🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.archaeology
Article #827

Re: sailing from Hawaiki (cont.)

#827
From: benlizross
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 00:00
48 lines
2776 bytes
Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
> 
> benlizross <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> : The question is not whether you can find
> : cultural similarities between the NW coast and parts of Polynesia (eg
> : the Maori and the Kwakiutl both built large wooden houses and excelled
> : at wood carving), but whether those parallels have to be explained by
> : some direct historical connection.
> 
> So what is the alternative to direct historical connection?

Gosh, Yuri, maybe you should have checked out the alternatives before
you started your "I am not a Diffusionist" campaign...

As you are no doubt aware, when you are not pretending not to be,
alternatives to direct historical connection would include common
inheritance from a remote common source in Asia, functional convergence,
and sheer coincidence. 

 
> : On the third point, as was explained during the earlier exchange: The NW
> : coast bark beaters broke down cedar bark into fibres. These fibres were
> : then used for a variety of purposes, including twining to make into
> : capes etc. Polynesian tapa beaters flattened and spread the inner bark
> : of Broussonetia papyrifera and other plants, and bonded pieces together,
> : to make a thin, paper-like fabric (tapa, bark cloth). Very little tapa
> : was made in NZ, since the bark-cloth plants didn't grow well. The Maori
> : twined capes mentioned in the earlier post were probably made from NZ
> : flax, but it's possible that some were made from bark. If the twining
> : techniques were the same in the two areas,
> 
> Yes, they were.
> 
> : that would be a different matter from the question of bark cloth.
> 
> So if the Maori twined capes were not bark cloth, what were they then?

Well, they may not have been bark at all, as I explained. But if they 
were, it is not up to me to make up a handy name for them. It is up to
you not to use the term "bark cloth" for things which are not, in the
normal usage of the term, bark cloth.

> Any more mindless stonewalling and obfuscation?

Any more knee-jerk insults?

Ross Clark
Technical Details
Message-ID: <39206AA0.290F@ihug.co.nz>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <391DD883.343C@ihug.co.nz> <11324-391EDB13-46@storefull-174.iap.bryant.webtv.net> <391F1032.36BC@ihug.co.nz> <8fph1t$bsv$1@news.tht.net>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 106cdd,29f2751f6f36180f
X-Google-Attributes: gid106cdd,public
X-Google-Thread: 1129f3,2e7fe8a344c352a5
X-Google-Attributes: gid1129f3,public
From: benlizross <benlizro@ihug.co.nz>
Subject: Re: sailing from Hawaiki (cont.)
Date: 2000/05/16
Message-ID: <39206AA0.290F@ihug.co.nz>
X-Deja-AN: 623785439
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <391DD883.343C@ihug.co.nz> <11324-391EDB13-46@storefull-174.iap.bryant.webtv.net> <391F1032.36BC@ihug.co.nz> <8fph1t$bsv$1@news.tht.net>
Organization: The Internet Group Ltd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,bc.general