Resources variability and the rise of Tahitian chiefdoms:
perspectives from landscape, settlement pattern studies and oral
traditions
Tamara Maric
Université de Paris-1, Panthéon-Sorbonne,
[email protected]
M. Hinanui Cauchois
University of Hawaii at Manoa
[email protected]
Introduction
This paper presents an overview of chiefdoms in four major
locations of the Society Islands (French Polynesia), their late
pre-contact importance and their link with exploitation of
natural resources. Many sources, ethnohistoric and oral
traditions, emphasize the intensity of warfare during the precontact period, intensified through the arrival of the first
Europeans in the archipelago at the end of the 18th century.
We examine which factors might have influenced the
development of chiefdoms in this specific region and their
potential impact on the emergence of territoriality and
warfare. We look at several examples of settlement patterns in
four islands of the Society archipelago, identified as important
chiefdoms (Tahiti, Moorea, Raiatea and Huahine) and their
relationship with various environmental factors such as
topography, soil types, hydrology, distance to water access,
rainfall and wind patterns, spatial distribution of agricultural
complexes, etc. We also use ethnohistoric sources and oral
traditions documenting the emergence of the Teva in Tahiti,
1. Windward Islands (Tahiti and Mo’orea)
1.1. The island of Tahiti
the Tamatoa in Ra’iatea as well as the chiefdoms of Maeva in
Huahine and the Marama in Mo’orea. These accounts will be
crossed with available archaeological data. While providing a
GIS database and sets of maps combining those various
factors (archaeology, environment and oral traditions), we
expect to highlight some relationship patterns between
territoriality, exploitation of resources and power in the
Society Islands. We also hope that our perspectives will
contribute to set up issues for further archaeological research
in the region.
and 1991 by the former local Department of Archaeology. The
numerous archaeological remains in the remote inland areas
[1] show ceremonial sites with social elite features (important
marae, archery platform) as well as small households,
associated with simple marae, and agricultural systems. Both
dry and irrigated agriculture are represented. An intensive
settlement is noticed on most of suitable alluvial terraces.
Leeward of Tahiti, the TEVA i UTA
chiefdom : Papara, Mataiea, Vaiari
Valley of Papeno’o
Located in the North-Eastern part of Tahiti, this
valley is the widest of the island (18 km long). It lies in an
intermediary zone, partly protected from the north-east winds.
The coastal plain is narrow, there is no franging reef. The
rainfall is quite heavy (3 m/year in the coastal area, 8 to 10
m/year inland). The valley have been studied between 1975
According to traditional accounts [2, 3] an ancestor
from Bora Bora married a local family of Vaiari at an
unknown period. His grandson, Tetuna’e nui, is known to
have built the « first » « marae hui ari’i » (marae of high rank
chief). After genealogical records, the foundation of the Teva
line based in Papara, occured around the 15th century. The
chiefdom eventually evolved within two territorial
confederations, Teva i Uta (Papara-Papeari), and Teva i Tai
(Peninsula). 11 generations after the 1st Teva, Papara won the
political supremacy upon Vaiari. During the 18th century, the
Teva were the most powerful chiefdom of Tahiti.
The Teva chiefdom was located in the widest coastal
plain of the archipelago (2 km wide), with swampy areas and
good soils for agriculture (taro crops). Located leeward, it has
a regular and moderate rainfall. The reef and lagoon were very
important areas for natural resources, as indicated in the
numerous land claims from the 1850’s.
1
The archaeological investigations carried out in
Mataiea-Papeari showed an intensive settlement on the coast,
while the very narrow and steep valleys could not be densely
settled. The recent research in the Taharu’u valley [4] shows
the concentration of elite’s residency on the coastal plain (e.g.
the huge marae Maha’aiatea), while households and small
agricultural sites are spread inland until a swampy area
located on a plateau, 800 m high. 173 archaeological
structures have been recorded in 2007 within 32 sites located
from the coast to the plateau. The marae are all of the interior
type in the valley. While on the plain, the important marae of
coastal types are associated with the ari’i of Papara.
The Peninsula : TEVA i TAI
The Peninsula was divided into 8 districts. At the
18th century, the Teva i Tai chiefdom had been unified under
the ruling of chief Vehiatua [5]. It had won the religious and
political supremacy previously leaded by the Teva i Uta [3].
The first introduction of the cult of ‘Oro from Taputapuatea,
in Raiatea could be at the origin of this new domination. From
1770’s, an alliance was concluded between Vehiatua and Tu
(Pomare) families. At the death of the last Vehiatua, Tu
inherited the Title, which contributed to reinforce his political
authority.
The Peninsula is located leeward, and the rainfall is
one of the most important of Tahiti. Three valleys (Vaitepiha,
Vaiote, and ‘Aiurua) have been studied [6,7]. They show a
dense settlement in the inland areas ceremonial sites,
important horticultural potential associated or not to
household sites.
Archaeological investigations have shown a high
concentration of sites in the Tupauru’uru area (East), where
specialized, elite structures (fare pote’e, important marae,
archery platforms, etc.) and horticultural systems are found.
The construction and the occupation of residential sites in that
area occured between mid-15th and 17th century [12, 13].
Important horticultural systems concentrated in the Tupaururu
area were used at least from the 13th century on.
In conclusion, the political importance of the
Tupauru’uru area may be directly linked to its horticultural
potential.
1.1.2. Valley of Papetoai, Apo’ota’ata
This valley (2 km long) is identified as a refuge area
according to oral traditions, at least for the late pre-contact
period. A marae Taputapuatea was built on the coastal plain,
as a sign that the cult of ‘Oro was established in this district.
The preliminary results of an ongoing archaeological research
project [14, 15] recorded 205 archaeological structures, within
25 sites : 17% of horticultural sites, 23% of habitation sites,
and 12% of marae.
The distribution of inland settlements shows a
concentration of important marae/habitation/horticultural sites
in the middle valley in a defensive settings (part natural and
anthropic) versus a high density of horticultural sites isolated
and/or associated to simple habitation sites and small marae
tupuna in a natural defensive settings (topography) at the
bottom and upper parts of the valley.
2. Leeward Islands
1.2. MOOREA (Windward areas)
1.1.1. Valley of ‘Opunohu
This valley is the best documented example for
household and religious sites in the Society Islands [8, 9]. In
the 1960’s, R. Green and al. carried out a pioneering research
project, emphasizing the first broad settlement pattern in
Polynesia. It was eventually followed by the study of ancient
agricultural systems [10], and the reconstruction of settlement
patterns through domestic architecture [11, 12, 13].
Around 1650 A.D, the Marama clan from Haapiti
won over the Atiro’o clan from ‘Opunohu. The valley was
then divided into two main areas : Amehiti in the Western
part, and Tupauru’uru in the Eastern part. The Marama line
ruled the area until the end of the 18th century. Between 1774
and 1790, several attacks from Tahitian fighting groups were
successfully pushed away. ‘Opunohu was considered as a
refuge area. After 1790, ‘Opunohu was under the influence of
the Pomares, while in 1804, Pomare II became the paramount
chief of Mo’orea. Some people were still living in the valley
in 1804-1805, until they deserted around 1815 for the
protestant mission in the village of Papetoai.
2.1. Huahine : Mata’irea hill, Maeva
Traditionally, Huahine had eight main chiefdoms
divided around the island. The ancient history was divided
into several periods : hau mo’orere corresponded to a long
period of warfare between the different groups, mostly in
inland areas. Later, hau ari’i, or hau pahu roa was the
unification of the eight chiefdoms. Towards 1650 A.D, Maeva
became the main political chiefdom of the island. It leaded
towards a unique socio-political and land tenure situation : the
eight chiefdoms shared a same main marae : Mata’irea rahi.
Hotuhiva, coming from abroad (might be from Raiatea,
Marquesas, Tahiti…) had eight sons with a high chief from
Huahine. They were the founders of the eight chiefdoms of
the island. Hotuhiva may be the metaphor for a new religious
order from a different island (cult of the god ‘Oro from
Raiatea ?). Around that time, two chiefly lines from the
Tamatoa attached to the marae Taputapuatea in Raiatea
dominated the eight chiefdoms of Huahine. Then the political
center of Mata’irea moved to Tefareri’i, in Huahine iti [16].
2
Mata’irea hill and Maeva have been the location of
40 years of archaeological work, mostly by Pr. Sinoto (Bishop
Museum) [17]. The hill has no rivers, only springs mentioned
in ethnohistoric sources. The slopes represent from 20 to 70%,
with some fallen rocks areas, and the coastal area is narrow.
The settlement pattern of Mata’irea is a unique case : this
refuge area was protected by a defensive wall of 1,5 km long.
The three main archaeological areas are located on the
mountain side, with a high concentration of house sites and
different types of marae. The area was used between 1300 and
1800 A.D (14C) [18]. The economy was based on both dry
horticulture, with dry horticultural systems associated to
houses and isolated in the Western part, and marine resources,
with a unique system of fishponds (‘aua i’a) in the Fauna nui
lake facing Mata’irea. The hypothesis that Mata’irea was
« abandoned » well before the arrival of the Europeans,
matches with the oral traditions mentioning that the political
center was transfered to Tefareri’i at some point.
the soils suitable for agricultural purposes are still in use
today.
In 1995, 112 archaeological structures were
recorded in the interior of the valley, with 5 agricultural
systems, for a total of 3,39 hectares of irrigated terraces,
associated with household units and marae. Edwards
concluded that the valley was not completely settled, as some
suitable inland areas have not been settled [22].
Valley of Tara’e, Tefareri’i
Conclusion
The preliminary survey of this valley [19] recorded
many habitation and horticultural sites on alluvial flat and
slopes 20 to 70% steep. The valley have been identified as the
most intensive horticultural area around the island. The high
horticultural potential and the « recent » status of political
center after Maeva was fought by some Tamatoa from
Raiatea.
In Tahiti and Mo’orea, the global settlement pattern
shows a continuous and intensive human occupation from
coastal areas to the central mountains, as a potential indicator
of demographic pressure. The archaeological data from Papara
and Apo’ota’ata tend to validate the following, well-known
ethnohistorical model : the elite was living in the coastal area
while lower social classes settled inland. Household, marae
and agriculture sites are often linked to each other. The
irrigated systems were limited by the topography in the inland
areas while irrigation was practiced in coastal swampy areas
that are mostly destroyed today by modern development (cf.
historical accounts). Both in Tahiti and Mo’orea, a link can be
clearly established between suitable ecological zones and
political and religious domination of the chiefdoms.
In the Leeward islands, the case of Ra’iatea tends to
emphasize the same tendency of a link between ecology and
political leadership, with the emergence and later domination
of the Tamatoa chiefdom in Opoa (16th-17th centuries
according to oral traditions), occupying a favorable ecological
zone, near the largest arable lands of the island. In the valleys
of Opoa and Fa’aroa, the extensive horticultural systems and
irrigation are close to the international marae of Taputapuatea,
which may have been built between 1200 and 1700 A.D
according to various genealogical sources. In Huahine, the
special case of Mata’irea Hill showed a main political center
dominating the entire island, with an economy based on dry
horticulture and intensive exploitation of marine resources in
the Fauna nui lake. Late prehistoric displacement of political
center towards Huahine iti (Tefaareri’i), occured in the most
extensive wet horticultural systems of the island, thus
emphasizing a link between exploitation of natural resources
and political power. Further archaeological research is needed
to explore such parallels to better understanding the
emergence of chiefdoms in the Society Islands
2.2. Raiatea
2.2.1. Opoa valley
At the 18th century, the island was divided into nine
districts withing two geographic areas: East and West coasts.
The district of Opoa-te-iva, in the South-East, was the most
powerful chiefdom, centered on the marae Taputapuatea.
According to genealogical records [5, 20], the emergence of
this chiefdom occured during the 16th or 17th century. Then,
the Tamatoa expanded religious influence in the Windward
islands. The environmental advantages of the geographic area
of Opoa can be linked to the origin of this powerful chiefdom.
4,5 km long, Opoa is one of the largest valley of the island.
Located windward, it benefits of an important rainfall. At the
entrance of the valley, is a large alluvial plain with swampy
areas [21]. The valley opens on a large bay with lagoon, and
2.2.2. Faaroa valley
In addition to those lands , the neighboring valley of
Faaroa shows similar geographical features such as a swampy
area of 32,96 hectares within the alluvial plain. An
archaeological inventory carried out in the early 1990’s
showed that 82% out of 588 recorded horticultural terraces are
irrigated structures spread upon 60% of the arable surface (10
Ha) of the alluvial plain [23].
3
location
oral traditions
C 14
N/A
15th-18th (Tahinu,
high valley)
Département Archéologie
sources
Tahiti
Papeno'o
15th ? (emergence of the
Teva clan)
in process
Salmon, 1910, Ta'aroa, 1971, Maric, 2009
in process
Vaitepiha
N/A
15th-18th
Garanger 1967
Vaihiria
?
16th-18th
Cristino et al. 1988 [24]
end of 7th (lower
valley ?)
Green and al., 1967, Descantes, 1990,
Leposfsky 1994
13th (horticultural
systems)
Leposfsky 1994
Papara
Mo'orea
Opunohu
before mid-17th : Atiro'o
and pre-Atiro'o lines
mid-17th and mid-18th
(Marama clan rules, division
mid-15-mid-17th
of the valley in 2 areas)
(Tupaururu area)
Apo'ota'ata
N/A
in process
Kahn 2005-2006
Cauchois 2005
Huahine
Entire island
no date (Hau Mo'orere,
warfare period)
Matairea
mid-17th (Hau ari'i,
Matairea political center)
Manunu
?
Saura, 2005
14th-19th
Saura, 2005, Sinoto 1996
17th (marae Manunu)
Saura, 2005, Wallin 2005
mid-17th ?
Sinoto 1965
Ra'iatea
Taputapuatea
13th-18th (construction
marae Taputapuatea)
13th (horticultural
Fa'aroa
systems)
Edward, 1990, Leposfsky 1994
Table synthesizing the chronological data available for the four islands and their main chiefdoms.
4
REFERENCES
[1] Edwards, E.
1988 Archaeological survey of Tahinu river, Papenoo valley,
Tahiti. Punaauia, Département Archéologie, C.P.S.H., Te
Anavaharau.
1990-1991 Prospection archéologique, zone Vainavenave.
Ms. Punaauia, Département Archéologie, C.P.S.H., Te
Anavaharau.
[2] Marau Ta’aroa 1971 Mémoires de Marau Taaroa.
Dernière reine de Tahiti. Traduits par sa fille la Princesse
Ariimanihinihi Takau Pomare. Paris, Musée de l'Homme.
[3] Salmon, T. 1910 On ari'i in Tahiti. Journal of the
Polynesian Society, vol. XIX n°1: 39-46.
[4] Maric, Butaud J.F. 2008 Prospection archéologique dans
la vallée de Taharu'u, commune de Papara (Tahiti, Polynésie
française). Rapport de travaux 2007.Université de Paris
1,Laboratoire de recherches Ethnologie préhistorique, UMR
7041, Paris X, 211 p.
[5] Henry, T. 2000 Tahiti aux temps anciens. Paris,
Publication de la Société des Océanistes, Musée de l'Homme.
[6] Garanger, J. 1964 Recherches archéologiques dans le
district de Tautira, Tahiti, Polynésie française. Journal de la
Société des Océanistes vol.20 : 5-21.
[7] Garanger, J. 1980 Prospections archéologiques de l'îlot
Fenuaino et des vallées Aiurua et Vaiote à Tahiti. Journal de
la Société des Océanistes vol.35 n°38 : 47-55.
[8] Descantes, C. 1990 Symbolic Stone Structures :
Protohistoric and Early Historic Spatial Patterns of the
'Opunohu Valley, Mo'orea, French Polynesia. PhD. Thesis,
Department of Anthropology, University of Auckland.
[9] Green, R.C., Green, K., Rappaport, R.A., Rappaport, A.,
Davidson, J. 1967 Archaeology on the Island of Mo'orea,
French Polynesia. Anthropological Papers of the American
Museum of Natural History vol.51, part. 2.
[10] Lepofsky, D. 1994 Prehistoric agricultural
intensification in the Society Islands, French Polynesia. PhD.
Thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
[11] Kirch, P.V., Kahn, J.G. 2003 The ancient "House
Society" of the 'Opunohu Valley, Mo'orea : Overview of an
archaeological project, 2000-2002. in : H. Marchesi (ed) Bilan
de la recherche archéologique en Polynésie française 20012002, Punaauia, Dossier d'Archéologie Polynésienne n°2,
Service de la culture et du patrimoine : 21-36.
[12] Kahn, J. G. 2005 Household at Community Organization
in the Late Prehistoric Society Island Chiefdoms (French
Polynesia). PhD. Thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
[13] Kahn, J. 2006 Society Islands (Central Eastern Polynesia)
Chronology : 11 Radiocarbon dates for the late prehistoric
expansion and proto-historic periods in the 'Opunohu Valley,
Mo'orea. Radiocarbon vol.48 n°3 : 409-419.
[14] Cauchois, M.H. 2005 Prospection archéologique à
Apo'ota'ata, Papetoai, Mo'orea. In : H. Marchesi (ed) Bilan de
la recherche archéologique en Polynésie française 20032004. Dossier d'Achéologie Polynésienne n°4, Service de la
culture et du patrimoine, Punaauia : 23-32.
[15] Cauchois, M.H 2008 L’occupation de l’espace préeuropéen et proto-historique de la vallée de Papetoai,
Mo’orea, Iles de la Société (Polynésie française), Publications
du GDR 2834 du CNRS «Etudes interdisciplinaires sur les
sociétés anciennes du Pacifique Sud», dirigé par Frédérique
Valentin (sous presse).
[16] Saura, B. 2005 Huahine aux temps anciens. Cahiers du
Patrimoine 8. Savoirs et Traditions. Tradition orale. Service
de la culture et du patrimoine de Polynésie française.
[17] Sinoto, Y. 1996 Mata'ire'a Hill : A Unique Pehistoric
Settlement, and a Hypothetical Sequence of Marae
Development in the Society Islands. In : J.M. Davidson et al.
(eds) Oceanic culture history : Essays in Honour of Roger
Green. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu : 541-553.
[18] Wallin, P., Solsvik, R. 2005 Radiocarbon dates from
marae structures in the district of Maeva, Huahine. Journal of
the Polynesian Society vol.114 n°4 : 375-3
[19] Eddowes, M. 2002 Inventaire archéologique de l'île de
Huahine. Rapport de prospection. Service de la culture et du
patrimoine, Punaauia.
[20] Emory 1927 Traditionnal History of Maraes in the
Society Islands. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin, 260 p.
[21] Jamet, R. 1993 Les sols en Polynésie française. Atlas de
l’ORSTOM, Paris.
[22] Edwards, E. 1995 Prospection archéologique de la vallée
d'Opoa, Raiatea, ïles de la Société, Polynésie française.
Punaauia,
Département
Archéologie,
C.P.S.H.,
Te
Anavaharau.
[23] Edwards, E. 1990 Prospection archéologique de la vallée
de Fa'aroa, Ra'iatea, Iles de la Société, Polynésie française.
Punaauia,
Département
Archéologie,
C.P.S.H.,
Te
Anavaharau.
[24] Cristino, C., Vargas, P., Rieu, J.-L. 1988 Fouilles
archéologiques et restauration du site VAI-1 - Vallée de la
Vaihiria, Tahiti. Punaauia, Département Archéologie, CPSH.
5