UNEXPECTED TRAJECTORIES: A HISTORY OF NIUEAN THROWING STONES

Transcription

1 UNEXPECTED TRAJECTORIES: A HISTORY OF NIUEAN THROWING STONES BARBARA ISAAC Oxford, England GWYNEIRA ISAAC Smithsonian Institution The throwing stones of Niue otherwise known as war hand-stones, war stones, fighting or battle stones are intensely rewarding to handle. They are carefully smoothed and evenly polished, fitting into the human hand with a satisfying shape and heft. To hold one provides a gratifying tactile experience. They are also the sole embodiment of a notable island behaviour, the existence of which has mostly faded from memory. Two fragments had been on exhibit within the Niue Museum, but unfortunately these were lost during the devastation brought by cyclone Heta in The only throwing stone on the island known to us resides with a keeper of traditional knowledge, Misa Kulatea, who inherited it from his uncle. Today, the majority of stones are housed in museums across the world. Their origins and particular histories, however, provide a curious trajectory illustrating the rapid social change experienced by Niueans in the mid 19th century, the collecting practices of missionaries, as well as the current configuration of these stones within ethnographic collections in museums in Europe, Australia and the United States. This paper sets out to explore the unique physical and social properties of these throwing stones their manufacture, use and cultural value alongside their collection history and how they became emblematic of a specific form of primitive warfare of the Savage Islanders. While sling stones are widely distributed around the Pacific, as well as represented in the literature (York and York 2011), few studies have focused on the uniqueness of the Niuean throwing stones as material and cultural phenomena that exhibit modifications particular to the physical properties governing thrown projectiles. The two notable exceptions to this omission are descriptions given by Percy Smith (1902: 211) and in 1926, Edwin Loeb (1971: 129), both of whom were writing in the early part of the 20th century long after the practice had been abandoned in Niue. Using information gleaned from the objects themselves, accounts from travellers, missionaries, ethnologists and archaeological data, as well as collection histories, we expand on this literature, examining the specific ways in which these stones have manifested Niuean and European cultural practices, and memories of the Savage Islands both in terms of acts of remembrance and forgetting. 369

2 370 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones This research sprang historically out of the intersection of two dissimilar yet intersecting interests: on the one hand, the possibility that the throwing of stones had been a behaviour essential to successful hunting at an early stage in human evolution (A.B. Isaac 1987) and, on the other, an interest in histories of loss and remembrance as explored through the process of collecting (G. Isaac in press). One of us (ABI), in searching for ethnographic accounts of stones modified for throwing, came across a reference by the popular 19th century writer on natural history, John George Wood (1870: 395), which led her to detailed descriptions by the anthropologist Edwin Loeb and his recording on Niue of fighting with stones modified for throwing. In attempting to identify museum holdings in order to compile statistics on the stones, a history of 19th century collecting emerged that touched on stories of encounter between cultures, the mission of early collectors, as well as the development of anthropology as a discipline. With the apparent absence of stones on Niue today, the importance of the museum holdings is inescapable, yet their removal and relocation also acts as indicators of the social histories involved, in particular, the actively disrupted relationships with a past that requires critical examination. In the following pages we present the accounts of first contact between Niueans and Europeans, also using these records to think through Niuean practices of stone throwing. We examine the incorporation of the stones into 19th century European thinking, as well as discuss the disappearance of the stones from the island and the role of museums in housing this cultural information. Detailed data on all stones identified in museums, including measurements, weights, raw material and collection information, are contained in the Appendix. SAVAGE ISLAND From the sea, Niue appears as a formidable fortress of high cliffs surrounded by rough, breaking surf. There are few havens even for canoes, let alone the larger vessels of Europeans. This was Savage Island as named by Captain James Cook (1774). His three attempts to land in 1774 were foiled by the extremely threatening behaviour of the islanders, resulting in the naturalist Sparrmann receiving an arm injury from a thrown stone (Sparrmann 1944: 117). The next recorded landing attempt was in 1830 by the London Missionary Society (LMS) missionary, John Williams, who observed from a rowboat the warriors lined up on the shore: each of them had three or four spears, with his sling, and a belt full of large stones (Williams 1837: 294). Since many Pacific islanders defended themselves by thrown or slung stones, the singularity of the Niuean missiles was not noted until the Reverend George Turner, who was a founder of the Malua Theological College on Upolu,

3 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 371 Samoa in 1844, took down information from Peniamina, a Niuean who had left the island on a whaler and who returned as a Christianised teacher in Turner stated that while Peniamina was with us at Malua, he gave me some interesting items respecting his island home. they are constantly at war with each other. Stones, rounded like a cannon-ball, for throwing with the hand, clubs, and spears, are their weapons (Turner 1861: 468). Concern had been expressed for the safety of Peniamina, and he was retrieved by Turner on the missionary voyage of The missionaries did not give up easily and the islanders eventually adopted Christianity through the efforts of the next teacher, a Samoan called Paulo, who had been landed there in 1849 by the Reverend A.W. Murray (1863: 362). When Murray returned to Niue in 1852, he was able to say that there had been no war on the island since 1849 (1863: 367). Once the field had been well-tilled by Paulo, the first of the English missionaries, the Reverend W.G. Lawes arrived in Lawes was later joined and replaced by his brother Frank Lawes in 1868, who remained on the island for 42 years, retiring in 1910, seven years after Niue was annexed by New Zealand. The LMS and its missionaries appear again and again as the original source of the war stones in England, unsurprisingly perhaps, as Niue was far from the shipping routes and had few resources to attract shipping. Thus with the exception of the brief encounter by Cook there were no first hand observations of Niuean throwing stones recorded by Western observers. The practice and resulting artefacts, although known to the early missionaries, were subsidiary to the larger picture of the islanders perceived savagery. The first letter dated April 19th 1862 from the Rev. W.G. Lawes to the Rev. Dr Tidman, the Foreign Secretary of the LMS, imagines the islanders before Christianisation: Terrible indeed must they have looked with their long hair held between their teeth, their eyes starting from their sockets and their hands full of spears and clubs. The weapons which they carried in their wars were a club in one hand, a bundle of 10 spears under the arm, and a bag of large round [sic] stones round the neck. They were continually at war amongst themselves. Of the young men in my teacher s class, many have stained their hands in blood, and all have witnessed scenes of bloodshed and cruelty. (W.G. Lawes 1862a; the crossing through of round is in the original MS.) Although Niue was neither well known nor frequently visited, there are a few reports that describe the sources for and manufacture of the throwing stones. 1 Thomas Hood, officer on HMS Fawn, in his one day on the island in 1862, observed, the floor of the caves is thickly encrusted with stalagmite. From these the natives make round balls like grape-shot, which they throw

4 372 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones from the hand with deadly precision without a sling (Hood 1863: 25). In 1865, two other determined travellers cruising with HMS Curaçoa, the gentleman explorer Julius Brenchley and the Hon. Herbert Meade R.N., also spent one day visiting the island. Brenchley learned from Rev. W.G. Lawes that: In the interior are to be found pools of not more than two feet in diameter, which contain fresh water, the level of which seems affected by the tides, a fact noticeable in some parts of the island of Oahu. It was these holes or pools that the natives used formerly to collect the stalagmites, which they made use of as projectiles in their combats and which they adroitly threw without the aid of a sling. (Brenchley 1873: 24) Herbert Meade, in his diary, used similar words, except in the description of the stones themselves: The water in these and other inland caves is said to be affected by the rise and fall of the tide. Here the islanders collect the stalagmites which, when rounded something like a mower s hone, formed, with spears and clubs, their only weapons prior to the introduction of firearms. (Meade 1870: 180) Meade s reference to the mower s hone is puzzling: different from a whetstone, a hone was wooden and also elongated (Oliver Douglas, pers. comm. 2010) a most unlikely comparison. It is possible that Meade was confusing the Niuean stones with the kawas of Tana, New Hebrides, described by Turner as about the length of an ordinary counting-house ruler, only twice as thick (Turner 1884: 312). This is unlikely, however, as Meade s book was produced from his journals after his death, and he does not mention the kawas on his visit to Tana. 2 COLLECTING STONES At this juncture it is worth asking when and how did the throwing stones first leave Niue? 3 At least 20, if not 21 of the 31 stones located in British museums seem to have come through the LMS or its missionaries (see Appendix). We know that the LMS had established a museum to display examples of artefacts accumulated by missionaries during their work in the field (Bell in press; Colley 2003: ; Hooper 2008: 65, 71; Wingfield in prep). In his study of the Society s Museum, however, Chris Wingfield has pointed out that no war stones are listed in the catalogue produced sometime between 1859 and 1862 (Wingfield, pers. comm. 2011). The first published record in Britain appears in the Guide to the Christy Collection, which is now held in the British Museum. 4 The Guide, written in 1868 by the Keeper, Augustus

5 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 373 Franks, describes the items placed on show at the British Museum in Room III, where there were conical stones used as missiles, a model of a boat, and an elegant plume from Savage Island (A.W. Franks 1868: 16). Registers and correspondence reveal the source of the stones was Thomas Powell, LMS missionary active in Polynesia from 1848 to Powell may have brought the stones to England when he returned on furlough in On his voyage out of the southern Pacific it is likely that he would have enjoyed a customary anchoring off Niue and a visit with the resident missionary, the Rev. W.G. Lawes, when he could have been given some examples of the islanders former savage practices to bring to England. 5 On his homecoming, Powell sold ethnographic items from Samoa and Niue directly to the British Museum (Letter dated 17 October 1866). 6 In November of that year, Powell suggested a meeting with Franks in order to show him a plume from Niue that he said belonged to his daughter (Letter dated 8 November 1866). A final receipt was submitted by Powell to Franks (4 February 1867) which included 2 spherical balls 2.0 (i.e., 2). 7 Through the LMS Museum, Powell also chose the stones to be sent to the 1867 Paris Exposition (Letter dated 8 February 1867 to Franks). The artefacts Deux pierres de guerre en stalagmite. Ile du Sauvage are listed as item #798 in the section Missions Protestants in the catalogue of the Exposition Universelle de 1867 a Paris. These artefacts would have been returned to the LMS Museum after the Exposition closed and are possible candidates for two stones purchased by the British Museum from the LMS in 1910 on the occasion of the LMS museum s closure (Oc , 298) (Wingfield, pers. comm. 2010). However at least three more were purchased from the London Missionary Society by the collector Beasley; on his death one was transferred to the British Museum, one to Liverpool and one to the Cambridge Museum. The year 1864 saw the wrecking of the LMS ship the John Williams II in Polynesia and in 1867 the wrecking of the new John Williams III, so the usual LMS sailing records do not track Powell s 1866 journey. The letters recorded for 1864 and 1866 by the Rev. W.G. Lawes to the LMS foreign secretary, the Rev. Dr Tidman, are also missing from the LMS archive. We have, however, found a description of the stones given by Powell in his 1867 address for the ordination of the Rev. Frank Lawes, the brother of W.G. Lawes, demonstrating the most detailed knowledge of the stones: A remarkable illustration of the ingenuity of the people is furnished by their large war stones, which were thrown from the hand. These are pieces of either stalagmite or stalactite, or of both, which they used to break off from the floors or roofs of their water caves, and then rub them down, on other stones or rough coral, to the required size and shape. These stones vary in size from

6 374 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones one to three or four pounds, and are of a spheroid shape, somewhat like that of the shot of Armstrong guns; only that both ends are elongated. This fact is remarkable as an indication of thought and design natural to this people; for it is not probable that the first inhabitants brought the ideas with them. But they found this limestone in the caves, saw the use to which it might be put, and designed the shape. It is therefore original on their part, and in this particular, they anticipated the European science of the recent century. (Powell 1868: 32) 8 The next recorded date for throwing stones being accessioned into a museum collection was in 1869 when the Colonial Museum in Wellington, NZ (now Te Papa), accessioned a battle stone (FE ) collected by John Inglis. Inglis was based in the New Hebrides as a Presbyterian missionary of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland. His only recorded contact with the island was when he sailed to London via Niue and New Zealand on the 1859 voyage with the Rev. George Turner (Turner 1861: 524). In 1869, however, he and his wife sailed from Aneityum, Vanuatu to Auckland on the Presbyterian ship the Dayspring. According to his reminiscences, these were often direct voyages and he does not record visiting Niue at that time (Inglis 1887). Perhaps the throwing stone had been given to him earlier by one of the LMS missionaries whom he knew well, and was then carried back to Auckland in 1869 and given the same year to the new museum. An interesting example of distribution through a social network of friends and colleagues is recorded in 1946, when W.G. Wallace, the son of Alfred Russell Wallace, gave a stone (Oc1946,02.1) to the British Museum that had been given to his maternal grandfather, Wm. Mitten, by Thomas Powell both of whom were amateur botanists. This example was been misidentified as a sling stone, most likely after it arrived at the Museum. The later history of collecting and donation mirrored the involvement of colonial administrators and academic anthropologists whose careers brought them to Niue. Stephenson Percy Smith, who donated a stone to the Auckland Museum, was appointed in 1902 as Government Resident for Niue Island after its annexation by New Zealand. The stone (11713), however, was donated in 1890 so the nature of its acquisition is not clear; it was also accompanied by a sling and designated as a sling with one stone. 9 Henry Greyshott Cornwall was Resident Commissioner from 1907 to 1918; at an uncertain date, he gave six sling stones ( ) to the Auckland Museum, of which five seem to be war stones and one ( ) weighing 160g, a true sling stone. A further six stones, three of which were accessioned in 1927 (10892/3, 1061), came through the anthropologist Dr Peter Buck (Te Rangi Hiroa), whose mother was Mäori. Buck joined the Bernice P. Bishop Museum in Honolulu in 1927, which suggests that on leaving New Zealand he decided to divest himself of

7 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 375 some of his impedimenta to the Auckland Museum. The anthropologist Edwin M. Loeb is recorded as giving five throwing stones to the Bishop Museum in Hawai i, which at present cannot be found. None of the other donors would seem to have had direct connections with the island, except perhaps for a British Museum example that was collected by the donor s father and brother, and given in 1891 by Miss E.K. Lister (Oc ). Another example is found in Harvard s Peabody Museum ( /55392); it was collected during Alexander Agassiz s voyage to the Pacific on the Albatross in The accompanying note states said to have been worn about the neck and probably reflects information given by the Rev. Frank Lawes. Ultimately then, we have the bare information that individuals brought items out of the field and presented them to friends and institutions. Other accessions have resulted as purchases directly from dealers (Te Papa OL /S, State Museum of Victoria X2673-9) or as donations from collectors whose sources are unknown (Te Papa FE004896/1-11). As such, none of the stones in museum collections were the result of systematic ethnographic or museum initiated field collecting as seen in other parts of the Pacific (O Hanlon and Welsch 2000). This history makes more sense when interpreted according to the general history of contact between Niueans and Europeans. With missionaries as the first collectors of the stones a practice consistent with persistent advocacy to end warfare the manufacture and use of the stones of Niue was halted in a very short period of time. Murray recorded that warfare ceased by 1852 (Murray 1863: 367). By the late 19th century when the majority of the ethnographic museums are fully active and engaged in directed collecting, the stones had already left the island via missionaries, travellers and, presumably, traders, who circulated them as manifestations of the successful end to savage behaviour. The ethnographic collectors, however, also valued them for their evidence of technological ingenuity. In general, the manner in which the stones left the island resulted in a limited record accompanying the stones to their final destinations within museum collections. A STONE S THROW: THE SPECIFICS AND GENERALITIES OF NIUEAN THROWING PRACTICES Niuean war stones are perhaps unique to the ethnographic record for the information that they provide. To our knowledge, stones thrown in conflict or in hunting around the world have never been picked up, measured and weighed (A.B. Isaac 1987: 4). Additionally, the Niuean war stones represent a considerable manufacturing effort also true of some of the Pacific sling stones which suggests that they had a meaning and importance beyond involvement in casual aggression. It may be possible by carefully collating

8 376 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones the various accounts, to reach some insight into the behaviour that informed them. The care given to their manufacture has also been a factor in their retention by collectors, thereby allowing us invaluable insight into the practice of throwing an endeavour impossible without these material references. The brief accounts of throwing practices made by the missionaries and travellers of the 19th century were later added to by the administrators and anthropologists of the early 20th century S. Percy Smith and Edwin Loeb who recorded and reconstructed the vanished throwing behaviour as far as they could from the generational memories of the descendants of the early 19th century warriors. 10 Percy Smith spent four months on the island in 1902, which resulted in five articles in the Journal of the Polynesian Society (Smith 1902, 1903). Specifically, he devoted two short paragraphs to describing the stones, reporting them as being 4 to 5 inches maximum diameter, 3 to 4 inches in length, and that they were made of coral, smooth, pointed and polished (Smith 1902: 211). He then lists nine specific terms, including maka-uli (black stone), maka-geegee (made of Tridacna shell) and maka-poupou-ana (made of stalactite). He states that the stones were carried in large baskets, but also as many as 50 would be carried by the warriors in their girdles and that when these were exhausted they took to the rough stones lying about, says my informant, Fakalagatoa (Smith 1902: 211). He mentions the exotic black stones and adds that he thinks that the fatu-kala (not very smooth) may also be of basalt. In his illustration (Smith 1902: , Plate 7) that shows manufactured articles, he includes one throwing stone. The anthropologist Edwin Loeb and his wife Harriet lived on Niue for almost seven months in , during which time he recorded new information to add to that of Smith s. However, as he wrote, most of the information available in Niue takes the form of stereotyped traditions, handed down from family to family (Loeb 1971: 129). He repeated information on dimensions and raw material directly from Smith and replicates Smith s list of specific names (with a change to one), adding six more (Loeb 1971: 129). In regard to the carrying devices for the stones, the early accounts differ somewhat in their descriptions. The Rev. W.G. Lawes described a bag hung around the neck (W.G. Lawes 1862a, quoted in Powell 1868: 28). Williams (1837: 294), Percy Smith (1902: 211) and Loeb (1971: 129), however, all refer to belts or girdles, with Loeb naming them kafa and describing them as plaited like a mat, six to seven inches wide and four fathoms in length (Loeb 1971: 132). In combat, the belt was probably more efficient. Overall, accounts of early contact with Niueans when combined with these anthropological descriptions suggest the throwing stones were strictly reserved for fighting. All accounts agree that the stones were not used for hunting, as animal protein was obtained using fishing nets and bird bows.

9 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 377 When considering aggressive behaviour against humans it is useful to separate out what was practiced between fellow Niueans from that directed against outsiders. Captain Cook s first impressions of savagery set the expected tone for subsequent intrusive interactions with the islanders, whether offshore or on the beaches on arrival (Cook 1774, Murray 1863: 361). The islanders had learned that such intrusions threatened the fabric of a society that inhabited a marginal environment whether the intruders were Tongan raiding parties or European blackbirders, or indeed missionaries who brought epidemic disease, which intensified an older fear, reported elsewhere in Polynesia and other parts of the world, of foreign spirits and foreign magic that belong to strangers and returning residents (Luomala 1978: 147). A show of force was necessary or, as in the remembered history of Tongan raiders, clever deception followed by annihilation. Where strangers were concerned, unbridled defensive aggression may have been the only way to victory. In examining the extent and frequency of the fighting between island factions, Smith stated that conflicts were very frequent and were conducted between the northern and southern populations (Smith 1902: ). Internal fighting seems to have been governed by different mores. Loeb proposed the idea that, it was both a game and a business to the people of Niue. It was a game inasmuch as it was carried on under certain fixed conventions and with a definite technique to which both sides conformed. It was a business in regard to its general purpose, that of taking land from the opposing toa [ warriors ]. (Loeb 1971: 128) In her paper, Symbolic slaying in Niue, Katharine Luomala (1978: 149) wrote: Conventions of fighting included trickery, duelling, and frightening of the enemy by hideous faces and menacing feints. Battles were often at night. While physical injury and loss of life were ordinarily comparatively light, the constant feuding kept Niue in turmoil. According to the records, clubs and spears were also carried, but apart from a two-pronged spear used to guide the warriors, they were not part of these activities. Slings were not mentioned in this form of fighting. Records also showed that the marginal environment of Niue was a key factor in shaping the practice of competitive warfare for scarce resources. Before contact, the island had limited fauna and few crops. This environmental history was explored in 2002 by archaeologists Richard Walter and Atholl Anderson, who consider Niue as near the limits for long-term settlement viability (Walter and Anderson 2002: 1). They recorded bones recovered from excavations and natural deposits in caves (Walter and Anderson 2002: 167). Only bones of the

10 378 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones Pacific rat (Rattus exulans) occur in any quantity, although a gecko is well represented in two caves and the Pacific flying fox (Pteropus tonganus) is represented by two bones. By far the preponderance of food debris resulted from avian fauna, fish and shellfish. Before contact, taro, arrowroot, yam, banana and sugarcane were cultivated. There is also evidence that the coconut may have been introduced as late as the early 18th century (Walter and Anderson 2002: 16). Probable post-contact additions were breadfruit, sweet potato, papaya, guava and citrus (Walter and Anderson 2002: 16). Moreover, the missionary Archibald Murray cited Turner s description of a custom of destroying all the plantations and fruit-trees of a person who dies, that they might go with him (Murray 1874: 343). The eradication of this practice and the introduction of new sources of food meant that the consequence is an abundance of food, such as they never had in heathenism (Murray 1874: 343). In thinking about the resources used to manufacture throwing stones, it is important to point out that the origin of most was the limestone caves and this also seems to be reflected in the ritual meanings of the stones. Because even mild droughts had severe impact on survival, the warriors were continually skirmishing to increase the amount of land available to their families (Loeb 1971: 128). As Murray (1874: 323) reported, the man who renders himself most formidable by warlike deeds was the man of greatest consideration. Loeb gave a detailed description of the complicated ceremony and the ritual that preceded the actual fighting. The warriors slept for three nights away from their families. Particular named stones were integral to the preparation. 11 He wrote: The fighting stones all had special names and they were put in a kafa (girdle) which was plaited like a mat. The kafa was about six to seven inches wide and was customarily four fathoms in length. The third night before the war arrived they wound the kafa around their stomachs and slept in this manner during the night, neither eating or drinking. (Loeb 1971: 132) After providing further details concerning the preparatory ritual, he quoted from some of the remembered war songs: Koe makauli moe gege, fakataka us he matatua Tuki kihe ulu, tuki kile nifo, ke akie alelo he koko. Haku maka tuki kihe lagi. It is a black stone, and a gege stone leave them both together. Hit him on the head, hit him on the teeth, tear the tongue out of his throat. My stone will hit the sky. (Loeb 1971: 134) 12 and from a song celebrating success in war:

11 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 379 Hoku maka pe ha afa to, malokokiholoi My stones will come like the hurricane. (Loeb 1971: 136) In associating throwing stones to the power of a hurricane, the songs also link the throwing stones to water life-giving and scarce a connection made more intriguing when considering that the stones are carved from the stalactites of the fresh-water caves, which were highly valued resources. Loeb discusses the role of the taula-atua shaman in the pre-battle ritual, but not in detail; elsewhere he notes that the taula-atua was the weather man of the olden days (Loeb 1924: 396). The possibility should be considered that in taking land, the toa warriors were not only interested in increasing crop acreage, but also in adding to the number of accessible water sources. Furthermore, anthropologist Hilke Thode-Arora, author of Weavers of Men and Women (2009), has pointed out that, for many Niueans even today, caves have connotations of ancestral spirits and of land rights linked to their presence. As throwing stones were often made from stalagmites/stalactites most likely from a cave in the warriors ancestral territory, these stones may have carried ancestral mana. If Loeb s remark on named throwing stones is to be understood to mean that there were personalised throwing stones owned by individual warriors, this might also be interpreted in terms of close ties with land and ancestors (pers. comm. 2011, see also Thode Arora 2009: 38, 107). Historical records indicate that Niuean fighting was rarely in pitched battles, but mostly in the forest between single warriors or groups who hoped for an element of surprise in encountering the enemy and who also hoped that a show of force would be enough to route them. This does not mean to imply, however, that there were not at times fights to the death. Percy Smith noted that in the actual fight the braves from either side would challenge one another (fepalekoaki) to combat, and these toas did tau-mamate (fight to the death) (Smith 1902: 212). It is in this kind of warfare that status weapons with mythical reputations, such as named swords (i.e., Dáinsleif and Kusanagi), play a role in intimidating opponents. We are drawn to suppose that some of the throwing stones now in museums might well have been the named stones carried by well-known toa and possessing an accumulated history of fearful use. This could partly explain why so much effort was originally expended on their manufacture. Additionally and practically, if the battle area was conventionally small, then thrown stones could be retrieved by the victors. In his account of the fighting, the colonial administrator Basil Thomson was convinced that the islanders were not particularly warlike and that your object in battle was not so much to crack your opponent s skull as to

12 380 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones frighten him off the field (Thomson 1902: 128). He reported that the Niuean warrior contented himself with cutting off defenceless stragglers and slaying individuals by ambush (Thomson 1902: 130). There are further indications that ambush was at times a preferred modus operandi. Thomson gives an account of a murder in 1887 not covered in the then penal code, adding that the Pulangi Tau, or Council of War, that would have given the man short shrift in heathen days by telling off one of his judges to betray him into ambush, had long been dissolved (Thomson 1902: 103-4). The last known throwing stone on the island of Niue now in the possession of Misa Kulatea was found by his uncle years ago beside a skeleton in the forest. The bones were removed respectfully to a traditional burial cave (Kulatea, pers. comm. 1997). That throwing stone may be evidence of a successful ambush. Some historic records from elsewhere include key information about normative practices for fighting distances when throwing stones. At a fundamental level, if fighting was initiated by throwing stones, then the distance between opposing groups would have been closer than if slings or spears were used. 13 There is less leverage in the arm than the combination of arm and sling, so the lethal distance has to be less than that of sling stones and, probably, if the following instances are to be believed, no more than the length of a cricket pitch. It is worth pointing out that within the thick undergrowth common to the island, stones could be thrown from the hand more easily than with a sling, which needs more space. This also supports the thesis that encounters were not necessarily staged in formal fashion in the wider open areas, but also happened as marauding groups or single warriors came across each other in the forest, or on the edges of cultivated plots, themselves not particularly large. In using comparative records to think through typical combat distances, we found a description from anthropologist and medical practitioner, Herbert Basedow, who recorded the training of Australian Aboriginal boys throwing mud balls standing about half a chain apart, that is, 11 yards [10.06 metres] (Basedow 1925: 75). 14 Basil Thomson also wrote that Niuean King Tongia had commented to the effect that the battlefield of an historic duel was no larger than the dining-room of a suburban villa (Thomson 1902: 128). Turner, when describing the throwing behaviour of the inhabitants of Tana, New Hebrides, said that they threw the kawas with deadly precision when their victim is within twenty yards of them (Turner 1884: 312). Although repeated accuracy for distances as great as 100 metres has been observed historically (A.B. Isaac 1987: 8-9), the combination of force versus distance versus accuracy has not been adequately measured and yet it is extremely important to understand these variables if the success of throwing by hand is to be gauged.

13 381 From other accounts gleaned from a range of historic cultural documents (A.B. Isaac 1987: 8), it seems that once the parties were engaged, the participants were continually on the move, so as not to be an easy target. In 1719, the traveller and naturalist, Peter Kolb, gave the following description of a Hottentot: He is constantly moving, sometimes backwards or sideways, he stands upright one moment and is bending down the next, dancing to and fro all the time quite unexpectedly throwing the stone from his hand, and in spite of his grimaces, hits his chosen goal so accurately that one must say that the best marksman could not have hit the bulls eye more accurately. (Kolb 1719: 526) Natural historian and writer, John George Wood recounted the behaviour of an Australian aboriginal confronted by an armed soldier. By dodging about has prevented the enemy from taking direct aim... will hurl one [stone] after another with such rapidity that they seem to be poured from some machine; and as he throws them leaps from side to side so as to make the missiles converge from different directions upon the unfortunate object of his aim. (Wood 1870:41) These accounts uncannily reflect John Williams depiction of the Niuean who had boarded the Messenger of Peace in 1830: on reaching the deck the old man was most frantic in his gesticulations, leaping about from place to place, and using the most vociferous exclamations at everything he saw... we could not persuade him to stand still even for a single second. (Williams 1837: 295) INCORPORATION INTO 19TH CENTURY KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS In Victorian England, missionaries positioned Niue as a prime example of savagery overcome and civilised by Christianity. The name that Captain Cook had given to the Island in 1774 conveniently lent itself to hyperbole, celebrating the achievements of the London Missionary Society in ending warfare and, by implication, that such success deserved to be supported further by the faithful congregations at home. Archibald Murray had written of the islanders: They realized most fully the idea one is accustomed to form of the savage wild, fierce, ungovernable (Murray 1863: 358). Later, Murray commented of the island, but, in a missionary point of view, it has of late years become possessed of great attractions, from the fact that a work has been accomplished upon it, through the instrumentality of Christian teachers, such as has few parallels in the history of missions. (Murray 1874: 314)

14 382 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones The Rev. William Gill, when recording his life s work in the South Sea Islands, although he had not worked on Niue, still chose to use it as a shining example: Such is Savage Island. Eighty-two years ago it was discovered by Captain Cook; for fifty-six years after its discovery it was left to its heathenism; the first visit of mercy was made to it in 1830; and, during the space of sixteen years, frequent and unsuccessful attempts were made to induce the people to receive a Christian teacher. This was accomplished in 1846; the subsequent five years were years of toil and faith in the midst of trial and persecution; and NOW, as a result of these labours, we have, on this once Savage Island, the whole of the people under the influence of the Gospel of Christ. (Gill 1880: 238, emphasis in original) These views are best summarised in a sentence by Rev. W. G. Lawes from a letter published in the Mission Magazine and Chronicle: Savage Island furnishes, we believe, the only recorded instance in which a whole population of between four and five thousand have been brought within a few years, from a state of utter barbarism to the open profession of the Christian faith. (W.G. Lawes 1862b: 312) It is notable that, eight years later Rev. Frank Lawes reversed this opinion, allowing the Niueans highly developed technological skills: They are not the unthinking, unreasoning people that I imagined and in mechanical skill they are I think in advance of some neighbouring islands (F. Lawes 1870). Indeed by the time of the traveller Thomas Hood s visit a few months after the Rev. W.G. Lawes had first arrived, Hood observed that the islanders had just finished and presented to Mr Lawes and his wife a sofa nicely made and inlaid with quaint imitations of birds and fishes in tortoiseshell and mother of pearl (Hood 1863: 16). Would that we knew the whereabouts of the sofa today. Terrifying as the islanders were to strangers, accounts suggest that the inhabitants were not without reason and could be persuaded not to kill intruders (Murray 1874: 317, Thomson 1902: 71). When Hood wrote after his 1862 visit to Niue on H.M.S Fawn, I don t remember ever being better pleased than with our reception at Savage Island we left the shore of these highly interesting and pleasant people (Hood 1863: 26), he was not just referring to the Rev. W.G. Lawes and his wife. Julius Brenchley, when visiting in 1865, was critical of the missionaries early stance, quoting Murray: My last visit to the island was at the close of At that time it was much in the same state as when it was discovered by Cook. Now how changed! How marvellously changed! (Brenchley 1873: 33). Brenchley then commented,

15 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 383 That it was at that time much in the same state as when Cook saw it, it is easy for me to credit; but how Mr. Murray professing to believe in its extreme savagery at that period could say so, after having told us only a few pages before, when speaking of this year of similitude 1853, that the desire for teachers is now universal, and we shall shortly occupy the island, would be inexplicable, were we not aware of the irresistible propensity of the missionaries to proclaim marvels, and, by means of vague generalities to give a semblance of support to their highly-coloured statements. (Brenchley 1873: 33) That some missionaries exaggerated the savagery of the Niueans in order to magnify the success of their teaching is understandable. As we have seen, however, others were more measured in their approach. Powell in the extract quoted above referred to the throwing stones as a remarkable illustration of the ingenuity of the people and that the idea of them was original on their part, and in this particular they anticipated the European science of the recent century (Powell 1868: 32). High praise, followed by a further comparison: [T]heir Fishing Nets are remarkable for their beauty of make... Many ladies, in England, have inspected specimens; but all have confessed it was out of their power to exceed the beauty with which the work was executed (Powell 1868: 33). In order to communicate the gospel and translate the Bible, missionaries learned languages, and subsequently, in their observation of custom, a notable few contributed to the emergence of the discipline of ethnography (Colley 2003: 408-9). The Rev. George Turner wrote that he had endeavoured to contribute to ethnological science: I have to some extent, followed the order of a list of queries respecting the human race, drawn up a number of years ago, by a committee of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (Turner 1861: 173). Thus, beyond the purpose of lauding themselves on their achievements in eradicating Niuean warfare and the subsequent success of Christianisation, some missionaries collected the throwing stones as part of their interests in learning about the societies in which they worked. When they took furloughs in England, missionaries often took the opportunity to seek out and converse with men of science. The networks were wide and we give an encapsulating example. In 1880, the former Governor of New Zealand, Sir George Grey presented an inscribed copy of LMS missionary W. Wyatt Gill s (1880) Historical Sketches of Savage Life in Polynesia with Illustrative Clan Songs to Edward Burnett Tylor, later Reader in Anthropology at Oxford. 15 The copy is now in the Bodleian Library. Folded inside the cover is a letter from Gill himself who had just visited Tylor. 16 Wyatt Gill, in referring to an invitation to breakfast with the polymath Sir John Lubbock, wrote about kinship terms, saying, These tribal laws are of deep interest & are well observed even now (with some modifications, of

16 384 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones course). At the end of the letter, he added, I often think of myself as half a savage; so unmindful am I of the usages of civilized men. If we return to the first appearances of the Niuean war stones in England and elsewhere, it is apparent that as embodied by collections (British Museum , Paris Exposition 1867, Auckland 1869), their introduction to the Western word is clustered in the decade of the 1860s. We suggest this was partly because of the newly arrived presence of the LMS on the Island. But it was also because of the emergence of new knowledge in England. The study of the past was evidenced by curiosity in the manufacture of lithics and in the evolution of behaviours such as hunting and warfare. In particular to this inquiry, Augustus Frank, who collected for the British Museum, was interested in the manufacture of stone tools and the Niuean war stones were unique examples of polished lithics in an unusual material. Together with Franks, the collector Christy also took a keen interest in and collected flaked and ground lithics. The stones, therefore, mirrored and contributed to the emergent study of the history and evolution of weaponry in the 19th century. At the same time as the physical appearance of the war stones in England, Lieutenant-Colonel Lane Fox, the founder of the Pitt Rivers Museum at Oxford University, was investigating the development of weaponry to demonstrate evolutionary trends in design a revolutionary innovation. In his Catalogue of the Anthropological Collection lent by Colonel Lane Fox for Exhibition in the Bethnal Green Branch of the South Kensington Museum, the Colonel wrote: If the hand stone was the earliest, and possibly the only weapon employed by the first progenitors of our species, it is not surprising they should, in the course of ages, have acquired extraordinary skill in the use of it, and that in the hands of modern savages it should be found to be a more formidable instrument of offence than is the case with civilized man, by whom the practice of stone throwing has been gradually superseded, by the introduction of more suitable appliances, requiring less skill and training to use them with effect. (1874: 158) Lane Fox continued with a reference to Turner s rounded stones like a cannon ball from Savage Island. There were, however, no examples of war stones mentioned in the 1874 exhibits at the family museum set up by General Lane Fox Pitt Rivers, the Bethnal Green Museum, or in the huge collections that he gave to the Pitt-Rivers Museum 18 years later. Sir Richard Burton in his second chapter of the Book of the Sword, entitled Man s first weapon, also quoted George Turner, stones rounded like a cannon-ball, among the people of Savage Island (Burton 1884: 18). 17 Perhaps it is apt to note that in 1868 there was the first tour in England of a team of Aboriginal cricketers, whose abilities were a source of astonishment

17 Barbara Isaac and Gwyneira Isaac 385 for the critical public. Cricket player, W.G. Grace commented that some had shown conspicuous skill at the game (Mulvaney 1967: 56). Across the growing British Empire, cricket was increasingly played, so that finally, we reach an apotheosis of the Niueans fighting behaviour. Having been persuaded by Paulo to put aside their weapons, including war stones, they were taught how to play cricket, perhaps by one of the Lawes brothers or possibly by visiting sailors (Thomson 1902: 124), which they continue to do. Loeb (1971: 128) wrote that the eleven villages today strive with each other on the cricket field. Meanwhile, in European terms, the warriors stones became quiescent curios to be transported by missionaries and travellers to the museums and private collections of the Western world. To summarise, conversion of the Niueans was not merely a religious process, but also a transformative one of inclusion into a rapidly growing Empire. Ultimately, the circulation of the stones mirrored the extraction and collection of resources, thus representing both the endless possibilities of the Empire, as well as shifting cultural polarities. As shown through ethnological endeavours, the stones also presented possibilities for the interpretation of these encounters and cultural practices using schemas for the study of humans more generally. As such, the stones began as symbols of savagery, yet later became absorbed into a social science context of ethnographic collections, which used the primitive frame to locate them within evolutionary paradigms. AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE There have been some extremely thorough archaeological surveys across the island (Trotter 1979, Walter and Anderson 2002). We frame their findings in the context of the island s historically observed ethnography (Walter and Anderson 2002: 10-23). The archaeologists recorded 100 cave and open air sites, and subjected them all to detailed investigation, including test pits and more extensive excavation where appropriate. The number of material culture items that were retrieved was small: 37 items are listed including pumice and coral abraders, two tooth ornaments, a shell adze, a worked Strombidae shell, a net weight, two drill bearings, an Asaphis shell scraper, a bone awl, an echinoderm spine abrader and spine drill. There were no throwing stones. These were also missing from the general discussion, except briefly in the section on Historical observations, which cites the missionary John Williams s observations (Walter and Anderson 2002: 19). 18 The archaeologists, moreover, did not include throwing stones in their descriptions of traditional artefacts and technology, nor was the concomitant behaviour considered in the discussions on adaptation to the environment and political organisation. It is only when reading the site reports that suggestive evidence begins to appear. Close to the windward coast, in the Ulupaka Cave

18 386 Unexpected Trajectories: A History of Niuean Throwing Stones complex, stalactites had been smashed from the roof to increase head room but there was no further evidence of manufacturing activities (Walter and Anderson 2002: 38). In the centre of the island however, there is the Paluki Cave complex within which are small pools of water: the rare combination of water and arable land would have encouraged settlement (Walter and Anderson 2002: 64). In an island of short resources, fresh water pools would also have encouraged envy. In the nearby Anapulaki Cave the archaeologists again recorded numerous stalactites and stalagmites. In the lower parts of the chambers and particularly against the walls, there are signs that many of these limestone formations have been cleared to provide headroom (Walter and Anderson 2002: 66). They noted how limestone cobbles, presumably from the broken stalactites and stalagmites were strewn across the floor together with gravel and larger boulders. The cave walls showed signs of red and white pigment, and there was a thin layer of charcoal and organic sediment, implying human use of the cave, which included some burials. Among the fragmented faunal remains were numerous large Tridacna shells several of which were shattered and flaked (Walter and Anderson 2002: 175). Pumice abraders and one coral abrader were also found. Walter and Anderson convincingly concluded that the artefacts were associated with manufacturing activities such as woodworking and the making of shell tools (Walter and Anderson 2002: 75). Additionally at least one of the abraders from Anapulaki could be likened to a mower s hone (Walter and Anderson 2002: 91, Fig. 47), supporting our reading of Meade s (1870) enigmatic text (see note 2). It does not appear, however, that the limestone debris was examined to see if it could have contained blanks for the manufacture of war stones, nor was the flaked Tridacna debris examined with this purpose in mind. If we bring together the archaeology of Anapulaki Cave with Powell s description of manufacture (Powell 1868: 32), it is hard to escape the conclusion that this was where some of the war stones had been made. Walter and Anderson noted that the presence of the cave seemed to be unknown to modern islanders. This would fit if it had been a place where powerful weapons were manufactured, perhaps with associated ritual a secret place which the recently Christianised Niueans wanted to put out of mind and memory as part of their savage past. THROWING THEM AWAY? As early as 1829, the LMS missionary William Ellis expressed his unease about the next generation of Polynesians growing up in total ignorance of all that distinguished their ancestors from themselves (Ellis 1829: vii). Similarly, W.Wyatt Gill, who presented stones to the Oxford University Museum, wrote: