Shag mouth layers rich in human living

Press, 10 February 1989, Page 9

Shag mouth layers rich in human living

By

HOWARD KEENE

(text and photographs)

THE DUNES at Shag River mouth, near Palmerston in Otago, are probably one of the most dug-over stretches of sand dune in the country; for a month recently, a group of people were digging more holes there, in what to the untrained eye looks like ordinary, lupin-covered dune. Shag mouth is one of the large early moa hunter (early period of Maori settlement) occupation sites on the east coast of the South Island and has been a source of interest and debate for over a century. The area has been a focus of interest since von Haast, Hutton, Hamilton and other learned gentlemen of the nineteenth century took to the dunes with spades — then fiercely and often antagonistically debated their conclusions — through to David Teviotdale, a bookseller in nearby Palmerston, who dug there extensively in the early part of this century. One of the great debates in New Zealand archaeology evolved at the Shag mouth. Haast saw evidence for an earlier Melanesian population in- New Zealand. The debate raged for years, and it was not until well into this century that a Polynesian origin for the earliest settlers was firmly established.

For a month in NovemberDecember It was the turn of a University of Otago anthropology department team to excavate Shag mouth dunes under the direction of Dr Atholl Anderson, an expert on southern Maori prehistory- He has recently presented important submissions to the Waitangi Tribunal in support of Ngai Tahu land claims.

It was obvious that small, controlled excavations, carried out in a modern way to extract the maximum information, should take place at this important site where so much has been collected but little is known of the people who lived there. The question was where to dig? So thorough had been the fossicking of previous searchers that it seemed a near-impossible task to locate significant, undisturbed ground. That is where the detective work of Brian Ailingham, a freelance archaeologist and the project’s co-director, from Seacliff, north of Dunedin, helped. He has kept a close eye on this and other archaeological sites in Otago and Canterbury for more than 20 years and knows this site intimately. work in the area, particularly working through Teviotdale’s diaries, has enabled Brian Ailingham to locate undisturbed occupational site at Shag mouth.

Teviotdale visited Shag mouth regularly over a 10-year period, making an extensive collection of artefacts now housed in the Otago Museum. In his 1924 paper in the “Journal of the Polynesian Society” he say£ “For the first few years I thought of nothing but finding curios.” In 1920 he was advised by the renowned enthnologlst, H. D. Skinner, to dig systematically, keep a diary with plans and sections and to catalogue all finds. Teviotdale says his areas of digging gradually joined up, “till practically the whole site has been covered."

The area today is windswept beach and dunes, backed by estuarine mudflats and a Salicornia tidal flat, which is only covered by water at spring tides. The channel of the Shag River reaches the sea by squeezing between the northern end of the dune belt and the rocks of Shag Point. Bird life abounds in the area and includes shag, gulls, oystercatchers, black swans, a small number of graceful royal spoonbills and the occasional penguin. Because of the drought this season, vehicle access was possible across the Salicornia flat to the campsite about 200 metres from the excavations. Before the digging started a bulldozer was brought in to clear away the dune sand covering the chosen site, allowing the team to get straight into the occupation layers below. As sometimes happens, the bulldozer turned up one of the finds of the excavation — a huge, broken hogback adze. Another adze fragment turned up nearby, making a perfect fit with the first piece, to produce an impressive tool more than 30 centimetres long. Once the overburden was stripped off, a grid was laid out and digging commenced. Excavation requires patience and concentration, and a knowledge of when to stop. Hasty work may mean a trowel through a fragile artefact or bone. The position of an object in relation to its surroundings is of vital importance, and this information may be lost if work proceeds before it is properly recorded. Slowly peeling back the layers at Shag mouth revealed horizons rich in charcoal interbedded with cleaner dune sand. It is difficult to estimate the length of time represented by this stratification. But compared to the modern situation, it would be quite possible for an old living surface to be covered by centimetres of wind-blown sand during a single storm. Hang! stones, blackened and

often heat-fractured, were spread throughout the excavation, but in some areas. there were obvious concentrations of stones and charcoal, marking the sites of old ovens. A deep shell midden in one corner of the site provided very different excavating conditions. Two metres or more of mainly cockle shells with some moa bone and broken artefacts indi-

cated a hollow where shells and other waste was tipped. When an artefact of significant bone was uncovered, a white plastic marker, aptly named a “tombstone,” was put beside it to prevent loss or disturbance by a clumsy foot before it could be recorded. At that stage, Rick McGovernWilson, a Ph.D. student at Otago University, collected his data. He

is making a taphonomic study of this and other sites: studying what happens to animal remains — in this case the distribution of remains around a site of human occupation. To that end McGovern-Wilson accurately surveyed the position of bones, artefacts and features such as cooking areas. The information will be fed into a computer program, which will provide a three-dimensional picture of the site in which the layers can be peeled off to reveal what was going on at any one level. He is hoping this type of study will give archaeologists a clearer understanding of what occurred at a site.

The artefacts and animal remains at Shag mouth suggest that the people there engaged in an economy fairly typical of the east coast of the South Island during the early period of settlement . — a lifestyle based on hunting moa and fishing. Flake tools were common. Huge blades and choppers made from quartzite turned up frequently and were probably used for butchering moa. These quartzite blades were a distinctive feature of the early settlers of the southern part'of the South Island, and they are rarely found north of Otago. Some were used directly as knives after being skilfully flaked oft a core stone, while others were retouched or finely pecked along the cutting edge to give a serrated blade. Excavated fishing gear included hooks, lure points and sinkers, and the tools used to make them — stone files, grinders and drillpoints. Many beautiful fishing artefacts have come from Shag mouth over the years, including an exquisite stone minnow lure, shaped like a

small fish originally with a hook point in the tail, which was featured in Te Maori exhibition. Often the most interesting artefacts are not the finished pieces, but those which broke at various stages of manufacture. The method of one-piece bone fishhook manufacture can be clearly seen from the throwaway pieces and pieces which didn’t make the grade. At Shag mouth a whole sequence was found ranging from the piece of moa bone sawn to a suitable size for cutting out a fishhook, through to small bone pieces with drill holes round the outside representing the discarded core of a one-piece hook, to the finished hook shape but with drill holes still around the inside which had broken before being finished. Food was probably plentiful during the occupation of Shag mouth. Bird remains included moa, kaka, albatross, weka, quail, shag and penguin. Fish, shellfish, seal, dog and rat found in the excavation were probably all eaten in varying amounts. Moa bones were scattered throughout the site, and the evidence is strong that moa were brought to the site and butchered. At some sites it is uncertain whether the birds were brought there, and in some places old moa bones may have been used to make tools after the moa was extinct. Feet and neck bones of moa were particularly common at Shag mouth, suggesting the birds were brought to the site and killed, for it is unlikely that the ancient hunters would have carried unnecessary body parts if the carcases had to be transported any distance. The moa neck is made up of small fragile bones called tracheal rings, which quickly be? came known as “cheezels” on site, for obvious reasons. They mostly occurred as isolated rings, but, occasionally, a whole row of rings representing a discarded neck, was excavated. Large moa leg bones, often

with the shaft smashed, presumably *to extract marrow, were common and probably the main meat joints. Moa egg-shell fragments and gizzard stones were also common, scattered and in concentrations. How long ago were people living at Shag mouth and for how long? Was the area occupied at the same time as other rich moa hunter sites such as Wairau Bar in Marlborough or Redcliffs? These questions may be resolved by radiocarbon dating. The style of artefacts and widespread use of moa suggest this is an old site, but just how old? Previous dates on samples of shell and moa bone taken by Michael Trotter, director of Canterbury Museum, gave ages of about.7oo years.

Samples for dating from the 1988 excavation will be taken from different stratigraphic levels and from different materials — probably bone, shell and charcoal to try and get a consensus on the age and an idea of how long the site was occupied. Another question is whether this was a permanent village site or a place visited seasonally to hunt and fish. Little emerged in the excavation to suggest permanent settlement structures such as houses. Most of the evidence may have been lost on other parts of the Shag mouth site by the earlier diggings and the question may never be resolved. If it was a permanently inhabited site a burial ground would be expected, but apart from a few human bones found by Teviotdale, no burial ground is known. One thing is certain; what is found in a dig like this gives a biased picture. Wood and fibre generally do not survive, except in caves and swamps. Wood must have been used widely because of the number of adzes and chisels which have come from Shag mouth. One surviving wooden artefact — a wooden bowl — was excavated by Teviotdale in the airless environment of the swamp to the west of the dunes; and another, a wooden lure shank, was uncovered during this excavation. Nothing is known of clothing or other fibres such as nets and mats from Shag mouth, although we can surmise that plenty of clothing was worn, given the exposed nature of the site and its southerly latitude. A month of excavation is not the end of the story. Many ? months of analysis remain on the , samples collected. # In the final analysis it is net the statistics, bones and artefacts in isolation that are important, but an over-all understaading and respect for the people and their culture who were the first settlers in this area many cehturies ago. ' ;

Visits over 10-year period

Quartzite blades frequent