Dificultades y fuentes para el estudio de la infancia medieval

The integrated model of Pohnpeian socio-political development discussed here combines the data presented separately in Figures 3.3 and 3.4. The model has been divided into periods which are distinguished by hypothetical changes in socio-political organization (see Figure 3.5). The dates presented in this discussion are primarily based on available archaeological data and historical records, with some estimated dates based on cultural sequences in oral tradition. Pohnpei has long been identified as a stratified chiefdom society (e.g. Ayres 1990; Cordy 1985; Petersen 1992). This model does not challenge this

determination, but it does attempt to define how and why the Pohnpeian socio-political system developed a centralized power structure, how this level of complexity was maintained, and the factors that led to its failure.

Figure 3.5 Diagram of socio-political change combining both archaeological data and historic information.

84 |

The first period demarcated in the integrated model of socio-political development on Pohnpei is the settlement period (500 BC-AD 1). This period is primarily concerned with the settlement of the island and the establishment of clans on the island. The time after each subsequent settlement event (6 according to oral traditions) would have required a renegotiation of social relations, which over time created the basis for clan and social hierarchy on Pohnpei.

The second period, AD 1 to approximately AD 900, is characterized by the

development of stone architecture (e.g. house platforms, foundations) around and following AD 600 and expansion of subsistence practices (c. AD 400). It is during this period that priest- leaders are hypothesized to have become important and territorial chiefdoms with some degree of hierarchy emerge.

The period between AD 900 and 1100 is of particular note because it precedes the proposed development of a centralized state on Pohnpeian around AD 1200-1300. Ceramics were no longer in use by this time, but this period is notable for early elaboration of stone architecture (starting c. AD 1000), which includes the start of small-scale islet construction at Nan Madol. This may correlate with traditional history in which the brothers (Olisihpa and Olisohpa), who are credited with the construction of Nan Madol, introduced a new belief system to the island. This 200 year period is particularly important because it is when new leaders established a base for themselves at Nan Madol and began building a foundation for further socio-political development. This period represents the incipient phase of

centralization on Pohnpei. At this time socio-political organization is assumed to have been characterized by priest-leaders and powerful clans based on oral traditions, which could be supported if additional dates were acquired from sites associated with oral traditions. This period may be characterized by an increase in prestige competition (feasting, displays of affluence, inter-personal competition) between social groups and clans as a means to establish or maintain their status on a local and potentially regional level. Archaeological

85 |

correlates of this likely consist of evidence for feasting, large breadfruit fermentation pits, and evidence for the cultivation of large yams and other root crops.

The period between AD 1100 and 1600 is believed to be the period in which socio- political power was centralized at Nan Madol, under the Saudeleur Dynasty. There is a significant increase in stone construction and monument building starting between AD 1100 and AD 1200 at Nan Madol and elsewhere, which is suggestive of the accompanying social and ideological changes. There is abundant evidence for religious, ritual and political activity centered at Nan Madol at this time (e.g. turtle ceremony at Ideht). There is no obvious archaeological evidence of inter-personal conflict or warfare (e.g. fortification, refuges, etc.) during the centralization of socio-political power on Pohnpei, which means violent conflict may not have been a significant strategy in gaining or maintaining socio-political power. The lack of evidence for violence does not preclude the use of coercion to maintain the Saudeleur Dynasty, which is supported by oral tradition.

Ideological shifts may have contributed to the populace questioning the legitimacy of the centralized system as the Saudeleur began to abuse their position of power. The

overthrow of Saudeleur rule by Isohkelekel and his allies recounted in oral tradition likely occurred around AD 1600 based on a decline in building projects at Nan Madol in the 1600s and 1700s. The battles which led to the replacement of the Saudeleur do not appear in the available archaeological data from Pohnpei, but evidence for warfare can be ephemeral (see Milner 1999) and may yet be discovered.

The Nahnmwarki system was probably established around AD 1600 in Madolenihmw (Mauricio 1993) to replace the organizational gap left by the removal of the Saudeleur. The U- shaped feast house (nahs) is associated with this time period, and monumental constructions (e.g. lolong) were no longer built. Construction at Nan Madol continued on a small scale until c. AD 1750, since the Nahnmwarki of Madolenihmw probably used the site as their base of power until the 18th century. The Nahnmwarki system was adopted in some of the other districts between AD 1600 and 1800.

86 |

The integrated model identifies a number of important factors related to socio- political development and change on Pohnpei. Throughout these socio-political shifts kinship and clan hierarchy continued to play significant roles in Pohnpeian power relations, and they still play an integral role. Another important aspect of the proposed model is that ideological and religious beliefs were as important to the development of socio-political hierarchy as demographic increase and surplus production. Though power was centralized under the Saudeleur based on introduced ideological and religious views, it is not clear how this centralization impacted upon areas far from the center of power. The largest effects of this centralization may have been on horticultural production systems and architectural

innovation, along with the integration of new levels of hierarchy in the socio-political system. A significant underlying theme in this proposed model is the trend from a focus on the sacred to the secular over the course of Pohnpeian prehistory (see Mauricio 1993). Oral tradition provides much of the evidence for this shift, but radiocarbon dates from Nan Madol show that the supposed sacred precinct of the site was built prior to the political precinct (see Bryson 1989). Based on the dates from Nan Madol, the probable development of purely secular leadership roles on Pohnpei took place over 500 to 700 years. Secular leaders founded their power upon control of land tenure and surplus production used in prestige competition (Bascom 1948; Fischer 1958; Petersen 1982a; Riesenberg 1968). Power and status are tied to prowess in social competition and knowledge, which has a somewhat sacred character (Ehrlich 1978; Falgout 1984; Fischer and Fischer 1957; Keating 1994; Mauricio 1993).

This study does not plan to address the full scope of the developmental trajectory presented above, but focuses on socio-political development on Pohnpei between AD 1000 and 1700. To answer questions relating to the processes of centralization and decentralization of socio-political power during this period, this study examines architectural development and change. Mortuary structures comprise a significant component of the architectural

elaboration on Pohnpei with the development of monumental tomb structures (lolong) concurrent with the centralization of power at Nan Madol. The next section is concerned with

87 |

how this study will address questions of socio-political change through the analysis of mortuary structures.

3.5 Conclusions

The model of socio-political development presented above still needs significant refinement in regards to the chronology of events and would benefit from the inclusion of additional archaeological data. Yet, it does provide significant information about the period of socio-political centralization on the island to allow for a discussion of the factors and

mechanisms that played a significant role in state formation on Pohnpei. The model emphasizes the role of social cooperation and ideology in socio-political centralization and discusses the role of conflict and coercion primarily in the decentralization of the political system. The thesis examines the possibility that conflict and coercion may have had a more significant role in socio-political centralization than currently recognized by this model (see Chapter 2). The next chapter focuses on how specific factors contributed to socio-political development on Pohnpei as a means of understanding how coercion and cooperation may have had an impact on the socio-political system.

89 |

Chapter 4: Current Evidence Relating to the Factors and Mechanisms