fig. KOH56 515/AU Window sill or lintel. Window facing board (korupe) with four holes and zigzag upper margin. north]. KOH60 319/AU [D4 White House]. 7. 398 mm long. 263/AU [B4 peat below alluvium].Inventory of wooden and fibre items found at Kohika 251 Battens KOH39 KOH40 KOH41 KOH42 KOH43 KOH45 KOH46 KOH47 KOH48 KOH49 KOH50 KOH51 KOH52 139/AU [D1 Yellow House]. Plank fragment. Totara. 9/WM [Square 1. 575 by 135 by 20 mm. Totara. KOH57 31/WM Door sill with deep U-shaped hollow along its length.7).7). Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. 50/WM [Square 2]. 310 mm long. Wooden slat with slight taper. north]. 265 by 100 by 30 mm. 7. Totara. 3/WM [Square 1. 7.7). 123/WM Plank fragment with one lashing hole. Plank fragment with simple lashing hole.7). 93/WM Board fragment with three holes. Totara.7). Pukatea. Short batten with one end bevelled. KOH54 273/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 598/AU Plank fragment. KOH58 43/WM [Square 1]. (Fig. (Fig. Plank fragment. (Fig. north]. Totara. Totara. 103/WM Corner of large plank with three lashing holes.6). AU [B3 sump]. Totara. 6/WM [Square 1. (Fig. 265 by 65 by 25 mm. Pukatea.). Totara. Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. 7. 90 by 35 mm. north].8). Totara.8). (Fig. U-shaped in cross-section. 410 by 110 by 40 mm. 535 by 1230 by 20 mm. Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. 535 by 60 by 23 mm. Kahikatea. 534/AU [D1 Bright Yellow floor]. 5/WM [Square 1]. Totara. Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. 390 by 120 by 15 mm. 7/WM [Square 1. Totara. Slat bevelled at each end.6). Kauri.7). north]. Plank fragment. Plank fragment. Plank fragment. Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. north]. 7.6). 7. 18/WM [Square 1. Totara. Pare with zigzag upper margin. 440 by 50 by 8 mm. 1545 by 40 by 10 mm.8. Totara. 410 by 38 by 8 mm. 527/AU Plank fragment with one lashing hole. 16/WM [Square 1. (Fig. (Fig. 7. 17/WM [Square 1. 7. 4/WM [Square 1]. Pukatea. (Fig. KOH55 35/WM [Square 1. 538/AU [D13 Layer 2]. 350 by 95 by 25 mm. Totara. 7. Pukatea. Conifer spp.7). Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. 7. 509/AU Short batten with three lashing holes. (Plate 7. 7. Door jamb with two large cut square holes and eyelet holes along one edge.10). (Fig. 108 by 64 mm. 370 by 28 by 18 mm. (Fig. 535/AU Plank fragment. Totara. 7. 7. . 7. Totara. (Fig. north].7). Wall batten (tumatahuki) with hole in end. Kahikatea. Doors and windows KOH53 89/WM Pare fragment very elaborately carved. Totara. (Fig.6). 7. Totara. 7. (Fig. Totara. Slats KOH59 61/WM [Square 1]. (Fig. 537/AU [D1 Bright Yellow floor]. (Fig. Totara. (Fig.

98 by 20 by 9 mm. Rimu. Plank fragment. WM Two gourd fragments. 6. 510/AU Plank fragment. 419/AU See entry under ‘Miscellaneous pieces’.14). 138/AU [D2 Yellow House]. Totara. Totara. (Fig. sawn off by WM. Pukatea. socket 25 mm long by 11 mm wide. Pukatea. below. 85 mm long. 6. 6. Totara. 130 by 45 by 25 mm. Adze and chisel handles KOH109 445/AU Adze handle rough-out. 453/AU Hair comb. Kanuka. Miscellaneous pieces KOH91 KOH92 KOH93 KOH94 KOH95 KOH76 KOH96 108/WM Y-shaped stick. triangular shaped. 6. 499/AU Plank fragment. (Fig. Fragment. 580 mm long. 375(2)/AU [D7 Yellow House]. Combs (heru) KOH101 KOH102 KOH103 KOH104 KOH105 KOH106 Flute 451/AU Hair comb.14). 6. 452/AU Hair comb. Puriri. Matai. Totara. Gourd. KOH110 112/WM Chisel handle.14). 6. 385/AU [D7 Yellow House]. Totara. Chopping block. Plank fragment. 455/AU Hair comb. 6. Rimu. Manuka.26). 105 by 10 by 40 mm. 121 by 17 mm. north].14). 506/AU Plank fragment. 500/AU Plank fragment.26). Totara.252 Kohika KOH75 KOH76 KOH77 KOH78 KOH79 KOH80 KOH81 KOH82 KOH83 KOH84 KOH85 KOH86 KOH87 KOH88 KOH89 KOH90 KOH349 605/AU Plank fragment with two lashing holes. (Fig. (Fig.26). Pukatea. Gourd shell KOH97 KOH98 KOH99 KOH100 443/AU [B4 peat below alluvium]. 372/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 185 by 130 by 12 mm. . Pukatea. Rimu. 6. WM Glued fragment of gourd. 533/AU Plank fragment. (Fig. (Fig. Totara. 395 by 50 by 20 mm. 101/WM Plank. 456/AU Hair comb. 30 mm thick. Rimu. (Fig. KOH111 457/AU Chisel socket for composite haft. 380 by 35 by 25 mm. 492/AU [B3 sump]. 508/AU Plank fragment. (Fig. (Fig.17). 13/WM Plank fragment. 6. Totara.26). Carefully made wedge for adze lashing? Totara. (Fig. 6. 79/WM [Square 1. front end of one side. Totara. Totara.14). (Fig.18). Gourd. 365 by 60 by 20 mm. Rimu. 454/AU Hair comb. 419/AU [D6 Yellow House]. butt end. Rimu. Plank fragment. Wakahuia lid KOH108 42/WM [Square 2]. 6. (Fig. Totara. Rimu.14). 505/AU Plank fragment. (Fig. KOH107 130/WM Flute (putorino) fragment.19). Carefully made item. Totara. Carefully made item.26). 6. (Fig. Wakahuia lid? 315 by 111 by 13 mm. Kanuka. 606/AU Palisade post butt. 328 by 28 by 17 mm. AU/599 Plank fragment. 880 by 45 by 30 mm. 25 mm in diameter. 429/AU [D2 Bright Yellow floor]. Totara. 6. 514/AU Plank Fragment.18). (Fig. 6. Rimu. Pukatea. 300 mm long. 6. Carefully made item.

16). Detachable canoe bow or stern piece. 18.16). KOH137 540/AU [B3 peat above alluvium].1). 6. 119/WM Spinning top. (Fig. Kanuka. (Fig. Manuka. (Fig. (Fig. Kanuka. KOH136 68/WM [Square 0]. 116/WM [Square 1. (Fig. Manuka. 597/AU Most of a dart. Dart front end. 6. 16 mm thick. Kanuka. Canoe bow or stern piece in five pieces. (Plate 6. KOH129 567/AU Bird spear section. .]. Kauri. (Plate 6.15). KOH132 291/AU [D2 White House]. (Fig. 6. Totara. 595 mm long. 549/AU [D13]. Canoe hull pieces KOH140 KOH141 KOH142 KOH143 KOH144 KOH335 19/WM. 78/WM Canoe gunwale fragment. (Plate 6. Bird spears KOH125 564/AU Bird spear section. (Fig.1). Totara.1).15).16). 259 by 20 mm. 17 to 14 mm wide. (Figure 6. Kanuka. 700 mm long. 64/WM Canoe gunwale fragment. Kanuka. tip missing. 20/WM. 6. 16–9 mm wide tapering to point. Tree-fern trunk wood.11). 6. Maire.1). 14 mm wide tapering smoothly to point. (Fig.(Fig. Bird spear section. Dart front end. (Plate 6. Manuka. 310/AU Canoe gunwale fragment. Manuka.1).1). 17 to 12. 65 by 31 mm. (Plate 6. 6.1). Bird spear section. 325 by 111 by 38 mm. Front end of dart. 620 mm long. Totara. 285 mm long. Manuka. KOH126 496/AU [D1]. 137 mm long. Totara.5 mm wide. 6. Kanuka. 562 by 305 by 200 mm.15). tapering to lap joint. 513 by 28 mm. Bird spear section. Manuka. (Fig. 710 by 175 by 120 mm. 385 by 29 mm. 1175 mm long.11). 375 mm long.1). 265 mm long. 6. Manuka. (Plate 6. 21/WM and 22/WM [Square 2].1). 6.1). 150 by 43 by 27 mm. north]. Complete dart.5 mm in diameter. (Fig. 6. 551/WM Spinning top. tip missing. 18 mm thick. KOH134 583/AU Bird spear section. (Plate 6. 1390 mm long.11). Kanuka. 6. Rimu (mapara). Totara. Manuka. 550/AU Spinning top.15). 6. north]. (Fig. Manuka. (Plate 6.16). 6. 121/WM Spinning top. 118 by 38 mm. Bird spear section. 794 by 20 mm. 6. 977 by 440 by 282 mm. (Plate 6.11). end of spear 510 mm long. (Fig. KOH131 278/AU [D2 Bright Yellow floor]. (Fig. 6.1). Kanuka.16). 261/AU [D2 Bright Yellow floor]. Bird spear section. 105/WM Spinning top.Inventory of wooden and fibre items found at Kohika 253 Spinning tops (potaka) KOH112 KOH113 KOH114 KOH115 KOH116 KOH117 KOH118 120/WM Spinning top. 6. 59 by 24 mm. 17 mm thick.1). 730 mm long. 6. 19–15 mm thick. (Fig.1). (Fig. tapering rapidly to blunt point. 167 by 7 by 3 mm. KOH127 565/AU Bird spear section. Manuka. Hull fragment. 895 mm long. 820 mm long. KOH128 566/AU Bird spear section. north]. Kanuka (Plate 6. (Plate 6. Manuka. Manuka.1). 94 by 47 mm. 24/WM [Square 4. (Plate 6.16). KOH133 614/AU Bird spear section. 6. Bird spear section. (Fig. KOH138 69/WM [Square 0]. KOH139 595/AU Barbed bird spear point. 680 mm long. (Plate 6. Barbed dart point. Spinning top. KOH130 569/AU Bird spear section. (Plate 6. 368 mm long. Rimu (mapara). 72 by 25 mm.1). Rimu (mapara). 53/WM [Drain ext. Kanuka. 391 by 108 by 30 mm. 89 by 43 mm.15). Javelins/darts KOH119 KOH120 KOH121 KOH122 KOH123 KOH124 45/WM [Square 1.15). 212/AU [D2 Bright Yellow floor].11). Totara. (Fig. tip missing. 18 mm thick.16). 18 mm thick. 1160 by 24 mm. 10–16 mm thick. KOH135 568/AU Bird spear section. 14 mm thick. 10–16 mm thick. 76/WM [Square 1]. tip and base missing.

(Fig. 107/WM Bailer rim fragment. 190 by 30 mm. Tawa (Fig. 289/AU. Totara. 6. Ramarama. Mahoe. 200 by 25 mm. 227 by 101 by 55 mm. KOH160 589/AU Canoe seat fragment. Narrow bowl. 6. KOH149 54/WM [Square 0]. KOH162 38/WM [Square 1]. Plate 7. Paddle tip.10). KOH166 556/AU [D7 Yellow House]. Tawa. Totara. . Vine rata. side wall 10 mm thick. 6. KOH165 554/AU Paddle handle. 820 by 41 by 32 mm. Totara. 6. 6. 75 by 56 by 10 mm.10). Rata or pohutukawa. 6. Tawa. KOH172 557/AU and 618/AU Paddle blade fragment in four pieces. Ramarama. Totara. 975 by 55 mm. 12 mm thick plank with Dshaped outline and six lashing holes. Paddle blade fragment. (Fig. (Fig. KOH164 57/WM [Square 3]. (Fig. 6. (Fig. end wall up to 55 mm. 6. (Fig. KOH157 124/AU Canoe seat fragment. and 49/WM Canoe bulkhead.10). Tawa. 65/WM [Square 1].12).9). (Fig. Canoe seat.12). 6.12). 6. (Fig. KOH163 316/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 6. 745 by 25 by 26 mm. 980 by 55 mm diameter.254 Kohika Canoe fittings KOH345 WM Fragment from elaborate carving.10). 6. (Fig. 4. 291/AU and 619/AU [Square B3 peat below alluvium].12).10). fragment. (Fig.8). 6. 858 by 28 mm.13. (Fig. 230 by 25 mm. KOH159 586/AU Canoe seat fragment.8).12). Vine rata. Totara. (Fig. Paddle handle. (Fig. Fragment of paddle blade and probably part of 486/AU(a). Paddles KOH161 288/AU. KOH155 591/AU Canoe seat fragment. (Fig. KOH152 593/AU Canoe seat. complete with spout. (Fig. Totara. Tawa. 6. Paddle with simple double-spiral pattern incised on handle top. Tawa. 2730 by 150 by 50 mm. 307 by 45 mm. 629 by 78 by 32 mm together with 389/AU also a paddle blade fragment.14). north]. 83/WM [Square 1. 1670 by 306 by 40 mm. Coprosma spp. (Fig. 435 by 30 mm.10). Coprosma spp. (Fig.13). 6. 434 by 25 by 8 mm. Taraire. Half a bowl. KOH169 486/AU(a) [D15]. 6. Manuka.10). Manuka. KOH150 97/WM [Square 4]. 479 by 62 by 12 mm. Tawa.12). 785 by 70 mm. Matai.9). KOH151 594/AU Canoe seat. Tawa. 6. 184 long by 94 wide by 8 mm thick. 810 by 18 mm. north]. 74/WM Bowl fragment. Fivefinger. (Fig. 6. KOH170 486/AU(b) [D15]. 80/WM [Square 1. Tawa. Four parts of a nearly complete canoe paddle with decorative carving on handle base. Tawa. (Fig. KOH167 555/AU Paddle blade. 341 by 53 by 10 mm.10). (Fig. The parts of a rough-out of a large steering paddle. 6.12). Manuka. (Fig. Tawa. 780 by 60 mm diameter. Paddle blade fragment. Canoe seat. (Fig. 437 by 173 by 65 mm with 10 mm thick walls. damaged. KOH154 587/AU Canoe seat fragment. 6. 6. (Fig. Tawa. KOH158 588/AU Canoe seat fragment. KOH153 590/AU Canoe seat fragment.12).12). 289/AU. 482 by 80 by 38 mm. KOH145 40/WM [Square 2]. (Fig.12). Bowls and bailers KOH174 KOH175 KOH176 KOH177 KOH178 613/AU Bailer with projecting handle. burnt. knob with carved human face. Tawa. KOH147 593/AU Canoe seat. possibly broken from spiral fretwork. KOH148 594/AU Canoe seat. KOH156 592/AU Canoe seat fragment. 6. KOH171 176/AU [C1 peat below alluvium]. 6. 290 by 68 by 5 mm. KOH168 157/AU Paddle blade fragment.12). 95 by 26 by 26 mm. KOH146 96/WM [Square 5]. 370 by 55 by 8 mm. oval.10). (Plate 7.12). 420 by 70 by 30 mm. Tawa. 6. 6. 6. Canoe seat. (Fig. (Fig.10). 575 by 88 by 19 mm.

Maire.8). 243 by 35 by 35 mm. Mahoe.2). 6. 6. 1580 by 23 mm. 73 by 59 mm. 6. 6.3). (Fig. 60/WM [Square 1] Ko top. Spatulate ko. 6. Kauri.(Fig. 6. Manuka. Kauri. Complete beater. (Fig. (Fig. Kauri. 577/AU Ko tip.Inventory of wooden and fibre items found at Kohika 255 KOH179 KOH180 KOH181 KOH182 98/WM [Square 4]. 235 by 42 by 40 mm. 6.2). (Fig. 615/AU Ko tip. 6. Kanuka. 221 by 45 by 25 mm. Manuka. 6. Maire.7). 289 by 52 by 42 mm. 2485 by 60 mm. 6. 200 by 67 by 47 mm. 582/AU Ko top. 6.2). 279/AU [D7 Yellow House]. north].8). Rata. 575/AU Composite digging tool shaft (?).3). Manuka. 998 by 27 mm. burnt. (Fig. 6. 6.2). (Fig.7). 2340 by 65 mm. 576/AU Ko. Matai. (Fig. 670 by 37 mm. 488/AU Damaged beater. 1889 by 65 mm. 585 by 35 mm. 6. 398 by 36 by 17 mm with 10 mm walls. (Fig. 581/AU Ketu blade. (Fig. 6. 670 by 27 mm. 6.7).3). Manuka. (Fig.7). Manuka. 1342 by 35 mm. 780 by 38 mm. 155/AU Complete beater. Other digging tools KOH211 KOH212 KOH213 KOH214 KOH215 KOH216 KOH339 91/WM [Square 1]. Maire. 81/WM [Square 3]. 6. 546/AU Weathered complete beater. (Fig. 472/AU Damaged beater. Complete. 6.(Fig. 285 by 51 by 41 mm.7). (Fig. 6. 489/AU Complete beater. 6.7). 372 by 38 mm. Manuka. 333 by 49 by 43 mm. Maire. Maire. 860 by 30 mm. 353/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 109/WM Bowl fragment. 1652 by 35 mm. Ko. Complete beater. 341 by 52 by 32 mm. worn beater. north]. 1620 x 40 mm. Complete beater. 617/AU Composite digging tool shaft. 578/AU Ko. 78/WM (note: 78/WM is recorded twice). 101 by 43 by 27 mm. Bailer scoop fragment. 268 by 60 by 50 mm. 545 by 35 mm. Maire. (Fig. (Fig. Manuka. 1020 by 30 mm. Manuka. Maire. Kanuka. (Fig. Totara.3). 154/AU and 315/AU [D2 Bright Yellow floor]. (Fig. (Fig. (Fig. Manuka. Maire. Manuka. with walls 10–20 mm thick.2). 6. 6. Totara.2).6. 575/AU Composite digging tool shaft (?). (Fig. . end wall 35 mm thick.7).13) 84/WM Rim fragment indicating the original bowl was c. (Fig. Pohutukawa or rata. 572/AU Ko tip. 39/WM [Square 1.7). 6. (Fig. 6.7).2).5) 580/AU Ko.2). Beater fragment. 6. 55/WM Composite digging tool handle. 94/WM Bowl fragment.3). 460 by 75 by 10 mm. 547/AU Weathered beater. 544/AU Beater with broken blade. (Fig. Fern-root beaters (patu aruhe) KOH183 KOH184 KOH185 KOH186 KOH187 KOH188 KOH189 KOH190 KOH191 KOH192 KOH193 KOH194 KOH195 KOH196 KOH197 Ko 90/WM [drain]. 297 by 40 by 30 mm. Maire. 6.2). (Fig. (Fig. Teka (ko foot-rest). Kanuka.7). (Fig. 6. Two pieces found separately from nearly complete beater. Totara. (Fig. 6. (Fig. 6. 6.7). 10 mm thick side walls. (Fig. 1817 mm long. 287 by 65 by 41 mm. 225 by 41 by 24 mm. KOH8 KOH198 KOH199 KOH200 KOH201 KOH202 KOH203 KOH204 KOH205 KOH206 KOH207 KOH208 KOH209 77/WM [Square 1. 90 by 38 by 23m. (Fig.465 by 58 by 20 mm with 5–10 mm thick walls. (Fig. 6. 6.2). Manuka. canoe shaped.7). 579/AU Ko. Manuka. Mahoe. 545/AU Complete beater. (Fig. Kauri. Carving of three-fingered hand from top of ceremonial ko. 6.2). 214 by 55 by 57 mm.7). 573/AU Ko tip. 6.7).2). (Fig. 6. (Fig. 548/AU Fragment of beater blade.3). Totara. 571/AU Double-ended ko. (Fig. 498/AU [D7 Yellow House]. (Fig.7). (Fig. 6. Kanuka. Maire.2). 6.

4).4). 189 by 41 mm by 17 mm. 585/AU Broken top of shaft rough-out. 6. Totara. Kanuka. 6. 1205 by 100 mm. 222 by 41 mm. (Fig. KOH236 101/WM Wood-splitting wedge or peg. north]. KOH219 560/AU Composite digging blade.4). 6. Kanuka. 218 by 44 by 45 mm. (Fig. 195 mm by 30 mm. (Fig. 194 by 55 by 15 mm. KOH337 310/AU(b) Wood-splitting wedge (?). . 6.4).4). Rimu (mapara). (Fig. Manuka. (Fig. (Fig. 233 by 51 by 36 mm. KOH249 563/AU Peg. 6. 182 by 66 by 27 mm. Pohutukawa or rata. 20 by 90 mm. KOH234 622/AU Casually made wood-splitting wedge. 6. Peg. 224 by 50 by 17 mm. 6. Totara. Totara. Pohutukawa or rata. 6. Totara (Fig. (Fig.24). Mahoe. 6. KOH237 156/AU Wood-splitting wedge or peg. 6. 213 by 23 by 20 mm. KOH343 188/AU [B1 brown silt shown in Fig. Rata or pohutukawa. 6. Pohutukawa or rata.25). Wedges/pegs KOH232 KOH233 623/AU Wood-splitting wedge. (Fig. 570/AU Broken top of shaft with flared knob. KOH235 283/AU [B4 peat below alluvium]. Matai. (Fig. (Fig.24). (Fig.23).21). 6.25). 6. 150 by 31 by 26 mm. Thread reels KOH239 KOH240 482/AU(a) Flat strip with zigzag outline. Knob from end of shaft.6). (Fig. 248 by 35 by 30 mm. 469/AU Broken top of shaft with phallic knob.4). Mahoe (Fig. 6.4).24). 118 by 40 by 22 mm. 6. Broken top of shaft.21). 6. 6. 509 by 102 by 21 mm. 6. 210 by 35 by 27 mm. (Fig. Maire. 110 by 35 mm.256 Kohika KOH217 596/AU Composite digging blade. KOH355 Edge split off detachable digging tool blade (?). trunk-wood. 306 by 91 by 18 mm. 226 by 39 mm. KOH238 624/AU Wood-splitting wedge or peg. Totara. (Fig.6). Kanuka. 6. KOH348 Peg. (Fig. 584/AU Burnt top of shaft with plain knob. KOH223 292/AU [D1 White House]. 259 by 31 mm.4). 6. 6.6]. KOH221 73/WM Composite digging blade. Rata.6). Totara. 304 by 32 by 27 mm with plain terminal knob. KOH336 310/AU(a) Wood-splitting wedge (?). 210 by 28 by 27 mm. 6.24). 170 by 45 by 16 mm. 6. Totara (Fig.25). (Fig. (Fig. (Fig. 6. Rimu (mapara).4).24). KOH231 303/AU [D1 Yellow House].6). (Fig. 353 by 46 mm. Wood-splitting wedge. (Fig. KOH218 561/AU Composite digging blade. KOH222 478/AU Composite digging blade. 6. 251 by 57 by 20 mm. 4. 6. KOH224 158AU–458/AU Composite blade rough-out. KOH220 559/AU Composite digging blade. 6. 620/AU Broken top of shaft with plain terminal knob. Rimu (mapara).6). Matai. Manuka.24).25). 6. (Fig. (Fig. Totara. 6. (Fig. 6. Totara. Shaft end knobs KOH225 KOH226 KOH227 KOH228 KOH229 KOH230 KOH347 Ladder 117/WM [Square 1.25). 200 by 25 mm by 15 mm. (Fig. (Fig. 553 by 78 by 22 mm. 482/AU(b) Flat strip with zigzag outline. (Fig. 229 by 29 by 20 mm. (Fig. Totara. 6.6).6). Rata or pohutukawa.25). Maire. Composite digging blade. (Fig. Ladder with four steps. 621/AU Casually made wood-splitting wedge.

22). Adzed log. Sharpened stick. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). Totara.22). (Fig. 541/AU Pointed weaving tool (kaui). 633/AU Adzed stick. 465 mm long. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). Manuka. (Fig. . Totara. 538/AU Pointed weaving tool (kaui). Totara. Manuka. 131 by 35 by 5 mm. 347/AU [D1 Yellow House]. (Fig. 15 by 13. 291/AU Pointed weaving tool (kaui). broken off. Posts.22).22). (Fig. 16 by 3–4 mm and 25–150 mm long. Marlin spike. 6.22). Mahoe. north]. Fragment of adzed timber. 131/WM [Square 1. 6. 6. 542/AU [D10]. (Fig. 52 by 8 mm. Adzed stem. 132/WM [drain]. Manuka. 6. Manuka (Fig. (Fig. 6. Totara. 155 by 15 by 11 mm. 710 by 140 by 110 mm. 115 by 27 mm. 6. 775 by 95 by 40 mm. 6. Adzed fragments KOH271 KOH272 KOH273 KOH274 KOH275 KOH276 KOH277 KOH278 KOH279 KOH280 KOH281 KOH282 342/AU [D2 Bright Yellow floor]. Manuka. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). Manuka. 562/AU Pointed weaving tool (kaui). (Fig. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). 189/AU [C12 lower peat]. 133/WM [Square 1.22). 129/WM [Square 1.22).22). 6. 113/WM [drain]. 634/AU Pointed stick. Eight strips bevelled on one face.Inventory of wooden and fibre items found at Kohika 257 Net gauges KOH241 KOH243 636/AU Net gauge (?). 603/AU Fragment of adzed timber. Manuka. (Fig. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). (Fig. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). 1360 by 80 by 40 mm. Totara. 6. 627/AU Sharpened stick. adze marked.22). 15/WM [Square 1. 604/AU Fragment of adzed timber. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). 950 mm long. (Fig. 231/AU [B2 spoil from drain].20). Post tip. Adzed stick. stakes and pointed sticks KOH262 KOH263 KOH264 KOH265 KOH266 KOH267 KOH268 KOH269 KOH270 11/WM Stake adzed to point. 539/AU Pointed weaving tool (kaui). Fibre-working tools KOH244 KOH245 KOH246 KOH247 KOH248 KOH250 KOH251 KOH252 KOH253 KOH254 KOH255 KOH256 KOH257 KOH258 KOH259 KOH260 KOH261 KOH338 192/AU [C12 lower peat]. 6. 30/WM Adzed wood chunk. Matai. Post tip. (Fig. Manuka.22). Wood. 670 mm long. north]. 412/AU [D6 Yellow House]. 602/AU [D1 Bright Yellow floor]. 6. (Fig.22). 370/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 6. (Fig. Totara. 276/AU [D1].22). Small flat stick.22).5 by 7 mm.20).22). 6. 460 by 75 by 70 mm. 6. Manuka. Stake. broken off. broken off. Totara (Fig. (Fig. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). Bevelled strips KOH242 401/AU [D7 White House]. 127/AU Adzed chunk.22). Pointed weaving tool (kaui). 310/AU Weaving tool (?). Manuka. Post tip. Totara. Pointed weaving tool (kaui). 6. 232/AU [C12 lower peat]. (Fig. 275/AU [D1]. (Fig.5 mm. Post tip. north]. 1240 mm long. (Fig. 479/AU Finely made kaui.22). broken off. 170/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 219 by 45 by 13. 480/AU Net gauge (?). Totara. Totara. 6. north]. 52/WM [Square 1]. 6.22). Manuka. 601/AU Fragment of adzed timber. 6. 494/AU [D2 yellow House]. 6. Totara.

Wood splinter. Coil of vine. Wood chip. 287/AU [D7 Yellow House]. Bag of wood chips. Rope and netting. Wood chip. Wood chip. Woven material. 151/AU [D1 Yellow House].258 Kohika Coils of vine KOH283 KOH284 KOH285 KOH286 KOH287 KOH288 KOH289 KOH290 KOH291 KOH292 KOH293 KOH294 637/AU [D12]. Wood chips. Two coils of lashing vine. 208/AU [D2 Yellow House]. 220/AU [D2 sump]. 266/AU [D7 Yellow House]. Coil of vine. 401/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 388/AU [D7 Yellow House]. various. Wood chip. Wood chip. 122/WM Wood chips. 328/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 381/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 160/AU [D2 Yellow House]. 324/AU [D7 Yellow House].6]. Wood chip. 420/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 372/AU [D1 Yellow House]. AU [D2 Yellow House]. 4. Rope. Wood chips. 352/AU [D1 Yellow House]. WM Fine matting. Totara. WM Rope and matting. . Fibre artefacts KOH295 KOH296 KOH297 KOH298 KOH299 KOH300 KOH301 KOH302 KOH303 KOH304 KOH305 KOH306 KOH307 KOH340 KOH341 AU [B3 peat below alluvium]. WM Fine matting. WM Fine matting. Wood chips KOH308 KOH309 KOH311 KOH312 KOH313 KOH314 KOH315 KOH316 KOH317 KOH318 KOH319 KOH320 KOH321 KOH322 KOH323 KOH324 KOH325 KOH326 KOH327 KOH328 KOH329 KOH330 KOH331 99/WM Wood chip. Wood chips. 361/AU [D1 Yellow House]. Wood chip. 321/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 490/AU [D1 Yellow House]. AU [D2 Yellow house]. Coil of vine. Wood chip. Coil of vine. 4. 230/AU [D1 Yellow House]. 188/AU [B1 brown silt in Fig. Wood chips. Rope. WM Rope. Coil of vine. Coil of vine. 324/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 365/AU [D1 Yellow House]. WM Rope fragments. Wood chips. AU [D1 Yellow House]. Wood chips. various. 247/AU [B1 brown silt shown in Fig. WM Rope. Wood chips. 135/AU [D2 White House]. Worked wood. 95/WM Wood chip. AU [D12 Yellow House]. Coil of vine. burnt. Rope sections. Rope sections.6]. WM Rope and matting fragments. 118/WM Bag of wood scraps. 149/AU [D2]. 4. Rope. Coil of vine. 397/AU [D7]. kit or net.6]. Coil of vine. Wood chip. two-ply twist. 371/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 394/AU [D7 Yellow House]. 226/AU [C12 lower peat]. 310/AU [D1 Bright Yellow floor]. various. Coils of vine. 229/AU [B1 brown silt shown in Fig. two plaited pieces. 396/AU [D7]. AU [D2 Yellow House]. Coil of vine.

87/WM and 150/AU [D1 Yellow House]. the other smashed off. Wood chip. Wood chip with one side adzed and other flake scars. 302/AU [D7 Yellow House]. Four wood chips with one side adzed. Wood chip. Nine chopped-off pieces of manuka. 259/AU [C1 upper peat]. AU [B3 sump]. Wood chip with one end adzed.Inventory of wooden and fibre items found at Kohika 259 KOH332 KOH333 KOH334 KOH346 KOH351 KOH352 KOH353 KOH354 319/AU [B4 peat below alluvium]. Wood chip with one side adzed and other flake scar. . 161/AU [D2 Yellow House]. 293/AU [D1 sump]. Wood splinter. 296/AU [D1 Yellow House].

149. 167. See also specific placenames and site names canoe paddle style. 205–210 human. wooden artefacts. 199–200. 102. 167 fishhooks. 55. 126. 146. 242. 66. 203. 46. 42–3 vegetation. 46. 109. 240. 198. 41. 51. 200–2. 96. 146. 1. 131 architecture. 210. 66. 160. 74. 96–100. 74. 127. 77. 177 manufacture. 203 whale. 147. 163. 162. 123 faunal remains. 72. 69. 167 pendants. 69. 55. 46. 70. 167 bowls. 104. 38. 158 Bright Yellow floor. 173. 213. 69. 20–44. 198. 194. 243. 40. 69. 145 construction. 163. and specific artefacts curated. 1. 14 awls. 3. 57. 199. 160. 234 braided cordage (whiri). 69 bird. 205. 30. 212. 68–9. 203 bone artefacts awls/chisels. 37. 164. 166. 49. 69. 135. 38. 19. 47. 240. 203 seal. 247 260 bevelled strips. 100 carving styles. 204 Banks Peninsula. 74. 204. Oldman Collection. 242. 198. 167 adzing technology. 141–2 Canterbury Museum. 63–4. 118–9 albatrosses. 74. 71. 247 carvings. 110–1 pounamu. 54. 78. 167 bailers. 149 barracouta. 4. 92. 19. 199. 46. 60. 29. See also specific woods buildings. 84. 214 broadleaf woods. 42. 18. 209 battens. Taupo. 122. 98–9. 69. 244 Cambridge University. 102–3 canoe hull pieces. 162 toggle. 203–4 dog. 247 timing of permanent Maori settlement. 235. 97. 123–8 artefacts. 161. 144. 241 cyclonic weather systems. 50. 69. 78. 146 banded rail. 39. 152–4. 122. 206–7. 240 beaters. 161. 55. 164. 239 as food. 127. 193–4. 203. 55 earliest ages of archaeological sites. See also houses. 16. 74. 126. 40. 6. 145 canoe paddles. 63. 69. 161. 202. 29. 203 fish. 167 needle. 198. 119.Index adzed fragments. 85–7 bone. 135–6. 37. 248 cabbage trees. 130. 54. 150 . 111. 120 Auckland Museum. 30. 22. 119 bracken. 14 Awaiti Stream. 239. 145–146 canoes. 172. 100–2. 167. 51. 177 expedient. 100 canoe fittings. 239 Bayesian calibration. 77. 118 adzes handles. 122–48. 163. 78–82. pataka burials. 107. 171. obsidian source. 31. 165. See also obsidian artefacts. 203–4 bird spears. 40 political/social relations with central North Island. 119–20 arts. 198. 164. 204 alluvium. 140 Bay of Plenty. 31. 247 carvings from. 175. 1. 69. 122. 174–5. 24. 17. 59. 229. 114 bins. 161. 248 amo. 161. Maori. 176. 84. 164. 69. 96. 164. 146 Awaiti Paku Stream. 206. 217. 160. 199. 22. 223. 164. 119. 94–6 Ben Lomond. 245 bird bone. 232. 233. 76. 245– 6. fern-root. 164. 58.

50. 54. 248 floors. 50. 65. 74 Cooks Beach. 51. 1. 46. 18. 58. 21. 130. 239. 158–9 Coromandel Peninsula. 65. 57. 240–1. 135 door sills. 40. 150 three-ply braids. 174 curated technology. 234–5 starch and xylem analysis. 74. 110–1 pounamu. 38–41 fire-pits. 76 faunal remains. 11. 54. 30. 233. 100. 233 diatom analysis of coprolites. 112–3. 42. 119. 226–9. 48. 232 variation. 64–5. 17. 59. 198. 65. 174 coprolites. 248 deforestation. 127 chisels bone. See also food acquisition and preparation digging tools. 136. 205–210 in coprolites. 59. 63. 147. 92. 77 fish bones and scales. 234 pollen analysis. Yellow House horizon flute. 150. 232 macroscopic analysis. 31. 83–4 Cook. 166. sandstone. 74. 87–92 dogs bone. 245 cooking stones. 51. 53. 134–5 doors. 38. 68. 63–4. 243. 167 Classic Maori culture. 245 geomorphology Kohika. 41. 150–2. 229. 200–2. 56. 140 expedient technology. 200. 92. 61. 42. 239 during occupation of Kohika. 209. 77 in coprolites. 71. 232–3 cordage. 40. 37 combs. 57. 64. 218. See also birds. 37. 146. 66–7. 16. 120. 149. 160. 203 climate. 249 diet. See also Bright Yellow floor. 136. 217–38. 59 firescoops. 69. 126. 39– 40. Hamilton. 217. 71. 71. 94. 243. 239. 239. 198–216. 242 flax (harakeke). 54. 231–2. 71. 74. 11–2. White House horizon. 69. 100. 17–8. 230. 241 fibre-working tools. 70. 59. 70. 217. 65. 158–9 single ‘spiral-wrapped’. 18. 217–38. 60. 74. 242. 51. 18. 57. 94–6 fibrework. 46. 29.Index 261 capillaria hepatica. 105. 64. 240. 38. 171. 152–4. 243 age of. artificial. 166. 92 earthquakes. 217. 45. 177. 146. 244. 158 ‘two-ply spiral-wrapped’. 57. 46. 120. 233. 50. 233–4 seasonality. 18 coastal progradation. 167 Fiordland. 217. 219–23 fishhooks. 42. 228. diet gardening. 146 food acquisition and preparation. 177 darts. 38 Edgecumbe earthquake. 239 Rangitaiki Plains. 235 diatomaceous earth. 167 handles. 69. 65. 22. 59. mammals. 239. 31. 232. 1. See woodcarvings charcoal. 225. 209. 65. 16. 108–9 defence. 102. 53. shellfish Fermah Rd. 239 eel. 69. 166. 65. 47. 55. 164. 64–5. 24. 77. 54. 11–2. 69. 243 phytolith analysis. 233 diatom analysis. 46. 55–6. 233–4. 229. 223–4. 40–1. 57. 30. 60. 200. 69. 67. 171 faulting. See hair combs conservation techniques. 37. 42. 55. 77. 47. 125. 84. 46. 248 East Coast. fish bones and scales. 19. 228–9 carvings. 148. 177 Fanal Island. 77. James. 163. 42. 30. 149–59. 55. 241 Edgecumbe. 149 fire. 63. 149. 69. 92. netting. 240. 46. See also cordage. 41. 167. 138 dunes. 218–25 palaeoenvironmental indications. 208–10. 64. 141. 53. wooden artefacts. 18. 12. 229. 232. 57. 234 fern-root beaters. 46. 126. 55. 243 door jamb. 160 cooking structures. 245 file. 48. 69. 218. 29. 177. 218. 234 Chartwell. plaiting floods. 29. 38 fern root. 235 parasite eggs in. 135. 58. 76. 111. 55. 203 coprolites. 60. 222. 164. 29. 13. 206 epa. 158. 217. 92. 164. 242–3. 11–19 gourd shell. 76. 146. 242 . impact of. 167 fishing. 120. 58–9. See also cooking structures. 245.

31. 51. 38 hotu. 241 lintels. 41 volcanic ash and disturbance. 167. 41. 134. 195–6. 188–91. 30. 40. 11. 55. 45–75 features. 40. 24–30. 60–71. 21–3. 13. 167. See also specific aspects of the excavation. 171–2. 242 Area D. 247 excavations and site history. 211–4. 51– 3. 9. 38. See also Bright Yellow floor. 130. 211. 46. 167 heke (rafters). 128. 46. 40. See cooking structures harakeke (flax). 89. 17. 242. 37–8. 6. 54. 240. See dogs ladder. 74. 192–3. netting. 192– 3. 243–6. 74. 248 construction methods. 92 ko. 37. 160. 240 vegetation. 108 Holdens Bay. 48–51 first human impact. 29. 140. See also Tunapahore A. 46. 91. 72. 128–40. 54. 114. 13. 96. See pounamu Hahei. 196 Kawerau. 55 Area D. houses abandonment. 161. White House horizon. 70–1. 19. 126. 158. 124–6. 247 layout and composition. 235. 92 Houhora. 167. 105–8. 149. 76. 196 households. 207. 69. 19. 74. 89. 1. 102. 126. 57–60. 51. 201. 48–51. 135 kanuka. 196 hair combs. 200. 243 Area B. 145 kuaha. 206. 53. 188–91. 1. 56. 167. 126 kaho-paetara. 37. 16. 188. 167 manufacturing method. 112 kauri. 51 Kaharoa Tephra. 63. 198. 37. 199. 208. 40. 128. 243. 147. 42. 96. 63. 239 history and tradition. 148. 21. 174. 211. See also cordage. 58. 203 Hauraki area. faunal remains. 38 ketu. 125–6. 94. 22–3. 38 jack mackerel. 87. 192–3. 198. 149. 242–3. 248 Area A. 87. 30. 46 john dory. 64 Historical Society excavations. P. 62. 160. 24. 22–3. 195–6. 138–40 heke ripi. 76. 98. 188–91. 42. 243–5 chronology. 244. 137 . 162. 77. 137. 208 kahikatea. 108. 29. 243 earliest known NZ carved house. 146. 240 Area A. 123. 129. 31. 122–3. 51. e. 39 function and location issues. 84.g. 167 manufacturing method. 201. 200. 16–7. 160. 63–4. 126 kumara god. 69. 166. 109. 140 kaui. 86. 240. 76. 166–7. 55. plaiting Haulashore Island. 56–7. 46. 199. 77–82. 118. 141. 150. 65. 42 hei tiki. 126. 202. 140. artefacts. 30. 171. 19. 18. 149. 110. 205. 240. 246–7 geomorphology. 14. 47–51. 128. 163. 108–9 Jessop. 76.. 38. 47 Area B. 79. 137. 59. 39. 242. 18. 3–4 local environment. 46. 29. 242. 23. 76. 209–10 javelins. 124. 138 heru (hair combs). 160. 241. 98 kowhaiwhai. 46. Tunapahore B Hawkes Bay. 144. 32. 198. 247 Kauri Point. 77. 211. 160. 149. 47 korupe. 108 hangi. 199. 122 lashing vine. 122. 17. 76. 140 kaho. 69. 241 Hawai Bay. 55. 137. 207 Kaharoa eruption. 49. 202. 134. 195–6. 137–40. 206. 94. 122. 246 Area C. 239. 206. 105. 196 greenstone. 245. Yellow House horizon carved house (whare whakairo). 198. 30. 11. 92. 126. 59. 72 kahawai. 46. 239 radiocarbon dates. 46. 1. 50. 87. 76–82 economy. 39. 137 kowhai. 30. 6–9. 240 stratigraphy. 39. 176.262 Kohika Great Barrier Island. 47–8. 243–6 houses (whare). 205. 92 Kohika. 22. 65–8. 38. 198. 40. 91. 240 settlement pattern. 30. 134. 167 kuri. 207. 14. 141–2. 41. 105–8. 74 human bone. 46. 203 hutu. 247. 240. 1. 87–8. 51–7. 107. 61–4.

241 Ngati Porou. 212. P. 57. 22. Lake. 9. 58 Upper Peat. 3 North Island Shear Belt. impact of. 46. 30. 192. 14. 126. 217. 203 Moutoki Island. 76. 94. 181. 131. 114. 229. 126. 37 mammals. 213 needles. 58. human bone. 242. 170 Matata Fault. 31. 138. 94–6 peat. 51. 114. 39 pare. 91. 194–5. 48. 176. 29. 112. 38. 69. 183. 218. 167 pounamu.Index 263 mahoe. 111–2 netting. 146 Motu River. 37. 30. 241. 18. 2. 72 Palliser Bay. 182. 66. 247 midden. 46. 192. 131 pahautea. 14 Oruarangi. 164. 40. 123–4 manuka. 77. 173. 185–6. 211 Miranda. 182. 58. 70. 71. 126 pipi. 118. 22. 98. 122. 39 matapihi. 39 Maketu obsidian. 144. 11–2. 174. 179–81. 174–6 sources. 122. 209. 37 Motuhora Island. 239 mapara (heart rimu). 100 Otamarakau. 51. 169. 193. 175. 156. 71. 234 pigment pot. 211. 150. 54. 86–7. 127. 172–4. 233. 92. 71. 55. 21. 196. 64. 125. 24. 158 Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. 145 Mangakaware. 69. 46. 213–4 pits. 137. 109. 111 mataaho. 155–7. 91. 78. 161. 187. 231–2. 210 New Zealand Archaeological Association. 176 core reduction sequence (scar patterns). 96. 40 Orini Stream. 69. 158. 107. 37. 245. 211. 19. 127–8 patu aruhe.. 68. 245 plaiting (raranga). 194–5. 154–5. 56–7. 162. 74. 162. 9. 247 Mamaku Plateau. 244. 246. 37. 51. whale bone manaia. 37. 185. 116 pendants bone. 187–8. 167 net gauges. 172. 91. 57. 17. 29. 69. 47 Ohiwa Harbour. 13. 170–2. 70. 161 Otago Museum. 170 Otoroa. 198–203. 173. 98. 248 western. 3. 247 chemical analyses. 69. 1. 168–9. 245. 136. 134. 174. 40 Omarumutu. 84. 126 Matata. 22. 129. 67. 104. 160. 146 Omeheu. 114. 127. 173. 92. 168–76 technology and distribution. 212. 54. 64–5. 167 phytolith analysis of coprolites. 196–7 green. 172. 74. 147 pataka. 5 New Zealand Historic Places Trust. 174–5. 177–97 obsidian hydration dates. 38 palaeosol. 190. 167 tooth. 195. 182 ‘other grey’. 59. 60 . 37. 188–93. 87. 186. 11 obsidian artefacts. 210–1. 241–2. 150. 59. 239 matting. 149 Lower Peat. 175. 166. seal bone. 30. 126 matai. 213 marine. 6. 140 Maori settlement. 241–2. 196 Papamoa Bog. 140. 54. See also dogs. 141. See also houses architecture. 65. 203 muka. 170. 123. 21. 212. 170. 1. 59. 14. 241. 69 palisades. 59 pegs. 144. 172. 160. 185. 174–6 ‘pebble-type grey’. 126 maire. 87. 55. 140. 194. 196 flake size and proportions. 96. 196 flake edge modification. 74 Mayor Island obsidian. 70. 188–90. 40–3. 37. 54. 127. 49–50. 72. 169. 55. 6 Ngaropo. 64 Ngati Awa. 114 Maketu Basin. 245. 3. 5. 53. 19. 17. 19 Opouriao Plains. 157. 47. See cooking structures paepae. 57. 92. 171 ovens. 159. 147. 182–7. 160. 76. 158 podocarp forest. 243. 144 Mokoia Island. 203 mussels freshwater. 196 debitage. 160. 118 maihi. 189. 39. 77. 38. 37. 169. 149. 141. 242. 31. 140 Matakana Island. 114. 146 Ngati Tuwharetoa. 67. 55. 1. 137. 86. 193–4. 9 Ngaroto. 135. 98. 145. 30. 149. 57. 160. 65. 167 pihunga. 102. 18. 30.

166. 63. 3. 91. 126 pounamu adzes. 166. 145–6 puha. 112. 134. 22. 11. 167 poupou. 110. 14. 4. 74. See pataka stratigraphy Kohika. 125–6. 96. 137 posts. 18 drainage. 194. 164. 98. 166. 78. 66. 162. 233–4. 134. 140. 85–7 spinning tops. 24. 247 river courses. 46. 92. 30. 147 Poverty Bay. 122. 72. 86. 38. 34 Tunapahore B. 51–3. 31. 142 impact of settlement from. 114. 130 rimu. 3. 74. 61. 64. 125–6. 59. 230. 143–4. 54. 94. 130. 164. 228. 156. 233–4 pollen stratigraphy. 70. 32. 240 pollen. 203 postholes. 31. 87. 69. 52–3. 76. 74. 47–8. Bay of Plenty archaeological sites. Lake. 203 sedges. 48. 55. 209 soils. 91. 199–200. 30. 13–5 vegetation. 72. 22. 98. 136. 240 Matata Fault. 42. 125. 239 raranga (plaiting). 243. 2. 122. 239 seeds. 35–6 Polynesia architecture. 19. 74. 20–44 poniu. 130. 58 Area D. 58. 16–17 Area A. 129. 3 political/social relations with central North Island. 217. 47–8 Area B. 146. 24 Tunapahore B. 235. 29. 144 radiocarbon dates earliest ages. 198. 130 Tairua. 49. 223 shaft knobs. 52–3. 78. 56–7 Area C. 55. 242. See also palisades potaka. 3. 229. 129. 244 as food. 60. 126. 77–82. 167 chisels. 198. 55. 129. 5–6 Rurima Island. 59. 29. 140 rope. 46. 107. 41 Rangitaiki River. See also mussels snapper. 111 puwerewere. 69. 18. 229. 11. 51–2. 37. 41. 92. 40 Kohika. 61–4. 147 poutahuhu. 157. 118 stone file. 59. 23 Tunapahore A. 24. 126 rauponga surface decoration. 167 storehouses. 126 tahuhu (ridgepole). 147 poutokomanawa. 31. 167. 72. 69. 235. 234. 18 geomorphological context. 167 kumara god. 206. 91. 158 rata. 210–5. 29. 140 pukeko. 39. 22. 165. 233. 174 . 140. 11–9 history and tradition. 175. 93 shellfish. 23. 208. 4–6 climate. 239. 16–7. 54. 207. 154–5. 137. 70–1. 232 sticks/stakes. 37. 114. 46. 53. 141. 50. 58. 12. 1. 98. 218. 56– 7. 114. 24. 109–10 pou matua. 92. 69. 58. 203 seal bone. 74. 229. 100. 60. 167 puriri. 241. 234 Ponui Island. 57. 124. 22. 102. 1. 122. 53. 123. 109 Rotorua. 14. 160. 145 reeds. 65. 22. 110 putorino. 31. 133. 143–4. 138–40 Rangitaiki Plains. 127. 203 pumice. 39. 243 Raupa. 217. 37. 40. See cordage Rotoaira. 69. 32–3 Tunapahore A. 166. 122. 31. 53. 31. 167 pendants. 118 rats. 24–30 Thornton-Atkinson archeological complex. 196 raupo. 21–37 Kohika. 21–37 supplejack. 144–5. 92. 125–6. 149. 102 pollen analysis of coprolites. 125.264 Kohika pohutukawa. 57. 201. 111. 129. 19. 229. 24 rafters (heke). 235 as insulation material. 166. 64–5 Thornton-Atkinson archaeological complex. 126. 29. 239 ridgepoles (tahuhu). 239 pukatea. 22–3. 109–10 starch analysis of coprolites. 74. 131. 83. 21–3. 146 rua. 66. See also specific placenames and site names archaeological site distribution. in coprolites. 4. 31. See also Taupo pumice containers. 62–4 spears. 217. 122. 55.

1. 160. 55. 35–6. 17. 11. and specific tephras volcanic eruptions. 38–9. 14. 134 Waitahaarikikore. 114. 48. 59 Area D. 242. 155. 30. 88. 30. 47. 126 Tokata Island. 6. 146 radiocarbon dates. 247 Taupo pumice. 47 Area B. 161. 146 Taupo eruption. 24 vegetation. 92 tephra. 24. 110. 241 volcanic ashes. 118 University of Auckland. 213–4 tukutuku panels. 172. 141 tumatahuki. 163 pendant. 239 Twilight Beach. 147 Tarawera eruption. 144. 123 wakahuia lid. 65 totara. 119. 239 Tarawera River. 226–7. 144 Tokoroa. 38–9. 134. 239 vine coils. 39–40 radiocarbon dates. 145. 203 Tokitoki site. 3 Waitakere Ranges. Abel. 31. 63. 39–40 radiocarbon dates. 32–3. 14. 126. 138 tawa. 120. 202 twill work. 239 Te Kaha. Maketu. 72. 24. 130. See also canoes tuatua. 24. 56. 229. 24. 55. 248 weaving tools. 193–4. 111 toggle. 40–3. See tephra. 114. 13. 3. 61. 63. 242. 37–8. 20–44 impact of volcanic disturbance and fire. 167 topsoil. 24. 120. bone. 12. 239 Kohika. 13. 228–9 toys. 29. 100 tatau. 115 weeding tools. 22. 69. 41 Waihi. 42. 91. 96. 117. 54. 146 tooth fishhook. 24 vegetation. 1886. 29. 87. 170. 22. 105. buried. 21. 46. 12. See also Kaharoa eruption. 154. 176. 32. 14. 16. 171– 2. 19 impact of first human settlement. 9. 112. 40. 14. 37 teka. 76. 112 wedges. 140 Te Ahumata. 127 taratara-a-kai surface decoration. See also specific tephra teremu. 247 Te Arawa. 31. 174 Waihi Beach Swamp. 31. 102. 48. 240 Taupo Volcanic Zone. 99–100. 31. 38–9 Tunapahore B first human impact. 215. 22. 41 prehistoric. 23 vegetation. 39 Waioeka. 203 weapons. 157 unidentified items. 37. 146 Te Puke. 83–4. 14. 37. 29. 18. 38. 16. 167 toitoi. 135. Taupo eruption impact on vegetation. 65. 135. 17. 234. 87. 105. 240. 4. 21. 13. 39–40 impact of Maori settlement. 174. 172 vegetation. 235. 11. 24–30. obsidian source. 74. 38–9 tutu. 41. 59. 104. 126 Taupo. 118. 204 tiki. 23. 37. 233. 125 Thornton-Atkinson archaeological complex doorway carvings from. 21–3. 144. 193–4. 58 Area C. 46. 11 tauwhenua. 23. 174–5. 135. 126. 72. 53. 146. 240 Taupo Tephra. 34. 208. 1. 41 thread reels. 74 Tasman. 126. 167 Tikopia. 3 Te Awa o te Atua. 22. 140 toxocara canis. 1. 149 Waitara. 98. 30. 31. 55. Tarawera eruption.Index 265 tapu. 45. 37. 206. 38. 100. 56. 31. 69. 40 tokoihi. 210–1. 112 Three Kings Islands. 96. 239 impact of Polynesian settlement. 242. 19. 42. 247 transport. 114. 22. 245 trade. 102. 79. 11. 113 Warrington. 38–9. 46. 240. 19. 247. 240 Area A. 120. 176. 160. 38. 127. 92 . 107. 89. 6. 12. 85. 146 Waipa. 196 Tolaga Bay. 29. 162. 37. 161. 111. 46. 98. 136 Tunapahore A first human impact. 40. 129. 1. 38. 108. 18. 66 Historical Society excavations. 173. 38–9 Taupo obsidian. 18. 212. 171. 239 Tarawera Tephra.

13 Whakatane Graben. 210. 240. 211. 214 Whitipirorua. 66. 171 Whangara. See houses whata. 149. 61. 240. 214 . 64 Whakatane Hill Soil. 211. 150. 71. 76. 77. 200. 212. 42. 70. 199. 128–37. 18 Whakatane and District Historical Society. 67. 205. 55. 207. 58 woodcarvings. 54. 118–9. 149. 188. 196 windows. 149. 123. 11. 74. 77. 126 wood chips. 6. 152–4. 137. 65. 163. 69. 122. 201. 77. 127 whatitoka. 243–4. 74. 241. 149. 240 faunal remains. 200. 85 Whakatane Ash. 83–4 overview. styles. 78. 123. 198. 210. 59. 118–9 wood. 160. 146 Whakatane River. 83. 40 climate. 78. 57. 122. 70. 205. 243–4 faunal remains. 232 Yellow House horizon. 206. 202. 199. 114. 171 Whakarewarewa. 9. 146–7. 245 field treatment and laboratory conservation. 137. 120. 158 White House horizon. 199. 72–4. 248 Whakamaru. 47. worked. 70. 205. 248. 128. 11. 193. 83–121. 143–6. 131. 141. 154. 119–20 reassembly and identification. 84–5 woodworking. 191–2. 55–6. 123. 46. 67–8. 69. 65–8. 63–4. 245–6 obsidian artefacts. 122. 167. 171 Whakatane. 203 Whangamata. 5. 132–3. 11. 126 whiri (braided cordage). 68. 202. 123. 63.266 Kohika wetland archaeology. 245 xylem analysis of coprolites. 58. 177. 24 Whakatane Museum. 64. 30. 14 whale bone. 200. 212. 1. 213. 59. 184. 138. 240. 195–7. 206. 201 excavation area. 240–1. 41. 163. 122. 9. 129– 30. 247 wooden artefacts. 127. 146 whare. 242 wooden artifacts. 189. 213. 207. 76. 178. 199. 241. 12.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful