RES 307 Draft 01 2008-2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

In contrast to eating and working, sleeping areas were common (Handy & Handy 1978:290). Apple (1971:7) notes that most activities and sleeping would have occurred outdoors except in the case of inclement weather or times of trouble: Commoners usually slept outdoors, on mats stored during the day in their houses for safekeeping. They crawled into their small thatched houses to sleep, day or night, during cold or wet weather (Byron, 1828:107; Stewart, 1828:134). Once inside, commoners slept on the mat - covered floor; men, women and children in a common dormitory, but in a definite order (Handy and Pukui, 1958:9-10). Commoners did most of their living and working outdoors - there were usually convenient shade trees nearby. ...The small houses of commoners served only intermittently as shelter - as desired, or as required by weather. Commoners ...utilized their houses for storage, occasional shelter, and for security. The possibility that Sites 18002 and 18005 were two of the structures of a kauhale is the basis for the third research question posed: 3) What is the relationship between Sites 18002 and 18005? Given the proximity between these structures, the platforms may represent specific feature types within a kauhale. This question may be answered through an examination of the following more specific questions. What form of habitation occurred at these sites? Are there specialized activity or use areas? Are there functional changes through time? Does the nature of habitation vary through time? Was the area increasingly or decreasingly utilized over time? Are there significant temporal contexts at which these changes occurred and do these correlate with historically documented changes or influences? Investigations will attempt to recover culturally deposited materials whose utilization would have been restricted to a specific gender and thereby distinguish the function of the specific platform. Items which could be recovered that are indicative of gender specific utilization include kapu food items such as pig remains and specialized tools such as tapa beaters. The inventory survey investigations conducted at Site 18004 included a limited amount of subsurface testing. Based upon the recovery of a small quantity of culturally deposited materials in addition to the informal nature of construction it was hypothesized that this site functioned as a temporary habitation. In order to assess this hypothesis, a fourth research question is posed: 4) What is the nature and function of Site 18004? What form of temporary habitation occurred at this site? Are there specialized activity or use areas? A cattle wall was constructed around this site as well as the neighboring Site 18006, which contains burials. Why was Site 18004 fenced off in this manner? The recommended investigations will attempt to identify structural components such as pavements, hard- packed living surfaces and deposits containing cultural remains. Data will be sought concerning the age of the site, the variety of food remains present as well as the variety of tools and artifacts which were used at the site. 14 EXHIBIT B