Throughout this study, the term âtradewareâ refers to imported porcelain, .... and decoration styles were found at the Jingdezhen, Dehua, and Zhangzhou kilns.
田野考古 第十四卷 第一、二期合刊 頁 131～160 2011.6.30
Trade ceramics in Late Prehistoric Timor and the social implications CHAO Chin-yung＊ Abstract The objectives of this article are twofold. First, I will brief the tradeware ceramic assemblages discovered in Manatuto, Timor Léste (East Timor) during the 2004-2006 field seasons. I will then analyze the distributional variations of tradeware between coastal settlements dated from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. The result reveals a clearly differentiated accessibility to imported tradeware among these closely located sites. I argue that this pattern may relate to their different sociopolitical rankings within local trading systems.
Introduction Most of the East Timor is virgin territory archaeologically. Archaeological research in East Timor only started in the 1950s (Almeida 1961: 244-246, 1967; Almeida and Zbyszewski 1967; Correa and Augusto 1956), and after the promising work of a series of excavations by Ian Glover during 1966-1967, research ceased until recent years. In general, archaeological interest in East Timor was primarily focused on early human colonization in this region (for example, O'Connor et al. 2002), or middle Holocene Austronesian dispersal (for example, Glover 1986). Recently, researchers have started to approach long-term landuse patterns in the mountains since the late Pleistocene at least 3,500 years ago (Veth et al. 2002). Yet, so far, little attention has been oriented toward studying the commercial trade networks during the past millennium. In history, Timor was renowned as the heartland of supreme quality white sandalwood. The earliest reference to Timor in Chinese literatures was Chau Ju-kua’s Chu-fan-chi (Records of Foreign Nations), published in 1225 AD during the Sung Dynasty. It implies that the sandalwood trade between Timor and China has already established, maybe through ＊
Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, Taipei.
131
Javanese traders, at least by the 12th century (Fox 2000:342). Yet, it is not easy to assess its magnitude and intensity simply through historic records (Ptak 1987:97). Prior to the presence of Dutch and Portuguese by the early 16th century, the Bugis and Makasarese traders of South Sulawesi had acquired immense profits through control over the sandalwood trade. Yet, during the prime time of the sandalwood trade of Timor in the 16th and 17th centuries, it was in fact the mestiço population called Topasses or black Portuguese who were in charge of the most shares of this lucrative trade. By the early 18th century, the sandalwood reserve in Timor was in a clear decline (Glover 1986:11), and when the English Commander William Bligh visited Timor in the end of the century, it was described as “scarce” (Bligh 1792). The overall history of sandalwood exploitation in Timor in the last few hundreds years can be characterized by “images of continuing and recurring scarcity” (McWilliam 2001:2). In regard to the focus of this conference, it should be noted that the eastern part of Timor Island was largely unaffected by Dutch trading activities during the time period. In fact, even the Portuguese influence was fairly limited before the mid-eighteenth century (Fox and Soares 2000; Hägerdal 2006) From 2004 to 2006, I conducted a series of archaeological survey and excavation1 in the Manatuto area on the north coast of Timor Léste, or East Timor (Fig. 1). In general, the Manatuto lowland is a triangle-shape area with the main river, Laclo River, running through, which floods annually. On the flood plain, isolated small hills stand conspicuously, and in many cases, prehistoric and historical sites are found on top of hills. I have identified a total of 60 sites and 20-plus isolated find spots. Eleven sites produce substantial amounts of tradeware (Figure 2), and four of them (Lekpaturen, Soraha, Bukit Aiteas and Malarahu Lama #4) were subsequently excavated with test pits to explore their material contents. In the following, I will present the tradeware assemblages found in Manatuto within the framework of a five-phase classification system.
1
This excavation was conducted in parts with a great aid from the participants of the University of Washington Archaeology Field School in East Timor in 2005.
132
Tradeware assemblage: a five-phase sequence Throughout this study, the term “tradeware” refers to imported porcelain, stoneware, and in some cases, glazed refined earthenware. It is consistently used in this manner in order to distinguish from other terms, such as ceramic and pottery, which are used to refer to locally made earthenware. In establishing occupation chronology archaeologically, some specific porcelain types that have relatively limited manufacture and/or consumption duration are used in this research as temporal markers for the reason that they are more diagnostic than others. Dating on these certain types of artifacts is often more precise, though not necessarily more accurate, than radiometric dates, in particular many of my dates fall in an unfortunate area of the radiocarbon calibration curve (ca. 300–380 BP) that return uncertainties spanning over two centuries. The tradeware classification system in this study employs a diverse range of art history typologies, which make it more temporally sensitive with the normal caveats associated with stylistic dating. Bearing these cautions in mind, the following classification categorizes tradeware assemblage from surface survey and excavations into a five-phase sequence (see Table 1). Each phase contains a series of diagnostic types and hence it represents a “collective” time rage. Because not every diagnostic type came in and went out of fashion at the same time, gaps and overlaps would inevitably exist between successive phases. Table 1、Tradeware chronology in Manatuto Phase I Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ V Unidentified Sum
Time span (pre)15th – mid/late 16th c. mid 16th – mid 17th c. mid 17th – early 18th c. 18th – mid 19th c. post mid 19th c
Counts 18 280 72 64 28 196 658
% 2.7 42.6 10.9 9.7 4.3 29.8 100.0
%* 3.9 60.6 15.6 13.9 6.1 --100.0
* when unidentified sherds are excluded.
133
Phase I —circa late 15th century to the first half of the 16th century 1. Monochrome (white) glazed potiche. Bulbous stoneware-like jars have handles at the shoulder and opaque white glaze covering the upper two-thirds of the body, leaving its foot unglazed (Fig. 4-1). This typical Sawankhalok (Si-Satchanalai) products represent a manufacturing time ranging from as early as the beginning of the 16th century to no later than the 1580s (Brown 2004:73-76, 207). 2. Sawankhalok celadon plates.
One distinct type is the plate with a bracket-type rim (Pl.
1-1). Those found in Manatuto are most similar to what Brown (2004) has termed the “classic celadon,” approximately the second half of the 15th century. 3. Thai underglaze black (oxide) painting.
These are the most diagnostic type of Thai
ware (Pl. 1-3). Manatuto assemblages of this type are all fragments, but their designs are peculiar to Sukothai products from the 14th to the 16th century (Brown and Sjostrand 2000). 4. Blue and white porcelain. Only a few blue and white tradeware have been identified into the early phase (Pl. 1-2). Almost identical finds come from the Darusalam wreck near Brunei, which stylistically suggesting a Middle Ming product between the 15th century and the turn of the 16th century (L’Hour et al. 2005). Other finds of this phase include a fragment of Vietnamese kendi with lotus scroll painting (Pl. 1-4), likely dating to the 15th century (cf. Stevenson and Guy 1997).
Phase Ⅱ— the second half of the 16th century to the early half of 17th century A. The majority: Zhangzhou ware The Zhangzhou ware, approximately so-called Swatow (Adhyatman 1999; Harrisson 1979, 1995), comprises the majority of the Phase Ⅱ tradeware in the Manatuto assemblage. Designs and decoration styles represent products between the post-Wanli and Ming-Ching transitional period, that is, circa late 16th to early 17th century (Fujian Provincial Museum 1997; Morimura 1994, 1996; Adhyatman 1999; Pei 1995; Li 1993). The Zhangzhou ware in Manatuto consists of three subgroups:
134
1. Zhangzhou blue and white.
This is the most abundant subgroup, including bowl, saucer,
pot, and jarlet (Pl. 2) and some kraak-style plates (Pl. 2-10, 11). 2. Zhangzhou overglaze polychrome. Residual design motifs include diapers with dots inside (Pl. 2-4, 7), chilin (fantastic beasts) and water-weeds. 3. Zhangzhou green-glaze celadon.
Only large plates were found, with single-line
incisions of simplified scrolls, flora and fishes, applied underneath the translucent green glaze (Pl. 2-2).
B. The miscellaneous. 4. Lead-glazed stoneware jars.
This particular type, also known as Tradescant jar
(Harrisson 1986:47-48) or Huanan tri-chrome (華南三彩) jar (Pl. 1-7), is now considered of Kuangtung/Fujian origin. Recent finds in Japanese historic sites and in the San Diego shipwreck suggest that their production was likely limited to the late 16th century (Desroches et al. 1996). 5. Slip-decorated iron glaze (or cocoa brown) ware.
Porcelains with similar technology
and decoration styles were found at the Jingdezhen, Dehua, and Zhangzhou kilns (Adhyatman 1999, plate 251; Harrisson 1995, plate 9; Krahl et al. 1986:479). 6. Anping jars.
The jars were widely found in Japan and Southeast Asia as well as dated
shipwrecks such as the San Diego, the Witte Leeuw, and the Vung Tau (Desroches et al. 1996; Jo"rg and Flecker 2001; Van der Pijl-Ketel 1982; Hsieh 1995). The consensus is that this type of thin-walled Anping jars (Pl. 1-7) was made to order in a semi-mass production during the early half of the 17th century, possibly in kilns in the north Fujian (Hsieh 2005:203-205).
Phase Ⅲ— mid-17th century to early 18th century 1. Chinese blue and white. The distinct painting style of the late Kangxi (康熙) Reign reveals in strokes of finely controlled dark-light contrast to express shadow in detail (Pl. 3-5, 6). Identical specimens (Pl. 3-8) with dated stratigraphy and seal marks are found in Fort Jesus in Kenya (Sassoon 1978) and from the Vung Tau wreck as well, dated to the end of the 17th century (Jo"rg and Flecker 2001). Yet, the largest amount of specimens in
135
this group was bowls with footrings decorated with packed chrysanthemum scroll pattern (Pl. 3-1, 2), most popular around the second half of the 17th century (Jo"rg and Flecker 2001:81; Lu 2006; Sakai 2002:107-108; Hsieh 2005). They are in general of lower quality porcelain body (Minyao or ‘public kiln’) but with good quality painting. Another common type, apparently made in different southern kilns, is the so-called ye-wen-pang (葉紋盤). These leaf-painting saucers are often associated with poems or seal marks (Pl. 2-5, 8). A recent synthesis suggests that they were mostly popular in the second half of the 17th century (Hsieh 2005:219-222). 2. Jingdezhen overglaze ware (enamel). The residual enamels on specimens show highly complex and elaborated decorations. Plates covered with stylized flowers and foliage motifs in bands (Pl. 3-7), so-called famille verte, are believed to date back to late 17th century (Krahl and Erbahar 1986). 3. Batavian ware (Pl.3-4).
Similar ceramics have been found in many historic sites and
shipwrecks around the worlds and they are believed relating to the Dutch maritime trafficking during the 17th century. 4. Arita Nisaide Karatsu ware ( 二 彩 唐 津 , dual-colored ware) (Pl. 1-5).
The
archaeological stratigraphy in various sites has suggested that this distinguishing type belongs to the Late Arita-Karatsu pottery (Phase Ⅲ), about the later part of the 17th century (Hsieh 2005:244-246).
Phase Ⅳ— the 18th century and early 19th century 1. Chinese blue and white.
In general, two major types are represented in this subgroup.
The prevailing type is bowls and saucers of good quality and a smooth glaze, but rather freely painted, often in a transformative style (Pl. 4-1, 3, 4, 7). They were possibly made in kilns in the Dehua area, Fujian Province (Chen et al. 1999), representing products in the 18th century and early 19th century. Identical finds also come from shipwrecks such as the Desaru wreck (1840s) (Sjostrand 2003) and Tek Sing wreck (1822) (Nagel Auctions 2000). The second type, of which only a few pieces were found, comprises blue and white bowls of much lower quality porcelain (Pl. 4-6), possibly made in kilns in Kuangtung Province. Identical bowls from the Desaru shipwreck suggest their presence during the mid-18th century (Sjostrand 2003, Plate 12).
136
2. Willow pattern saucers. This type is typically painted with broad brush strokes and the motifs in the central medallion are either a Chinese garden or lakeside scene. The prototype of Willow Pattern appeared around the mid-18th century (e.g., Krahl et al. 1984; Harrisson 1995: 76-79), as we see in the Manatuto assemblage. The pattern later developed into a mass-produced ware in the late 18th and early half of the 19th century, which were made especially for export to Europe and America, renowned as the Canton ware. 3. European transfer-printed monochrome earthenware. The majority are plates and saucers. Most underglaze transferred print is blue color, followed by red print, and a few sherds printed in green and black. The prevailing designs are copies of Chinese Willow patterns, which likely represent the earliest transfer-printed ceramics in England. Stylistically, most specimens belong to so-called pearlware, made between the end of the 18th century and the early part of the 19th century (Samford 1997:8-16; Sussman 1977:105). Some identical examples were found at Banten Lama, Java. Other designs include the “exotic” styles of Middle East scenes, “Chinoseries”-styled ladies, and colonial peoples. The production dates are estimated somewhat later, roughly early to middle 19th century. Likewise, from this technological point of view, most pearlware found in Manatuto was produced after the 19th century (Miller 1991:9-10; Samford 1997:16).
Phase V—post mid-19th century 1. European hand-painted polychromes. The refined earthenware of this period belongs to “whiteware” rather than its resemblance, the “pearlware” (Harrisson 1995:96-98). The decorations are primarily hand-painted, such as large red flowers with green and blue leaves. Stylistically, whiteware with flora decorations became popular after the middle 19th century and its prevalence peaked in the 1870s (Miller 1991:6-8). 2. Chinese blue and white. Ceramics of this type has coarse, porous, poorer quality paste and less vitreous, often closer to stoneware than to porcelain. Pinholes in the glaze are seen frequently and so is the stacking-ring mark in the interior. The decoration is a mixture and even combines hand-painting and block-printing, a feature known as In-chin-hua ( 印青花). Common motifs include transformative so (壽 or longevity) (Pl. 4-2), Si (喜 or joy) or Swang-si (雙喜 or double-joy) (Pl. 4-8), and hand-painted flower vases and scrolls in very free
137
style (Pl. 4-9). Strictly speaking, this blue-and-white porcelain of poorer quality, also known as “Kitchen Ch’ing,” was not tradeware for export, but mainly for domestic use. This blue and white porcelain was possibly made in the southern provinces of China, especially in Guangdong. However, around the mid-19th century, it was carried to Southeast Asia and Northwest America in a greater quantity during the course of Chinese emigration overseas (Kelly and May 2001; Mudge 1986:191-192). To sum up, it appears that Phase Ⅱ sherds comprise the major portion of the tradeware assemblage in Manatuto (Table 1), which fairly agrees with the peak time of sandalwood trade generally suggested by the historic records. Based on the five-phase sequence as introduced above, a total of eleven sites that produce substantial tradeware are then grouped into the Early and the Late Tradeware periods, on the grounds of marked distinction between Phase Ⅲ and Phase Ⅳ (Table 2). In the eight sites that are assigned to the Early Tradeware Period, each contains over 90% of pre-Phase Ⅳ tradeware, while almost all tradeware found in the three Late Tradeware sites belong to either Phase Ⅳ or Phase V. Thus, the demarcation between Phase III and Ⅳ seems legitimate, which divides the Early Tradeware Period from the Late Period at the time of early 18th century. Noticeably, the date also concurs with the marked decline in sandalwood reserves in Timor as suggested by the consensus of most historical studies. Thus, it seems conceivable that the imported (Early Period) tradeware was a direct result of sandalwood trade during the 16th to 17th centuries.
Table 2、Early and Late Tradeware Periods sites (sherds counts and percentage) Period
Num.
Site names
Ⅱ
I
Ⅲ
Early
5
Malarahun Lama #1
5
(26.3)
11
(57.9)
3
Soraha Barat
1
(10.0)
9
(90.0)
1
Lekpaturen
5
(4.3)
91
2
Soraha
1
(3.4)
19
6
Malarahun Lama #4
1
(2.5)
34
4
Bukit Aiteas
2
(2.4)
63 11
(100)
3
(5.1)
26
(44.1)
1
(10.0)
7
Hataro #5
8
L.U.R.I.
2
(10.5)
(79.1)
17
(14.8)
(65.5)
7
(24.1)
(85.0)
5
(12.5)
(75.9)
18
(21.7)
25
(42.4)
Ⅳ 1
(5.3)
2
(6.9)
5
(8.5)
V
2
(1.7)
Late
9
Buuak
9
(90.0)
11
Hataro Altar
20
(74.1)
7
(25.9)
10
Kampung Hatubela
10
(90.9)
1
(9.1)
138
Prestige goods economy model Recent Southeast Asian archaeology on the tradeware study has voiced to call for more emphasis on the consumer society and the role of imported ceramics in the local economy and belief systems (e.g., Miksic’s paper in this volume). The rest of this article will expand this approach and investigate how imported ceramics were distributed among contemporary villages as well as social dynamics involved. Various ethnographic and archaeological studies have demonstrated that elites’ control over the acquisition, production, and distribution of prestige goods, whether obtained through external foreign trade/exchange or produced locally by specialists, is a key avenue for elites to compete and maintain their status (Bacus 1999; Bayman 2002; Earle 1987, 2002; Feinman 1999; Frankenstein and Rowlands 1978; Junker 1999; Schortman and Urban 2004). Peregrine (1991) argued that in a prestige economy system such as prehistoric Fiji, the elite’s manipulation was not focused on control over subsistence production but on “steering performance” (for example, acquiring prestige goods) and “social reproduction performance” (for example, redistributing those prestige goods acquired). Both performances are critical to persistence and development of sociopolitical complexity. Prehistoric exchange system could serve as a reservoir of food and energy, but through time its function would have gradually shifted to political manipulation (Allen 1978), as the control over the access to prestige goods was a way to engender power. Prestige goods “serve as potent symbols of social rank and political authority in the context of status rivalry” (Junker 1999:6). They are used to display wealth, success, and power, and are “passed down the political hierarchy from elites at the center to lesser elites in outlying communities to maintain political and economic loyalties” (Trubitt 2003:249). For example, the feasting activity, an important social activity in many pre-industrial societies for status competition within and between communities, is frequently associated with exotic porcelain that will have apparent archaeological visibility (Hayden 1995, 2003; Parkes 1992). It is in this sense that differentiated distributions of imported materials, functioning as cultural prestige goods, can be considered as an archaeological proxy for the inequality of that society. For example, in the pre-Spanish Philippines, the uneven distributions of prestige goods displayed a hierarchical structure between the upstream-downstream settlements, a
139
pattern that was considered an archaeological indicator of sociopolitical complexity (cf. Bronson 1977; Junker 1994). In the chiefly Tanjay, high-quality and low-quality Chinese porcelain were not only unevenly distributed between coastal center and upriver secondary center, but also their occurrences at the intrasite level were uneven, suggesting differential frequencies associated with elite versus non-elite zones (Junker 1999).
Tradeware abundance as archaeological proxy to social inequality Based on the prestige goods economy model discussed above, I propose that the intersite variations of tradeware abundance among Manatuto hilltop sites is proportionate with their uneven accessibilities to imported prestige goods, thus an archaeological proxy for sociopolitical inequality among closely located coastal settlements. In this study, tradeware abundance is determined according to the ratio of imported tradeware to locally made earthenware. Nonetheless, from the methodological perspective, it cannot be as straightforward as simply counting the sherds. Quantifying the difference between sites inevitably involves how to measure the amount of pottery in each assemblage. In the past, various authors have used many different methods, such as sherd count or sherd weight. However, they do not actually refer to the same matter, methodologically. The unearthed assemblage is a sample of the deposited pottery (archaeological context) that is a sample of the “parent population’ of pots in use (systemic context), therefore what archaeologists end up with has gone through various sampling processes, such as disproportionate breakage, dispersal, post-depositional distortion, and retrieval, etc. Accordingly, each measure relies on various bridging arguments to justify how much and in what conditions it represents the “parent” assemblage (see Orton 1993 for a detailed review on this issue). For example, statements based on sherd count depend on, in general, the assumption that each type of pottery has the same breakage rate both in systemic and archaeological contexts. For the purpose of this study, i.e., comparing ratios of tradeware/earthenware between sites, the measure of vessel-equivalent can provide best estimates of the “death assemblage” (archaeological context) without the need for further assumptions (Orton 1993:178–179). It is
140
methodologically sound for spatial analyses on assemblages from different sites, because it only demands the assumption that chances for “selecting’ different types are equal among different sites. During the fieldwork, my dry-screen recovery in each site should have guaranteed constant retrieval rates from site to site, because my screen-size (1/4” to 1/8”) is well smaller than measurable pot-rim sherds. However, the breakage rate in different pottery types may not be constant. For example, jar rims tended to be robustly built in the Manatuto earthenware assemblage, and consequently, they broke into fewer pieces than bowl rims. To make this clearer, consider two pottery types in two separate assemblages. The first one contains one pot in site A and it breaks into two rim sherds, while site B contains two bowls and they break into eight rim sherds. In this oversimplified situation, the ratio of vessel amounts between the two sites in the “parent population’ (1:2) transforms to 1:4 (or 2:8) in the “death assemblage”. Furthermore, the breakage rate may vary from site to site, which would further complicate the situation. To overcome this problem, I used the rim sherd counting device created by Egloff (1973), which uses the traditional system of measuring a vessel’s orifice based on rim sherds. by a graded series of concentric arcs (Figure 3). In practice, I counted the rim sherd by the percentage of a whole vessel that the sherd represents. For example, I record 0.25 pots instead of one pot, if a rim sherd measured one-fourth of a whole vessel’s orifice. In doing so, rim sherds that were too small to measure (relatively less than one-sixteenth of the orifice) are admittedly excluded in this analysis. The measure thus arrived is called the “rim estimate vessel equivalent” (rim-EVE, see Table 3.). It is equivalent to a certain fraction of a vessel, rather than a rim sherd. Thus, in the hypothetical example above, given a retrieval rate of 50%, the rim-EVE is 0.5 (pot rim) at site A and 2 x 0.5 (bowl rim) at site B. The ratio of vessels between these two sites remains 1:2 as calculated by the rim-EVE, instead of 1:4 by simple sherd count. This is an estimator similar to the minimum number of individuals (MNI) long employed in fauna analysis and recently in lithic analysis (e.g., Grayson 1981; Hiscock 2002). Likewise, the rim-EVE value in this analysis is treated as an archaeological proxy to population at a given site.
141
Table 3. Statistics of rim-sherd measured and rim-EVE values in BA, ML4, and LPR Site name
1
/4
1
/6
1
1
/8
/10
1
/12
1
/16
n
Total rim-EVE
Bukit Aiteas (BA)
5
4
14
1
14
3
41
5.121
Malarahu Lama #4 (ML4)
0
4
12
5
12
1
34
3.729
Lekpaturen (LPR)
3
7
20
2
9
0
41
5.117
Note: only measurable sherds are included in this table, n = total measurable rims in the site. Total rim-EVE is the sum of fraction (e.g. 1/4 -1/16) times the number of measurable rims in that fraction scale.
On the other hand, the tradeware sherds are quantified in a somewhat different way. Because tradeware possess a much broader range of attribute diversity, and attributes that a specific tradeware sherd has tend to be uniform (such as glaze types or decoration patterns), one can estimate the minimum number of tradeware vessels using a stepwise measuring system. In this study, the first-tier criterion is the footring. Each foot sherd counts as one vessel, unless two or more foot sherds exhibit identical characters or measurements such as width or height. It follows that the unique specimen (which very likely represents one vessel), such as an Anping jar rim sherd that is rare overall counts as one. If a specific sherd is the sole specimen of the type among the assemblage of a given site, it also counts one. The least legitimate criterion is the painting pattern. Some unique painting patterns serve as discriminating traits, but others do not. For examples, the so-called famille verte Jingdezhen plate is a discriminating type but Zhangzhou ware overglaze enamel bowls are not, unless there is no other sherd of this type from the assemblage. The measure arrived in this stepwise scheme is called the “estimated minimum number of vessel” (eMNV). The thinking behind this term is a splitter classification viewpoint—since it is feasible to partition whole tradeware assemblage into numerous types, we can measure its eMNV in the same manner, in particular in the case of smaller assemblages such as those in this study. The value of “tradeware abundance” (TA) is then determined as: TA = eMNV / rim-EVE The equation assumes that locally made earthenware pottery would be a more consistent proxy to population in the settlement, while imported tradeware may not. Tradeware is treated as cultural prestige goods in which the variability is determined by uneven access to trade networks and relative sociopolitical rankings. Taken overly simplistically, the TA value thus
142
derived would be translated into how much tradeware is possessed per person in a given settlement. The thinking behind the equation is that the larger population a settlement has the more tradeware it will likely own, if everything being equal and no sociopolitical factors involved. In such cases, TA values in different sites are expected fairly similar. Otherwise, sites with higher social ranking are expected to score higher TA values. As a measure for relative abundance, the TA value seems a better proxy to assess differential sociopolitical ranking between sites than simply comparing the amount of tradeware excavated from different sites.
Analysis results In this analysis, I measured tradeware and earthenware rim sherds excavated from three hilltop sites: Lekpaturen (LPR), Bukit Aiteas (BA), and Malarahu Lama #4 (ML4) (see Figure 1). These three sites and Soraha site were surveyed and excavated in 2004-2006 (Chao 2007, 2008, 2010). Unfortunately, my test excavations in Soraha indicated a poor stratigraphic integrity in the site, thus, it will not be included in this study. One critical issue in comparing assemblages from different sites involves potential variation at the intrasite level. It is theoretically possible that the differences between assemblages could be largely accounted for by the within-site variations (such as various activity areas or elite/non-elite zones), rather than by between-site variations. To minimize such possibility, I only sampled test units that were located in the close proximity to the central plaza, based on the assumption that if the central plaza was the focus locale for day-to-day lives, then it is likely that households surrounding it would be of the elite class. If the assumption is valid, then differences in assemblages from various sites may better represent between-site variability than within-site variability. Thus, only test units 02 and 03 near the central plaza were sampled in the analysis for the LPR site. At BA, I used TP1, and at ML4, TP1 and TP2. Because over 95% of identifiable tradeware from test excavations could be stylistically dated to Phase II and Phase III, which translate to a time period from the mid-16th century to the early 18th century, only sherds retrieved from strata between the 16th and 18th centuries are included in calculations. In doing so, I basically excluded pottery found lower than the
143
stratum where tradeware first appears and/or where radiocarbon dating suggested dates prior to the 16th century. Table 4. Tradeware abundance in three hilltop sites: BA, ML4 and LPR Site
eMNV
Total Tradeware
Total rim-EVE
Measurable Rims
TA
BA
41
(196)
5.121
(41)
8.007
ML4
15
(42)
3.729
(34)
4.022
LPR
9
(31)
5.117
(41)
1.863
Note: TA value is calculated by eMNV / rim-EVE.
The result shows considerable disparities in the tradeware abundance among these three sites (Table 4), from the highest numbers at BA (8.007) to ML4 (4.022), and a dramatic decline at LPR (1.863). There is a considerable spatial variability in the quantity of porcelain over these three settlements (only one settlement or three?), with the BA site yielding the greatest values in both absolute amount and relative tradeware abundance. I propose that the noticeable intersite variability in imported tradeware, as cultural prestige goods, is related to the differentiated sociopolitical ranking among these settlements within the local trading system.
Discussion Premodern harvesting and transporting sandalwood was an extremely heavy task, often involving many deaths, which required leadership to organize logistical support. Transporting sandalwood from inland to the coast involved communication between various domains that would have been hostile otherwise. The primary mode of sandalwood trade was that people lived in small trading ports stocked sandalwood collected from other places, and then sold it to foreign trading ships that called at the right place in the right season. Alternatively, sandalwood stored in these small coastal settlements was transported to outside entrepôts (for example, Makassar or Batavia) through a series of Southeast Asian agents who visited the Timorese coasts seasonally to bargain for sandalwood. From there, either European or Asian seaborne merchants then transshipped these fragrant woods to major markets in the East and South Asia (Box 1967, 1968).
144
The sandalwood trade was highly seasonal and determined by monsoonal patterns. Sandalwood would have to be pooled and stocked in many small coastal centers before seaborne traders came seasonally in monsoon winds. Manatuto has been recognized in history as one such small trading port; yet, archaeological data reveal that it was not just one Manatuto village, but rather there were nearly a dozen closely located settlements surrounding the Laclo River mouth, which conceptually comprised “the” Manatuto. These settlements were within sight of each other, with half of the settlements on the north bank and the rest on the south. Many of them were very close neighbors to other sites. For example, in the case of BA and ML4, it would take less than twenty minutes for a person to reach another one by walking along the path on the ridge. Walking from Soraha to LPR takes even less time. It is unlikely that each of these closely located villages would have run their own sandalwood trade independently. Rather, they would more likely have organized the sandalwood trade through some sort of regional collaboration. Otherwise, it would have cost more to guard their sandalwood from being plundered by their next-door neighbors. Besides, as stated above, these settlements would likely have been cooperatively defending themselves against external, maritime based raiders (Chao 2008; Chao and Lape 2009). The highly clustered settlement pattern created a buffer zone encompassing the Laclo River mouth area to keep away from other groups. It is possible that outposts were set up as an early warning system against maritime raiders approaching from the coast. Repeated (likely annually) collaborations in organizing sandalwood collecting and transactions would be a mechanism that facilitated the maintenance of alliance relationships. Because each of them shared the same locational advantage over the riverine route that conveyed commodities between inland and the coast, it seems more feasible that they cooperated with each other rather than competed. Then, each settlement would get its share from this regional collaborative trade system. Everything being equal, these closely located settlements surrounding the Laclo River mouth would be expected to have an equivalent share of imported goods. Yet the result of the analysis, although only three archaeological sites were sampled, suggests that tradeware was unevenly distributed among settlements. The variations in tradeware abundance reflect the differential access to imported cultural prestige goods in the collaborative trade organization, which was determined by sociopolitical rankings between settlements rather than the physical
145
distances to the shore. In the three sites examined in the above analysis, there appear marked intersite variations that indicate a clear sociopolitical ranking system among closely integrated settlements during the late prehistoric/protohistoric Manatuto. The BA site, at which the TA value is several times higher than the rest, appears to have been in a more advantageous position in the maritime trade organization than its collaborators. This indicates BA’s position in the upper tier of the ranking system. Both the collaborative trade organization and the collective defense mechanism required a leader or leaders. The political elites of BA may have been the regional leader of this kind, who directed the sandalwood trade and thus possessed an above average share of imported goods both for themselves and the village. It is interesting that oral histories seem to accommodate to this archaeological scenario. Available historic narratives seemed to suggest that Aiteas (in BA) and Soraha were the two clans at the top of the social rankings. The traditional matrimony system in Manatuto is basically clan/village-exogamous. The payment of bridal price traditionally included water buffaloes and much other cultural wealth that greatly contributed to extensive debt-bondage in the society. The only exception was the marriages between two clans: Soraha and Aiteas (village names and clan names are often confusingly undistinguished in historic narratives). People from the two clans not only often married each other, but when they did, it was unnecessary to pay the bride price. All that was necessary to legitimize the marriage was to exchange blood by toasting a cup of wine mixed with drops of blood from both sides. This practice (not paying bride price) was regarded as extraordinarily exceptional by local people today. But, the repeated marriages surely facilitated and reaffirmed alliances between “ruling” clans.
Concluding remarks This preliminary analysis has enabled me to make stronger arguments regarding the trading system and local social organizations. The hierarchical trade and social organizations in prehistoric Manatuto thus reconstructed are appealing, but are not unique in the setting of Island Southeast Asia. The most comparable examples come from Tanjay and Cebu in the pre-Spanish Philippines during the mid-16th to 18th century, when there was considerable spatial variability in the quality of the porcelain, which was regarded as an archaeological
146
proxy for sociopolitical ranking. Three qualitative categories of porcelain were used to compare spatial variations: high-quality Chinese porcelain, low-quality Chinese porcelain, and the lower-quality Siamese and Annamese porcelain and stoneware (Nishimura 1992). In Tanjay, there was three to four times more high-quality Chinese porcelain unearthed from the elite zone than that from the non-elite zone (Junker 2001). When we compare the coastal center and upriver secondary centers, the disparity in terms of high-quality porcelain was even more pronounced, while for lower-quality Siamese and Annamese porcelain, the coastal center had only about one-third to one-fifth as much as its counterparts upriver (Junker 1999). Researchers believed that the distributional variability in the imported cultural prestige goods reflects sociopolitical rankings and is proportional to the development of social complexity (Junker 1999). However, on the north coast of East Timor, it is the quantity of tradeware, rather than quality, that varies from site to site. Indeed, at the tradeware-bearing sites in Manatuto, the quality of porcelain appears fairly even over settlements. It is not my intention to overstate the intersite variations to a degree that implies a rigidly stratified social structure in existence in premodern Manatuto. To what degree the numeric variability of tradeware abundance can translate to sociopolitical inequality is not an easy issue and needs more holistic deliberation. Would BA own four times as much political privilege as LPR? Would the sociopolitically privileged villages (such as BA) also own substantial privilege over other villages with inferior ranking? How would the sociopolitical privilege translate to the overall real life? These issues certainly deserve further investigation.
References Adhyatman, S. 1999 Zhangzhou (Swatow) Ceramics: Sixteenth to Seventeenth Centuries Found in Indonesia. Ceramic Society of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia. Allen, J. 1978 Fishing for wallabies: trade as a mechanism for social interaction and elaboration on the central Papuan coast. In Evolution of Social Systems, pp. 419-455. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Almeida, A. d.
147
1961 Contribution a l'etude du neolithique du Timor Portugais. Paper presented at The 5th International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Hamburg. 1967 Contribution to the study of rock paintings in Portuguese Timor. In Archaeology at the Eleventh Pacific Science Congress: papers presented at the XI Pacific Congress, Tokyo, August-September, 1966, edited by W. G. Solheim II, pp. 69-76. Asian and Pacific archaeology series, no. 1. Social Science Research Institute, University of Hawaii, Honolulu. Almeida, A. d. and G. Zbyszewski 1967 Contribution to the study of the prehistory of Portuguese Timor -- lithic industries. In Archaeology at the Eleventh Pacific Science Congress: papers presented at the XI Pacific Congress, Tokyo, August-September, 1966, edited by W. G. Solheim II, pp. 55-67. Asian and Pacific archaeology series, no. 1. Social Science Research Institute, University of Hawaii, Honolulu. Bacus, E. 1999 Prestige and potency: Political economies of protohistoric Visayan polities. In Complex Polities in the Ancient Tropical World, edited by E. Bacus and L. Lucero. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Va. Bayman, J. M. 2002 Hohokam craft economies and the materialization of power. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 9(1):69-95. Bligh, W. 1792 A Voyage to the South Sea. Facsimile reproduction ed. Australiana Facsimile Editions, no. 121. Libraries Board of South Australia, Adelaide. Bronson, B. 1977 Exchange at the upstream and downstream ends: Notes toward a functional model of the coastal state in Southeast Asia. In Economic Exchange and Social Interaction in Southeast Asia: Perspectives from Prehistory, History, and Ethnography, edited by K. Hutterer, pp. 39-52. Michigan Papers on South and Southeast Asian. vol. 13. Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Brown, R. M. 2004 The Ming gap and shipwreck ceramics in Southeast Asia. PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Brown, Roxanna M. and Sten Sjostrand
148
2000
Turiang：A Fourteenth-Century Shipwreck in Southeast Asian Waters. Pacific Asia Museum, Pasadena, CA.
Chao, Chin Yung (趙金勇) 2007
A preliminary investigation on ancient trade in Manatuto, Timor L é ste, Field Archaeology of Taiwan, Vol. 11:27-60. (〈初探東帝汶的古代貿易考古-以 Manatuto 地區為例〉，《田野考古》)
2008 A Microregional Approach to the Social Dynamics in the Late Prehistoric Manatuto, East Timor, Eleventh – Eighteenth Century, PhD dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle. 2010 The relationships between prehistoric defensive settlement patterns in Timor Léste and Paleo-ENSO, in On Prehistory of Taiwan, Academia Sinica, Taipei. (in-print) (〈東帝汶 地區史前防禦性聚落型態與聖嬰現象〉，《臺灣史前史專論》，中央研究院歷史語 言研究所。出版中) Chao, Chin-yung Chao and Peter V. Lape 2009
The appearance and persistence of late prehistoric defensive settlement patterns in Manatuto, Timor Léste,
presented in 19th Congress of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory
Association, Hanoi, Nov. 29th to Dec. 5th, 2009. Chen, Chien Zhon, Ho Chui Mei, and Ba Chen (editors) (陳建中、何翠媚與班臣編著) 1999 Dehwa Civilian Blue and White. Wen Wu Press, Bejing. (《德化民窯青花》 。文物出版 社，北京) Correa, M. and A. Augusto 1956 Nouvelles stations lithiques du Timor portugais et la prehistoire de l'Indonesie orientale. In Actas de la IV sesion, Madrid 1954: Congresos Internacionales de Ciencias Prehistoricas y Protohistoricas (4th International Ccongress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences), edited by A. Beltran, pp. 259-300. Libreria General, Zaragoza. Desroches, J.-P., G. Casal and F. Goddio (editors) 1996 Treasures of the San Diego. Paris: AFAA ; New York : Elf ; Manilla : National Museum of the Philippines. Earle, T. K. 1987
Chiefdoms in Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology 16.
2002
Bronze Age Economics: The Beginnings of Political Economies. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo.
149
Egloff, B. J. 1973
A method for counting ceramic rim sherds. American Antiquity 38(3):351-353.
Feinman, G. M. 1999 The changing structure of macroregional Mesoamerica: the Classic-Postclassic transition in the Valley of Oaxaca. In World-Systems Theory in Practice: Leadership, Production, and Exchange, edited by P. N. Kardulias, pp. 53-62. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham. Forman, S. 1977
East Timor: exchange and political hierarchy at the time of European discoveries. In Economic Exchange and Social Interaction in Southeast Asia: Perspectives from Prehistory, History, and Ethnography, edited by K. L. Hutterer, pp. 97-112. Michigan papers on South and Southeast Asia. vol. 13. Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, Michigan University, Ann Arbor.
Fox, J. J. 1982
Great lord rests at the centre: the paradox of powerlessness in European-Timorese relations. Canberra anthropology 5(2):22-23.
2000
Maritime communities in the Timor and Arafura region: Some historical and anthropological perspectives. Modern Quaternary Research in Southeast Asia V–VI: 337-356.
Fox, J. J. and D. B. Soares (editors) 2000 Out of the Ashes: Destruction and Reconstruction of East Timor. Crawford House, Adelaide :. Francillon, G. 1980 Incursions upon Wehali: A modern history of an ancient empire. In The Flow of Life: Essays on Eastern Indonesia, edited by J. J. Fox, pp. 248-265. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Frankenstein, S. and M. J. Rowlands 1978 The internal structure and regional context of early Iron Age society in south-western Germany. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology, University of London 15:73-112. Fujian Provincial Museum (ed.) (福建省博物館編) 1997 ZhangZhou Wares. Fujian People’s Publish, Fuzhou. (《漳州窯》 。福建人民出版社，福 州) Glover, I. C.
150
1986 Archaeology in Eastern Timor, 1966-67. Terra Australis 11. Research School of Pacific Studies, Australia National University, Canberra. Grayson, D. K. 1981 The effects of sample size on some derived measures in vertebrate faunal analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 8:77-88. Hägerdal, H. 2006
Servião and Belu: colonial conceptions and the geographical partition of Timor. Studies on Asia Series III, Vol.3(1):49-64.
Harrisson, B. 1979
Swatow in het Princessehof : The Analysis of a Museum Collection of Chinese Trade Wares from Indonesia. Gemeentelijk Museum Het Princessehof, Buchbeschreibung.
1986
Pusaka: Heirloom Jars of Borneo. Oxford University Press, Singapore.
1995
Later Ceramics in South-East Asia: Sixteenth to Twentieth Centuries. Oxford in Asia studies in ceramics. Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur.
Hayden, B. 1995
The emergence of prestige technologies and pottery. In The Emergence of Pottery: Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies, edited by W. K. Barnett and J. W. Hoopes, pp. 257-265. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
2003
Were luxury foods the first domesticates? Ethnoarchaeological perspectives from Southeast Asia. World Archaeology 34(3):458-469.
Hiscock, P. 2002
Quantifying the size of artifact assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:251-258.
Hsieh, Ming Liang (謝明良) 1995 On An-Ping vessels, Bulletine of Art History Department, National Taiwan University 2: 75-105. (〈安平壺芻議〉 ， 《國立台灣大學美術史研究所集刊》2: 75-105) 2005 Tradeware and Cultural History, Yun Cheng Press, Taipei. (《貿易陶瓷與文化史》 。允晨 文化，臺北市) Jo"rg, C. J. A. and M. Flecker 2001
Porcelain from the Vung Tau Wreck: the Hallstrom Excavation. Sun Tree Publishing, London.
Junker, L. L.
151
1994
The development of centralized craft production systems in A.D. 500-1600 Philippine chiefdoms. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 25(1):1-30.
1999
Raiding, trading, and feasting: the political economy of Philippine chiefdoms. University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu.
2001
The evolution of ritual feasting systems in prehispanic Philippine chiefdoms. In Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by M. Dietler and B. Hayden, pp. 267-309. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC
Kelly, R. E. and R. V. May 2001 Shadows of the Past：At Cabrillo National Monument. National Park Service, Cabrillo National Monument, San Diego. Krahl, R., J. Ayers and N. Erbahar 1986
Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapi Saray Museum, Istanbul: A Complete Catalogue. Sotheby's Publications, London.
Kuwayama, G. 1997
Chinese Ceramics in Colonial Mexico. Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles.
L'Hour, M., E. Veyrat, M. Toulgoat and O. Hulot (editors) 2005
La Mer Pour Memoire. Buhez Association, Paris.
Li, Kwangti (李匡悌) 2004 Salvage Archaeology on San-shi and Shui-nei sites. Tainan City. (《三舍暨社內遺址受 相關水利工程影響範圍搶救考古發掘工作計畫》。台南市政府委託中央研究院歷史 語言研究所執行之研究報告) Li, Chien An (栗建安) 1993
A brief on survey in Dong Xi kilns, Bulletin of Fu Cheng Heritage and Museum 1993 (1/2): 138-150. (〈東溪窯調查記略〉 ， 《福建文博》1993 年第 1、2 期合刊:138-150)
Liu, Yi Chang et. al. (劉益昌, 謝明良, 王淑津, 顏廷伃) 2005
Zeelandia Fort Museum Archaeological Excavation and Exhibition Plans: The Final Report. Chen Kwung University, Tainan. (《熱蘭遮城博物館 (現永漢民藝館) 調查修復 規劃案-熱蘭遮城考古遺址出土文物研究與展示構想計畫—期末報告》 。台南市政府委 託國立成功大學研究發展基金會執行之研究報告)
Lu, Tai Kang (盧泰康)
152
2006
Imported Pottery in Taiwan durng the 17th Centruy. PhD dissertation, Dept. of History, Cheng Kong University, Tainan. (《十七世紀臺灣外來陶瓷研究－透過陶瓷探索明末清 初的臺灣》 ，國立成功大學歷史系博士論文)
McWilliam, A. 2001
Haumeni, not many: renewed plunder and mismanagement in the Timorese Sandalwood Industry. Resource Management in Asia-Pacific Working Paper Vol. 29. Resource Management in Asia-Pacific Program, Division of Pacific and Asian History, Research School for Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University, Canberra.
Miksic, J. N. 2006
Chinese ceramics and the economics of early Southeast Asian urbanisation, 14th to 16th centuries. Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association Bulletin 26:147-153.
Miller, G. L. 1991
A revised set of CC index values for classification and economic scaling of English ceramics from 1787 to 1880. Historical Archaeology 25(1):1-25.
Morimura, K. 1994
Implications of the chronology of Zhang Zhou Ware (Swatow), in Studies on Ceramics from the Coastal Fu Chieng during the Late Ming to Early Ching Dynasty(〈漳州窯系製 品 (スワトウ) の年代觀とその意義〉 ，收於《明末清初福建沿海貿易陶瓷的研究–漳州 窯出土青花、赤繪與日本出土中國外 SWATOW》 ，頁:132-141。福建省博物館，福州 市)
1996
The chronology and trade of blue-and-white, polychrome and overglazed ceramics from Zhang Zhou kiln and so-called Swatows, Bulletin of Fu Cheng Heritage and Museum 96(2):136-138. (〈福建省漳州窯系青花、五彩、琉璃地的編年和貿易--明末清初的汕頭 器〉 《福建文博》96(2):136-138)
Mudge, J. M. 1986
Chinese Export Porcelain in North America. Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., New York.
Nagel Auctions 2000
The Tek Sing Treasures, Germany.
Nishimura, M. 1992
Long Distance Trade and the Development of Complex Societies in the Prehistory of the Central Philippines: The Cebu Central Settlement Case. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan.
Nogami,Takenori (野上建紀)
153
2001
Late-Ming-to-Ching dynasty ceramics in the shipwrecks, Tradeware Research 21:63-74. (〈沉船資料にみる明末~清朝磁器〉 ， 《貿易陶磁研究》21:63-74)
O'Connor, S., M. Spriggs and P. Veth 2002
Excavation at Lene Hara Cave establishes occupation in East Timor at least 30,000-35,000 years ago. Antiquity 76(291):45-50.
Ohashi, Koji and Takashi Sakai (大橋康二、坂井隆) 1999
Ceramics from the site of Banten in Indonesia, Bulletin of National Museum of Japanese History 82: 47-83. (〈インドネシア・バンテン遺跡出土の陶磁器〉 ，《國立歷史 民 俗博物館研究報告》 ，82:47-83)
Oita Municipal Museum of Historical Archives (大分市歷史資料館編) 2003
The South Chinese Polychrome from Bungo Palace. Oita Municipal Musem of Historical Archives, Oita, Japan. (《豐後府內南蠻の彩り—南蠻の貿易陶磁器》 。大分市歷史資料 館)
Orton, C. 1993
How many pots make five?- an historical review of pottery quantification. Archaeometry 35:169-184.
Pai, Kuwen (白焜) 1995
Jingdezheng export ceramic during the late Ming Dynasty to Chien-long regime, early Chin Dynastic, Bulletin of Fu Cheng Heritage and Museum 95(1): 27-35. (〈晚明至清乾 隆時期景德鎮外銷瓷研究〉 ， 《福建文博》95(1):27-35)
Parker, P. 1992
Reciprocity and redistribution in Kalasha prestige feasts, Anthropozoologica 16:37-46
Peregrine, P. 1991
Some Political Aspects of Craft Specialization. World Archaeology 23(1).
Van der Pijl-Ketel, C. 1982
The Ceramic Load of the Witte Leeuw (1613). Rijsksmuseum, Amsterdam.
Ptak, R. 1987
The transportation of sandalwood from Timor to China and Macao, c. 1350-1600. In Portuguese Asia: Aspects in History and Economic History, Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, edited by R. Ptak, pp. 87-110. Beitrage zur Sudasienforschung ; Bd. 117. Steiner, Wiesbaden.
Sakai, Takashi (坂井隆)
154
2002
Banten: A Port City Nation and Its Ceramic Trade. Doseisha, Tokyo. (《港市國家バンテ ンと陶磁貿易》 。同成社，東京)
Samford, P. M. 1997
Response to a market: dating English underglaze transfer-printed wares. Historical Archaeology 31(2):1-30.
Sassoon, C. 1978
Chinese Porcelain Marks from Coastal Sites in Kenya: Aspects of Trade in the Indian Ocean, XIV-XIX Centuries. BAR international series (supplementary) Vol. 43. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, England.
Schortman, E. M. and P. A. Urban 2004
Modeling the roles of craft production in ancient political economies. Journal of Archaeological Research 12(2):185-226.
Sjostrand, S. 2003
The Desaru Shipwreck Excavation: Final Report. Submitted to Malaysian Department of Museums and Antiquities, Kuala Lumper. (available on-line at: http://maritimeasia.ws/desaru/index.html, last access: April 29th, 2008)
Stevenson, J. and J. Guy (editors) 1997
Vietnamese Ceramics: A Separate Tradition. Art Media Resources with Avery Press, Chicago.
Sussman, L. 1977
Changes in Pearlware dinnerware, 1780-1830. Historical Archaeology 11:105-112.
Therik, T. G. 2004
Wehali , the Female Land: Traditions of A Timorese Ritual Centre. Pandanus Books and Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies (RSPAS), Canberra.
Trubitt, M. B. D. 2003
The production and exchange of marine shell prestige goods. Journal of Archaeological Research 11(3):243-277.
Tsang, Chen Hwa, Kao Yo Teh and Liu Yi Ch (臧振華、高有得、劉益昌) 1993
A preliminary report of a Ching Dynasty Fort in Tzo Ying, Bulletin of Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 64 (3)：763-865. (〈左營清代鳳山縣舊城聚落的試掘〉 ， 《中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊》64 (3)：763-865)
Veth, P., S. O'Connor and M. Spriggs
155
2002
The Continuity of Cave Use in the Tropics: Examples from East Timor and The Aur Islands, Maluku. Asian Perspectives 44(1):180-192.
156
Figure 1、Southeast Asia and the Timor Island (The square in the lower map marks research area in this study as shown in Figure 2)
157
Figure 2、Manatuto map and tradeware sites (‧: archaeological sites; ×: isolated finds; circled sites are used in tradeware abundance analysis). Site name: 1: LPR; 2: Soraha; 3: Soraha Barat; 4: Bukit Aiteas; 5: Malarahun Lama #1; 6: Malarahun Lama #4; 7: Hataro #5; 8: L.U.R.I.; 9: Buuak; 10: Kampung Hatubela; 11: Hataro Altar
Figure 3 、The device used to measure the orifice radius and to calculate the percentage factor (Adopted from Egloff 1973)
158
Plate 1. Imported ceramics found in Manatuto area: Phase I (1-4) , Phase II (6-7) and Phase III (5)
Plate 2. Phase II Zhangzhou ware ceramics found in Manatuto area.
159
Plate 3. Various Phase III Jingdezheng trade wares found in Manatuto area.
Plate 4、Phase IV (1, 3-7) and Phase V (2, 8-9) Chinese blue and white found in Manatuto area.
160
