Abstract
Pottery has long been the artefact of choice for establishing migrations in the West Pacific, as demonstrated by the discovery in the 1940s that dentate-stamped pottery of the Lapita Cultural Complex had a distribution that spanned thousands of kilometres (Kirch 1997: 6-70. Traditionally the decorative attributes of pots were assessed to infer cultural connections and establish migration patterns (ibid: 12).
More recently archaeologists have turned to methods of physicochemical analysis to provide insight into these migrations with much greater resolution. Previous investigations of Early Lapita settlement all recognise a high degree of mobility (Anson 1983: 1986; Hennessey 2007; Hunt 1989; Summerhayes 2000a; Thomson and White 2000). There are however, two quite different interpretations of these mobility patterns. The first of these interpretations, “Specialised Regional Production” (Hogg 2012: 28), suggests that pottery production is being conducted by sedentary specialist potters belonging to a large regional exchange network (Hunt 1989; Kirch 2000; 2017). In this model significant movements of ceramics are occurring when exchanged between communities, with little in the way of local production occurring (Hogg 2012: 1; Hunt 1989). The second interpretation of these mobility patterns, “Mobile Specialised Production” (Hogg 2012: 28), suggests that most ceramics were produced locally by mobile specialist potters who moved around the landscape collecting resources with which to produce their ceramic assemblages (Anson 1983; 1986; Hennessey 2007; Summerhayes 2000a; Thomson and White 2000).
With these differences in mind, this research was undertaken with the aim of assessing these models of mobility through the physicochemical analysis of an Early Lapita assemblage from Tamuarawai (EQS), Emirau Island, Papua New Guinea. By analysing the patterns of pottery production at Tamuarawai we can assess the nature of mobility at the site and provide further insight into the nature of Early Lapita settlement and mobility through comparison with existing settlement models.
Evidence demonstrated that a wide variety of resources were being utilised in the production of the Tamuarawai ceramic assemblage, with a high number of clay sources and a range of temper minerals employed in the production of the assemblage. With little in the way of discernible correlation between clays, tempers, and vessel form, the evidence suggests that potters were highly mobile, collecting resources for local production of pottery. There was limited evidence of the importation of complete vessels. These results suggest that ceramic production at Tamuarawai was being conducted through a process of “Mobile Specialised Production”.