Nā Koehana: Artifacts of the Past and Present

Credit: Darienne Dey, Steve Soltysik

Grade Level: 6-8

Learning Time: 2 class periods or 90 minutes

Keywords: archaeology, artifact, anthropogenic, garbologist, koʻi, Kumulipo, photodegrade

(Photo source: S. Soltysik)

Summary & Goals: In the absence of written materials (such as recorded histories or nautical charts), archaeologists and navigators alike must make important decisions based on conclusions drawn from observations. Students will evaluate their own classrooms and homes and decide which items may last hundreds of years and which items may be lost. They will also identify artifacts from within a contemporary setting, describe the function of each artifact, and interpret possible associations between contemporary “artifacts.” As a result of these lessons, students will understand the processes involved in drawing conclusions and making informed decisions based on systematic observations, and will understand the contributions that careful observation makes to human knowledge.

Background | Standards | Resources and Materials | Instructions | References

Background:

SCIENTIFIC Written accounts alone do not present a complete record of human history, since they do not account for the thousands of years of human experience before the invention of writing and can often be biased. Archaeology, the study of peoples and cultures through material or physical remains, can provide clues about past human experiences. The things that humans create and leave behind are sometimes preserved under layers of sediment deposited over time by natural occurrences. Thus, to an archaeologist the soil is like a historical document to be deciphered, translated, and interpreted in order to help him or her understand the human past. But unlike a document, the soil of an archaeological site can be interpreted only once in the state in which it is found: the very process of excavation destroys a site forever, making

These lessons have been developed in partnership with the University of Hawaiʻi College of Education and Polynesian Voyaging Society. Funding has been provided by the Department of Education Native Hawaiian Education Program.

© Bishop Museum, 2014. All rights reserved. 1 such an investigation a costly experiment that cannot be repeated. Accordingly, archaeologists conduct excavations with great care. A variety of remote sensing techniques can be used to investigate a site without disturbing it while also allowing archaeologists to uncover unique data that is otherwise unobtainable using traditional archaeological excavation. Examples include ground-penetrating radar, soil-resistivity testing (measuring a soil’s electrical resistance), or magnetic surveys to determine the nature of materials that lie below the ground surface. The human past is like a vast, uncompleted jigsaw puzzle with many scattered pieces. An archaeologist searches for different pieces of this same puzzle; that is, he or she looks for what has been left behind in the form of artifacts (human-made objects) and other evidence of past human activity. He or she identifies, categorizes, and correlates these pieces of evidence to get a better picture of what the completed “puzzle” (i.e., the past) might have looked like. Many puzzles of human history (e.g., the initial colonization of Pacific islands) were pieced together through the joint efforts of archaeologists, linguists, forensic anthropologists, historians, cultural experts, and other scientists. How well physical objects survive is strongly affected by the materials of which they consist and the environment in which they may lie for centuries before being rediscovered. Materials may be organic (i.e., living or once living) or inorganic (i.e., never living). Organic remains include plants and animals, and anything made from plants or animals (e.g., food, paper, wood, leather) and, due to being affected by humidity and air, survive well only if protected in airless, sealed (e.g., in volcanic ash), completely dry or completely waterlogged, and very hot or very cold (even frozen) environments, otherwise they will decay. Inorganic remains include stone, metal, clay, plastic, and glass and will not decay, but are still subject to rust, tarnishing, and breaking down when subjected to unstable conditions. Researchers classify anthropogenic, or human-made, debris as either land- or ocean- based. Garbology is the study of (mostly modern) refuse and trash and often overlaps with archaeology (specially, ethnoarchaeology or “the study of the remains of living cultures”), since fossilized or otherwise time-modified trash is often the only remnant of ancient populations that can be found. For those cultures that did not leave large structures, samples of writing or pottery, or well-marked tombs containing burial goods, refuse and trash are likely to be the only possible sources of information. In addition, ancient garbage sometimes contains what might not otherwise be available, such as food remains, pollen traces of contemporaneous local plants, and broken tools. Within and around water, garbologists might examine marine debris, which consists of anthropogenic artifacts that have been deliberately or accidentally released into a lake, sea, ocean, or waterway. Once waterborne in the ocean, debris will typically follow the flow of ocean currents until ending up on a beach, within the middle of an oceanic gyre (i.e., as part of the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch”), or even on the seafloor (as within the Arctic Ocean). 80 percent of marine debris is plastic, which accumulates because it typically does not biodegrade as many other substances do, though it can photodegrade under exposure to sunlight. However, wet conditions (i.e., floating in the ocean) inhibit this process.

CULTURAL Based on the wā ʻumikūmākolu (section 13) of the Kumulipo (a Hawaiian creation chant

© Bishop Museum, 2014. All rights reserved. 2 that provides an account of the origin of Hawaiian species), the three major “houses” of knowledge into which all physical entities are divided are papahulilani (i.e., the space above the head, which includes astronomical, atmospheric, and meteorological phenomena), papahulihonua (i.e., the earth and ocean, which includes geological and oceanographic phenomena), and papahānaumoku (i.e., flora and fauna, which includes all biological entities). Therefore, one possible Hawaiian equivalent of organic would be anything belonging to papahānaumoku, and since humans belong to papahānaumoku, even inorganic manmade materials would also fall under papahānaumoku, (whereas inorganic naturally- occurring materials would fall under papahulihonua). Although plastics may seem like a notable exception to this category, increasingly more synthetic-material-eating fungi (e.g., Pestalotiopsis microspora, which “eats” polyurethane) and bacteria (e.g., a strain of Flavobacterium that “eats” nylon) are being discovered, and more readily biodegradable plastics are being manufactured (e.g., the packing products of FP International), lending support to the Hawaiian notion of manmade products as “organic” and instilling faith that solutions do exist (and will present themselves) for curbing the negative effects of manmade debris. Still, even materials that could be categorized as belonging to papahānaumoku (i.e., that were organic) were historically able to stay intact during “voyages” from distant shores to Hawaiʻi. According to British explorer George Vancouver, who visited Hawaiʻi in the early 1790s, it was not uncommon for “fir trees” (which, to him, included spruce, fir, and pine) to drift from the Northwest Coast of North America onto the shores of Hawaiian islands, particularly Kauaʻi, and for Hawaiians to use these logs to make some of their canoes. In fact one of the definitions for the term hūkaʻa is “resinous timber drifting to Hawaiʻi from the northwest coast of America” (Pukui & Elbert, 1986, p. 87). In the relatively modern time of the early 1990s, Hawaiians once again used spruce trees (this time generously gifted by the Tlingit, Haida, and Tshimshian peoples of the Pacific northwest in the absence of locally- grown, suitably-sized koa trees in Hawaiʻi) to construct Hawaiʻi’s second deep-sea voyaging canoe Hawaiʻiloa, who (unlike her predecessor Hōkūleʻa) was built using mostly natural materials. Those who live closely with the land are heavily conscious of the value of life, offering prayers in order to request permission of and, afterwards, thank the animals and even the plants whose lives they take in order to sustain their own. In 1990, before the felling of the two 418-year-old Sitka spruce trees that would become the hulls of the aforementioned canoe Hawaiʻiloa, Tlingit Paul Marks offered a prayer to them (which he also paraphrased in English):

We thank you tree, in Tlingit askwani. And the tree that we are going to use today. That we look to you as a symbol of strength and power. And that you would hold up in the storms and weathers to come. And that it would be a blessing to the Hawaiian nation. And that it would also serve as a link between the three nations, Haida, Tlinglit, and the Hawaiians. And that our love would grow with one another.

And that it would be an ongoing relationship. (Finney, 2003, p. 15)

Afterwards, Hawaiian Keliʻi Tauʻā, joined by Hawaiian pwo (master navigator) Nāinoa Thompson and master carver Wright Bowman, Jr., implored the forgiveness of the four major Hawaiian gods (i.e., Kāne, Kanaloa, Kū, and Lono) as well as “the multitude of gods” for taking the trees’ lives and asked for their blessings in giving the trees new life as part of a voyaging canoe (pp. 15-16). They recognized the balance between loss and gain, and similarly, archaeologists must be conscious of what is irreparably lost for the sake of gaining new insight into the past, carefully weighing the consequences of their actions.

VOYAGING Just as every dig also destroys as it uncovers (leaving little to no possibility of checking information not recorded), once a decision is made by the navigator aboard a voyaging canoe in terms of forward progress, there will be no practical opportunity to “back up” and take a different turn, especially in the middle of the ocean (where there are few if any position- indicating markers). Therefore, archaeologists and navigators alike must be especially makaʻala (vigilant) in order to include all possible information when deciding how best to proceed with their endeavors and must be prepared to live with these decisions, wherever they take them. Archaeology itself is an exploratory enterprise, and although it has been primarily land- based, emergent sub-fields of archaeology entail voyaging into relatively new realms—that is, across and below the waves and above and beyond the clouds. Experimental archaeology involves replicating (or attempting to replicate) past processes and artifacts to understand how they came about. Prime examples relating to Pacific voyaging include…  Nālehia, a 40-foot long replica of Hawaiian waʻa kaulua (double-hulled canoe) commissioned by anthropologist and Polynesian Voyaging Society co-founder Dr. Ben Finney between 1965-1966,  Hōkūleʻa, the 62-foot long waʻa kaulua replica that, although constructed of mostly modern materials, was still “performance accurate” and was first navigated successfully without instruments (by Satawalese pwo Pius “Mau” Piailug) from Hawaiʻi to Tahiti in 1976, and  Hawaiʻiloa, a 57-foot long waʻa kaulua replica made from mostly natural materials (in 1993) that was also navigated without instruments from Hawaiʻi to Tahiti as well as from Te Henua ʻEnana (i.e., the Marquesas) to Hawaiʻi in order to simulate the original voyage of Hawaiʻi’s first human settlers. Underwater archaeology studies evidence of peoples and cultures underwater. Changes in sea level due to seismic events or more widespread climatic changes have resulted in some sites of human occupation (that were once on dry land) being submerged. Also, because human societies have always made use of water, underwater archaeological sites may include submerged indigenous settlements, wrecks of ships and/or aircraft, remains of structures created in water (e.g., bridges), and refuse or debris sites where people disposed of their waste or munitions. For example, in 1973, during an excavation on the island of Huahine (in French Polynesia), the Bishop Museum’s current Senior Anthropologist Dr. Yosihiko Sinoto discovered the first (and, at the time, only) hard physical evidence of long-distance ocean

© Bishop Museum, 2014. All rights reserved. 4 voyaging: a 12-foot-long wooden steering paddle, 23-foot-long wooden planks (with some of their binding sennit and natural caulking still intact), and a 35-foot-long unbroken wooden mast. Thanks to the anaerobic conditions of the swamp in which they were found, the submerged remains of what appeared to be a 65-foot-long canoe had been well preserved since the time of their original deposition (estimated to have been around A.D. 1000-1100). Space archaeology is the study of manmade items found in space, including launch complexes on Earth, orbital debris, satellites, and objects and structures on other celestial bodies (e.g., Mars). Their interpretation serves as a means by which to preserve and learn from mankind’s sojourns (thus far) into space. In 1992, while on their own separate voyages, Hōkūleʻa and the space shuttle Columbia connected through satellite communications between Nāinoa and his fellow Punahou School alumnus astronaut Lacy Veach, who had also carried the head of a koʻi (a Hawaiian adze) aboard.

Koʻi (in foreground) floating aboard Columbia and Hawaiʻi Island (in background) (Photo credit: L. Veach; http://pvs.kcc.hawaii.edu/index/adz_in_space.jpg)

Similarly, xenoarchaeology concerns the physical remains of past (but not necessarily extinct) alien life and cultures. Due to the immense distance between celestial bodies, by the time scientists discover any evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence, the civilization to which it belongs may have already long since vanished. Therefore, the SETI (i.e., search for extraterrestrial intelligence) projects that are run by Harvard University, the University of California, Berkeley, the SETI Institute, and, up until 1995, the United States government can be seen, in a sense, as extraterrestrial archaeological studies.

BISHOP MUSEUM

Bishop Museum scientists have been in search of answers to the question of the origins of Pacific peoples since the inception of the museum. During the mid-1920s and 1930s, young Bishop Museum researcher Dr. Kenneth Emory surveyed ancient marae and other stone structures throughout Tahiti and its neighbors, but it was in 1950 that Dr. Emory started a revolution in Hawaiian archaeology. Up until then, most archaeologists concentrated on surface remains, believing that Pacific islands had not been settled long enough for deep deposits containing artifacts to have accumulated. But when Dr. Emory decided to teach his University of Hawaiʻi anthropology students about excavation techniques at a rock shelter in Kuliʻouʻou (on the southeastern coast of Oʻahu), they were pleasantly surprised to find that its soil was deeply stratified and yielded ancient fishhooks, adze fragments, and even tattoo needles. Soon afterwards, he called upon the expertise of current Bishop Museum Senior Anthropologist Dr. Yosihiko Sinoto, and after several years of additional excavations and intensive work, Dr. Sinoto was able to establish a radiocarbon-dated archaeological sequence based on over 4,000 fishhooks of shell, bone, and wood excavated from 32 sites around the islands. Drs. Emory’s and Sinoto’s subsequent examination (and reexamination) of fishhooks from Hawaiʻi, the Society Islands, and Te Henua ʻEnana (i.e., the Marquesas) led them to conclude that, since early Hawaiian fishhooks closely resembled the archaic Marquesan hooks and late Hawaiian hooks were more like late Tahitian hooks, Hawaiʻi had been settled first from Te Henua ʻEnana around A.D. 1000 with the arrival of influential Tahitian voyagers around A.D. 1400. Even today, the museum’s Anthropology Department remains concerned with investigating and preserving the material heritage of Hawaiʻi and the Pacific Basin. These endeavors have resulted in the world’s largest collection of Hawaiian artifacts, totaling over a million and representing Native Hawaiian and historic Hawaiʻi immigrant life as well as cultures from across the Pacific. Many of these artifacts are currently showcased in Hawaiian Hall and Pacific Hall. Currently, researchers in the Anthropology Department are re-analyzing artifacts from important archaeological sites that were excavated in Hawaiʻi over 50 years ago This research is being done as part of the department’s Hoʻomaka Hou Research Initiative, which aims to analyze the collections using the most modern techniques available. For example, researchers are now able to x-ray stone tools to find out where ancient cultures quarried stone to make the tools. One toki, or adze from the Tuamotus that is on display in Hawaiian Hall was sourced to a quarry on the island of Kahoʻolawe, which is over 3,000 miles away. That means that someone carried that tool with them on their voyaging canoe in the past. It was also on the grounds of the Bishop Museum that the logs of Hawaiʻiloa were ceremonially presented to Hawaiians and where Tlingit educator Dr. Walter Soboleff christened the future canoe with a Tlingit name as well—Khutxh. Ayun nah Ha Kayatun or “Steering by the Stars” (Finney, 2003, p. 20). Tlingit executive Byron Mallott further affirmed his people’s connection with Hawaiians:

In your canoe, you carry all of us who share your vision and aspiration for a people to live and prosper with their future firmly built on knowledge of their heritage and traditions. (Finney, 2003, p. 21)

Today, because of the aloha and tireless efforts of dedicated individuals to preserve her

(in spite of her mostly organic make-up), Hawaiʻiloa still serves as an emblem (along with Hōkūleʻa, other voyaging canoes, and the museum itself) of the revival and perpetuation of past traditions in the present for the education and benefit of future generations.

Standards: Nā Honua Mauli Ola

 ʻIke Pikoʻu (Personal Connection Pathway)

GLOs

 GLO 3 Complex Thinker

 GLO 5 Effective Communicator

HCPS III Grade 6-8 – Science

 SC.6.1.2 Use appropriate tools, equipment and techniques to safely collect, display, and analyze data.

 SC.8.1.1 Determine the links between evidence and conclusions of an investigation.

Common Core Grades 6-8 Reading Literacy Science & Technical

 6-8.SL.1 Engage effectively in a range of collaborative discussions with diverse partners.

 6-8.SL.2 Interpret information presented in diverse formats.

 6-8SL.4 Present claims and findings.

Grades 6-8 Writing

 6-8.W.7 Conduct short research projects to answer a question, drawing on several sources.

NGSS Middle School Earth and Human Activity—Students will understand the following DCI:

 ESS3.C Human impacts on Earth Systems—How do humans change the planet?

Resources and Materials:

Materials:  A 24-piece puzzle of a highly recognizable picture.  Choose 4 or 5 areas within the school with which the students are familiar (e.g., your classroom, the cafeteria, the library), observe the types of “artifacts” left behind (i.e., in rubbish bins, on the floor), select similar portions of such artifacts (e.g., candy wrappers, plastic pen caps), and place each set of artifacts in a separate bag (i.e., one bag per school area). Each set of artifacts should help to tell a story of each school area.  RECORD OF OBSERVATIONS worksheet (2 per student, included below).

Websites:  Basics of Archaeology for Simulated Dig Users (by S. Brown): http://www.archaeological.org/pdfs/education/digs/Digs_basics.pdf.  Marine Debris Module (by S. Webb): http://www.hawaiiatolls.org/research/NWHIED2005/resources/MDM/MDM.html.  NOAA Marine Debris Shoreline Survey Field Guide: http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/tsunamidebris/pdf/shorelinefieldguide.pdf.

Instructional Procedures:

1. ENGAGE: How do archaeologists make sense of their pieces of the puzzle (that is, material evidence)? They first identify and then categorize what they find.  Divide the class into 5 groups, and distribute four puzzle pieces to each group, leaving four puzzle pieces (of the total 24) undistributed.  In their groups students will first identify the “attributes” (or characteristics) of each of the individual puzzle pieces, which may include straight edges, a puzzle piece arm (or two, three, or four), a hole (or two, three, or four), a description of what is pictured and/or its colors, etc. Then, as groups, students will decide on categories and group their puzzle pieces accordingly.  As a class each group will share its broad categories, which will be compiled in a place (e.g., a mounted whiteboard) where everyone can see them.  Have the students determine (as a class) what correlations (relationships) exist among categories and how they know. One possible prompt: do puzzle pieces with “arms” correlate just because they have that attribute in common? (Possible response: No, puzzle pieces with arms and puzzle pieces with holes go together because they potentially fit together.)

 Based on these correlations, have the students design a “framework” (hint: assemble the framing pieces of the puzzle first) for trying to solve the puzzle.  Have the students take turns (that is, rotating among groups) fitting pieces together to “solve” the incomplete puzzle.  Afterwards, have them reflect: o What is the puzzle of (i.e., what is pictured)? o Was it necessary to have all of the pieces to a) put it together and/or b) tell what was pictured? o What other strategies might have been useful for solving the puzzle? o How did it make them feel, not having ALL of the information available? o What are the fewest number of puzzle pieces necessary (in their estimation) to be able to identify what is pictured? (Take away a few a time, in order to provide a visual)

2. EXPLORE:  Review the properties of organic and inorganic materials.  Ask students to look around the classroom and list the things (including people and things worn by people) that are organic and those that are inorganic.  Have them address the following questions: o What (within the classroom) might survive in 1,000 years? o What kinds of conclusions may future archaeologists draw about us? o What incorrect assumptions might they make (based on what still remains)? o What would you like them to know about our class or our school?  Homework: Have students list the furniture and objects in a room within their home or at a place (besides school) that they frequent, noting which objects are organic, inorganic, or have elements of both media. Then, have them summarize what they think an archaeologist would say about that room or place or even them as individuals: o Would your name(s) survive? If so, how? If not, why not? o Would your taste in colors, music, books, or hobbies survive? o Would archaeologists be able to tell what your gender or age were?

3. EXPLAIN:  Tell the students to imagine that 1,000 years have passed and an archaeological expedition at your school has recently (that is, 1,000 years from now) uncovered a number of artifacts that they, as archaeologists of the future, must now examine and interpret.  Divide the class into 4 or 5 equally-sized groups, giving each student a copy of the RECORD OF OBSERVATIONS worksheet and providing each group with one of the numbered bags of “artifacts.”  Ask the students to open the bags, examine the artifacts, and consider the material of each object and how each object might have been used, all the while recording this information on their RECORD OF OBSERVATIONS worksheet.

 After identifying the objects, have students speculate in what context these objects would have been found.  Reconvene as a class and have a representative from each group explain their group’s interpretations, providing explanations of the objects and their contexts (i.e., identifying, categorizing, and correlating their artifacts).

4. ELABORATE/EXTEND:  Task students with participating in or conducting their own small-scale park or beach clean-up. As they remove manmade debris, they should also be noting some (or all) of what they are finding on an additional RECORD OF OBSERVATIONS worksheet.  Task them with assembling materials for a hypothetical (or actual) mini time capsule that would represent your class. Revisit previously discussed questions and concepts throughout the process. Also, task the students with deciding at what future point in time (e.g., in one month, in 10 years) they would like to reopen the time capsule (or if they would like to leave it for future students to open).  Create and simulate an excavation (on a miniature scale) that might take place on an island within the Pacific, drawing upon the parameters of Mystery Cemetery (Brown, 2010a) and/or Shoebox Dig (Brown, 2010b).

5. EVALUATE:  Using questions provided by the teacher, students will review their own and their classmates’ written and verbal explanations and interpretations of the their surroundings within the classroom and within their familiar place (outside of class), and their RECORD OF OBSERVATIONS from the bag activity as well as from their park or beach clean-up. As part of their reviews, they will assess the accuracy of the observations and the extent to which conclusions follow from the observations.

References

Archaeology. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology.

Biological Sciences Curriculum Studies (BSCS). (2002). BSCS biology: An ecological approach (9th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

Bishop Museum. (2012a). Cultural studies. Retrieved from http://www.bishopmuseum.org/research/cultstud/cultstud.html.

Bishop Museum. (2012b). Ethnology database. Retrieved from http://data.bishopmuseum.org/ethnologydb/index.php.

Brown, S. (2011). What will survive? [PDF document]. Archaeological Institute of America. Retrieved from http://www.archaeological.org/sites/default/files/files/What%20Will%20Survive- edited.pdf.

Brown, S. (2010a). Mystery cemetery [PDF document]. Archaeological Institute of America. Retrieved from http://www.archaeological.org/pdfs/education/cemetery/Cemetery_procedures.pdf.

Brown, S. (2010b). Shoebox dig [PDF document]. Archaeological Institute of America. Retrieved from http://www.archaeological.org/pdfs/education/digs/Digs_shoebox.pdf.

Carroll, R. (2005). Huahine: Island of the lost canoe. Honolulu, HI: Bishop Museum Press.

Edith Kanakaʻole Foundation (EKF). (2013). Papakū makawalu. Retrieved from https://www.edithkanakaolefoundation.org/current-projects/papaku-makawalu/.

Finney, B. (2003). Sailing in the wake of the ancestors: Reviving Polynesian voyaging. Honolulu, HI: Bishop Museum Press.

Hirst, K. K. (2013). Experiment archaeology. In About.com: Archaeology. Retrieved from http://archaeology.about.com/od/eterms/g/experimental.htm.

Marine debris. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_debris.

Pukui, M. K., and Elbert, S. H. (1986). Hawaiian dictionary (Rev. ed.). Honolulu, HI: Bishop Museum Press.

Search for extraterrestrial intelligence. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_for_extraterrestrial_intelligence.

Smigielski, A. (1995). Decoding the past: The work of archaeologists. Art to Zoo: Teaching with the Power of Objects. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Retrieved from http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/images/educators/lesson_plan/decoding_the_past/d ecodingthepast.pdf.

Underwater archaeology. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_archaeology.

Name: Group #: Artifact Bag #:

Record your observations of the artifacts provided in your group’s bag. In the first column, sketch the object.

Object Material Function Possible Location (i.e., (sketch) (i.e., what made of) (i.e., use) where found)