222
The Context of Field Archaeology
13.3 Evidence from Field Archaeology
Davidson [6], looking at the question of when pa-building became important,
believes that “the evidence is still inadequate to answer this question”. She quotes
the work of Groube and Mihaljevic, though she is dubious about their demographic
assumptions:
Groube reviewed various models of population growth in prehistoric New Zealand and considered the amount of time people might spend building or rebuilding fortifications. He
concluded that by the fourteenth century the population might already have achieved a relatively high proportion of that existing in A.D. 1800. He postulated a sudden and rapid
efflorescence of fort building thereafter. . .Milhaljevic, following a similar approach to that
of Groube, suggested that the maximum prehistoric population was reached by A.D. 1200,
and maintained thereafter by cycles of warfare.
Davidson goes on to consider some archaeological evidence for dating:
About twenty pa have been radiocarbon dated. Even if the oldest dates for each site are
accepted, none of these pa is more than about 500 years old. . .Some of the earliest dates for
“pa” are for sites which may not actually have been fortified at the time, or if so, depended
on palisades, or palisades and scarps, rather than ditches. Examples are the Auckland volcanic cone sites of Mount Wellington and Mount Roskill, and initial occupation of the
swamp pa of Oruarangi in the Hauraki Plains. Early use of defensive ditches is seen at
Kauri Point and Te Awanga. Unfortunately, neither is precisely dated, and the ditches may
have been built at any time between the late fourteenth and sixteenth centuries. On the
whole, A.D. 1500 is a reasonable estimate for the appearance of ditches. The fighting stage
preceded the use of a substantial ditch at Otakanini, but the two appeared together at Te
Awanga. Thus the various defensive devices observed in the late eighteenth century have a
history of at least 300 years, and their origins appear to lie in the period between A.D. 1300
and 1500. The final development of prehistoric fortifications was a progressive strengthening of the ditches and palisades, and sometimes the addition of a second ditch. The third
and final stage of the Kauri Point defences in the eighteenth century involved a double ditch
(p. 193).
Davidson, 3 years later [7], comments:
Dates for paa, with two possible exceptions, still do not go back beyond the 15th century.
Taking these 15th century dates back to their earliest limit at two standard deviations we just
touch A.D. 1300. In most areas there seems to be a fairly even spread from the 15th century
to the period of less than 250 years. Irwin’s Pouto study stands out against this pattern, with
its preponderance of relatively recent dates for paa. (Ten out of 13 dates were less than 250
years before present.)
We note that both the Pouto pa and pa built in northern Taranaki in the 17th
century were built to defend newly developed horticultural land.
Ten years of careful, detailed field archaeology in the Bay of Plenty, carried out
by K.W. Moore for the New Zealand Archaeological Association’s site recording
scheme, offers an additional perspective to the vivid descriptions of Maori pa presented in Best’s pioneering volume. Using this data, Aileen Fox [8] analyses the
distribution of the recorded Maori sites in the bay in relation to topography:
This was the territory of the Te Arawa and Urewera tribes in the later prehistoric times,
with a probable divide on the Rangitaki river and the swamps... The outstanding feature
The Context of Field Archaeology
13.3 Evidence from Field Archaeology
Davidson [6], looking at the question of when pa-building became important,
believes that “the evidence is still inadequate to answer this question”. She quotes
the work of Groube and Mihaljevic, though she is dubious about their demographic
assumptions:
Groube reviewed various models of population growth in prehistoric New Zealand and considered the amount of time people might spend building or rebuilding fortifications. He
concluded that by the fourteenth century the population might already have achieved a relatively high proportion of that existing in A.D. 1800. He postulated a sudden and rapid
efflorescence of fort building thereafter. . .Milhaljevic, following a similar approach to that
of Groube, suggested that the maximum prehistoric population was reached by A.D. 1200,
and maintained thereafter by cycles of warfare.
Davidson goes on to consider some archaeological evidence for dating:
About twenty pa have been radiocarbon dated. Even if the oldest dates for each site are
accepted, none of these pa is more than about 500 years old. . .Some of the earliest dates for
“pa” are for sites which may not actually have been fortified at the time, or if so, depended
on palisades, or palisades and scarps, rather than ditches. Examples are the Auckland volcanic cone sites of Mount Wellington and Mount Roskill, and initial occupation of the
swamp pa of Oruarangi in the Hauraki Plains. Early use of defensive ditches is seen at
Kauri Point and Te Awanga. Unfortunately, neither is precisely dated, and the ditches may
have been built at any time between the late fourteenth and sixteenth centuries. On the
whole, A.D. 1500 is a reasonable estimate for the appearance of ditches. The fighting stage
preceded the use of a substantial ditch at Otakanini, but the two appeared together at Te
Awanga. Thus the various defensive devices observed in the late eighteenth century have a
history of at least 300 years, and their origins appear to lie in the period between A.D. 1300
and 1500. The final development of prehistoric fortifications was a progressive strengthening of the ditches and palisades, and sometimes the addition of a second ditch. The third
and final stage of the Kauri Point defences in the eighteenth century involved a double ditch
(p. 193).
Davidson, 3 years later [7], comments:
Dates for paa, with two possible exceptions, still do not go back beyond the 15th century.
Taking these 15th century dates back to their earliest limit at two standard deviations we just
touch A.D. 1300. In most areas there seems to be a fairly even spread from the 15th century
to the period of less than 250 years. Irwin’s Pouto study stands out against this pattern, with
its preponderance of relatively recent dates for paa. (Ten out of 13 dates were less than 250
years before present.)
We note that both the Pouto pa and pa built in northern Taranaki in the 17th
century were built to defend newly developed horticultural land.
Ten years of careful, detailed field archaeology in the Bay of Plenty, carried out
by K.W. Moore for the New Zealand Archaeological Association’s site recording
scheme, offers an additional perspective to the vivid descriptions of Maori pa presented in Best’s pioneering volume. Using this data, Aileen Fox [8] analyses the
distribution of the recorded Maori sites in the bay in relation to topography:
This was the territory of the Te Arawa and Urewera tribes in the later prehistoric times,
with a probable divide on the Rangitaki river and the swamps... The outstanding feature