Geochemical sourcing of basalt artifacts from Kaua'i, Hawaiian Islands

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attachedcopy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial researchand education use, including for instruction at the authors institution

and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling orlicensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party

websites are prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of thearticle (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website orinstitutional repository. Authors requiring further information

regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies areencouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Author's personal copy

Geochemical sourcing of basalt artifacts from Kaua‘i, Hawaiian Islands

Peter R. Mills a,*, Steven P. Lundblad b, Julie S. Field c, Alan B. Carpenter d, Windy K. McElroy e, Pua Rossi f

aDepartment of Anthropology, Social Sciences Division, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, 200 W., Kawili Street, Hilo, HI 96720, USAbDepartment of Geology, Natural Sciences Division, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, 200 W., Kawili Street, Hilo, HI 96720, USAcAnthropology, Ohio State University, 4056 Smith Laboratory, 174 W., 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USAdHawai‘i Division of State Parks, PO Box 621, Honolulu, HI 96809, USAeGarcia and Associates, 146 Hekili Street, Kailua, HI 96734, USAfHawaiian Studies, Kaua‘i Community College, 3-1901 Kaumuali‘i Hwy., L�ıhue, HI 96766, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 22 April 2010Received in revised form3 August 2010Accepted 4 August 2010

Keywords:geochemical sourcingprovenance studiesstone artifactsHawaiian Islands

a b s t r a c t

We report on energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) sourcing of 807 basalt artifacts and 34 basaltecofacts recovered from stratified midden at Nu‘alolo Kai, Kaua‘i. These data are compared with EDXRFanalyses of 473 alluvial pebbles from Waimea Canyon, 34 adzes from the Kaua‘i Museum, and publishedgeochemical data for Kaua‘i basalts. Formal tools, such as adzes, chisels, and mirrors were predominantlymanufactured from sources not available at Nu‘alolo Kai. Most adzes and chisels are consistent withsources available elsewhere on Kaua‘i, but two basalt mirrors are outside the expected geochemicalrange of Kaua‘i basalts. In contrast, almost all expedient tools were manufactured from basalts availableat Nu‘alolo Kai. These findings support the existence of an island-wide distribution system for adzematerial on Kaua‘i, and challenges extant models of pre-contact Hawaiian economics to consider themechanisms through which specialized commodities were produced and distributed.

� 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

We employ non-destructive energy-dispersive X-ray fluores-cence (EDXRF) to source basalt tool debitage from Nu‘alolo Kai(Figs. 1 and 2) on the N�a Pali Coast of Kaua‘i. While EDXRF is nota new analytical technique, its large-scale application to basaltlithic assemblages is a promising new extension of the method.Nu‘alolo Kai is at the base of an overhanging escarpment where400 m high cliffs meet the sea. Bennett (1931) reported the site (50-30-01-196), and Bishop Museum archaeologists conducted exca-vations between 1958 and 1964. The complex includes severalfeatures: a canoe shed (K2); the main occupation area (K3); andtwo occupation areas to the southeast of K3 under the same cliff (K4and K5) (Graves et al., 2005; Kirch, 1985; Soehren, 1966; Soehrenand Kikuchi, 1980). The archaeologists excavated approximately145 m3 and cataloged over 13,600 objects (Graves et al., 2005).Fifteen strata extend down more than two meters in K3. Althoughthe site was predominantly related to habitation and marine

subsistence, extensive agricultural terracing is also present inNu‘alolo ‘�Aina immediately to the east.

More recent investigations by UH M�anoa (Calugay and McElroy,2005; Graves et al., 2005; Graves and McElroy, 2005; Hunt, 2005;Morrison and Hunt, 2007; O’Leary, 2005; Pfeffer, 2001) andHawai‘i State Parks and the N�a Pali Coast ‘Ohana (Major, 2005;Major et al., 2007; Major and Carpenter, 2007, in preparation;Yent, 1983, 1985) have resulted in new interpretations, and haveexpanded excavations along the shorefront. Some samples in thepresent sourcing study derive from a sandy flat (Site 197) to thewest of Site 196, where there is an early historical era canoe shed,and an additional location along the beachfront (Site 7154, Majorand Carpenter, in preparation) where stream erosion has exposedhabitation deposits (Fig. 1).

Four radiocarbon dates from wood charcoal (Hunt, 2005) rangebetween A.D. 1400 and the historical era, with the majority of theoccupation dating after A.D. 1700. Nine additional wood charcoalradiocarbon dates (Graves et al., 2005) suggest that the earliestinhabitants may have arrived in the late 13th century A.D. Wide-spread anthropogenic paleoenvironmental changes on Kaua‘iappear between A.D. 1000 and 1250/1300 (Burney and Burney,2003; Carson, 2005).

This geochemical study examines 807 basalt artifacts and 34ecofacts from Nu‘alolo Kai. Transportation of stone tools between

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 808 974 7465, þ1 808 937 4417 (mobile);fax: þ1 808 974 7737.

E-mail address: millsp@hawaii.edu (P.R. Mills).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science

journal homepage: http : / /www.elsevier .com/locate/ jas

0305-4403/$ e see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.jas.2010.08.005

Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e3393

Author's personal copy

islands and districts can serve as an indicator of voyaging andexchange, but the expense and damage caused to artifacts inconventional geochemical studies have inhibited large-scale sourcingof Hawaiian lithics (Mills et al., 2008, submitted for publication).Domestic commodity exchange models in Hawai‘i emphasize thatcommoners relied on local resources within their own ahupua‘a(traditional land division) (Earle, 1977, 1997). Ethnohistorical dataalso indicate that Kaua‘i Islanders operated relatively independentlyfromother islands, but there are accountsof long-distance voyages byelites (Dibble,1909; Emerson,1893; Fornander,1878;Kamakau,1991;Malo, 1951). By conducting large-scale non-destructive sourcing, weare able to assess potential linkages between this seemingly isolatedfishing village and other Hawaiian communities.

Where possible, the artifacts are assigned to chronologicalgroups. Graves et al. (2005) established three “analytic zones” forartifacts associated with dated stratigraphic contexts. Five hundredand forty-two of the analyzed artifacts (66.9%) are associated withthese zones (Table 1).

Adzes are the most common formal stone tools at Nu‘alolo Kai,but expedient tools composed of fine-grained basalts are morenumerous (Calugay and McElroy, 2005). Based on shape and wearpatterns, Soehren and Kikuchi (1980) classified the expedient toolsas ‘files,’ ‘reamers,’ ‘saws,’ ‘whetstones,’ ‘drills,’ and ‘scrapers’.Calugay and McElroy (2005) classified the expedient tools’ wearpatterns andmorphologies, and deduced that these dimensions areclosely related, and, largely determined by patterns of use (Fig. 3).

Fig. 1. Nu‘alolo Kai, adapted from Tomonari-Tuggle (1989), 61 m (200 ft.) contours.

Fig. 2. Detail of excavations at 50-30-01-196 (Hunt, 2005; Soehren, 1966; Soehren and Kikuchi, 1980). See Fig. 1 for general location.

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e33933386

Author's personal copy

Debitage that we associatewith adze technology includes wholeand fragmentary adzes, unpolished adze preforms, and flakes withevidence of grinding on the dorsal surface. Other formal groundstone tools at the site include four ‘chisels’ and two ‘mirrors.’Chisels are ground rods with small bits that could have been usedfor detailed carving. Mirrors are finely polished thin basalt discsthat reflected images when wet (Bennett, 1931; Burney andKikuchi, 2006; Malo, 1951). We analyzed unpolished basalt debit-age as a separate category.

1.1. Comparative geochemistry

Nu‘alolo Kai basalt geochemistry can be estimated from pub-lished studies (Fig. 4). The N�a Pali coast consists almost entirely of

shield-building lavas extruded between 5 and 4 mya that aredefined as the N�a Pali member of the Waimea Canyon basalt series(Sherrod et al., 2007). Over the next million years, small amounts ofgeochemically similar lava spilled over the summit caldera to thesouth (Olokele basalts). Between 3.5 and 4 mya, post-shieldMakaweli basalts covered underlying N�a Pali member lavas to thesouthwest of the caldera. A small eruptive series on southeastKaua‘i also caps underlying N�a Pali basalts (the H�a‘upu series,which remains undated), and ends the Waimea Canyon basaltseries. Then, following a hiatus, rejuvenated volcanism between2.6 mya and 150,000 years ago produced the K�oloa volcanic seriesthat covers most of the eastern half of Kaua‘i. K�oloa volcanics aremostly evolved basanites. They should contain relatively highconcentrations of incompatible trace elements such as rubidium(Rb), strontium (Sr), yttrium (Y), zirconium (Zr), niobium (Nb), andbarium (Ba), and lower concentrations of compatible elements suchas nickel (Ni) and copper (Cu). Unfortunately, most of the 271geochemical analyses synthesized by Sherrod et al. (2007) relied onmajor oxides, and did not report on trace elements.

Fine-grained basalts suitable for adzes are unequally distrib-uted. Two reported adze quarries are within the Waimea Canyonvolcanic series (Bennett, 1931; Brigham, 1902). One is on NounouRidge on the north side of the Wailua River, and another quarry is

Fig. 3. Expedient flake tools and mirrors (Soehren and Kikuchi, 1980): (a) file; (b) scraper, (c) reamer; (d) saw; (e) whetstone; (f) perforated mirror; and (g) mirror with finelyground edges.

Table 1Basalt samples from Nu‘alolo Kai in relationship to chronological analytic zones.

Analytic Zone Date range Provenience Numberof samples

1 AD 1700e1850 K3 and K5 2472 AD 1500e1700 K3 and K5 2533 AD 1250/1300e1500 K3 only 42

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e3393 3387

Author's personal copy

reported on Mokihana Ridge in Waimea Canyon (Fig. 4). Nogeochemical data from these sources have been published. An adzeworkshop is also located several kilometers inland from NounouRidge (Yent, 1988). Samples analyzed with WDXRF from this sitecontained markedly different geochemical profiles that Sinton andSinoto (1997) referred to as “Keahua I” and “Keahua II”. Thesedisparate compositions reinforce the interpretation of the site asa workshop rather than a quarry.

To augment the published datasets, we analyzed 34 basaltpebbles and unmodified basalt fragments from themidden that theoccupants had presumably collected nearby. We also analyzed 473alluvial pebbles from the mouth of Waimea Canyon. The WaimeaCanyon catchment includes both the Waimea Canyon volcanicseries and the K�oloa volcanic series. Mechanical weathering of theriver drainage should have produced an assemblage of pebbles thatfavors dense basalts. These combined analyses thus provide anestimation of the geochemical range of fine-grained basalts from

Fig. 4. Geologic map of Kaua‘i adapted from Sherrod et al. (2007).

Group A

Group B

Group C

Group D

Group E

Group F

Group G

Group H

Group I

Group J

Group K

Outlier

Waimea Canyony

Conant Adzes

Mauna Kea Quarry

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0 800

Zr ppm

Sr p

pm

700600500400300200100

Fig. 5. SreZr scatterplot for all analyzed samples. Samples from the Mauna Kea Adze Quarry (N¼ 820) are plotted for comparison (Mills et al., 2008).

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e33933388

Author's personal copy

Kaua‘i in general, and fromNu‘alolo Kai itself. Flows fromMokihanaridge should be represented in the alluvium, but Nounou Ridgevolcanics would only be represented indirectly through the generalgeochemistry of the Waimea Canyon basalts.

Thirty-four additional adzes, adze fragments, and adze blanksfrom the Conant collection of the Kaua‘i Museumwere also analyzed.Although the artifacts lack specific provenience, thedonor lived in theK�ılauea region of East Kaua‘i and gatheredmost of the artifacts in theearly decades of the 20th century. Similarities in geochemicalpatterns between the Nu‘alolo Kai collections and the Conantcollection help establish island-wide adze distribution patterns.

2. Methods

EDXRF is a relatively inexpensive, rapid, and non-destructivemethod of sourcing basalt (Latham et al., 1992; Lundblad et al.,2008; Mills et al., 2008). Despite its benefits, fewer elements can

be characterized with as much precision as can be obtained withWDXRF, ICP-MS, or INAA. For example, Lebo and Johnson (2007)relied on five elements to discriminate between Kaua‘i sourcesand samples from Nihoa and Necker using ICP-MS and WDXRF.Only three of those elements e Sr, Nb, and Zr e are analyzed here.While more precise techniques may be needed to discriminatebetween similar sources, EDXRF is a valuable tool for illuminatinggeneral patterns in geochemistry within a site assemblage thatcannot be practically addressed with small-scale, expensive,destructive, and time-consuming techniques.

Analyses were completed on UH Hilo’s QuanX� EDXRF spec-trometer, using a methodology tailored to basalts (Lundblad et al.,2008), and that generates compositional data for 19 elements.Each sample run included a pelletized USGS basalt standard(BHVO-2). Our classification of geochemical groups emphasizes‘Mid-Z’ trace elements, particularly Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, and Nb becausethese elements exhibit the best analytical precision. We establish

Table 2Average concentration values and standard deviations for each of the 11 defined geochemical groups (AeK) from Nu‘alolo Kai, compared with the USGS standard BHVO-2.

Group A (423) B (103) C (205) D (12) E (3) F (4) G (2)

Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D.

Quantitative Analysesa

Rb ppm 11 3 12 3 19 3 13 4 18 2 21 5 18 2Sr ppm 316 31 426 25 514 34 455 41 332 28 479 36 189 7Y ppm 28 8 29 3 25 2 27 4 30 4 34 4 30 16Zr ppm 149 7 195 11 122 7 132 16 216 6 249 6 148 1Nb ppm 13 3 17 2 23 2 12 6 16 2 18 1 13 1

Semi-quantitative analysesb

Na2O % 3.6 3.8 2.7 2.4 2.3 1 2.1 0.4 2.6 0.3 2.3 0.5 1.7 0MgO % 6 2 4 2 6 2 5 1 5 1 4 1 3 1Al2O3 % 11 2 12 2 12 2 13 2 11 1 11 1 15 4SiO2 % 43 6 41 5 40 4 41 7 46 3 42 2 38 2K2O % 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.8 0 0.9 0.2 1 0.2CaO % 7 3 9 3 10 2 10 1 7 1 8 2 3 1TiO2 % 1.9 1.2 2.6 0.7 1.9 2.1 2.1 0.3 2.6 0.1 2.8 0.3 2.2 0.1V ppm 250 100 300 100 300 0 300 50 300 50 350 50 250 0MnO ppm 1400 1200 1300 400 1300 200 1200 200 1200 300 1500 500 8600 1500Fe % 9.2 5.4 8.9 1.5 9.7 1.5 8.0 3.1 9.8 1 8.2 1.7 16.4 1.8Ni ppm 80 60 60 20 60 20 60 20 80 80 100 40 240 40Cu ppm 120 80 100 40 60 20 120 100 100 40 110 40 300 20Zn ppm 130 30 130 10 130 20 110 10 140 10 140 10 140 0Ba ppm 110 40 160 40 450 50 160 80 340 200 240 60 120 60

Group H (44) I (38) J (3) K (2) BHVO-2 (97)

Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Av. S.D. Accepted value

Quantitative analysesRb ppm 52 14 67 8 67 8 79 14 13 2 9.8Sr ppm 1404 240 1397 117 1119 51 1225 438 374 21 389Y ppm 42 5 45 5 51 1 52 5 27 2 26Zr ppm 292 63 375 29 536 28 688 106 185 12 172Nb ppm 72 15 85 8 73 5 83 12 18 2 18

Semi-quantitative analysesNa2O % 2.9 1.2 3.2 1.3 3.4 1.4 2.6 1.0 2.1 0.2 2.22MgO % 6 4 3 1 4 2 3 1 7 0 7.23Al2O3 % 11 4 14 2 13 3 12 3 13 1 13.5SiO2 % 39 6 45 8 49 4 49 9 48 1 49.9K2O % 1.2 0.3 1.5 0.1 1.9 0.3 2.2 0.5 0.6 0 0.52CaO % 8 2 7 1 6 1 4 1 11 1 11.4TiO2 % 2.4 0.6 2.8 0.4 2.3 0.2 2.1 0.4 2.6 0.1 2.73V ppm 250 50 250 50 200 0 200 50 350 0 317MnO ppm 1600 200 1900 400 2000 100 2100 200 1500 0 1666Fe % 10.1 2.3 9.1 1.4 8.1 1.1 7.1 1.0 9.0 0.5 8.6Ni ppm 60 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 119Cu ppm 40 40 20 20 20 0 40 20 120 0 127Zn ppm 150 20 150 20 150 10 230 130 100 0 103Ba ppm 1320 240 1460 160 1240 20 1040 20 130 20 130

a Concentrations and standard deviations on quantitative analyses are rounded to 1 ppm.b Semi-quantitative averages and standard deviations are rounded to reflect varying degrees of accuracy: Na2O, K2O, TiO2, and Fe are rounded to 0.1%; MgO, Al2O3, and SiO2,

are rounded to 1%; Zn is rounded to 10 ppm; Ba, Ni and Cu are rounded to 20 ppm; V is rounded to 50 ppm; MnO is rounded to 100 ppm. Total Fe is reported in a formatfollowing Shackley (2005). Data on Na were not gathered on 67 samples.

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e3393 3389

Author's personal copy

initial groupings observing clustering of Zr and Sr. These twoelements occur in basalts at levels well above detection limits.Other elements are then examined to identify any additional clus-ters that are not evident with Sr and Zr. Principal ComponentAnalyses (PCA) are then applied to observe how these groupscluster using multivariate techniques.

3. Results

3.1. Defined geochemical groups

We define 11 geochemical groups (AeK) and two outliers fromNu‘alolo Kai (Fig. 5, Table 2). Full compositional analyses areavailable online (UH Hilo Geoarchaeology Lab, 2010). The groupsinclude local and non-local materials that correlate with tool types.By comparing Sr and Zr concentrations, it is also apparent that noNu‘alolo Kai artifacts in the sample match with Mauna Kea AdzeQuarry geochemistry on Hawai‘i Island (Mills et al., 2008). Thequarry is composed of a series of geochemically similar flows(Fig. 5), and is the largest known quarry in the Hawaiian Islands.

3.1.1. Group A (N¼ 423)Thisgroupmatcheswellwith localN�aPalimemberbasalts. Thirty-

one of the 34 basalt ecofacts analyzed from the Nu‘alolo Kai excava-tions fall within this group. The low concentrations of incompatibletrace elements (Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Nb, and Ba) and relatively high concen-trations of compatible trace elements (Ni and Cu) are consistentwiththe shield-building tholeiitic lavas of the N�a Pali member (Reinerset al., 1999). High standard deviations for MnO and TiO2 indicatethat a variety of flows contribute to this group. The large stratifiedexposure of N�a Pali basalts in the cliffs of Nu‘alolo could explain thisdistribution, but the group could also include any number of artifactsfrom other Waimea Canyon basalts and other tholeiitic sources.Sampleswith similar composition are abundant in the 473 geologicalcontrol samples from theWaimea Canyon drainage (Fig. 5). Tholeiiticbasalts are also common throughout Hawai‘i, and documented adzebasalt sources on O‘ahu, L�ana‘i, and K�ılauea Volcano (Hawai‘i Island)fall within similar ranges (Sinton and Sinoto, 1997).

Group A is themost abundant at just over half (50.3%) of the lithicsamples, and includes examples of every lithic class with the excep-tion of basaltmirrors. Nevertheless, only 10.8% of the adze debitage isin this group, and expedient tools are dominant (Table 3). Only oneadze out of 34 in the Conant collection is similar to Group A (Table 4).

3.1.2. Group B (N¼ 103)The remaining three basalt ecofacts from Nu‘alolo Kai that were

not in Group A match with this group, which is also within theexpected range of N�a Pali member volcanics, but the group displayselevated concentrations of Sr and Zr and TiO2 relative to Group A,and clusters around a separate centroid (Fig. 6). Unlike Group A, thisgroup is not well represented in the 473Waimea Canyon geologicalcontrol samples (Figs. 6 and 7). This group is also skewed towardsexpedient flake tools and contains only 1.9% of the adze-relatedsamples (Table 1). No adzes in the Conant collection matched thisgroup.

3.1.3. Group C (N¼ 205)Although Group C is within the range of the Waimea Canyon

basalts, the specific geochemistry is only replicated in a few of the473 Waimea Canyon control samples. The group’s geochemicalrange is tightly clustered, and completely separates from Groups Aand B when plotted against Sr and Zr (Fig. 6). Ba also discriminatesbetween these groups. In contrast with Groups A and B, however,only two out of 281 expediently produced flake tools (0.7%)contribute to this group. The remainder of Group C is composed of128 adze-related samples (61% of the adze debitage), three formallyproduced chisels, and 72 pieces of undifferentiated basalt debitage.The nearly complete absence of expediently produced files, saws,scrapers, reamers and drills (that are abundant in geochemicalGroups A and B) reinforces the conclusion that this source was notlocally available, and demonstrates a strong technological separa-tion in the modes of production between adzes (and chisels), andexpedient flake tools. Moreover, 53% of the adzes in the Conantcollectionmatchwith Group C, indicating that the group representsa major adze source for Kaua‘i. Group C is also consistent with the“Keahua I” geochemical group defined by Sinton and Sinoto (1997).

3.1.4. Group D (N¼ 12)This group is also consistent with N�a Pali member basalts and

is compositionally intermediate between Groups A, B, and C.

Table 3Artifact types from Nu‘alolo Kai in relation to defined geochemical groups.

Geochemical Group

A B C D E F G H I J K Outlier Total

Large Adzes 6 1 39 13 8 67Small Adzes 2 1 13 2 3 4 3 28Adze Fragments 8 26 1 5 5 45Chisels 1 3 4Adze Flakes 5 50 1 9 2 1 68Unpolished flakes 58 60 69 2 1 13 16 219Files 201 26 2 2 1 1 233Reamers 18 1 5 1 25Saws 25 3 2 1 1 32Drills 2 1 3Whetstones 12 1 13Scrapers 4 1 5Hammer stones 3 1 4Mirrors 2 2Pounders 3 3Modified Basalt 44 8 3 1 56Unmodified Basalt 31 3 34Total 423 103 205 12 4 3 2 44 38 3 2 2 841

Table 4Conant collection adzes in relation to geochemical groups.

Geochemical group

A B C D E F G H I J K Outlier Total

Conant collectionadzes

1 0 18 5 2 0 0 4 3 1 0 0 34

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e33933390

Author's personal copy

Except for one adze fragment, all Group D samples are expedienttools and basalt flakes with no polish on the dorsal surface. Ona PCA plot (Fig. 7), Group D matches best with Group B, butdisplays lower Zr concentrations, and typically lower Nb concen-trations. Five of the 34 adzes in the Conant Collection also fallwithin this range.

3.1.5. Group E (N¼ 3)This group contains higher Zr concentrations (20e50 ppm)

relative to Sr than Groups A or B, and it is similar to the geochemicalrange of artifacts published for Nihoa and Necker (Lebo andJohnson, 2007). Two of the samples are small adzes recoveredwithin 2 m of each other in the upper strata of K3, but one of thesehas substantially higher Ba concentrations than the other, which is

reflected in Fig. 7. The final sample was recovered from earlierdeposits (AD 1500e1700) in K5. Two adzes in the Conant collectionare similar to this group.

3.1.6. Groups F (N¼ 4) and G (N¼ 2)Groups F and G are on the fringes of Groups A and B. Group F

measures higher in mid-Z trace elements than either Group A orGroup B. Group Gmeasures lower in Sr and higher in Zr than GroupA, and also has markedly higher Fe and MnO concentrations thanall but a few of the other artifacts in Group A. Samples in Group Finclude two expedient tools, a basalt flake, and a polished adzeflake. Both samples in Group G are expedient tools. Thesegeochemical groups may represent tools produced from lessabundant N�a Pali volcanic sources.

150150

200

200

250

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Zr ppm

Sr p

pm

Group A

Group B

Group C

Group D

Group E

Group F

Group G

Waimea Canyon

Conant Adzes

10050

Fig. 6. SreZr scatter plot detail of Groups A through G.

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

-500 0 500

PCA 1 (70.6%)

PCA

2 (1

2.6%

)

Fig. 7. PCA plot (covariance matrix) for MgO, K2O, CaO, TiO2, Fe, Ni, Cu, Rb, Sr, Y, Nb, and Ba. Groups H through K are outside the range of the plot.

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e3393 3391

Author's personal copy

3.1.7. Group H (N¼ 44) and Group I (N¼ 38)These two groups depart from expected compositions of theWai-

mea Canyon basalt series. The higher concentrations of incompatibletrace elements, lower concentrations of compatible trace elements (Niand Cu), and higher K2O and MnO values, all point to post-shield orrejuvenatedstage lavas, suchas those that compose theK�oloaVolcanicSeries coveringmuch of the eastern half of Kaua‘i. The two groups aredistinguished from each other by different ratios of Sr to Zr. GroupH isparticularly broadly defined and likely represents more than a singlequarry source. Like Group C, these two groups are almost entirelydominated by adze debitage. Only three expedient tools are classifiedin these two groups. Four adzes in the Conant collection fallwithin therange of Group H, and three more match with Group I.

3.1.8. Group J (N¼ 3)This small group is on the limit of the expected geochemical

range for rejuvenated K�oloa volcanics, and consists of three smalladzes recovered fromK3. A single adze in the Conant collection alsocompares favorably with this group. Group J bears some similarityto a known quarry near the summit of Haleakal�a, Maui (Sinton andSinoto, 1997), but major element concentrations for MnO inparticular do not match well.

3.1.9. Group K (N¼ 2)The two basalt mirrors analyzed from Nu‘alolo Kai exhibit

markedly different geochemistry from the other classes of basaltartifacts. The two samples also differ from each other geochemi-cally, but share in common elevated Sr and Zr levels, with Zrconcentrations beyond the range of those observed in Groups H, I,and J. One mirror is well beyond the range of the 473 controlsamples from theWaimea Canyon drainage, and the other is on thevery fringe of that cluster.

3.1.10. Outliers (N¼ 2)One outlier is a sinker commonly used on octopus lures (l�uhe‘e).

It has been cut with ametal saw, andmay be a historically importedstone. Elevated concentrations of Al2O3 (30%) and Fe (49%) are wellbeyond the range of basalts, but could still be the product of lateriticalteration of a parent basalt. The second outlier is an adze flakefrom the deepest deposits of K3, and is compositionally interme-diate between Group I and Group J (Fig. 5).

3.2. Adze source material and site chronology

One hundred and sixty samples of adze-related debitage can beassigned to temporal analytic zones (Table 5). Group C is the domi-nant source of adzes in all time periods, with Groups A, H, and Iproviding thenext threemost significant contributions.Anobservedtrend is that bothGroupsAandHare less commonlyused in the latertwo periods, and Groups C and I are more commonly used.

4. Conclusions

Residents of Nu‘aolo Kai predominantly used adzes made fromnon-local basalts. By the earliest occupation of K3 (ca. A.D. 1300),

the site’s occupants were relying on at least three non-local sourcesof adze basalt (Groups C, H, and I) that were quarried throughoutthe remaining pre-contact era. The common presence of thesegroups in the Conant collections suggests that these sources weredistributed widely on Kaua‘i. Reported quarry locations in theWailua drainage (Nounou Ridge) and Waimea Canyon (MokihanaRidge) are near twomain residential centers for Kaua‘i’s paramountchiefs, which could be consistent with attached craft specialistswho operated through a redistributive economy. This finding is atodds with some models of Hawaiian economics (Earle, 1977, 1997),but is similar to patterns on Hawai‘i Islandwhere a few quarry areassupplied material for use throughout the island (Bayman andNakamura, 2001; Lass, 1994; McCoy, 1990). These results indicatea sustained degree of economic organization that extended beyondahupua‘a boundaries. Determining the specific geologic sources ofthese clusters may be resolved with additional geochemical char-acterization of potential source areas.

Nu‘alolo Kai’s residents also may have produced a minority ofadzes from N�a Pali member volcanics (Group A). Althoughproducing adzes from locally available basalts was feasible, thesematerials were apparently not preferred and procurement of non-local sources developed as a cultural choice. Residents, however,regularly used many local basalts to produce expedient tools. Thereare few expedient basalt tools in the earliest deposits (Calugay andMcElroy, 2005), but by A.D. 1500e1700, Nu‘alolo Kai’s occupantswere producing many expedient basalt tools from local sources.

Finally, despite the apparent existence of an island-widedistribution system for adze material on Kaua‘i Island by the 14thcentury, there is no evidence of long-distance exchange of MaunaKea material from Hawai‘i Island at the southeastern end of thearchipelago. This finding establishes one limit to the interactionsphere of the immense Mauna Kea Quarry adze productioneconomy. Other geochemical groups at Nu‘alolo Kai may still derivefrom other islands. Groups E, J, K, and one adze flake outlier appearto be non-local sources that were not commonly used on Kaua‘i.Both Groups E and J are minimally represented in adzes in theConant collection of the Kaua‘i Museum, and could derive fromKaua‘i, but may also result from inter-island voyaging. The latterpossibility seems especially valid for the two stone mirrors thatcomprise Group K, which do not match any of the control samplesfrom Waimea Canyon. Most adzes were probably produced anddiscarded within a short period, but stone mirrors could have beencurated over generations, andmight reflect the location of ancestralhomelands. Rather than speculate on specific sources for themirrors with these preliminary data, we suggest that a concertedeffort to compile geochemical data for Hawaiian mirrors will allowfor better inferences on potential source areas.

Acknowledgements

Acquisition of the EDXRF at the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo wassupported by a major research instrumentation grant from theNational Science Foundation (BCS 0317528). We are grateful to theBishop Museum for access to the 1958e1964 Nu‘alolo lithiccollections, and to the Kaua‘i Museum for the opportunity toexamine the Conant collection. We also appreciate the constructivecomments from all three anonymous reviewers at JAS.

References

Bayman, J.M., Moniz Nakamura, J.J., 2001. Craft specialization and adze productionon Hawai‘i Island. Journal of Field Archaeology 28, 239e252.

Bennett, W.C., 1931. Archaeology of Kauai. In: BPBM Bulletin 80. Bishop MuseumPress, Honolulu.

Brigham, W.T., 1902. Ancient Hawaiian stone implements. BPBM Memoirs 1 (4)Honolulu.

Table 5Chronological distribution of adze-related samples by geochemical group at Nu‘aloloKai.

Zone Geochemical group (% contribution to Zone)

A B C D E F G H I J Outlier

1 (N¼ 53) AD 1700e1850 9.4 0 58.5 0 3.8 0 0 9.4 17.0 1.9 02 (N¼ 66) AD 1500e1700 10.6 0 66.7 1.5 0 0 0 15.2 6.1 0 03 (N¼ 41) AD 1250/1300e1500 17.1 0 48.8 2.4 0 0 0 17.1 7.3 4.9 2.4

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e33933392

Author's personal copy

Burney, L.P., Burney, D.A., 2003. Charcoal stratigraphies for Kaua‘i and the timing ofhuman arrival. Pacific Science 57 (2), 211e226.

Burney, D.A., Kikuchi, W.P., 2006. A millenium of human activity at MakauwahiCave, Maha‘ulepu, Kaua‘i. Human Ecology 34 (2), 219e247.

Calugay, C., McElroy, W.K., 2005. An analysis of coral, basalt, and sea urchin spineabrading tools from Nu‘alolo Kai, Kaua‘i. In: Carson, M.T., Graves, M.W. (Eds.), N�aMea Kahiko o Kaua‘i: Archaeological Studies in Kaua‘i. Society for HawaiianArchaeology Special Publication, vol. 2, pp. 212e235. Honolulu.

Carson, M.T., 2005. A radiocarbon dating synthesis for Kaua‘i. In: Carson, M.T.,Graves, M.W. (Eds.), N�a Mea Kahiko o Kaua‘i: Archaeological studies in Kaua‘i.Society for Hawaiian Archaeology Special Publication, vol. 2, pp. 11e32.Honolulu.

Dibble, S., 1909. A History of the Sandwich Islands. T.G. Thrum, Honolulu.Earle, T.K., 1977. A reappraisal of redistribution. In: Earle, T.K., Ericson, J. (Eds.),

Exchange Systems in Prehistory. Academic Press, New York, pp. 213e229.Earle, T.K., 1997. Exchange in Oceania: search for evolutionary explanations. In:

Weisler, M.I. (Ed.), Prehistoric Long-Distance Interaction in Oceania: an Inter-disciplinary Approach. New Zealand Archaeological Association Monograph,vol. 21, pp. 224e237. Auckland.

Emerson, N., 1893. The long voyages of the ancient Hawaiians. In: Papers of theHawaiian Historical Society, vol. 5 Honolulu.

Fornander, A., 1878. An Account of the Polynesian Race, Its Origins and Migrations,and the Ancient History of the Polynesian People to the Times of KamehamehaI, vol. 1. Trubner, London.

Graves, M.W., Field, J.S., McElroy, W.K., 2005. An overview of site 50-30-01-196,Nu‘alolo Kai, Kaua‘i: features, excavations, stratigraphy, and chronology ofhistoric and prehistoric occupations. In: Carson, M.T., Graves, M.W. (Eds.), N�aMea Kahiko o Kaua‘i: Archaeological studies in Kaua‘i. Society for HawaiianArchaeology Special Publication, vol. 2, pp. 149e187. Honolulu.

Graves, M.W., McElroy, W.K., 2005. Hawaiian fishhook classification, identification,and analysis, Nu‘alolo Kai (Site 50-30-01-196), Kaua‘i. In: Carson, M.T.,Graves, M.W. (Eds.), N�a Mea Kahiko o Kaua‘i: Archaeological studies in Kaua‘i.Society for Hawaiian Archaeology Special Publication, vol. 2, pp. 181e211.Honolulu.

Hunt, T.L., 2005. Archaeological stratigraphy and chronology at Nu‘alolo Kai, N�a Palidistrict, Kaua‘i. In: Carson, M.T., Graves, M.W. (Eds.), N�a Mea Kahiko o Kaua‘i:Archaeological studies in Kaua‘i. Society for Hawaiian Archaeology SpecialPublication, vol. 2, pp. 236e258. Honolulu.

Kamakau, S.M., 1991. Ruling Chiefs of Hawai‘i. Kamehameha Schools Press,Honolulu.

Kirch, P.V., 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks. University of Hawai‘i Press,Honolulu.

Lass, B., 1994. Hawaiian Adze Production and Distribution. UCLA Institute ofArchaeology, Los Angeles.

Latham, T., Sutton, P.A., Versub, K.L., 1992. Non-destructive XRF characterization ofBasaltic artifacts from Truckee, California. Geoarchaeology 7, 81e101.

Lebo, S.A., Johnson, K.T.M., 2007. Geochemical sourcing of rock specimens and stoneartifacts from Nihoa and Necker Islands, Hawai‘i. Journal of ArchaeologicalScience 34, 858e871.

Lundblad, S.P., Mills, P.R., Hon, K., 2008. Analysing archaeological basalt using non-destructive energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence: effects of post-depositionalchemical weathering and sample size on analytical precision. Archaeometry50 (1), 1e11.

Major, M., 2005. Seeing the Lama: charcoal, evolution, and Hawaiian settlement. In:Carson, M.T., Graves, M.W. (Eds.), N�a Mea Kahiko o Kaua‘i: ArchaeologicalStudies in Kaua‘i. Society for Hawaiian Archaeology Special Publication, vol. 2,pp. 120e148. Honolulu.

Major, M., Carpenter, A., McEldowney, P.H., 2007. Archaeological Inventory Surveyof Sites 50-30-01-197 and 50-30-01-7150 at Nu‘alolo Kai, Na Pali Coast State

Wilderness Park, District of Waimea, Kaua‘i. In: a. State of Hawai‘i, Departmentof Land and Natural Resources, Division of State Parks and N�a Pali Coast ‘Ohan.

Major, M., Carpenter, A., 2007. Preservation Plan for Selected Sites at Nu‘alolo Kai,N�a Pali Coast State Wilderness Park, District of Waimea, Kaua‘i. State of Hawai‘i,Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of State Parks and N�a PaliCoast ‘Ohana.

Major, M., Carpenter, A. Data recovery at Site 50-30-01-7154, Nu‘alolo Kai, N�a PaliCoast State Park, Island of Kaua‘i. State of Hawai‘i, Department of Land andNatural Resources, Division of State Parks, Honolulu, in preparation.

Malo, D., 1951. Hawaiian antiquities. In: Bishop Museum Special Publication, vol. 2Honolulu.

McCoy, P.C., 1990. Subsistence in a non-subsistence environment. In: Yen, D.E.,Mummery, J.M.J. (Eds.), Pacific Production Systems. Australian NationalUniversity, Canberra, pp. 85e119.

Mills, P.R., Lundblad, S.P., Smith, J.G., McCoy, P.C., N�aleimaile, S.P., 2008. Science andsensitivity: a geochemcial characterization of the Mauna Kea Adze Quarrycomplex, Hawai‘i Island, Hawai‘i. American Antiquity 73 (4), 743e759.

Mills, P.R., Lundblad, S.P., Hon, K., Moniz-Nakamura, J.J., Kahahane, L.K., Drake-Raue,A., Souza, T.M., Wei, R. Reappraising craft specialization and exchange systemsin precontact Hawai‘i through non-destructive sourcing of basalt adze debitage.Journal of Pacific Archaeology, submitted for publication.

Morrison, A.E., Hunt, T.L., 2007. Human impacts on the nearshore environment: anarchaeological case study from Kaua‘i, Hawaiian Islands. Pacific Science 61 (3),325e345.

O’Leary, O., 2005. Analysis of the Nu‘alolo Kai ¼-inch fishbone assemblage, N�a PaliCoast, Kaua‘i. In: Carson, M.T., Graves, M.G. (Eds.), N�a Mea Kahiko o Kaua‘i:Archaeological studies in Kaua‘i. Society for Hawaiian Archaeology SpecialPublication, vol. 2, pp. 259e274. Honolulu.

Pfeffer, M.T., 2001. Implications of new studies of Hawaiian fishhook variability forour understanding of Polynesian settlement history. In: Hurt, T.D., Rakita, G.F.M.(Eds.), Style and Function: Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Archaeology.Greenwood Publishers, Westport, pp. 165e181.

Reiners, P.W., Nelson, B.K., Izuka, S.K., 1999. Structural and petrologic evolution ofthe L�ıhue basin and eastern Kaua‘i, Hawai‘i. GSA Bulletin 111, 674e685.

Shackley, M.S., 2005. Obsidian: Geology and Archaeology in the North AmericanSouthwest. University of Arizona, Tucson.

Sherrod, D.R., Sinton, J.M., Watkins, S.E., Brunt, K.M., 2007. GeologicMap of the State ofHawai‘i.USGSReport2007e1089,Version1.0.http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1089/.

Sinton, J., Sinoto, Y., 1997. A geochemical database for Polynesian adze studies. In:Weisler, M.I. (Ed.), Prehistoric Long Distance Interaction in Oceania. New Zea-land Archaeological Association Monograph, vol. 21, pp. 194e204. Auckland.

Soehren, L., 1966. Archaeological Excavations at Nu‘alolo, Kaua‘i. MS, Department ofAnthropology, Bishop Museum, Honolulu.

Soehren, L., Kikuchi, W., 1980. Archaeological Survey and Excavations, Sites K2, K3,K4, and K5, Nu‘alolo Kai, Kaua‘i. MS, Department of Anthropology, BishopMuseum, Honolulu.

Tomonari-Tuggle, M.J.F., 1989. An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey: N�a PaliCoast State Park. State of Hawai‘i, Department of Land and Natural Resources,Division of State Parks, Honolulu.

UHHiloGeoarchaeologyLab, 2010.http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/depts/geoarchaeology/index.php.

Yent, M., 1983. Archaeological Mapping and Inventory of the Cultural Resources atNu‘alolo Kai, N�a Pali Coast State Park, Kaua‘i. Hawai‘i Division of State Parks,Honolulu.

Yent, M., 1985. Archaeological Testing of Eroding Cultural Sites at Nu‘alolo Kai, N�aPali Coast State Park, Kaua‘i. Hawai‘i Division of State Parks, Honolulu.

Yent, M. 1988. Archaeological Investigations at Kauakahi Adze Workshop (Site 30-07-4000), Keahua Arboretum, Wailua, Kaua‘i. MS, Hawai‘i Division of StateParks, Honolulu.

P.R. Mills et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 3385e3393 3393