Re: First arrivals in NZ

From: George (gblack_at_hnpl.net)
Date: 09/18/04 

Date: 18 Sep 2004 13:19:29 -0700

R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh <rmarsh@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message news:<669ok0lh6bdjh17omrflj32pe4q55bu75e@news.xtra.co.nz>...
> In message <414BF24E.F8438446@not.com.au>, Seppo Renfors
> <Renfors@not.com.au> wrote:
>
> >Apparently there has been some teeth gnashing among some people about
> >these new dates indicating a much earlier presence of people in NZ
> >than is conventionally accepted. The conventional view is based on
> >sharp changes in pollen finds indicating large scale burning by early
> >agriculture. But what if the earliest people didn't practise
> >agriculture? Still a few people have questioned the possibility of the
> >R.exulans ages being correct.
>
> It sounds pretty solid to me.
>
> Is there any reason the rats couldn't have hitched a ride with a
> transitory crew or failed colony at the earlier time, leaving full
> human colonisation for the later date? Finding rats only means people
> got here with rats in their canoe; it doesn't mean they lived here for
> any length of time.
>
> Tasman found it and left, possibly leaving behind some seasick rats,
> despite not landing. It wasn't visited by Europeans again for over
> 100 years at a time when Europeans were actively exploring the globe.
> It's not such a stretch that Polynesians might have found it 2000
> years ago, stayed for the summer, then gone home or died out, leaving
> behind some rats, and not visited again for 1000 years. It might even
> explain the Maui myth.

Those Rattus exulans claims are made on only 16 samples..
In the 800-1000 year gap one would expect that Rattus exulans would be
represented by a greater population
Notes
The Age of Rat Introduction into New Zealand.

Further Evidence from Earthquake 1 North Otago
A Anderson & T Higham
6 Test sites were examined.
Being
1 Test Pit
2 South Excavation
3 Baulk
4 Enlarged Test Pit
5 North Excavation
6 Against Cliff.
Questioned are the XX section and the existance of disturbed layering
(burrow)
undescribed by Holloway (2002)
Fig 5 demonstrates no recording of layering..
Sheep (*and other introduced species) bone was found in the layer
claimed to contain the 'old rat bone'
The claims for AMS bone samples OxA - 10879, OxA - 10882,
NZA 9619, NZA 9620, NZA 9621 & NZA 5921 are evidence of poorly
recorded sample collection..

There have been no 'ancient rat bone' found since 1997 which is
strange as the recovery methods have improved , site excavation
techniques improved with far more recpording of the sites...

Refs:
Anderson A J
1996 Was Rattus exulans in New Zealand 2000 years ago.
Archaeology in Oceania : 31: 178-183Differential reliability of C14
ages of rat bone gelatine in South Pacific history
Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand : 30: 243-261Newsletter of
the New Zealand Archaeological Society Association
3 : 28The Holdaway R N & Bevan N R articles are already referenced
here.http://www.rsnz.govt.nz/publish/jrsnz/2002/024.phpYaldwyn J C
The matchbox the rat bone the Hukanui #76 excavations 1959
Archaeology in New Zealand 45: 118-129
June 2002 Archaeology in New Zealand Vol 45 No.2 page 118
September 2002 Archaeology in New Zealand Vol 45 No.3 page 216 A
Anderson..

Pollution possibilities (C14)

Formaldhyde (NZA 6086) Carbonates. Canopy Effect. Food chain
reservoirs (2500 year old carbon). Mineral oil (glycerin.)

Relevant Pages

  • Re: First arrivals in NZ
    ... Finding rats only means people ... South Excavation ... There have been no 'ancient rat bone' found since 1997 which is ... 1996 Was Rattus exulans in New Zealand 2000 years ago. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Old rats -
    ... > prior to the Maori settlement of New Zealand.. ... The only rat bone taken from the site was a rat jaw bone ... > and NOT labelled with any excavation information. ... plans) and their proper labelling/packaging ...
    (sci.archaeology)
Quantcast