Summary

What underlies the widespread diffusion of homogeneous material culture that can periodically be observed across large geographical areas from ancient times to the present day? The general aim of the project is to contribute to globalization research in this field. This will be done through an ethno-archaeological pilot project in Melanesia, where the past and present are still intimately connected. An archaeological study of the Lapita culture in the 2^nd century BC will be coupled with an ethnographic analysis of modern canoeing. Both phenomena are an expression of globalization in different periods and will be able to shed light on each other. They are in fact closely connected inasmuch as the geographically far-reaching Lapita complex – the first agriculture accompanied by a new language and a particular material culture – must have been spread through navigation in seagoing outrigger canoes. A comparative study on and near the island of Mbuke – in the province of Manus in the Bismarck Sea near Papua New Guinea – should clarify the issue. The study will involve an archaeological trial excavation of a Lapita site and an anthropological analysis of the use of canoes today as identity markers and a means of communication. An essential focus of the study is the inter-cultural dependence created by these means between otherwise separate ethnic groups. The study should contribute to improved understanding of globalization as a past and present phenomenon. How are culture and knowledge spread, and how are they received locally? And what are the consequences of globalization for the formation of social identity? The project is part of a large-scale research programme (supported by the Danish Research Council for the Humanities and the University of Aarhus) entitled “Material Culture and Identity Formation: Globalization in the Past and Present”, with the collaboration of Moesgaard Museum, the Papua New Guinea National Museum and ANU in Canberra.

The aim of the project

The project will carry out an ethno-archaeological pilot study in Melanesia with the aim of shedding light on the connection between material culture, identity formation, and globalization in the past and present. This region was selected because the past is extremely present and active there, and because the Institute of Anthropology, Archaeology and Linguistics at the University of Aarhus and the Moesgaard Museum already possess considerable competence with regard to the region and the field of knowledge as a whole.

                      The plan is to carry out an archaeological field investigation of the Lapita culture (2^nd century BC) during the four-five weeks when the Galathea 3 ship is between the Indonesian waters and the Solomon Islands, and this investigation will be combined with an ethnographic analysis of modern canoeing. Both phenomena are an expression of globalization in different periods and will therefore be able to shed light on each other. They are furthermore closely connected, since the geographically far-reaching Lapita complex must have been spread through navigation in large seagoing outrigger canoes, probably with considerable consequences for culture and society. Concretely, a comparative study on and near the island of Mbuke – in the province of Manus in the Bismarck Sea near Papua New Guinea – illustrates the complex of problems. Mbuke was chosen because canoeing has undergone a striking renaissance under the influence of present-day globalization, and because early Lapita localities can presumably be identified on the island.

                      Drawing on existing knowledge of the field, an archaeological trial excavation of a Lapita settlement on Mbuke is thus planned, and the interpretive process will work in tandem with an anthropological analysis of the current use of canoes as means of communication and as identity markers. The canoes are used daily as a means of transport, but also for long voyages and weekly regattas – which is a magnificent sight! An important focus of the study will be the cross-cultural contact and interdependence between otherwise separate ethnic groups created by these means, but also the variable responses to outside impulses that will certainly also be possible to observe.

                      What underlies the widespread diffusion of homogeneous material culture that can periodically be observed across large geographical areas from ancient times to the present day? This is a question that archaeologists in particular, throughout most of the history of the discipline have sought in vain to answer with reference either to massive migration or cultural diffusion. Archaeology must however enter into dialogue with anthropology in order to loosen up the problem and thereby contribute to today’s globalization research: this is precisely the general aim of the project. The ethno-archaeological study should contribute to a better understanding of globalization as a past and present phenomenon and answer questions like the following: How are culture and knowledge spread, and how are they received locally? And what are the consequences of this for the formation of social identity? In this connection recent theories on modern globalization will be important interpretive tools, especially concepts like hybridization, fragmentation and homogenization of culture and society (Appadurai, Friedman, Huntington, among others).

National and international background for the research project

The proposed destination offers the potential to activate a multi-annual project. An ethno-archaeological study like the one outlined above has not been carried out before in the region, but it is anticipated that the study will take the research in this field an important step forward. Inspiration can however be sought from some pioneering Danish efforts in New Guinea itself (Steensberg 1973; Højlund 1981) and recent initiatives in other areas (Hodder 1982; David & Kramer 2001). Danish archaeology has not carried out excavation activities in Melanesia before. However, Ton Otto’s many years of anthropological research activities in the province of Manus in Papua New Guinea provide a breeding ground for an extraordinary new contribution, whereby existing anthropological knowledge will be brought into play along with new anthropological and ethno-archaeological initiatives. In recent years, Australian archaeologists from Australian National University (ANU: especially Matthew Spriggs, Wal Ambrose, Glenn Summerhayes and Jean Kennedy) have produced decisive new knowledge about the enigmatic Lapita culture, which is now connected with the spread of agriculture and Proto-Oceanic languages in Oceania.

                      In the late summer of 2004, Moesgaard Museum brought into focus the ancient tradition of building outrigger canoes in a research and dissemination project that involved visiting a group of canoe builders from Manus (http://www.moesmus.dk/kanu/kanu.php). The ethnographer Steffen Dalsgaard has written an MA thesis[1] on the tradition of canoeing (and has just begun a three-year PhD scholarship), while the archaeologists involved, Mads Ravn and myself, have considerable knowledge of past globalization, the archaeology of the area, and modern field methods. The ethnographer Rane Willerslev is a specialist in visual and material anthropology and will be responsible for the dissemination aspect of the project, in particular video documentation.

                      The project is part of a major research programme supported by the Danish Research Council for the Humanities and the University of Aarhus and entitled “Material Culture and Identity Formation: Globalization in the past and present”, with the collaboration of Moesgaard Museum, Papua New Guinea National Museum in Port Moresby and ANU in Canberra. With this pilot project on Mbuke our primary aim is to lay the foundation for a larger research project in Manus/PNG with the help of the above-mentioned collaborators and with focus on the themes of globalization, identity and material culture. It is thus expected that the results of the pilot study on Mbuke will be of decisive significance for the direction that future research in this field will take.

                      The international collaboration began already on September 17^th 2005, when Professor Matthew Spriggs (ANU) visited the University of Aarhus. On the agenda was a future joint project involving the training of Danish, Australian and Papua New Guinean doctoral students as well as the establishment of Post-doc scholarships. It should also be mentioned that we have been in close contact with curator Nick Araho of the PNG National Museum, and that local assistants will be used for the archaeological fieldwork. The project also aims to strengthen the existing contacts with other institutions and researchers with activities in the region: Professor Chris Gosden, School of Archaeology and the Pitt Rivers Museum at Oxford University and Professor Graeme Barker, McDonald Institute of Archaeology, Cambridge University.

Globalization, Lapita and canoeing: the broader perspective

The general theme of the project is the interaction between identity formation and material culture under the influence of modern globalization and the many earlier globalization eras that form the basis of the present one. By globalization is meant an expansion and intensification of relations across boundaries: when various cultures and traditions meet, social identity, cultural meaning and material culture often undergo creative hybridization; but there is also the potential for more drastic consequences for culture and society in the direction of fragmentation or homogenization. Cultural meanings and social norms easily come under pressure and contribute to the formation of something new. Archaeological excavation and ethno-archaeological and anthropological fieldwork constitute the tools we plan to use to explore this entire problem area. With this focus, the project also wishes to contribute to both globalization research and contemporary debates on this theme.

                      The Lapita culture (c. 1500 BC) has been chosen as the object of study because its rapid expansion across a vast geographical area is reminiscent of modern globalization. Especially striking is the homogeneous material culture which suddenly appears at around the same time on scattered islands in a gigantic body of water. The spread of the first farming communities – accompanied by linguistic change, a particular style of pottery and outrigger canoes and new technology connected to this – should perhaps be connected with the formation of a new cultural identity that was maintained through a close network of contacts; otherwise the Lapita culture could hardly have spread from the Admiralty Lakes in the west to Tonga in the east – over 3000 kilometres. Some of the oldest Lapita sites are situated in the province of Manus, which was probably a cultural and social melting pot: a hotspot, a centre of innovation that received and passed on foreign impulses. With regard to research strategy, it is now important to identify more pre- and proto-Lapita sites, since the cultural-encounter situation is in need of more archaeological clarification. In addition, a relational analogy obtained from the anthropological present will be able to further understanding of the cultural encounter and the underlying communication, monopolization of resources, hybrid culture, and changes in identity. The research strategy may be summarized in three points:

1. Identification of several sites from just before and just after the introduction of the Lapita culture through intensive field surveys.

2. Trial excavations at a couple of these sites in order to evaluate their potential in the future research process. It will be advantageous if the natural science researchers on board Galathea 3 contribute to the study: Geologists will be able to determine the soil sedimentation and volcanic activity, which can destroy the knowledge potential of the sites considerably. Biologists will be able to assist in determining species of wild plants and animals, in contrast to domesticated species introduced with the Lapita culture (Matisoo- Smith et al. 2004 and Steadman, et al. 1999).

3. An ethno-archaeological study will compare the use of material culture and technological knowledge in identification strategies and power games both today and in the Lapita period.

                      The Mbuke canoes were chosen as an object of study because canoes and canoeing have been at the crux of several globalization phases. Trade and communication between people on the Admiralty Islands (the Manus province today) were only possible due to the big sea-going outrigger canoes. They were constructed to sail quickly and carry goods, and these were part of barter deals between ethnic groups dependent on each other’s products. In all probability, the canoes represent the technology underlying several prehistoric globalizations, not least the Lapita culture (e.g. Spriggs 1997). After the colonial period and the inclusion of Manus in a national and international economy, the inhabitants have obtained fibre-glass boats and outboard motors, and now canoes are an expression of group identity and cultural heritage more than a necessary means to stay alive. It is precisely pride about and increased awareness of the value of ancestors’ abilities that has made the canoes markers of ethnic affiliations. In the past five-six years, globally high oil prices and inflation in the national currency have inspired and economically encouraged people to resume the art of canoe building. The island of Mbuke is the place in Manus where the most canoes are built, and they are used for practical purposes, like trips to markets, neighbouring islands and to town, as well as for sport in the weekly regattas.

                      The planned anthropological fieldwork on the cultural and economic significance of the canoes will continue the work of previous studies carried out jointly with Moesgaard Museum and the Institute of Anthropology, Archaeology and Linguistics, including documentation for canoe building and its historical background. It is natural to supplement these elements with the natural science measurements of a meteorological and oceanographic nature, which Galathea 3 makes possible. A collaboration involving the use of various scientific methods will furthermore make it possible to test-run the canoes in their proper element, and this in the long run will contribute to a better understanding of which regional patterns of communication, trade routes and globalization processes were possible in the past.

Work and time plan

Our plans can easily be adjusted to the programme of Galathea 3. The natural science resources of the ship will, to the extent possible, be used in both the archaeological and anthropological fieldwork. Moreover, we would like to make use of the ship for a seminar for archaeologists, anthropologists and researchers in natural science.

Week 1: Arrival on Mbuke. Practical arrangements are finalized. Archaeological survey and selection of the object of the excavation.

Week 2: Trial excavation and ethnographic fieldwork concerning the use of canoes for long voyages, sport, and so on.

Week 3: Trial excavation, data processing, and continuation of the ethnographic fieldwork

Week 4: Follow-up and writing up of the report

Week 5: Writing up of the report and discussion of the future project work

Publication and popular dissemination

The results of the pilot study will be regularly published on http://www.aal.au.dk/global/index. The aim is to publish in international journals (e.g. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology). Making the results topical is very important. The purpose of the project is thus also to render visible important new globalization research based on collaboration between archaeology and anthropology. The popular dissemination of the research results will occur in newspaper articles and in Jordens Folk. With the help of the multimedia laboratory at Moesgaard Museum, the plan is to use the video recordings to create a film of interest to, for instance, TV and various educational establishments.

Selected literature

Allen, J. & White, P. 1989. “The Lapita Homeland: Some new data and an interpretation”. The Journal of the Polynesian Society. 1989 vol. 98, pp 129-46.

Allen, J. & Gosden, C. 1996. “Spheres of interaction and integration: Modelling the culture history of the Bismarck Archaipilago”. In: J. Davidson, G. Irwin, F. Leach, A. Pawley, and D. Brown (eds.) Oceanic Culture History. Essays in Honour of Roger Green. pp. 183-97. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology Special Publication. Dunedin North: New Zealand Journal of Archaeology.

Appadurai, A. 1996. Modernity at Large. Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Mineapolis & London: University of Minnesota Press.

Bellwood, P.1979. Man’s Conquest of the Pacific. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bellwood, P., Fox, J.J. & Tryon, D. (eds.) 1995. The Austronesians. Historical & Comparative Perspectives. Canberra: Department of Anthropology.

Bellwood, P. & Renfrew, C. (eds.) 2003. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge: The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research Publications.

Carrier, A. and Carrier, J. 1991. Structure and Process in a Melanesian Society. Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers.

Carrier, J. and Carrier, A. 1989. Wage, Trade, and Exchange. Berkeley: University of California Press.

David, N. & Kramer, C. 2001. Ethnoarchaeology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge World Archaeology Series.  

Frank, A.G. & Gills, B. (eds.) 1993: The World System. Five hundred years or five thousand? London & New York: Routledge.

Fredericksen, C. 1997: “The maritime distribution of obsidian blade technology in the Admiralies”. The Journal of the Polynesian Society / A quarterly of the peoples of the Pacific area: Vol 106. pp. 375-93

Friedman, J. 1994. Cultural Identity and Global Process. Great Britain: Sage

Fortune, R. 1965. [1935]. Manus Religion. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Godelier, M. 1999. The Enigma of the Gift. Polity Press and the University of Chicago Press.

Gosden, C. 1999. Anthropology and Archaeology. A changing relationship. London & New York: Routledge.

Gosden, C. 2004. Archaeology and Colonialism: Cultural Contact from 5000 BC to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Topics in Contemporary Archaeology Series).  

Green, R.C. 1991. “The Lapita Cultural Complex: Current Evidence and proposed Models”. In: Bellwood, P.S. (ed.). Indo-Pacific Prehistory 1990, vol.2, Pp 295-305. Canberra and Jarkarta: IPPA and Asosiasi prehitorisi Indonesia. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 11.

Green, R. C. 2003. “Assessments and Anniversary of the First Lapita Excavation (July 1952)”. In Sand, C. (ed.), Pacific Archaeology. (Le Cahiers de l’Archaeologie en Nouvelle-Caledonie, Noumea, New Caledonia) vol. 15, pp 95-120.

Haddon, A.C. & Hornell, J. 1975. [1937]. Canoes of Oceania. II. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.

Hannerz, U. 1996. Transnational Connections. Culture, People, Places. London & New York: Routledge.

Hodder, I. 1982. Symbols in action. Ethnoarchaeological studies of material culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hunt, T.L. 1989. Lapita ceramic exchange in the Mussau Islands, Papua New Guinea. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Washington.

Huntington, S.P. 2001. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order. Free Press.

Højlund, F. 1981. “The Function of Prestige Weapons in the Reproduction of New Guinea Highlands Tribal Societies”. Oral History IX no.3. pp. 26-51.

Irwin, G. 1992. The Prehistoric Exploration and Colonisation of the Pacific. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kirch, P.V. 2000. On the Road of the Winds: an archaeological History of the Pacific Islands before European Contact. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press. 

Matisoo-Smith, E. and Robins, J.H. 2004. “Origins and dispersals of Pacific peoples: evidence from mtDNA phylogenies of the pacific rat”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol 101, No. 24. pp: 9167-9172.

Mead, M. 1953. [1930]. Growing Up in New Guinea. New York: Mentor Books.

Mead, M. 1956. New Lives for Old. London: Victor Gollancz Ltd.

Mead, M. 2002. [1934]. Kinship in the Admiralty Islands. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

Otto, T. & Borsboom, A. 1998 (eds.). Cultural Dynamics of Religious Change in Oceania. Koninklyk Instituut Voor Taal Land: KITVL Press.

Poulsen, J. 1987. Early Tongan Prehistory. Volume I-II. Highland Press and ANU: Canberra.

Schwartz, T. 1962. The Paliau Movement in the Admiralty Islands, 1946-54. (Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 49, 2).

Schwartz, T. 1963. “'Systems of Areal Integration”. Anthropological Forum, 1. pp. 56-97.

Steadman, D.W. et al. 1999. “Prehistoric birds from New Ireland Papua New Guinea: Extinctions on a large Melanesian Island”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA vol. 96. pp 2563-2568.

Steensberg, A. 1973. Oldtidslevn i New Guineas Hverdag. København: Forum.

Spriggs, M. 1997. The Island Melansians. Cambridge (MA) & Oxford: Blackwell. 

Terrel, J.E. & Welch, R.L. 1997. “Lapita and the temporal geography of prehistory”. Antiquity 71, pp. 548-572.

Vandkilde, H. n.d. „Archaeology, Anthropology and Globalization. Inaugural lecture, October 22^nd 2004”.  In Vandkilde, H. (ed.), Archaeology and Anthropology. Inaugural Lectures of the Institute of Anthropology, Archaeology, and Linguistics at Aarhus University 1996-2004. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Also as net publication http://www.aal.au.dk/global/index.