Additional Evidence for Pre-1788 Visits by Pacific Islanders to Norfolk Island, South-West Pacific
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Records of the Australian Museum (1993) Supplement 17. ISBN 0 7310 0280 6 145 Additional Evidence for pre-1788 Visits by Pacific Islanders to Norfolk Island, South-West Pacific JIM SPECHT Australian Museum, PO Box A285, Sydney South, NSW 2000, Australia ABSTRACT. One of F.D. McCarthy's earliest professional papers was a report of stone tools on Norfolk Island which he interpreted as evidence for pre-British visits by Pacific Islanders, probably from Polynesia. Since McCarthy's paper (1934), additional artefactual, biological and historical evidences have supported his original conclusions. The present paper describes further finds and concludes that the evidence is firmly in favour of Pacific Islanders visiting and using the Kingston area of Norfolk Island about 700 years ago and, probably, again at a later date. These visits originated in the East Polynesian area, possibly the Society or Cook Islands and New Zealand, though a landing from Melanesia cannot be ruled out. Why there was no population on Norfolk at the time of its discovery by Cook in 1774 remains unanswered, but the answer probably lies in a range of factors. Further progress on understanding the island's prehistory requires the location and excavation of in situ deposits. SPECHT, J. 1993. Additional evidence for pre-1788 visits by Pacific Islanders to Norfolk Island, South-west Pacific. Records of the Australian Museum, Supplement 17: 145-157. Norfolk Island was one of the few Pacific islands that from the late 18th century onwards, combined with the was uninhabited at the time it was first visited by results of a brief field survey in 1976, supported Europeans. Yet circumstantial evidence for earlier visits McCarthy's interpretation, suggesting that the island was to and possibly occupation of the island by Pacific visited at least once, possibly twice, by people from East Islanders was reported from the first days of the British Polynesia prior to 1774 (Specht, 1984). Stone tools of penal colony established there in 1788 (ef Thorpe, 1929). forms paralleled in Australia and Melanesia were In one of his first publications F.D. McCarthy (1934) discounted as evidence for landings from those areas, and described the discovery of flaked stone tools in the Emily their arrival on the island after 1788 was tentatively Bay area of the island (Fig. 1). Reviewing these finds in accepted. Subsequent work by biologists in the Kingston the light of archaeological and historical evidence, he area (Rich et al., 1983) revealed evidence at about 700- concluded that these tools most likely indicated that 800 years ago for a major burning episode that might Pacific Islanders, probably from East Polynesia, visited have been caused by human activity, and the appearance and perhaps settled the island some time before Cook's of the Polynesian rat (Rattus exulans), which is widely visit in 1774. regarded as a commensal of humans in the Pacific (e.g., A review of historical evidence and finds reported Williams, 1973; Roberts, 1991). The radiocarbon dates 146 Records of the Australian Museum (1993) Supplement 17 for these events were consistent with the interpretation together with a range of stone adze blades found more of the archaeological surface finds (Meredith et al., recently. In addition, there are records of two shell 1985). artefacts found in the Kingston area which suggest In this paper I report new evidence for landings on contacts with Melanesia rather than a Polynesian point Norfolk prior to colonisation by the British in 1788. of origin. The circumstances of their discovery raises the These include a painting in the Natural History Museum, possibility that they may have reached Norfolk before London, which may be the oldest visual record of 1788. The paper concludes, however, that most of the evidence for a pre-British Polynesian visit to the island, evidence supports East Polynesian visits to and use of o. cS'. " " .' ~" ' .. South Society Is " " NORFOLK Cooks '. Kermadecs Steele's Bumboras Emily Bay t t;] 0 km Fig,I, Map of Norfolk Island showing localities mentioned in the text. Specht: Norfolk Island 147 the Kingston area about 750 years ago. Comparisons with signed by Watling, and a further 389 unsigned works. finds reported from Raoul island in the Kermadecs The history of the collection is complex and confused. reveal some points of similarity, which in turn raise Dutton (1974) suggests that White took the collection questions about the manner in which the two islands were to England in 1794, seven years before Watling left the visited. Irwin's (1992) work on Pacific navigation and colony. Although the collection is loosely named after colonisation opens new avenues for discussing Watling, there is no evidence to suggest that White's prehistoric exploration of the Pacific. Islands like Norfolk collection contained works only by Watling. Indeed, undoubtedly featured in this, and the overall weight of according to Dutton, some are clearly by other artists, the archaeological evidence from Norfolk supports his and some dated items must have been executed before arguments. Thus, while Norfolk holds geographically a Watling was even sentenced to deportation. The Natural marginal position, its actual significance in understanding History Museum received the collection from a James issues about the settlement of the Pacific may be more Lee of Kensington in 1902 (Gladstone, 1938:109-110), central. by which time items may have been added to or removed Additional notes are listed in the Appendix. from the collection. This obviously leaves the ascription of painting 79 to Watling open to question; likewise, its precise age cannot be determined. The 'Watling' Painting Other Finds Reported from Norfolk Island What may be the oldest surviving visual record of a prehistoric Polynesian find from Norfolk Island is shown on painting 79 (formerly no. 88) in the 'Watling' Since the publication of my 1984 monograph, other collection of the Zoology Library, Natural History finds have been reported from Norfolk Island. Some are Museum, London. This is a water colour of a stone adze known only from photos and sketches sent to me by blade. The undated and unsigned painting carries the various people (items 1 to 6), and their descriptions and inscription 'A Norfolk Island Hand adges' (sic). The illustrations are, therefore, less than complete; others I painting is 275 mm long and 145 mm wide (Fig.2). have actually inspected (items 7 to 12). This painting, which has been inspected in photographic form only, depicts a stone adze blade Items Not Inspected similar to Duff Type 1 forms from early East Polynesian contexts (Duff, 1959: 128). This is consistent with the (1) A stone blade registered as 1903.10-20.1 in the discovery of a Type lA preform in the Slaughter Bay Ethnography Department, Museum of Mankind, London, area at Kingston (Specht, 1984:fig.13A). is attributed to Norfolk Island. This item is known only Thomas Watling was an artist who was sentenced in from the register entry, a copy of which was supplied 1789 to 14 years deportation from Britain for forging by Dr M. O'Hanlon who reported that the item could bank notes. He arrived in the colony of New South not be relocated at the time of our correspondence. The Wales in October 1792 (Gladstone, 1938:89), one year register entry describes it as 'long adze blade of black after the first reports of finds of stone tools on Norfolk basaltic stone', followed by the attribution 'Paiiti Maori Island (Specht, 1984:12). In Sydney Watling worked for from Urenui Norfolk Island'. The word 'Paiiti' may be Surgeon-General John White until White returned to a misspelling for 'patiti', a Maori term for 'hatchet' England in 1794. Watling painted scenes of Aborigines, (Williams, 1892:130). 'Urenui' probably refers to the views and natural history specimens from the Sydney Urenui area of the Taranaki district of New Zealand, area. He was pardoned in 1797 and left the colony in since no place of this name is known on Norfolk itself. 1801. The register entry, the source of which is not indicated, The 'Watling' collection contains 123 paintings actually may be simply a comparative statement between item Fig.2. Painting 79 in the 'Watling Collection', Zoology Library, Natural History Museum, London. 148 Records of the Australian Museum (1993) Supplement 17 1903.10-20.1 and New Zealand examples of similar stone of basalt found 'off New Farm Road' in May 1986. From adze blades.! a drawing supplied by Varman, it is 405 mm long, 150 (2) A possible example of a Duff Type 4A adze blade mm at the widest point and up to 80 mm thick. It (Duff, 1959: 137,fig.6; cf Leach, 1990:fig.4) has been resembles E.36959 held by the Australian Museum and reported by Mrs M.J.(Honey) McCoy from the Bumboras found in 1934 in the garden of T.E. Adams house, near area of Norfolk, near Creswell Bay just west of Kingston. the present Seventh Day Adventist church (McCarthy, This item was found in 1987, and is known only from 1934:267,pl.1). While E.36959 has some evidence of a water colour painting of the tool by Mrs McCoy which faceting indicative of human workmanship, the available was sent to me by Mrs M. Hoare of Norfolk Island photograph of the Hitch specimen does not allow an (Fig.3). The tool is about 300 mm long, 30 mm wide assessment of its origin. at the cutting edge, up to 40 mm thick and weighs about (6) R.J. Varman (in Wt. 28 Apr. 1985) reported that 2 kg (on the water colour, the dimensions are given in Mr Leo McCoy of Norfolk Island holds a flaked and mm; I assume this is incorrect).