stablishing a date for the initial settlement

of Pacific islands has been a contentious is-

sue among archaeologists almost since the

advent of absolute dating methods (e.g., Anderson

1995). During the past roughly two decades ar-

chaeologists have made rather dramatic progress

narrowing the dating disparities that plagued ear-

lier researchers. This has been achieved by (1) re-

dating sites that appeared to be early, which has al-

most always resulted in significantly younger ages

(e.g., Anderson and Sinoto 2002; Anderson and

Smith 1992; Dye and Pantaleo 2010; Kirch and

McCoy 2007; Rolett and Conte 1995); (2) em-

ploying various forms of chronometric hygiene

(Anderson 1991; Dye 2000; Spriggs and Anderson

1993) or date classification (Rieth et al. 2011;

Wilmshurst et al. 2011a) to eliminate poorly

provenienced samples, samples of low reliability,

or those with an unknown ocean reservoir contri-

bution; (3) great improvements in the technology

of radiocarbon dating, particularly in the pretreat-

ment of samples and the now common employ-

ment of the AMS technology, which has greatly re-

duced the standard error associated with date

determinations; (4) use of short-lived plant taxa or

plant parts to reduce the inbuilt age of samples

(Dye 2000; McFadgen 1982); and (5) the appli-

cation of Bayesian calibration (Denham et al.

A PALEOENVIRONMENTAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL MODEL-

BASED AGE ESTIMATE FOR THE COLONIZATION OF HAWAI‘I

J. Stephen Athens, Timothy M. Rieth, and Thomas S. Dye

Recent estimates of when Hawai‘i was colonized by Polynesians display considerable variability, with dates ranging from

about A.D. 800 to 1250. Using high resolution paleoenvironmental coring data and a carefully defined set of archaeolog-

ical radiocarbon dates, a Bayesian model for initial settlement was constructed. The pollen and charcoal assemblages of

the core record made it possible to identify and date the prehuman period and also the start of human settlement using a

simple depositional model. The archaeological and paleoenvironmental estimates of the colonization date show a striking

convergence, indicating that initial settlement occurred at A.D. 940–1130 at a 95 percent highest posterior density region

(HPD), and most probably between A.D. 1000 to 1100, using a 67 percent HPD. This analysis highlights problems that may

occur when paleoenvironmental core chronologies are based on bulk soil dates. Further research on the dating of the bones

of Rattus exulans, a Polynesian introduction, may refine the dating model, as would archaeological investigations focused

on potential early site locations.

Estimaciones recientes de cuando fue colonizado Hawai’i por los Polinesios muestran una gran variabilidad, con fechas supe-

riores alrededor de 800 a 1250 d. C. Utilizando datos de núcleos paleoambientales de alta resolución y una cuidadosa defi-

nición de conjuntos de fechas arqueológicas de radiocarbono, se construyó un modelo Bayesian para el asentamiento inicial.

La asociación de polen y de carbón de las muestras de núcleos hizo posible identificar y fechar el periodo pre-humano y el

inicio del asentamiento humano utilizando un modelo de depósito simple. Las estimaciones arqueológicas y paleoambienta-

les de la fecha de colonización muestran una sorprendente convergencia, indicando que el inicio del asentamiento ocurrió

hacia 936–1133 d. C. en un 95 por ciento la región de mayor densidad posterior (HPD en inglés), y más probablemente entre

1000 a 1100 d. C., usando un 67 por ciento de HPD. Este análisis ilumina los problemas que pueden ocurrir cuando los fecha-

mientos de núcleos paleoambientales se basan en las fechas del volumen de suelos. Además, investigaciones adicionales sobre

la datación de huesos de Rattus exulans, una introducción polinesia, puede refinar aún más el modelo de fechamiento, así

mismo que los las investigaciones arqueológicas estén enfocadas en las posibles ubicaciones de sitios tempranos.

J. Stephen Athens and Timothy M. Rieth 䡲 International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., 2081 Young St.,

Honolulu, HI 96826 (JSAthens@iarii.org, TRieth@iarii.org)

Thomas S. Dye 䡲 T. S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc., 735 Bishop St., Suite 315, Honolulu, HI 96813

(tsd@tsdye.com)

American Antiquity 79(1), 2014, pp. 144–155

144

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

EPORTS 145

2012; Dye 2011; Dye and Pantaleo 2010; Petchey

et al. 2011). We believe that most archaeologists

would agree that research of the last two decades

has established the broad outline of the timing of

settlement throughout the Pacific, with the settle-

ment of East Polynesia, of which Hawai‘i is a

part, occurring between about A.D. 900 and 1250

(Anderson and Sinoto 2002; Wilmshurst et al.

2011a). However, this is still a fairly broad range,

which impedes our ability to identify the process

or processes underlying such an extraordinary feat

of finding and colonizing remote and isolated

archipelagos and islands in the vast ocean of East

Polynesia.

In this paper we focus on the dating of the

Polynesian colonization of Hawai‘i. Our point of

departure concerns recent papers on this subject by

Janet Wilmshurst and colleagues (2011a; see also

Mulrooney et al. 2011 and Wilmshurst et al.

2011b);

Dye (2011); Kirch (2011); Rieth et al.

(2011); and Duarte (2012) (Table 1). It is encour-

aging that the topic garnered four published pa-

pers, a published letter and reply debate, and a

Master’s thesis within two years, with researchers

approaching the issue from three distinct per-

spectives. Using nearly identical methods,

Wilmshurst et al. (2011a), Rieth et al. (2011), and

Duarte (2012) classified large pools of archaeo-

logical radiocarbon dates based on their level of

precision and accuracy and produced summed

probability distributions using the most reliable

dates. Their results are statistically indistinguish-

able, estimating colonization of Hawai‘i by ca.

A.D. 1220–1260. Dye (2011) created a model-

based Bayesian calibration using dates from pale-

oenvironmental cores and from Polynesian-intro-

duced flora and fauna to estimate colonization

between A.D. 780–1119 (95 percent highest pos-

terior density region [HPD], equivalent to two

sigma). Kirch (2011) puts the issue into context by

reviewing and summarizing the history of ideas re-

lating to the timing of the colonization of Hawai‘i.

He then brings together the latest information, in-

cluding the chronology of settlement for the Cen-

tral East Polynesia region, paleoenvironmental

proxy records from O‘ahu and Kaua‘i, dates ob-

tained from bones of the Polynesian-introduced rat

Rattus exulans, and the re-dating of the Bellows

archaeological Site O18. He concludes (Kirch

2011:22) that colonization is “unlikely to have

occurred before A.D. 1000,” though he leaves

open the possibility that it could have happened in

the tenth century and that settlement was defi-

nitely established by A.D. 1200.

Though all of these approaches have converged

upon a “short” (recent) chronology for Hawai‘i in

contrast to the “long” (early) chronology once fa-

vored by archaeologists (e.g., Graves and Addison

1995; Hunt and Holsen 1991; Kirch 1985), they

nevertheless continue to represent a considerable

range of possible settlement times, varying be-

tween about ca. 250–450 years.

We present the results of our model-based

chronology building, which carries this research a

bit further. Using a revised calibration chronology

for the Ordy Pond paleoenvironmental sequence

and an expansion of Dye’s (2011) Bayesian colo-

nization model, we address three components of

the settlement debate. The first is to attempt to re-

fine and narrow the A.D. 800–1250 time frame

posited for initial settlement. Although some may

feel that this is splitting hairs, considering the in-

herent statistical uncertainty of radiocarbon dates,

a more finely calibrated date has implications for

larger issues of Polynesian dispersals, including

whether Hawai‘i fits into a pattern of episodic

Austronesian radiations throughout the Pacific,

spurred by protracted ENSO events (Anderson et

al. 2006), population growth models (Rieth and

Athens 2013), and other issues. Secondly, we be-

lieve it is important to develop a statistical model

for whatever date range or ranges we derive be-

cause it forces us to be more rigorous in specify-

ing our assumptions and establishes the uncer-

tainty of our estimates. Thirdly, we believe that by

going through this process, we may be able to

pinpoint some directions for future research on the

issue of the initial colonization in Hawai‘i.

Table 1. Recent Hawai‘i Colonization Age Estimates.

Colonization Estimate Reference

A.D. 1214–1255 (Maui Island) Duarte 2012

A.D. 780–1119 Dye 2011

Possibly A.D. 900–1000,

probable A.D. 1000s,

and colonization definite

by A.D. 1200 Kirch 2011

A.D. 1220–1261 (Hawai‘i Island) Rieth et al. 2011

A.D. 1219–1266 Wilmshurst et al. 2011a

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

Paleoenvironmental Studies

The paleoenvironmental data we utilize are from

the coring investigations at Ordy Pond, a large wa-

ter-filled limestone sinkhole in southwestern

O‘ahu (Athens 2009; Athens et al. 1999, 2002).

Although many paleoenvironmental coring stud-

ies have been conducted on O‘ahu and Kaua‘i, and

a few on the other larger islands, the Ordy Pond

sinkhole has some almost unique characteristics

that make it particularly suitable for obtaining

high resolution chronological and environmental

information. One of the most important of these is

the integrity of its stratigraphic column, dating

back almost 8,000 years (Uchikawa et al. 2008;

Uchikawa et al. 2010). Also, because there are no

drainages into the pond, the pollen record tends to

emphasize the local vegetation surrounding the

pond better than most other wetland locations.

Lastly, the finely lamellar sediments (except for

the upper part of the column) of alternating layers

of authigenic carbonates and diatom tests

(Uchikawa et al. 2008) and organic material

(mostly detrital algal remains) suggest minimal to

no bioturbation, which otherwise tends to muddle

the discrete sampling intervals.

For this analysis, we are particularly interested

in the proxies indicating human settlement on

O‘ahu and the date when they first begin to appear

in the core record. The proxies consist of pollen

from plants that were introduced to Hawai‘i by

Polynesians at the time of initial settlement or

very close to the time of initial settlement.

The

most important of these, because they produce

abundant pollen and therefore tend to be easily vis-

ible in the core records, are coconut palms (Cocos

nucifera) and candlenut (Aleurites moluccana,

called kukui in Hawaiian), and there are a few

others that appear fairly regularly. The micro-

scopic charcoal particle record is also an important

indicator of anthropogenic activities on O‘ahu,

since charcoal is entirely absent from the earlier

prehuman sediments as documented by many cor-

ing studies. Thus, the possibility that the earliest

charcoal might be the result of natural fires rather

than human activities seems virtually nil.

A revised age depth model of the Ordy Pond

core was performed using the clam software pack-

age, version 2.1. As discussed by Blaauw

(2010:516), clam “attempts to provide an easy, au-

tomated, transparent, documented and adaptable

environment for producing age-models from ra-

diocarbon sequences.” It allows the researcher to

easily consider different age-depth model choices

and to input such constraints as “presence or ab-

sence of a hiatus, reservoir effect, outliers, or an-

chor points.” For our purposes, an important fea-

ture of clam is that it can produce confidence

intervals for undated sampling levels (or inter-

vals) derived from the calibrated radiocarbon ages

at other points in the core sequence.

A linear interpolation dating model was se-

lected because it involves only the assumption of

a regular progression of age with depth between

dating samples, which seems appropriate for a

sinkhole near sea level (there are not likely to be

depositional hiatuses given that the top of the sed-

iment column is well below sea level). Although

the available dates suggest relatively minor fluc-

tuations in depositional accumulation for the pre-

historic time period represented by the core

(Athens et al. 1999:71), more complex models are

not needed to accommodate these. Finally, the lim-

ited number of radiocarbon dates (3) and the sin-

gle pollen age estimate for the timing of the advent

of historic pollen do not lend themselves to the use

of more complex age models (e.g., cubic spline).

In order to highlight the selection of the Ordy

Pond paleoenvironmental record for modeling ini-

tial settlement, we provide comparative data from

the Weli Pond core (Athens and Ward 2000), one

of our best records after Ordy Pond for dating the

Polynesian colonization of O‘ahu. The problem is

that, while the pollen and charcoal records that

document initial colonization in Weli Pond fully

duplicate the Ordy Pond findings, the chronology

between these records is not synchronized, with

Weli Pond being earlier. As will be shown, the

bulk soil radiocarbon determinations obtained

from Weli Pond are likely the source of the dating

discrepancy.

Archaeological Data

A conservative subset of archaeological radio-

carbon dates was selected for our Bayesian model.

These determinations were derived from (1)

charred wood and nutshells of Polynesian-intro-

duced taxa; (2) bones of the Polynesian-intro-

duced rat R. exulans, in which the dates have

46 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 79, No. 1, 2014]

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

EPORTS 147

Table 2. Paleoenvironmental and Archaeological Radiocarbon Age Estimates Included in the Bayesian Colonization Model.

Conventional C14

Lab No. Sample Material Provenience Age (B.P.) Period Reference Island Comment

Beta-83313 Seed Ordy Pond 1120 ± 60 Pre-colonization Athens et al. 1999 O‘ahu Prehuman colonization deposit

Wk-15982 Fibrous plant material, Kaloko Pond 993 ± 45 Pre-colonization Athens et al. 2007 Hawai‘i Prehuman colonization deposit

(mostly palm roots?)

Beta-20852b Aleurites moluccana Bellows 1330 ± 230 Post-colonization Tuggle and Spriggs 2001 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

Wk-19312 Aleurites moluccana Pololū 568 ± 38 Post-colonization Field and Graves 2008 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Wk-19313 Aleurites moluccana Pololū 463 ± 31 Post-colonization Field and Graves 2008 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Beta-135125 Aleurites moluccana Ka‘ohe 440 ± 40 Post-colonization Williams 2002 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Beta-42172 Aleurites moluccana Makawao 865 ± 80 Post-colonization Kennedy 1991 Maui Polynesian introduction

Beta-310824 Aleurites moluccana Nu‘u 430 ± 30 Post-colonization Rieth et al. 2013 Maui Polynesian introduction

Beta-343212 Aleurites moluccana Kailua 690 ± 30 Post-colonization Unreported (Athens) O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

Beta-5613 Aleurites moluccana Anahulu 600 ± 110 Post-colonization Kirch 1992 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

NOSAMS-0809-26 Artocarpus altilis Halawa 690 ± 35 Post-colonization McCoy et al. 2010:377 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Beta-339778 bark (charred) Hearth; Ka‘aphu 570 ± 30 Post-colonization Rieth and Tomonari-Tuggle 2013 Maui Combustion feature

Beta-208143 cf. Ipomoea batatas Kahua 1 580 ± 40 Post-colonization Ladefoged et al. 2005 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Beta-101871 cf. Osteomeles Probable hearth;

anthyllidifolia Bellows 720 ± 40 Post-colonization Addison 2001 O‘ahu Combustion feature

Beta-101872 cf. Osteomeles Probable hearth;

anthyllidifolia Bellows 670 ± 40 Post-colonization Addison 2001 O‘ahu Combustion feature

Beta-260904 Chamaesyce sp. Hearth; Bellows 580 ± 40 Post-colonization Dye and Dye 2009 O‘ahu Combustion feature

Beta-138980 Chenopodium oahuense Hearth; Bellows 440 ± 40 Post-colonization Desilets 2000 O‘ahu Combustion feature

Beta-150615 Cocos nucifera Kipahulu 730 ± 50 Post-colonization Dye et al. 2002 Maui Polynesian introduction

Beta-233042 Cordyline fruticosa Halawa 440 ± 40 Post-colonization McCoy and Graves 2010 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Beta-150620 Cordyline fruticosa Kipahulu 420 ± 50 Post-colonization Dye et al. 2002 Maui Polynesian introduction

Beta-251247 Cordyline fruticosa Bellows 450 ± 40 Post-colonization Lebo et al. 2009 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

Wk-19311 fern caudex Hearth; Pololū 781 ± 38 Post-colonization Field and Graves 2008 Hawai‘i Combustion feature

Wk-19310 fern caudex Hearth; Pololū 696 ± 35 Post-colonization Field and Graves 2008 Hawai‘i Combustion feature

Beta-135126 Lagenaria siceraria Ka‘ohe 640 ± 40 Post-colonization Williams 2002 Hawai‘i Polynesian introduction

Beta-260905 Sida fallax Hearth; Bellows 400 ± 40 Post-colonization Dye and Dye 2009 O‘ahu Combustion feature

Beta-45363 Syzgium malaccense Luluku 1060 ± 80 Post-colonization Leidemann et al. 2003 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

Beta-28136 Tetraplasandra sp. Hearth; Kualoa 840 ± 40 Post-colonization Carson and Athens 2007 O‘ahu Combustion feature

Beta-28135 Tetraplasandra sp. Hearth; Kualoa 650 ± 40 Post-colonization Carson and Athens 2007 O‘ahu Combustion feature

CAMS-25560 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 1030 ± 60 Post-colonization Athens et al. 1999:247 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

CAMS-26396 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 990 ± 50 Post-colonization Athens et al. 1999:247 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

CAMS-25561 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 680 ± 50 Post-colonization Athens et al. 1999:247 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

SR-5081 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 460 ± 50 Post-colonization McDermott et al. 2000 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

SR-5085 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 650 ± 50 Post-colonization McDermott et al. 2000 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

SR-5080 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 740 ± 50 Post-colonization McDermott et al. 2000 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

SR-5082 Rattus exulans ‘Ewa 990 ± 130 Post-colonization McDermott et al. 2000 O‘ahu Polynesian introduction

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

been obtained from properly pre-

treated/processed collagen samples (Rieth and

Athens 2013); and (3) charred wood/plant mate-

rial from short-lived plant taxa/parts obtained

from archaeological combustion features (Table

2). This selection of radiocarbon dates is conser-

vative in that the presence of these plants, ani-

mals, and archaeological features is wholly de-

pendent on people and thus must belong to the

post-colonization period. Contemporaneous, or

older, dates obtained from identified short-lived

native plant taxa/parts collected from non-fea-

ture archaeological midden or cultural deposits

were avoided because the sample association with

an archaeological event was ambiguous, and for

Maui and Hawai‘i Island, there is a possibility that

the charcoal could be from natural fires predating

humans. With regards to the Polynesian-intro-

duced plants, the in-built age of these samples

(e.g., A. molluccana, C. nucifera, Syzgium malac-

cense, and others) is of no concern, because the

target event of interest is not the specific archae-

ological feature or cultural deposit, but rather the

timing of human colonization, which cannot post-

date the growth of the plant.

Thirty-three archaeological dates are used in

our Bayesian model; 16 are from Polynesian-in-

troduced plants, seven are from R. exulans bones,

and 10 are from short-lived plant materials from

archaeological combustion features (Figure 1).

Six of these dates were included in Dye’s (2011)

initial presentation of the Bayesian model. Geo-

graphically, 19 of the dates are from O‘ahu, nine

are from Hawai‘i Island, and five are from Maui

(Figure 2).

Statistical Modeling

The Bayesian model was calibrated using the BCal

software (Buck et al. 1999) and the IntCal09

Northern Hemisphere curve (Reimer et al. 2009).

As described by Dye (2011:132), “A Bayesian

model to estimate the Polynesian colonization of

Hawaii can be simple. It establishes two periods,

one for the period before the islands were colo-

nized by Polynesians and one for the period after

the colonization event.” An advantage of Bayesian

models for archaeology and paleoenvironmental

studies derives from the incorporation of prior

knowledge into the statistical calculations, thereby

“bookending” or limiting probability distributions.

The application of Bayesian statistics to archaeo-

logical chronologies is fully described by Buck et

al. (1996).

The Hawai‘i colonization model can be ex-

pressed as:

48 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 79, No. 1, 2014]

Figure 1. Count of radiocarbon dates by origin or type, including hearth features, rat bones, and various Polynesian-

introduced plant taxa. These include A. moluccana (candlenut, kukui), R. exulans (Pacific rat), C. fruticosa (ti, kī), A.

altilis (breadfruit, ‘ulu), C. nucifera (coconut, niu), I. batatas (sweet potato, ‘uala), L. siceraria (bottle gourd, ipu), and S.

malaccense (mountain apple, ‘ōhi‘a ‘ai).

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

pre

> β

pre

= α

post

> β

post

= 0

where α

pre

and β

pre

represent the beginning and

end of the pre-colonization period, while α

post

and

post

signify the beginning and end of the post-

colonization period; “>” means “older than.”

Again from Dye (2011:132), “The parameters

of interest in this model are β

pre

and α

post

, which

the model indicates are equal; the colonization

event simultaneously ended the pre-colonization

period and began the post-colonization period.”

While our present model treats the settlement of

the Hawaiian archipelago as a unitary phenome-

non, we leave open the possibility that future

high resolution data might disclose a sequence of

initial settlement for the different islands (or even

of district/regional settlement within the indi-

vidual islands).

The pre-colonization period includes two ra-

diocarbon determinations (Table 2). One of these,

used in Dye’s (2011) earlier model, is from a seed

obtained from Ordy Pond at the 668 cmbs interval,

which is well below the earliest signs of human ac-

tivities in this record (which definitely begins at

the 630–632 cmbs interval, though, less conclu-

sively, may be as early as the 643–644.5 cmbs in-

terval [see Athens et al. 1999:176]). The other

pre-colonization date was obtained from fibrous

plant material, mostly endemic palm (Pritchardia

sp.) roots, collected from the base of a paleoenvi-

ronmental core at Kaloko Pond, Pu‘uhonua o Hō-

naunau National Historical Park (Athens et al.

2007). The pollen record for this level of the core

indicates an entirely pristine lowland native forest

in this area, which other paleoenvironmental re-

search has shown to antedate the arrival of humans

(Athens 1997; Athens et al. 2002). Ideally, dates

included in the pre-colonization group relate to de-

posits immediately predating paleoenvironmental

evidence for human activity because such dates

yield more precise estimates of the colonization

event.

EPORTS 149

Figure 2. Hawaiian archipelago displaying the locations from which pre- and post-colonization radiocarbon dates were

obtained for the Bayesian model and also the paleoenvironmental coring locations.

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

Results

Paleoenvironmental Data

The Ordy Pond pollen diagram (Athens 2009;

Athens et al. 1999, 2002) is quite interesting be-

cause even a glance shows there are substantial

changes occurring at what is clearly the prehis-

toric/prehuman interface of the record. The first

appearance of charcoal particles occurs in the

630–632 cmbs interval, along with a “possible”

coconut pollen grain, and there are also several

major vegetation shifts.

At the next higher study

interval at 618–619.5 cmbs, we see not only a

major increase in charcoal particles, but also the

definite presence of coconut, and there are major

changes in the frequency of other plant taxa as

well. In fact, a transformation of the landscape had

occurred in a matter of scarcely 100 years, and per-

haps in much less time (Athens 2009:1495; Athens

et al. 2002:63). Extensive archaeological investi-

gations on the ‘Ewa Plain where Ordy Pond is lo-

cated show that very few, if any, people were oc-

cupying this arid landscape at this early period for

another 100 to 200 years (Athens et al. 2002) and

that it is not until after about A.D. 1250 that the

charcoal particle record suggests local settlement

(the density and size of charcoal particles sub-

stantially increase at this time, suggesting a more

local origin, and hence proximal settlement and

agriculture [Athens et al. 1999:83–85; Clark 1988;

Patterson et al. 1987]). Presumably this was be-

cause the aridity of the ‘Ewa Plain would have

been unfavorable for habitation and agriculture

compared to many other areas on O‘ahu.

Thus, at Ordy Pond, we regard the critical study

interval for Hawaiian colonization as the 630–632

cmbs interval. To date this interval, we utilized a

linear interpolation model based on three AMS ra-

diocarbon determinations on two seeds and one

piece of wood (the uppermost

C sample), which

were almost evenly spaced in the stratigraphic

column. We also estimated a date of 120 B.P.

(A.D. 1830) for the upper part of the core when

historic pollen first began to appear in the record;

Western contact and influence had become per-

vasive in the islands by this date. Obviously our

task would be much easier if we could directly ra-

diocarbon date the two intervals of interest, but un-

fortunately plant material for dating in this core

was limited to just the three dated samples in the

entire column (the algal mat lenses were inappro-

priate for dating [Athens et al. 1999:63–65]). Thus,

it was necessary to interpolate dates for the pollen

and charcoal particle sampling intervals. The clam

statistical program provided an interpolated age es-

timate at a 95 percent confidence interval for the

630–632 cmbs interval of A.D. 936–1133 (Table

3). By way of comparison, an estimate is also

provided for the next higher interval at 618–619.5

cmbs. An external comparison is also provided by

two intervals from a core obtained from Weli Pond

along the south coast of O‘ahu (Figure 2). The

deepest Weli Pond interval having charcoal parti-

cles along with a single grain of kukui pollen is at

560–563 cmbs, and the next highest interval at

545–548 cmbs displays substantial vegetation

changes, three Polynesian plant introductions

(kukui, C. nucifera, and Cordyline fruticosa), and

also a quantum increase in charcoal particles.

As may be seen in Table 3, the two cores pro-

vide conflicting dating results, with the Weli Pond

record indicating colonization at A.D. 703–966

and Ordy Pond at A.D. 936–1133, with the latter

only minimally overlapping the date range of Weli

Pond at two standard deviations. We have greater

confidence in the Ordy Pond dates because they

were obtained from macro-plant remains that must

derive from the immediate environs of Ordy Pond,

while the Weli Pond dates derive from bulk sedi-

ment. The problem is that the bulk sediment ap-

parently incorporated older carbon material de-

posited from erosion of the interior slopes through

colluvial and fluvial action (see Anderson 1994 for

a discussion of the problem of bulk soil radiocar-

bon dates in pollen cores from Mangaia, Cook Is-

lands). That this is probably the case is suggested

by the date for the latest clearly prehuman vegeta-

tion at Ordy Pond, which is A.D. 829–1065 (Table

3).

In our view, it is not realistic for dates of ma-

jor vegetation changes of the landscape to differ at

locations on leeward O‘ahu separated by only 17

km with no significant geographical barriers or

differences in the paleo-vegetation communities.

Thus, we feel confident that the Weli Pond dates

are too early due to the incorporation of older car-

bon in the bulk soil radiocarbon samples.

Archaeological Bayesian Model

The results of the Bayesian calibration of radio-

carbon dates obtained from archaeological fea-

50 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 79, No. 1, 2014]

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

tures, Polynesian-introduced plant taxa, and bones

of Polynesian-introduced rats yield an estimate

of the colonization date, given the data and model

parameters. This date converges with the interpo-

lated estimate obtained from Ordy Pond. The 95

percent HPD for an iteration of the model using

the dates from only Polynesian-introduced flora

and archaeological combustion features is A.D.

1000–1210 (Figure 3). Adding the R. exulans

bones to the model produces a 95 percent HPD of

A.D. 940–1129, 60–70 years older than the model

that excludes the rat bone dates.

Conclusions

Within the last few years, renewed inquiry into the

timing of Polynesian colonization of Hawai‘i has

resulted in estimates ranging from ~A.D. 800 to

1250. Our reanalysis of the Ordy Pond paleoen-

vironmental record using clam software and an ex-

pansion of Dye’s (2011) model-based Bayesian

calibration converge on the 95 percent HPD range

of A.D. 940–1129 as the best estimate of the col-

onization event.

If a 67 percent HPD is used, the Polynesian col-

onization of Hawai‘i would most probably have

occurred between about A.D. 1000 and 1100.

Scarcely 50 years later in the Ordy Pond record, by

A.D. 993–1176, population expansion on O‘ahu is

evident in substantially increased charcoal counts

and major pollen changes at Ordy Pond. This ex-

pansion is mirrored in the archaeological data in

the form of radiocarbon dated Polynesian plant in-

troductions and combustion features (Table 2).

With respect to the rat bone dates, admittedly

there are unresolved questions regarding the po-

EPORTS 151

Table 3. Interpolated Age Estimates from Clam Statistical Program, Ordy Pond and Weli Pond

(95 Percent Confidence Interval).

Calibrated Calibrated 2-sigma

2-sigma 2-sigma Age

Depth Date Range Date Range Spread

Location (cmbs) (yrs. B.P.) (yrs. A.D.) (yrs.) Significance

Ordy Pond 618–619.5 774–957 993–1176 183 Substantial native vegetation changes,

abundant charcoal, and Polynesian-introduction

Ordy Pond 630–632 817–1014 936–1133 197 Substantial native vegetation changes,

first charcoal, and possible Polynesian-

introduction

Ordy Pond 651–653 885–1121 829–1065 235 Unchanged native forest, no charcoal,

no Polynesian-introductions

Weli Pond 545–548 926–1162 788–1024 236 Substantial native vegetation changes,

abundant charcoal and Polynesian-introductions

Weli Pond 560–563 984–1247 703–966 263 Minor native vegetation changes, first

charcoal, and Polynesian-introduction

Figure 3. 95 percent HPD for two iterations of the Bayesian model, excluding (right) and including (left) Polynesian rat

bone dates.

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

tential for a marine dietary component for the rats

(Commendador et al. 2012; Richards et al. 2009),

or the possibility of their intake and metabolism of

C-depleted carbon in their food as a result of the

‘Ewa Plain’s limestone substrate.

However, at

face value, the Bayesian model and Ordy Pond age

interpolation suggest settlement must have oc-

curred, with a 95 percent probability, between

A.D. 940 and 1130.

As Dye (2011:137) predicted, the addition of

more data has improved the precision of the age

estimate for colonization. Our results offer ana-

lytical support for Kirch’s (2011:22) preference for

a colonization date after A.D. 1000. We can now

also see that Wilmshurst et al. (2011a), Rieth et al.

(2011), and Duarte’s (2012) calculations docu-

ment the secure establishment of colonizing pop-

ulations in Hawai‘i, approximately 10–280 years

after initial colonization.

As a practical matter, this research has pro-

vided insight into an apparent dating inconsis-

tency between the Ordy Pond and Weli Pond

cores. Consideration of the latest date for intact na-

tive vegetation in the Ordy Pond core, at A.D.

829–1065 (Table 3), suggests that the earlier dates

of the Weli Pond core must be due to the incorpo-

ration of older carbon in the bulk soil dating sam-

ples of this core. For much paleoenvironmental re-

search, such bulk soil dates on wetland/lake soils

(where not contaminated by

C-depleted carbon

from groundwater or limestone sources) probably

have sufficient precision. The problem, however,

is that the level of required precision clearly varies

situationally. Thus, while the variation between the

Weli Pond and the Ordy Pond dates might be re-

garded as relatively minor for some research prob-

lems, it is too large if we are attempting to narrow

the timing of Polynesian colonization in Hawai‘i.

Our results highlight two future research di-

rections. One is that a systematic, geographically-

informed research program should be initiated to

select and test potential early settlement locales.

No such program has been undertaken in Hawai‘i,

and the current sample and distribution of known

early archaeological deposits has largely been a

product of chance investigations. Currently, the de-

posits at Bellows and Kualoa, on O‘ahu, and

Pololū, on Hawai‘i Island, are reliably dated to this

initial colonization period, but there must be oth-

ers. Second, further research on the dating of R. ex-

ulans bones is required to determine whether the

dietary habits of R. exulans need to be accounted

for in radiocarbon calibrations, and also to refine

the date when rats were introduced to Hawai‘i

and to evaluate the model for exponential growth

of rat populations following introduction by col-

onizing Polynesians (Athens 2009; Athens et al.

2002).

Acknowledgments. Ethan Cochrane and Alex Morrison pro-

vided helpful comments on the original draft of this paper,

which was presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Soci-

ety for American Archaeology in Honolulu, 2013. Carl Lipo,

Terry Hunt, and Timothy Rieth have had numerous discussions

about the methods for estimating the timing of island colo-

nization that improved the manuscript, if failing to reach a con-

sensus. Raquel Macario prepared the Spanish translation of the

abstract, for which we are grateful. Any errors or omissions re-

main the sole responsibility of the authors.

References Cited

Addison, David J.

2001 Archaeological Subsurface Testing for the Removal of

Pipeline Utilities under the Installation Restoration Pro-

gram at Bellows Air Force Station, Waimanalo,

Ko‘olaupoko District, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. Submitted to U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, Pacific Ocean Division. Fort

Shafter, Hawai‘i. Copies available from International Ar-

chaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Anderson, Atholl

1991 The Chronology of Colonization of New Zealand. An-

tiquity 65:767–795.

1994 Palaeoenvironmental Evidence of Island Colonization:

A Response. Antiquity 68:845–847.

1995 Current Approaches in East Polynesian Colonization

Research. Journal of the Polynesian Society 104:110–132.

Anderson, Atholl, John Chappell, Michael Gagan, and Richard

Grove

2006 Prehistoric Maritime Migration in the Pacific Islands:

An Hypothesis of ENSO Forcing. The Holocene 16(1):1–6.

Anderson, Atholl, and Yosihiko Sinoto

2002 New Radiocarbon Ages of Colonization Sites in East

Polynesia. Asian Perspectives 41:242–257.

Anderson, Atholl J., and Ian W. G. Smith

1992 The Papatowai Site: New Evidence and Interpretations.

Journal of the Polynesian Society 101:129–158.

Athens, J. Stephen

1997 Hawaiian Native Lowland Vegetation in Prehistory. In

Historical Ecology in the Pacific Islands: Prehistoric En-

vironmental and Landscape Change, edited by Patrick V.

Kirch and Terry L. Hunt, pp. 248–270. Yale University Press,

New Haven.

2009 Rattus exulans and the Catastrophic Disappearance of

Hawai‘i’s Native Lowland Forest. Biological Invasions

11:1489–1501.

Athens J. Stephen, and Jerome V. Ward

2000 Paleoenvironmental Study of Fishponds at Fort

Shafter, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. In Fort Shafter: Cultural Resource

Investigations at Hawai‘i’s First U.S. Military Post, by Myra

J. Tomonari-Tuggle, Stephen Hamilton, and Katharine

Slocumb, Appendix F, pp. F1–F58. Submitted to U.S. Army

52 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 79, No. 1, 2014]

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

Corps of Engineers, Pacific Ocean Division, Fort Shafter,

Hawai‘i. Copies available from International Archaeological

Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Athens, J.Stephen, Jerome V. Ward, and Dean W. Blinn

2007 Paleoenvironment of Pu‘uhonua o Hōnaunau National

Historical Park, South Kona, Hawai‘i Island. Submitted

to National Park Service, Haleakalā National Park,

Makawao, Hawai‘i. Copies available from International Ar-

chaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Athens, J.Stephen, Jerome V. Ward, H.David Tuggle, and

David J. Welch

1999 Environment, Vegetation Change, and Early Human

Settlement of the ‘Ewa Plain: A Cultural Resource Inven-

tory of Naval Air Station, Barbers Point, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i;

Part III: Paleoenvironmental Investigations. Submitted to

Department of the Navy, Pacific Division, Naval Facilities

Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawai‘i, under

contract to Belt Collins Hawaii. Copies available from In-

ternational Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Hon-

olulu.

Athens, J.Stephen, H.David Tuggle, Jerome V. Ward, and

David J. Welch

2002 Avifaunal Extinctions, Vegetation Change, and Poly-

nesian Impacts in Prehistoric Hawai‘i. Archaeology in Ocea-

nia 37:57–78.

Blaauw, Maarten

2010 Methods and Code for ‘Classical’ Age-Modeling of Ra-

diocarbon Sequences. Quaternary Geochronology

5:512–518.

Buck, Caitlin E., J. Andrés Christen, and Gary N. James

1999 BCal: An On-line Bayesian Radiocarbon Calibration

Tool. Internet Archaeology 7. Electronic resource,

https/intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue7/buck, accessed Novem-

ber 13, 2013.

Buck, Caitlin E., William G. Cavanagh, and Cliff Litton

1996 The Bayesian Approach to Interpreting Archaeolog-

ical Data. Wiley, Chichester.

Carson, Mike T., and J. Stephen Athens

2007 Integration of Coastal Geomorphology, Mythology, and

Archaeological Evidence at Kualoa Beach, Windward

O‘ahu, Hawaiian Islands. Journal of Island and Coastal Ar-

chaeology 2:24–43.

Clark, J.S.

1988 Particle Motion and the Theory of Charcoal Analysis:

Source Area, Transport, Deposition, and Sampling. Qua-

ternary Research 30:67–80.

Commendador, Amy, Julie Field, John Dudgeon, and Timothy

Rieth

2012 The Diet of Rodents, Pigs, and Dogs in Prehistoric

Hawai‘i Island: Implications for an Evolving Agricultur-

al Landscape from Isotopic Analyses. Paper presented at

the 78th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Ar-

chaeology, Honolulu.

Denham, Tim, Christopher Bronk Ramsey, and Jim Specht

2012 Dating the Appearance of Lapita Pottery in the Bis-

marck Archipelago and Its Dispersal to Remote Oceania.

Archaeology in Oceania 47:39–46.

Desilets, Michael

2000 Archaeological Monitoring and Sampling, Interim Re-

moval Action, Five Underground Storage Sites— OU7 Bel-

lows Air Force Station, Waimanalo, Ko‘olaupoko District,

O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. Submitted to Earth Tech, Inc., Honolulu.

Copies available from International Archaeological Research

Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Duarte, Trever K.

2012 Colonization and Prehistory on the Island of Maui: A

Radiocarbon Synthesis of Maui Island. Unpublished Mas-

ter’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of

Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu.

Dye, Kekapala P., and Thomas S. Dye

2009 Pre-construction Archaeological Resource Survey

for the New Civil Engineering Building, Bellows Air

Force Station, Waimanalo, Ko‘olaupoko, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i,

TMK: (1)4-1-001:015. Submitted to J. M. Waller Associ-

ates. Copies available from T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Ar-

chaeologists, Inc., Honolulu.

Dye, Tom

2000 Effects of

C Sample Selection in Archaeology: an Ex-

ample from Hawai‘i. Radiocarbon 42(2):203–217.

Dye, Thomas S.

2011 A Model-Based Age Estimate for Polynesian Colo-

nization of Hawaii. Archaeology in Oceania 46:130–138.

Dye, Thomas S., and Jeffrey Pantaleo

2010 Age of the O18 Site, Hawaii. Archaeology in Ocea-

nia 45:13–119.

Dye, Thomas S., Mike T. Carson, Myra Tomonari-Tuggle

2002 Archaeological Survey of 60 Acres of the Kipahulu His-

toric District within the Kipahulu District of Haleakalā Na-

tional Park, Maui. Submitted to Department of the Navy,

Pacific Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command,

Pearl Harbor, Hawai‘i. Copies available from International

Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Field, Julie S., and Michael W. Graves

2008 A New Chronology for Pololu Valley, Hawai‘i Island:

Occupational History and Agricultural Development. Ra-

diocarbon 50:205–222.

Graves, Michael W., and David J. Addison

1995 The Polynesian Settlement of the Hawaiian Archi-

pelago: Integrating Models and Methods in Archaeologi-

cal Interpretation. World Archaeology 26:380–399.

Hunt, Terry L., and Robert M. Holsen

1991 An Early Radiocarbon Chronology for the Hawaiian

Islands: A Preliminary Analysis. Asian Perspectives

30:147–161.

Kennedy, Joseph

1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey and Test Results for

the Proposed Pukalani Highlands Property, Located at

Pukalani, TMK: 2-3-44, Ahupua‘a of Kailua, District of

Makawao, Island of Maui. Submitted to Pukalani Highlands

Partners, Kahului, Maui, Hawai‘i by Archaeological Con-

sultants of Hawaii, Inc. Copies available from International

Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Kirch, Patrick V.

1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to

Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University of

Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

1992 Anahulu: The Anthropology of History in the Kingdom

of Hawaii, Vol. 2, The Archaeology of History. Universi-

ty of Chicago Press, Chicago.

2011 When Did the Polynesians Settle Hawai‘i? A Review

of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer.

Hawaiian Archaeology 12:3–26.

Kirch, Patrick V., and Mark D. McCoy

2007 Reconfiguring the Hawaiian Cultural Sequence: Re-

sults of Re-dating the Halawa Dune Site (Mo-A1-3), Molo-

ka‘i Island. Journal of the Polynesian Society 116:385–406.

Ladefoged, Thegn N., Michael W. Graves, and James H. Coil

2005 The Introduction of Sweet Potato in Polynesia: Ear-

ly Remains in Hawai‘i. Journal of the Polynesian Society

114:359–373.

Lebo, Susan A, Kekapala P. Dye, and Thomas S. Dye

2009 Pre-construction Archaeological Survey for New

Recreational Lodging at Bellows Air Force Station. Sub-

mitted to Earth Tech Inc., Honolulu. Copies available from

EPORTS 153

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

54 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 79, No. 1, 2014]

T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc., Honolulu.

Leidemann, Helen, Leslie H. Hartzell, Ines P. Gordon, Susan A.

Lebo, John E. Dockall, Heidi A. Lennstrom, Shannon

McPheron, and Barbara Dolan

2003 Continuity and Change in Upland Kāne‘ohe Habita-

tio: Data Recovery and Monitoring Investigations in Lu-

luku, Kapalai, and Punalu‘u Mauka ‘Ili, O‘ahu. Submit-

ted to the Hawaii State Department of Transportation by

the Department of Anthropology, Bishop Museum, Hon-

olulu. Copies available from International Archaeological

Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

McCoy, Mark D., and Michael W. Graves

2010 The Role of Agricultural Innovation on Pacific Islands:

A Case Study from Hawai‘i Island. World Archaeology

42:90–107.

McCoy, Mark D., Michael W. Graves, and Gail Murakami

2010 Introduction of Breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis) to the

Hawaiian Islands. Economic Botany 64:374–381.

McDermott, Matt, David Shideler, John Winieski, and Hallett

H. Hammatt

2000 Archaeological Data Recovery Report for the Ar-

chaeological Sites in the Proposed Barber’s Point Harbor

Expansion Area, Kalaeloa, Ahupua‘a of Honouliuli, Dis-

trict of ‘Ewa, Island of O‘ahu. Submitted to the Hawaii State

Department of Transportation by Cultural Surveys Hawaii,

Inc. Copies available from International Archaeological Re-

search Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

McFadgen, B. G.

1982 Dating New Zealand Archaeology by Radiocarbon. New

Zealand Journal of Science 25:379–392.

Mulrooney, Mara A., Simon H. Bickler, Melinda S. Allen, and

Thegn N. Ladefoged

2011 High-precision Dating of Colonization and Settlement

in East Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Academy

of Sciences 108:E192–E194.

Nagata, Kenneth M.

1985 Early Plant Introductions in Hawai‘i. The Hawaiian

Journal of History 19:35–61.

Patterson, William A., Kevin J. Edwards, and David J. Maguire

1987 Microscopic Charcoal as a Fossil Indicator of Fire. Qua-

ternary Science Review 6:3–23.

Petchey, Fiona, Matthew Spriggs, Foss Leach, Mike Seed,

Christophe Sand, Michael Pietrusewsky, and Katy Anderson

2011 Testing the Human Factor: Radiocarbon Dating the First

Peoples of the South Pacific. Journal of Archaeological Sci-

ence 38:29–44.

Reimer, P.J., M.G.L. Baillie, E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J.W. Beck, P.G.

Blackwell, C. Bronk Ramsey, C.E. Buck, G.S. Burr, R.L.

Edwards, M. Friedrich, P.M. Grootes, T.P. Guilderson, I.

Hajdas, T.J. Heaton, A.G. Hogg, K.A. Hughen, K.F.

Kaiser, B. Kromer, F.G. McCormac, S.W. Manning, R.W.

Reimer, D.A. Richards, J.R. Southon, S. Talamo, C.S.M.

Turney, J. van der Plicht, and C.E., Weyhenmeyer

2009 IntCal09 and Marine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration

Curves, 0–50,000 Years cal BP. Radiocarbon 51:1111–1150.

Richards, Michael P., Eric West, Barry Rolett, and Keith Dobney

2009 Isotope Analysis of Human and Animal Diets from the

Hanamiai Archaeological Site (French Polynesia). Ar-

chaeology in Oceania 44:29–37.

Rieth, Timothy M., and J. Stephen Athens

2013 Suggested Best Practices for the Application of Ra-

diocarbon Dating to Hawaiian Archaeology. Hawaiian Ar-

chaeology 13:3–29.

Rieth, Timothy M., Terry L. Hunt, Carl Lipo, and Janet M.

Wilmshurst

2011 The 13th Century Polynesian Colonization of Hawaii

Island. Journal of Archaeological Science 38:2740–2749.

Rieth, Timothy M, Ethan E. Cochrane, Myra J. Tomonari-Tug-

gle, and Alex E. Morrison

2013 Archeological Inventory and Reconnaissance Surveys

of Nu‘u, Haleakalā National Park, Maui Island, Hawai‘i

(draft report). Submitted to National Park Service, Haleakalā

National Park, Makawao, Hawai‘i, by International Ar-

chaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Rieth, Timothy M., and Myra J. Tomonari-Tuggle

2013 An Archeological Inventory Survey of Five Stream Ar-

eas, Ka‘apahu, Haleakalā National Park, Maui Island,

Hawai‘i (draft report). Submitted to National Park Service,

Haleakalā National Park, Makawao, Hawai‘i, by Interna-

tional Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Rolett, Barry V., and Eric Conte

1995 Renewed Investigation of the Ha’atuatua Dune

(Nukuhiva, Marquesas Islands): A Key Site in Polynesian

Prehistory. Journal of the Polynesian Society 104:195–228.

Spriggs, Matthew, and Atholl Anderson

1993 Late Colonization of East Polynesia. Antiquity

67:200–217.

Tuggle, H. David, and Matthew Spriggs

2001 The Age of the Bellows Dune Site O18, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i,

and the Antiquity of Hawaiian Colonization. Asian Per-

spectives 39:165–188.

Uchikawa, Joji, Brian N. Popp, Jane E. Schoonmaker, and Li

2008 Direct Application of Compound-specific Radiocar-

bon Analysis of Leaf Waxes to Establish Lacustrine Sed-

iment Chronology. Journal of Paleolimnology 39:43–60.

Uchikawa, Joji, Brian N. Popp, Jane E. Schoonmaker, Axel Tim-

mermann, and Stephan J. Lorenz

2010 Geochemical and Climate Modeling Evidence for

Holocene Aridification in Hawaii: Dynamic Response to

a Weakening Equatorial Cold Tongue. Quaternary Science

Reviews 29:3057–3066.

Wagner, Warren L., Derral R. Herbst, and S. H. Sohmer

1990 Manual of the Flowering Plants of Hawai‘i. 2 vols.

Bishop Museum Special Publication 83. University of

Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.

Williams, Scott S.

2002 Ecosystem Management Program, Cultural Resources

Inventory Survey of Previously Unsurveyed Areas, Redleg

Trail Vicinity, U.S. Army Pohakuloa Training Area, Island

of Hawai‘i. Submitted to U.S. Army Engineer District, Hon-

olulu, by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co.,

Inc. Copies available from International Archaeological Re-

search Institute, Inc., Honolulu.

Wilmshurst, Janet M., Atholl J. Anderson, Thomas F.G. High-

am, and Trevor H. Worthy

2008 Dating the Late Prehistoric Dispersal of Polynesians

to New Zealand Using the Commensal Pacific Rat. Pro-

ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

105:7676–7680.

Wilmshurst, Janet M., Terry L. Hunt, Carl P. Lipo, and Atholl

J. Anderson

2011a High-Precision Radiocarbon Dating Shows Recent

and Rapid Colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings of

the National Academy of Sciences 108:1815–1820.

2011b Reply to Mulrooney et al.: Accepting Lower Preci-

sion Radiocarbon Dates Results in Longer Colonization

Chronologies for East Polynesia. Proceedings of the Na-

tional Academy of Sciences 108:E195.

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM

EPORTS 155

Notes

1. Mulrooney et al. (2011) critiqued several of Wilmshurst

et al.’s (2011a) date classification criteria, noting that they are

“overly strict and exclude accurate estimators of early cultural

activity” (Mulrooney et al. 2011:E192). They reanalyzed

Wilmshurst et al.’s data sets using a different set of criteria, re-

sulting in estimates of A.D. 1184, 1230, and 1268 for colo-

nization of Hawaii (the range of ages is based on the applica-

tion of different criteria). In their reply to Mulrooney et al.

(2011), Wilmshurst et al. (2011b) point out, among other issues,

that Mulrooney et al.’s reanalysis only increases the age of col-

onization estimates proportional to the increased statistical er-

ror and uncertainty of the dates introduced by their relaxed se-

lection criteria.

2. The Polynesian introduction of numerous plant taxa to

Hawai‘i has been discussed by botanists (e.g., Nagata 1985;

Wagner et al. 1990). Confirmation of botanical assessments for

the introduction of many agricultural and non-agricultural taxa

has been confirmed palynologically in numerous wetland cores

in which the pollen of these taxa (e.g., coconut and kukui) is co-

incident with, or follows, the expected initial arrival of Poly-

nesians but is absent from earlier core intervals (Athens

1997:267–269). Some taxa, however, have been difficult to

identify palynologically due to rarity or non-diagnostic char-

acteristics. There have been a few modifications of several of

the botanical assessments.

3. Note that substantial changes in the pollen frequency of

several plant taxa begin in the earlier interval at 643–644.5

cmbs. While these earlier changes may be part of the same

process, human activities cannot be unambiguously associated

with them.

4. The latest clearly prehuman vegetation for the Pu‘uhonua

core on Hawai‘i Island is slightly later at A.D. 972–1160,

which entirely falls after the Weli Pond date, though it is

within the earlier half of the Ordy Pond range. Whether this

means that Hawai‘i Island was settled slightly later than O‘ahu,

or only that the Pu‘uhonua area did not begin to manifest the

effects of Polynesian settlement until slightly later due to the

much larger size of this island, is unclear.

5. While representing a different environmental and

edaphic context, Wilmshurst et al. (2008:7678) did not observe

marine reservoir offsets in their stable isotope measurements

on a large suite of dated rat bones in New Zealand.

Submitted July 23, 2013; Revised September 26, 2013;

Accepted September 27, 2013.

Delivered by http://saa.metapress.com

Society for American Archaeology - American Antiquity access (392-89-746)

IP Address: 24.93.31.203

Wednesday, January 15, 2014 8:08:14 PM