Atholl Anderson, Lorena Becerra-Valdivia, Haidee Cadd, Christopher E. Marjo, Jonathan Palmer, Chris Turney, Janet M. Wilmshurst
{"title":"史前波利尼西亚人扩散的南部边界的年代和位置","authors":"Atholl Anderson, Lorena Becerra-Valdivia, Haidee Cadd, Christopher E. Marjo, Jonathan Palmer, Chris Turney, Janet M. Wilmshurst","doi":"10.1002/arco.5337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Prehistoric Polynesian voyaging into high latitudes with landfall in Antarctica remains a widely credited proposition. We examine it through archaeological and environmental evidence from the Subantarctic region of the southwest Pacific, focussing upon an extensive archaeological site at Sandy Bay on Enderby Island. Combining a new set of radiocarbon ages with former, older, ages we show that the site is now within the same rapid expansion phase in which South Polynesia was first colonised. Radiocarbon ages across the site indicate a single continuous settlement, probably of some decades. Consideration of limiting factors in Subantarctic settlement, including of seafaring capability and critical resources, suggests that the site was about as far south as prehistoric habitation could be sustained and was probably vacated at the onset of the Little Ice age (LIA) in the late 14th century. An absence of prehistoric remains on islands further south also suggests that Polynesian exploration reached a boundary 2000 km short of Antarctica. The southern case is discussed briefly in the wider context of Polynesian expansion.</p>","PeriodicalId":46465,"journal":{"name":"Archaeology in Oceania","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/arco.5337","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The age and position of the southern boundary of prehistoric Polynesian dispersal\",\"authors\":\"Atholl Anderson, Lorena Becerra-Valdivia, Haidee Cadd, Christopher E. Marjo, Jonathan Palmer, Chris Turney, Janet M. Wilmshurst\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/arco.5337\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Prehistoric Polynesian voyaging into high latitudes with landfall in Antarctica remains a widely credited proposition. We examine it through archaeological and environmental evidence from the Subantarctic region of the southwest Pacific, focussing upon an extensive archaeological site at Sandy Bay on Enderby Island. Combining a new set of radiocarbon ages with former, older, ages we show that the site is now within the same rapid expansion phase in which South Polynesia was first colonised. Radiocarbon ages across the site indicate a single continuous settlement, probably of some decades. Consideration of limiting factors in Subantarctic settlement, including of seafaring capability and critical resources, suggests that the site was about as far south as prehistoric habitation could be sustained and was probably vacated at the onset of the Little Ice age (LIA) in the late 14th century. An absence of prehistoric remains on islands further south also suggests that Polynesian exploration reached a boundary 2000 km short of Antarctica. The southern case is discussed briefly in the wider context of Polynesian expansion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archaeology in Oceania\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/arco.5337\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archaeology in Oceania\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/arco.5337\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeology in Oceania","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/arco.5337","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The age and position of the southern boundary of prehistoric Polynesian dispersal
Prehistoric Polynesian voyaging into high latitudes with landfall in Antarctica remains a widely credited proposition. We examine it through archaeological and environmental evidence from the Subantarctic region of the southwest Pacific, focussing upon an extensive archaeological site at Sandy Bay on Enderby Island. Combining a new set of radiocarbon ages with former, older, ages we show that the site is now within the same rapid expansion phase in which South Polynesia was first colonised. Radiocarbon ages across the site indicate a single continuous settlement, probably of some decades. Consideration of limiting factors in Subantarctic settlement, including of seafaring capability and critical resources, suggests that the site was about as far south as prehistoric habitation could be sustained and was probably vacated at the onset of the Little Ice age (LIA) in the late 14th century. An absence of prehistoric remains on islands further south also suggests that Polynesian exploration reached a boundary 2000 km short of Antarctica. The southern case is discussed briefly in the wider context of Polynesian expansion.
期刊介绍:
Archaeology in Oceania is published online and in print versions three times a year: April, July, October. It accepts articles and research reports in prehistoric and historical archaeology, modern material culture and human biology of ancient and modern human populations. Its primary geographic focus is Australia, the islands of the Pacific Ocean and lands of the western Pacific rim. All articles and research reports accepted as being within the remit of the journal and of appropriate standard will be reviewed by two scholars; authors will be informed of these comments though not necessarily of the reviewer’s names.