Fifty years of the New Zealand Archaeological Association.

Fifty years of the New Zealand Archaeological Association. Part retrospect, part review, this article lets Peter Gathercoletake the long view and reflect on recent trends in New Zealand New Zealand(zē`lənd), island country (2005 est. pop. 4,035,000), 104,454 sq mi (270,534 sq km), in the S Pacific Ocean, over 1,000 mi (1,600 km) SE of Australia. The capital is Wellington; the largest city and leading port is Auckland. archaeology. LOUISE FUREY & SIMON Simon,in the Bible.1 One of the Maccabees.2 or Simon Peter: see Peter, Saint.3 See Simon, Saint.4 Kinsman of Jesus.5 Leper of Bethany in whose house a woman anointed Jesus' feet. HOLDAWAY (ed.). Change through Time: 50Years of New Zealand Archaeology (New Zealand Archaeological Association AssociationAssociation in archaeology has more than one meaning and is confusing to the layman. Archaeology has been critiqued as a soft science with a somewhat poor standardization of terms. Monograph 26). viii+374 pages, 20 illustrations, 10 tables, CD-ROM of 17earlier 'classic' articles nominated by the authors. 2004.Auckland: New Zealand Archaeological Association; 0-9597915-9-0paperback NZ$45. MATTHEW CAMPBELL See also Matt Campbell and Matthew Campbell (Kangaroos footballer)Matthew Campbell (born January 30, 1964) is a former Australian rules footballer in the VFL/AFL and currently a media personality. (ed.). Digging into History: 50 years of the NewZealand Archaeological Association. Archaeology in New Zealand 47 (4)(special issue). 2004. vii+220 pages, 64 illustrations. In his first editorial in March 1927, O.G.S. Crawford (1927: 3-4)stated that Antiquity's policy would not be narrow. His firstnumber was true to his word. Alongside distinguished archaeologists,authors included New Zealand-born social anthropologist Noun 1. social anthropologist - an anthropologist who studies such cultural phenomena as kinship systemscultural anthropologistanthropologist - a social scientist who specializes in anthropology Raymond Firth,who was shortly to publish his pioneer study, Primitive Economics of theNew Zealand Maori (1929). Firth's article, 'MaoriHill-Forts', an ethnological eth��nol��o��gy?n.1. The science that analyzes and compares human cultures, as in social structure, language, religion, and technology; cultural anthropology.2. study of the Maori pa, invoked directcomparison with British hill-forts, at least in part, no doubt, tointroduce non-New Zealand readers to such structurally comparable sitesby means of a familiar archaeological idiom (Firth 1927). Since 1927 discussion of the archaeology of New Zealand has figuredoccasionally in this journal, the tempo increasing as it became moresystematically defined and explored after 1945. Today, its examinationhas acquired a wider significance. The study of Maori prehistory prehistory,period of human evolution before writing was invented and records kept. The term was coined by Daniel Wilson in 1851. It is followed by protohistory, the period for which we have some records but must still rely largely on archaeological evidence to andhistory includes evidence from accounts of early European observers aswell as from conventional archaeological fieldwork, thus encouraging thestudy of an indigenously perceived archaeology, not, it could be argued,simply the results of a technique introduced by non-Maori specialists toincrease historical knowledge. Moreover, New Zealand being one of thelast landmasses of any size to receive first human settlement prior tothe expansion of European society beyond Europe, the short time-span andrapidly evolving sophistication so��phis��ti��cate?v. so��phis��ti��cat��ed, so��phis��ti��cat��ing, so��phis��ti��catesv.tr.1. To cause to become less natural, especially to make less naive and more worldly.2. of Maori culture over perhaps only somesix centuries offers opportunities for fascinating case studies toculture historians and anthropologists, as well as to archaeologists. The underlying theme of Change through Time is how an archaeologythat became both professional in execution and as indigenous in contentand style as its subject matter developed so quickly. New Zealandarchaeology had its beginnings with nineteenth century discoveries,mainly by a handful of natural scientists, of the existence of aremarkable extinct avian fauna, especially the moa. The prime mover prime mover:see energy, sources of. Prime moverThe component of a power plant that transforms energy from the thermal or the pressure form to the mechanical form. inthis study was Sir Julius von Haast Sir Johann Franz Julius von Haast (May 1, 1822 – August 16, 1887) was a German geologist He usually called himself (Sir) Julius von Haast.Haast was born at Bonn, Kingdom of Prussia. , first Director of the CanterburyMuseum, Christchurch. He took the presence of unpolished stone toolswith moa bones as evidence of a local Palaeolithic, parallelingdiscoveries in the Northern Hemisphere, while that of polished toolselsewhere indicated the existence of a local Neolithic. However, oncepolished and unpolished tools began to be found together, a localPalaeolithic was no more. For many years thereafter New Zealandarchaeology remained museum-inspired and museum-led, regional inaspiration and control, with few agreed nationwide objectives, and, morecrucially, no central organisation to work for their realisation. This all changed in 1954. On 27 August, 16 people (including twoOtago University science students in Wellington for a philosophyconference who happened to be wandering about the building) met in theDominion Museum and set up the New Zealand Archaeological Association.In the Chair was H.D. Skinner, pupil of A.C. Haddon, Director of theOtago Museum, Dunedin, and doyen of New Zealand ethnology ethnology(ĕthnŏl`əjē), scientific study of the origin and functioning of human cultures. It is usually considered one of the major branches of cultural anthropology, the other two being anthropological archaeology and , who hadtaught a one-year course in anthropology at Otago since 1919. All othermajor New Zealand museums were represented, alongside a handful ofrespected local historians. The convenor of the meeting was Jack Golson,a Cambridge research student, who earlier that year had taken up post atthe Anthropology Department of what was soon to become the independentUniversity of Auckland Not to be confused with Auckland University of Technology.The University of Auckland (Māori: Te Whare Wānanga o Tāmaki Makaurau) is New Zealand's largest university. . Golson's arrival was catalytic. By launching a programme ofintensive fieldwork in the North Island, on the basis of newly excavatedevidence (which, put briefly, demonstrated that early as well as latersites could have evidence of horticulture), he opened the way for afundamental reclassification ReclassificationThe process of changing the class of mutual funds once certain requirements have been met. These requirements are generally placed on load mutual funds. Reclassification is not considered to be a taxable event. of New Zealand prehistory, replacing one ofa simple transition from hunting/gathering to horticulture. Moreover,alongside setting up the Auckland University Archaeological Society,Golson saw the need for a national archaeological organisation. In hiscontribution to 'Digging into History' (pp. 31-2; see alsoGolson 1986: especially 3-4) he writes that a national organisation'could be a vehicle for promoting archaeology as an independentavenue to the study of New Zealand prehistory and of doing so bybuilding on and going beyond the provincialism pro��vin��cial��ism?n.1. A regional word, phrase, pronunciation, or usage.2. The condition of being provincial; lack of sophistication or perspective. Also called provinciality.3. that the very shape ofthe country encouraged. It could smooth the way for growing universityparticipation in what had for so long been a museum field of operation.It could provide a common meeting ground for the professional and theamateur practitioner and the means of responding to the widespreadinterest in the country in the monuments and relics of its past'.All these things happened. Golson's leadership brought into beingan organisation of amateur and professional members who held annualmeetings of high intellectual calibre, and, from July 1958, oversaw anational scheme of site recording that began to demonstrate the extentof the country's potential archaeological resource (today thescheme has approaching 60 000 sites on record). In his contribution to a Festschrift fest��schrift?n. pl. fest��schrif��ten or fest��schriftsA volume of learned articles or essays by colleagues and admirers, serving as a tribute or memorial especially to a scholar. for H.D. Skinner (Golson1959), Golson proposed a two-stage scheme for New Zealand archaeologythat did away with its longstanding preoccupation with the moa as aprime chronological marker. The first settlement (of Eastern Polynesianorigin) he called the Archaic phase, whether there was evidence of themoa or not; the second Classic Maori. The question that remained--andstill does--was the nature of the relationships between the two overtime and space. Of course, this revolution (for such it was) was not carriedthrough by Golson alone. As well as the growing number of NZAA members,Golson was joined in 1958 by Roger Green, an American Fulbright Fellowfrom Harvard. One of Green's teachers had been G.R. Willey, who,with P. Phillips, had just published Method and Theory in AmericanArchaeology (1958), a work that influenced the writings of both Golsonand Green. Green spent more than a year in the Auckland AnthropologyDepartment, working with Golson and undertaking his own research. Hethen worked in the tropical Pacific, before taking Golson's placewhen, in 1961, the latter moved to the ANU Anu(ā`n), ancient sky god of Sumerian origin, worshiped in Babylonian religion. at Canberra. He stayed until1967; after another spell in the Pacific, he returned to New Zealand in1970 on a Captain Cook Fellowship, before being appointed to a personalChair at Auckland University in 1973 (Davidson 1999: 838-44). This lengthy introduction is necessary because Golson and Green, atthe onset of their careers and thereafter, have had profound effects onthe way New Zealand archaeology has developed. Partly due to the lengthof his Auckland appointments, overall Green has been the main architectof New Zealand archaeology, especially when his work is seen in aPacific context. Janet Davidson, herself a distinguished New Zealandarchaeologist, writes: 'Green has played a major role in the growthof Pacific archaeology through his field work and his writing, but alsothrough his personal influence. For someone who has been a dedicateduniversity teacher for most of his career; he has produced surprisinglyfew outstanding students. On the other hand, a great many people whocannot claim to have been "his" students have cause to begrateful to him for encouragement, for reading and commenting on writtenwork--ranging from small papers to drafts of dissertations andbooks--and in many cases, for assistance in raising funds or findingother opportunities to take part in fieldwork' (Davidson 1999:848). Of course, other outside appointees, mostly from Cambridge,contributed greatly to Auckland's success in those formative yearsof the 1960s and 1970s, including Wilfred Shawcross, Peter Bellwood andRichard Cassels. Meanwhile at Otago I spent a decade from 1958 buildingon Skinner's groundwork to create a fully-fledged Department ofAnthropology (Gathercole 2000a, b). Above all, however, it has been asuccession of highly talented New Zealanders who have built on theGolson/Green foundations to achieve the archaeological maturity thesebooks so well demonstrate. A study of a nation's archaeology, Change through Time showshow this has happened. Its 18 contributors are described in the Preface(p. vi) as 'the current generation of archaeologists who researchand teach New Zealand archaeology, and at the same time acknowledge thecontributions of the scholars who taught us: Together they contribute 14chapters to the book, which fall into five groups. Despite a measure ofrepetition, given their common starting points and often commonproblems, tight editorial control has ensured that each author writeslucidly and to the point, each detailing a topic's past treatment,its current research state, and future prospects. The first chapter considers the importance of theory (sometimesregarded as lacking in the discipline, despite discussions on culturalchange persisting in the literature for years). This is followed by oneon material culture, now enjoying a come-back after a time whenstructures were much more the centre of attention. Then there arechapters on social organisation, settlement patterns, and, a welcometopic, ritual; this group concludes with a discussion invitingarchaeologists to be more aware of the significance of current researchin tropical Polynesia when interpreting their own findings. There follows four chapters on detailed aspects of culture: ontrade and exchange, horticulture, zooarchaeology, and chronology, thelatter including a careful discussion of radiocarbon and other datingtechniques. Next are chapters bringing some new topics into regulararchaeological review. There is a plea to improve co-operation betweenbiological anthropologists and archaeologists, a good example beingjoint work on kiore, the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans), a distinctspecies that helps in tracking Polynesian settlement. The recent rapidgrowth of historical archaeology is emphasised, especially its relevanceto the study of the development of New Zealand as a multiculturalsociety. Linked to this is recognition of the importance of heritagemanagement, one result of relentless pressures for more land to bereleased for commercial development. A vital aspect of today'sheritage concerns, which perhaps could have received more emphasis inthe book as a whole, is the need to work in close association with theMaori people, both to maintain vigilance in the protection of sacredsites and landscapes, and to help extend at large knowledge of theirpast and present significance. The final chapter of the book discusses New Zealand archaeology inthe context of the whole Pacific. Pacific archaeology has beentransformed in the last 50 years, particularly by studies of the Lapitaculture (named after a site in New Caledonia), which, over more than1000 years after c. 1500 BC, spread from the Bismarck archipelagosouth-east beyond the Solomons' chain into then uninhabitedislands, developing cultures ancestral to those we call Polynesian. NewZealand archaeologists have contributed much to this research. Can sucha spread of resources continue? This chapter concludes with some timelyadvice for the future of the discipline (see Bedford below). The book includes a 78-page bibliography of over 1700 references,meticulously compiled by Dorothy Brown. The chapters are keyed to'classic' papers published in the last 50 years (all 17 ofwhich are included on an accompanying CD-ROM) that advanced ideasfruitful for later research, so providing opportunities to re-assesssuch works in historical perspective. The editors of Change through Time must be congratulated that thevolume was completed within two years. Production standards are high,with very few misprints and reference errors. The only significantdrawback is the absence of an index, which I hope will be included whenthe book is reprinted. Triumphantly, copies were on sale at the verysuccessful 50th Anniversary Conference of the Association held at NewPlymouth in November 2004, when Golson, Green and other early memberswere present--a week of intense discussion and conviviality con��viv��i��al?adj.1. Fond of feasting, drinking, and good company; sociable. See Synonyms at social.2. Merry; festive: a convivial atmosphere at the reunion. I shall longremember. What then of prospects for the future? In the book's lastchapter Stuart Bedford (p. 296) reflects on the changing nature of theNew Zealand Archaeological Association, including theprofessionalisation Noun 1. professionalisation - the social process whereby people come to engage in an activity for pay or as a means of livelihood; "the professionalization of American sports"; "the professionalization of warfare"professionalization of archaeology, and the shift of archaeology intothe market place 'which has in many respects contributed toincreasing territoriality TerritorialityBehavior patterns in which an animal actively defends a space or some other resource. One major advantage of territoriality is that it gives the territory holder exclusive access to the defended resource, which is generally associated with and further politicisation ofarchaeology' and concludes: ' Without doubt one of the majorearly achievements of the NZAA is the New Zealand archaeologicalcommunity's history of involvement and influence in the archaeologyof the tropical Pacific, which in turn has influenced practise andtheory in New Zealand. This has unquestionably un��ques��tion��a��ble?adj.Beyond question or doubt. See Synonyms at authentic.un��question��a��bil been due partly to NewZealand's political influence and proximity to the region, theattraction of tropical climates in combination with archaeological terraincognitae, and the early identification of Polynesian connections, butalso has as much to do with the pioneering inspiration and influence oftwo young archaeologists who arrived in the South Pacific from differentsides of the Atlantic, more than 45 years ago, and laid the basis for a"community of culture" to which students and avocational av��o��ca��tion?n.1. An activity taken up in addition to one's regular work or profession, usually for enjoyment; a hobby.2. One's regular work or profession.3. Archaic A distraction or diversion. orprofessional archaeologists could, and have, contributed'. 'Digging into History', a special issue of theNZAA's house journal, Archaeology in New Zealand, illuminates someof the ways many of the activities discussed above have been effected.Carefully edited by Matthew Campbell to illustrate their range, thisissue consists of reminiscences by Association members and others ofsome of their experiences. There is considerable emphasis on inevitabletribulations in the cause of fieldwork--plenty of frustration, forexample, when seeking elusive postholes in baking sunshine. Sometimesexperiences could verge on the dangerous, as when Jill Hamel Ham´elv. t. 1. Same as Hamble. flew in1976 to the Chatham Islands, 500 miles east of Christchurch, in a1939-45 converted Anson troop glider, fitted with an engine, thatvibrated each of its 10 000 rivets, all trying 'to get us across anunexpected amount of sea to a bit of land which looked as if a goodspring tide would cover most of it'. In contrast is the image ofRon Scarlett, much loved osteologist osteologista specialist in osteology. at the Canterbury Museum, at the1952 Pyramid Valley moa swamp excavation, triumphantly holding aloft abone, shouting with glee 'Cnemiornis, Cnemiornis! The extinctgoose'. Rich with photographs of excavations, field trips and conferences,this memoir also includes more serious contributions, including that byGolson quoted above and an elegantly composed 'short history'of the Association (pp. 4-26) by Nigel Prickett, one of thejournal's former editors. In addition, Les Groube (p. 110), in manyrespects New Zealand archaeology's most original thinker, sharplyberates the current lack of critical assessment of the heritage ofnineteenth century ethnology: 'I would like to see a reneweddetermination to re-examine the pioneering manipulators of the Maoripast, both amateur and professional, their methods, motives and results.To the young Turks o/professional archaeology today, such a task barelyfalls within the remit of the NZAA, but from what I have been able toread since leaving New Zealand in 1969, I am fearful of the emergence ofan apartheid prehistory, where professionalism and--if I may be allowedan old man's cynicism--fadism, has wrenched us from our primarytask: unravelling the history of the Maori. To do this we mustexamine--to use the new BBC BBCin full British Broadcasting Corp.Publicly financed broadcasting system in Britain. A private company at its founding in 1922, it was replaced by a public corporation under royal charter in 1927. vogue-word--the bullshit we inherited fromthe nineteenth century. When I left New Zealand I thought thisre-examination was underway; I have been disappointed with what I haveread. We, the scientific manipulators, should not ignore thegenealogical manipulators who preceded US...'. Archaeology in New Zealand grew out of the New ZealandArchaeological Association Newsletter, begun in 1957 as a cyclostylednews-sheet, edited and initially largely written by Ron Scarlett, thatdid much to keep members in touch with activities nationwide.Archaeology in New Zealand and the annual New Zealand Journal ofArchaeology, launched in 1979, help maintain the Association'scontinuity and coherence. Surveying its archives, Nigel Prickett hascommented how hard the Association is on its office holders. Having beena national secretary in the 1960s, also building a local society atOtago, I can only agree. But as someone who has benefited much fromworking first within the Association, then as an overseas member, I amgrateful for such good fortune. Among other things, the books reviewedhere demonstrate the extent to which many others have enjoyed similarexperiences. Acknowledgements I have to thank the following for their comments on an earlierversion of this article: Matthew Campbell, Dr Louise Furey, ProfessorJack Golson, Professor Helen Leach, Dr Yvonne Marshall, Rhys Richards,Professor Matthew Spriggs and Professor Douglas Sutton. References CRAWFORD, O.G.S. 1927. Editorial Notes. Antiquity 1: 1-4. DAVIDSON, J.M. 1999. Roger Curtis Green Emeritus Professor of Prehistory Roger Curtis Green BA, BSc, PhD, FRSNZ, MANAS, ONZMRoger C Green is an archaeologist at the University of Auckland and has had a long academic career. , in T. Murray (ed.) TheGreat Archaeologists Vol. II: 835-53. Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio. FIRTH, R. 1927. Maori Hill-Forts. Antiquity 1: 66-78. GATHERCOLE, P. 2000a. Otago 1958-1968 (Part 1). Archaeology in NewZealand 43: 206-19. - -2000b. Otago 1958-1968 (Part 2). Archaeology in New Zealand 43:283-96. GOLSON, J. 1959. Culture Change in Prehistoric New Zealand, in J.D.Freeman & W.R. Geddes (ed.) Anthropology in the South Seas: Essayspresented to H.D. Skinner: 29-74. New Plymouth: Thomas Avery & Sons. --1986. Old Guards and New Waves: Reflections on Antipodean an��tip��o��des?pl.n.1. Any two places or regions that are on diametrically opposite sides of the earth.2. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) Something that is the exact opposite or contrary of another; an antipode. Archaeology 1954-1975. Archaeology ix Oceania 21: 2-12. WILLEY, G.R. & P. PHILLIPS. 1958. Method and Theory in AmericanArchaeology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including . Peter Gathercole, Darwin College, Cambridge CB3 9EU, UK