Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Polynesian Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Journal of the Polynesian Society
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
RITUAL LANDSCAPE IN LATE PRE-CONTACT
RAROTONGA: A BRIEF READING
MATTHEW CAMPBELL
University of Auckland
147
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
148 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 149
ARA METUA
The Ara Metua provides a fine example of the interplay in landscape
between environment and culture. This road, that in pre-contact times
encircled the island along the coastal plain, and along which many marae
are located, is by far the largest archaeological site on Rarotonga. It was
probably paved with basalt and coral for much of its length and kerbed
where habitation was most dense (Hiroa 1927:211). Parker (1974:64)
suggests that it was built to link the lowland marae in a ceremonial route.
The road in its current state is discontinuous, and the pre-contact road is
almost completely destroyed or buried by modern roading, but the latter
largely traces the course of the old road and it seems safe to assume that the
physical relationships of archaeologically recorded marae to the road remain
as they were in pre-contact times.
According to Rarotonga tradition, the Ara Metua was constructed by
Toi, a pre-Tangi'ia ancestor (its alternative name is Te Ara Nui o Toi 'The
Great Road of Toi') (Crocombe 1964:8), but the road as it was known in the
early contact period must have been of later construction. No radiocarbon
dates are known for it, but there is a date of 1530 for marae sites associated
with it (Trotter 1974:146). There is no reason to think the road is not of the
same antiquity as the marae.
The Ara Metua is one of the largest sites in Polynesia, and although
small sections of paved road are known from elsewhere, it is also unique in
Polynesia in terms of its size and elaboration. So what was the road? What
did it represent, and why was it built?
We can account for its form and location by a simple environmental
fact?the topography of Rarotonga constrains the road to follow the coastal
plain that encircles the island. The Atlas of the South Pacific (1986) indicates
that Rarotonga is the only Polynesian high island with anything like an
almost continuous coastal plain (the basaltic lava flow at Black Rock?
now quarried?was not very high), and so is probably the only island that
could have carried such a road.
As for its function, like any road it had more than one, but it is first and
foremost a road in the most pragmatic sense?an infrastructural element
that facilitated the movement of people, goods and information. Its primary
day-to-day function was economic. It traversed every tapere, and so may
have fostered a sense of island-wide unity. The road was located away from
the exposed beach ridges and close to productive lands. Bellwood (1971:149)
describes it as being built along an ecotone, minimising travel to inland and
coastal resources, but distance on a small island would not have been a
major settlement factor. Even so it was the focus of lowland settlement. The
earliest European observers of the island, from the London Missionary
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
150 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
Society, recorded how agriculture and settlement were closely related with
the road
Almost every individual having his Kaina or small farm cultivated with
plantains, ti, taro, yams etc., so that the whole settlement appeared one
extensive garden.... The road is a tolerable good one in most Places and
shaded from the sun by the branches of the spreading trees. The land on each
side of the road was cultivated all the way, and on many little farms a house
was standing for the accommodation of the owner when he comes to look
after his land, food, &c... The houses of the people are on each side of the
road surrounded with little gardens in which various kinds of vegetables were
growing (Williams and Barff 1830).
There is a good road around the island, which the natives call the ara medua,
or parent path, both sides of which are lined with bananas and mountain
plantains.... The houses of the inhabitants were situated from ten to thirty
yards or more from this pathway (Williams 1837:205).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 151
Of the rituals that directed and controlled tapu, rituals of binding are
universal. On Rarotonga the missionary Charles Pitman (1833 [II]:207)
describes how the carved wooden gods were wrapped in rolls of cloth:
When the god was displeased the prophets would open the door of their sacred
places (Maraes), & sweep away the dust, cobwebs &c. from the floor where
their god was placed & from their deity also. The prophet would then take off
his robes (immense rolls of native cloth) & carefully examine it as he unfolded
it. They often found the excrements of rats, their nests &c. in it, & large holes
eaten by these sacrilegious intruders, which when discovered the prophet
would inform the people of the cause of the anger of their deity, & give
orders for fresh cloth to be made, & a new kiikii to be adzed out, as the only
means of appeazing the anger of their offended god.
Taking the rolls of cloth off the gods must have been an anxious, even
dangerous event for pre-Christian Rarotongans. This was a tapu removing
ritual that de-sanctified the old god image (ki 'iki 7), requiring the carving of
a new one.
At the installation of a chief, his mana was bound up by his maro 'loin
cloth' that concealed his genitals, the source of his generative potency. Such
a ceremony is described in the Minute Books of the Cook Island Land Courts.
It was performed by the Potikitaua (a priestly title) at the installation of
Tinomana Mereana (incidentally a female ariki) in 1881 (Anautoa 1906
[M.B.II]:318, Taraare 1906 [M.B.II]:322). In the same case, the Potikitaua
is described winding cloth around the newly built house of Makea Ariki
(Urataua 1906 [M.B.II]:320). For New Zealand Maori, this latter ritual,
although similar to sanctifying tapu binding ceremonies, was a de-sanctifying
ritual, separating the house from divine influence and making it fit for human
habitation (Smith 1974:40). It seems to have been the same on Rarotonga.
Other important related rituals are the ritual circuits of chiefs and gods.
The circuits of Lono and K? around Hawai'i have been made famous by
Sahlins' (1981) analysis of the death of Captain Cook. The Rarotongan
analogue is the circuit made by Tangi'ia when he first came to the island.
Not only did this circuit establish the political system, it both bound the
tapu, controlling and directing the mana of the gods for human use, and,
like the house-binding ritual, made the island safe for human habitation.
Tangi'ia's route is permanently inscribed on the landscape in the Ara Metua.
The ceremonial route linking the marae replicates the ceremonial circuit of
Tangi'ia that established them, so that the Ara Metua makes the whole island
a ritually sanctified landscape. The worship of the great pan-Polynesian
gods took place here, where the ariki continued the tarpw-controlling work
of their predecessor, Tangi'ia. The Ara Metua and its associated marae are
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
152 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
the physical aspects of a coherent pan-island ritual system, and were integral
to the process of mediation between humans and the divine.
The road is not a physically imposing monument like the heiau of Hawai4 i,
not so overt an advertisement of power, but by virtue of its size and the
labour involved in building it, it undoubtedly falls into the category of
"monumental construction". Monumental structures may arise from
consensus between elites and the commoner labour force, or alternatively
elite domination and the suppression of dissent (Hodder 1994:538). This
begs the questions, what were the socio-political parameters that led to its
construction, and what were the socio-political consequences of its being
there? Does it represent political unity and consensus, or the imposition of
hegemonic rule? These questions are not easily answered either from the
archaeological record or from traditional histories as they are currently
understood.
In 1903, the New Zealand colonial administration established a system
of land courts in the Cook Islands. The oral traditions given as evidence in
the courts and recorded in the minute books are an important source of
ethnohistoric information for Rarotonga that seems to be reliable to at least
150 years before European contact (Campbell n.d.). From the time of Tangi'ia
up until this time, there is no direct evidence either of political unity or
disunity, hegemony or independence, although the establishment of the island
encircling ceremonial route indicates a unified ritual system. Although
mata'iapo and matakeinanga may have been more or less independent,
they were so within an island-wide system that was unified in its operation,
and independence was defined in relation to other matakeinanga, rather
than in opposition to them. The road cut across tapere boundaries and would
have reinforced these tendencies. It also represented, and was an integral
part of, a unified ritual system. Whether this political and ritual system was
practiced under a dominant paramount or independent mata a would
have made little difference to its operation.
The form, function and location of the road can usefully be analysed, in
both settlement and landscape, with respect to at least three concepts?
ritual, economy and environment. These are not either/or concepts. The
road's role as marker of an ecotone and a ceremonial route are both central
to the analysis of settlement and landscape presented here. The road is a
source of fascination and could easily be over-analysed, which I hope I
have not done, but this would be preferable to downplaying its importance.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 153
MARAE
Figure 1 shows the Ara Metua and all archaeologically recorded marae.
Those that Tara 'Are (2000) records as being established by Tangi'ia are
highlighted. Only nine of the 47 marae established by him have so far been
recorded, but the first quarter of his circuit can be traced. Not all marae, nor
even all marae along the Ara Metua, were founded by Tangi'ia, and not all
marae founded by him are adjacent to the road. Tara 'Are (2000:155)
describes the establishment of ?rai te Tonga and "after this [Tangi'ia and
his companions] went inland and made another marae and called it Paepae
tua-iva; dedicated to the god Tonga-iti, while Ta'1-v?nanga was made the
guardian. Again they went seaward and built a marae named Msrae-koroa."
This inland:seaward movement mirrors an important spatial contrast
throughout island Polynesia. Indeed landward:seaward is the basis of spatial
reference and directionality in most Oceanic languages (Palmer in press).
The seaward direction is also associated with high status on Rarotonga
(Baltaxe 1975:82). The coast is associated with tapu, horizons and things
foreign. The inland, on the other hand, is a lower status realm, associated
with the non-tapu and the domestic, so that the seaward:inland (tav.uta)
contrast is a status contrast.
Marae
o established by Tangi'ia
other
Figure 1. The Ara Metua and recorded marae on Rarotonga, with those
established by Tangi'ia highlighted. Numbers refer to their place
in the sequence as given by Tara 'Are (2000).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
154 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 155
Figure 3. View of Te Manga from Arai te Tonga. Te Atukura is the smaller twin
peak to the left of and behind Te Manga.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
156 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
been located just high enough on a ridge spur to have a narrow view of the
ocean as well as mountain views, as described by Yamaguchi (2000:149).
This marae was not part of the public ritual of the Ara Metua, but would
have been associated with the private community ritual of Pa Ariki and the
community of Turangi Tapere. This community ritual would have intersected
with the public ritual at P?kuru Va'anui. Piako has clear views of almost the
entire head of the valley 'tapere, so a defensive or lookout role for this site
is also a possibility. There is little overlap between the viewsheds of P?kuru
Va'anui and Piako, but they are complementary; between them they view
most of the valley.
RARI 57 has a view of neither peaks nor sea. Domestic sites further down
Kiikii Valley have good views of Ikurangi and Oroenga at least, though not
of the sea. There is in fact a low hill at the mouth of the valley that bends the
Kiikii Stream sharply to the west as it enters the coastal plain. This hill is
less than 20m high and so does not show up on any contour map, with the
result that it does not form part of the viewshed analysis. Even so it still
excludes a sea view for the entire valley floor. Although the viewshed of
RARI 57 is limited, it is still a fairly elaborate structure (Campbell 2000:53).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 157
Ritual here would have been largely divorced from the public ritual circuit.
It would have been private, associated with the community.
The Land Court records mention a marae called Toronae in Kiikii Valley,
which I have suggested is probably the same as RARI57 (Campbell
2000:51). Pakitoa (1908 [M.B.V]:20) tells the court that "my ancestor
Taumatatau was at Kiikii, Toronae was his marae". Uritaua (1912
[M.B.V]:141) gives a little more historical detail:
The fight was at Kiikii.... The tribe were in the valley at Toronae and did not
join in the fight. Kapo their chief warrior stood in the entrance of the valley
and the tribe were behind him. Kapo would not let them join in the fight. But
when he heard Rupe was killed he let them go out of the valley.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
158 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
blank space. The other reason is that views to mountain peaks are only one
of many factors influencing the location of marae. Many of these other
factors will be entirely contingent, and so cannot be modelled predictively.
Another limitation, and a common limitation of landscape studies in
general, is that there is no notion of the processes by which the landscape
has been created and changed through time. The analysis is heavily
dependent on the works of Tara 'Are (2000), written in the 1860s, and the
records of the Land Courts, recorded from 1903 on. While these clearly and
reliably refer to the late pre-contact period, they are nonetheless limited to
that time. Tangi'ia's story is a justification of the political system and social
self-image of the time, set in quasi-historical terms. Marae, the Ara Metua
and the ritual system associated with them evolved together, as did the story
of Tangi'ia that legitimises the system, but the story itself is timeless (at
least as far as Western historical notions of time are concerned), and this
evolutionary process is invisible.
THE ROLE OF MARAE
One implication of this discussion is that different marae had different
roles in the community and in public ritual. The Proto Polynesian term
*malaqe is glossed in Biggs and Clark (n.d.) as 'open, cleared space used as
a meeting-place or ceremonial place'. Although the marae concept and its
architectural expression have been elaborated differently throughout Eastern
Polynesia, the meeting/ceremonial concept remains central. On Rarotonga
they are characterised by their diversity (Campbell 2000:64), but not all
societies exhibit variation in marae morphology. In the Cook Islands,
Yamaguchi (2000:178) demonstrates that Mangaian marae are very
homogenous in their morphology and topographical location, correlated
with the highly unified and formalised political and religious system on the
island in late prehistory. Yet, marae on Tongareva, in the Northern Cook
group, are also homogenous in their morphology, even though the atoll
lacked a unified political system. Tongarevan marae functioned as territorial
markers, and so they shared a uniform system of territorial signs expressed
in a uniform morphology (Yamaguchi 2000:224). Rarotongan marae were
more cosmological in nature, and Yamaguchi (2000:225) proposes that the
variation in morphology reflects variation in ritual space. The degree and
nature of variation in marae morphology in different societies depends
largely on contingent factors.
Although Mangaian marae lack significant variation and are probably
culturally conservative in form, retaining many older features (Kirch and
Green 2001:251), the activities associated with individual marae were
nonetheless varied. In fact some were "entirely secular" (Hiroa 1934:174).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 159
Pukuru Vaanui was the court of royalty (koutu) of Pa and Kainuku, a very
sacred place. Maroariki means the binding on of the sacred girdle. The children
of arikis when bom were all placed in this koutu.... When an ariki is appointed
he is taken to the koutu and there installed.... Each mataiapo has his koutu
where he was installed (Uritaua 1912 [M.B.V]:135).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
160 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
Other examples from the records also show that different marae served
specific purposes (though doubtless any marae was associated with more
than just one particular activity). Toronae has already been discussed, and
Vaerota is another example:
They agreed to act and fought Tamaariki and his people who were driven out
and from that time he had no power. His power went to the mataiapos of
Takitimu. And the two arikis. They all returned home and met at Vaerota and
it was decided to hold this land as conquerors. So they went and seized it
each from Teaio to Maoate. Each had his own piece (Te Rei 1904 [M.B.I] : 115).
STRUCTURAL SPACE
The opposition coast:mountain is of a different kind to the tav.uta
opposition. It is not one of status since both mountain and coast are signifiers
of tapu and status. The opposition, from this analysis, represents at least in
part a contrast between public and private (or corporate). Mountain marae
are located deep within the tapere, away from the public ceremonial route
of the Ara Metua and so are the focus of community, rather than pan-island,
ritual. There is a movement from the coast, which was associated with tapu
and status, but public, to the low-status zone of valley floors with their
domestic associations, back to a high-status zone in the mountains, associated
with tapu and the heavens, and with private ritual. That the three spaces
may be conceptually linked is indicated by the use of both local and imported
(from elsewhere on the island) materials, that is basalt and coral. It is notable
that, in contrast to the usual archaeological definition of a tapere as being
centred on a valley?an agricultural and settlement zone?the definition
invariably given in the Land Courts was "from the mountain to the sea"?
from one high status zone to another.
Hanson and Hanson (1983:21) note the gender basis for structural
oppositions in New Zealand Maori culture, a situation common throughout
East Polynesia. Male, tapu, active is opposed to female, non-tapu, passive.
These associations can get very complex, and will only be touched on here.
The male/seaward:female/inland opposition, and the male/mountain
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 161
Mountain Coast
(Heavens) (Ara Metua, Ocean)
(Domestic)
Private^-^ Public
(corporate)
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
162 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Camphell 163
boundaries. The reason for this may lie in the tapere system.6 Tapere
boundaries follow the ridge-lines between major valley systems, by nature
immovable, and smaller sections are similarly often centred on tributary
valleys. These boundaries may have been seen as essentially set. Williams
(1837:204) noted the "rows of superb chestnut trees (inocarpus) planted at
equal distances, and stretching from the mountain's base to the sea", which
marked permanent boundaries on the coastal plain. It is unlikely that
boundaries had become less mutable during the missionary period, or
because of the influence of the Court, which was always limited. The Minute
Books lack evidence for the point field model strongly affecting land tenure,
and this may have been the Rarotongan norm.
It may be of limited relevance to Rarotongan conceptions of physical
space, but the point field model continues to work as a conception of
Rarotongan social space. Social structure in pre-contact Rarotonga was
notably fluid and variable (Campbell n.d.) and this can be explained as a
consequence of changing social boundaries. Mana can be seen as a point
field concept and as the mana of contending individuals or communities
waxes and wanes, so the social and status boundaries between them change.
If this is the case, it begs the question of just how limited the model as a
conception of physical space is for Rarotonga. If landscapes can be usefully
analysed with reference to mana and tapu, point field concepts, then the
relative immutability of boundaries on Rarotonga is a contingent exception
to a probably general Polynesian concept.
The landscape is a product of environmental and cultural factors, of the
adaptation of one to the other. Settlement is constrained by environment,
but humans also modify their environment. The coastal zone of public ritual
along the Ara Metua coincides with the highly productive zone of lowland
settlement. Inland of this zone are lower status, private, community ritual
sites, occupying the zone of inland settlement and production. Further inland
still are the high status mountain marae. Thus a concentric zonation of soils
and productive resources (which includes the outermost zones of ocean,
reef and lagoon) is matched by a concentric zonation of settlement and by a
concentric status zonation of marae. This is hardly likely to be a coincidence.
Overlying this is the radial pattern of the tapere. That the two spatial patterns
together are a diagram of tapu binding and controlling the radiating
emanations of mana is possibly no coincidence either. Certainly radiating
valleys and concentric ecological zones existed on Rarotonga before humans
did, but landscapes are found as well as formed.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
164 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
DISCUSSION
I have presented a model of the ritual use of space on Rarotonga and
sought insights that can be incorporated into a more comprehensive model
of spatial organisation. Settlement and landscape are both spatial approaches
to archaeological interpretation, but there the similarity seems to end. Their
articulation is not as straightforward a matter as some have proposed. The
landscape analysis undertaken here has not grown naturally out of a
settlement analysis, and has not provided a wider context for it. They deal
with the same things, but they approach those things from quite different
viewpoints. It is not my intention here to attempt a solution to this knotty
theoretical and methodological problem, merely to point out that we are not
currently able to integrate the ritual and conceptual aspects of landscape
into a settlement pattern study. In this respect I have not done what I set out
to do, but perhaps this brings the problem into clearer focus.
Monuments like marae and the Ara Metua are extensions of, or links to,
the sacred landscape. Mountains and marae are identified one with the other.
This sort of identification is at the heart of the landscape concept, but this
will not account for all identifications of either mountains or marae. Multiple
readings of the same sign, be it architectural monument, landscape element
or the relationships between them, are possible, preferable, even unavoidable.
Such readings would, in pre-contact times, have been complexly interrelated
in ways that gave rise to further readings (Bradley 2000:145). Most of this
is not now recoverable, hence the subtitle of this paper.
The landscapes presented here have benefited from access to the records
of the Land Court and the published account of Tangi'ia's story. Landscape
is an arena for political and social action. The formation and perception of
landscape is a continual process, often carried out in contests over rights
and access to land and resources (both physical and conceptual) (Snead and
Preucel 1999:173). Thus the Land Courts are part of this process of
recreation, or creating anew the landscape, reconfiguring a historically
constituted landscape in a time of great social change in order to deal with
the outcomes of that change. The process, in this instance, was mediated by
an external power, the imposition of court rulings. The Land Court can be
seen as an administrative attempt to appropriate the process of landscape
formation. In order to effectively administer the land, it had to suppress the
Rarotongans' capacity to speak for and about their own landscape. Its failure
to achieve its aims stems from its inability to appropriate the discourse of
landscape creation. It had some limited success, for instance, in imposing a
European cadastre on Rarotongan land holding, but this was largely cosmetic.
Rarotongans maintained their own discourse, which constitutes the basis of
the ethnographic and oral historic material of the Minute Books. Equally,
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 165
the writing (in the 1860s) and especially the eventual publication (from
1918) of Tara 'Are's version of the Tangi'ia story is another, though more
subtle, example of landscape recreation. Tara 'Are's version has become
the received version. Though others exist both in print (e.g., Maretu 1985,
Te Aia 1893, Williams 1837) and in the Land Court records (e.g., Te Pa
1905 [M.B.II]:53), Tara 'Are's version has gained the weight of authority.
It constrains the mythic worldview of modern Rarotongans as much as it
constrains my analysis.
The Rarotongan worldview was inscribed on the landscape, reinforcing
social continuity, identity and status. All landscapes, by definition,
incorporate the worldview of their creators/inhabitors in this fashion, but
this analysis has benefited form the assistance of the ethnohistoric record,
without which it could not have proceeded as it did. On its own a landscape/
viewshed analysis could not predict the status of marae or which lowland
marae were established by Tangi'ia, though it would still expose some
general patterns. Another advantage of using oral tradition is that it gives
direction, suggesting lines of inquiry that might not otherwise be obvious,
such as the Tangi'ia story making more explicit the tapu binding function
of the Ara Metua. Landscape analysis benefits from the use of ethnohistory
not just in specific instances but also in general methodological terms.
Landscape seems to provide a fertile meeting ground for archaeology and
ethnohistory. I believe these sorts of archaeological analyses (explorations
might be an equally applicable term) will become increasingly important
and appropriate in Oceania, where the ethnohistoric record is so rich.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper has developed out of my doctoral research at the Archaeology
Department, University of Sydney. Thanks are due to my supervisors, Peter White
and Ian Johnson. Robin Torrence, Roland Fletcher and Tracey Ireland are just the
first three of many who discussed with me some of the ideas that ended up in this
paper at various times over various cups of coffee and glasses of red wine. On
Rarotonga Ngatuaine Maui and the late Kauraka Kauraka in particular have earned
my gratitude for enabling my work. Dave Herdrich and Bill Palmer generously
supplied me with copies of their unpublished manuscripts. Jacqui Craig and Simon
Holdaway have read and commented on earlier drafts of this paper.
NOTES
1. The term landscape derives from Western art traditions, and ultimately implies
a proprietorial oversight of the land, an abstraction of nature from culture (or
vice versa) and the resulting cultural representation of nature (Lemaire 1997,
Olwig 1993). In non-Western societies this opposition of nature and culture
may not exist, so that the social scientist's concepts are not directly relevant to
the societies under study. It seems impossible to escape the use of visual
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
166 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
metaphors in describing landscape, even when talking about the not visible.
The same vision that gazes on a painted or painterly landscape is the possessive
vision that gazes on imperial and colonial domains?the Enlightenment or
Western gaze (Bender 1999) that revealed the South Pacific to the oversight of
missionaries and colonial administrators. The scholarly gaze on its subject is a
descendant of that vision. Salmond (1982) points out that these metaphors
arise out of the Western system and conception of knowledge, and that other
knowledge systems use different metaphors. The visual metaphor must be used
with care, and any attempt to use the landscape concept to retrieve some putative
non-Western nature/culture unity (rather than use it as an analytical tool within
the Western tradition) will ultimately fail, since the concept derives from the
nature:culture dichotomy.
2. By viewshed is meant the area that can be viewed from the marae. Murivai and
Pureora could have been included in the analysis, but have been omitted in
order to avoid cluttering the map. If the reader finds the map already too cluttered
they might simply note that where viewsheds overlap the symbology will be
relatively darker, therefore dark equals three overlapping viewsheds, light equals
only one.
3. Some points about the limitations of viewshed analyses, and this analysis in
particular, should be made here. The analyses were carried out in the Spatial
Analyst module of Arc View 3.1 on a computerised digital elevation model
(DEM), which in this case is derived from a 20m contour topographic map
(NZMS 272/8/6). This is a rather coarse baseline, and viewshed accuracy is
limited by the definition of the base data. Microtopography will not register at
this level, and a 3m hill can block a view just as well as a 300m one. Viewsheds
are based on the view from ground l?vel, taking no account of the height of
any possible, but currently unknown, superstructures on the marae, or even
the height of a human, both of which increase the view, and taking no account
of a view being blocked by vegetation. Large i 'i (Inocarpus fagifer) and 'utu
(Barringtonia asiatica) are today associated with many marae, limiting their
viewsheds. This may also have been the case in prehistory?Gill (1876:302)
describes sacred trees on many marae of Mangaia. The view, both today and
in pre-contact times, may have been more conceptual than real. Viewsheds are
taken from a single point, whereas marae cover an area. This is particularly
the case in the Tupapa Valley mouth, where the marae around Arai te Tonga
virtually abut each other. Parts of both Koroa and Murivai (Figure 2) probably
lie outside the area that views all four peaks. There is no substitute for standing
at these sites and observing the actual view in person, as Yamaguchi (2000:140)
has done. However the GIS analysis replicated Yamaguchi's observations for
Marae Piako, and the other viewsheds may be confidently assumed to obtain a
similar accuracy. Finally the peaks I have plotted and labelled are derived
from the same topographic map, and were chosen by the cartographer for
topographic as much as social reasons, though it is hard to think that such
imposing landscape elements as the four peaks mentioned above would not
have been equally imposing to pre-contact Rarotongans.
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Campbell 167
REFERENCES
Note: References to evidence from the Rarotongan Land Court Records take the
form: Witness, year. Land section name(s) and number(s). [Minute book
number]: pages of case (may be discontinuous).
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
168 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Matthew Camphell 169
Maretu, 1985. Cannibals and Converts: Radical Change in the Cook Islands. Edited
and translated by Marjorie Crocombe. Suva: University of the South Pacific.
Olwig, Kenneth, 1993. Sexual cosmology: Nation and landscape at the conceptual
interstices of nature and culture; or what does landscape really mean? In B.
Bender (ed.), Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Providence/Oxford: Berg,
pp.307^13
Pakitoa, 1908. Taraare 102D. [M.B.V]:20.
Palmer, Bill, n.d. Absolute spatial reference and the grammaticalisation of
perceptually salient phenomena. In G. Bennardo (ed.), Representing Space in
Oceania. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Australian National University. In press.
Parker, R. Hamilton, 1974. Survey of the Ara Metua. In M.M. Trotter (ed.),
Prehistory of the Southern Cook Islands. Canterbury Museum Bulletin 6:63
69. Christchurch.
Pitman, Charles, MSS. 1827-1845. Journals. 6 volumes, State Library of New South
Wales, Sydney.
Sahlins, Marshall D., 1981. Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities: Structure
in the Early History of the Sandwich Island Kingdom. Ann Arbor: The University
of Michigan Press.
Salmond, Anne, 1982. Theoretical landscapes: On cross-cultural conceptions of
knowledge. In D. Parkin (ed.), Semantic Anthropology. London: Academic
Press, pp.65-87.
Savage, Stephen, 1980. A Dictionary of the Maori Language of Rarotonga. Suva:
Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.
Shore, Bradd, 1989. Mana and tapu. In A. Howard and R. Borofsky (eds),
Developments in Polynesian Ethnology. Honolulu: University of Hawai4 i Press,
pp. 137-74.
Smith, Jean, 1974. Tapu Removal in Maori Religion. Polynesian Society Memoir
40. Wellington.
Snead, James E. and Robert W. Preucel, 1999. The ideology of settlement: Ancestral
Keres landscapes in the northern Rio Grande. In W. Ashmore and A.B. Knapp
(eds), Archaeologies of Landscape: Contemporary Perspectives. Maiden:
Blackwell, pp. 169-97.
Taraare, 1906. Arerangi 128G. [M.B.II]:318-325.
Tara 'Are, Te Ariki, 2000. History and Traditions of Rarotonga. Edited by Richard
K. Walter and Rangi Moeka'a. Polynesian Society Memoir 51. Auckland.
Te Aia, 1893. Genealogies and historical notes from Rarotonga, Part III. Journal of
the Polynesian Society, 2(4):271-79.
Te Aia, 1907. Takinuku IIB. [M.B.III]:234-38.
Te Pa, 1905. Pokoinu 107, Areanu 104, Nikao 106, Puapuautu 105A & B.
[M.B.II] :49-82.
Te Rei, Samuela, 1904. Avaavaroa 17. [M.B.I]: 107-39.
Thomas, Julian, 1993. The politics of vision and the archaeologies of landscape. In
B. Bender (ed.), Landscape: Politics and Perspective. Providence/Oxford: Berg,
pp. 19-48.
Trotter, Michael M., 1974. Appendix 2: Radiocarbon dates from Rarotonga. In M.
M. Trotter (ed.), Prehistory of the Southern Cook Islands. Canterbury Museum
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
170 Ritual Landscape in Pre-contact Rarotonga: A Brief Reading
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:19:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms