256
15 Dating the First Settlement of New Zealand
their moonrakers (topmost sails) reaching to the height of an 11 storey building,
they sailed through the “screaming sixties” in the Great Southern Ocean, dodging
icebergs, rounding Cape Horn and making their way north through the Atlantic at a
time when sailing ships were already dinosaurs. Their life was extended by Gustav
Erikson’s invention of mechanical devices that enabled them to be crewed by as
few as 50 men. It was the torpedoes of World War II that put an end to the last era
of sail.
If the building of additional defences was tied to the successive half lives of pa,
and, as we calculate, these half lives occurred every 107.7 years, you would expect
to see the first and most major round of fortifications in about 1553. There does
appear to be archaeological evidence that this was the case. Matthew Schmidt [9],
following a protocol for chronometric hygiene, reduces 317 radiocarbon dates used
to determine the beginning of the fortification period in Maori pa to an acceptable
60. He concludes:
If we consider the number of calibrated dates that overlap at 1550 cal AD from the robust
and maximum categories for both marine shell and charcoal, the different sample types
indicate a commencement of fortification building by 1550 AD.
Where Schmidt speaks of “a commencement of fortification building” in AD
1550, we would suggest, rather, the building of a first round of additional defences.
By our theory a first round of fortifications in 1553 would be followed by a second round of fortifications in 1660 and a third round in 1768, each of these periods
corresponding to a halving of the number of warriors available to defend a pa. For
the archaeologist, the disturbance of stratigraphy as each new round of fortifications was constructed would make the pursuit of chronometric hygiene difficult and
confound dating.
We follow Nigel Prickett [10] in seeing pa as belonging to a defensive system in
which the largest pa act as citadels and are supported by medium-sized and smaller
pa which act as a chain of defence. In times of conflict all would act as refuges
for related peoples living outside in small undefended settlements and smaller more
vulnerable pa. In other words, we take the total pa populations to include the total
population of a pa area, including those people usually living in undefended settlements. Nigel Prickett cites S. Percy Smith’s wonderful example of the co-ordinated
defence of a pa area [11]:
Beyond the tactical support of adjacent paa is the general strategic advantage of a network
of small fortifications. A network of paa allows independence, with mutual support in case
of external threat. If the threat was sufficient the occupants of the fortified homesteads could
withdraw to a nearby large fortification which might act as a tribal or sub-tribal ‘citadel’. In
the first decades of the last century a northern taua was defeated by a combined force of Nga
Mahanga at the large paa, Ngaweka, at the forest edge on the south bank of Stoney River, by
just such a strategy. . .On first hearing of the approach of a hostile force, the Ngamahanga
hapu, of Taranaki, all assembled to consider what steps should be taken to meet it.
Some proposed that each hapu should remain in its own pa and await attack, but one of the
chiefs of Nga-weka arose and said, “Kia kotahi ano taringa hei ngaunga maa te hoa riri.”
(“Let there be only one ear for the enemy to bite.”) (Smith 1910: 312).
15 Dating the First Settlement of New Zealand
their moonrakers (topmost sails) reaching to the height of an 11 storey building,
they sailed through the “screaming sixties” in the Great Southern Ocean, dodging
icebergs, rounding Cape Horn and making their way north through the Atlantic at a
time when sailing ships were already dinosaurs. Their life was extended by Gustav
Erikson’s invention of mechanical devices that enabled them to be crewed by as
few as 50 men. It was the torpedoes of World War II that put an end to the last era
of sail.
If the building of additional defences was tied to the successive half lives of pa,
and, as we calculate, these half lives occurred every 107.7 years, you would expect
to see the first and most major round of fortifications in about 1553. There does
appear to be archaeological evidence that this was the case. Matthew Schmidt [9],
following a protocol for chronometric hygiene, reduces 317 radiocarbon dates used
to determine the beginning of the fortification period in Maori pa to an acceptable
60. He concludes:
If we consider the number of calibrated dates that overlap at 1550 cal AD from the robust
and maximum categories for both marine shell and charcoal, the different sample types
indicate a commencement of fortification building by 1550 AD.
Where Schmidt speaks of “a commencement of fortification building” in AD
1550, we would suggest, rather, the building of a first round of additional defences.
By our theory a first round of fortifications in 1553 would be followed by a second round of fortifications in 1660 and a third round in 1768, each of these periods
corresponding to a halving of the number of warriors available to defend a pa. For
the archaeologist, the disturbance of stratigraphy as each new round of fortifications was constructed would make the pursuit of chronometric hygiene difficult and
confound dating.
We follow Nigel Prickett [10] in seeing pa as belonging to a defensive system in
which the largest pa act as citadels and are supported by medium-sized and smaller
pa which act as a chain of defence. In times of conflict all would act as refuges
for related peoples living outside in small undefended settlements and smaller more
vulnerable pa. In other words, we take the total pa populations to include the total
population of a pa area, including those people usually living in undefended settlements. Nigel Prickett cites S. Percy Smith’s wonderful example of the co-ordinated
defence of a pa area [11]:
Beyond the tactical support of adjacent paa is the general strategic advantage of a network
of small fortifications. A network of paa allows independence, with mutual support in case
of external threat. If the threat was sufficient the occupants of the fortified homesteads could
withdraw to a nearby large fortification which might act as a tribal or sub-tribal ‘citadel’. In
the first decades of the last century a northern taua was defeated by a combined force of Nga
Mahanga at the large paa, Ngaweka, at the forest edge on the south bank of Stoney River, by
just such a strategy. . .On first hearing of the approach of a hostile force, the Ngamahanga
hapu, of Taranaki, all assembled to consider what steps should be taken to meet it.
Some proposed that each hapu should remain in its own pa and await attack, but one of the
chiefs of Nga-weka arose and said, “Kia kotahi ano taringa hei ngaunga maa te hoa riri.”
(“Let there be only one ear for the enemy to bite.”) (Smith 1910: 312).