Island and Coastal Archaeology

This article was downloaded by: [CDL Journals Account]
On: 20 April 2011

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 922973516]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t716100767
Households and Hierarchy: Domestic Modes of Production in Leeward

Kohala, Hawai'i Island
Julie S. Fielda; Patrick V. Kirchb; Kathy Kaweluc; Thegn N. Ladefogedd
a
Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA b Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA c Anthropology
Department, University of Hawai'i, Hilo, Hawai'i, USA d Department of Anthropology, University of
Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Online publication date: 09 April 2010
To cite this Article Field, Julie S. , Kirch, Patrick V. , Kawelu, Kathy and Ladefoged, Thegn N.(2010) 'Households and
Hierarchy: Domestic Modes of Production in Leeward Kohala, Hawai'i Island', The Journal of Island and Coastal
Archaeology, 5: 1, 52 — 85
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/15564890903178663
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15564890903178663
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Island & Coastal Archaeology, 5:52–85, 2010
Copyright © 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1556-4894 print / 1556-1828 online
DOI: 10.1080/15564890903178663
Households and Hierarchy:

Domestic Modes of
Production in Leeward
Kohala, Hawai‘i Island
Julie S. Field,1 Patrick V. Kirch,2 Kathy Kawelu,3 and
Thegn N. Ladefoged4
Downloaded By: [CDL Journals Account] At: 04:53 20 April 2011
1
Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
2
Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley,
California, USA
3
Anthropology Department, University of Hawai‘i, Hilo, Hawai‘i, USA
4
Department of Anthropology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
ABSTRACT
This article describes archaeological evidence for the transformation of

Hawaiian society from the fifteenth to nineteenth centuries AD. Using
archaeological testing of households coupled with high-resolution survey
data, we trace changes in the domestic mode of production in late pre-
contact Hawai‘i. These analyses yield insights into the transformation
of Polynesia’s most highly stratified society. The traditional land units
(ahupua‘a) of Makiloa and Kālala, located on the arid, leeward coast
of Kohala, Hawai‘i, are investigated with both survey and excavation,
and detailed information pertaining to subsistence, household extent,
and material culture are reviewed. Changes in the economy and
configuration of households from the fifteenth to nineteenth centuries
AD are discussed, as are the appearance of elite residences in the
later periods. This microscale perspective on the evolution of Hawaiian
economy and society provides a necessary complement to a macroscale
perspective of human ecodynamics in the Hawaiian archipelago.
Keywords pre-contact, agriculture, human ecodynamics, Polynesia
Received 30 October 2008; accepted 13 July 2009.

Address correspondence to Julie S. Field, Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, 4034
Smith Labs, 174 W. 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. E-mail: field.59@osu.edu
52
Domestic Modes of Production in Hawai‘i
INTRODUCTION Hawaiian Households and the Domestic

Mode of Production
Since 2001 the Hawai‘i Biocomplexity
Project, a multidisciplinary team including The term ‘household’ refers to a social
archaeologists, ecologists, soil scientists, de- unit that can be variably defined by factors of
mographers, and quantitative modelers has economics and social relations (Lévi-Strauss
investigated long-term human ecodynamics 1979:47). Our use of the term ‘household’
in the Hawaiian archipelago (Kirch 2007a; refers to small social groupings that are
Kirch et al. 2007). The human ecodynamics unified by bonds of kinship (‘ohana) and
approach in archaeology rejects the assump- others who are not kin in the usual sense
tion that the environment or ecosystem of consanguineal or affinal relations (‘ōhua),
can be detached from humans and their but who were assigned roles as dependents
behavior, and argues instead that human- or helpers (Handy and Pukui 1958:5). Our
environmental relationships involve the co- use of the word ‘household’ also empha-
evolution of socio-historical and natural sizes the key role of houses or homesteads
processes, resulting in what have been (kauhale) as primary organizing structures
termed socioecosystems (Barton et al. 2004; in the society. This distinction reflects the
McGlade 1995). To that end, the first phase widespread pattern of houses as units of
of the project focused on large-scale spatial kinship, following the “house society” model
dynamics integrating natural biogeochemical which has been described in linguistic and
gradients and intensive dryland agricultural ethnographic studies of Austronesian and
field systems (Hartshorn et al. 2006; Kirch Polynesian societies from throughout the
et al. 2004; Ladefoged and Graves 2008; Pacific (Fox 1993; Kahn and Kirch 2004;
Vitousek et al. 2004). A second phase, ini- Kirch and Green 2001).
tiated in 2007, now focuses on the non- Our emphasis is also on the function of
linear dynamics of population growth, agri- households as primary economic units. In
cultural intensification, and sociopolitical his classic work on Stone Age Economics,
change. which drew heavily upon Hawaiian ethno-
This requires, in part, the generation history, Sahlins (1972) pointed to the key
of data at multiple scales: the macro scale role of households in what he termed the
of islands, or districts (moku) within is- domestic mode of production (DMP) in
lands, and the micro scale of households pre-industrial societies. The household is
and associated land units. In this paper we “charged with production, with the deploy-
report upon the micro scale, in particular ment and use of labor-power, (and) with the
the archaeological correlates of late pre- determination of the economic objective”
contact Hawaiian households. Our approach of society (1972:76–77). The key elements
follows developing trends in anthropologi- of the DMP—labor, simple technology, and
cal archaeology, in which households are limited production objectives—are system-
widely recognized as fundamental social atically interrelated. In small-scale societies,
units within traditional societies (e.g., Ash- these forces combine to work against the
more and Wilk 1988; Cioleck-Torello 1989; production of a surplus greater than that
Flannery, 1976; Reid and Whittlesley 1982; required by each household for its own
Wilk and Rathje 1982). Our approach seeks to autonomous existence (Chayanov 1966). In
model the social and economic changes that complex chiefdoms, however, and more par-
occurred at the household level during the ticularly in the emergence of archaic states,
late-prehistoric period. As outlined below, the “anti-surplus” tendencies of the DMP are
these changes often leave detectable archae- overcome to forge a larger and integrated
ological signatures, revealing the integration political economy. As Sahlins states: “The
of independent households into larger social political economy cannot survive on that
and economic units. restrained use of resources which for the
JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 53

Julie S. Field et al.
domestic economy is a satisfactory exis- mography, and social organization intersect,

tence” (1972:135), and he points to the case we have chosen to focus on the detailed ar-
of Hawai‘i as one which took “the primitive chaeological study of a sample of prehistoric
contradiction between the domestic and features on the leeward side of Kohala
public economies to an ultimate crisis” be- District, Hawai‘i Island. In Hawai‘i, groups
tween a society organized on the principles of contiguous stone features such as enclo-
of kinship, and one dictated by the structures sures and terraces are usually interpreted as
of hierarchy and chiefly power (1972:141). the archaeological correlates of households
We hypothesize that as the base eco- (Cordy and Kaschko 1980; Kirch and O’Day
nomic units of the society, pre-European 2002; Kolb and Snead 1997; Weisler and
contact Hawaiian households would have Kirch 1985). The presence of marine midden,
undergone a transformation from a largely lithic debitage, shell and bone tools, and
domestic mode of production to integra- surface scatters of fire-cracked rock are also
tion into a larger sociopolitical apparatus in key indicators of archaeological features that
which one role was to produce surplus to were used for residence. These features are
underwrite the larger political economy. This often thought to reflect the ethnographically
transformation would have occurred partly attested kauhale habitation system, in which
as a product of demographic growth, and particular activities such as cooking, eating,
partly through a process of social transition and sleeping were carried out in separate
by which emerging elite were able to em- structures (Handy and Pukui 1958:7–14;
power themselves in relation to lower-status Malo 1951:27–30). In the century prior to the
individuals. How this process occurred has overthrow of the traditional Hawaiian ritual
long been of interest to historians and social system in 1819, the activities of people of dif-
scientists (Childe, 1951; Johnson and Earle ferent genders were also sometimes spatially
1987), and has been the subject of numerous segregated, with separate structures erected
studies in Hawai‘i and other parts of Polynesia for particular activities of men and women,
(Cordy 1981; Earle 1997; Kirch 1984, 2006; such as cooking and eating. In this way a sin-
Ladefoged 1993, 1995; Service 1975). Our gle household, which could have consisted
focus is therefore not on determining the of several generations of consanguineal and
causal mechanisms for the evolution of social affinal kin along with their ‘ōhua, would
complexity in ancient Hawai‘i, but to exam- have occupied a single kauhale complex.
ine the variables and complex relationships Following the introduction of Christianity
that developed between people and their the kauhale system was modified as the
environment in the late prehistory of the prohibitions on separate gender activity areas
archipelago. A conceptual model of our were abandoned, and Hawaiian households
human ecodynamics approach is graphically shifted to single-structure residences (Kirch
displayed in Figure 1. This outlines several 1985, 2006; Ladefoged 1991). However,
key variables that we seek to investigate and we argue that archaeological evidence from
model. It is important to note that we distin- Hawai‘i suggests that important changes also
guish between classes of variables which can occurred in the organization and structuring
be potentially studied archaeologically, from of Hawaiian households during the three to
those which are modeled mathematically four centuries prior to European contact (ca.
and quantitatively. In particular, elite and AD 1400–1778). These changes reflect the
commoner households are two important emergent social power of chiefs, and the
categories amenable to direct archaeologi- requirements of surplus production placed
cal investigation. Data obtained from such on the commoner society.
features should provide evidence for key By excavating a sample of archaeological
economic variables, such as the use of marine features that meet our criteria for use as resi-
resources, pig and dog husbandry, regional dences, and placing these within a chronolog-
exchange, and surplus extraction. ical framework through 14 C dating, we seek
Because the household is the critical to obtain a data set which spans the critical
nexus at which agricultural production, de- time period over which the Hawaiian DMP
54 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Figure 1. Conceptual model of the demographic, sociopolitical, and economic variables that we seek
to investigate in Leeward Kohala. The variables outlined in grey were the focus of the
2007–2008 survey and excavations in Makiloa and Kālala.
was transformed through the emergence of including their size and structure, production
a regionally integrated political economy. and consumption patterns, domestic tech-
Investigation of archaeological residential nology, and contribution to surplus have
features—and through them the changing remained elusive. This paper summarizes
nature of Hawaiian households—has the results from the first of three field seasons
potential to provide a microscale perspec- of archaeological investigation of household
tive on the evolution of Hawaiian economy features in Kohala, in the adjacent traditional
and society. We regard this as a necessary land units (ahupua‘a) of Makiloa and Kālala.
complement to the macroscale perspective We selected these ahupua‘a because the
provided by the study of landscape-level corresponding areas of the upland intensive
agroecosystems, in particular the leeward agricultural field system had already been
Kohala field system. surveyed and dated (Ladefoged and Graves
Kohala’s landscape is dominated by an 2008), and a preliminary seriation analysis
intensive dryland agricultural field system of residential features in Makiloa and the
which extended over roughly 60 km2 . This adjacent ahupua‘a of Pahinahina and Kahua
system has been studied by several investi- 1 suggested limited interaction between the
gators, including our own project (see Lade- ahupua‘a (Graves et al. 2002; O’Conner
foged and Graves 2000, 2008; Ladefoged et al. 1998). In 2007–2008 we investigated resi-
1996 for a summary of the early work includ- dential features within the coastal zone of
ing that of Rosendahl 1972, 1994). However, Makiloa and Kālala, providing data to com-
the nature of pre-contact households that plement the prior inland studies. Here we
organized and operated this field system, report on intensive survey and excavations

within the coastal region of Makiloa and the attraction of the coastal zone was there-
southern part of Kālala, with an emphasis on fore littoral and marine resources, including
14 residential complexes. shellfish, seaweeds, fish, and turtles. Due
to its relatively young geological age, the
Makiloa-Kālala shoreline is dominated by low
THE MAKILOA-KĀLALA STUDY AREA lava cliffs; coral reef development is minimal.
Two substantial bays, Pohakuloa and Kamilo,
Makiloa and Kālala are two of 32 ahupua‘a offered sheltered landing places for canoes,
incorporating portions of the leeward Kohala with gravel and boulder beaches. Shellfish
field system (Figure 2). In the traditional and seaweed could be gathered, and inshore
Hawaiian system of land rights that was fishes caught, from the low bluffs and rocky
described in the early post-contact period, in- promontories along this shoreline. Potable
dividual ahupua‘a were awarded by the king water was available from small seeps or
(ali‘i nui) to chiefs (ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a), who springs that issue from the lava rocks at sea
often appointed land managers or stewards level and would have been accessible at low
(konohiki) to oversee these estates (Chinen tide.
1958; Sahlins 1992). Commoner households The occupants of the coast presum-
within an ahupua‘a paid regular tribute ably obtained their subsistence staples from
(ho‘okupu) in foodstuffs and other goods; the inland field system, either by exchange
such tribute passed upwards through the with upland households or by cultivating
hierarchy of konohiki, ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a, upland plots themselves. The area of in-
and ali‘i nui. With a total area of 15.08 tensive field system falling within Makiloa
km2 , Kālala is roughly three times larger than and Kālala ahupua‘a is approximately 475
Makiloa (area 5.12 km2 ) and extends farther ha. If we assume an average production
into the upland forest zone. Both ahupua‘a value of ∼5 mt/ha/yr (following Massal and
incorporated portions of the Kohala field Barrau 1973:25), and a short fallow regime
system, although both were south of the of cropping for any given plot every other
most productive central core (Ladefoged et year, then this area could in theory have
al. 2008). At the time of the Great Mahele produced as much as 1,187.5 mt/yr. Further
or division of lands in 1846–1852, Makiloa assuming an average daily per capita con-
and Kālala were not claimed by any of sumption level of 2.5 kg of starch staple, one
the high chiefs, but rather were designated can calculate an order-of-magnitude carrying
as “Government land.” This suggests that capacity for the two combined Makiloa-
they were not among the most desirable or Kālala ahupua‘a of around 1,300 persons.
productive ahupua‘a, which tended to be Hawaiian and other Polynesian households
claimed by the ali‘i nui or ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a. typically averaged between 6 and 8 per-
Makiloa and Kālala span a wide range of sons (Kirch 2007c:100–101); thus the two
variation in rainfall and temperature, from the ahupua‘a might have accommodated on the
coast up across the volcanic flow slopes to order of between 162 and 213 households
the crest of the Kohala Mountains (reaching a according to ideal production estimates.
maximum elevation in Kālala of 985 m). The These estimates, however, do not take into
coastal sector which was the focus of our account such critical factors as stochastic
2007–2008 fieldwork is arid, with less than variation in yield due to periodic drought, the
250 mm rainfall annually, mostly during the extraction of surplus for animal husbandry,
winter months. Between 6 and 9 km inland, or direct tribute exactation by non-farming
where the field system is located, rainfall elites. Thus the number of households actu-
is between 750 and 1,800 mm, sufficient ally supported within these two territories
to support crops of sweet potato (Ipomoea was almost certainly fewer—indeed, perhaps
batatas), and taro (Colocasia esculenta). far fewer—than the range indicated by this
On the coast, aridity combined with crude maximal estimate of carrying capacity.
high temperatures precludes horticultural A future goal of our research project is
activities (Vitousek et al. 2004). The main to check such theoretical carrying capacity
56 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Figure 2. Map of Kohala, Hawai‘i, showing the traditional land units (ahupua‘a) of Makiloa (MKI)
and Kālala (KAL), and the extent of the Kohala field system. Base hillshade obtained from
Hawaii Statewide GIS Program (http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/gis/).
estimates with empirical archaeological data units. Testing this sequence of territorial divi-
on actual numbers of residential complexes, sion is another objective of our investigation.
and to constrain these temporally with
chronological data.
Based on a pattern of sequential sub-
division of originally larger territories into MAKILOA-KĀLALA COASTAL
smaller units, Ladefoged and Graves (2006) SETTLEMENT PATTERNS
analyzed the formation and temporal fission-
ing of ahupua‘a in leeward Kohala. They Our research commenced with an intensive
identify six successive phases of subdivision, survey of coastal Makiloa-Kālala, recording
with Makiloa first appearing in Level 2, as all visible surface architecture located be-
a segment taken out of an originally larger tween the shoreline and the modern high-
ahupua‘a of Kālala (which adjoins to Makiloa way (which varied between 540 and 340
on the north). At an even earlier stage (Level m inland). This comprises the main coastal
6), Makiloa and Kālala were both part of zone of occupation, with a “barren zone”
an original “proto-ahupua‘a” that included lying between the coast and the upland field
a large tract from Kehena southwards to system. The entire coastal sector of Makiloa
Makiloa. Thus, as an independent territorial was surveyed, as well as the southern part of
unit, Makiloa presumably emerged late, in the Kālala up to a prominent cinder cone named
second to the last phase of subdivision of land Pu‘u ‘Ula‘ula (“Red Hill”), an area of about

Table 1. Summary of features recorded in the 2007–2008 survey of Makiloa and Kālala
ahupua‘a classified according to morphology and function. The morphologies of the
features recorded in the survey are listed in the rows; the columns provide
additional detail for the functional habitation/non-habitation categories.
Non- Primary Secondary

Morphology Habitation Residential Residential Total
Alignment or wall 11 5 16
Curved wall (any shape) 1 33 34
Enclosure 9 15 19 43
High-back terrace w/ enclosing 4 4
wall
Midden and/or lithic scatter 4 4 8
Modified outcrop 14 1 15
Mound 60 60
Not determined/not field checked 22 22

Platform(S) 13 1 1 15
Rockshelter or overhang shelter 1 2 3
Terrace(s) 19 8 27
Total 154 20 73 247
0.64 km2 . The area was surveyed by close feature types are enclosures of various shapes
walking of transects, using Trimble GeoXH (“C”, “J”, “U”) and terraces. Some individ-
GPS instruments to record archaeological ual features consist of spatially contiguous
features.1 A standardized feature form was architectural elements, which we define as
filled in for each feature, including a mea- ‘components’, and which were recorded us-
sured sketch, dimensions, and other attribute ing an additional alphabetical letter. A single
data. Within the surveyed area, a total of 247 feature can contain one or more components,
individual features were identified (Table 1). and these are termed “multi-component
Feature numbers were prefixed with MKI- or features”. For example, a multi-component
KAL- to designate their ahupua‘a, followed feature could contain several spatially con-
by a unique numeric identifier. Figure 3 tiguous terraces with contiguous walls or
depicts the distribution and morphology of enclosures (e.g., MKI-2A, -2B, -2C, etc.).
archaeological features in the study area. Of the 247 features recorded in the study
area, 11 features were recorded as “multi-
component”, although this should be consid-
Morphological and Functional ered a minimum estimate of the number of
Classification of Components, Features, multi-component features as not all compo-
and Complexes nents within features were recorded.
Functional designations were based in
Archaeological features in the survey part on the morphology of the architecture,
area included a variety of stone architectural and on the character of visible surface de-
types. In general, features were constructed posits (e.g., the presence of marine shell
of angular ‘al‘ā rocks (cobble and boulder midden, paving, coral pebbles). We acknowl-
facing with interior rubble fill), to form free- edge that these functional classifications may
standing walls or terrace retaining walls, with be subject to later reinterpretation, as the
heights up to 1 m or occasionally more. surface deposits and surface architecture may
Among the most common morphological not reflect the range of activities recorded in
58 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Figure 3. GIS-generated maps of the Makiloa and Kālala coastline. Map A indicates the morphology
of the features as recorded during the GPS survey. Map B indicates the location of excavated
features mentioned in the text, and also the distribution of sites classified as primary or
secondary residential features, or as heiau. Primary residences are indicated by their
alphanumeric code.
the subsurface deposits. Tentative functional residences based upon their size (both in
designations were assigned to the morpho- surface area and wall height), the amount
logical categories, and these are summarized and type of associated midden, and the
in Table 1. Ninety-three residential features morphology of the walls. For example, the
were recorded in the study area and these primary residential features that we refer
were divided into 20 “primary residential to as a “high-backed terrace with enclosing
features” and 73 “secondary residential fea- wall” are rectangular structures with interior
tures”. Our designation of ‘residence’ is based floor spaces that range in size from 15 to
on the presence of either an enclosing wall 22 m2 . A free-standing stacked wall on the
or a raised stone terrace, pavements or up-slope side (hence “high-backed”), offered
platforms, and also the presence of associ- protection from the frequently strong winds
ated midden and surface artifacts. Primary which sweep down the mountain slope. The
residences were discerned from secondary down-slope side is terraced. These structures

usually have substantial deposits of shell and of any secondary residential features. This is
bone midden within and extending beyond due to the fact that these features are large
the walls. In contrast, secondary residential residential and religious structures.
features are smaller in size and include a As a result of our analyses of residential
wide range of surface structures, such as feature number and proximity, we identify
‘curved walls’, ‘enclosures’ or ‘lithic scat- 14 of the residential clusters to be potential
ter’. The presence of midden in association residential complexes. Although it is likely
with these features indicates their use as that the primary and secondary residential
residences. features within the clusters were constructed
Our survey suggested that primary and at different times, their spatial proximity
secondary residential features are not evenly suggests that they are associated, and likely
distributed over the coastal landscape (see reflect the activities of a single social unit. In
Figure 3b), but tend to occur in dense our remaining analyses we will examine the
clusters. To test the degree of clustering, chronology and cultural materials from the
we performed a nearest neighbor analysis residential features individually, but we will
using ArcGIS 9.2, which indicates that this also examine them as potential members of
clustering is unlikely to be the result of complexes that were established at different

chance (Z score = −5.77 sd, significance times, and which variably persisted over the
level = .01, critical value −2.58). We also centuries. Thus we will discuss below the
performed a hierarchical distance-based clus- attributes of Complexes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 5c,
tering analysis, which identified 24 spatially 5d, 5e, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10.
distinct clusters, 10 of which were isolated In addition to primary and secondary res-
single features or pairs of features. These idential features, several other kinds of struc-
clusters are based on Euclidian distance, and tures were identified during our survey. Of
the features within each cluster are generally particular interest is a large multi-component
within 25–100 m of each other. Features that feature (KAL-1) prominently situated on the
are further away are in different clusters, north side of Kamilo Bay, the largest single
or are isolated. Further analyses of these architectural feature in the study area (Figure
clusters identified the presence and number 5). Based on its massive size, architectural
of primary residence features within the morphology, and other attributes, KAL-1 is
clusters, and from this we have defined 14 classified as a temple or heiau. Its position
residential clusters along the Makiloa-Kālala at the ahupua‘a boundary suggests that it
coastline (Figure 4). Each of these clusters is functioned as a part of the annual Makahiki
based upon the original distance-based hier- “harvest festival” undertaken in the name
archical analysis and contains one or more of Lono, god of dryland agriculture (Valeri
primary residences and several secondary 1985). The Makahiki ritual involved a clock-
residences in close proximity. The largest wise circuit around the island by the Lono
cluster, Cluster 5, consists of 33 features priests, during which each ahupua‘a was
spread over an area of 0.9 km2 . This cluster is visited in order to collect tribute. Open to
flanked to the north and south by the gulches the south and situated immediately inside the
that feed into Pohakuloa and Kamilo Bays, southern boundary of Kālala, KAL-1 may have
and because of this geographic isolation the been the site of the tribute collection for this
features form a single cluster. Because of large ahupua‘a. Several pits on the northern
its great size and the presence of 5 primary wall of the large U-shaped enclosure, each
residences within it, we performed a density ringed with numerous water-rolled white
analysis of the primary residences in order coral (Porites sp.) cobbles, are probably
to define several sub-clusters. Thus, Figure image holes. The color white was associated
4 indicates that Cluster 5 consists of sub- with Lono, as in the barkcloth and bird’s
clusters, which we define as 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, skins that hung from his image staff (Malo
and 5e. In two instances (5c and 5e) we 1951:144).
defined a single, isolated primary residence Another morphological feature category
as residential complexes, despite the absence which occurs in relatively high frequency
60 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Figure 4. Complexes 1–10 as determined by hierarchical clustering analysis based upon Euclidian
distance. The primary and secondary residential features within each complex are
indicated by symbol and alphanumeric code.
is stone mounds or cairns. These range in Tuohy 1987), most if not all of these are prob-
base diameter from <1 m up to 4–5 m, with ably burials. Our survey identified 60 such
the larger examples sometimes taking on the mounds.
appearance of formal platforms with faced
sides. They often have one or more central de-
pressions, and waterworn coral and/or basalt RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX EXCAVATIONS
cobbles are often found on them. Based on
similar features elsewhere on Hawai‘i Island The complexes of primary and secondary res-
which have been excavated (Soehren and idential features identified in our survey and

Figure 5. Plan of the KAL-1 heiau, located on the southern boundary of Kālala ahupua‘a.
confirmed as discrete spatial clusters through activity specialization, and to obtain materials
spatial analysis are interpreted as prehistoric for dating. Since the residential complexes
Hawaiian households (kauhale). Subsurface consist of multiple features, it was necessary
testing of these features was then necessary to sample several features within each. Test
to determine whether or not features within units ranging in size from 0.50 × 0.50 m to 2 ×
a complex were contemporary, or whether 2 m were excavated. Units were positioned
they represented sequential construction of both inside and outside the features, often
new residential features over time. A further adjacent to standing stone architecture. This
aim of excavation was to determine when placement allowed for the collection of
new complexes were established, and if cultural materials that had been swept against
household organization changed over time, walls and into corners, and to extend under
as evidenced by temporally linked variations the walls and retrieve materials that could
in structure morphology, size, and cultural indicate the date of initial construction. In
deposits. total, 30 units were excavated, sampling a
total of 16 features, representing 9 of the 14
Excavation Methodology complexes.
Because the shallow cultural deposits
Our excavations were designed to obtain usually comprised only a single stratigraphic
samples of cultural material in order to deter- unit, excavations proceeded in arbitrary
mine feature function, degree of exploitation levels (usually 5 cm); subsurface com-
of marine resources, consumption of domes- ponents such as hearths were excavated
tic animals such as dog and pig, craft or other separately. Artifacts encountered during
62 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

excavation were point-provenienced. All sed- upright waterworn stone, both typical ritual
iment was sieved through 1/8 and 1/16 markers, suggest that MKI-1A in addition to
inch mesh, with the exception of features being a primary residential feature, served a
MKI-1A and 1B, part of which was sieved special function, possibly as a fishing shrine
with 1/8 inch mesh only. Below we briefly (ko‘a).
describe salient architectural and subsurface Three units were excavated: TU 2 in
aspects of the nine residential complexes MKI-1B produced no cultural materials or
we excavated, treating them in geographic subsurface components encountering a nat-
sequence from south to north. Following ural deposit of pebbles and gravel at 10
these summaries, the indications for spatio- cmbs. This suggests that the open enclosure
temporal variation in household size are had a specialized function, possibly canoe
discussed, along with a comparative analysis storage. TU 3, outside the structure, revealed
of cultural materials using normalized values. a thin deposit of lithics and midden overlying
Chronological data based on 14 C and U/Th a natural layer of gravel and pebbles. In
dates are also discussed in detail. contrast, TU 1 in the southwest corner of
the enclosure exposed a 35 cm thick cultural
Complex 1 (Features MKI -1A, -1B, -144, deposit incorporating a slab-lined hearth
-148) defined by two rock slabs. Between these
slabs and the enclosure wall a 10 cm thick
Complex 1 consists of two primary deposit of ashy midden contained fragments
residences (MKI-148, MKI-1A, 1B) and one of shell, sea urchin spines, charcoal, lithics,
secondary residence (MKI-144). MKI-144 and fish bone, and artifacts such as sea
consisted of a round enclosure with ap- urchin spine files, cut bone, and a bone
proximately 10 m2 of floor space. It was toggle. A layer of flat slabs formed the hearth
constructed of stacked cobble walls with foundation, and two midden/ash deposits
rubble-filled interiors, and had no visible were found below this, extending to 42
surface features or associated components. cmbs. The hearth features did not extend
MKI-148 was a large U-shaped enclosure (140 under the wall, and had been built after the
m2 in interior floor area) with a paved floor main enclosure was constructed. Fragments
and a raised stone paved platform in one of kukui nutshell were extracted from this
corner. Its large size and midden suggests feature and submitted for radiocarbon dating.
that it was used as a residence, but part of
the structure was later transformed into a
probable burial platform. This structure was Complex 2 (Features MKI-2A, -2B, -2C,
not tested with subsurface excavation. -2D, -2E, -2F, -2G, -2H, -2I, -2J, -11, -12,
MKI-1A, 1B was the only feature in this -13, -17, -18)
complex to be investigated archaeologically.
Located on a slight rise about 55 m inland of Complex 2 consists of 15 features ar-
the shoreline, this multi-component feature rayed over an area of 0.4 hectare. MKI-2, the
is composed of a small (10.39 m2 ) square furthest inland, is a large multi-component
enclosure (Feature MKI-1A) attached to a feature with 10 components (Figure 6). A
larger U-shaped enclosure open to the west long rectangular terrace (22.75 m2 ) backed
(Feature MKI-1B). Several pieces of branch with a high stacked wall on the upslope side
coral (Pocillopora meandrina), an indicator (MKI-2A) was classified as a primary resi-
of ritual use, were noted in the enclosure dence; a dense concentration of shell midden
walls. A single elongated waterworn basalt and lithics extends downslope. Slightly far-
boulder is positioned on the southern wall; ther down the ridge two circular enclosures
such waterworn stones often functioned as (MKI-2B, MKI-2C) and a stone-paved terrace
symbols of the fishing god Kū‘ula (Malo (MKI-2D) are linked by a free-standing wall
1951:82–84). Surface midden around the (MKI-2E) which also encloses three mounds
structure consisted of marine shell, fish bone, (MKI-2F, MKI-2G, MKI-2H), and a low lying
and flaked stone. The branch coral and stone-faced terrace (MKI-2J). The enclosing

Figure 6. Plan of primary residential feature MKI-2. Two excavations were focused on the main
house structure, MKI-2A. A third excavation was placed in structure MKI-2C.
wall was probably added later, and may as māmane (Sophora chrysophylla), ‘ohe
date to the post-contact period. The mounds makai (cf. Reynoldsia sandwicensis), and
(some marked with coral) are most likely koa (Acacia koa), all endemic Hawaiian
post-contact burials. dryland forest trees, no longer found within
Two excavation units were opened in the leeward Kohala region.
the MKI-2A terrace exposing an irregular We interpret MKI-2 as a residential com-
stone pavement that extended to a depth plex with functionally and temporally differ-
of 35 cmbs. Charcoal fragments retrieved entiated features. MKI-2A was a primary resi-
from this pavement deposit were identified dential feature most likely built in pre-contact
64 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

times, but was used throughout the historic The limited cultural material included shell
period. MKI-2B and -2C are interpreted as midden, lithics, volcanic glass, and animal
cooking features due to their small sizes bones. Artifacts included a sea urchin spine
and charcoal-rich deposits. A single test unit file fragment, a coral file fragment, an awl, and
from MKI-2C contained abundant charcoal, a piece of cut mammal bone, all associated
dog remains, and fragments of metal. As with the pit. A fragment of candlenut shell
discussed in the following sections, the later (kukui) was also recovered and submitted
date suggests that MKI-2B, -2C, and -2D were for radiocarbon dating.
built after MKI-2A, and were ultimately joined Nearby, the feature MKI-17 consists of
together by the enclosing wall (MKI-2E) prob- a free-standing L-shaped stacked stone wall
ably during the post-contact era. The terrace that encloses a large area of flat, unpaved
subdividing the enclosure (MKI-2J) was prob- ground surface (200 m2 ). No artifacts or
ably constructed later than the free-standing midden were visible on the surface, but the
wall (MKI-2E). The four stone mounds, some feature appears to enclose a residential living
of which have waterworn coral and basalt surface. Nearby, feature MKI-18 consisted
cobbles on them, are probably burials. They of a stone-faced terrace with an attached C-
may well date to the mid-nineteenth century shaped stone structure. Although this feature
and probably mark the final activity on this was badly disturbed by kiawe tree root dam-
complex. age, it could have enclosed approximately 40
MKI-13 is a rectangular enclosure downs- m2 of interior space.
lope from MKI-2. The size of the structure
(17 m2 ), and also the presence of a 20 cm2
cupboard in the northwest corner indicates Complex 4 (Features MKI-23A, -23B, -24A,
that this was a primary residence. The struc- -24B, -19, -21, -22)
ture’s northern wall appears to have been
widened after initial construction, possibly Complex 4 consists of a group of primary
to incorporate burials, as suggested by two and secondary residential features atop a
depressions (ca. 50 cm in diameter) with ridge overlooking the southern side of Po-
waterworn coral and basalt cobbles in close hakuloa Gulch and Pohakuloa Bay. MKI-21
proximity. An excavation in the northwest is a 15 m2 lithic and midden scatter that lies
corner of MKI-13 exposed a silty-clay soil atop a knoll. Although no surface architecture
with numerous rock inclusions in a loosely is associated with the scatter, the dense
mixed matrix, suggesting that a fill was laid concentrations of flakes and a basalt awl
down to create a suitable living surface. indicate that the knoll was used as an activity
This excavation produced shell, sea urchin, area. Nearby, features MKI-19 and MKI-22
animal bone, lithics, and charcoal, but at are enclosures that are lightly paved with
lower density than in other features. These pebbles, midden, and coral. MKI-19 has an
deposits were not sampled for radiocarbon irregular shaped perimeter wall that encloses
dating. a floor space of 37 m2 . MKI-22 is rectangular
About 15 m seaward are MK-11 and in shape, and is paved with clinker lava (59
-12. MKI-12 is a square enclosure (25.44 m2 ). These features were not tested with
m2 ) with an entryway in the west wall, subsurface excavations.
and five stone-lined pit features. MKI-11A, Both MKI-23A and -24 are primarily
immediately north of MKI-12, is a rectangular rectangular features made of stacked cobbles
enclosure (24.99 m2 ) with an attached L- and boulders. MKI-23A has an interior area
shaped shelter (MKI-11B), open toward the of 30 m2 , post-contact sawn timber posts
sea (probably a later addition). The smaller set in the interior corners, and a range
size of these structures, and also the more lim- of late nineteenth-century Euro-American
ited amounts of midden, indicate that these artifacts scattered on the surface. MKI-23B
structures are probably secondary residential is a large enclosing wall that surrounds MKI-
features. An excavation unit in the enclosure 23A. Surface shell midden within MKI-23A
exposed the northern portion of a pit feature. and -23B included specimens of unusually

large size (e.g., Drupa sp. and Cellana sp. mounds atop natural boulder outcrops. Mid-
exceeding 10 cm in diameter), in contrast den was scattered across the surface of these
with the smaller size ranges typically seen features, indicating a range of subsistence
in marine mollusk assemblages from pre- and cooking activities at the features. To the
contact midden contexts. south, MKI-25G is a high (1.6 m), conical,
An excavation unit (TU 1) in the floor stone mound, probably a post-contact burial
of MKI-23A revealed milled wood slats lying (Figure 7).
atop a layer of water-rounded stone pebbles Excavations within MKI-25A and -25B
and coral (‘ili‘ili) containing metal nails and revealed a deposit containing marine mid-
metal fragments, shell, charcoal, and broken den and artifacts but no historic-era Euro-
coral. At 10–15 cmbs large cobbles were American items. While the deposits within
encountered, the foundation stones for the MKI-25A were thin, those in MKI-25B ex-
historic period floor. Below this (at 25 cmbs) tended to a depth of 37 cmbs, with a
was a fine, silty matrix of loose midden, high density of lithics including fire-cracked
devoid of historic artifacts and containing rock and volcanic glass, as well as charcoal,
charcoal, shell, sea urchin spines, fishbone pig bone and pig teeth, branch coral, and
and scales, candlenut endocarp, a fragment shell and sea urchin midden. A fragment of
of a coral abrader, and a piece of broken ‘ūlei wood charcoal was recovered from the
coral. This stratigraphic sequence thus re- deepest midden deposit in MKI-25B, and was
veals both pre-contact and post-contact occu- submitted for radiocarbon dating.
pation phases. A fragment of kukui nutshell
from this deepest pre-contact deposit was
submitted for radiocarbon dating. Complex 5e (Feature MKI-56)
MKI-24 consists of a large rectangular
enclosure (52.52 m2 ) and a paved terrace Complex 5e is the most northerly res-
(MKI-24B) on a promontory overlooking idential complex in Makiloa, consisting of
Pohakuloa Bay. The enclosure wall is unusual a large rectangular multi-component feature
in reaching a height of 1.75 m, which suggests (MKI-56) with three internal spaces and an
that the roof of the building may have also up-slope wall nearly 2 m thick (Figure 8).
been quite high. Two excavations units in On the south, this is joined to a small “space
the structure revealed a layer of ‘ili‘ili paving cell” which probably was the foundation for
just below the surface. Mixed in this deposit a separate thatched superstructure. On the
were shell, sea urchin, fishbone, lithics, and north is a separate terrace, its interior floor
one metal square-cut nail. Below this no well paved with waterworn pebbles (‘ili‘ili).
Euro-American artifacts were encountered, A large upright slab and pieces of branch
suggesting an earlier occupation that pre- coral suggest that this terrace functioned as
dates the construction of the high stone a shrine. Several large artifacts were found
walls. Due to the presence of Euro-American on the surface, including a fragmented Cha-
artifacts from the eighteenth century, these ronia sp. shell, waterworn stones, branch
deposits were not radiocarbon dated. coral, Porites sp. coral, basalt flakes, sea
urchin spine files, and a hammerstone. The
Complex 5a (Features MKI-25A, -25B, feature is in close proximity to a series of
-25C, -25D, -25E, -25F, -25G) retaining walls and platforms and commands
an excellent view of Kamilo Bay. The north-
Complex 5a lies northeast of Pohakuloa ern edge of this bay marks the boundary
Bay, and is a cluster of ridgeline features between Makiloa and Kālala ahupua‘a, and
including primary and secondary residences. immediately beyond it in Kālala is the large
The primary residence feature MKI-25A is KAL-1 heiau. In total, the interior space of
a rectangular enclosure (15.76 m2 ) with an MKI-56 is the largest in the study, at 84.8 m2 .
attached rectangular enclosure on the inland The size and complexity of MKI-56 and the
side (MKI-25B). To the northeast, MKI-25C, presence of midden and artifacts suggested
-D, -E, and -F are raised stone platforms and that this large feature was an elite primary
66 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Figure 7. Plan of primary residential feature MKI-25. Two excavations were placed in features
MKI-25A, B. A third was placed in the midden that stretched across the center of the
complex.
residence, either that of the konohiki (land extending to 47 cmbs. The uppermost 10
manager) or the ali‘i ‘ai ahupua‘a chief. cm of compact sediment included charcoal, a
Time constraints limited excavation at shell scraper, sea urchin spine files, volcanic
MKI-56 to a single 0.50 × 0.50 m test unit glass, lithics, coral abraders, bone fragments,
(TU 1) in the northeast corner of the central candlenut endocarp, a bone fishhook, and
enclosure, revealing a dense midden deposit volcanic glass. Below 10 cm the deposit

Figure 8. Plan of primary residential feature MKI-56. A single test unit was placed in the northeastern
corner of the central portion of the structure.
was loose and fine, possibly suggesting a harvested from the ocean and placed under
deposit that had accumulated in the corner the wall during construction.
of the structure. Cultural materials included
urchin spine files, coral abraders, coral files,
lithics, a basalt file, two bone fishhooks, Complex 7 (Features KAL-10A, -10B, -10C,
volcanic glass fragments, cut bone, pearl -10D)
shell, candlenut shell, branch coral, and a
cowry shell octopus lure. Two fragments of The southernmost ridgeline complex in
candlenut shell (kukui) were recovered from Kālala includes four enclosures (KAL-10A,
levels 2 (10 cmbs) and 6 (30 cmbs), and these -10C, -23A, -23B), a C-shaped feature (KAL-
were submitted for radiocarbon dating. 10B), and a natural outcrop of boulders
After reaching the natural subsurface, TU with a paved surface that may have been a
1 was expanded to expose the face of the shrine (KAL-10D). KAL-10A is interpreted as
main wall forming the rear of MKI-56. This a primary residence of Complex 7. It is a large
extended for three stacked courses below enclosure (72.8 m2 ) with a unique shape:
ground surface. A 10 cm piece of branch coral two rectangles joined at the corner. A linear
was recovered from the base of the lowest storage compartment, capped by a series of
stone course. This branch coral displayed flat lintel slabs, is evident on the enclosure’s
intact verrucae (and hence had not been northeastern external side. Two units exca-
abraded in the surf zone), indicating it was vated in the western end and center of the
68 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

enclosure revealed thin cultural deposits that the southeast interior corner. A test unit, TU
contained marine midden, volcanic glass, and 2, placed in front of the cupboard reached
bone fishhooks. a depth of 45 cmbs, and revealed a dense
KAL-10B, 15 m south of KAL-10A, is a C- midden deposit and yellow beach sand with
shaped secondary residence feature located lithics, historic glass, historic ceramic beads,
in the middle of a large midden scatter. A and metal down to a depth of 35 cmbs. Due to
single unit, TU 3, in the southern portion the presence of eighteenth- and nineteenth-
of the feature revealed a rich assemblage century Euro-American artifacts in KAL-23A
of tools and manufacturing debris, including and -23B, no charcoal was submitted for
pearl shell, cut bone, sea urchin spine files, radiocarbon dating.
and an adze fragment. A fragment of wood
charcoal recovered from the deepest portion Complex 9 (KAL-30A, -30B, -37)
of this deposit was submitted for radiocarbon
dating. Complex 9 consists of two primary res-
KAL-10C is a large rectangular enclosure idences, two of which (KAL-30A, KAL-37)
(68.75 m2 ) with an attached J-shaped feature are rectangular high-backed terraces with en-
on the south and a linear storage cupboard closing walls. A single secondary residential
capped with flat slabs on the southern feature (KAL-30B) lay within a few meters of
exterior. This feature is also large and has KAL-30A (Figure 9). KAL-30A was a moderate-
substantial surface midden, which suggests sized primary residence, with an interior floor
that it too was a primary residence. Three space of 20 m2 . Half of the interior floor
units were placed in KAL-10C: TU 4 contained space of this feature was excavated with
moderate amounts of midden to a depth of two adjacent ∼2 m2 units. The excavation
40 cm; TU 5 and 6 had denser midden and revealed a dense deposit of midden, adze
also several tools, including coral abraders, flakes, coral abraders, sea urchin spine files,
sea urchin spine files, fire-cracked rock, cut shell scrapers, bone fishhooks, and also two
bone, and pearl shell. slab-lined fire hearths at a depth of 15 cmbs.
KAL-10D incorporates a boulder outcrop Fragments of koa wood were identified from
and a layer of stone paving and artifacts. the southernmost fire hearth, and submitted
Some of these artifacts include branch coral for radiocarbon dating.
(Pocillopora sp.), water-rolled Porites coral, KAL-30B consisted of an enclosure with
water-rolled basalt pebbles, and shell mid- three interior space cells, a high-backed
den. This feature may have been a shrine, wall, and an open front terrace. Several
or possibly a burial. depressions in the upper portions of the
walls may have been post-holes for wooden
Complex 8 (KAL-23A, -23B) images. The presence of coral in the base of
these depressions suggests that this structure
Complex 8 lies along the same ridgeline served as a religious shrine (possibly a ko‘a)
as Complex 7, and consists of a primary for the adjacent main residence. The three
and a secondary residential feature. KAL-23A space cells and the terrace would have
is a moderate-sized (21.25 m2 ) enclosure. provided approximately 33 m2 of interior
Two test excavations in the floor of the living space. Half of the interior of the
feature revealed thin (15 cm) deposits, and northernmost space cell of KAL-30B was
a moderate amount of marine midden. Glass excavated, revealing an extremely dense but
and ceramic beads dating to the early contact fragmented midden deposit. The condition
period were also found in each unit. Nearby, of the midden suggests that this floor was
KAL-23B is a rectangular enclosure approx- repeatedly trampled. Sea urchin spine files,
imately 5 m long and 4 m wide, oriented coral abrader, a shell scraper, and bone
on the same axis as KAL-23A. Similarities fishhook were recovered from the deposits
in construction style and size suggest that of KAL-30B, and also a portion of a bronze
they are contemporaneous. A well-preserved coin inscribed with the words ‘TOTUM’
cupboard with a large slab lintel is located in and ‘BRASIL’. Numismatic catalogues identify

Figure 9. Plan of residential feature KAL-30. Two test excavations were placed in KAL-30A, and a
third excavation bisects the northern space cell in KAL-30B.
this coin as a colonial currency that was Although portions of the stone walls have
minted in Brazil between 1750 and 1777 been knocked down, it had a high-backed
(American Numismatic Society 2008). This wall which enclosed a flat, open terrace. The
coin had been cut, probably in order to feature would have had a living space of
utilize the bronze for a tool or ornament. In approximately 20 m2 .
addition to a relative age of post-1777 for this
deposit, a fragment of wood charcoal from
the candlenut (kukui) tree was extracted Complex 10 (KAL-2, -5, -6, -9)
from a depth of 15 cmbs and submitted for
radiocarbon dating. Complex 10 is the northernmost com-
KAL-37 was not investigated archaeolog- plex in the Kālala survey area, and it is defined
ically, as it has been disturbed considerably topographically by a steep-sided ridgeline
by modern camping and trash dumping. that marks the edge of the Pololu volcanic
70 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

substrate. The complex consists of three sec- that were investigated archaeologically, fol-
ondary residences (KAL-2, -6, -9) and a single lowed by a comparative analysis of their
primary residence (KAL-5). This residence cultural content.
has two large interior space cells and a long
L-shaped back wall that enclosed a partially Primary and Secondary Residence Size
paved terrace. The total interior living area for and Number
this feature totaled 40 m2 . Several Cypraea
spp. shells that had been perforated for A critical factor that we believe is in-
use as octopus lures were found on the dicative of the transition from domestic to
surface of the site, along with abundant flakes surplus production is the number and size
and cores of volcanic glass. A single 2.2 × of the primary residences, and the number
1.5 m2 excavation unit was placed in the and size of secondary residences that are
northernmost space cell, revealing a thin associated with the primary structure. We
layer of midden with abundant Cellana sp. hypothesize that under the DMP, households
shell scrapers and coral abraders to a depth would have been smaller in terms of number
of 35 cmbs. A fragment of corroded metal of residents, and required fewer and smaller
was recovered from 30 cmbs, suggesting structures for tool making, cooking, and
a late post-contact era occupation for this other activities. A single, small-sized central
residence. primary residence would have sufficed for
KAL-2 is located due north of KAL-5, and many of the activities related to household
consists of an oval-shaped enclosure with a economics, and fewer secondary residential
floor area of 18 m2 . This feature was likely features would be required. We hypothe-
used for a small residence, as evidenced by size that with the transition to a surplus-
the thick midden deposit on the outside generating mode of production households
and inside of the walls. This feature was would have increased in size, in turn ne-
not investigated archaeologically. Lastly, Fea- cessitating additional and frequently larger
tures KAL-6, and -9 consist of enclosures and structures. Primary residences would have
terraces that may have been used for small become larger, and associated secondary
shelters and cooking structures. Feature KAL- residences would have been more numerous.
9 is directly south of KAL-5 and consists of a 3 This hypothesis suggests that a classification
m wide C-shaped enclosure. Further down of complexes according to residence size and
the ridgeline, KAL-6 was composed of an number may be indicative of the transition
L-shaped wall and a small terrace (6 m2 ). from a DMP to supra-household surplus
Neither of these structures was investigated economy.
archaeologically. Our survey identified a wide range of
floor areas among the individual features in
the complexes, from 10 to 1350 m2 . When
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COMPLEX compared by complex, the median value for
ARCHITECTURE AND CULTURAL the individual feature floor areas ranged from
CONTENT 15.86 to 135.75 m2 , with standard deviations
between 2.86 and 124.8 m2 (Table 2). We
Residential complexes defined by our survey suggest that two groups are apparent in this
include the presence of both primary and distribution: complexes with median floor
secondary residential features. However, the areas of 40 m2 or less and relatively low
character and quantity of architecture and standard deviations, and those with median
deposits within each complex are diverse, values of 70 m2 or greater and relatively high
and we argue that this variability is informa- standard deviations. Complexes 2, 3, 4, 5a,
tive for understanding the transition from a 5b, 8, 9, and 10 fall under the latter category of
DMP to a more integrated political economy. smaller-sized residences. We infer that these
In the following discussion we compare the complexes are likely to represent smaller
size, configuration, and presumed function of households that were autonomous and did
architectural features within the complexes not produce a surplus. Along those same

Table 2. List of primary and secondary residential features and their total interior floor area
(m2 ). The median and standard deviation (SD) for the features in each complex is
listed in the final column.
Primary Secondary Median and SD

Complex Residential m2 Residential m2 for Complex
1 MKI-1A 10.39
MKI-148 140 Median = 75.19
MKI-144 10 SD = 91.64
2 MKI-2A 22.75
MKI-13 17
MKI-12 25.44
MKI-11 24.99
MKI-17 200 Median = 19.87
MKI-18 40 SD = 4.06
MKI-2D 7.87
MKI-2C 2.62
MKI-2B 6.2
3 MKI-107 50
MKI-111 12.5
MKI-108 12 Median = 31.20
MKI-110 12 SD = 26.51
MKI-109 12
MKI-106B 1350
4 MKI-23A 30
MKI-24 52.52
MKI-19 37 Median = 41.26
MKI-21 15 SD = 15.92
MKI-22 59
5a MKI-25A 15.76
MKI-25B 42
MKI-25C 21 Median = 28.88
MKI-25D 6 SD = 18.55
MKI-25E 5
MKI-25F 18
5b MKI-79 60
MKI-80 8 Median = 34
MKI-81 12 SD = 36.76
MKI-82 7.5
5c MKI-68 144 single feature
5d MKI-195 224
MKI-69 47.5
MKI-55C 75 Median = 135.75
72 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Table 2. List of primary and secondary residential features and their total interior floor area
(m2 ). The median and standard deviation (SD) for the features in each complex is
listed in the final column. (Continued)
Primary Secondary Median and SD

Complex Residential m2 Residential m2 for Complex
MKI-55B 20 SD = 124.80
MKI-54 25
5e MKI-56 84.8 single feature
6 KAL-26 189
KAL-21 50 Median = 119.50
KAL-25 9 SD = 98.28
7 KAL-10A 72.8
KAL-10C 68.75 Median = 70.77
KAL-10B 6.5 SD = 2.86
KAL-10D 8
8 KAL-23A 21.25 Median = 15.62
KAL-23B 10 SD = 7.95
9 KAL-30A 20
KAL-37 20 Median = 20
KAL-30B 33 SD = 7.50
10 KAL-5 40
KAL-2 18 Median = 29
KAL-6 6 SD = 15.55
KAL-9 3
lines, the complexes with larger residences Comparative Analysis of Cultural Content
(Complex 1, 7, 5c, 5d, 5e, and 6) were
likely involved in surplus production. We Interpreting the Makiloa and Kālala resi-
tested this hypothesis through our analysis of dential complexes also depends on evidence
material culture and subsistence activities, as derived from cultural content. All excavated
described below. In several cases the quantity features yielded charcoal, invertebrate and
and kind of cultural items recovered from vertebrate faunal materials, and artifacts rang-
the residences contradicts the hypothesis of ing from lithics to rarer categories such as
surplus production for the complexes that abrading tools and fishhooks. Both richness
contained larger residences. It is important of cultural content (numbers of different
to note that some of the complexes may faunal and artifact classes represented) and
have spanned the transition from a largely density of cultural materials varied signifi-
DMP to a surplus economy, and thus the cantly between features, offering important
area of the residences visible through surface evidence for feature function and household
survey may not be indicative of the earlier activities. In Table 3 we summarize some
histories of each household. The comparative key indices of invertebrate and vertebrate
analysis of cultural content and also the suite fauna, along with several artifact categories.
of radiocarbon dates obtained for several Because excavation areas and volumes dif-
of the residences in the sample provide a fered between features, we calculated the
more rigorous analysis of the economics of total volume of cultural deposit excavated at
households on the Kohala coast. each feature, and standardized the reported

74
Table 3. Normalized values (0.1 m3 ) for artifacts recovered from the Makiloa and Kālala excavations, 2007–2008. Artifacts from
individual test excavations are aggregated by feature.
Complex 1 Complex 2 Complex 4 Complex 5a Complex 5e Complex 7 Complex 8 Complex 9 Complex 10
Categories MKI-1A MKI-2A MKI-2C MKI-11 MKI-23A MKI-24 MKI-25A, B MKI-56 KAL-10A KAL-10B KAL-10C KAL-23A, B KAL-30 KAL-5
Area (m2 ) 0.6 1 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.75 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.75 0.75 8.9 3.3
Depth of deposits (m) 0.35 0.29 0.33 0.35 0.35 0.5 0.65 0.47 0.45 0.15 0.8 0.67 0.75 0.34
Cubic volume (m3 ) 0.21 0.29 0.0825 0.0875 0.087 0.25 0.4875 0.1175 0.225 0.0375 0.6 0.5025 6.675 1.122
Total shell midden 1341 2298 858 362 329 328 1896 1510 1988 1464 1290 2346 not col- 713
weight (g) lected
Total bone NISP 1635 825 560 190 1699 158 1074 4050 2920 3003 5412 3519 902 274
Pig/dog/medium 22 24 14 73 3 4 81 55 36 48 309 90 4 8
mammal NISP
Fish bone NISP 1598 800 546 117 1690 156 993 3905 2774 2936 5082 3414 798 265
Total adze flakes 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0
Total lithics 109 147 9 17 14 82 312 149 80 165 894 87 2 4
Total fishhooks 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 3 4 5 0 0 1 1
(whole, frag., tab)
Total coral abrader 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 30 2 5 12 0 1 1
Total sea urchin files 8 6 4 1 0 0 0 13 0 27 3 0 2 1
Total scrapers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 1 1
Total historic artifacts 0 1 192 0 569 2 0 0 2 0 0 36 1 1
Figure 10. Photographs of selected artifacts from the 2007–2008 Makiloa and Kālala excavations.
A: imported Euroamerican clay trade beads, ca. 1850s; B: sea urchin (Heterocentrotus
mammillatus) spine files; C: coral abraders; D: shell scraper (Cellana sp.); E: polished adze
fragment; F: fishhook portions and fragments.
values for all recovered materials in terms primary residences of Complex 2 and 5a.
of standardized counts or weights per 0.1 These are interesting findings, as the size of
m3 . This allows for direct comparisons be- the residences varies considerably between
tween features despite differences in sample these complexes (15–22 m2 for the resi-
sizes. dences of Complexes 2, 5a, and 8, and 72
The Makiloa and Kālala residential fea- m2 for Complex 7). However, as we cannot
ture deposits are dominated by marine mid- discern whether these differences are due to
den, but also yielded a suite of tools that are length of occupation, foraging intensity, or
typical for coastal features in Hawai‘i. The resource abundance, we cannot attribute any
most commonly found remains across all fea- significance to these differences that pertain
tures were fish bones, marine mollusk shells, to a DMP or to surplus production. However,
and sea urchin spines and tests, followed by as it is more likely that residences that were
small amounts of medium mammal (pig and occupied for the longest duration would have
dog). Adze fragments or flakes were relatively the densest and heaviest deposits, we argue
rare, but tools such as urchin spine files, that residential features that have relatively
abraders, cut bone, and fishhooks occurred short chronologies and large amounts of
in several contexts (Figure 10). marine midden may indicate instances of
The primary residences of Complexes surplus production.
7 and 8 produced the highest quantity of The normalized total bone NISP count
shell midden by weight, followed by the indicates abundant animal remains at

Complexes 5e, 7, and 8. When broken down mammillatus) were the most common (see
by taxa, Complex 7, 8, and 5e have the Sinoto 1967 for descriptions of these com-
greatest amount of fish as well as pig, dog, mon Hawaiian artifact classes), suggesting
and medium mammal bone (the “medium a focus on fishing for these households. In
mammal” class is probably almost exclusively the case of 5e, the manufacture of fishhooks
pig and dog bone as well). This abundance of was likely done by specialists residing in the
animal remains reflects a greater production household of the chief or konohiki. A total
and collection of protein by households that of 21 whole fishhooks and fishhook parts
we believe post-date the transition to a sur- were recovered in the excavations, and nor-
plus mode of production. In the case of 5e the malizing their counts by excavated volume
greater amounts fish and domestic animals indicates that Complexes 5e and 7 produced
likely reflects the higher consumption of the most, followed by Complex 2. Complexes
meat and richer food stuffs by elites, a pattern 1, 9, and 10 produced one fishhook each. We
similarly noted by Kirch and O’Day (2002) for suggest that the abundance of fishhooks at
high-status residential features in Kahikinui, Complexes 5e and 7 are indicative of surplus
Maui. When compared to residence size, production. In the case of Complex 5e and 7,
the higher proportion of fish and medium this corresponds well with the increased size
mammal bone corresponds well to larger- of these households. The fishhooks include
sized households; in this case, Complexes 5e, both one- and two-piece forms, as well as
7, and 8 had interior floor spaces that ranged two points that are probably from octopus
from a total of 31 to 156 m2 . hook rigs (Emory et al. 1959:28–29). With the
Artifact content reveals other trends exception of a single one-piece shank of pearl
pertaining to fishing, food processing, and shell, all of the hooks are of mammal bone.
tool making. No whole basalt adzes were No trolling lures or points were recovered.
recovered during the 2007–2008 seasons, All of the fishing gear is consistent with
but adze fragments were recovered from inshore angling, either from the rocky coast
Complex 1, 2, 7, and 9. These fragments pre- or in the shallow benthic zone immediately
sumably derived from use on site, although offshore.
adze chips were sometimes later reused as Imported Euro-American and Asian ar-
cutting tools. All of these adze fragments tifacts were also recovered from some fea-
are made from dense, fine-grained basalt not tures, serving as a temporal marker for post-
locally available in Makiloa or Kālala. The contact habitation. Complexes 2, 4, and 8 had
presence of adzes at these features suggests the most Euro-American artifacts, including
woodworking activities (such as carving milled wood, metal nails, fragments of glass
canoes, bowls, or working other wooden bottles, trade beads, and a percussion cap
implements), while the presence of non-local from a muzzle-loading firearm. The age of
basalt implies an interaction network with these items suggests occupation during the
regions where basalt quarries were located. mid to late 1800s. The absence of Euro-
Other lithic artifacts such as flakes, cores, American artifacts at other features implies
and volcanic glass were most abundant at that these residences were abandoned prior
Complexes 5a and 7, and were found in high to the late 1800s. This likely represents a
numbers in Complexes 1, 2, and 5e. Adze rapid depopulation of Makiloa and Kālala
fragments and lithics were recovered from soon after contact with the West, a pattern
residences of all sizes, and do not indicate any well documented from early historic records
visible trends towards increased production (Bushnell 1993; Schmidt 1968).
of canoes or other work wood items.
Tools related to the manufacture of
fishhooks and fishing equipment were found RADIOCARBON DATING AND FEATURE
at all of the excavated features, but were most CHRONOLOGY
common at Complex 2, 5e, and 7. Abraders
made from coral, followed by the spines of Our third approach to analysis of the residen-
the slate pencil sea urchin (Heterocentrotus tial features of Makiloa and Kālala focused
76 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Table 4. Radiocarbon dates from Makiloa-Kālala features.
Conventional Calibrated Age Calibrated Age

13
Measured C/12 C Radiocarbon Range BP (1 σ Range BP (2 σ
Lab No. Location Material Radiocarbon Age Ratio Age probabilities)∗ probabilities)∗
Beta-256577 KAL-1 beneath north Aheahea wood 420 ± 40 −26.5 400 ± 40 1442–1512 (57.4%) 1432–1526 (66.6%)
wall 15 cmbs 1600–1616 (10.8%) 1556–1633 (28.8%)
Beta-243703 MKI-2A TU 1 15 cmbs Mamane wood 360 ± 40 −26.4 340 ± 40 1485–1528 (23.2%) 1462–1642 (95.4%)
1551–1634 (45%)
Beta-243704 MKI-25 TU 3 35 cmbs ‘Ūlei wood 230 ± 40 −24.1 240 ± 40 1529–1540 (3.8%) 1520–1593 (14.5%)
1634–1678 (35.9%) 1619–1685 (40.1%)
1766–1800 (21.4%) 1732–1808 (31.3%)
1940–1953 (7.1%) 1928–1955 (9.5%)
Beta-256572 KAL-30A TU 1B Koa wood 190 ± 40 −21.8 240 ± 40 1529–1540 (3.8%) 1520–1593 (14.5%)
Feature 1 15 cmbs 1634–1678 (35.9%) 1619–1685 (40.1%)
1766–1800 (21.4%) 1732–1808 (31.3%)
1940–1953 (7.1%) 1928–1955 (9.55)
Beta-240446 MKI-1A, Hearth feature Kukui nutshell 180 ± 40 −21.9 230 ± 40 1641–1680 (32.3%) 1521–1575 (7.4%)
20 cmbs 1764–1801 (26.7%) 1584–1590 (.4%)
1939–1953 (9.2%) 1626–1692 (36.9%)
1728–1811 (38.3%)
1921–1955 (12.4%)
Beta-240674 MKI-2C Cookhouse Kukui nutshell 190 ± 40 −23.1 220 ± 40 1645–1680 (28.6%) 1515–1558 (3.1%)
hearth feature 15 1764–1801 (29.2%) 1631–1695 (33.1%)
cmbs 1939–1953 (10.4%) 1726–1814 (43.6%)
1839–1842 (.2%)
1853–1867 (.6%)
1918–1955 (14.9%)
(Continued on next page)
77
78
Table 4. Radiocarbon dates from Makiloa-Kālala features. (Continued)
Conventional Calibrated Age Calibrated Age

13
Measured C/12 C Radiocarbon Range BP (1 σ Range BP (2 σ
Lab No. Location Material Radiocarbon Age Ratio Age probabilities)∗ probabilities)∗
Beta-256595 KAL-30B TU2 Feature 1 Kukui wood 220 ± 40 −12.6 220 ± 40 1645–1680 (28.6%) 1515–1558 (3.1%)
15 cmbs 1764–1801 (29.2%) 1631–1695 (33.1%)
1939–1953 (10.4%) 1726–1814 (43.6%)
1839–1842 (.2%)
1853–1867 (.6%)
1918–1955 (14.9%)
Beta-240448 MKI-56 TU 1 Level 6 30 Kukui nutshell 180 ± 40 −24.3 190 ± 40 1662–1683 (13.4%) 1644–1706 (22.4%)
cmbs 1735–1805 (41.7%) 1721–1819 (48.3%)
1930–1952 (13.1%) 1832–1880 (6.9%)
1915–1955 (17.8%)
Beta-240447 MKI-23A TU 1 35 cmbs Kukui nutshell 160 ± 40 −23.7 180 ± 40 1664–1685 (12.1%) 1648–1706 (20.4%)
1732–1808 (42.5%) 1720–1820 (47.6%)
1928–1952 (13.6%) 1832–1883 (9.6%)
1914–1954 (17.8%)
Beta-240675 MKI-11A TU 1 35 cmbs Kukui nutshell 150 ± 40 −24.9 150 ± 40 1669–1697 (11.6%) 1665–1785 (46.0%)
1726–1780 (24.4%) 1795–1893 (32.6%)
1798–1814 (7.0%) 1906–1952 (16.9%)
1836–1845 (3.4%)
1851–1877 (9.7%)
1917–1945 (12.1%)
Beta-240449 MKI-56 TU 1 Level 2 10 Kukui nutshell 100.2 ± 0.5 pMC −21.2 40 ± 40 1699–1722 (17.9%) 1690–1730 (23.5%)
cmbs 1817–1834 (12.2%) 1810–1925 (71.9%)
1879–1916 (38.1%)
Beta-243702 KAL-10B TU 3 15 cmbs Puakiawe wood 141.4 ± 0.5 pMC −21.2 140.3 ± .5 Pmc Post–0 BP (within the Post–0 BP (within the last
last 50 years) 50 years)
∗
Calibrations performed with OxCal 4.1 (Bronk Ramsey 2001) using the IntCal04 atmospheric curve (Reimer et al. 2004).
Figure 11. Calibrated radiocarbon dates from the 2007–2008 excavations in Leeward Kohala.
Calibrations performed with OxCal 4.1 using the IntCal04 atmospheric curve (Bronk
Ramsey 2001; Reimer et al. 2004).
on the absolute age of the features. The houses (igniting the oily kernels) and as a
utility of 14 C age determinations in Hawai‘i is relish. The other samples were fragments
hampered by the relatively short chronology of wood charcoal from māmane (Sophora
for human occupation, and the ‘flatness’ of chrysophylla), ‘ūlei (Osteomeles anthyllidi-
the IntCal 04 radiocarbon calibration curve folia), ‘āheahea (Chenopodium ohauense)
for the last three centuries. We focused on pūakiawe (Styphelia tameiameiae) koa
retrieving samples for dating from activity (Acacia koa), and kukui (Aleurites moluc-
areas or combustion features, as these were cana). Excepting koa and kukui, all of these
most likely to reflect the use of the features samples are from shrubs or small trees that
as residences. Twelve samples of carbonized would have been native to the Kohala coast.
plant material were selected for radiocarbon Our selection of these samples was based
dating. Samples were identified by M. Jeraj on the fact that these shrubs are shorter-
(U. Wisconsin) using Hawaiian botanical lived than larger trees, but this does not
reference materials. Most samples consist preclude the possibility that the wood from
of candlenut (kukui, Aleurites moluccana) these shrubs could have preserved in the dry
endocarp, which was chosen to avoid the environment of leeward Kohala for several
problem of in-built age associated with long- decades. Although we feel that it is unlikely
lived wood taxa. Candlenuts were used by that these shrubs persisted as dead wood
Hawaiians both as a source of light within for more than a few decades, we cannot

exclude the possibility that they may have is still significant overlap between the Beta-
been preserved for much longer. The samples 243703 and Beta-240674 dates. However, the
were dated by accelerator mass spectrometry breakdown of 2σ probabilities suggests that
(AMS) through Beta Analytic, Inc. Results are this feature dates to sometime after AD 1630.
presented in Table 4, and an OxCal plot of The most recent group consists of sam-
probability distributions for these dates at 2σ ples from Complex 2, 4, 5e, and 7. Beta-
is provided in Figure 11. 240448 and 240449 consisted of kukui nut-
The oldest sample from a residence shell from the single excavation of Complex
consists of māmane wood charcoal which 5e (the elite residence MKI-56, from levels
was extracted from the floor paving of feature 2 and 6, 20 cm apart in depth). Beta-240448
MKI-2A, in Complex 2. This sample (Beta- has a highest probability intercept of cal AD
243703), produced the calibrated date of AD 1721–1819 while Beta-240449 has a highest
1462–1642 at 2σ , indicating that this was the probability intercept from cal AD 1810–1925,
earliest residence in our excavated sample to and lesser probability intercept from cal AD
be established within coastal Makiloa. This is 1690–1730. However, the absence of post-
also a feature that we have identified based contact materials in this feature allows us to
upon its architecture and associated surface reject a post-contact date, and together the
midden to be a primary residential feature. two dates suggest occupation of this feature
As described above, it is small in size but in the eighteenth century. Beta-240447, the
associated with other secondary residential sample from Complex 4 (MKI-23A), was
features. Overlapping in age with MKI-2A is a obtained from a midden deposit that lay di-
sample of ‘āheahea wood charcoal obtained rectly below a layer of milled-Euro-American
from a test excavation positioned against the wooden slats, and has a highest probability
north wall of the large heiau feature KAL-1. intercept range of cal AD 1720–1820. These
The charcoal was obtained from underneath deposits, in tandem with the large amounts
the structure’s wall, and yielded two inter- of other Euro-American artifacts at the resi-
cept age ranges of cal AD 1432–1526 and dence, suggest an age of post–AD 1778.
1556–1633 (Beta-256577). Since the charcoal Similarly young ages are also suggested
was obtained from beneath the wall, this for the deposits within the secondary resi-
provides a terminus ante quem for the date dences of Complex 2 (MKI-11A) and Com-
of wall construction. plex 7. Beta-240675 consisted of a sample
The next five samples are statis- of kukui nutshell, which was recovered
tically indistinguishable. Samples Beta- from a hearth deposit in the floor of the
243704, 256572, 240446, 240674, and MKI-11A residence. The highest probability
256595 all have multiple calibration inter- intercept range for this sample is cal AD
cepts, with the highest probability intercepts 1665–1785. Sample Beta-243702 consisted of
falling in the mid-seventeenth to late eigh- pūakiawe wood sampled from the deposit of
teenth centuries. They consist of ‘ūlei wood, midden, tools, and lithic debris in KAL-10B of
charcoal kukui wood, koa wood, and kukui Complex 7. This resulted in a ‘post-bomb’
nutshell, and were obtained from a hearth age, suggesting that the sample may have
rake-out in the primary residence of Complex derived from a relatively recent brush fire
5a (MKI-25, TU 3), the hearth feature in that had intruded into the shallow cultural
Complex 1 (MKI-1A), the cookhouse hearth deposit.
feature in Complex 2 (MKI-2C), and the In addition to 14 C dating, we are also
hearth and feature deposits in KAL-30A and using U-series dating of branch coral obtained
-30B. As before, the absence of post–AD 1880 from cultural contexts to establish a chrono-
material suggests that these features were logical framework for our features, following
abandoned by the early nineteenth century. methods reported by Kirch and Sharp (2005).
In the case of Complex 2, the potentially later A branch coral offering from the heiau site
date for the cookhouse lends some support KAL-1 yielded a 230 Th age of AD 1600 ± 12
to the hypothesis that this complex had a (2σ ). Together with the radiocarbon date
lengthy period of occupation, although there from under the heiau wall (Beta-256577),
80 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

this indicates a likely construction date for argue that these complexes were produced
the temple around AD 1600. A second 230 Th by households operating largely in a domestic
age of AD 1623 ± 5 (2σ ) was obtained from mode of production.
a piece of branch coral directly under the Based upon our survey data and 14 C dates
foundation wall of feature MKI-56, the elite from Makiloa and Kālala, we argue that the
residence situated on the opposite side of transition from a DMP to a surplus-generating
Kamilo Gulch from the KAL-1 heiau. This economy occurred after about AD 1650. It
suggests initial construction of this residence was during this period that many new pri-
early in the seventeenth century, while the mary residences were established, and mul-
two radiocarbon dates from the occupation tiple secondary residences were established
deposit at MKI-56 indicate continued occu- within pre-existing complexes. The primary
pation of the feature into the eighteenth residences were now generally larger in size,
century, a reasonable interpretation given and their component structures exhibit a
the depth of the cultural deposit in this wider range of architectural forms, including
feature. Additional U-series dates currently in interior divisions, attached enclosures, and
process will be reported in a later publication. adjacent shrines. Marine midden densities
at primary residences also increase during

this period, as do the amounts of pig, dog,
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS and large fish bones. Prime examples are
Complexes 5e, 7, and 8, which consist of
The survey and excavation of residential sequences of large residences with a variety
complexes within the ahupua‘a of Makiloa of associated components. Based upon our
and Kālala reveal the changing dynamics survey and excavation data, we suggest that
of population size, resource extraction, and Complexes 3, 4, and 10 were established
social hierarchy during the late pre-contact during or after the transition to a surplus
period (ca. AD 1460–1880). We have identi- economy, resulting in a total population
fied 14 residential complexes in this sector of 12–15 households on the Makiloa-Kālala
of the Kohala coastline, and have determined coastline at the time of initial European
the age of 10 of the primary and secondary contact. This represents a roughly three-fold
residential features based on 14 C and U-series increase in households from the earliest set-
dates and associated post-contact artifacts. tlement period, with perhaps a simultaneous
These results indicate that the area was doubling or tripling of the population along
first occupied between AD 1460 and 1640, the coast.
initially by only a single household (MKI-2A) These transformations match our expec-
at Complex 2. Although the error ranges tations for the transition from a DMP in which
associated with our 14 C determinations do households acted as largely autonomous
not allow us to trace with great precision economic units, to a regionally integrated
the chronological establishment of additional political economy. While it is likely that
households during the following centuries, the increase in numbers of archaeological
it seems likely that Complexes 1, 5a, and features during this period was in part a re-
9 were established as a product of popu- flection of population growth (Kirch 2007b),
lation growth between AD 1520 and 1680. the morphology and size of primary and
During this period these new households secondary residences is also indicative of
were established near bays that afforded changing patterns of residence. We attribute
canoe access. Preexisting households, such this change to the transformation of Hawaiian
as Complex 2, were expanded and new households, and an emphasis on surplus
secondary residences were constructed in production of food and material goods, along
the immediate area of the primary residence. with increased specialization and probably
Based upon the close proximity of these also the gender differentiation in activities
structures, the small size of the primary described from the contact period. Fishing
residences, and the moderate amounts of and the exploitation of marine resources
marine midden and pig and dog bone, we was common to all of the households along

this leeward coast, but NISP counts of fau- and structures with attached semi-circular
nal remains demonstrate an increase in the enclosures.
collection of fish at complexes that date to The 14 C and U-series dates from the
the late phase (post–AD 1650). Dog and pig MKI-56 elite residence and from the KAL-
appear to have been consumed rarely by the 1 heiau, which straddle the important
earlier households, but increase in frequency ahupua‘a boundary between Makiloa and
in the late period. Kālala, indicate that the temple was probably
A final issue is whether the households constructed around AD 1600, while the
that occupied the coastal residential features residence site was constructed a few decades
in Makiloa-Kālala were strictly specialized later in the early to mid seventeenth century.
in marine exploitation, exchanging marine These key dates thus allow us to propose
products with farming households which with some confidence that the fissioning
resided permanently in the upland field of an originally much larger territorial unit
system; or, whether these coastal features occurred at the beginning of the seventeenth
represent only the marine-focused parts of century.
households that integrated both farming In sum, the results of our survey and
and marine exploitation into their domestic excavation of residential features in Makiloa-
economies. These two opposed models have Kālala have begun to offer several lines
been debated for many years in Hawai- of evidence that we expect will allow us
ian archaeology (e.g., Tuggle and Griffin to begin to parameterize the key variables
1973). Our 2007–2008 coastal feature ex- defined graphically in Figure 1. The results
cavations do not as yet support either of summarized here are only the first in a
these two models exclusively. Excavations in projected three seasons of fieldwork. Our
upland residential complexes, to be under- future plans include expanding work to two
taken as a part of our continuing research, sample ahupua‘a in the central core of
may yield evidence to help resolve this the Kohala region, as well as to residential
debate. features situated within the upland field
Our data also imply a differentiation system. Our eventual goal is to trace how
between commoner and elite households changes in the domestic mode of production
sometime after ca. AD 1650. The single elite in late pre-contact Hawai‘i may yield further
household in the sample, MKI-56 (Complex insights into the transformation of this most
5e), lies at the boundary between Makiloa and hierarchical and stratified of all Polynesian
Kālala, directly opposite the KAL-1 heiau, societies.
and Kamilo Bay, and based on the dated
coral sample from under the wall foundation
was first constructed sometime after AD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
1623. As described above, the position of an
elite residence at this important ahupua‘a The 2007–2008 survey and excavations
boundary line, as well as the abundance in Makiloa-Kālala were funded by Na-
of artifacts, marine midden, and domestic tional Science Foundation Human Social
animal fauna suggests that this particular Dynamics program grant BCS-0624238.
household participated in the collection of Additional financial support was provided
tribute from Makiloa and Kālala ahupua‘a. by the Class of 1954 Fund of the University
This residential complex also exhibits unusu- of California, Berkeley and the University of
ally elaborated architecture for the Makiloa Auckland. We thank the State of Hawai‘i De-
and Kālala survey sample, as it includes mul- partment of Land and Natural Resources,
tiple internal divisions within a single large and the State Historic Preservation Office
structure, an attached shrine with branch for permission to carry out archaeological
coral, and a possible canoe shed. Other research on State lands. Students from the
residential complexes in Kālala and Makiloa University of Auckland and the Univer-
are smaller and simpler, more often com- sity of Hawai‘i HARP field school project
posed of single-room structures, C-shapes, assisted with the survey and excavations,
82 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

and students from The Ohio State Univer- Childe, V. G. 1951. Social Evolution. London:
sity assisted with the laboratory analyses. Watts and Co.
Robin Connors assisted throughout the Chinen, J. J. 1958. The Great Mahele: Hawai‘i’s
excavations. Warren Sharp of the Berkeley Land Division of 1848. Honolulu: University of
Geochronology Center carried out the U- Hawai‘i Press.
Ciolek-Torello, R. S. 1989. Household, floor assem-
series dating of coral samples. We also wish blages, and the “Pompeii Premise” at Grasshop-
to thank Michael Graves and Mark McCoy per Pueblo. In Households and Communities:
of the HARP project. Proceedings of the Twenty-first Annual Con-
ference of the Archaeological Association of
the University of Calgary. (S. MacEachern, D.
END NOTE Archer, and R. Garvin, eds.):201–208. Calgary:
The University of Calgary.
1. Throughout this paper we use the term ‘feature’ Cordy, R. 1981. A Study of Prehistoric Social
rather than the term ‘site’. This is in contrast to Change: The Development of Complex Soci-
many conventional approaches in archaeology eties in the Hawaiian Islands. New York:
where ‘sites’ contain ‘features’. Our use of the Academic Press.
term ‘feature’ is an intentional rejection of Cordy, R., M. Kaschko. 1980. Prehistoric ar-
this conventional site-based approach (sensu chaeology in the Hawaiian Islands: Land units
Dunnell and Dancey 1983; Kirch 1985; Weisler associated with social groups. Journal of Field
and Kirch 1985). Recording the archaeological Archaeology 7:403–416.
record at the feature scale allows for greater pre- Dunnell, R. C. and W. S. Dancey. 1983. The siteless
cision, and it removes the problems associated survey: A regional scale data collection strategy.
with over-applying a functional classification In Advances in Archaeological Method and
to spatially contiguous or adjacent features. Theory (M. B. Schiffer, ed.): (6):267–287. New
This is particularly useful for the Hawaiian York: Academic Press.
archaeological record, in which many features Earle, T. 1997. How Chiefs Come to Power:
(such as the kauhale residential system) had The Political Economy in Prehistory. Stanford:
specific functions, but were often in close Stanford University Press.
spatial proximity to one another. Emory, K. P., W. J. Bonk, and Y. H. Sinoto.
1959. Hawaiian Archaeology: Fishhooks. B.
P. Bishop Museum Special Publication No. 47.
REFERENCES Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.
Flannery, K. V. (ed.). 1976. The Early Mesoamer-
American Numismatic Society. 2008. Web site, ican Village. New York: Academic Press.
http://numismatics.org/collection/1940.88.650 Fox, J. J. (ed.).1993. Inside Austronesian Houses:
(accessed April 2009). Perspectives on Domestic Designs for Living.
Ashmore, W. and R. Wilk. 1988. House and Canberra: Australian National University.
household in the Mesoamerican past: An In- Graves, M. W., B. V. O’Connor, and T. N. Lade-
troduction. In Household and Community in foged. 2002. Tracking changes in community-
the Mesoamerican Past (W. Ashmore and R. scaled organization in Kohala and Kona, Hawai‘i
Wilk, eds.):1–27. Albuquerque: University of Island. In Pacific Landscapes: Archaeological
New Mexico Press. Approaches (T. N. Ladefoged and M. W. Graves,
Barton, C. M., J. Bernabeu, J. E. Aura, O. Gar- eds.):231–254. Los Osos: Easter Island Founda-
cia, S. Schmich, and L. Molina. 2004. Long- tion Press.
term socioecology and contingent landscapes. Handy, E. S. C. and M. K. Pukui. 1958. The
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory Polynesian Family System in Ka‘u, Hawai‘i.
11:253–295. Wellington: The Polynesian Society.
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2001. Development of the Hartshorn, A. S., P. V. Kirch, O. A. Chadwick, and
radiocarbon calibration program OxCal. Radio- P. M. Vitousek. 2006. Prehistoric agricultural
carbon 43(2A):355–363. depletion of soil nutrients in Hawai‘i. Proceed-
Bushnell, O. A. 1993. The Gifts of Civilization: ings of the National Academy of Sciences
Germs and Genocide in Hawai‘i. Honolulu: 103:11092–11097.
University of Hawai‘i Press. Johnson, A. W., T. Earle. 1987. The Evolution of
Chayanov, A. V. 1966. The Theory of Peasant Human Societies: From Foraging Groups to
Economy. Homewood, IL: American Economic Agrarian State. Stanford: Stanford University
Association. Press.

Kahn, J. G. and P. V. Kirch. 2004. Ethnographie in precontact Hawai‘i. Science 307:102–104.

préhistorique d’une “société a maisons” dans Kolb, M. J. and J. E. Snead. 1997. It’s a small world
la vallée de ‘Opunohu (Mo‘orea, ı̂les de la after all: Comparative analyses of community or-
Société). Journal de la Société des Océanistes ganization in Archaeology. American Antiquity
119:229–256. 62:609–628.
Kirch, P. V. 1984. The Evolution of Polynesian Ladefoged, T. N. 1991. Hawaiian architectural
Chiefdoms. Cambridge: Cambridge University transformations during the early historic era.
Press. Asian Perspectives 30(1):57–69.
Kirch, P. V. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: Ladefoged, T. N. 1993. Evolutionary Process in
An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology an Oceanic Chiefdom: Intergroup Aggression
and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i and Political Integration in Traditional Ro-
Press. tuman Society. Doctoral Dissertation, Depart-
Kirch, P. V. 2006. From Chiefdom to Archaic ment of Anthropology, University of Hawai‘i,
State: Sociopolitical Evolution in Hawai‘i. Honolulu. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.
Schalitt Memorial Lecture. Provo: Brigham Ladefoged, T. N. 1995. The evolutionary ecol-
Young University. ogy of Rotuman political integration. Jour-
Kirch, P. V. 2007a. Hawai‘i as a model system nal of Anthropological Archaeology 14:341–
for human ecodynamics. American Anthropol- 358.
ogist 109:8–26. Ladefoged, T. N. and M. W. Graves. 2000. Evolu-

Kirch, P. V. 2007b. “Like shoals of fish”: Archae- tionary theory and the historical development
ology and population in pre-contact Hawai‘i. of dry land agriculture in North Kohala, Hawai‘i.
In The Growth and Collapse of Pacific Is- American Antiquity 65:423–448.
land Societies: Archaeological and Demo- Ladefoged T. N. and M. W. Graves. 2006. The for-
graphic Perspectives (P. V. Kirch and J.-L. Rallu, mation of Hawaiian territories. In Archaeology
eds.):52–69. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i of Oceania (I. Lilly, ed.):259–283, New York:
Press. Blackwell Press.
Kirch, P. V. 2007c. Paleodemography in Kahik- Ladefoged, T. N., M. W. Graves. 2008. Variable
inui, Maui: An archaeological approach. In development of dryland agriculture in Hawai‘i:
The Growth and Collapse of Pacific Island A fine-grained chronology from the Kohala Field
Societies: Archaeological and Demographic System, Hawai‘i Island. Current Anthropology
Perspectives (P. V. Kirch and J.-L. Rallu, 49:771–802.
eds.):90–107. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Ladefoged, T. N., M. W. Graves, and R. P. Jennings.
Press. 1996. Dryland agricultural expansion and inten-
Kirch, P. V., O. Chadwick, S. Tuljapurkar, T. Lade- sification in Kohala, Hawai‘i Island. Antiquity
foged, M. Graves, S. Hotchkiss, and P. Vitousek. 70:861–880.
2007. Human ecodynamics in the Hawaiian Ladefoged, T. N., C. Lee, and M. W. Graves.
ecosystem, 1200–200 BP. In The Model-Based 2008. Modeling life expectancy and surplus
Archaeology of Socionatural Systems (T. A. production of dynamic pre-contact territories
Kohler and S. E. van der Leeuw, eds.):121–139. in Leeward Kohala, Hawai‘i. Journal of Anthro-
Oxford: Oxford University Press (for Santa Fe pological Archaeology 27:93–110.
Institute). Lévi-Strauss, C. 1979. Nobles Suavages. In Cul-
Kirch, P. V. and R. C. Green. 2001. Hawaiki, ture, Science, et Développement: Contribution
Ancestral Polynesia: An Essay in Historical An- à une Histoire de l’Homme: Mélanges en
thropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University l’Honneur de Charles Morazé, pp. 41–55.
Press. Toulouse: Privat.
Kirch, P. V., A. Hartshorn, O. Chadwick, P. Malo, D. 1951. Hawaiian Antiquities. Bernice
Vitousek, D. Sherrod, J. Coil, L. Holm, and W. P. Bishop Museum Special Publication No. 2.
Sharp. 2004. Environment, agriculture, and set- Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.
tlement patterns in a marginal Polynesian land- Massal, E. and J. Barrau. 1973. Food Plants of the
scape. Proceedings of the National Academy South Sea Islands. South Pacific Commission
of Sciences, U.S.A. 101:9936–9941. Technical Paper No. 94. Noumea: South Pacific
Kirch, P. V. and S. O’Day. 2002. New archae- Commission.
ological insights into food and status: A case McGlade, J. 1995. Archaeology and the eco-
from precontact Hawai‘i. World Archaeology dynamics of human modified landscapes. An-
34:484–497. tiquity 69:113–132.
Kirch, P. V. and W. D. Sharp. 2005. Coral 230 Th dat- O’Connor, B. V. 1998. Spatial and Temporal Vari-
ing of the imposition of a ritual control hierarchy ation in Hawaiian Residential Architecture: A
84 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Seriation Study of Selected Coastal Settlements Polynesian Culture History: Essays in Honor
in Northern Hawai‘i Island. Unpublished M.A. of Kenneth P. Emory (G. A. Highland, R. Force,
thesis, University of Auckland. A. Howard, M. Kelly, and Y. Sinoto, eds.):
Reid, J. J. and S. M. Whittlesley, 1982. Households 341–361. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Special
at Grasshopper Pueblo. American Behavioral Publication 56. Honolulu: Bishop Museum
Scientist 25:687–704. Press.
Reimer, P., M. Baillie, E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J. Beck, Soehren, L. J. and D. P. Tuohy, 1987. Archaeolog-
C. Bertrand, P. Blackwell, et al. 2004. Intcal04 ical Excavations at Pu‘uhonua o Hōnaunau
terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration 0–26 cal National Historical Park, Hōnaunau, Kona,
kyr bp. Radiocarbon 46:1029–1058. Hawai‘i. Department of Anthropology Report
Rosendahl, P. H. 1972. Aboriginal Agriculture 87–2. Honolulu: Bishop Museum.
and Residence Patterns in Upland Lapakahi, Tuggle, H. D. and B. P. Griffin (eds.) 1973.
Island of Hawai‘i. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univer- Lapakahi, Hawai‘i: Archaeological Studies.
sity of Hawai‘i. Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series No. 5.
Rosendahl, P. H. 1994. Aboriginal Hawaiian struc- Honolulu: Social Science Research Institute.
tural remains and settlement patterns in the Valeri, V. 1985. Kingship and Sacrifice: Ritual
upland agricultural zone at Lapakahi, Island of and Society in Ancient Hawai‘i. Chicago:
Hawai‘i. Hawaiian Archaeology 3:14–70. University of Chicago Press.
Sahlins, M. D. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Vitousek, P. M., T. Ladefoged, A. Hartshorn, P. V.

Chicago: Aldine. Kirch, M. Graves, S. Hotchkiss, S. Tuljapurkar,
Sahlins, M. D. 1992. Historical Ethnography. Vol. and O. Chadwick. 2004. Soils, agriculture,
2 of Anahulu: The Anthropology of History in and society in precontact Hawai‘i. Science
the Kingdom of Hawai‘i (P. V. Kirch and M. D. 304:1665–1669.
Sahlins). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Weisler, M. and P. V. Kirch. 1985. The struc-
Schmidt, R. C. 1968. Demographic Statistics of ture of settlement space in a Polynesian
Hawai‘i, 1778–1965. Honolulu: University of chiefdom: Kawela, Molokai, Hawaiian Islands.
Hawai‘i Press. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology 7:129–
Service, E. 1975. Origins of the State and Civi- 158.
lization: A Process of Cultural Evolution. New Wilk, R. R. and W. L. Rathje. 1982. Archaeol-
York: Norton. ogy of the Household: Building a Prehistory
Sinoto, Y. H. 1967. Artifacts from excavated sites in of the Domestic Life. Beverley Hills: Sage
the Hawaiian, Marquesas, and Society Islands. In Publications.

Island and Coastal Archaeology

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Island and Coastal Archaeology

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

This article was downloaded by: [CDL Journals Account]

On: 20 April 2011

The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology

Households and Hierarchy: Domestic Modes of Production in Leeward

Online publication date: 09 April 2010

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Households and Hierarchy:

This article describes archaeological evidence for the transformation of

Keywords pre-contact, agriculture, human ecodynamics, Polynesia

Received 30 October 2008; accepted 13 July 2009.

INTRODUCTION Hawaiian Households and the Domestic

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 53

domestic economy is a satisfactory exis- mography, and social organization intersect,

54 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 55

56 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 57

Non- Primary Secondary

Not determined/not field checked 22 22

58 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 59

clustering is unlikely to be the result of complexes that were established at different

60 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 61

62 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 63

64 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 65

66 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 67

68 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 69

70 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 71

Primary Secondary Median and SD

72 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Primary Secondary Median and SD

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 73

Complex 1 Complex 2 Complex 4 Complex 5a Complex 5e Complex 7 Complex 8 Complex 9 Complex 10

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 75

76 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Table 4. Radiocarbon dates from Makiloa-Kālala features.

Conventional Calibrated Age Calibrated Age

Conventional Calibrated Age Calibrated Age

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 79

80 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

at primary residences also increase during

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 81

82 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 83

Kahn, J. G. and P. V. Kirch. 2004. Ethnographie in precontact Hawai‘i. Science 307:102–104.

ogist 109:8–26. Ladefoged, T. N. and M. W. Graves. 2000. Evolu-

84 VOLUME 5 • ISSUE 1 • 2010

Sahlins, M. D. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Vitousek, P. M., T. Ladefoged, A. Hartshorn, P. V.

JOURNAL OF ISLAND & COASTAL ARCHAEOLOGY 85

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi