Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

CHAPTER 1
Lithograph of a Rapanui canoe (vaka) from the visit of Jean-Franois de La Prouse in April, 1786.
(Drawing by Franois Blondela, engraved by Gaspard Duche de Vancy, published in La Prouse 1797,
courtesy of Archivo Fotogrfico y Digital, Biblioteca Nacional de Chile)

The Origin of the Polynesians

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

A Very Brief Introduction to a Very Long Voyage . . .

The Polynesians were perhaps the greatest navigators in the world, but
they are not the best the world has ever known, for their most impressive feats
are significantly absent in the collective consciousness outside the cultural area.
The isolation imposed by the great bodies of water that separate the Polynesian
islands and the various countries that have annexed them have kept these island
communities from developing a unified politico-cultural identity even if they
have shared the same roots for the past 3,500 years and the languages they speak
belong to the same family, the second largest in the world in terms of number of
languages. Maybe these same conditions are why Polynesians are so culturally
rich, making their under-representation in textbooks all the more serious. Most
people outside of Polynesia do not know anything about the Lapita, the ancestors
of the Polynesians. Schools do not teach that at the time of their great expansion,
starting some 3,500 years ago and in a span of about 500 years, the long-distance
voyaging canoes of the Lapita carried entire families settling an area 4,300 km
wide from one end to the other. That was one of the speediest human expansions
in the pre-historic world. Most people are unaware of the navigational feats of
the Polynesians, who eventually inhabited hundreds of islands encompassing
millions of square kilometres of water without navigational instruments, but
guided by a complex understanding of natural signs. New evidence indicates
these same navigational techniques allowed them to cross at least 3,700 km
of open ocean arriving to the Americas by at least 1300-1400 AD, and most
likely earlier, introducing the pre-Columbian chickens encountered by Spanish
conquistador Francisco Pizarro in Inca territory in 1532. The fact is, the greatest
accomplishments of the Lapita and the Polynesians have been systematically
underestimated for years. Perhaps their most famous achievement, the tip of the
iceberg, per se, lies on Rapa Nui (a.k.a Easter Island), the easternmost Polynesian
island, where hundreds of monolithic statues are considered by many to be an icon
of human ingenuity, one of the great wonders of the world. Yet even there, the first
European explorers strongly questioned the capacity of the primitive inhabitants
of Rapa Nui to design and construct the magnificent platforms and statues. Their
7

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

technical prowess continues to intrigue us today, as we still do not know how the
statues were transported. What is most tragic is that the reason why so many
questions remain unanswered is because the first outsiders to land on Rapa Nui
were so busy doubting the Rapanuis technical abilities that they never thought
to investigate how these achievements may have been carried out. By the time
someone asked, the few remaining survivors of the epidemics and slave raids that
had devastated the local population were unable to fully explain how this had been
done and the mystery of Rapa Nui was born. It is sad that one of the greatest
human accomplishments is covered in a veil of obscurity because of arrogance
and ignorance. It is time we learned more about this culture, which is far from
extinct and alien to us. There are so many more matters to inquire. However, this
voyage of (re)discovery must start from the very beginning, 5,000 years ago in
what is now the Philippines and Taiwan.

Made in Taiwan: The Lapita

Recent studies in the field of Genetics, Linguistics, and Archaeology,
indicate that Polynesians descend from Neolithic Austronesians originating from
what is now China, inhabiting the island of Taiwan in the early 3rd millennium
BC. Several agro-pastoral societies flourished on Taiwan at the time. They
manufactured clay utensils, polished stone adzes, fishhooks, and ornaments such
as bracelets and pendants made of seashells. They already had catamaran type
vessels, with one or two outriggers, that allowed them to navigate and explore
the open ocean in search of new lands. One or more groups of skilled sailors
set south, populating the Philippines, all of Malaysia, and the vast archipelago of
thousands of islands that is Indonesia.

One of these groups travelled east from the northern Philippines, reaching
the Bismarck Archipelago off the northern coast of Papua New Guinea, circa
1500 BC. In time, the new settlements became disconnected to the motherland
and the locals developed their own set of beliefs, customs, and social behaviours,
8

becoming the Lapita, the direct ancestors of the Polynesians. The culture and its
characteristic pottery were named after the archaeological site on New Caledonia
where the cultural remains of the Lapita were officially first found.i The origins
of the Lapita have not been clearly identified, and it is unknown whether they
started out in the Bismarck Archipelago or on a neighbouring island. All those
whose roots could be traced to Taiwan, spoke Austronesian, a language that bore no
relation to Papuan, which was spoken by the original inhabitants of Melanesia and
the Bismarck Archipelago who had colonized the area some 30,000 years earlier.

The Lapita introduced many technological advances including pottery,
outrigger canoes, and new fishing and navigation methods that probably presented
major innovations in the local cultural landscape. They traded obsidian, adzes, and
shells between faraway islands, indicating they had reliable long-distance voyaging
vessels. The Lapita apparently lived side by side with the Melanesians on many of
the islands they settled however, genetic studies of skeletons found in Lapita sites in
Fiji and Vanuatu, concluded that those who were not absorbed by the Melanesians
and continued migrating into Polynesia mixed very little with Melanesians.1

Although the Lapita made several tools and ornaments (ground-stone
adzes, polished stone and shell fishhooks, bracelets and pendants made of sea
mammal bones and shells, and flaked-stone tools of obsidian and other available
i

Between 1908 and 1909, during the German occupation of the Bismarck Archipelago, Catholic
missionary Otto Meyer, who was stationed in Watom Island, discovered in some eroded
agricultural fields ceramic fragments with geometrical designs. Surprised by this find, he
searched for more specimens and discovered several other fragments, which he sent to the Muse
de lHomme in Paris. Meyer published his findings in a German scientific journal, however his
piece received little attention amidst the great upheavals Europe was going through at the time.
Later, in 1917, geologist Maurice Piroutet found a similar ceramic fragment at a beach in the Foue
province of New Caledonia. This discovery, published in a monograph about the stratigraphy
of the island, also went unnoticed. Three years later archaeologist F. C. McKern, on a Bishop
Museum expedition to the Tonga Archipelago collected over 1,500 ceramic fragments from Uea,
Tongatapu, and Motutapu. A link between all these discoveries was not established until almost
30 years later when finally, in 1952, archaeologists E. W. Gifford and D. Shutler excavated in
Lapita, New Caledonia. Only then did it become apparent that the ceramic must have belonged
to a group of people that occupied an extensive part of Oceania.

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

rock), they are best known for their distinct tooth-edged, decorated, low-fire
earthenware. It is likely that the Lapita decorated themselves with designs similar
to those used to adorn their pottery either by painting their bodies with turmeric or
tattooing. We do not know if they wore rings or ear ornaments, but they probably
used feather headdresses and headbands and dressed in clothes made of bark cloth
and braided plant fibres.

Austronesian: The Mother of Many Languages

Although Austronesian is now extinct, it is the second largest language
family created by mankind, only slightly smaller than the Niger-Congo group.2
Roughly one fifth of the languages spoken in the world today descend from
Austronesian, a family of 1,257 related languages, extending all the way from
Rapa Nui to Madagascar.3 The Lapita spoke a language called Proto-Polynesian
that descended from Austronesian. Since all Polynesian languages stem from
a common tongue, it is possible for linguists and anthropologists to make a
comparative study of Polynesian words and reconstruct the Proto-Polynesian
language through all the terms that share a common root. In essence, expressions
shared by all Polynesians must reflect concepts that revert back to their Lapita
ancestors. For example, if in all Polynesian languages the word ariki and its close
cognates mean chief, head of a lineage, descendent of the gods, etc., it must have
been a term originally used by the Lapita.

Anthropologists Patrick Kirch and Roger Green made significant linguistic
reconstructions of the language of the Lapita. Based on their findings it has been
possible to establish that when the Lapita expanded into Western Polynesia in the
1st millennium AD, they were composed of groups believing in unilineal descent
(*kainanga), whose members could trace their origin to a common ancestor
(*tupuna), led by a chief (*qariki) who was the firstborn son of the head of the highest
ranking lineage. Kirch and Green were also able to identify the word for master
craftsman (*tufunga), warriors (*toa), and navigators (*tau-tahi), this last one being
a key figure in this oceangoing culture.4 Since it was not possible to reconstruct
10

the word for religious leader or priest, Kirch and Green have suggested that the
chiefs fulfilled that role. In addition to the linguistic evidence, archaeological and
ethnographic data also helped determine that the Lapita were what anthropologists
term a House Society, referring to a social unit occupying an estate that comprises
both material and immaterial properties, including all the ceremonies and rituals
performed there as well as the names and social titles of its dwellers who are
connected to each other by a continuous line of kinship and/or affinity through
birth, marriage, or adoption.5 House Societies are characteristically stratified and
ancestor worship is an integral part of their religious practices.

Lapita settlements abound in the places they populated, but because
many of these are inaccessible, few sites have been studied archaeologically. The
settlements were composed of a few hundred clan members to a group consisting
of a single extended family. Their houses were rectangular, or sometimes built on
stilts, and they were often located on the islets of the lagoon surrounding an island,
or somewhere further inland not far from a beach or beside a stream.

Ceramic Patterns and Migration Patterns

Lapita ceramic first appeared along with a few obsidian and shell ornaments
about 3,500 to 3,200 years ago in the Bismarck Archipelago. Lapita pottery has
also been found on Vanuatu, New Caledonia, Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga however,
it is not found elsewhere in Oceania, probably because many of the islands do
not have the appropriate clay. The importance of this ceramic is that, like the
Austronesian language, its design elements evolved from one island to the next
while maintaining a common root, reflecting the migration pattern and ancient
trade networks of the Lapita and early Polynesians.

The Lapita are most famous for their beautiful non-utilitarian pottery
with distinctive artistic designs (see Figure 1, next page). Lapitaware was often
tempered with shell or sand and it was decorated with anthropomorphic figures
and geometric patterns that were either imprinted or sketched on ceramic. Even
11

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

though the patterns evolved as the Lapita advanced across the Pacific, their
designs were so standardized that samples of them can be clearly identified in Fiji,
Samoa, and Tonga. In addition, Lapitaware had many shapes and was sometimes
burnished with an orange or red slip to produce a glossy finish.

Not all Lapitaware was decorated. In fact, most excavated fragments indicate
that this pottery consisted of plain spherical cooking pots with a smooth, short, and
narrow vertical neck. The decorated pieces, which may or may not have been used for
cooking, were open containers with a flat or rounded base. The embellishments usually
covered the upper part of the pots including the rim. Some decorated Lapitaware found
on Vanuatu was used to save family relics and to store human skulls. Therefore, it is
possible to infer that some of the pottery with anthropomorphic designs was used in
rituals and offeringsmaybe to invoke the aid and protection of an ancestor, as was
the case with so many other Austronesian peoples. These Lapita burial practices may
have closely resembled rites and customs that were still practiced by many Oceanic
cultures well into the first half of the twentieth century. In these societies, the skulls of
ancestors were believed to possess supernatural powers and surviving relatives stored
them in the family home hoping to win the favour, protection, and assistance of the
deceased.6

Fearless Navigators with Catamarans

Kirch and Green reconstructed many nautical terms, indicating that the Lapita
had advanced navigational techniques and various types of canoes with one or two
outriggers, fitted with a mast, and sails made out of pandanus fibre. Single-hull outriggers
were probably used for offshore and deep-sea fishing, while double-hull canoes would
have been used for long-distance trading. Most importantly, the Lapita developed
sophisticated voyaging canoes that were made of twin hulls joined together by a platform
with two small masts and sailsthe pre-curser of our modern day catamarans. Lapita
voyaging canoes were large enough to transport several families and their belongings
over more than 1,000 km of open ocean.

Figure 1. Detente-stamped Lapita pattern samples reconstructed from potsherds

found in the eponymous site of Lapita in New Caledonia (locality WKO013A).
(Courtesy of Christophe Sand, Dpartement dArchologie, Direction des
Affaires Culturelles et Coutumires de la Nouvelle-Caldonie)

12

Based on comparative studies of Polynesian cultures, its possible to infer that
Lapita settlements had an enclosed area that served as a shipyard next to house that
stored boats and fishing gear. That was also where navigators and their assistants
taught apprentices how to build canoes and, most significantly, how to navigate. Lapita
13

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

navigators, or wayfinders as they are now termed, used the different rising and setting
points of constellations and stars for reckoning as well as natural indicators such as cloud
formations and seabird flight patterns. They were also trained to learn about ocean and
wind currents. The success or failure of their travels and explorations depended on the
wayfinders mastery of all these techniques.

Guided by nothing more than their eyes and a complex interpretation of natural
signs the Lapita explored great expanses of the Pacific and were able to transport cargo
and people between distant settlements. This knowledge was probably kept secret from
non-apprentices and wayfinders were probably members of some sort of guild. They
must have been highly ranked in Lapita society as they played a key role in the local
economy by discovering new lands brimming with untouched resources. Additionally,
when natural forces such as cyclones and tsunamis destroyed the settlements, people
depended on wayfinders for evacuation and food.

Fishermen, Farmers, Merchants, and Traders: The Mixed

Economy of the Lapita

The Lapita settled on islands with unique ecosystems that supported an incredibly
rich and varied biomass, making them the marine equivalent of our tropical rainforests.
Although these fragile ecosystems depended greatly on climactic fluctuations, it was
usually possible to obtain large amounts of food with very little effort. The Lapita
practiced offshore and deep-sea fishing, but preferred exploiting the resources proffered
by the lagoons and nearby reefs while also engaging in farming the plants and animals
they carried with them. They had a mixed economy, but above all they were also great
merchants, trading goods with settlements both near and far.

The Lapita always travelled with the animals and plants they thought would be
useful to them in the new settlements. Animals included pigs, chickens, and dogs, all of
which they ate. They planted tubers of Indo-Pacific origin and other plant life originally
14

domesticated or genetically selected by Papuans. These consisted of several varieties of

yams, taro, bananas, and kava (from which they obtained a sedating drink). Taro and its
relative kape, require much water, so they were planted ain gardens irrigated by rainwater
at the foot of a hill or mountain, or on the coastal plains of high islands, in swamps
that were drained and conditioned for these purposes. In some atolls, where freshwater
is scarce, the locals planted taro and kape in deep dug trenches filled with compost,
reflecting the ingenuity of the Lapita and their resilience in the face of adversity.

Later in their expansion, the Lapita encountered hundreds of uninhabited islands,
not all of which were suitable for habitation. However, many of the new islands consisted
of pristine environments where hunting involved minimal effort. These islands were
home to a variety of land birds that had lost their ability to fly, having atrophied limbs
from lack of predators; this made them very easy prey and they were soon exterminated.
Such was the case of many land birds across the Pacific, including a megapode that was
a bird as big as a turkey. Not even a large lizard endemic to Fiji and Tonga was spared.7
The Lapita also ate land crabs that were as large as the coconut crabs that still exist on
some islands today.

Fragments of pottery and obsidian originating from islands north of New
Guinea have been found in excavations of Lapita settlements, indicating that there was
an extensive trade network connecting the various Lapita outposts in Oceania. All of the
physical and cultural evidence left by the Lapita, indicates that they were a sophisticated
group of merchants and travellers who were looking for new islands to open new trade
routes, increase their resources, and spread their culture.

The Great Lapita Expansion, or How 20 Generations

Conquered New Worlds

Between the years 1500 BC to 1000 BC, the Lapita spread to most of the islands
from the Bismarck Archipelago to Western Polynesia. One of the most impressive feats
of the Lapita is that they settled an area that is 4,300 km wide, encompassing millions of
15

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

square kilometres of ocean in a period of about 500 years or 20 generations (calculating
a span of 25 years for each generation). This constitutes the most rapid human expansion
of a pre-historic agricultural society. The causes behind this speedy migration are
unknown. It may have been overpopulation or an influx of rival groups that drew them
out of the area, or perhaps the simple promise of a better life on a new island with more
resources. It could have been a combination of these factors or another one altogether.
This has yet to be determined.

appears in Figure 2. It is important to note that the settlement dates of the different
Polynesian islands have changed over the years as better C14 dating techniques have led
to a re-calibration of dates all across the Pacific.

The Lapita first spread from the Bismarck Archipelago to the Solomon Islands,
and from there, to the Santa Cruz Islands, 500 km east of San Cristbal Island in the
Solomons. Beyond that point to the east, the lands were uninhabited, for there were
no more Papuan settlements to be encountered in those yet unexplored Pacific islands.
These new lands must have seemed like an inexhaustible source of wealth to the first
Lapita settlers however, the biodiversity of these islands dramatically decreased the
further removed they were from any continental mass, making them very vulnerable to
human impact.

As some Lapita groups moved east, others migrated south, populating New
Caledonia and Vanuatu. Around 1200 BC they had discovered and populated the
islands of Fiji, which is much further than they had previously travelled on their canoes,
indicating that by that time they had the skills and technology to undertake a roundtrip voyage across 1,440 km of open ocean. By about 950 BC they had discovered and
populated the islands of Tonga and Samoa.

Figure 2. Map detailing the Lapita and Polynesian migrations.

(Map by Gonzalo Rojas)

What happened in the next 1,000 years or so is unclear, but it seems likely that
once the Lapita settled Tonga and Samoa, they continued populating nearby uninhabited
islands, such as the Kermadecs, located west of Tonga and now part of Fiji. Judging from
the density of early settlements on these islands it seems that this was the cradle of the
Polynesians, where the Lapita developed a set of beliefs, customs, practices, and social
behaviours unique to the people who would go on to explore and settle an area that spans
about 6,500 km from Samoa to Rapa Nui, and 7,500 km from central New Zealand (a.k.a
Aotearoa) to Hawaii. A map of the proposed Lapita and Polynesian migration routes

16

17

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

One Thing Leads to Another: The Rise of the Polynesians

Moving Away From Home: The Colonization of Eastern Polynesia

It is hard to determine when and why the Lapita living in Samoa and Tonga
became Polynesians and what exactly set them apart. It may well be that the distances
between Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga put unnecessary strains on trade with other Lapita
settlements. It is also possible that, as the Lapita settlements in other parts of Oceania
disappeared, the ones in Western Polynesia became more self-sufficient. For unknown
reasons, contact between Fiji and Lapita settlements to the west ceased quickly. Even
though Fiji received a second wave of immigrants from Vanuatu and New Caledonia,
these new settlers had experienced a very different cultural evolution from the PrePolynesian Lapita settled on Tonga and Fiji. In Melanesia, the surrounding populations
absorbed the Lapita, giving birth to new pottery-based cultures that flourished from 500
BC to 200 AD and who were undoubtedly a Lapita legacy. Natural disasters, such as the
eruption of Rabaul volcano in 540 AD (Volcanic Explosivity Index 6) may have forced the
Lapita to evacuate New Britain in the Bismarcks as well as other neighbouring islands.8
Some scientists have speculated that the Lapita were devastated by wars or diseases,
such as malaria, to which the Lapita probably had little resistance. Whatever the cause,
Lapita pottery disappeared around 500 AD, and it seems reasonable to assume that over
the centuries the Lapita underwent deep cultural transformations as they adapted to all
the advantages and disadvantages of island life. The development of new technologies
and subsistence strategies of the descendants of the Lapita led them to replace their
earthenware with earth ovens; they changed the layout of their houses and settlements
and developed new fishing methods that changed the appearance of their fishing tools
and fishhooks. The consequence of the sum of the most dramatic of these changes was
what separated the Polynesians from their ancestors. That is when the Lapita became
the Polynesians. Although several archaeologists have worked in Tonga and Samoa,
very few have found sites that date from 1 to 500 AD, which is when the Lapita probably
became the early Polynesians.

Like their ancestors, the Polynesians were skilled navigators and soon inhabited
an area composed of over 1,000 different islands in the largest ocean of the world.
Currently known as the Polynesian Triangle, it includes Hawaii, Rapa Nui, and New
Zealand (Aotearoa) as each of its vertices. Although the native inhabitants of these
islands are culturally Polynesian, there are enough differences in language, religion, and
social stratification to separate them into two distinctive groups, Western Polynesia and
Eastern Polynesia. Western Polynesia encompasses Samoa, Tonga, and 13 Polynesian
outlier islands in Micronesia and Melanesia.ii Eastern Polynesia consists of all the
islands east of Samoa and Tonga, specifically the Cook, Austral, Society, Marquesas,
Tuamotu, Gambier, and Pitcairn Islands as well as the outermost Polynesian islands of
New Zealand (Aotearoa), Hawaii, and Rapa Nui (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. Polynesia and other cultural divisions in Oceania.

(Map by Carlos Rojas after Patrick Kirch, published in Kirch 2000)
ii

Islands that were colonized by Polynesians, but are located in Melanesia and Micronesia are
called the Polynesian Outliers. In Melanesia they are: Anuta, Bellona, Mele, Nuguria, Nukumanu,
Ontong Java, Pileni, Rennell, Sikiana, Takuu, Tikopia. Polynesian outliers in Micronesia are
Kapingamarangi and Nukuoro.

18

19

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

Eastern Polynesia represents one of the biggest enigmas in archaeology
today since tracing the exact origins of its first settlers and the chronological
sequence of their settlements has proved very difficult. The answers to both
are essential to explaining how they developed the differences in language,
religion, and socio-cultural practices that set them apart from the Lapita, Western
Polynesians, and each other. Indeed, the greater or lesser degree of affinity
between these cultures and that of their predecessors was generated during the
expansion process. The most common differences are idiomatic innovations, but
there are significant changes in cultural and religious beliefs as well.

One of the main differences between Eastern Polynesians and Western
Polynesians is that Eastern Polynesians built megalithic ceremonial structures
and worshipped ancestral deities represented in large objects, such as a sizeable
rock or a hunk of coral with a remarkable shape, carved wooden boards, and/or
statues made of stone or wood. Most Eastern Polynesian ceremonial platforms
were called marae (or some variation of this word). These consisted of an area
that was often enclosed by a wall and sometimes had an attached structure called
ahu, which was where Eastern Polynesians stored or displayed sacred objects that
represented their deified ancestors, together with all other religious articles. The
marae and ahu were places of worship, where followers made offerings to the
gods to request favours or thank them for their assistance.

So far no one has found archaeological remains in Eastern Polynesian
settlements that can be accurately dated as belonging to the previous era (BC). As
a result, it has been postulated that once the descendants of the Lapita occupied
Western Polynesia and started becoming Polynesians, they must have ceased their
exploration and settlement of other Polynesian islands for a thousand years or more.
This isolation would have accelerated their transformation into the Polynesians
that are familiar to us today. The reasons why they stopped settling and exploring
other islands are unknown, but the wealth of resources in the newly discovered
islands, a discontinuity in migratory flows, etc., may have played a significant role.
Nevertheless, because they were obviously not obstructed by technology, some
scholars have suggested that this halt in expansion is nothing more than an illusion
20

resulting from insufficient data and archaeological research. It must be added that
one of the great difficulties for archaeologists working in Oceania lies in finding
early archaeological sites since the coastlines of so many of these islands have
been altered by cyclones and tsunamis in addition to a subsidence of one metre
per millennium.9 Therefore, any 2,000-year-old site on the coast would be about
2 m. below sea level, and inland sites of the same era would be covered by large
deposits of soilboth serious obstacles to archaeologists. Thus the main problem
with this hypothesis is that no one has found the sites needed to support a constant
expansion.

A Chip Off the Old Block: The Great Polynesian Expansion

Archaeological evidence indicates that by 1300 AD Polynesians had
occupied a region in Oceania known as the Polynesian triangle because the
locations of its outermost islands form an area that is triangular in shape. It is
important to remember that there are a few culturally Polynesian islands outside
of the triangle, as is the case with some islands in Melanesia and Micronesia.
Archaeological records suggest that the Polynesian Triangle and its outlier islands
were settled in four great migrations leaving from the Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, and the
Cook Islands.

Dating the settlement of the various Polynesian islands is still controversial
as there is no scientific consensus regarding the validity of early archaeological
findings however, most would agree that the process was complete by 1200
AD and began around 500 BC with the settlement of the islands northeast of
New Guinea, known as the Polynesian outliers.10 These include several islands
south of the Carolines in Micronesia, as well as a dozen Melanesian islands and
atolls. The Lapita colonized Tonga and Samoa in 950 BC, which are where the
first Polynesian settlements appeared.11 Another migration group continued
east, populating the Society, Tuamotu and Marquesas Islands between 600-900
AD.12 Smaller groups may have parted from there to settle Hawaii around
800 AD and New Zealand (Aotearoa) by 1200 AD.13 A third great migration left
21

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

from the northern Cook Islands and gradually populated the Polynesian Equatorial
Islands (Line, Phoenix, Howland, and Baxter Islands) probably between 800-1000
AD.14 Mangareva in the south-eastern tip of the Tuamotu Islands had already been
colonized by 900 AD, apparently by two different migration groups, one starting from
the southern Cook Islands passing through the Austral Islands, the other descending
from the Marquesas to the Tuamotu Islands.15 These are thought to be the ancestors
of the first inhabitants of Pitcairn, Henderson, and Rapa Nui, all settled between 9001000 AD.16 A map showing the Polynesian migration pattern appears in Figure 4.

The Ends of the Earth: Mangareva, Pitcairn, Henderson,

and Rapa Nui

Archaeological evidence indicates that the island of Mangareva in the
Gambier Islands, and neighbouring Pitcairn and Henderson, formed a cultural and
socio-economic unit in the past. According to many researchers, the homeland of
the Rapanui people must have been one of those islands.

Mangareva is the largest landmass in the Gambier and Pitcairn Islands
group, with an area of 14 km2. There are a total of seven islands in the Gambier
group totalling only 24.4 km2. They are: Taravai, Aukena, Akamaru, Agakauitai,
Kamaka, Makaroa, and Manui. They are all high islands with narrow coastal
strips that surround the valleys and lagoons encircled by a coral reef. The islands
are of volcanic origin and are located inside a great coral reef of nearly 100 km
in diameter. The reef is clearly visible from north to southeast, where there are
22 coral islets or motu, measuring an average 500 m2 total. The reason why the
Gambier Islands are so small is that they are the visible mountain peaks of a sunken
island formed 6.26 million years ago from a hot spot currently located south of
Pitcairn Island. Through the millennia, the ancient island drifted about 625 km
northwest from where it originated, suffering both erosion and subsidence.17

Over time, the different migration groups that arrived at Mangareva from
the Austral and Marquesas islands merged, giving birth to a new culture that
combined characteristics of its parent cultures. The mixture is evident in their
language, Mangarevan, which is a blend of Marquesan and Austral terms.

Figure 4. The settlement of Polynesia.

(Map by Gonzalo Rojas)

22

During the first millennium AD, Eastern Polynesian material culture
was very similar in places as far from each other as Huahine and the Marquesas
Islands 1,450 km away. The shape of their ornaments, tools, and artefacts, such
as fishhooks, adzes, mother of pearl shell scrapers, coral polishing files, etc., are
almost identical in all Eastern Polynesia up until around 1000 AD, indicating
that the islands were probably regularly connected until that time. Ethnographic
23

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

data from Mangareva indicates that its early settlers stayed in contact and
traded with people from the Australs, Tuamotu, Society, and Marquesas Islands.
Considering the distances between Mangareva and the Society and Marquesas
Islands, Mangarevan navigators probably arrived there by way of the Tuamotu
Islands where they could stop for food, shelter, and repairs. At the same time,
Mangarevan oral traditions relate that chiefs continued exploring the surrounding
ocean in search of new lands.

The availability of natural resources is variable in the Gambiers, and
although there is plenty of water and food for the people that live there today,
considering the size of the islands, they could have easily become overpopulated
in the past, putting great strains on the livelihood of the original inhabitants. The
Gambiers do not have any rivers or streams, instead the locals rely on rainwater and
several creeks on the coastal plains to supply them with enough fresh water. The
reef that formed around the perimeter of the submerged ancient island encloses
a lagoon rich in marine life with a total of 246 species of fish recorded there so
far.18 There are shellfish, oysters, and both inshore and offshore fish species,
as oceanic fish enter the lagoon on the south side where the reef is not as high.
However, the fish are not always edible as the reef undergoes a periodical process
of decay as a result of sedimentation caused by cyclones and other meteorological
and/or anthropogenic events. Given the right conditions, dinoflagellates called
Gambierdiscus toxicus proliferate in the lagoon adhering to the algae and seaweed
contaminating them with toxins that bioaccumulate the further they move along
the food chain. Although fish are unharmed when they eat the algae, it causes a
gastrointestinal and neurological illness called ciguatera in people who eat the
contaminated fish.19 Ciguatera is not a disease to be taken lightly. Symptoms
can last anywhere from weeks to decades and it can lead to long-term disability
in severe cases. Even though most people gradually recover, relapses triggered by
the consumption of certain foods or activities are not uncommon.20 More recently,
researchers have suggested that some Polynesian migrations were triggered by
intense outbreaks of ciguatera poisoning produced by recurring Pacific climactic
variability.21
24

Scarcity of land and unreliable fishing because of ciguatera must have
driven navigators from the Gambiers to continue their explorations with great zeal.
Since they were well aware of the distribution pattern of the islands in that part
of the ocean, they must have continued looking for new lands to the east. The
closest land mass is Temoe Atoll, just 40 km east of the Gambiers, followed by
the Pitcairn Islands: Pitcairn (526 km east of Mangareva), Henderson (676 km
east of Mangareva), and Ducie (1,038 km east of Mangareva). According to oral
tradition, Pitcairn was discovered by Rangahenua from Mangareva who arrived
there following a vision and called it He Rangi or possibly Kai Rangi.22 This may
relate to a similar Rapanui oral tradition where Rapa Nui, also known as Mata
ki te Rangi in ancient times, was settled as a result of the vision of a man called
Haumaka.23

Pitcairn and Henderson were already settled by 900 AD and for 400-500
years they were part of a cultural and socio-economic unit with Mangareva.24
Archaeological excavations show that the economies of Henderson and Pitcairn
depended greatly on trade with Mangareva, their main commercial partner at the
time. Pitcairn traded fine grain basalt that was used to make high quality axes,
adzes, and other important stone tools.25 They also may have exported prepared
foods such as fermented breadfruit paste and sweet ti root extract. Henderson
had many turtles whose meat and shells were very valuable to Polynesians. In
addition, Henderson had a rich population of land birds with feathers that would
have been valuable for trade; however, these birds may have been exterminated
rather quickly since they were collected for food as well. Pitcairn and Henderson
did not have mother of pearl shell, which was used to make quality fishhooks and
ornaments, but Mangareva had plenty. Apart from trading manufactured goods,
raw materials, and food, given the small size of the settlements on Pitcairn and
Hendersonthe population of Henderson probably did not exceed a hundred
its very likely that they also travelled to find women among allies on the other
islands. A diagram of this contact network appears in Figure 5.

25

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

[In] all those places, the statues resemble those of Easter Island but they are
smaller. They have enormous ears and their uniform lower bodies are mounted
over platforms. In Pitcairn there was a large ancient marae, which at each
corner was decorated with a statue of about 3 m high mounted over a platform
of joined rock. In Puamau, around the eastern point of Hiva Oa island in the
Marquesas group, you can still see tall statues [...] raised about 4 m from the
ground. Like in Easter Island, the artists also carve similar wooden sculptures
[...yet] stone statues and sculptures are of a specific type having large round
eyes, great pursed lips, and a very flat heads.27

Most unfortunately, the platform described above was eventually
destroyed and the statues were thrown over the cliff. The remains of a headless
anthropomorphic statue were rescued and taken to the Otago Museum, in New
Zealand (Aotearoa). It is interesting to note that the Pitcairn Island statue is very
similar to archaic Rapanui statues, and other statues in Tubuai, Raivavae, and Hiva
Oa (Figures 6A and 6B).
Figure 5. Contact network between the Pitcairn and Gambier Islands.
(Map by Alexandra Edwards after Green and Weisler, published in Green and Weisler 2002)

Several early European visitors to Pitcairn described a stone platform with
large monolithic statues that had been built by the original Polynesian inhabitants
of the island. The platform, which was built on a high peak overlooking Bounty
Bay no longer exists, but according to the accounts of European visitors it
resembled Rapanui ceremonial structures and it had an elevated ramp about 4 m
high on the far end with an almost vertical back that overlooked the cliffs and the
ocean. The ramp, which faced inland, was between 12-15 m wide and was paved
with roundish water-worn stones. On top of the ramp there was a long narrow area
over which stood three or four stone statues that looked inland.26 Furthermore
these early visitors also likened the structure and statues to the ones on Tubuai,
Raivavae and the Marquesas Islands:

26

Figures 6A and 6B. Torso of an archaic statue of Rapa Nui, as compared

to one from Pitcairn Island.
(Figure 6A: Photograph by Edmundo Edwards; Figure 6B: Photograph
by Anonymous, Otago Museum Collection, published in Heyerdahl and
Ferdon 1961)

27

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

Recent advances in Archaeology and Palaeontology indicate that Rapa
Nui was also discovered and settled about 900-1000 AD.28 According to oral
tradition, a small group of navigators/explorers arrived first, followed by a chief
called Hotu Matua with a group of settlers carrying essential plants and other
valuables. Polished basalt fishhooks, which are extremely rare elsewhere in
Polynesia, have been found in both Rapa Nui and Pitcairn suggesting a strong link
between the two islands. Ethnographic data and archaeological findings attest to
the strong cultural ties between Rapa Nui and the Gambier and Pitcairn Islands
during the settlement phase of Rapa Nui. This is corroborated by their languages,
shared oral traditions, and similar ceremonial architecture styles.iii 29 All of this
strongly suggests that the homeland of the Rapanui lay in the Gambier or Pitcairn
Islands.

Rapanui wayfinders stayed in contact with their closest neighbours and
other trade partners after initial settlement. This is mentioned in several Rapanui
oral traditions, including one that relates how the eldest son of Hotu Matua returned
to the homeland of his father.30 It is not surprising that Rapanui ceremonial
platforms are similar to others found on Pitcairn, Mangareva, and Temoe since their
ancient inhabitants shared a common origin however, the fact that all other major
Eastern Polynesian ceremonial complexes were built after the seventeenth century,
iii

Fishhooks shaped like those found on Rapa Nui exist in Tonga, New Zealand (Aotearoa), the
Society, and the Marquesas and Solomon Islands, however most of these were made of bone,
shell, and/or wood. Although basalt is found on many Pacific islands, polished stone fishhooks
have only been found in New Zealand and the Chatham Islands, and on Pitcairn and Rapa Nui.
This type of fishhook is probably rare because it was very time-consuming and difficult to make.
Some stone fishhooks were used in rituals or for decoration, as is the case with most of the
samples found in New Zealand and the Chatham Islands, but functional stone fishhooks were
used to catch fish in depths up to 300 m. The hook was initially weighed down with a stone
tied with a special knot that became unfastened by jerking the line when the hook reached the
bottom. The small aperture of the hooks was designed to keep the fish from escaping when
being pulled out of the water. According to Ethnographer H. G. Beasley, Rapanui stone hooks
are extraordinary in terms of both form and patina representing the pinnacle of achievement with
respect to fishhooks from all over the world. (Skinner 1942: 260-261; Chauvet 2005: Web, June
20th 2010)

28

while archaeological evidence indicates that the Rapanui started building large
ceremonial platforms by 1100-1200 AD, elicits some remarkable implications.31
One wonders what role, if any, Rapanui stonework played in the development of
religious structures on other Polynesian islands, particularly if inter-island contact
was greater in the past. Although it may be a case of cultural parallelismwhere
different cultures develop similar techniques independentlyit is also possible to
theorize that such an influence existed. Regardless of their building materials,
the large structures of the northern group of the Society Islands, especially the
largest ones such as Marae Tainuu and Marae Taputapuatea of Raiatea, show great
similarity to Rapanui ceremonial constructions.iv Furthermore, stone statues
were apparently a late development in Eastern Polynesian statuary, most of them
being attributed to eighteenth century sculptors and, except for a few rarities, they
only exist in the Marquesas and Society Islands, Mangareva, Pitcairn, Raivavae,
and Rapa Nui. 32

What is more remarkable is that in 2007 evidence emerged indicating that
Polynesians arrived to the Arauco Peninsula in southern Chile. Tests conducted
iv

Most monumental stone structures are found in Eastern Polynesia. The only ones in Western
Polynesia consist of large mounds built between 1100-1700 AD over which "God Houses" were
erected. The most notable one is called Pulemelei on Samoa and its early foundations were
dated to 1100-1200 AD, however the upper structure was completed several centuries later.
(Martinsson-Wallin 2007: 41-3)
v

Sweet potato, the pre-historic main staple of faraway sub-tropical islands such as Rapa Nui and
New Zealand (Aotearoa), originates from the Americas and its natural characteristics demand a
human introduction. Palaeoclimatic data suggests that the El Nio Southern Oscillation (ENSO)
reversed wind currents around 1000 AD, allowing Polynesians to voyage more easily to South
America. Nevertheless, an earlier contact is necessary since charred sweet potato remains in early
Polynesian sites date to about 1000 AD. ENSO events may have facilitated trade, but an earlier
round trip voyage is not impossible considering the navigational prowess of the Polynesians.
Many controversial questions arise, is there a link between Inca and Rapanui masonry? Is there
a connection between the totora reed watercraft of northern Peru and Rapa Nui? As the theory
of a Polynesian-American contact gains momentum researchers find themselves scrambling for
clues. Biological Anthropologist Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith is now testing DNA of human crania
with Polynesian traits found in Mocha Island, once a popular sperm whale ground. The island
lies about 100 km from where bones belonging to the pre-Columbian Polynesian chickens were
found. (Lawler 2010: 1344-46)

29

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

on DNA extracted from a chicken bone excavated by Jos Miguel Ramrez and
Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith in the El Arenal-1 archaeological site in Chile revealed
that the animal had been introduced from Polynesia around 1300-1400 AD.v 33
The bone belonged to domestic fowl bred by the Mapuche people of Southern
Chile and had the same DNA (including a mutation) as chicken bones excavated in
early sites on Tonga, American Samoa, Niue, Hawaii, and Rapa Nui.34 Chicken
remains first appeared in Pre-Lapita sites in 3000-2800 BC in Vanuatu and Tonga,
and scientists think chickens spread from there to greater Polynesia.35 This early
contact is further supported by the fact that, of all continental Chile, only the
people of Arauco marked fowl ownership by cutting the phalanxes of the chickens
into different patterns, the same as the Rapanui did for hundreds of years.vi Early
contact with the Americas is not only controversial regarding milestones in
mainstream history, but the subject raises serious debate on whether there is a link
between monumental stone structures in Eastern Polynesia and the Americas.

Contact between Rapa Nui and other islands ceased sometime before 1600
AD, when it seems both Pitcairn and Henderson were abandoned. Although we
do not know for certain when and why this occurred, it is probably connected to an
increase in the population of Mangareva and the bloody tribal wars that developed
there as a result of competition for diminishing food resources and arable land.
Either returning groups from the Pitcairn Islands originated the conflict by fuelling
the population surge of the Gambier Islands, or they returned because they felt
compelled to support their relatives and allies at war in their motherland. Whatever
the case, Pitcairn was abandoned and Rapa Nui lost contact with the other islands.
The absence of wood large enough to construct long-distance voyaging canoes
drew Rapa Nui into total isolation prior to the first arrival of Europeans on Easter
Sunday 1722.

vi

Some people on Rapa Nui and in the Arauco region today still cut the phalanxes of chickens to
mark ownership.

30

Detail of one of the earliest maps of the Pacific Ocean, 1622.

(Cartographer Hessel Gerritsz, Bibliothque Nationale de France, Cartes et Plans, SH Arch. N 30,
Wikimedia Commons).

31

Chapter 1 / The Origin of the Polynesians

Endnotes
Spriggs 1995: 131-32
Lewis 2009: Table 4
3
Ibid.
4
Kirch and Green 2001: 193, 207, 222
5
Levi-Strauss 1982: 174; Hage P. 1999: 203, 205
6
Garae 2008: Web, June 21st 2010
7
Steadman et al. 2002: 3673
8
Rabaul Volcano in New Britain in Global Volcanism Program, n.d.: Web, June
20th 2010
9
Taylor and Bloom 1977; Dickinson et al. 1994: 87
10
Kirch n.d: Web, June 22nd 2010; Kirch 2008: 722
11
Burley et al. 2012: e48769. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048769
12
Lepofsky et al. 1996: 270; Kirch 2008: 722
13
Kirch 2008: 722
14
Green and Weisler 2002: 231; Anderson 1991: 767; Wilmshurst et al. 2008: 7676
15
Ibid.; Kirch 2008: 722
16
Green and Weisler 2002: 231; Kirch 2008: 722
17
Guillou et al. 1994: 635-640
18
Cook 1970: 154
19
Pearn 2001: 4
20
Pearn 2001: 7
21
Rongo, et al, 2009: 1423
22
Mtraux 1971: 34, 95-96
23
Ibid.; Barthel 1978
24
Green and Weisler 2002: 231
25
Weisler 2002: 258-64
26
Routledge 1919: 313
27
Translated from the French in Mager 1902: 87; Beechey 1825: 113-14
28
Kirch 2008: 722
29
Green 1998: 87; Conte 2000: 257-69.
1
2

32

Englert 1948:73; Vargas et al. 2006: 397

Vargas et al. 2006: 401
32
Edwards 2003: 198, Table 5.1.1
33
Storey et al. 2007: 10335
34
Ibid.
35
Storey et al. 2007: 10336
30
31

33