Elsevier Science International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences Vol. P-R.pdf

(18897 KB) Pobierz
P
the Highlands of New Guinea commences as early
as 7000 BC (Golson 1988). These archaeological
indications confirm the long-held ethnobotanical
hypothesis that Near Oceania was one of several
independent centers for the origins of tropical
horticulture (see Food Production, Origins of ).
Pacific Islands, Archaeology of
The Pacific Islands, also known as Oceania, have been
subdivided traditionally by anthropologists into three
main geographic regions: Melanesia, Micronesia, and
Polynesia. Following Green (1991), prehistorians now
stress the division between Near Oceania in the west
(including the Bismarck Archipelago and the Solomon
Islands), and Remote Oceania (which includes all of
island Melanesia southeast of the Solomons, along
with Polynesia and Micronesia). This latter distinction
recognizes the Pleistocene settlement of Near Oceania,
whereas the widely dispersed islands of Remote
Oceania were discovered and settled only within the
past 4,000 years. Archaeological research in Oceania
has a long history, but modern efforts emphasizing
stratigraphic excavations did not begin until after
World War II (Kirch 2000), and have revealed the
main chronological sequence for human settlement.
This sequence is summarized here, followed by reviews
of the development of complex societies in Oceania,
and of the human impact on island environments.
2. Austronesian Expansion and Lapita
During the early Holocene, the southeastern Solomon
Islands marked the limit of human expansion. Be-
ginning around 2000 BC, a major expansion or
diaspora of people speaking languages belonging to
the Austronesian language family commenced (Blust
1995). Their immediate homeland has generally been
regarded as comprising the island of Taiwan (and
perhaps adjacent areas of mainland China). The ability
of early Austronesians to disperse rapidly has been
attributed to their invention of the outrigger sailing
canoe (Pawley and Ross 1993). The Austronesians
were horticulturalists who transported root, tuber,
and tree crops via their canoes, along with breeding
stocks of domestic pigs, dogs, and chickens.
The Austronesian diaspora rapidly encompassed
the major archipelagoes of island Southeast Asia; one
branch of Austronesian-speakers expanded along the
north coast of New Guinea into the Bismarck Archi-
pelago. This branch is known to linguists as Oceanic,
and the Oceanic languages (numbering about 450
modern languages) include most of those spoken
throughout the Pacific. The great exception is New
Guinea, where roughly 750 non-Austronesian lan-
guages are spoken.
Archaeological evidence for the initial Austronesian
dispersal into the Pacific comes from both western
Micronesia (the Marianas and Palau archipelagoes),
and from the Bismarck Archipelago. In western
Micronesia, early sites contain red-slipped pottery,
some of which is decorated with lime-filled, impressed
designs (Rainbird 1994). These sites, along with
radiocarbon-dated sediment cores exhibiting signals
of human presence (e.g., high influxes of microscopic
charcoal resulting from anthropogenic burning)
suggest that humans settled, the Marianas and Palau
no later than 1500 BC, and possibly as early as 2000
BC.
In the Bismarck Archipelago, the initial Austro-
nesian incursion has been correlated with the ap-
pearance of a distinctive suite of sites, also containing
pottery with lime-infilled decorations, but with motifs
1. Early Human Settlement of Near Oceania
The oldest known occupation sites are radiocarbon
dated to ca. 36,000 years ago (the late Pleistocene), on
the large island of New Guinea and in the adjacent
Bismarck Archipelago (Allen 1996). At several times
during the Pleistocene, New Guinea was joined to
Australia as a single land mass (known as Sahul), and
human entry into and expansion throughout this vast
Australasian region occurred rapidly. Late Pleistocene
sites in the Admiralty Islands, New Ireland, and Buka
(Solomons), all would have required open ocean
transport, suggesting the presence of some form of
watercraft (possibly rafts, bark boats, or dugouts)
(Irwin 1992).
Early human colonists in Near Oceania were hun-
ters and gatherers, who exploited tropical rainforests
as well as inshore marine resources (see Hunter–
Gatherer Societies, Archaeology of ). Long-distance
communication and exchange is indicated by the
movement of obsidian between islands. By the early
Holocene period (after 8000 BC), there is archaeo-
botanical evidence for domestication of tree, root,
and tuber crops (such as the Canarium almond and
various aroids) within Near Oceania. Archaeological
evidence for the cultivation of swamplands at Kuk in
10987
Pacific Islands, Archaeology of
made largely by a technique of dentate-stamping.
These sites and the associated artifacts (such as
Tridacna -shell adzes and Trochus -shell fishhooks, as
well as ornaments) represent the earliest known phase
of the Lapita cultural complex, dating to ca. 1500–
1300 BC (Gosden et al., 1989, Spriggs 1997). Early
Lapita sites were frequently hamlets or villages con-
sisting of houses elevated on posts or stilts, situated
over tidal reef flats or along shorelines. Excavated
plant and animal remains indicated a mixed economy
with horticulture and marine exploitation. Substantial
quantities of obsidian, chert, pottery, shell artifacts,
and other materials were exchanged between com-
munities (Kirch 1997).
Correlations among archaeological assemblages,
language groups, and human biological populations
are often complex, and need not be isomorphic.
However, a strong consensus is emerging among
scholars in several disciplines that the initial phase of
the Lapita cultural complex can be correlated with the
Proto Oceanic interstage of the Austronesian language
family. Moreover, genetic evidence (such as mtDNA
and hemoglobin markers) supports the view that the
Lapita phenomenon reflects a substantial population
intrusion into the Bismarck Archipelago, deriving out
of island Southeast Asia (Hill and Serjeantson 1989).
At the same time, the Proto Oceanic speakers un-
doubtedly had considerable interaction (cultural,
linguistic, and genetic) with the indigenous non-
Austronesian speaking populations who already occu-
pied the Bismarck region in the mid-Holocene. Thus
the Lapita cultural complex is seen as an outcome of
cultural processes of intrusion, integration, and inno-
vation.
guage themselves had developed in this Tonga–Samoa
region between ca. 900–500 BC, directly out of the
founding Lapita cultural complex (Kirch 2000, Kirch
and Green, in press). While archaeologists debate the
exact chronology and sequence of Polynesian dis-
persals, most agree that the central Eastern Polynesian
archipelagoes (such as the Society Islands, Cook
Islands, and Marquesas Islands) were settled first, no
later than AD 300 and perhaps some centuries earlier
(Rolett 1998). Remote Easter Island was discovered
by AD 800–900 (Van Tilburg 1994), while the
Hawaiian Islands were also well settled by this date.
The twin large, temperate islands of New Zealand
were colonized by Polynesians around AD 1200
(Anderson 1989, Davidson 1984). Critical to the
success of this unprecedented diaspora was the double-
hulled sailing canoe, capable of carrying 40–60 people
on voyages lasting one month or longer (Irwin 1992).
That the Polynesians reached South America and
returned is suggested by preserved remains of the
sweet potato ( Ipomoea batatas ), a South American
domesticate, in several prehistoric Polynesian sites.
Because it was the last sector of Remote Oceania to
be settled, and because its populations represent a
single radiation or diaspora, Polynesia constitutes a
monophyletic cultural and linguistic group. Thus,
Polynesia has often been regarded as an ideal region
for testing models of cultural differentiation from a
common ancestor (e.g., Kirch 1984, Kirch and Green,
in press).
4. De
elopment of Complex Societies
When the eighteenth- to nineteenth-century European
voyages of discovery inspired by the Enlightenment
encountered Pacific island societies, they frequently
encountered large, dense populations organized into
complex, hierarchical sociopolitical formations. With
populations often numbering into the tens or hundreds
of thousands, such societies had two to three decision-
making levels, and hereditary leaders who enjoyed
elite privileges and status markers. Anthropologists
classify such sociopolitical formations as chiefdoms,
and indeed, the Polynesian chiefdoms are often
considered the archetypal model (see Chiefdoms,
Archaeology of ).
The origins, development, and elaboration of Pacific
island chiefdoms have been a major topic of archaeo-
logical research (e.g., Davidson 1984, Kirch 1984,
Rainbird 1994, Sand 1995, Spriggs 1997). Based on
linguistic and archaeological evidence, early Austro-
nesian societies were characterized by some degree of
internal ranking (especially between senior and junior
branches of a descent line), but were probably
heterarchical rather than hierarchical in structure.
However, heterarchic competition (in such social
arenas as marriage and exchange, as well as com-
petition for land) between social groups provided the
3. Human Colonization of Remote Oceania
Beginning ca. 1300 BC, the Lapita pottery makers
expanded rapidly beyond the Solomons and into the
southwestern archipelagoes of Remote Oceania:
Vanuatu, the Loyalty Islands, New Caledonia, Fiji,
Tonga, and Samoa. Numerous radiocarbon-dated
archaeological sites document that Lapita sites in all
of these archipelagoes are no later than 900 BC.
We have already noted that the westernmost islands
of Micronesia were colonized directly out of island
Southeast Asia by Austronesian speakers ca. 2000–
1500 BC. Around 2,000 years ago, Oceanic speakers
who made plainware pottery (a late form of Lapita)
and who used shell adzes, fishhooks, and other
implements, founded settlements on several volcanic
islands of central Micronesia (Chuuk, Pohnpei, and
Kosrae). The atolls of the Marshall Islands were also
colonized at this time.
The final stage in the human settlement of the
Pacific Islands began after 500 BC, with the Polynesian
dispersals eastwards out of Tonga and Samoa. An-
cestral Polynesian culture and Proto Polynesian lan-
10988
Pacific Islands, Archaeology of
basis for true hierarchy (and eventually, in the largest
societies, class stratification) to emerge.
Archaeologists have identified several factors and
processes that were significant in the rise of Oceanic
chiefdom societies. Many of these were closely linked,
and should not be considered unicausal variables. For
example, population growth leading to large, high-
density populations can be identified as a necessary,
but probably not su cient, cause underlying socio-
political complexity (Kirch 2000, Sand 1995). The
human populations of the volcanic islands typically
reached densities of between 100–250 persons per
square kilometer prior to European contact, resulting
in intense competition for arable land and other
resources. Such conditions encouraged centralized,
hierarchic control, as well as providing incentives for
militaristic aggression.
A second process linked to population growth and
to increased hierarchy was intensification of pro-
duction, including agricultural systems and other
forms of production or resource extraction, as well as
economic specialization (e.g., in pottery production
and trade). On many islands, large-scale irrigation
works or dryland field systems were developed during
late prehistory. Although population increases may
have initially spurred intensification, once in place
such intensive production systems provided a means
for surplus extraction by chiefs and other leaders, thus
encouraging hierarchy. Often culturally marked as
tribute, such surpluses were the economic foundation
of an emergent elite, including not only hereditary
chiefs, but priests, warriors, craft specialists, and
others.
Ideology likewise played a key role in Pacific island
societies, with the elite cadres of the larger and most
complex societies actively employing ideological con-
trol as a means of legitimation. The origins of Oceanic
ritual systems can be traced back to common Austro-
nesian concepts of the sacredness of ancestors; these
concepts later became elaborated as cults in which the
highest chiefs were seen as directly descended from
powerful gods, and hence essential to the continued
well-being of the society at large. Archaeologically, the
rise of elite-dominated ideological systems is par-
ticularly reflected in monumental architecture, of
which the most impressive examples are the giant
statue-bearing temples of Easter Island, and the site of
Nan Madol on Pohnpei. Other forms of monumental
architecture, however, are ubiquitous throughout
Pacific islands chiefdoms. Even when monumental
architecture is absent, material signs of ideological
control can be quite striking, as in the multiple
sacrificial interments associated with the burial of Roy
Mata, a chief of Vanuatu (Garanger 1972).
Finally, competition, conflict, and warfare also
characterized many of the complex societies of the
Pacific, especially following the rise of large and dense
populations (see also Cultural Resource Management
(CRM): Conser
aeologically, warfare is marked by a diversity of kinds
of fortifications, such as the pallisaded pa volcanic
cones and headlands of New Zealand, or the ring-
ditch fortified villages of Fiji. Another, more gruesome
signal of the levels that inter-societal aggression
reached on some islands is cannibalism (or para-
cannibalistic treatment of enemies, such as dismem-
bering, roasting, and the nonfunerary discard of
skeletal remains). Although some anthropologists
have expressed skepticism regarding the accounts of
cannibalism in the Pacific by European voyagers,
there is now direct archaeological evidence for canni-
balistic or para-cannibalistic practices in late pre-
history on Easter Island, the Marquesas, New Zealand,
Mangaia, and Fiji.
5. Human Impacts to Island Ecosystems
The islands of Remote Oceania, due to isolation and
related factors, provide model conditions for studying
the effects of human colonization and land use on
pristine ecosystems. Interdisciplinary research among
archaeologists and natural scientists (see also En
i -
ronmental Archaeology ) over the past three decades
has amplified our understanding of such human–-
ecosystem interactions (Kirch and Hunt 1997).
Because of the substantial open-ocean distances
isolating them from continents as well as other islands,
and the di culty of dispersal to islands, prior to
human arrival oceanic ecosystems were typically
characterized by: high species-level endemicity, but
lower diversity in higher-level (generic and family)
taxa; lowered competition; survival of archaic forms;
and vulnerability to disturbance from outside agents.
Larger vertebrates such as marsupials (wombats,
cuscus) and rats, snakes, frogs, and most lizards were
restricted primarily to Near Oceania, with only a
handful of species declining in numbers eastwards to
Fiji and Samoa. (The reef and marine resources of
Pacific islands also display a west-to-east decline in
species diversity.) Throughout most of Remote
Oceania, prehuman vertebrate faunas were dominated
by birds (including many flightless forms which had
evolved in situ from flighted ancestors). Prior to human
arrival, these bird populations lacked large vertebrate
predators, and presumably also a typical predator
avoidance strategy. They must have been extremely
easy prey for the first humans to step foot on these
islands.
When humans first arrived in Remote Oceania, they
typically found the islands to be forested, and in-
habited by a range of largely endemic species, domi-
nated by birds, along with invertebrates such as land
snails and insects. Oceanic peoples possessed a suc-
cessful colonization strategy that allowed them to exist
on isolated islands, by: (a) transporting in their sailing
canoes stocks of horticultural crop plants, along with
domestic pigs, dogs, and chickens (rats came along,
ation of Cultural Heritage ). Arch-
10989
Pacific Islands, Archaeology of
presumably as ‘stowaways’); (b) clearing areas of
rainforest for garden land; and (c) intensively ex-
ploiting the abundant natural avifaunal and marine
resources.
This colonization strategy had several consequences
for island ecosystems, all of which are increasingly well
documented through both archaeological and paleo-
environmental indicators. Forest clearance on many
islands is signaled in changing pollen spectra from
sediment cores, with tree taxa rapidly giving away to
ferns and grasses; also characteristic are sharp in-
creases in microscopic charcoal influxes, indicating
human-induced burning, in most cases probably asso-
ciated with shifting cultivation. On some islands, forest
clearance led to increased erosion rates, along with
alluviation of valley bottoms or along coastal plains.
The exploitation of natural resources is particularly
evident in the zooarchaeological assemblages from
early settlement sites, which are characterized by high
numbers of land and seabirds, many of them rep-
resenting now extinct or extirpated species (Stead-
man 1995). A dramatic case of avifaunal extinctions
on Pacific islands is that of the moa, a group of 13
species of large, flightless birds which became totally
extinct in New Zealand during the brief period of
Polynesian occupation (Anderson 1989).
Cumulative effects of human actions on islands led
to irreversible changes, such as dramatic declines in
biodiversity, and the conversion of natural rainforests
to intensively managed, anthropogenic landscapes.
The consequences for human populations themselves
were undoubtedly mixed. The replacement of natural
ecosystems with intensive food production systems
enabled the growth of large and dense human popula-
tions. At the same time, reduction or depletion of
natural resources, coupled with the necessity for
intensive land use, encouraged highly complex socio-
political systems which at times competed fiercely for
control of land and the means of production.
See also : Australia and New Guinea, Archaeology of;
Melanesia: Sociocultural Aspects; Polynesia and
Micronesia: Sociocultural Aspects; Southeast Asia,
Archaeology of
Golson J 1988 The origins and development of New Guinea
agriculture. In: Harris D, Hillman G (eds.) Foraging and
Farming: The E
olution of Plant Exploitation . Unwin Hyman,
London
Gosden C, Allen J, Ambrose W, Anson D, Golson J, Green R,
Kirch P V, Lilley I, Specht J, Spriggs M 1989 Lapita sites of
the Bismarck Archipelago. Antiquity 63 : 561–586
Green R C 1991 Near and Remote Oceania: Disestablishing
‘‘Melanesia’’ in culture history. In: Pawley A (ed.) Man and a
Half: Essays in Pacific Anthropology and Ethnobiology in
Honour of Ralph Bulmer . The Polynesian Society, Auckland,
New Zealand
Hill A V S, Serjeantson S W (eds.) 1989 The Colonization of the
Pacific: A Genetic Trail . Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK
Irwin G 1992 The Prehistoric Exploration and Colonisation of the
Pacific . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Kirch P V 1984 The E
olution of the Polynesian Chiefdoms .
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Kirch P V 1997 The Lapita Peoples: Ancestors of the Oceanic
World . Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK
Kirch P V 2000 On the Road of the Winds: An Archaeological
History of the Pacific Islands Before European Contact .
University of California Press, Berkeley, CA
Kirch P V, Green R C, in press, Hawaiki, Ancestral Polynesia:
An Essay in Historical Anthropology . Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK
Kirch P V, Hunt T L (eds.) 1997 Historical Ecology in the Pacific
Islands: Prehistoric En
ironmental and Landscape Change .
Yale University Press, New Haven, CT
Pawley A K, Ross M 1993 Austronesian historical linguistics
and culture history. Annual Re
iew of Anthropology 22 : 425–59
Rainbird P 1994 Prehistory in the northwest tropical Pacific: The
Caroline, Mariana, and Marshall Islands. Journal of World
Prehistory 8 : 293–349
Rolett B V 1998 Hanamiai: Prehistoric Colonization and Cultural
Change in the Marquesas Islands (East Polynesia) . Yale
University Publications in Anthropology No. 84, New Haven,
CT
Sand C 1995 ‘‘Le Temps d’Avant’’: La Pre
histoire de la Nou
elle -
donie . L’Harmattan, Paris
Spriggs M J T 1997 The Island Melanesians . Blackwell, Oxford,
UK
Steadman D W 1995 Prehistoric extinctions of Pacific island
birds:
Cale
Biodiversity
meets
zooarchaeology.
Science 267 :
1123–30
Van Tilburg J A 1994 Easter Island: Archaeology, Ecology and
Culture . British Museum Press, London
P. V. Kirch
Bibliography
Allen J 1996 The pre-Austronesian settlement of island
Melanesia: Implications for Lapita archaeology. Transactions
of the American Philosophical Society 86 (5): 11–27
Anderson A 1989 Prodigious Birds: Moas and Moa Hunting in
Prehistoric
Pain, Health Psychology of
1. Basic Terms
Pain is an adaptive phenomenon that signals im-
pending danger to the body. Pain can, however, also
be maladaptive, for example in states of chronic pain,
and thus can itself become a significant disorder.
Epidemiological studies show that 80 percent of the
population experience recurrent pain, with more than
10 percent of the population being permanently
disabled by it. Although pain has for a long time been
New
Zealand .
Cambridge
University
Press,
Cambridge, UK
Blust R 1995 The prehistory of the Austronesian-speaking
peoples: The view from language. Journal of World Prehistory
9 : 453–510
Davidson J M 1984 The Prehistory of New Zealand . Longman
Paul, Auckland, New Zealand
Garanger J 1972 Arche
brides . Publi-
cation de la Socie te des Oce anistes No. 30, Paris
ologie des Nou
elles - He
10990
Pain, Health Psychology of
viewed a purely sensory phenomenon or an epi-
phenomenon of a medical disorder, this view changed
during the last 40 years of the twentieth century. It has
been recognized that pain is a psychobiological ex-
perience, with emotional aspects being as important as
sensory pain characteristics. Thus nociception, the
physiological process of a noxious signal being trans-
mitted from the periphery to the brain, has been
differentiated from the experience of pain, which
encompasses all aspects including psychological,
social and cultural factors. The international Associ-
ation for the Study of Pain (IASP) definition takes
this shift from a biomedical to a biobehavioral or
psychobiological perspective into account by char-
acterizing pain as an ‘unpleasant sensory and emo-
tional experience associated with actual or potential
tissue damage or described in terms of such damage’
(Merskey 1986). This definition was prompted by the
fact that pain may often be experienced in the absence
of identifiable objective pathology. A major change in
the traditional view of pain was the gate control theory
of pain proposed in Melzack and Wall (1965). More
important than its physiological aspects, which have
not all been confirmed, was the conceptual model
behind it. The gate control theory stated not only that
pain could be modulated by both afferent and efferent
factors at the level of the spinal cord, but also
emphasized that pain has sensory–discriminative,
motivational–emotional, and cognitive–evaluative
components as well, and thus it assigns an important
role to psychological factors. A core feature of this
model is the integration of peripheral stimuli with
psychological variables such as mood, attention, or
cultural experience in the perception of pain. Thus, the
gate control theory has been instrumental in abol-
ishing the dichotomy of psychogenic versus soma-
togenic pain—psychological and physiological factors
always interact in the production of the experience of
pain and are not mutually exclusive causes of pain.
The IASP classification of pain is organized in five
general categories: (a) the bodily system affected, (b)
time characteristics, (c) intensity of pain (d) duration
of pain, and (e) its presumed etiology. This classifi-
cation lacks reliability especially in respect of the last
characteristic. In addition, it neglects psychological
factors that are only coded with respect to the presence
of a psychiatric disorder or within the category
‘psychophysiological dysfunction.’ ICD-10 as well as
DSM - IV still adhere to the distinction between psycho-
genic–somatogenic or physical vs. somatoform pain,
which must be viewed as obsolete given the large
number of research findings emphasizing the import-
ance of psychological factors in any type of pain, both
acute and chronic (Gatchel and Turk 1999).
The biopsychosocial model of pain views pain as a
complex response that can be described on the
verbal–subjective, the motor–behavioral and physio-
logical levels. Pain can be based on nociceptive input,
but nociception is not a prerequisite of the experience
of pain, which can be an exclusively central phenom-
enon, but always has physiological antecedents and
consequences (Flor et al. 1990). The multiaxial classi-
fication of pain as proposed by Turk and his colleagues
(cf. Turk and Rudy 1988) categorizes pain patients
along both the somatic and the psychosocial dimen-
sions. This classification has yielded three subgroups
of patients in the psychosocial domain characterized
as adaptive copers, interpersonally distressed, and
dysfunctional, with significant differences in the course
of the illness and response to treatment.
3. The Role of Learning in Chronic Pain
Both associative and nonassociative learning proces-
ses as well as social learning have been found to be of
fundamental significance for the development of chro-
nic pain. The repeated application of painful stimuli
leads to reduced responsivity, i.e., habituation to the
painful stimulation. In many states of chronic pain,
sensitization rather than habituation occurs due to
changes both at the level of the receptor and of the
central nervous system (Woolf and Mannion 1999).
Sensory information accelerates habituation and
reduces activation caused by surprise, insecurity, and
threat. This mechanism may underlie the effects
reported in a large number of studies that support the
positive results of preparatory information prior to
acutely painful procedures such as surgery or bone
marrow aspiration.
The most influential model of psychological factors
in chronic pain was Fordyce’s assumption that chronic
pain can develop and be maintained due to operant
conditioning of pain behaviors, i.e., overt expressions
of pain. Fordyce (1976) postulated that acute pain
behaviors such as limping or moaning may come
under the control of external contingencies of re-
inforcement, and thus develop into a chronic pain
2. Classification of Pain
The common distinction between acute and chronic
pain—referring to pain of at least three to six months
duration and
or pain that exceeds the normal time for
healing in the case of an acute injury—is useful,
because chronic pain is often maladaptive and needs
special attention. Whereas acute pain such as pain
related to medical procedures or childbirth usually
leads to anxiety and apprehension, chronic pain tends
to be associated with helplessness, depression, and
irritability as well as interference with family function,
work, or social interaction (Gatchel and Turk 1999).
In addition to the large number of workdays that are
lost as a consequence of it, chronic pain is the leading
cause of invalidity in the age under-50s group and
causes enormous costs for the health care system
(Melzack and Wall 1994).
10991

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika:

Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin