!
Archaeological Survey of the
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites
Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia
Adam Thompson, MA
Archaeologist for the Federated States of Micronesia
August 2013
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia
by Adam Thompson, MA
Archaeologist for the Federated States of Micronesia
Acknowledgement of Support: The project reported here has been financed in full with
the Historic Preservation Funds from the National Park Service in the U.S. Department
of the Interior.
Disclaimer: The contents, opinions and interpretations expressed in the following pages
do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Interior.
Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity: The project recieved Federal funds form the
U.S. National Park Service. Regulations of the U.S. Department of Interior strictly
prohibit unlawful discrimination in departmental Federally Assisted Programs on the
basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, or handicap. Any
person who believes s/he has been discriminated against in any program, activity, or
facility operated by a recipient of Federal assistance should write to: Director, Equal
Opportunity Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, P.O. Box
37127, Washington, D.C. 20013-7127.
2
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
ABSTRACT
Throughout the month of March 2013 survey was conducted in the thickly vegetated
low-lands of Tofol Valley to locate sites near to the museum which could be incorporated
into an outdoor exhibit for the Kosrae museum. These sites were cleared, mapped, and
photographed. A minimal amount of excavation was performed to expose stone
alignments within the center of these platforms in order to assess their use in ancient
times, while still preserving them intact for people to see in the future. These sites will
show what an archaeological site looks like when it is first re-discovered by
archaeologists allowing visitor’s to understand what archaeological survey is like. This
outdoor exhibit is not only intended for the benefit of foreign tourists but more
importantly for the benefit of students at the local high schools which lies across from
the museum.
A cluster of three sites were located in a small low-land section of the valley. Each of
these structures showed a unique form related to its function. Additionally, a fourth site
was located in the uplands. Between these four sites there are two dominant styles that
are believed to relate to the two different time periods to which radiocarbon samples
have dated the valley. The contrast of these two forms suggest a change in settlement
pattern from being evenly dispersed throughout the valley to a more recent
concentration closer to the lower coastal areas. However, these conclusions are only
tentative given the small sample size of four sites.
Subsequent to this initial intensive survey, a wider reconnaissance survey was
performed in July 2013 to locate previously recorded sites. The Department of Forestry
planted trees on a transect deeper in the uplands and located a larger prehistoric
complex. These additional sites were added to the survey project so that all the sites
could be registered as historic sites on the Kosrae state registry. In total, 8 sites
representing 15 structures were registered (see letter on opposite page). These sites
are clustered around five different areas throughout the valley covering roughly one
kilometer.
Plans are underway to begin organizing field trips for the students at the high school
and several tourists have been shown the sites already. More work will be needed to
clear the sites and make them more presentable. It is hoped that restoration projects
will follow in the future. For now, the project documented in this report has recorded
how the sites remain as of 2013.
3
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Acknowledgements
I would like to give special thanks to the Department of Forestry for assisting in the
clearance of the lower Tofol habitation site. When we first visited the site as we were
preparing for the project we found that a large eucalyptus tree had fallen upon it. The
pile that was made once the tree was removed was an impressive bit of evidence of the
work that went to clear the site. Later the Forestry Department provided more
invaluable assistance in bringing to attention the location of a complex of sites deep
within the valley. As their work brings them often to more remote parts of the island,
particularly the upland environments that have been little researched by archaeologists,
it is recognized that the Kosrae Historic Preservation Office should make every attempt
to work alongside the Department of Forestry to locate more upland sites.
Blair P. Charley of the Kosrae Island Resource Management Authority (KIRMA)
provided assistance in GIS mapping the sites located throughout the valley. His
accurate maps should ensure that the sites may be easily re-located in the future.
I would also like to thank Nena Lonno for his assistance in the field in locating the sites.
It is recognized that Kosrae history should be written by Kosraeans and so all of the
sites described here were first identified as historic features by him. I would also like to
thank Standon Andrews who shared his ideas that fostered many of the interpretations
of the sites included in this report. The project itself was the brainchild of Berlin Sigrah
who had felt the need to locate and clear the sites ever since the historic preservation
office was at its original location on the hill closer to the sites. I am pleased that we
could finally see the project through.
I must also thank the KIRMA review board and chairman, Daniel Thomson, for officially
registering the sites the Kosrae state historic site registry, and thereby helping to
preserve the sites for the future. The KIRMA review board recognizes the value of
these sites towards preserving Kosrae’s history, as well as, the opportunity to restore
the sites and provide greater access to share that history with young Kosraeans and
visitors to the island.
This report follows the report guidelines presented on the American Samoa Historic
Preservation Office website, which were kindly supplied by David Herdrich. Site
registration forms follow the example provided by the Linda Aguon of the Guam Historic
Preservation Office.
4
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
5
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
4
LIST OF FIGURES! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
7
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
8
INTRODUCTION ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
9
!
!
!
!
!
HISTORICAL AND PREHISTORIC BACKGROUND! !
!
!
!
14
RESEARCH DESIGN!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
22
METHODS! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
23
FINDINGS! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
26
CONCLUSIONS!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
48
REFERENCES!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
55
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
60
!
!
!
92
!
!
98
!
!
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING!
APPENDIX A: SITE FORMS!
APPENDIX B: HISTORIC CONTEXTS & STRATEGIES!
APPENDIX C: KOSRAE STATE SITE REGISTRATION FORMS !
6
!
10
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
List of Figures
Fig. 1. Map of Micronesia showing the location of Kosrae!
!
!
!
Fig. 2. Dates for basal sands from cores on Kosrae mainland (Athens 1995)!
Fig. 3. Timeline of coring dates from Fig. 2!
!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 4. Frequency plot of Kosrae main island radiocarbon dates (Athens 1995)!
Fig. 5. Short list of Kosrae main island dates! !
!
!
!
!
Fig. 6. Date ranges for Tofol Valley, site A11-32 (Beardsley 2007)! !
!
Fig. 7. Map of Finol Tokosra showing two types of structures (Beardsley 2007)!
Fig. 8. Double-roomed compounds in Innem Valley (Cordy 1983)! !
!
Fig. 9. Three-sided single room structure in Innem Valley (Cordy 1983)!
!
Fig. 10. Site map of areas surveyed in Tofol in the late 1970s (Likiaksa 1979)!
Fig. 11. Map of Tofol Historic sites registered within this report!
!
!
Fig. 12. Map of the Lower Tofol double-roomed compound! !
!
!
Fig. 13. Map of the Lower Tofol enclosure!
!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 14. Map of the Lower Tofol habitation site! !
!
!
!
!
Fig. 15. Map of the Lower Tofol ceremonial site!!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 16. Map of central platform at the Lower Tofol ceremonial site! !
!
Fig. 17. Site map of A11-27, Middle Tofol platform!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 18. A11-18: Low Enclosure (Likiaksa 1979)!!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 19. Features continuing from A11-27!
!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 20. Map of the Upper Tofol double-roomed compound! !
!
!
Fig. 21. Site map of A11-34, Upper Tofol Complex!
!
!
!
!
Fig. 22. A11-7: Enclosure with Platform (Likiaksa 1979)!
!
!
!
Fig. 23. Basic model for early and late prehistoric site types! !
!
!
Fig. 24. location of early and late prehistoric sites!
!
!
!
!
7
11
13
13
15
15
19
19
21
21
27
27
29
31
33
35
37
41
41
43
45
47
47
49
51
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
List of Photographs
photo 1. Central stone seat facing altar at Lower Tofol ceremonial site!
!
photo 2. Captain Melander’s grave!
!
!
!
!
!
!
photo 3. The first corner to be discovered at the Lower Tofol habitation site!!
photo 4. Clearance of Lower Tofol ceremonial site at midway point! !
!
photo 5. Lower Tofol double-roomed compound!!
!
!
!
!
photo 6. Lower Tofol Hilltop Enclosure! !
!
!
!
!
!
photo 7. Lower Tofol habitation site!
!
!
!
!
!
!
photo 8. Lower Tofol ceremonial site!
!
!
!
!
!
!
photo 9. Basalt vessel found at Lower Tofol ceremonial site! !
!
!
photo 10. Large basalt bowl from Koarom, Malem!
!
!
!
!
photo 11. Western corner of Middle Tofol platform!
!
!
!
!
photo 12. Japanese artifacts found at A11-27! !
!
!
!
!
photo 13. Upper Tofol double-roomed compound!
!
!
!
!
photo 14. Tomb at Upper Tofol complex! !
!
!
!
!
!
8
1
17
23
25
28
30
32
34
39
39
40
43
44
46
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
INTRODUCTION
The high school students of Kosrae commonly come to the museum to relax in the
shade and come inside to avoid the rain giving them an opportunity to look at the
displays. It is not expected that every student will take an immediate fascination with
the degraded platforms and broken artifacts which only through careful interpretation tell
the the history of their island. But if at least a few could be intrigued it could ensure that
archaeology on the island could be continued by local archaeologists in the future and
they could become spokespeople for the ancient sites around the island. The future of
archaeology on Kosrae, as on other islands, really depends on some local students
being able to transcend the common malaise that is exhibited by most locals for these
historical sites to see what we archaeologist find so fascinating. Much as the
Pohnpeian Christian priest, Narcissus, first led the mass conversion of Kosrae to
Christianity in 1863, when Rev. Benjamin Snow had wasted away 11 years in futile
effort, so archaeology has won few converts over the 35 years it has been practiced on
the island. Archaeology needs its Narcissus, someone who can look at themselves and
their people and see that the traditional ways represented by these ancient sites can
teach a way by which people can live self-sustainably with their own identity.
The primary purpose of this project was to locate archaeological sites on the surface
near to the Kosrae museum that could be used as outdoor exhibits. One of the sites
had previously been located and it was believed that other sites would be found in the
vicinity. These sites could then be shown to visiting tourists as well as to local students
during field trips as the island’s high school is located across the street from the
museum.
Additionally, the sites are located close to modern development within the government
lands. This gives the Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO) both the opportunity
and the responsibility to survey the area to ensure that modern development does not
disturb these sites through erosion or outright destruction. Further the site lies close to
the road and near a scenic outlook and therefore could be easily incorporated into a
tourist walk. It is near the museum and visitors and locals that visit the museum could
be encouraged to visit the site.
The intensive survey will also provide an opportunity to learn more of the archaeological
history of the area. The Finkol Tokosra site lies deeper within the same valley system.
This site has provided dates of 650 AD as well as 1650 AD. It is unclear whether this
was a continuous settlement or two distinct cultures as no dates have been found in
between. The study of the Tofol site will help to assess its place in time in comparison
to the Finkol Tokosra site. Training was given to the Kosrae HPO field staff in field
methods to answer these questions.
9
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Kosrae is a small, tropical high volcanic island in the eastern Caroline Islands of
Micronesia. It is roughly 550 km east-southeast of Pohnpei the closest neighboring high
island. Two small coralline atolls, Mwoakilloa and Pingelap, are situated between the
two islands roughly equal distances apart. Thus spaced they provide stops between the
island that turns a three-day sail between Kosrae and Pohnpei into three single-day
voyages island-hopping between the atolls. At the time of contact the canoes on
Kosrae were not suitable for voyaging (Ritter and Ritter 1982). However, the canoes of
the neighboring atolls including the Marshall Islands which lie 600 km to the northeast
are suitable for voyaging. Accordingly it appears that the intermittent atolls allowed for
the sharing of distant cultures at distinct periods in time that caused major changes to
the otherwise remote volcanic islands that developed their own autonomous histories.
Kosrae has a land area of 109 km2. 70% of the island is steeply-sloped mountain, with
another 15% of lowlands and the remainder consisting of mangrove swamps. At
present 63% of the island is naturally forested, primarily in the steeply-sloped areas,
23% is agroforest in the lowland valleys, and 11% is secondary forest, with only 3% not
forested (Whitesell et al 1986).
There is only a fringing reef encircling the island due to the relatively short geological life
of the island at 1-2 million years (Keating et al 1984). There is abundant rainfall (5,000
mm annually, with higher amounts in the island’s interior) and high humidity year round
resulting in plentiful agricultural production. Typhoons are uncommon as they begin
further to the west though large typhoons are documented to have occurred in 1891 and
1905. These large storms helped to create the large berm of coral rubble along the
edge of the island that helped to create the mangrove belt encircling much of the island.
A separate 70 hectare island named Lelu may be found in the largest harbor. It is
composed of a small mountain, Finol Poro, and 27 hectares of man-made islets that
have since been further filled in. This was the location of the well-known megalithic
temple of Lelu, which served as the residence of the high chiefs, creating a geographic
division between them and the common class.
The major waterways consist of the Finkol, Malem, Yela, Okat, Innem, Tofol, Pilyuul,
Utwe, Mutunte, and Yeseng rivers (Segal 1989). It is around these waterways that the
villages of the common people developed.
10
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 1. Map of Micronesia showing the location of Kosrae
11
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Changes in Sea Level and Coastal Deposition
Athens (1994, 1995) described several cores that had been taken around the island to
assess environmental change based on palynological and geomorphological changes
over time. If one concentrates on the cores with coral sands and gravels at their basal
levels one will see a that the mainland of Kosrae has been growing over time as it
changes from sandy lagoons to swampy mangrove environments. Fig. 2 shows the
date ranges for the basal coral sands for those cores. Fig. 3 provides a visual timeline.
One should notice two periods when those transformations were occurring. The first of
these appears to be over a much longer time period of gradual change while the later
period is much more concentrated. Athens postulates a lowering of sea-level from
1062-1362AD, termed the Pukusruk Te formation which shows that sea-levels did not
fully stabilize until that time. It is likely that much of Kosrae’s flat arable land did not fully
form until after this time. This environmental change would explain a movement of
people towards the shore later on.
Previous work had focused on changes in sea-level predating this period specifically
from 4100-600 BP (paludal study, Randall & Smith 1991; Fujimoto et al 1996). Athens
work appears to be the first to identify changes within this more recent time period.
Though it should be noted that Bath et al (1983) dated mangrove wood in subsurface
deposits to 1025-1245AD at Leahp (site D2-1) which provides complimentary evidence
that the mangroves formed there only at this time.
These changes in coastal deposition should mirror those seen on the outer atolls.
Recent findings by Dickinson (2001, 2003, 2004) show that atolls for Micronesia rose
relatively early and align with the early period of sea-level change shown in Fig. 3. The
data on the later sea-level changes though has not been seen within the atolls of
Micronesia though it corresponds to later atolls that arose further to the east such as
Tokelau and the Tuamotus. Such large-scale environmental changes are difficult to
assess but for the present study there appears to be acceptable evidence to suggest an
environmental impact on cultures throughout the time periods.
Another researcher to write extensively on sea level changes within the Pacific over this
time period is Nunn (1998, 2000) who proposes an additional sea-level rise between the
two events of sea-level decline described above during a period termed the Little
Climatic Optimum which precipitated a catastrophic event in resource depletion. The
validity of this sea-level rise is still debated. The present data for Kosrae, while scant,
is more representative of a steady sea-level decline that sped up from 1000-1400 AD
which could have also accounted for resource depletion as shallower reefs would be
warmed by the sun much more easily than changes in global sea-level temperatures. A
sudden change would have more drastic effects and could account for the events Nunn
describes without the such intense shifts.
12
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
coring
location
Thompson
date range for
basal coral sands
depth
(cm)
Finfokoa 2
AD 380-780
148-152
Yewak 1 (Malem)
AD 530-900
195-200
Utwa 1 (Utwe)
AD 760-1070
375-380
Loal 2 (Tafunsak)
AD 1020-1300
128-132
Finaunpes 1 (Lelu)
AD 1150-1330
200-205
Finalof 1 (Tafunsak)
AD 1260-1420
145-150
Fig. 2. Dates for basal sands from cores on Kosrae mainland (Athens 1995)
Fig. 3. Timeline of coring dates from Fig. 2
13
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
HISTORICAL AND PREHISTORIC BACKGROUND
Athens (1995) carefully compiled a full list of radiocarbon dates obtained from the main
island of Kosrae up until that time. The frequency plot for those dates showed a marked
concentration beginning roughly six hundred years ago matching the conclusions of
Ueki (1984) who proposed a rapid rise in population at the time. It was then that the
complex hierarchy formed around the ceremonial center at Lelu marked by its
monumental architecture. However, Athens also notes the rise in radiocarbon dates
that occur at AD 500-600 when larger settlement first arises. Given the antiquity of
these sites it may be expected that these sites would be under-represented in
comparison to sites that are relatively more recent.
A more general review of the earliest dates for sites located around the island shows a
small concentration of dates between 1200 and 1300 BP. Additionally, large sites at
Menke and Innem valleys that have yet to be dated show similarities to these earlier
sites. Many of these older sites appear to be located deeper into the mountain valleys
and therefore may not have been reached by surveys which have tended to focus on
the coastal sites. These sites have shown a unique form of statue construction with
limited carved relief, the application of a lightly fired ceramic coating, and red paint. The
nature and age of these statues means that today they are difficult to see as the painted
clay has largely washed away and the form is often hard to see. The culture that
created these statues has been recently dated to 1288 BP within the middle Tofol valley
(Beardsley 2007, 2008). A bird statue has also been described at the site of Tepat that
has been dated to 1260 BP (Cordy 1981). No other sites with statues have been dated
at this time. However, the discovery by the author of a red painted carved stone on the
island of Mwoakilloa dated to 1370 BP provides evidence that the culture at the time
was dynamic and still voyaging.
Athens et al (1996) showed that widespread burning took place within the lowlands from
1350-1550 BP based on accumulations of charcoal around the island. Pollen cores
showed the presence of taro, breadfruit, and coconut. Their conclusion was a
deliberate and rapid transformation of the natural forest to an agroforest at that time.
This large-scale development would have set the stage for increased populations and
cultural development in the following century. The paucity of radiocarbon dates before
this time may suggest that despite initial contact at 1900 BP permanent settlement of a
larger population beyond a hundred people did not occur until this time of forest
transition.
14
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 4. Frequency plot of Kosrae main island radiocarbon dates (Athens 1995)
site
earliest
date
reference
Lelu subsurface
1940 BP
Athens 1990
Tepat (D12-3)
1260 BP
Cordy 1981
Upper Okat (D10-9)
1220 BP
Welch et al 1990
Nefalil (C8-1)
1010 BP
Cordy et al 1985
Likihnluhlwem (D17-1)
830 BP
Bath et al 1983
Lelu ruins (A31-1)
620 BP
Cordy 1993
Wiya Bird Cave (D16-1)
610 BP
Sinoto 1982
Lela, Malem
560 BP
Swift et al 1990
Wiya (D15-1)
548 BP
Cordy 1981
Lacl (D11-1)
530 BP
Welch et al 1990
Safonfok (D55-1)
450 BP
Beardsley 2005
Fig. 5. Short list of Kosrae main island dates
15
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
The earliest recorded European expeditions to Kosrae were for the purposes of
exploration and scientific observations: the Coquille captained by Louis Duperrey in
1824 and the Senyavin, captained by Fyedor Lütke from 1827-1828 (Ritter and Ritter
1982). Both voyages produced an accurate account of the island at the time. They
estimated a population of roughly 3,000 people with at least half of these living on the
small island of Lelu (Ritter 1981). Such a small population was found to be well below
the carrying capacity of the island however (Athens 2007) which was likely to be at least
6,000 if not more.
The political hierarchy at that time was divided into four distinct social strata with a
single paramount chief, tokosra, who was both the secular and sacred leader at the top.
Beneath the paramount chief were ten high chiefs that he appointed, mostly consisting
of his male relatives. The paramount chiefs and the high chiefs all lived in Lelu and
administered their orders from there. These orders were then carried out by the forty to
fifty low chiefs who were the land managers of the land units, or facl. Within these land
units agricultural production was carried out by the commoners. Breadfruit was said to
be the largest staple along with giant swamp taro (Cyrtosperma chamissonis), taro
(Colocasia esulenta), bananas, yams (Dioscorea), coconuts, and sugarcane. A portion
of these food crops were then given to the high chiefs of Lelu by the commoners as a
tribute in exchange for rights to the land which was all owned by the high chiefs. In this
way the high chiefs could live on Lelu island without having to produce any of their own
food while maintaining a stronghold with which to maintain power. Athens (2007) notes
a leveling of population based on the frequency plot of radiocarbon dates (see fig. 1) at
1425 AD. This date correlates with the construction of the Lelu ruins and the formation
of the hierarchical system described above. It is believed that this hierarchical system
acted to control population numbers.
The sites described in this report within the valley of Tofol represent at least one of
those land unit, facl, where a low chief would oversee agricultural production in the
lower valley where a swampland could be used to grow all of the plants described
above.
A Swedish captain named Melander came to Kosrae during the German period
(1899-1914) and purchased the whole of the Tofol area from the tokosra for an unknown
sum of money (Likiaksa 1979). Captain Melander planted coconuts for copra and
raised cows and pigs. His grave was located by the Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
which states that he was born in Sweden on January 17, 1845 and died in Kosrae on
January 12, 1928 (see photo 2). Melander was reported to have sold the Tofol region to
the Japanese company (NBK) for 30,000 in Japanese currency who farmed the area
extensively. “In 1936, by Imperial Ordinance, the Nanyo Takucho-Ku Kabushi Kaisha
(South Seas Colonies Company) was established. This semi-government corporation
capitalized at 20 million yen, assumed ownership of all Japanese property and mining
rights. The company then purchased the Tofol area from Captain Melander who had
been given the land by the Togusra” (Segal 1989, p134)
16
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 2. Captain Melander’s grave
17
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
The neighboring valley of Innem was also farmed extensively during the Japanese
period by a Japanese company called Nantaku, particularly in the low flat land of the
lower valley where the soil is rich and swampy. Cotton was tried at first but proved
unsuccessful and it was later converted to sugar cane. Again, the harvest was
unsuccessful and the valley was abandoned after five years (Cordy 1983).
Thus, one would expect extensive clearing performed at the lower flat areas of both
valleys to have disturbed, if not completely destroyed any sites in the open flats. Nena
Lonno who has worked throughout much of the duration of the Kosrae Historic
Preservation Office reported that the main flat area of Tofol had been surveyed when it
was clear and no sites had been found. This area was avoided within the present
surveys so as not to repeat the same survey.
Likiaksa (1979) performed the earliest archaeological survey of the Tofol valley. That
survey located 26 sites throughout the valley over the course of two weeks. However,
the exact location of those sites is difficult to ascertain given that there was no GPS
technology at the time and the survey was quickly performed. That survey was one of,
if not the earliest, archaeological surveys performed by the Trust Territory government.
While the survey proved useful in the later parts of the present project it was found that
it did not meet the current standards set by the Department of Interior and did not
include the necessary information to re-locate and register the sites. For this reason the
present project was expanded to re-locate and register those sites within the guidelines
set by the Department of the Interior.
Since the Likiaksa survey no work had been performed until that of Beardsley (2007)
who concentrated on the middle of the valley in her attempt to locate the burial of Finkol
Tokosra, a story from oral traditions that tells of an evil king that was assassinated by
the village after he mistreated one of their women. Dr. Beardsley was successful in
locating an area of dense stones that showed a pit feature within its soil profile that
matched the description of the grave of Finkol Tokosra. Beardsley also located a
statue-making workshop. Her work produced the first and only radiocarbon dates for
the site showing a thousand year period of occupation from 650 to 1650 AD (see Fig. 6).
It is still debatable whether these dates represent a continuous occupation or two
distinct periods of occupation. Either way it should be expected that at least some
cultural change should have taken place within the thousand years between the two
time periods. Therefore part of the goal of the current project is to assess if differences
in the structure of the sites may be representative of distinct time periods. Within the
Finol Tokosra site two different types of structures were observed, a double-roomed
enclosure and a single-roomed platform (see Fig. 7). This distinction would help to
guide the interpretations of the sites found during this survey.
18
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 6. Date ranges for Tofol Valley, site A11-32 (Beardsley 2007)
Fig. 7. Map of Finol Tokosra showing two types of structures (Beardsley 2007)
19
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Structures from Neighboring Valley
The closest valley to Tofol, and therefore the best comparison for the nature of
structures and settlement, is Innem valley where Cordy (1983) produced a rather
complete description of the structures to be found. Within this report three structures
showed the same double-roomed structure found at the Finol Tokosra site. Two of
these three structures were located in their own region of the valley with another
structure that was only partially complete and was unable to be fully mapped though it is
possible that it too was of the same form. The third double-roomed structure was also
found in its own area with small sleeping platforms of thick walls and a religious
platform. These sites were more widely dispersed in an area deeper into the valley.
A distinction could be made between structures found in the other regions of the valley
that showed thinner walls and a form more similar to the one-roomed three-sided
structures also found at the Finol Tokosra site. These sites were more tightly clustered
and closer to the coast. Changes in settlement pattern therefore suggest a transition
from widely dispersed structures throughout the valley to tightly clustered sites nearer to
the coast.
The form of the double-roomed compound may also be seen in its greatest prevalence
in the valley of Menke (Beardsley 2012). It is from personal communication with Dr.
Beardsley that the term compound has been used here as a means to distinguish it
from the other structures. Elsewhere the term enclosure is used and may be used
interchangeably. It is also this example which first led the auther to believe there was a
greater focus towards the interior of the mountains at the time that these structures
were being built. Menke is now in the process of being dated and we should learn its
age soon. It is believed at this point to pre-date most of the sites in Kosrae and align
with the 1300 year old dates based on the common characteristic of the red-painted
ceramic-covered statue. Being so old it is difficult for any stories to survive that speak
of the true nature of its culture. Even the stories that are told today of the goddess
Sinlaku appear tinged with doubt as it was the Finkol settlement which has been dated
to a more recent time that Safert (1919) claimed was the place where Sinlaku was
worshipped instead of Menke. It is the belief of the author that Menke may pre-date
even this great story. Regardless, the presence of double-roomed enclosures in Innem
and Menke show that is is a widespread site type that should be given more attention.
20
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 8. Double-roomed compounds in Innem Valley (Cordy 1983)
Fig. 9. Three-sided single room structure in Innem Valley (Cordy 1983)
21
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
RESEARCH DESIGN
The purpose of this investigation was to locate sites in the upper and lower parts of the
Tofol valley in order to assess potential changes in settlement pattern over the known
thousand year prehistoric occupation. The presence of two distinct site types had
presented themselves for the middle portion of the valley. This project was aimed at
evaluating how these site types extended into the lower and upper areas. Specifically
were there more examples of one type or the other within the lower versus upper
valleys, which could elaborate on changes in settlement pattern over time.
This project related to the overall research goal for Kosrae in that it aimed towards
better defining the prehistoric period which had previously been described as a uniform
span of time covering 1800 years. Undoubtedly, much change occurred over this time
including change described in the background material above. This project aimed to
break that larger prehistoric period into small distinct periods with better defined site
types, and strategic goals for each. This project therefore looked closely at the two site
types seen within the Finol Tokosra site as well as any other site types that would
present themselves within the findings of the survey.
This project follows a theory based on landscape archaeology that developed out of
settlement pattern studies, which is founded on the principle that sites located across a
landscape represent the cumulative histories of that landscape. Yet, sites representing
distinct time periods and cultures may be found within a single landscape and these
sites may still be distinguished based on shared characteristics that represent a
common culture specific to a given time period. The theory behind this project begins
with an acceptance that unique site structures are more likely to represent a distinct
cultures from different time periods than to represent differences within a single
settlement at a common timeframe. In other words greater change occurs over the
course of a hundreds of years than it does over the course of a single year.
Within this framework, this project begins with the belief that double-roomed compounds
originate from an early time period than single-room platforms based on the background
research described above and hypothesizes that a shift occurred from upland
settlement early on to a more coastal settlement later. If this hypothesis were true one
would expect more single-room platforms to be found at the lower areas than in the
upper areas.
Our research strategy therefore aims to give equal survey coverage to the upper and
lower areas and assess the presence of the two site types while looking for additional
site types that could further elucidate cultural changes over time.
This project could be further strengthened by radiocarbon dating the structures
identified in the survey.
22
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 3. The first corner to be discovered at the Lower Tofol habitation site
METHODS
The project began from a small corner of a site that had been found by Nena Lonno
long ago and still remained in his memory. Much of the site could not be seen beneath
the remains of a massive eucalyptus tree which had fallen on it with broken branches
scattered everywhere. Survey was undertaken throughout the low swamplands
bordering the mountains. It is in this micro-environment that sites had been found in
other regions such as Lacl (Welch et al 1990) and had been described for the Tofol
valley specifically (Likiaksa 1979). The thick vegetation made the location of sites
difficult. When found they appeared only as a small alignment of stones, but when
clearing started, opened up into a much larger area. Photo 3 shows the clearance of
the Lower Tofol ceremonial site in process. The thick vegetation in the background
covered the entirety of the site. When it was found it was believed that it was only a
small platform, but instead, turned out to much more impressive.
Once cleared the sites were mapped using tape measures and graph paper. Each
stone was drawn as it lay in the earth. Afterwards the shape was interpreted from what
was drawn and outlined on the paper. Photographs were taken as well.
Particular attention was given to any stones that lay within the structure to try to
determine its potential function. A minimal amount of excavation was performed to
reveal more stones beneath the upper 10 centimeters of topsoil. In some cases this
revealed clues to the status and nature of the structure but in other cases it still
remained uncertain.
23
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Initially, the project was intended to focus intensively on 2-4 sites and was expected to
utilize special projects funds from the National Park Service to analyze radiocarbon
dates from those sites to definitively test the hypothesis that the distinct style of site
construction could be applied to different time periods. It became clear relatively late in
the project that these funds would not be acquired. Initially, it was also planned that
greater focus would be given to the Yela conservation easement reconnaissance
survey. However, as the Yela Environment Landowners Authority had yet to complete
the necessary contracts to establish the conservation easement it was determined to be
prudent to limit the survey to a few representative sites until the agreements were
settled so as not to disrupt the process. The Yela valley was also found to be difficult
terrain in which to work.
Therefore, it was decided to return to the Tofol valley to perform additional
reconnaissance survey to locate additional sites. This survey was prompted by reports
by the Department of Forestry that they had seen sites in the upper portions of the
valley that we had yet to survey. The Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
accompanied Forestry during their trip into the upper Tofol valley to plant trees along the
rivers floodplain. At the very end of their transect a large complex was found half a
kilometer from the end of the road through thick vegetation which could only be located
with their assistance.
At the culmination of the project it was realized that many of the sites while located by
the previous surveys had never been fully documented or registered. An effort was
made to perform additional surveys throughout the majority of the valley. Ultimately one
kilometer of the valley was surveyed focusing on the natural areas left intact and free of
development where the most undisturbed sites would be located. It was realized that
many of the sites had been located in the past but the poor quality of the previous
survey performed over thirty years before required additional work to acquire the
necessary information in order to complete site registration forms. Efforts were made to
incorporate previous site designations so as to reduce the amount of confusion between
the studies and the sites were registered according to the current process of registering
historic sites with the Kosrae Island Resource Management Authority (KIRMA) review
board.
In truth, these were the first sites to be officially registered to the State Registry. All
previous work had been limited to the production of a site inventory with the completion
of site forms being the end product. The absence of a state registry initially led to some
confusion as State registration forms needed to be created for Kosrae for the first time.
These form were modeled after those used by Guam and it is hoped will satisfy the
requirements of the Department of Interior.
24
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 4. Clearance of Lower Tofol ceremonial site at midway point
25
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
FINDINGS
Four sites were found in the initial survey work in March. Three were located in the
lower Tofol valley below the Finol Tokosra site. These three were located in close
proximity to each other within an area called the Lower Tofol complex. One site was
found in the Upper Tofol valley above the Finol Tokosra site. In this way the sites
located in this survey extend the overall boundary of the habitation of the Tofol valley
and add to the overall understanding of the changes in settlement pattern. Though the
results of Likiaksa (1979) continued to suggest the habitation of the valley extended
even further.
Of these sites two, one in the Lower Tofol complex and the Upper Tofol site exhibited a
two-roomed four-sided shape. The other two sites within the Lower Tofol complex
exhibit a three-sided single room shape with the fourth open side bounded by the ridgeline.
As the Kosrae HPO prepared to submit the sites studied thus far for registration there
was a push to register more sites within the valley. The previous survey projects were
reviewed once again, specifically Likiaksa (1979). Initially, the hand-drawn maps within
the report (see Fig. 18) were found to be very confusing but after the intensive survey of
the Lower Tofol complex it became clear that this area was Area 7 from the previous
report. This led to the identification of an additional site, the Lower Tofol hilltop
enclosure A11-13.
This was followed by additional surveys in the middle and upper portions of the valley.
A site was located and found to be A11-27 which was described by Beardsley (2007)
but given only limited attention. Additional information was necessary in order to
complete site registration forms. Most exciting was the location of a large complex deep
in the upper valley which was discovered by the Department of Forestry. This complex
was mapped and recorded as well.
Initially, from the small sample size it was believed that the original hypothesis was true
that a shift had occurred from a settlement evenly dispersed throughout the valley to a
more coastal settlement. However, with the additional discovery of the upland complex
that was believed to derive from a later time the hypothesis became less clear and it
appeared that an overall larger population in the later time period could account for
increased settlement throughout the valley including the upper and lower areas. The
upper Tofol complex is, however, believed to be a defensive location following the
assassination of the tokosra and the ensuing conflict that would result. Therefore it is
unclear whether the settlement patterns within Tofol valley will be true elsewhere.
See below for a more detailed description of the sites and the ultimate conclusions...
26
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 10. Site map of areas surveyed in Tofol in the late 1970s (Likiaksa 1979)
Fig. 11. Map of Tofol Historic sites registered within this report
27
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 5. Lower Tofol double-roomed compound
Lower Tofol double-roomed compound
Site Number: A11-12
Location: N 05°19’23.8”, E 163°00’30.0”
Elevation: 18 meters
Area: 16 x 11 meters, 176 m2
Major Features
Brief Description:
This site was a four-sided double-roomed structure. The larger of the rooms had a welldefined wall, while the smaller room had a smaller wall. Stones were found within the
center of the large room, however, they did not indicate any structure. A depression
was also found within the large room. Some stones appear to indicate that the room
would be entered from the center of the north side through the small room with steps
leading over the center of the middle wall. This is typical of structures seen at the site of
Menke.
28
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 12. Map of the Lower Tofol double-roomed compound
29
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 6. Lower Tofol Hilltop Enclosure
Lower Tofol Hilltop Enclosure
Site Number: A11-13
Location: N 05°19’26.1”, E 163°00’28.8”
Elevation: 25 meters
Area: 9 x 6 meters, 54 m2
Brief Description:
The site lies next to the existing road going to the scenic outlook near to the dilapidated
building that was once the agricultural station and the former HPO. It was thickly
vegetated with a utility pole near to it. It appears to have been disturbed by the road
development and was difficult to uncover. Its size was found to be 9 x 6 meters which
matches site A11-13 which was described as being 9 x 9 meters as the northwest extent
could not be fully delineated due to the eroding hill and encroaching grass. Likiaksa
described a platform in the southwest corner. Evidence of such a platform was found in
the opposite corner of the present structure. It is believed that this is the same structure
as exact measurements and configurations are always difficult for poorly preserved
sites.
30
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 13. Map of the Lower Tofol enclosure
31
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 7. Lower Tofol habitation site
Lower Tofol Habitation site
Site Number: A11-15
Location: N 05°19’23.1”, E 163°00’32.1”
Elevation: 20 meters
Area: 19 x 10 meters, 190 m2
Brief Description:
This was the largest structure, yet it was also the least elaborate. A simple wall
averaging three stones high, or roughly 0.5 meter formed a terrace platform on threesides with the open side facing the mountain ridge. There were no stones found in the
center of the platform. It is believed that this was a large area for the habitation of an
extended family. A possible entrance may be seen on the west side of the structure.
This side faces the path leading to the other structures within the area and would make
sense.
32
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 14. Map of the Lower Tofol habitation site
33
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 8. Lower Tofol ceremonial site
Lower Tofol Ceremonial site
Site Number: A11-16
Location: N 05°19’25.0”, E 163°00’30.5”
Elevation: 20 meters
Area: 16.5 x 11 meters, 181.5 m2
Brief Description:
This three-sided structure was raised considerably higher than all the other structures in
this survey, averaging 2-2.5 meters. The south-east corner was well-intact and showed
the original design while the opposite south-west corner was considerably deflated.
Several grinding stones were found at the site as well as a small basalt bowl. At the
center of the structure a small platform was raised above the rest of the surface. Minor
excavation of the surface was conducted to better observe the stones. It was found that
six layers of stone formed multiple steps up to a small platform. It is believed that this
central platform was an altar and the site would have been used for ceremonial
purposes including the consumption of seka (Piper methysticum) based on the
presence of the grinding stones. The basalt bowl may have been used to serve seka.
A raised stone within the wall opposite of the central platform also appears to possibly
be a seat facing the altar.
34
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 15. Map of the Lower Tofol ceremonial site
35
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Central platform of A11-16
After clearing of the upper layer of topsoil, the central altar of the lower tofol ceremonial
site was found to have several layers of stone steps leading to the top. These multiple
levels of steps would represent a special status to the person or object who sat upon
the upper platform. For this reason the central platform may be seen as an altar. It is
unclear whether a chiefly or priestly personage would sit upon the altar if it was intended
for some spirit to be worshipped. Opposite the altar a raised stone different from the
rest sat upon which a curved surface provided an ideal seat for facing the altar. It was
next to this seat that a basalt vessel and grinding stone (described in the next section)
was found.
“After the month of feasting and festivity, the king would go into seclusion in a
special compound in Lelu...While the king was in seclusion there was priestly
activity dedicated to Sinlaku. Priests from her village in Utwe on the south side
walked all the way to Tofol, blowing the trumpet shell. Then they proceeded by
canoe into the canal at Lelu. They carried a special kind of spear and knots of
coconut leaflets, necklaces, a basket with certain kinds of shells in it and
bleached taro leaves. When they arrived in Lelu, seka was pounded and
ceremoniously served. The bleached taro leaves were torn into strips and tied
around the king’s and queen’s wrists while the priests chanted and held the
hands of the Togusra and his wife” (Segal 1989, 29)
The quotation above describes a procession from sites in Utwe, possibly those found at
Menke and/or Finkol valleys that made their way to Tofol and then to Lelu. Given the
elaborate nature of the central altar at the Lower Tofol ceremonial site, the profusion of
pounding stones, the basalt vessel, and the presence of red-painted stones that were
likely statues marking the entrance to the site (see section below), it is believed that this
structure may have played an important role in that procession. It would have provided
a place where the priests could have re-arranged their gifts prior to moving on to the
canoes that would have taken them to Lelu. Other rituals may have also taken place
but we can only guess at those today.
It was discovered as an expected, yet positive, outcome of the clearing of the topsoil
that the vegetation did not grow back so plentifully and could be more easily managed.
This outcome is likely due to the removal of large roots especially of ginger plants that
were most prevalent and the poor quality of the underlying clay. It is recommended that
future projects perform this same method, stripping the topsoil to reveal, but not disturb,
the underlying stones while at the same time removing roots and soil nutrients to
prevent pioneering plant species from covering the site again.
36
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 16. Map of central platform at the Lower Tofol ceremonial site
37
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Artifacts found at A11-16
Perhaps the most interesting single artifact to be found during the project was a broken
fraction of a basalt cup. At first it was difficult to be sure it was not a highly-fired piece of
pottery with calcareous inclusions as it was hard to imagine such a finely carved vessel
to be able to be produced. However, Standon Andrews remembered that a large basalt
bowl had been found by the Nedlic family in Koarom, Malem many years ago, which
had been photographed at the time. After examining the texture of the vessel more
closely it was clearly made of basalt though its color and texture was quite different from
the surrounding stones used within the structure. It seems likely that it was produced at
a separate site.
In addition several grinding stones were found at different sites. Three were seen at the
ceremonial complex at the Lower Tofol site where the basalt vessel was found. Another
was found at the habitation site. None were seen at the double-roomed structures.
These grinding stones were believed to have been used for the pounding of seka (Piper
methysticum). The basalt vessel is also believed to have been used for drinking seka
as it lay next to a grinding stone and a large stone facing the central altar that appeared
to be a seat. The close association of grinding stones with the single-roomed structures
which are believed to have come later would suggest that seka was only used later in
prehistory.
Also a couple stones of unusual shape were found that were covered in red-painted
clay (see back cover). Stones of this nature were found in the middle of the valley as
well (Beardsley 2007). Both of these stones lay at the bottom of the platform and
appeared to be in secondary context. Whether they belong to an early culture and had
been disturbed by later arrivals as is believed for the platform of the Lower Tofol doubleroomed compound or have only recently moved is difficult to determine.
38
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 9. basalt vessel found at Lower Tofol ceremonial site
photo 10. Large basalt bowl from Koarom, Malem
39
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 11. Western corner of Middle Tofol platform
Middle Tofol Platform
Site Number: A11-27
Location: N 05°19’20.3”, E 163°00’28.8”
Elevation: 23 meters
Area: 32 x 16 meters
Brief Description:
This site was located during the initial survey and identified by Nena Lono as one that
had been studied by Dr. Beardsley in 2003, who describes it as a small compound just
off the Tofol river. Dr. Beardsley also noted the inclusion of Japanese era features as
well. Her research was able to place the date of initial settlement at roughly 1200 AD
(2007). The site itself shows similarities to a low enclosure recorded by Likiaksa as
A11-18.
The site was returned to later in order to assess its significance for the Kosrae state
registry as there was uncertainty as to whether it had been officially registered yet. At
that time a Japanese trench was noted along the back of it running into the valley
through tightly-spaced ridges that provided a natural defense. A Japanese beer bottle
was also found and Nena Lono provided a metal axe that had also been found at the
site of an unknown date. This was the only site in that showed such a clear mix
between the prehistoric and Japanese periods. Thus, it is certainly the same site
described by Beardsley.
40
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 17. Site map of A11-27, Middle Tofol platform
Fig. 18. A11-18: Low Enclosure (Likiaksa 1979)
Site 18 is a low enclosure, [roughly] 15 by 9 meters and Eshaped. It has 2 openings. These walls are 0.6 meter wide and
high. The enclosure is subdivided into 2 rooms (5.5 x 8.5 m, 8 x
8.5 m), with a connecting entrance. However, only [three meters
of] the downslope side of these rooms are paved.
41
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
In comparing the site to those described by Likiaksa one appeared to resemble a
common form but did not match well on the map. Therefore it was believed to be a
different site of a common site structure. This style of structure appeared to be a
double-roomed platform that represented an intermediate form between the two
described in the previous intensive survey. The date of the site at 1200 AD places it in
between the periods assigned for the other two site types.
Dr. Beardsley described the site further. “More importantly, however this small
compound appeared to be part of a larger array of sites within the drainage. A paved
stone pathway running parallel to the river connected this site to others farther
upstream, indicating in very concrete and physical features the presence of a linked
network of settlements within the drainage.” (2007:32)
The Japanese trenches and prehistoric sites were found to continue into the valley. A
piece of white ceramic was also found. However, some of the prehistoric features
appeared to have been effected by natural erosion likely caused by the geographical
bottleneck. Nevertheless, the density of the features is worth noting and continues
further up the middle of the valley to site A11-32 which Beardsley describes in great
detail (2007). The difference between the Lower Tofol sites and the denser habitation in
this middle section of the valley may be attributed to the farming activities that occurred
lower in the valley during the Japanese and Trust Territory time periods. Yet, it also
appears to represent two distinct patterns of settlement: a widespread settlement in the
Lower valley during times of peace associated with ceremonial processions from Utwe
to Lelu Island, and dense settlements within the protected part of the valley associated
with stories that describe conflict between the people of the valley and the high chiefs
that lived within the Lelu ruins. These stories included a description of the Upper Tofol
complex as another place of refuge deep in the mountains to escape from the wrath of
the high chiefs.
42
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 19. Features continuing from A11-27
photo 12. Japanese artifacts found at A11-27
43
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 13. Upper Tofol double-roomed compound
Upper Tofol double-roomed compound
Site Number: A11-33
Location: N 05°19’03.1”, E 163°00’20.3”
Elevation: 78 meters
Area: 15.5 x 7 meters, 108.5 m2
Brief Description:
This site was another four-sided double-roomed structure similar to that found on the
lower site. The retaining wall was more developed due to the upland slope and the site
was smaller than the one below but overall its structure was much the same. One
major difference was that a well-defined platform was found at the center of its larger
room. Possible stone alignments could be seen in the area below the structure that
may represent planting areas as seen at the Lower Tofol complex.
44
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 20. Map of the Upper Tofol double-roomed compound
45
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
photo 14. Tomb at Upper Tofol complex
Upper Tofol Complex
Site Number: A11-34
Location: N 05°18’53”, E 163°00’18”
Elevation: 88 meters
Area: 60 x 100 meters
Brief Description:
This site was located alongside the assistance of the Department of Forestry who were
planting trees within the upland stream bed. Initially three structures were located and
mapped however it was found that the site continued deep into the uplands with a
dense concentration of features. While there was not enough time within the present
project to fully outline the boundary of the site, the Kosrae HPO will continue to outline
the boundary of these features in the future.
The features were dominated by large terraces meant to order the steep terrain and
four-sided single room structures. This represented a new style that had not been seen
before but for which examples could be found in Likiaksa. Oral history suggests that
this area may have been used as a refuge from conflicts between the people of the
valley and the high chiefs, which likely occurred following the assassination of Finol
Tokosra.
46
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 21. Site map of A11-34, Upper Tofol Complex
Fig. 22. A11-7: Enclosure with Platform (Likiaksa 1979)
This site overlooks the stream flat of area 3. It is 15 by 13 meters, and its walls
are 1.2 meters wide and 1.5 meters high. It[s] opening is 1 meter wide. In the
northwest corner of the enclosure is a free-standing platform (0.3 m high). It has
a square shape, 3.5 x 3.5 meters. No surface artifacts were seen on the surace
of the site. Also, the floor of the enclosure was not paved.
47
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
CONCLUSIONS
Evaluation
This project benefitted from being flexible. Initially, it was expected to be smaller in
scope with an intense focus on sites within the confined Lower Tofol area. It later
developed into a large-scale survey more fitting of the landscape archaeology model it
intended to follow. During this transition the answers to the research questions changed
showing that a larger sample size of a wider area is needed to accurately access the
nature of valley settlement.
The initial conclusions of the intensive survey of the more limited sample size were of a
well-defined difference in site structure that correlated with two distinct periods. The
subsequent reconnaissance survey, however, revealed additional site types and a more
complex history. Future projects should therefore focus on reconnaissance surveys that
are capable of identifying enough sites to produce a large sample of site types to fully
represent the entire valley.
The previous reconnaissance survey (Likiaksa 1979), theoretically, should have
provided a wide enough survey to allow for a more intensive survey to be performed.
However, the inadequacy of the 34 year old data was clear in its hand-drawn reports
when compared to the USGS map which is the standard at present (see Figs p27).
Therefore, this study exemplifies the need to upgrade previous reconnaissance surveys
to the present standard before attempting more costly intensive surveys.
Further, confusion occurred over the funding of the project. It was believed that a large
amount of funding was available for a variety of purposes with which radiocarbon dates
should be able to be easily funded. It was only late in the project that this was found to
not be true. The unavailability of these funds is not a problem, however. It means only
that there should be a greater focus towards reconnaissance surveys which in the end
will locate more sites to be registered and provide a wider look at the valley context.
Summary of Interpretations
Initially two distinct types of structures were observed in this survey from the more
recent work at the Finol Tokosra site (Beardsley 2007) and the intensive survey of the
Lower Tofol complex: a four-sided two-roomed structure and a three-sided singleroomed structure. These two forms are believed to date to separate periods.
Beardsley’s project at Finol Tokosra exhibited a thousand year occupation from
650-1650 AD. At the Finol Tokosra site where these radiocarbon dates were obtained
both types of structures are equally represented. The project began from the theoretical
basis that these two types would represent distinct periods and hypothesized a shift in
settlement between the two periods from an upland settlement to a coastal settlement.
48
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 23. Basic model for early and late prehistoric site types
49
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
The four-sided, two-roomed structures are also seen at the site of Menke which has yet
to be dated but shows a shared characteristic of red-painted, clay-encased, stone
statue that is also seen in Tofol as well as at Tepat and on the island of Mwokil. These
sites have all been dated to 1260 BP and 1370 BP respectively. Accordingly it is
believed that the four-sided, two-roomed structure and the red-painted, clay-encased
stone statues are both characteristic of this early period.
Within the early part of the survey this more ancient style of structure was found at both
the upper and lower reaches of the Tofol valley, suggesting a wider settlement pattern at
this early time with fewer structures spread across the region.
In contrast, the three-sided, one-roomed structure was found to be more concentrated
within the Lower Tofol region within a close proximity to a single older double-roomed
compound. This arrangement suggested a later settlement pattern more focused on the
lower coastal flats.
The late sea-level decline documented by Athens (1995) which led to the accumulation
of greater lowlands would provide an environmental cause for this change in settlement
pattern. Further it is possible that this change from 1062-1362 AD could also explain a
lack of dates within the period representing a lowered population as the changing sealevels may have effected reefs leading to a lowered resource base. Nevertheless the
environmental history for this time is still yet to be fully understood.
However, an alternative theory presented itself later in the project, that an overall higher
population occurred during the later period and that the survey suffered from a underrepresented sample in the uplands. The subsequent reconnaissance survey to locate
additional sites for registration revealed additional sites throughout the valley believed to
be from the later time period as well.
Within the late period upland sites, at least two more types of structures were seen in
the Upper Tofol complex (A11-34) and at the Middle Tofol platform (A11-27). The
second of these, the Middle Tofol platform (A11-27) appears to represent an
intermediate stage between the two structures types identified before. This site was
dated to 1200 AD (Beardsley 2007) and fits nicely within the proposed timeframe.
Also of interest at site A11-27 is the mix of features clearly associated with the
Japanese period and the prehistoric time. While prehistoric features may be found
throughout the entirety of the valley it is interesting that Japanese period features are
only found here in association with the World War II build-up. Beardsley (2007) noted
that this particular part of the valley was characterized by a “bottleneck” where the
mountain ridge comes close together with only a narrow stream bed of flat land to enter
through. In this way the geography creates a natural defense that was utilized by the
Japanese and prehistoric settlement alike.
50
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Fig. 24. location of early (blue triangle) and late (yellow circle)prehistoric site types
51
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Perhaps then the construction of the transitional style structures there can be
associated with a time period of conflict. This would then be followed by a time of
peace associated with the Lower Tofol ceremonial site in the later style of single-room
platform. This period could then be followed by a movement into the more defensive
outpost of the Upper Tofol complex. Stories told by elders have suggested that the
movement deep into the valleys were defensive and the story of Finol Tokosra, the high
chief who was assassinated, tells of great conflict. The history that is revealed is then
on of peaceful relations marked by widespread settlement particularly into the Lower
areas, and times of conflict marked by dense settlement within naturally defensive
locations. While these conclusion are only tentative they provide a basis for research
questions for future projects in neighboring valleys which would be expected to be
similarly effected by the island-wide politics.
Regardless, the discovery of these additional sites supports the alternative conclusion
that the later time period was accompanied by population gains that led to increased
settlement throughout the entire valley not just the lowlands. This would suggest that
results from surveys performed thus far suggesting the movement of people to the coast
may be representative of a biased sample and that further studies in the uplands will
reveal additional late periods sites there as well. Additional landscape archaeology
studies are needed of wider valleys, however, to further assess whether these
conclusions are island-wide or specific to the Tofol valley.
Registration
There is a long-standing debate amongst archaeologist as to whether historic structures
lying close together should be lumped together as features of a single site or should be
split into multiple sites within a given area. This is the debate of the lumpers and the
splitters. This debate also occurred for the registration of the sites located within this
survey, particularly the Lower Tofol complex. Initially, it was decided to lump the sites
together into a common site as at one point in time they would have represented a
common community. However, this decision was changed for several reasons. Firstly,
it was found that the sites had been numbered 34 years ago and to change them would
create added confusion. Secondly, it was found that each structure may have its own
history. That one structure could have been built well before the others and
incorporated into the group later as is believed to have occurred in Lower Tofol and
elsewhere, specifically Nefalil (Cordy et al 1985). Thirdly, due to the heavy vegetation it
is possible that structures within a group may be overlooked. Labeling them as
individual sites allows newly discovered sites to be more easily incorporated.
Likiaksa was a splitter. Every feature whether it was an agricultural terrace or a
habitation structure was given a distinct site number. Beardsley was a lumper. Sites
are labeled according to villages that are composed of associated features. For the
purposes of registration the numbering has tried to follow what’s been done in the past.
The sites initially located by Likiaksa, A11-12, A11-15, A11-16 represent individual
platforms and compounds. Those sites initially described by Beardsley, A11-27 &
52
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
A11-32, include larger areas. This difference also reflects the greater density of
features in the Middle Tofol sites as compared to the Lower Tofol sites as well. Sites
A11-33 & A11-34, which have been located by the present survey incorporate both
strategies. A11-33 lies fairly on its own with no significant features around it. However
A11-34 represents a dense complex with a boundary that is still being fully defined.
Since the uplands are some of the least explored areas on the island this may prove to
be a pattern.
Site forms are included in the appendix of this report. The sites were presented to the
Kosrae Island Resource Management Authority (KIRMA) Board who approved the
registration of the sites including sites A11-12, A11-15, A11-16, A11-27, A11-32, A11-33,
A11-34. This represents a sites known at present throughout the entire Tofol valley
which satisfactorily represents the different settlement zones for the Lower, Middle, and
Upper Tofol valleys. It is hoped that this coverage extending throughout the entire
valley will set the example for valley-wide surveys in the near future in Okat and Innem.
All of these sites fulfill criteria D on the National Register nomination form for the US
Department of Interior in that they yield information on the prehistory of Kosrae,
specifically the settlement of Tofol valley. Sites A11-12, A11-16, A11-27, A11-33 fulfill
criteria C in that they embody a site type and a particularly style of construction
particular to different time periods. A11-32 the Finol Tokosra site fulfills criteria A that is
associated with a particular event in Kosrae history.
Additional investigation
Work will continue at the Upper Tofol complex to further map the boundary of the site as
it extends deeper into the valley. The Department of Forestry has reported the
presence of historic sites within its transects in the Okat Valley as well and plans are
made to survey within Okat and Innem valleys. These surveys will be modeled after the
present study. Both valleys have had surveys performed in the past (Welch et al 1990;
Cordy 1983). Like the present project, sites located in the past may be re-located and
new sites discovered. In this way it is hoped that the historic sites of the island may be
registered one valley at a time, allowing settlement patterns of each to be compared.
Across the Federated States of Micronesia, in Yap, Pohnpei, and Kosrae, the prehistoric
period has been viewed as a single static historic context covering two to three
thousand years. In comparison, the last two hundred years of history is divided into
small periods of a few decades based on the influence of different foreign groups. This
discrepancy leads to the indigenous culture being greatly overlooked in favor of
Western cultures. This project has attempted to give greater detail to the ancient culture
by dividing it into different periods based on archaeology and oral history. For now this
report proposes a basic heuristic model that double-room dwellings represent the early
prehistoric while single-room dwellings represent the late prehistoric (see Fig. 27). This
model will provide guidance for future studies while still providing a testable theory to be
refined as more data is acquired. (For a more complete description of the historic
contexts of Kosrae see appendix B)
53
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Attempts have been made to include many photographs, maps, and diagrams into this
report to make it more intelligible to the local community and the scientific community
alike. It is the authors experience that both groups depend highly on visual
representations more than lengthy descriptions. Given the prevalence of computers
and internet at the time of its creation it is also deemed to be more cost-effective to
disseminate the report via CD, flash drive, and facebook than to create a large number
of paper copies. The down-side is that such reports may suffer from being seen as not
fulfilling completely the professional standard set by archaeologists of a highlyprogressed academic track. However, it is deemed more important to share history with
the 99.9% of people who have not achieved such a standard of learning, which includes
those of Micronesia and the rest of the world.
54
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
REFERENCES CITED
Athens, J.Stephen
1990! Kosrae Pottery, Clay, and Early Settlement. Micronesica. 2:17-32.
1994! Landscape Archaeology on a Micronesian High Island: Prehistoric Settlement
!
and Agriculture on Kosrae. Paper presented at the 59th Annual meeting of the
!
Society for American Archaeology, Anaheim, California.
1995! Landscape Archaeology: Prehistoric Settlement, Subsistence, and Environment o
!
Kosrae, Eastern Caroline islands, Micronesia. International Archaeological
!
Institute, Inc., Honolulu.
2007!
!
!
!
Prehistoric Population Growth on Kosrae, Eastern Caroline Islands. In The
Growth and Collapse of Pacific Island Societies: Archaeological and
Demographic Perspectives, ed. by P.V. Kirch & J.L. Rallu, pp 257-277. University
of Hawai`i Press: Honolulu.
Athens, J.S., Jerome V. Ward, & Gail M. Murakami
1996! Development of an Agroforest on a Micronesian High Island: Prehistoric
!
Kosraean Agriculture. Antiquity 70:834-846.
Bath, Joyce E.
1984! A Tale of Two Cities: An Evaluation of Political Evolution in the Eastern Caroline
!
Islands of Micronesia since AD 1000. PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii.
1986! Archaeological Salvage on Water Lines B and D, Lelu, Kosrae. Report for the
!
Kosrae Office of History and Culture, Kosrae.
Bath, Joyce E. and Kanalei Shun
1982! Archaeological Salvage on Water Line C, Lelu, Kosrae. Report for the Kosrae
!
Office of History and Culture, Kosrae.
Bath, Joyce E., Kanalei Shun, and Ross Cordy
1983! Archaeological Investigations at Likihnhluhlwem and Leap (the Kosrae Phase 2
!
Project). Report for the Kosrae Office of History and Culture, Kosrae.
Beardsley, Felicia
2005! Safonfok, Kosrae, Emergence of Complexity: Archaeological Investigation of
!
Prehistoric Settlement in East Micronesia. British Archaeological Reports,
!
Archaeopress: Oxford.
2007! Archaeological Excavation in Tofol, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia: Ground-Truthing
!
Oral History at Site Ko-A11-32. Field Report. Report on file at Kosrae Historic
!
Preservation Office.
55
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
2008! Stone Figures from the Finol Tokosra site, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia. Antiquity
!
82(315).
2012! Phase I: Archaeological Exploration of Menke, Utwe Municipality, Kosrae,
!
Federated States of Micronesia. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation
!
Office.
Bloom, Arthur L.
1970! Paludal Stratigraphy of Truk, Ponape, and Kusaie, Eastern Caroline Islands.
!
Geological Society of American Bulletin 81:1895-1904.
Christian, F.W.
1899! The Caroline Islands. Charles Scribner’s Sons: New York.
Cordy, Ross
1981! Archaeological Investigations in Wiya and Tepat Fal, Kosrae. Historic
!
Preservation Office, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, Saipan.
1982a!Lelu, The Stone City of Kosrae: 1978-1981 Research. Journal of the Polynesian
!
Society 91(1):103-119.
1982b !Archaeological Research on Kosrae (Eastern Caroline Islands). Bulletin of the
!
Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 3: 129-134.
1985! Investigations of Leluh’s Stone Ruins. National Geographic Research 1:255-263.
1993! The Lelu Stone Ruins (Kosrae, Micronesia): 1978-81 Historical and
!
Archaeological Research. Asian and Pacific Series Nr. 10, Social Science
!
Research Institute, University of Hawaii. University of Hawaii Press: Honolulu.
Cordy, Ross (ed.)
1983! Archaeological Survey of Innem, Okat, and Loal, Kosrae Island. Micronesian
!
Archaeological Survey Report Nr. 7. Historic Preservation Office, U.S. Trust
!
Territory of the Pacific Islands, Saipan.
Cordy, Ross, Joyce Bath, Kanalei Shun, and J. Stephen Athens
1985! Archaeological Data Recovery in Central Utwa, Kosrae Circumferential Road.
!
Kosrae Office of History and Culture, Kosrae.
Craib, John L.
1978! Archaeological Surveys for Capital Improvement Projects on Kosrae, Kosrae
!
District, Eastern Caroline Islands. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation
!
Office.
56
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Dickinson, William R.
2001! Paleoshoreline Record of Relative Holocene Sea Levels on Pacific Islands.
!
Earth-Science Reviews 55: 191-234.
2003! Impact of Mid-Holocene Hydro-Isostasic Highstand in Regional Sea Level on
!
Habitability of Islands !in Pacific Oceania. Journal of Coastal Research 19(3):
!
489-502.
2004 ! Impacts of Eustasy and Hydro-Isostasy on the Evolution and Landforms of
!
Pacific Atolls. Paleaogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 213:
!
251-269.
Ehrlich, Paul M.
1981! Historical Background of the Colonial Periods in Lelu Municipality. Historic
!
Preservation Office, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, Saipan.
Fujimoto, Kiyoshi, Toyohiko Miyagi, Takao Kikuchi, and Toshio Kawana
1996! Mangrove Habitat Formation and Response to Holocene Sea-Level Changes on
!
Kosrae Island, Micronesia. Mangroves and Salt Marshes 1(1):47-57.
Graves, Michael W.
1986! Late Prehistoric Complexity on Lelu: Alternatives to Cordy’s Model. Journal of the
!
Polynesian Society 95: 479-489.
Hezel, Francis X.
1979! Foreign Ships in Micronesia: A Compendium of Ship Contacts with the Caroline
!
and Marshall Islands, 1521-1855. Trust Territory Historic Preservation Office,
!
Saipan.
Laird, William E.
1983! Soil Survey of Island of Kosrae, Federated States of Micronesia. U.S. Dept. of
!
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington D.C.
Likiaksa, Clanry
1979! Archaeological Summary Report, Tofol Fal, Lelu. Report on file at Kosrae Historic
!
Preservation Office.
Maxwell, Bruce D.
1982! Floristic Description of Native Upland Forests on Kosrae, Eastern Caroline
!
Islands. Micronesica 18: 109-120.
Merlin, Mark, Robert Taulung, and James Juvik
1993! Sahk Kap ac Kain in acn Kosrae: Plants and Environments of Kosrae. The Office
!
of Historic Preservation, Federated States of Micronesia.
57
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Nunn, Patrick D.
1998! Sea-Level Changes over the Past 1,000 Years in the Pacific. Journal of Coastal
!
Research 14(1): 23-30.
2000! Environmental Catastrophe in the Pacific Islands around A.D. 1300.
!
Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 15(7): 715-740.
Phillip, Alex
1963! Kusaie Folklore of Micronesia: Expedition Around the Island. Report on file at
!
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Rainbird, Paul
2006! The Archaeology of the Conical Clan in Micronesia. In Archaeology of Oceania:
!
Australia and the Pacific Islands, ed. by Ian Lilley, pp. 302-317. Blackwell
!
Publishing: Oxford.
Randall, Richard H. and Barry D. Smith
1991! A Study of Recent Erosion along the Pukusruk and Panyea Coastal Regions of
!
Kosrae, Eastern Caroline Islands. Miscellaneous Report No. 63, University of
!
Guam Marine Laboratory: Guam.
Richards, Z.T. and J-P.A. Hobbs
2011! Prehistoric Pacific Island kings entombed in truncated coral pyramids. Coral
!
Reefs published on-line.
Ritter, Philip L.
1981! The Population of Kosrae at Contact. Micronesica 17:11-28.
Ritter, Lynn Takata and Philip L. Ritter
1982! The European Discovery of Kosrae Island: Accounts by Louis Isidore Duperrey,
!
Jules Sebastian Cesar Dumont D’Urville, Rene Primevere Lesson, Fyedor Lutke,
!
and Friedrich Heinrich von Kittlitz. Micronesian Archaeological Survey Report Ny.
!
13. Historic Preservation Office, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands,
!
Saipan.
Sarfert, Ernst
1919! Kosrae. Vol. 1, Ethnography: General Information and Material Culture. Results
!
of the South Seas Expedition 1908-1910. L. Friedrichsen, de Gruyter & Co.,
!
Hamburg [translated by E.A. Murphy, 1983]
1920! Kosrae. Vol. 2, Non-Material Culture. Results of the South Seas Expedition
!
1908-1910. L. Friedrichsen, de Gruyter & Co., Hamburg [translated by E.A.
!
Murphy, 1983]
58
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Segal, Harvey Gordon
1989! Kosrae: The Sleeping Lady Awakens. College of Micronesia - FSM: Pohnpei.
Sinoto, Yoshiko H.
1982! Report on the Test Excavation of the Bird Cave, Site D-16, on Kosrae Island,
!
East Caroline Islands. Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu.
Swift, Marilyn K., Randy A. Harper and J. Stephen Athens
1990! Studies in the Prehistory of Malem Municipality: Kosrae Archaeology,
!
Micronesian Resources Study. Micronesian Endowment for Historic Preservation,
!
F.S.M. Historic Preservation Office, Pohnpei. International Archaeological
!
Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.
Ueki, Takeshi
1984! Processes of Increasing Social Complexity on Kosrae, Micronesia. PhD
!
Dissertation. Brown University.!
Welch, David J., Judith R. McNeill, and J. Stephen Athens
1990! Intensive Archaeological Survey of the RS-3 Circumferential Road Corridor,
!
Okat Valley, Kosrae, Eastern Caroline Islands, Micronesia. International
!
Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.
Whitesell, Craig D., Colin D. MacLean, Marjorie C. Falanruw, Thomas G. Cole, and Alan
H. Ambacher
1986! Vegetation Survey of Kosrae, Federated States of Micronesia. Berkeley (CA):
!
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range
!
Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin PSW-17.
59
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
APPENDIX A: SITE FORMS
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 12
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
X Early Prehistoric
Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: A11-12 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Common Name:
Lower Tofol double-roomed compound (Thompson 2013)
within the Lower Tofol site complex, or Area 7 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’25.0”, E 163°00’30.5”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the
scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below
towards the Tofol River to the west. This site lies across the stream at the base of the opposite hill.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 18 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 800 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
X agricultural
midden
rockshelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
ritual
Historic:
structure
_____midden
_____object
_____fortification
_____surface scatter
_____subsurface deposit
_____land mark
_____miscellaneous (specify):
60
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Lower Tofol complex consists of a cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites
A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16.
The Lower Tofol double-roomed compound is a low thick-walled structure with two rooms. The southern wall lies
close to a drop-off and has been made thicker, measuring roughly 2 m wide and of larger stones. The larger of the
two rooms is on this side and measures roughly 10 x 11 m. The smaller room lies on the north side and measures 6
x 10 meters with walls only 0.5 m wide. The entrance lies through the smaller room and there is a place midway
through the dividing wall for the path to continue. Within the structure some small stone alignments appeared to
resemble agricultural terraces at A11-15. These are believed to be from the re-use of the site at a later time.
Initially, it would have been used for habitation (Thompson 2013).
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the structure is 16 x 11 m. It is standard practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained
around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should measure 48 x 43 meters, or more generally a 25m radius
from the center of the site.
Date of Construction (if known): believed to be Early Prehistoric period 600-1200AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
shell midden
human remains
faunal material
stone/shell tools
metal
glass
historic ceramics
other (specify):
Type of Soil:
X humus
sand
other ( specify):
clay
X silt
Type of Vegetation at Site: lowland secondary agroforest (bananas, noni tree, eucalyptus, etc)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
X lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
61
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Likiaksa (1979), Thompson (2013)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
X Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
Surface Collection :
Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
Likiaksa (1979) first documented the site as A11-12 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It is described as a
low rectangular enclosure with wall 1 m wide and 1.2 m high. Though its total measurement is listed as 21 x 21 m
and would seem too big, the size of the rooms listed as 5.5 x 11 m and 14 x 11 m match more closely. The
description of the entrance through the patition’s wall connecting the rooms and the paved floor also match the site
as it was relocated in 2013.
The site was relocated in 2013 as part of an intensive survey of the Lower Tofol site complex. At that time the site
was finely mapped with special attention given to any features that may distinguish its use. A specific use could not
be deduced at that time but it was suspected that it may have been an older structure pre-dating the other sites in the
complex that was incorporated into the complex at a later date.
Present Location of Material: no material has ever been collected from the site.
Published References:
Likiaksa, C. (1979) Archaeological Summary Report, Tofol Fal, Lelu. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation
Office.
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
no radiocarbon dates exist for this specific site
Site Integrity:
good
X fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
X agricultural
commercial
not used
not known
park
X other (specify): experimental agroforest (Forestry Department)
Previous Use:
residential
X agricultural
burial/ritual
commercial
not used
not known
other (specify):
62
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Threats to Site:
deterioration
development
none known
other (specify):
private
Ownership:
Thompson
X
public
X vandalism
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance:
The Lower Tofol double-roomed compound represents a common site type associated with settlements during the
Early Prehistoric era. Its existence demonstrates that settlement at that time continued into the lower valleys and
allows for comparison to other sites to understand how settlement changed. At present, it appears that settlement
within the Tofol valley during the Early Prehistoric era was dispersed throughout the valley and then became more
concentrated in defensive positions in the Late Prehistoric era.
Its location near to the Kosrae museum and the Kosrae high school would allow it to be easily used for field trips for
tourists and/or students who would like to see what an untouched archaeological site looks like. Hopefully, this
could lead to the development of interest in archaeology for some students and help the Kosrae historic preservation
office to further develop.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
63
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 13
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
Early Prehistoric
X Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: A11-13 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Common Name:
Lower Tofol hilltop enclosure (Thompson 2013)
within the Lower Tofol site complex, or Area 7 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’26.1”, E 163°00’28.8”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the
scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below
towards the Tofol River to the west. The Lower Tofol hilltop enclosure lies at the switchback turn of the road
leading up to the scenic view. There is a utility pole very close to the site. It lies a bit above the other sites in the
complex.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 25 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 750 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
agricultural
midden
rock shelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
ritual
Historic:
structure
_____midden
_____object
_____fortification
_____surface scatter
_____subsurface deposit
_____land mark
_____miscellaneous(specify):
64
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Lower Tofol complex consists of a cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites
A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16.
The Lower Tofol hilltop-enclosure is a medium-sized, four-sided, one-room structure terraced against the
southwestern hill slope. Remnants of internal features remained but were difficult to fully understand given the poor
preservation of the site.(Thompson 2013). The wall was roughly 0.5 to 1 m high around. Its location raised above
the area provides it with a good view across the area. It believed that the site may date to a later time when conflict
existed between the people of the valley and high chiefs of Lelu and provided a look out.
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the structure is believed to be 9 x 7.5 m. Its western edge was not well defined in 2013 when the
site was measured to be 9 x 6 m and was described as being 9 x 9 m in 1979 when it is believed to have better site
integrity. It is standard practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained around historic sites. Thus the
boundary of the site should measure 25 x 25 meters, or more generally a 25m radius from the center of the site.
Date of Construction (if known): believed to be Late Prehistoric period 1200-1800AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
shell midden
human remains
faunal material
stone/shell tools
metal
glass
historic ceramics
other (specify):
Type of Soil:
sand
X humus
other ( specify):
clay
X silt
Type of Vegetation at Site: lowland secondary agroforest (bananas, noni tree, eucalyptus, etc)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
X lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
65
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Likiaksa (1979), Thompson (2013)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
Surface Collection :
Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
Likiaksa (1979) first documented the site as A11-13 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It is described as a
low enclosure with platform measuring 9 x 9 meters. The wall was said to be 0.8 meter high with no entrances.
Within the enclosure was a rectangular platform, 1.5 x 3.5 meters, abutted against the southwest wall.
The site was relocated in 2013 as part of an reconnaissance survey of the Tofol Valley. At that time it appeared to
have been impacted by erosion and road development. A utility pole had been placed near to the southwest corner
preventing the identification of the internal platform. The structure was found to be 9 x 6 meters though heavy
vegetation meant its western edge was not confidently defined.
Present Location of Material: no material has ever been collected from the site.
Published References:
Likiaksa, C. (1979) Archaeological Summary Report, Tofol Fal, Lelu. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation
Office.
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
Site Integrity:
Site Condition:
Present Use:
X
no radiocarbon dates exist for this specific site
good
fair
X
poor
disturbed
undisturbed
destroyed
residential
agricultural
X commercial
park
not used
not known
residential
X agricultural
burial/ritual
commercial
not used
not known
X other (specify): utility pole
Previous Use:
other (specify):
66
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
deterioration
Threats to Site:
X
none known
private
Ownership:
development
X vandalism
other (specify):
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance:
The Lower Tofol complex as a whole offers an opportunity to compare structures representing different aspects of
the valleys settlement. The Lower Tofol hilltop enclosure is believed to have been used as a defensive look out and
therefore represents a later period of conflict that is documented in oral traditions.
Its location near to the Kosrae museum and the Kosrae high school would allow it to be easily used for field trips for
tourists and/or students who would like to see what an untouched archaeological site looks like. Hopefully, this
could lead to the development of interest in archaeology for some students and help the Kosrae historic preservation
office to further develop.
However, the disturbed nature of the site detracts from its overall significance and makes its future preservation
more difficult.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
67
yes
X
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 15
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
Early Prehistoric
X Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: A11-15 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Common Name:
Lower Tofol habitation site (Thompson 2013)
within the Lower Tofol site complex, or Area 7 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’25.0”, E 163°00’30.5”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the
scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below
towards the Tofol River to the west. The Lower Tofol habitation site lies across the stream within a grove of
eucalyptus trees.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 20 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 750 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
X agricultural
midden
rock shelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
ritual
Historic:
structure
_____midden
_____object
_____fortification
_____surface scatter
_____subsurface deposit
_____land mark
_____miscellaneous(specify):
68
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Lower Tofol complex consists of a cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites
A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16.
The Lower Tofol habitaiton site is the largest structure within the Lower Tofol complex, yet it is also the least
elaborate. A simple wall averaging three stones high, or roughly 0.5 meter formed a terrace platform on three-sides
with the open side facing the mountain ridge. There were no stones found in the center of the platform. It is
believed that this was a large area for the habitation of an extended family. A possible entrance may be seen on the
west side of the structure. This side faces the path leading to the other structures within the area. Small terraces
around the structure appear to be the remains of gardening features (Thompson 2013).
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the structure is 19 x 11 meters. It is standard practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained
around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should measure 51 x 43 meters, or more generally a 25m radius
from the center of the site.
Date of Construction (if known): believed to be Late Prehistoric 1200-1800AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
shell midden
human remains
faunal material
stone/shell tools
metal
glass
historic ceramics
other (specify): basalt vessel, grinding stones
Type of Soil:
X humus
sand
other ( specify):
clay
X silt
Type of Vegetation at Site: lowland secondary agroforest (bananas, noni tree, eucalyptus, etc)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
X lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
69
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Likiaksa (1979), Thompson (2013)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
X Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
Surface Collection :
Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
Likiaksa (1979) first identified the site as A11-15 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It was described as a low
terraced platform measuring 0.5 meter high. It was said to be smaller than the area described above at 9 x 9 m. This
discrepancy is hard to explain other than with the assumption that heavy vegetation prevented the entire site from
being cleared.
The site was relocated in 2013. At that time a eucalyptus tree had fallen on the site and made the boundaries
difficult to find until a large amount of clearing had been performed. It was found to be a simple but large platform
most suitable as a habitation platform.
Present Location of Material: no material was collected
Published References:
Likiaksa, C. (1979) Archaeological Summary Report, Tofol Fal, Lelu. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation
Office.
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
Site Integrity:
No radiocarbon dates exist for this specific site
X good
fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
X agricultural
commercial
not used
not known
park
X other (specify): experimental agroforest (Forestry Department)
Previous Use:
residential
X agricultural
burial/ritual
commercial
not used
not known
other (specify):
70
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
deterioration
Threats to Site:
development
none known
private
Ownership:
X vandalism
X other (specify): falling trees
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance:
The Lower Tofol site complex provides information on the prehistoric settlement of the Tofol valley including
changes in settlement pattern over time. The Lower Tofol habitation site fits into the site type of a single-room
platform that is associated with the Late Prehistoric roughly 1400-1800 AD. Its presence along with the Lower
Tofol ceremonial site shows an increased population in the Lower Tofol area at that time associated with oral
traditions of a movement of people from the mountains to the coast.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
71
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 16
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
Early Prehistoric
X Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: A11-16 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Common Name:
Lower Tofol ceremonial site (Thompson 2013)
within the Lower Tofol site complex, or Area 7 (Likiaksa 1979)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’25.0”, E 163°00’30.5”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the
scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below
towards the Tofol River to the west. The Lower Tofol ceremonial site lies just below the dilapidated building that
was once the Kosrae Historic Preservation Office and the Agricultural building before that.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 20 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 750 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
agricultural
midden
rockshelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
X
ritual
Historic:
structure
_____midden
_____object
_____fortification
_____surface scatter
_____subsurface deposit
_____land mark
_____miscellaneous(specify):
72
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Lower Tofol complex consists of a cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites
A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16.
The Lower Tofol ceremonial site is raised three-sided platform that averages roughly two meters high. The southeast corner was well-intact and showed the original design while the opposite south-west corner was considerably
deflated. Several grinding stones were found at the site as well as a small basalt bowl. At the center of the structure
a small platform was raised above the rest of the surface. Minor excavation of the surface was conducted to better
observe the stones. It was found that six layers of stone formed multiple steps up to a small platform. It is believed
that this central platform was an altar and the site would have been used for ceremonial purposes including the
consumption of seka (Piper methysticum) based on the presence of the grinding stones. The basalt bowl may have
been used to serve seka. A raised stone within the wall opposite of the central platform also appears to possibly be a
seat facing the altar. (Thompson 2013)
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the structure is 16.5 x 11 meters. It is standard practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be
maintained around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should measure 48 x 43 meters, or more generally a
25m radius from the center of the site.
Date of Construction (if known): believed to be Late Prehistoric 1300-1800AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
faunal material
glass
shell midden
human remains
X stone/shell tools
metal
historic ceramics
X other (specify): basalt vessel, grinding stones
Type of Soil:
X humus
sand
other ( specify):
clay
X silt
Type of Vegetation at Site: lowland secondary agroforest (bananas, noni tree, eucalyptus, etc)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
X valleys
X lower elevation secondary forest
steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
73
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Likiaksa (1979), Thompson (2013)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
X Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
X Surface Collection :
Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
Likiaksa (1979) first identified the site as A11-16 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It was described as a
terraced platform elevated 1.4 meters on the downslope side measuring 11 x 10 meters. It was said to be located
25m from the existing Agricultural Office Station.
The site was relocated in 2013 as part of an intensive survey of the Lower Tofol site complex. At that time the site
was finely mapped and was found to be slightly bigger than the previous measurements though the major features fit
within a smaller area matching the previous description. At that time a small, yet elaborate platform was found at
the center of the site with concentric alignments of stone. The presence of this platform, several grinding stones and
a basalt vessel led to the belief that the site was an important ceremonial site that matched oral histories described by
Segal (1989)
Present Location of Material: the remnants of a basalt vessel was collected and is currently held at the Kosrae
Museum.
Published References:
Likiaksa, C. (1979) Archaeological Summary Report, Tofol Fal, Lelu. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation
Office.
Segal, Harvey Gordon (1989) Kosrae: The Sleeping Lady Awakens. College of Micronesia - FSM: Pohnpei.
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
no radiocarbon dates exist for this specific site
Site Integrity:
good
X fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
X agricultural
commercial
not used
not known
park
X other (specify): experimental agroforest (Forestry Department)
Previous Use:
residential
X agricultural
burial/ritual
commercial
not used
not known
other (specify):
74
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
deterioration
Threats to Site:
development
none known
private
Ownership:
X vandalism
X other (specify): erosion
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance:
The Lower Tofol site complex provides information on the prehistoric settlement of the Tofol valley including
changes in settlement pattern over time. The Lower Tofol ceremonial site shows that the complex was used for
more than just habitation. It is also believed to have been a stop on the priestly procession from Utwe to Lelu during
an annual festive ritual during the time of the Lelu ruins.
Its location near to the Kosrae museum and the Kosrae high school would allow it to be easily used for field trips for
tourists and/or students who would like to see what an untouched archaeological site looks like. Hopefully, this
could lead to the development of interest in archaeology for some students and help the Kosrae historic preservation
office to further develop.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
75
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 27
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
X Early Prehistoric
Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
X Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: A11-27 (Beardsley 2007)
Site Common Name:
Middle Tofol platform (Thompson 2013)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’20.3”, E 163°00’28.8”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The site is located next to the Tofol river across from where the main
road running through the valley to the court house connects to the gravel road leading up to the dam. This is a
narrow part of the valley described by Beardsley (2007) as a bottleneck. The site lies just outside of this bottleneck
to the east of the river against the side of the ridge. Features continue upstream through the bottleneck.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 23 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 900 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
agricultural
midden
rock shelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
X
ritual
Historic:
structure
X fortification
_____land mark
_____midden
_____object
_____surface scatter
_____sub surface deposit
_____miscellaneous(specify):
76
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Middle Tofol platform is a tall terraced platform roughly 1.5 to 2 meters high. It resembles site A11-16 in
proportion though is slightly larger in dimension. It differs though in that it has two rooms instead of one. It is
believed to represent a transitional style between the early prehistoric double-roomed enclosures and the later
prehistoric single-room platforms. It is believed that the construction of A11-16 may have quickly followed the
construction of this site. The similarity leads to the belief that this structure might have also been used for
ceremonial purposes given its large size. A Japanese World War II trench may be found at the back of the structure
abutting the ridge. On the other side of the small finger ridge is another trench with two small man-made caves. An
additional prehistoric structure may also be found here. This structure appears to be a double-room enclosure
roughly the same size as other similar features seen elsewhere in the valley. It has been disturbed by a natural
drainage. Other features were also seen on the other side of the Tofol river in the same area which appear to be
stepped platforms.
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the main structure is 32 x 16 meters. However, the combined area of the other features found
further upstream is roughly 100 x 100 meters.
Date of Construction (if known): dated to the Early Prehistoric 1200AD with Japanese era modifications
1920-1940AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
shell midden
faunal material
stone/shell tools
X glass
human remains
X metal
X historic ceramics
X other (specify): metal axe
Type of Soil:
X humus
sand
other ( specify):
clay
X silt
Type of Vegetation at Site: lowland secondary agroforest (bananas, noni tree, eucalyptus, etc)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
X lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
77
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Beardsley (2007), Thompson (2013)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
X Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
X Surface Collection :
X Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
Beardsley (2007) tells how their initial work in the Tofol valley began with an exploratory excavation at A11-27 in
2003. She describes the site as lying next to the Tofol river and the presence of a Japanese era occupation, details
that match observations made in 2013. She also states that the initial occupation was dated to about A.D. 1200.
Further she describes how a large array of sites continue into the well-protected valley. In 2013 the site was
relocated and mapped.
Present Location of Material: material collected is held at the Kosrae Museum
Published References:
Beardsley, F. (2007) Archaeological Excavation in Tofol, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia: Ground-Truthing Oral
History at Site Ko-A11-32. Field Report. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
1200 AD (Beardsley 2007)
Site Integrity:
good
X fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
park
agricultural
commercial
X not used
not known
residential
X agricultural
burial/ritual
commercial
not used
not known
other (specify):
Previous Use:
other (specify):
78
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
deterioration
Threats to Site:
development
X none known
private
Ownership:
vandalism
other (specify):
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance:
This site is believed to represent a transitional style between the early and late prehistoric periods. Given its size it
is also believed to be the location of important village-wide events in the ancient past. It marks the entrance to the
more confined valley that holds a denser array of sites that has been labeled Middle Tofol, marking a transition to
high populations and denser settlement patterns. Additionally the presence of Japanese World War II era trenches
and caves exemplify how the naturally defensive qualities of this part of the valley were utilized during a different
era.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
79
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 32
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
X Early Prehistoric
X Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: A11-32 (Beardsley 2007)
Site Common Name:
Finol Tokosra site (Beardsley 2007),
[also called Finkol Tokosra (Beardsley 2008)]
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’11.0”, E 163°00’24.8”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The site is located across from the unused water treatment plant beside
Tofol river midway up the road to the dam within the confined midsection of the valley known as Middle Tofol.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 35 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 1000 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
midden
X surface scatter
burial
agricultural
rock shelter
pictograph / petroglyph
X subsurface remains
X
ritual
Historic:
structure
_____midden
_____object
_____fortification
_____surface scatter
_____subsurface deposit
_____land mark
_____miscellaneous(specify):
80
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Finol Tokosra site represents the center of the settlement of the valley. It is within this area that a dense semiurban center developed in the Late Prehistoric and the statue-making cult of the Early Prehistoric (Beardsley 2008)
was located. Two double-roomed compounds, site type indicative of the Early Prehistoric are clearly mapped
(Beardsley 2007:79). Additional platforms with multiple alignments of stones forming large terraced steps
indicative of the Late Prehistoric may be also seen.
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the site is 110 x 80 meters and is clearly mapped in Beardsley 2007:79. It is standard practice for a
50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should measure roughly
140 x 110 meters, or more generally a 70m radius from the center of the site.
Date of Construction (if known): dated to the Early & Late Prehistoric 650-1650AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
faunal material
glass
X
shell midden
human remains
stone/shell tools
metal
historic ceramics
X other (specify): carved stone statues covered in clay relief
Type of Soil:
sand
X humus
other ( specify):
clay
X silt
Type of Vegetation at Site: lowland secondary agroforest (bananas, noni tree, eucalyptus, etc)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
X lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
81
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Beardsley (2007)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
X Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
X Surface Collection :
X Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
Beardsley concentrated her study in the Tofol valley on site A11-32 located that she associated with the oral legend
of Finkol Tokosra a king who was assassinated by the people of Tofol valley. She describes the site as being
composed of “extensive feasting areas, elaborate housing compounds with multiple chambers, monumental
architecture, a stone-lined spring and a spring-fed bathing area, a medicine making area, several seka production
areas, faa’faa making areas, kitchens with um, a boulder pavement throughout the entire site, and a defined public
space linked to a private area by sweeping staircases” (2007:35).
Present Location of Material: material collected by Beardsley (2007) is held at the Kosrae Museum
Published References:
Beardsley, F. (2007) Archaeological Excavation in Tofol, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia: Ground-Truthing Oral
History at Site Ko-A11-32. Field Report. Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Beardsley, F. (2008) Stone Figures from the Finkol Tokosra site, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia. Antiquity 82.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
Wk-20594
Wk-20593
Wk-20595
Wk-20598
Wk-20596
Wk-20597
1290-1172 BP (Beardsley 2007)
1295-1012 BP (Beardsley 2007)
504-300 BP (Beardsley 2007)
1135-797 BP (Beardsley 2007)
435-0 BP (Beardsley 2007)
285-0 BP (Beardsley 2007)
Site Integrity:
good
X fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
park
agricultural
commercial
X not used
not known
other (specify):
Previous Use:
residential
agricultural
commercial
not used
other (specify):
82
burial/ritual
X
not known
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
deterioration
Threats to Site:
development
X none known
private
Ownership:
vandalism
other (specify):
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance:
The Finol Tokosra site is the most heavily studied site within the Tofol Valley, is associated with a major legend of
Kosrae’s oral history, and contains artifacts from an early statue-making culture. The site has provided the major
radiocarbon dates that define the time frame for the prehistoric settlement of the valley. Its significance is
unquestionable.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
83
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 33
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
X Early Prehistoric
Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: none
Site Common Name: Upper Tofol double-roomed compound (Thompson 2013)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°19’03.1”, E 163°00’20.3”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The site lies at the end of the road running past the modern waterworks to
the old Japanese dam. From there one crosses the river and walks uphill
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 78 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 1300 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
agricultural
midden
rockshelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
ritual
structure
midden
object
fortification
surface scatter
subsurface deposit
land mark
miscellaneous(specify):
Historic:
84
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Upper Tofol double-roomed compound sits atop the large natural terrace above the Tofol river on its eastern
side. It is upon these expansive terraces raised well above the flood zone of the river that upland sites are typically
found. This site is well terraced against a fairly steep slope by a substantial retaining wall and consists of two
rooms. The larger of the two rooms is on this side and measures roughly 9 x 6.5 m. The smaller room lies on the
north side and measures 6 x 4 meters. The entrance lies through the smaller room and there is a place midway
through the dividing wall for the path to continue. A small central platform was found at the center of the larger
room (Thompson 2013).
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total size of the structure is 15.5 x 7 m. It is standard practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained
around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should measure 47.5 x 39 meters, or more generally a 25m
radius from the center of the site.
Date of Construction (if known): believed to be Early Prehistoric 600-1200AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
shell midden
human remains
faunal material
stone/shell tools
metal
glass
historic ceramics
other (specify):
Type of Soil:
X humus
sand
clay
X silt
X
loam
other ( specify): silty loam beneath a humic layer
Type of Vegetation at Site: secondary upland forest (hibiscus, ginger, mahogany, neubergia, callophyllum,
thespesia, cinnamon)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
X steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
85
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Thompson (2013)
Reconnaissance Survey :
X Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
Surface Collection :
Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
none
Present Location of Material: no material has been collected from the site
Published References:
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
no radiocarbon dates exist for the site
Site Integrity:
good
X fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
park
agricultural
X not used
commercial
not known
X other (specify): experimental agroforest (Forestry Department)
Previous Use:
residential
commercial
agricultural
X not used
other (specify):
86
burial/ritual
not known
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Threats to Site:
Thompson
X deterioration
development
none known
private
Ownership:
vandalism
X other (specify): erosion
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance: The Upper Tofol double-roomed compound is significant as it is the
furthest upland site for a structure of its style within the Tofol valley to date. Thus it provides a measurement of the
size of the Early Prehistoric village.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
87
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Federated States of Micronesia
Kosrae State
Site Register Form
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ko - A- 11- 34
(Island / Municipality / Land Section / Number)
Site Number:
Cultural Period:
Early Settlement
Early Prehistoric
X Late Prehistoric
Whaling
Missionary
German
Japanese
Trust Territory
Previous Site Designation: none
Site Common Name: Upper Tofol complex (Thompson 2013)
Site Traditional Name: unknown
Municipality / Village: Lelu
Map Coordinates: N 05°18’53”, E 163°00’18”
Map Reference: WGS 1984 UTM zone 58
Location relative to permanent feature: The Upper Tofol complex lies roughly 400 meters south, going deeper
into the valley, from the dam on the Tofol river at the end of the gravel road. It lies on the western side of the river.
Approximate Elevation (above sea level): 88 meters
Approximate Distance from shoreline: 1600 meters
Type of site (check all that apply):
Prehistoric:
X residential
burial
agricultural
midden
rock shelter
pictograph / petroglyph
surface scatter
subsurface remains
ritual
structure
midden
object
fortification
surface scatter
subsurface deposit
land mark
miscellaneous(specify):
Historic:
88
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Description:
The Upper Tofol complex consists of three major features: a stepped tomb that measures 10 x 10 meters, a singleroomed enclosure measuring 17 x 14 m, and a platform, measuring 5 x 6 m surrounded by a terrace wall 17 x 13 m.
These sites all lie within 24-30 meters of each other and are therefore within the 16m buffer zone surrounding each
of the historic sites. They are all believed to be from a common time frame and closely associated with each other.
Approximate size (meter) and shape of site boundaries:
The total area of the site measures 60 x 100 meters. However, it was found that the site continued towards the
mountain. As time did not allow to delineate and record the entire site this initial portion is registered as a single site
representative of the rest of it. The rest of the site should be registered in the future as a new site associated with this
one.
Date of Construction (if known): believed to be Late Prehistoric 1300-1800AD
Depth of Cultural Deposit: surface
Associated Cultural Material:
pottery
shell midden
human remains
faunal material
stone/shell tools
metal
glass
historic ceramics
other (specify):
Type of Soil:
X humus
sand
clay
X silt
X
loam
other ( specify): silty loam beneath a humic layer
Type of Vegetation at Site: secondary upland forest (hibiscus, ginger, mahogany, neubergia, callophyllum,
thespesia, cinnamon)
Environmental Zone:
Main Island:
Outer Islands/Atolls :
coastal beach
coastal plain
mangrove Swamp
X stream / river
lower elevation secondary forest
X valleys
X steep slope transitional zone
high elevation slope, ridges and plateaus
coastal beach
coastal flat lands
rocky coral brim / coast
89
coastal strand vegetation
interior swamp land
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Research performed at the site to date:
Thompson
Thompson (2013)
X Reconnaissance Survey :
Intensive Survey :
X Mapping :
Surface Collection :
Subsurface Excavation :
Previous description of site (no. of structures, no. of features, types of cultural material):
none
Present Location of Material: no material has been collected from the site
Published References:
Thompson, A. (2013) Archaeological Survey of the Lower and Upper Tofol sites, Kosrae, Eastern Micronesia.
Report on file at Kosrae Historic Preservation Office.
Radiocarbon Dates (if any):
no radiocarbon dates exist for the site
Site Integrity:
good
X fair
poor
Site Condition:
disturbed
X undisturbed
destroyed
Present Use:
residential
park
agricultural
X not used
commercial
not known
X other (specify): experimental agroforest (Forestry Department)
Previous Use:
residential
commercial
agricultural
X not used
other (specify):
90
burial/ritual
not known
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Threats to Site:
Thompson
X deterioration
development
none known
private
Ownership:
vandalism
X other (specify): erosion
X
public
both
Name of Property Owner: government land
Address of Property Owner:
Name of Occupant if different than Owner: none
Address of Occupant:
Archaeological or Historical Significance: The Upper Tofol complex is significant as it is the furthest upland site
to be identified in the Tofol valley and continues into the mountain for an undetermined distance. Oral traditions tell
that people of the Tofol valley sought refuge from conflicts with the high chiefs of Lelu by heading into the
mountains. This site may represent this time period. As the uplands are the least studied area on the island it is a yet
unanswered question of how deep settlement went into the mountains. This site thus represents a valuable source of
potential information about the prehistory of Kosrae.
Site Recorder:
Adam Thompson
Organization:
FSM Archaeologist
Date:
21 July 2013
Site recommended for future FSM Register Nomination:
Review Board Comments:
91
X
yes
no
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
APPENDIX B: HISTORIC CONTEXTS & STRATEGIES
The following pages outline historic contexts for the island of Kosrae, their
corresponding property types, preservation goals, strategies, criteria, and priority to
guide present and future historic preservation projects.
Early Settlement of Kosrae (0-500 AD)
This period of Kosrae’s history is marked by a very specific and rare property type as it
represents only a small colonizing population settling a specific environment. The only
site to be found within this earliest period of Kosrae’s history is at Katem, a formerly
walled compound on the southeast side of Lelu ruins [Layer VI of TP-9/10 of Athens
subsurface deposits in deep sand including pottery (Athens 1995)]. This therefore
may be considered the type site (A1-1). The settlement is marked by a specific artifact
type as well in the form of the only known pottery to be discovered on Kosrae.
Cordy also obtained early dates at Wiya (D15-1) of 1855 BP (Cordy 1981a) for a
tridacna shell found on the surface that was believed to have been dug up from a
garbage pit and therefore out of context. This site should be offers the best
opportunity to further investigate this historic context.
preservation goal: to discover additional deposits and further investigate D15-1
strategy: Given the rarity of these sites it is not practical to actively excavate for these
deep sites which take considerable digging and possibly a water pump as they lie
below the water table due to the subsidence of the island and as other cultural layers
would be expected to lie above these deep deposits. Instead monitoring of largescale excavations in deep sands offers a more efficient and opportunistic strategy.
However, the date obtained at D15-1 offers an opportunity for further investigation that
could be of interest to archaeologists at academic institutions.
criteria: radiocarbon dates within the given range and/or pottery-bearing deposits
priority: low, due to the difficulty of finding such rare sites
92
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Early Prehistoric Kosrae (500-1300 AD)!
This period is marked by double-roomed compounds of stacked basalt rocks in a
rectilinear alignment with a wall transecting its middle creating a smaller room roughly
one-third the area of the whole and a larger room two-thirds the whole. Many times a
low platform may be found at the center of the larger room but not necessarily always.
Sites such as these may be seen in Menke, Innem and Tofol valleys. Additional sites
that appear to be in this time period include agricultural terraces and stone pavings
identified in the upland Tofol valley, large tiered structures identified as temples in
Menke valley, and (Cordy). Previous studies have shown that these sites are likely to
be found further upland though they may be evenly distributed across the valley as
well. These sites are also marked by ceramic-covered stone statuary as identified in
Tofol valley at site A11-32 (Beardsley 2007), at Menke (Beardsley 2011), and at Tepat
(Cordy 1981). This period is marked by more dispersed populations .
preservation goal: assess the distribution of such sites
strategy: The largest area where these sites may be found yet to be fully investigated is
the upland areas. Reports from the Department Forestry and the Kosrae Conservation
Society have identified potential sites from this historic context in the upland mountains
that are difficult to reach. The Kosrae HPO should attempt to accompany these and
other departments when they go into the uplands.
Plans for climate change adaptation have recommended that future development focus
more in the uplands. Monitoring of road and utility developments as they move deeper
into the mountain are also recommended, including road-side surveys.
criteria: Basalt stone structures intact enough to show a clear double-roomed
configuration, the presence of statuary or dates within the given time period.
priority: high, a large amount of un-surveyed land still exists
93
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Late Prehistoric Kosrae (1300-1800 AD)
This period is marked by structures made of coral blocks and/or basalt stone with a
three-sided alignment to form a terrace. These sites have been identified in Tofol,
Innem, Loal, Okat, Yela/Yal, etc. These sites are found more predominantly along the
coastal mountain ridge just inside of the mangroves (Loal, Okat, Yal, Nefalil, Lela) at
times forming large complexes of 8-11 structures. These complexes are believed to be
the dwellings of low chiefs connecting the commoners to Lelu island. and in the
lowland valley streams (Tofol and Innem). This time period appears to be marked by
higher populations with a more developed hierarchy and greater population densities
focused closer to the coast. It is also at this time that the use of prismatic basalt stone
is adopted including the ruins at Lelu island. Additional features within this historic
context include artificial islets and tomb features such as at Yela.
preservation goal: assess the distribution of such sites as it relates to settlement
patterns, assess relationship between sites across the island including the difference
between those with prismatic stone and those without.
strategy: As many of these sites may be found in the lowlands near to the modern
population road-side surveys are recommended along with the identification of local
informants who know about the location of such complexes.
criteria: well-preserved terrace platforms, the use of prismatic basalt, or dates falling
within the given range.
priority: medium, a large number of sites have already been found
94
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Note on Early Prehistoric and Late Prehistoric sites
Many of the sites within these two historic contexts fall within overlapping geographic
areas. In fact, there is reason to believe that sites dating to the early prehistoric period
continued to be used in the late prehistoric. Previous studies have treated these two
time periods as the same. However, as the combined time period of these two historic
contexts covers more than a thousand years and there are specific features that
appear to fall within early and later contexts efforts are being made to better define
these two contexts as distinct in order to understand changes in settlement pattern as
they relate to environmental changes across the period including changes in sea-level
and changes in culture such as within the social hierarchy.
preservation goal: to further distinguish between early and late prehistoric contexts
strategy: Surveys should attempt to focus on entire valleys to assess the frequency of
sites specific to the two contexts and when the budget allows to date such sites. This
strategy follows a landscape archaeology approach first developed for Pacific Island
valley systems by Roger Green.
priority: medium, effort were made by the 2013 Lower and Upper Tofol project
Note on the Lelu Ruins
While Lelu ruins fits within the Late Prehistoric context it represents a unique and
special site of international significance. Efforts are currently underway to nominate it
along with Nan Madol as a World Heritage site. The successful nomination to the
World Heritage List will require a management plan.
preservation goal: to clean-up Lelu and maintain an improved look for the site,
including new signage
strategy: contact the Lelu Landowners Authority to discuss management
95
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Whaling period (1800-1850AD)
This period is marked by underwater shipwreck such as that of Bully Hayes ship the
Leonora (C31-1) in Utwe harbor, the whaling ship Waverly in Lelu harbor (A30-1) and
the Lelu harbor site (shown below) where whales were harvested.
preservation goal: to preserve these sites
strategy: monitoring through underwater surveys.
priority: medium, these are significant sites but are difficult to work on
Missionary period (1850-1880AD)
This period is represented by the Missionary school in Walung.
preservation goal: to preserve structures
strategy: monitoring
German period (1880-1910AD)
There is a lack of sites within this period.
preservation goal: locate more sites
strategy: seek out local informants
Japanese period (1910-1940AD)
This period is marked by two integrated contexts of the early Japanese civil
government (1920-1930) and the WWII military buildup (1930-1940) which directly
effected most of the previous civil sites and is now most common. The most notable
site from the civil period are charcoal kilns (D6-5, D6-17). While Japanese military sites
are composed of pillboxes, the radio station, Japanese stairs, and tunnels found
throughout the island, a notable example of which may be found at Mt. Oma.
preservation goal: to identify the distribution of WWII sites around the island
Strategy: Most military sites have been found to be located in the Malem district and a
large-scale survey project focused in this region is being planned for 2014. The
previous documentation of local interviews on the subject should assist in the location
of these sites. This project will also be coordinated with the activities of the Kosrae
Conservation Society at Mt. Oma.
criteria: identification by local informant as a WWII site, or historic record.
priority: high, project identified for 2014
96
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Trust Territory period 1940-1960
The one significant site within this period was the old Lelu church which was recently
destroyed in the construction of the new Lelu church. Efforts were made to preserve
the old church by the Kosrae Historic Preservation Office and Kosrae Island Resource
Management Authority (KIRMA) board. These efforts were unsuccessful as the
community of Lelu rallied against them.
preservation goal: identify if any other significant sites exist
priority: low
2013 results
In 2013, an intensive survey project was conducted in the Lower and Upper Tofol valley
and a reconnaissance survey was performed in the Lower Yela Valley around the
proposed conservation easement. These surveys located and registered sites within
three historic contexts: the Early Prehistoric (600-1200 AD), the Late Prehistoric
(1200-1800 AD), and the Japanese period (1920-1940 AD). An effort was also made
within the Tofol project to identify distinguishing characteristics between the Early and
Late Prehistoric periods. Theoretically, it is believed that double room structures are
earlier than single-room structures.
Early Prehistoric
A11-12,27,32, 33: double-roomed compounds
A11-27: double-roomed platform
Late Prehistoric
A11-15, 16, 32, D6-11: single-room platforms
A11-13, 34: single-rooms enclosures
D6-18: tomb structure
Japanese period
D6-17: charcoal kiln
97
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
APPENDIX C: KOSRAE STATE SITE REGISTRATION FORMS
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Lower Tofol double-roomed compound
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Lower Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
0.5 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
163°00’30.5”
Northing
05°19’25.0”
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E ______________________ N ____________________________
2. E ______________________ N ____________________________
3. E ______________________ N ____________________________
4. E ______________________ N ____________________________
98
Ko-A-11-12
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
99
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: ____Reconnaissance X Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, latte site, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is an early
prehistoric residential site
that may have been re-used for agricultural purposes in the late prehistoric
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent ___Good
X Fair ___Deteriorated ___Ruin
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger ____Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
Certain
____Present Danger _____ Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
__________________________
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
100
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
X 600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
____ 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
________________________________________________________________
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent ___Good
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent ___Good
X Fair ___Poor
X Fair ___Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent ___Good ___Fair
X Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
early prehistoric settlement patterns
101
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature;
terrain and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
Likiaksa (1979) first documented the site as A11-12 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It is described as a
low rectangular enclosure with two rooms and walls 1 m wide and 1.2 m high. Though its total measurement is
listed as 21 x 21 m and would seem too big, the size of the rooms listed as 5.5 x 11 m and 14 x 11 m match more
closely. The description of the entrance through the partition’s wall connecting the rooms and the paved floor also
match the site as it was relocated in 2013. The site was relocated in 2013 as part of an intensive survey of the Lower
Tofol site complex. At that time the site was finely mapped with special attention given to any features that may
distinguish its use. The structure is made of large basalt cobbles and contains the dispersed remnants of a central
platform. The structure is believed to pre-date the other structures within the immediate area and the disturbed
platform to be the result of disturbance from agricultural activity.
The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern
side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below towards the Tofol River to the west. This site
lies across the stream at the base of the opposite hill. The Lower Tofol complex consists of a cluster of four
structures found in close proximity to each other, sites A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16. The Lower Tofol
double-roomed compound is a low thick-walled structure with two rooms. The southern wall lies close to a drop-off
and has been made thicker, measuring roughly 2 m wide and of larger stones. The larger of the two rooms is on this
side and measures roughly 10 x 11 m. The smaller room lies on the north side and measures 6 x 10 meters with
walls only 0.5 m wide. The entrance lies through the smaller room and there is a place midway through the dividing
wall for the path to continue. Within the structure some small stone alignments appeared to resemble agricultural
terraces at A11-15. These are believed to be from the re-use of the site at a later time. Initially, it would have been
used for habitation.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative of
its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Lower Tofol double-roomed compound represents a common site type associated with settlements during the
Early Prehistoric era. Its existence demonstrates that settlement at that time continued into the lower valleys and
allows for comparison to other sites to understand how settlement changed. At present, it appears that settlement
within the Tofol valley during the Early Prehistoric era was dispersed throughout the valley and then became more
concentrated towards the coast and later in defensive positions in the Late Prehistoric era.
Its location near to the Kosrae museum and the Kosrae high school would allow it to be easily used for field trips for
tourists and/or students who would like to see what an untouched archaeological site looks like. Hopefully, this
could lead to the development of interest in archaeology for some students and help the Kosrae historic preservation
office to further develop.
102
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
103
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-12.
104
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological Map of A11-12
105
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of A11-12
106
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
13 August 2013
KHPI No.:
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Lower Tofol hilltop enclosure
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Lower Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
0.2 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
163°00’28.8”
Northing
05°19’26.1”
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E ______________________ N ____________________________
2. E ______________________ N ____________________________
3. E ______________________ N ____________________________
4. E ______________________ N ____________________________
107
Ko-A-11-13
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
108
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: X Reconnaissance
Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is an late prehistoric
platform that
appears to have been used as an outlook during times of conflict
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent ___Good
Fair
X Deteriorated ___Ruin
5. Danger:
No Known Future Danger ____Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
Certain
____Present Danger X Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe: disturbed by previous road
development and utility pole construction
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
109
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
________________________________________________________________
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent ___Good
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent ___Good
Fair
Fair
X Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent ___Good ___Fair
X Poor
X Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
conflict in the late prehistoric
110
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature;
terrain and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
Likiaksa (1979) first documented the site as A11-13 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It is described as a
low enclosure with platform measuring 9 x 9 meters. The wall was said to be 0.8 meter high with no entrances.
Within the enclosure was a rectangular platform, 1.5 x 3.5 meters, abutted against the southwest wall. The site was
relocated in 2013 as part of a reconnaissance survey of the Tofol Valley. At that time it appeared to have been
impacted by erosion and road development. A utility pole had been placed near to the southwest corner preventing
the identification of the internal platform. The structure was found to be 9 x 6 meters though heavy vegetation
meant its western edge was not confidently defined.
The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern
side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below towards the Tofol River to the west. The
Lower Tofol hilltop enclosure lies at the switchback turn of the road leading up to the scenic view. There is a utility
pole very close to the site. It lies a bit above the other sites in the complex. The Lower Tofol complex consists of a
cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16. The
Lower Tofol hilltop-enclosure is a medium-sized, four-sided, one-room structure terraced against the southwestern
hill slope. Remnants of internal features remained but were difficult to fully understand given the poor preservation
of the site. The wall was roughly 0.5 to 1 m high around. Its location raised above the area provides it with a good
view across the area. It believed that the site may date to a later time when conflict existed between the people of
the valley and high chiefs of Lelu and provided a look out.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative of
its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Lower Tofol complex as a whole offers an opportunity to compare structures representing different aspects of
the valleys settlement. The Lower Tofol hilltop enclosure is believed to have been used as a defensive look out and
therefore represents a later period of conflict that is documented in oral traditions.
Its location near to the Kosrae museum and the Kosrae high school would allow it to be easily used for field trips for
tourists and/or students who would like to see what an untouched archaeological site looks like. Hopefully, this
could lead to the development of interest in archaeology for some students and help the Kosrae historic preservation
office to further develop.
However, the disturbed nature of the site detracts from its overall significance and makes its future preservation
more difficult.
111
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
112
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-13.
113
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-13
114
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of A11-13
115
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Lower Tofol habitation site
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Parcel No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Lower Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
0.5 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
163°00’30.5”
Northing
05°19’25.0”
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E ______________________ N ____________________________
2. E ______________________ N ____________________________
3. E ______________________ N ____________________________
4. E ______________________ N ____________________________
116
Ko-A-11-15
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
117
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: ____Reconnaissance X Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is an late prehistoric
residential site
that appears to have been used by the common people
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Deteriorated ___Ruin
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger ____Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
Certain
Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
____Present Danger
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
118
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
________________________________________________________________
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent
X Good ___Fair
Poor
Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
late prehistoric settlement patterns
119
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature; terrain
and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
Likiaksa (1979) first identified the site as A11-15 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It was described as a low
terraced platform measuring 0.5 meter high. It was said to be smaller than the area described above at 9 x 9 m. This
discrepancy is hard to explain other than with the assumption that heavy vegetation prevented the entire site from
being cleared. The site was relocated in 2013. At that time a eucalyptus tree had fallen on the site and made the
boundaries difficult to find until a large amount of clearing had been performed. It was found to be a simple but
large platform most suitable as a habitation platform.
The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern
side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below towards the Tofol River to the west. The
Lower Tofol habitation site lies across the stream within a grove of eucalyptus trees. The Lower Tofol complex
consists of a cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, &
A11-16. The Lower Tofol habitaiton site is the largest structure within the Lower Tofol complex, yet it is also the
least elaborate. A simple wall averaging three stones high, or roughly 0.5 meter formed a terrace platform on threesides with the open side facing the mountain ridge. There were no stones found in the center of the platform. It is
believed that this was a large area for the habitation of an extended family. A possible entrance may be seen on the
west side of the structure. This side faces the path leading to the other structures within the area. Small terraces
around the structure appear to be the remains of gardening features.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative
of its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Lower Tofol site complex provides information on the prehistoric settlement of the Tofol valley including
changes in settlement pattern over time. The Lower Tofol habitation site fits into the site type of a single-room
platform that is associated with the Late Prehistoric roughly 1400-1800 AD. Its presence along with the Lower
Tofol ceremonial site shows an increased population in the Lower Tofol area at that time associated with oral
traditions of a movement of people from the mountains to the coast.
120
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
121
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-15.
122
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-15
123
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of North eastern corner of A11-15
124
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
A-11-16
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Lower Tofol ceremonial site
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Lower Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
0.5 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
163°00’30.5”
Northing
05°19’25.0”
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E ______________________ N ____________________________
2. E ______________________ N ____________________________
3. E ______________________ N ____________________________
4. E ______________________ N ____________________________
125
Ko-
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
126
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: ____Reconnaissance X Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is a late prehistoric
ceremonial site
based on the presence of sakau pounding stones and a basalt drinking vessel and the strictly ceremonial
use of sakau in the prehistoric time.
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion, tree harvesting
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Deteriorated ___Ruin
Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger
Certain
____Present Danger
Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
127
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
________________________________________________________________
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent
X Good ___Fair
Poor
Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
ceremonial platforms of the late prehistoric
128
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature; terrain
and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
Likiaksa (1979) first identified the site as A11-16 within the part of Tofol he called Area 7. It was described as a
terraced platform elevated 1.4 meters on the downslope side measuring 11 x 10 meters. It was said to be located
25m from the existing Agricultural Office Station. The site was relocated in 2013 as part of an intensive survey of
the Lower Tofol site complex. At that time the site was finely mapped and was found to be slightly bigger than the
previous measurements though the major features fit within a smaller area matching the previous description. At
that time a small, yet elaborate platform was found at the center of the site with concentric alignments of stone. The
presence of this platform, several grinding stones and a basalt vessel led to the belief that the site was an important
ceremonial site that matched oral histories described by Segal (1989).
The Lower Tofol complex is located below the hill that provides the scenic outlook in Tofol. It is on the southern
side of the hill leading towards the valley. A small stream runs below towards the Tofol River to the west. The
Lower Tofol ceremonial site lies just below the dilapidated building that was once the Kosrae Historic Preservation
Office and the Agricultural building before that. The total size of the structure is 16.5 x 11 meters. It is standard
practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should
measure 48 x 43 meters, or more generally a 25m radius from the center of the site.
The Lower Tofol complex consists of a cluster of four structures found in close proximity to each other, sites
A11-12, A11-13, A11-15, & A11-16. The Lower Tofol ceremonial site is raised three-sided platform that averages
roughly two meters high. The south-east corner was well-intact and showed the original design while the opposite
south-west corner was considerably deflated. Several grinding stones were found at the site as well as a small basalt
bowl. At the center of the structure a small platform was raised above the rest of the surface. Minor excavation of
the surface was conducted to better observe the stones. It was found that six layers of stone formed multiple steps
up to a small platform. It is believed that this central platform was an altar and the site would have been used for
ceremonial purposes including the consumption of seka (Piper methysticum) based on the presence of the grinding
stones. The basalt bowl may have been used to serve seka. A raised stone within the wall opposite of the central
platform also appears to possibly be a seat facing the altar. (Thompson 2013)
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative
of its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Lower Tofol site complex provides information on the prehistoric settlement of the Tofol valley including
changes in settlement pattern over time. The Lower Tofol ceremonial site shows that the complex was used for
more than just habitation. It is also believed to have been a stop on the priestly procession from Utwe to Lelu during
an annual festive ritual during the time of the Lelu ruins. Its location near to the Kosrae museum and the Kosrae
high school would allow it to be easily used for field trips for tourists and/or students who would like to see what an
untouched archaeological site looks like. Hopefully, this could lead to the development of interest in archaeology
for some students and help the Kosrae historic preservation office to further develop.
129
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
130
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-16.
131
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-16
Close-up map of central platform
132
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of southern wall of A11-16
133
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Oral Historical record of ceremonial procession from Menke to Lelu through Tofol
“After the month of feasting and festivity, the king would go into seclusion in a special
compound in Lelu...While the king was in seclusion there was priestly activity dedicated
to Sinlaku. Priests from her village in Utwe on the south side walked all the way to Tofol,
blowing the trumpet shell. Then they proceeded by canoe into the canal at Lelu. They
carried a special kind of spear and knots of coconut leaflets, necklaces, a basket with
certain kinds of shells in it and bleached taro leaves. When they arrived in Lelu, seka
was pounded and ceremoniously served. The bleached taro leaves were torn into strips
and tied around the king’s and queen’s wrists while the priests chanted and held the
hands of the Togusra and his wife” (Segal 1989, 29)
134
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
A-11-27
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Middle Tofol platform
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Middle Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
2.5 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
Northing
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E 163°00’27.9”
N
05°19’18.7”
2. E 163°00’25.7”
N
05°19’19.9”
3. E 163°00’25.2”
N
05°19’20.8”
4. E 163°00’28.8”
N
05°19’20.3”
135
Ko-
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
136
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: ____Reconnaissance X Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is an early prehistoric
platform that represents a transition period in structure type between the early and late periods.
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion,
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Deteriorated ___Ruin
Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger
Certain
Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
____Present Danger
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
137
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
1200 AD (Beardsley 2007)
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent
X Good ___Fair
Poor
Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
_______________________________________________________________________
138
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature; terrain
and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
Beardsley (2007) tells how their initial work in the Tofol valley began with an exploratory excavation at A11-27 in
2003. She describes the site as lying next to the Tofol river and the presence of a Japanese era occupation, details
that match observations made in 2013. She also states that the initial occupation was dated to about A.D. 1200.
Further she describes how a large array of sites continue into the well-protected valley. In 2013 the site was
relocated and mapped.
The site is located next to the Tofol river across from where the main road running through the valley to the court
house connects to the gravel road leading up to the dam. This is a narrow part of the valley described by Beardsley
(2007) as a bottleneck. The site lies just outside of this bottleneck to the east of the river against the side of the
ridge. Features continue upstream through the bottleneck.
The Middle Tofol platform is a tall terraced platform roughly 1.5 to 2 meters high. It resembles site A11-16 in
proportion though is slightly larger in dimension. It differs though in that it has two rooms instead of one. It is
believed to represent a transitional style between the early prehistoric double-roomed enclosures and the later
prehistoric single-room platforms. It is believed that the construction of A11-16 may have quickly followed the
construction of this site. The similarity leads to the belief that this structure might have also been used for
ceremonial purposes given its large size. A Japanese World War II trench may be found at the back of the structure
abutting the ridge. On the other side of the small finger ridge is another trench with two small man-made caves. An
additional prehistoric structure may also be found here. This structure appears to be a double-room enclosure
roughly the same size as other similar features seen elsewhere in the valley. It has been disturbed by a natural
drainage. Other features were also seen on the other side of the Tofol river in the same area which appear to be
stepped platforms. The total size of the main structure is 32 x 16 meters. However, the combined area of the other
features found further upstream is roughly 100 x 100 meters.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative
of its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
This site is believed to represent a transitional style between the early and late prehistoric periods. Given its size it
is also believed to be the location of important village-wide events in the ancient past. It marks the entrance to the
more confined valley that holds a denser array of sites that has been labeled Middle Tofol, marking a transition to
high populations and denser settlement patterns. Additionally the presence of Japanese World War II era trenches
and caves exemplify how the naturally defensive qualities of this part of the valley were utilized during a different
era.
139
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
140
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-27.
141
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-27
Archaeological map of main platform of A11-27
142
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of eastern corner of main platform of A11-27
143
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
A-11-32
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Finol Tokosra site
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Middle Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
3.8 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
Northing
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E 163°00’24.6”
N
05°19’11.1”
2. E 163°00’27.0”
N
05°19’10.0”
3. E 163°00’28.0”
N
05°19’12.4”
4. E 163°00’26.0”
N
05°19’13.3”
144
Ko-
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
145
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: ____Reconnaissance X Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site spans the early and late
prehistoric periods and is the location of the assassination of a high chief as told in the oral record
roughly three hundred years ago.
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Deteriorated ___Ruin
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger
Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
Certain
Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
____Present Danger
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
146
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known): Wk-20594
Wk-20593
Wk-20595
Wk-20598
Wk-20596
Wk-20597
1290-1172 BP (Beardsley 2007)
1295-1012 BP (Beardsley 2007)
504-300 BP (Beardsley 2007)
1135-797 BP (Beardsley 2007)
435-0 BP (Beardsley 2007)
285-0 BP (Beardsley 2007)
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent
X Good ___Fair
Poor
Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
conflict in the Late Prehistoric
147
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature; terrain
and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
Beardsley concentrated her study in the Tofol valley on site A11-32 located that she associated with the oral legend
of Finkol Tokosra a king who was assassinated by the people of Tofol valley. She describes the site as being
composed of “extensive feasting areas, elaborate housing compounds with multiple chambers, monumental
architecture, a stone-lined spring and a spring-fed bathing area, a medicine making area, several seka production
areas, faa’faa making areas, kitchens with um, a boulder pavement throughout the entire site, and a defined public
space linked to a private area by sweeping staircases” (2007:35).
The site is located across from the unused water treatment plant beside Tofol river midway up the road to the dam
within the confined midsection of the valley known as Middle Tofol. The Finol Tokosra site represents the center of
the settlement of the valley. It is within this area that a dense semi-urban center developed in the Late Prehistoric
and the statue-making cult of the Early Prehistoric (Beardsley 2008) was located. Two double-roomed compounds,
site type indicative of the Early Prehistoric are clearly mapped (Beardsley 2007:79). Additional platforms with
multiple alignments of stones forming large terraced steps indicative of the Late Prehistoric may be also seen. The
total size of the site is 110 x 80 meters and is clearly mapped in Beardsley 2007:79. It is standard practice for a 50’,
or 16 m boundary to be maintained around historic sites. Thus the boundary of the site should measure roughly 140
x 110 meters, or more generally a 70m radius from the center of the site.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative
of its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Finol Tokosra site is the most heavily studied site within the Tofol Valley, is associated with a major legend of
Kosrae’s oral history, and contains artifacts from an early statue-making culture. The site has provided the major
radiocarbon dates that define the time frame for the prehistoric settlement of the valley. Its significance is
unquestionable.
148
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
149
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-32
150
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-32 (Beardsley 2007)
151
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of excavation into burial pit of Finol Tokosra and large basalt stone to cover the area
152
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
The Legend of Finol Tokosra
One day a woman was fishing along the shore. She saw the king and his men coming near her, so she
wrapped her fish in a mat. She did not want to give her fish to him, but in those days, if a king [chief]
asked for something, you were obliged to provide it, or suffer the penalty, which was usually death.
When the king and his men arrived, the fish were still alive and wiggling, making the mat move around
in very odd ways. The woman told the king her baby was wrapped in the mat . But soon, the fish broke
through the mat and revealed themselves. Angry at having been lied to, the king cut off her head.
Her family, who lived in Tofol, wanted revenge. The people of Tofol wanted to remove this king from
power too (he was particularly demanding of them and they were tired of fulfilling all his requests), so
they were in full support of the plot for revenge. They decided to invite the king and his men to a large
celebratory feast. Then, they proceeded to dig a very large hole and gather food for the feast.
On the appointed day, the people of the village called for the king and his men. When they arrived, all
the people of Tofol were already celebrating. They picked up the two canoes with the king and his men
still in them, hoisted them above their heads and passed them to the front of the crowd. There, the
canoes, the king and his men were thrown into the big hole and every one from Tofol picked up a stone
and threw it into the hole, stoning the king and his men to death and filling the hole completely with
stones. Then, the had their feast.
When the king and his men were killed, the people of Tofol smashed the site to hide the grave, then they
fled to the southern end of the island, to Walung and Malem, in fear of reprisal form the king’s supporters
in Leluh, the lagoon islet just offshore from Tofol. From Walung and MAlem we have stories about the
sudden arrival of refugees running from the king. In Malem, they are given land and construct the village
of Lela. According to Clain George (the oldest storyteller on the island), Malem continues to harbor the
only known family on the island from Tofol, the Talley family, descended from those who escaped Tofol
at that time.
When the king and his men were killed, they were covered up and a large basalt stone was moved in to
cover the area and confuse the king’s relatives [see photograph above]. The woman killed by the king
and his men had two grown sons. It is they who planned the revenge of their mother’s death.
-story from Beardsley (2007)
153
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
A-11-33
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Upper Tofol double-roomed compound
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-1
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Upper Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
0.5 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
163°00’20.3”
Northing
05°19’03.1”
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E ______________________ N ____________________________
2. E ______________________ N ____________________________
3. E ______________________ N ____________________________
4. E ______________________ N ____________________________
154
Ko-
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
155
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: X Reconnaissance
Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is an early prehistoric
residential site
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Deteriorated ___Ruin
Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger
Certain
Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
____Present Danger
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
156
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
________________________________________________________________
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent
X Good ___Fair
Poor
Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
_______________________________________________________________________
157
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature; terrain
and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
The Upper Tofol double-roomed compound lies at the end of the road running past the modern waterworks to the
old Japanese dam. From there one crosses the river and walks uphill. The site sits atop the large natural terrace
above the Tofol river on its eastern side. It is upon these expansive terraces raised well above the flood zone of the
river that upland sites are typically found. The surrounding vegetation is typical of the secondary upland forest and
includes mahogany, callophyllum, thespesia, cinnamon, neubergia, and the like. This site is well terraced against a
fairly steep slope by a substantial retaining wall and consists of two rooms. The larger of the two rooms is on this
side and measures roughly 9 x 6.5 m. The smaller room lies on the north side and measures 6 x 4 meters. The
entrance lies through the smaller room and there is a place midway through the dividing wall for the path to
continue. A small central platform was found at the center of the larger room. The total size of the structure is 15.5 x
7 m. It is standard practice for a 50’, or 16 m boundary to be maintained around historic sites. Thus the boundary of
the site should measure 47.5 x 39 meters, or more generally a 25m radius from the center of the site.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative
of its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Upper Tofol double-roomed compound is significant as it is the furthest upland site for a structure of its style
within the Tofol valley to date. Thus it provides a measurement of the size of the Early Prehistoric village.
158
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
159
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-33
160
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-33
161
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of eastern wall of A11-33
162
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Kosrae Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
Date:
A-11-34
KHPI No.:
13 August 2013
A. PROPERTY NAME
1. Common:
Upper Tofol complex
2. Historical / Formerly Known As / Other:
unknown
B. LOCATION
1. Lot / Tract / Land ID or Estate No.:
2. Municipality:
056K00-2
Lelu
3. Land Square and Section:
Tofol
4. Local Place Name of Area:
Upper Tofol
C. GEOGRAPHIC DATA
1. Approximate Acreage:
1.5 acres
2. EASTING / NORTHING. Locate center point for property if one acre or less:
Easting
3.
Northing
Locate at least three points if property is greater than one acre:
1. E 163°00’18” N 05°18’53”
2. E 163°00’12” N 05°18’49”
3. E 163°00’10” N 05°18’48”
163
Ko-
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
D. CLASSIFICATION / USE / ACCESS
1. Category (check one): ____District
X Site ____Building ____Structure ____Object
2. Status (check one or more): ___Occupied X Unoccupied ___Preservation work in Progress
3. Accessible to Public (check one): ____No
____Yes, Restricted
X Yes, Unrestricted
4. Current Use (check one or more as appropriate):
X Agriculture
_____ Commercial
_____ Conservation
_____ Education
_____ Entertainment
_____ Government
_____ Industrial
_____ Military
_____ Museum
_____ Park
_____ Ranch
_____ Residence
_____ Religious
_____ Science
_____ Transportation
_____ Unused
_____ Other
5. Additional Comments on Present Use:
Experimental Agroforest for the Forestry Department
____________________________________________________________________________________
______
E. PROPERTY OWNER
1. Ownership (check one or more as appropriate):
X Government of Kosrae ____Private
2. Owner’s Name:
Kosrae State Government - Office of the Governor
3. Physical Address
Tofol, Kosrae
4. Mailing Address:
PO Box 158, Tofol, Kosrae, 96944
5. Contact Numbers and Fax Number:
691-370-3002 or 691-370-3003
6. Email Address:
7. Lessee(s):
8. Lessee(s) Address:
Additional Information:
Department of Resources and Economic Affairs, 691-370-2017
164
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
F. RECORDS SEARCH: LEGAL DESCRIPTION / LAND TITLE / SURVEYS
1. Land Title and Legal Description Located at (indicate Government Agency):
2. Address:
Kosrae Land Court
PO Box 808, Tofol, Lelu,Kosrae 96944 phone: 691-370-3025
3. Survey Records Located at:
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
4. Date of Survey / Performed by / For:
March-July 2013, Adam Thompson, Kosrae HPO
5. Type of Survey: ____Reconnaissance X Intensive-Detailed
Windshield ____Other,
Specify:_______________________________
X Surface Mapping ____
6. Original Field Notes, Artifacts, Human Remains Located At (indicate what and where these items are
located, person to contact, contact numbers and physical address):
Kosrae Historic Preservation Office
PO Box 568, Tofol, Lelu, Kosrae FM 96944 phone: 370-3078 (Stanton Andrews)
G. DESCRIPTION / CONDITION
1. Type of Property (describe briefly the type of property, such as, pre-contact settlement site, burial
ground, rockshelter, pictograph cave, etc. / include significant features.): The site is a late prehistoric
village site within a defensive refuge believed to be associated with later conflicts mentioned in the oral
record.
2. Known pressures on site: ___No
X Yes, Indicate:
vegetation, erosion
3. Vandalized / artifacts looted? X No ___Yes, Indicate:
_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____
4. Condition: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Deteriorated ___Ruin
5. Danger:
X No Known Future Danger
Possible Future Danger ____Future Danger
Certain
Presently Being Destroyed/Damaged - Describe:
____Present Danger
6. Integrity:
X
Altered / Original Location _____ Altered / Moved _____ Unaltered
165
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
H. HISTORIC CONTEXT / AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1.
The Historic Context of this Property is best classified as (check one or more):
____ 0 – 600 A.D. Early Settlement Period
600 – 1200 A.D. Early Prehistoric Period
X 1200 - 1820 A.D. Late Prehistoric Period
____ 1820 – 1850 A.D. European Discovery & Whaling Period
____ 1850 – 1880 A.D. Missionization Period
____ 1880 – 1910 A.D. German Period
____ 1910 – 1940 A.D. Japanese Civil Occupation
____ 1940 – 1945 A.D. World War II / Japanese Military Occupation
____ 1945 – 1984 A.D. Trust Territory
2. Specific Dates (if known):
________________________________________________________________
3. Areas of Significance (check one or more as appropriate):
X Indigenous / Prehistoric ___Indigenous / Historic ___Agriculture ___Architecture ___Art
___Commerce ___Communications ___Conservation ___Education ___Engineering ___Industry
___Invention ___Landscape ___Architecture ___Literature ___Military ___Music ___Political
___Religion ___Spiritual ___Science ___Social / Humanitarian ___Theater ___Transportation
___Other (Specify)__________________________
4. Importance as Example of Type: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
5. Interpretive Value: ___Excellent
X Good
Fair
Poor
6. Research Potential: ___Excellent
X Good ___Fair
Poor
Poor
7. Local Attitude about Site: __Valuable __Not as Valuable __Not at all Valuable X Ambivalent
__Unknown
8. Suggested Themes:
conflict in the late prehistoric
166
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
I. SITE DESCRIPTION / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
1. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION MUST INCLUDE: Bearings and sources used to locate feature; terrain
and vegetation; size; shape; construction techniques; materials used; condition; surface artifacts or
midden visible; boundary description; boundary justification.
The Upper Tofol complex lies roughly 400 meters south, going deeper into the valley, from the dam on the Tofol
river at the end of the gravel road. It lies on the western side of the river. The Upper Tofol complex consists of three
major features: a stepped tomb that measures 10 x 10 meters, a single-roomed enclosure measuring 17 x 14 m, and a
platform, measuring 5 x 6 m surrounded by a terrace wall 17 x 13 m. These sites all lie within 24-30 meters of each
other and are therefore within the 16m buffer zone surrounding each of the historic sites. They are all believed to be
from a common time frame and closely associated with each other. The total area of the site measures 60 x 100
meters. However, it was found that the site continued towards the mountain. As time did not allow to delineate and
record the entire site this initial portion is registered as a single site representative of the rest of it. The rest of the
site should be registered in the future as a new site associated with this one. The site is difficult to get to due to the
narrow river pass and the significant change in elevation. These characteristics place it in a protective position
within the environment.
2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE MUST INCLUDE: Unusual or important characteristics;
accessibility; interpretive and research potential; evaluation of the site’s importance as a representative
of its class and historic context; recommendations for register category; and other important factors that
contribute to the property’s significance.
The Upper Tofol complex is significant as it is the furthest upland site to be identified in the Tofol valley and
continues into the mountain for an undetermined distance. Oral traditions tell that people of the Tofol valley sought
refuge from conflicts with the high chiefs of Lelu by heading into the mountains. This site may represent this time
period. As the uplands are the least studied area on the island it is a yet unanswered question of how deep settlement
went into the mountains. This site thus represents a valuable source of potential information about the prehistory of
Kosrae.
167
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
168
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
USGS map indicating the location of A11-34.
169
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Archaeological map of A11-34
170
Lower and Upper Tofol Sites, Kosrae!
Thompson
Photograph of northern corner of raised platform at A11-34
171