AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 81:459464 (1990)
The Solomon Islands Project: An Introduction JONATHAN S. FRIEDLAENDER Anthropology Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, P A 19122
KEY WORDS
Genetic distances, Acculturation, Modernization effects. Pacific Islands
ABSTRACT
The twin themes of the Solomon Islands Biomedical Project remain 1)the remarkable genetic heterogeneity of the groups in the Solomons; and 2) the differential responses to these groups to rapid modernization/ acculturation over the past two decades of this long term study. This introduction summarizes the historical and ethnic relationships of the survey groups, their established genetic distances and their rankings with regard to acculturation at the times of their first survey, and changes occurring up to 1985-86. Relevant features of diet, life style, and epidemiology are described.
This series of papers reports analyses of data collected from the 1985 and 1986 field seasons of the Solomon Islands Project, as well as some more sophisticated analyses of materials collected in prior expeditions to the survey groups. Findings of the earlier biomedical expeditions are published or referenced in a recent summary monograph (Friedlaender, 1987).The twin themes of the Solomons Project remain 1) the genetic distinctiveness and remarkable heterogeneity of the groups in the Solomons, and 2) the differential responses of these groups to rapid modernizatiordacculturation during the last two decades, related to the genetic heterogeneity of the groups. Studies on other populations from different regions have outlined a fairly uniform set of health changes that can be predicted to accompany modernization or migration to urbanized areas. To the contrary, we have been most impressed with the heterogeneity of the process. Besides some major distinctions between reference groups in the industrialized West and the Solomons, there are important genetic distinctions among the Solomon Islands groups we have surveyed, and there are environmental differences in their separate experiences, both before and during acculturation. There may also be differences in the responses among Solomon Islands groups to the changing constellation of modernization effects.
This introduction summarizes the historical and ethnic relationships of the survey groups, their established genetic distances, and their rankings with regard to acculturation at the time of their first survey. Relevant features of diet, life style, and epidemiology are described. POPULATION HISTORIES
The Solomon Islands are part of the great island chain that extends eastward from Southeast Asia north of Australia, to New Caledonia, where water crossings between islands reach distances in excess of 60 miles (Fig. 1).Although the archaeological record of this part of the world is still quite sketchy, the accepted scenario today is that modern human populations a t a pre-horticultural technological level reached New Ireland in northern Melanesia by 33,000 B.P., demonstrating an antiquity of settlement for this area of the same order as the Australia New Guinea landmass (Allen et al., 1988). In the Solomons, human presence is now established by at least 28,000 B.P. (Wickler and Spriggs, 1988). The early populations moving through these islands may well have been heterogeneous prior to their settlement, and there was most likely more than one early “migration.” given the long time depth of occupation. Received December 13,1988; accepted June 8,1989
’.60
J.S. FRIEDLAENDER
€
A
N i
of right
Flib
Fig. 1. The Solomon Islands and survey sites on Bougainville and Malaita.
LINGUISTICS
Because of the poor early archaeological record, a great deal of attention has been placed on linguistic relationships. Linguistically, the current inhabitants of the interior of New Guinea and the large island interiors of the Solomons (such as Bougainville) are very heterogeneous. Nevertheless, they are commonly lumped together in a residual linguistic relationship, the “Papuan” or “non-Austronesian” (NAN) languages, distinguishing them from the cohesive Austronesian language group (formerly called Malayo-Polynesian), common through most of the rest of the South Pacific. The Austronesian languages were introduced to the Southwest Pacific by a much more homogeneous group of people who were seafarers originating from Southeast Asia about 6,000 to 7,000 years B.P. They have conventionally been tied to the archaeologicalremains of the Lapita pottery makers in Melanesia, dated
there to 3,500 to 2,000 B.P. These people must have intermarried extensively as they moved through Island Melanesia, and undoubtedly obliterated many of the earlier non-Austronesians in those areas, linguistically and biologically. The seven groups now included in the survey are named in Figure 1-three on Bougainville Island (Nasioi, Nagovisi, Aita); three on Malaita Island (Kwaio, Lau, Baegu); and the Ontong Java atoll population to the north of the main island chain. Linguistically, the populations can be clustered into three groups, which also follow geographic and genetic relationships. The Bougainville groups are all inland non-Austronesian speakers, the Malaita groups are all Austronesian speakers of the same branch, and the Ontong Javanese speak a Polynesian language, a distantly related division of Austronesian. How these relationships should fit with genetic distances is open to question. The Malaitan groups could
461
INTRODUCTION: THE SOLOMON ISLANDS PROJECT
well be an intermixed group of Austronesian and non-Austronesian populations, while the Ontong Java “Polynesians” clearly have had considerable contact with Micronesians and Melanesians during different periods.
For our purposes here, we crudely combined these distance matrices to construct an overall rank of relationship. For the seven populations in the survey, distances for a matrix were rank-ordered from 1 to 21, and the rank orders over three different matrices were averaged-the one derived from blood polymorphisms, the one from male dermatoglyphics, and the one from male odontometrics. The resulting averaged matrix of ranks is presented in Table 1. The dendrogram that is derived from this averaged matrix is very similar to the linguistic and geographic patterns described earlier (Fig. 2). The Lau and Baegu are the closest of any groups, with the Kwaio entering in at a short remove, constituting a Malaita cluster; the Nagovisi and Nasioi from South Bougainville are also a consistent cluster, and the rest of the distances are rather large, with the Aita of North Bougainville tending to enter with the South Bougainville groups; and Ontong Java closest to the Malaita cluster, and farthest away from the Bougainville NAN speakers. These relationships will be important to recall in the following papers.
POPULATION DISTANCE STUDIES
We have carried out extensive studies on the population distances of groups in Bougainville and elsewhere in the Solomons (see Dow et al., 1987; Rhoads, 1987; Rhoads and Friedlaender, 1987; Friedlaender. 1975). While selected blood polymorphisms often suggested different patterns of relationship, the pattern that emerged repeatedly was, first, the considerable genetic similarity of the Lau and Baegu (Malaita Island) on the one hand and the Nasioi and Nagovisi (South BougainvilleIsland) on the other. The Aita of North Bougainville were distinctive in a number of polymorphisms, and the Ontong Java population tended to cluster with the Malaitan groups at a very considerable distance. Other opulation distance matrices were derived rom male and female odontometrics (Harris and Bailit, 19871, male and female dermatoglyphics (Froehlich, 19871, and male and female anthropometr (Rhoads and Friedlaender, 1987). In eac matrix, the smallest distance was that se arating Lau and Baegu from Malaita, an(Pin most matrices the next largest distance separated the Nasioi and Nagovisi of Bougainville. The Kwaio of Malaita most often clustered loosely with the other two Malaita groups, but sometimes clustered with the Bougainville groups. The Ontong Java sample was sometimes quite removed from the rest (most notably in the two dermatoglyphics distance matrices) but sometimes was rather close t o the Malaitans. The Aita of North Bougainville held quite variable positions in these distance matrices, sometimes the most distinctive of all, sometimes in the middle of the entire distribution.
P
i
ACCULTURATION STATUS
Cross-cutting these genetic and geographic clusterings are differences in modernization or acculturation among the groups. There are large and idiosyncratic differences among the groups, their ecologies, and also the manner in which the modern industrialized world has affected them. Nevertheless, it was necessary to rank them with regard to overall modernization in a schematic way. Page and others (1974) first devised a ranking, using eight different criteria, including evidence of the secular trend in height, conversion to Christianity, availability of some form of Western medical care, and formal education. At the time of the initial surveys in 1966-72, the groups were
TABLE 1. Pupulation distance rankings for 7 Solomon Islands societies (auerage ranking o n 3 sets blood polymorphisms, male dermatoglyphics, and male odontometrics) Nasioi Naeovisi Lau Baegu Kwaio
9.0 9.3 11.3 11.7 11.7
Ontong
16.3
12.7 12.0 12.0 18.7
Aita
Nasioi
-
of distances-
:1.7
14.3 11.0 11.0 13.0
10.0
7.7 11.3
12.0
Naeovisi
Lau
Baeeu
Kwaio
1.0 7.7
Java
462
J.S. FRIEDLAENDER POPULATION BOUGAlNVl LLE
AC C U LTU R AT1 0 N
Nasioi
+++
Nagovis I
Stt
Aita
MALAITA
1 1 1 -
+ -
L au
Baegu
GENETIC DISTANCE
+
-
~
Kwaio
ONTONG JAVA
Fig. 2. Genetic distances and acculturation rankings of the 7 survey groups as of 1966-1972.
ranked as presented in Table 2. Even if the exact ranking is open to debate, there was an easy dichotomy to be made between the more and less acculturated groups. Note that the acculturation ranking cross-cuts the genetic and geographic clustering of the groups, so that while the two South Bougainville populations (the Nasioi and Nagovisi) were the most acculturated, the North Bougainville Aita were among the least. In Malaita, the Kwaio and Baegu were among the least acculturated, but the Lau were among the more acculturated. Ontong Java, at that time, was relatively unacculturated. CHANGES TO 1985-86
All the groups were affected by modernization influences in the intervening 14-19 years to the latest surveys in 1985-86. The different degrees to which they have been modernized, and the change in the relative acculturation ranking that may have resulted, is difficult to agree on, except that the differences between the groups have become much smaller. The most obvious change during the interval between surveys has been in Bougainville, where an open pit copper mine has been built in the mid-l970s, providing a transformed economy for the Nasioi, Nago-
visi, and for the Aita. On Malaita, there has also been considerable change in the status of the Lau and Baegu, with a road passing by these two related groups. The remote Ontong Java population has had a dramatic infusion of cash from the sale of trochus shell and beche-de-mer to Southeast Asian food markets, so that their shift in dietary items is every bit as dramatic as elsewhere in the Solomons. The traditional diets of the seven groups were somewhat varied, and have become more uniform with increasing modernization (see Page et al., 1987). The major element in all of the traditional diets was a primary carbohydrate root crop staple, up to 90% wet weight of their diet. In both Bougainville and Malaita, this was originally taro, supplanted in the 1940s by sweet potatoes. In Ontong Java, a swamp variety of taro was the starchy staple of choice. The other carbohydrate sources for all the populations included bananas, plantain, pandanus parts, breadfruit, cassava, yams, and a variety of wild plant foods. Major protein sources included nuts, the occasional feast pig for all but the Ontong Javanese, and fish for all groups, but particularly for the Ontong Javanese, for whom it constituted about 20% by
INTRODUCTION: THE SOLOMON ISLANDS PROJECT
m
Y
2
$1
z"
++ +++* +++*
m + + $ + + + N 'I-;++
-I.+
if
+
463
wet weight of their diet. In areas relatively near the coast, coconuts, with heavy concentrations of saturated fats, were traditionally an important part of the diet, primarily as "grease" for the taro and sweet potato stews and other baked concoctions. The Ontong Java population was, and still is, remarkable for its reliance on green coconuts as a liquid source, there being little water of drinking quality on that island until 1987. Ripe coconuts were most heavily consumed by the Ontong Javanese as well, and least by the highland Aita. With modernization, the major imported items that have become staples are white rice and bread, supplanting and replacing taro and sweet potatoes, and secondarily, doughnuts cooked in animal lard, sugar, salt, tinned mutton and tinned mackerel, cookies, coffee, and tea. Smoking of homegrown tobacco and, in the wealthier areas, cigarettes is very common. These considerations are especially important for the discussions of heterogeneous response among groups to modernization in serum cholesterol, apolipoproteins, glucose metabolism abnormalities, pulmonary function, blood pressure, and body weight increases to follow. None of the populations could be considered malnourished during the last two decades, although some were relatively low in protein consumption. Gardening and carrying burdens while walking are the two activities that lead to the greatest energy expenditure in all groups except the seafaring Ontong Javanese. It was assumed that there was a close correspondence with acculturation and lessened activity levels. Those groups living in the remote hills (Kwaio and Aita) walked long distances over difficult terrain to and from their garden plots, often an hour or two per gardening day. By contrast, the Ontong Javanese and Lau live on the seaside, use canoes, and walk shorter, easier distances to their gardens. Infectious disease load has generally decreased with modernization in general, although the specific nature of the traditional disease burden varied considerably from one area to the next-seaside to hills, atoll to large high island (Stephens and Blumberg, 1987; Friedlaender and Page, 1987). Besides malaria and other typical tropical disease, hepatitis B is extremely common in several of the Solomon Islands populations. As will be shown, evidence of retroviral infections is
464
J.S. FRIEDLAENDER
very apparent, as well. To generalize, prior were all significant contributors. And, of to acculturation, there was extensive heter- course, we are indebted to the hospitality ogeneity in specific disease prevalence from and cooperation of the citizens of the Soone locale to the next, superimposed on the lomon Islands and Papua New Guinea who fairly extensive pattern of genetically based have continued to participate in this series of biological variation. The general effect of surveys. modernization has been to homogenize the LITERATURE CITED patterns-the best analogy is that of separate and formerly isolated islands being Allen J, Gosden C, Jones R, and White J P (1988) Pleistocene dates for the human occupation of New Ireland, flooded by a rising tide of modernization. northern Melanesia. Nature 331:707-709. However, while certain overall effects were Dow M, Cheverud J, and Friedlaender JS (1987) Statisexpectable (e.g., weight gain and blood prestical comparisons of patterns of biological and cultursure increase), these were never uniform al-historical variation. In JS Friedlaender (ed.):The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University across groups. This heterogeneity of rePress, pp. 265-282. sponse is one of the major phenomena we Friedlaender JS (1987) with WW Howells and J G wish to explore in our series of projects. That Rhoads (eds.):The Solomon Islands Project: A Longis why we have extended the genetic and term Study of Health, Human Biology, and Culture Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. epidemiological description of the groups, included a description of genetically based Friedlaender JS (1975)Patterns of Biological Diversity: The Demography, Genetics, and Phenetics of Bougainlipid variation and glucose metabolism difville Islanders. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ferences among them, added materials on Friedlaender JS, and Page LB (1987) Epidemiology. In physiological fitness variation, and added a JS Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 89-124. fine-grained analysis of the relationships of changing fatness and blood pressure dis- Froehlich JW (1987)Fingerprints as phylogenetic markers in the Solomon Islands. In JS Friedlaender (ed.): tributions among and within groups. We The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford Univerbelieve they add new insights to the undersity Press, pp. 175-214. standing of the interplay of genetic back- Harris E, and Bailit HL (1987) Odontometric comparisons among Solomon Islanders and other oceanic peoground and the differential effects of modples. In JS Friedlaender led.): The Solomon Islands ernization. Project, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 215-264. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Our fieldwork has been supported primarily by N.S.F. grants (Anthropology Program), as well as grants from Temple University and others mentioned in specific papers. We are deeply grateful to the Health Ministries, Papua New Guinea Medical Research Unit, and Provincial and Local Government Councils of the separate survey areas who cooperated with us over the years and granted us permission to carry out our field surveys. Members of survey teams not listed as authors deserve special mention. Bettina Lesser was essential to the 1985 field season from inception to conclusion. Tobias Nagurney, Lisa Noll, Frank Richards, Rebecca Lewis, and David Byerley
Page LB, Damon A, and Moellering RC (1974)Antecedents of caridiovascular disease in 6 Solomon Island Societies. Circulation 49:1132-1146. Page LB, Rhoads JG, Friedlaender JS, Page JR, and Curtis K (1987) Diet and nutrition. In J.S. Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 65-88. Rhoads J G (1987) Anthropometry. In JS Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 155-174. Rhoads JG, and Friedlaender JS (1987) Blood polymorphism variation in the Solomon Islands. In JS Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 125-154. Stephens R, and Blumberg BS (1987) Hepatitis B in the Solomon Islands. In JS Friedlaender led.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 327-350. Wickler S, and Spriggs M (1988) Pleistocene human occupation of the Solomon Islands, Melanesia. Antiquity 62:703-706.
The Solomon Islands Project: An Introduction JONATHAN S. FRIEDLAENDER Anthropology Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, P A 19122
KEY WORDS
Genetic distances, Acculturation, Modernization effects. Pacific Islands
ABSTRACT
The twin themes of the Solomon Islands Biomedical Project remain 1)the remarkable genetic heterogeneity of the groups in the Solomons; and 2) the differential responses to these groups to rapid modernization/ acculturation over the past two decades of this long term study. This introduction summarizes the historical and ethnic relationships of the survey groups, their established genetic distances and their rankings with regard to acculturation at the times of their first survey, and changes occurring up to 1985-86. Relevant features of diet, life style, and epidemiology are described.
This series of papers reports analyses of data collected from the 1985 and 1986 field seasons of the Solomon Islands Project, as well as some more sophisticated analyses of materials collected in prior expeditions to the survey groups. Findings of the earlier biomedical expeditions are published or referenced in a recent summary monograph (Friedlaender, 1987).The twin themes of the Solomons Project remain 1) the genetic distinctiveness and remarkable heterogeneity of the groups in the Solomons, and 2) the differential responses of these groups to rapid modernizatiordacculturation during the last two decades, related to the genetic heterogeneity of the groups. Studies on other populations from different regions have outlined a fairly uniform set of health changes that can be predicted to accompany modernization or migration to urbanized areas. To the contrary, we have been most impressed with the heterogeneity of the process. Besides some major distinctions between reference groups in the industrialized West and the Solomons, there are important genetic distinctions among the Solomon Islands groups we have surveyed, and there are environmental differences in their separate experiences, both before and during acculturation. There may also be differences in the responses among Solomon Islands groups to the changing constellation of modernization effects.
This introduction summarizes the historical and ethnic relationships of the survey groups, their established genetic distances, and their rankings with regard to acculturation at the time of their first survey. Relevant features of diet, life style, and epidemiology are described. POPULATION HISTORIES
The Solomon Islands are part of the great island chain that extends eastward from Southeast Asia north of Australia, to New Caledonia, where water crossings between islands reach distances in excess of 60 miles (Fig. 1).Although the archaeological record of this part of the world is still quite sketchy, the accepted scenario today is that modern human populations a t a pre-horticultural technological level reached New Ireland in northern Melanesia by 33,000 B.P., demonstrating an antiquity of settlement for this area of the same order as the Australia New Guinea landmass (Allen et al., 1988). In the Solomons, human presence is now established by at least 28,000 B.P. (Wickler and Spriggs, 1988). The early populations moving through these islands may well have been heterogeneous prior to their settlement, and there was most likely more than one early “migration.” given the long time depth of occupation. Received December 13,1988; accepted June 8,1989
’.60
J.S. FRIEDLAENDER
€
A
N i
of right
Flib
Fig. 1. The Solomon Islands and survey sites on Bougainville and Malaita.
LINGUISTICS
Because of the poor early archaeological record, a great deal of attention has been placed on linguistic relationships. Linguistically, the current inhabitants of the interior of New Guinea and the large island interiors of the Solomons (such as Bougainville) are very heterogeneous. Nevertheless, they are commonly lumped together in a residual linguistic relationship, the “Papuan” or “non-Austronesian” (NAN) languages, distinguishing them from the cohesive Austronesian language group (formerly called Malayo-Polynesian), common through most of the rest of the South Pacific. The Austronesian languages were introduced to the Southwest Pacific by a much more homogeneous group of people who were seafarers originating from Southeast Asia about 6,000 to 7,000 years B.P. They have conventionally been tied to the archaeologicalremains of the Lapita pottery makers in Melanesia, dated
there to 3,500 to 2,000 B.P. These people must have intermarried extensively as they moved through Island Melanesia, and undoubtedly obliterated many of the earlier non-Austronesians in those areas, linguistically and biologically. The seven groups now included in the survey are named in Figure 1-three on Bougainville Island (Nasioi, Nagovisi, Aita); three on Malaita Island (Kwaio, Lau, Baegu); and the Ontong Java atoll population to the north of the main island chain. Linguistically, the populations can be clustered into three groups, which also follow geographic and genetic relationships. The Bougainville groups are all inland non-Austronesian speakers, the Malaita groups are all Austronesian speakers of the same branch, and the Ontong Javanese speak a Polynesian language, a distantly related division of Austronesian. How these relationships should fit with genetic distances is open to question. The Malaitan groups could
461
INTRODUCTION: THE SOLOMON ISLANDS PROJECT
well be an intermixed group of Austronesian and non-Austronesian populations, while the Ontong Java “Polynesians” clearly have had considerable contact with Micronesians and Melanesians during different periods.
For our purposes here, we crudely combined these distance matrices to construct an overall rank of relationship. For the seven populations in the survey, distances for a matrix were rank-ordered from 1 to 21, and the rank orders over three different matrices were averaged-the one derived from blood polymorphisms, the one from male dermatoglyphics, and the one from male odontometrics. The resulting averaged matrix of ranks is presented in Table 1. The dendrogram that is derived from this averaged matrix is very similar to the linguistic and geographic patterns described earlier (Fig. 2). The Lau and Baegu are the closest of any groups, with the Kwaio entering in at a short remove, constituting a Malaita cluster; the Nagovisi and Nasioi from South Bougainville are also a consistent cluster, and the rest of the distances are rather large, with the Aita of North Bougainville tending to enter with the South Bougainville groups; and Ontong Java closest to the Malaita cluster, and farthest away from the Bougainville NAN speakers. These relationships will be important to recall in the following papers.
POPULATION DISTANCE STUDIES
We have carried out extensive studies on the population distances of groups in Bougainville and elsewhere in the Solomons (see Dow et al., 1987; Rhoads, 1987; Rhoads and Friedlaender, 1987; Friedlaender. 1975). While selected blood polymorphisms often suggested different patterns of relationship, the pattern that emerged repeatedly was, first, the considerable genetic similarity of the Lau and Baegu (Malaita Island) on the one hand and the Nasioi and Nagovisi (South BougainvilleIsland) on the other. The Aita of North Bougainville were distinctive in a number of polymorphisms, and the Ontong Java population tended to cluster with the Malaitan groups at a very considerable distance. Other opulation distance matrices were derived rom male and female odontometrics (Harris and Bailit, 19871, male and female dermatoglyphics (Froehlich, 19871, and male and female anthropometr (Rhoads and Friedlaender, 1987). In eac matrix, the smallest distance was that se arating Lau and Baegu from Malaita, an(Pin most matrices the next largest distance separated the Nasioi and Nagovisi of Bougainville. The Kwaio of Malaita most often clustered loosely with the other two Malaita groups, but sometimes clustered with the Bougainville groups. The Ontong Java sample was sometimes quite removed from the rest (most notably in the two dermatoglyphics distance matrices) but sometimes was rather close t o the Malaitans. The Aita of North Bougainville held quite variable positions in these distance matrices, sometimes the most distinctive of all, sometimes in the middle of the entire distribution.
P
i
ACCULTURATION STATUS
Cross-cutting these genetic and geographic clusterings are differences in modernization or acculturation among the groups. There are large and idiosyncratic differences among the groups, their ecologies, and also the manner in which the modern industrialized world has affected them. Nevertheless, it was necessary to rank them with regard to overall modernization in a schematic way. Page and others (1974) first devised a ranking, using eight different criteria, including evidence of the secular trend in height, conversion to Christianity, availability of some form of Western medical care, and formal education. At the time of the initial surveys in 1966-72, the groups were
TABLE 1. Pupulation distance rankings for 7 Solomon Islands societies (auerage ranking o n 3 sets blood polymorphisms, male dermatoglyphics, and male odontometrics) Nasioi Naeovisi Lau Baegu Kwaio
9.0 9.3 11.3 11.7 11.7
Ontong
16.3
12.7 12.0 12.0 18.7
Aita
Nasioi
-
of distances-
:1.7
14.3 11.0 11.0 13.0
10.0
7.7 11.3
12.0
Naeovisi
Lau
Baeeu
Kwaio
1.0 7.7
Java
462
J.S. FRIEDLAENDER POPULATION BOUGAlNVl LLE
AC C U LTU R AT1 0 N
Nasioi
+++
Nagovis I
Stt
Aita
MALAITA
1 1 1 -
+ -
L au
Baegu
GENETIC DISTANCE
+
-
~
Kwaio
ONTONG JAVA
Fig. 2. Genetic distances and acculturation rankings of the 7 survey groups as of 1966-1972.
ranked as presented in Table 2. Even if the exact ranking is open to debate, there was an easy dichotomy to be made between the more and less acculturated groups. Note that the acculturation ranking cross-cuts the genetic and geographic clustering of the groups, so that while the two South Bougainville populations (the Nasioi and Nagovisi) were the most acculturated, the North Bougainville Aita were among the least. In Malaita, the Kwaio and Baegu were among the least acculturated, but the Lau were among the more acculturated. Ontong Java, at that time, was relatively unacculturated. CHANGES TO 1985-86
All the groups were affected by modernization influences in the intervening 14-19 years to the latest surveys in 1985-86. The different degrees to which they have been modernized, and the change in the relative acculturation ranking that may have resulted, is difficult to agree on, except that the differences between the groups have become much smaller. The most obvious change during the interval between surveys has been in Bougainville, where an open pit copper mine has been built in the mid-l970s, providing a transformed economy for the Nasioi, Nago-
visi, and for the Aita. On Malaita, there has also been considerable change in the status of the Lau and Baegu, with a road passing by these two related groups. The remote Ontong Java population has had a dramatic infusion of cash from the sale of trochus shell and beche-de-mer to Southeast Asian food markets, so that their shift in dietary items is every bit as dramatic as elsewhere in the Solomons. The traditional diets of the seven groups were somewhat varied, and have become more uniform with increasing modernization (see Page et al., 1987). The major element in all of the traditional diets was a primary carbohydrate root crop staple, up to 90% wet weight of their diet. In both Bougainville and Malaita, this was originally taro, supplanted in the 1940s by sweet potatoes. In Ontong Java, a swamp variety of taro was the starchy staple of choice. The other carbohydrate sources for all the populations included bananas, plantain, pandanus parts, breadfruit, cassava, yams, and a variety of wild plant foods. Major protein sources included nuts, the occasional feast pig for all but the Ontong Javanese, and fish for all groups, but particularly for the Ontong Javanese, for whom it constituted about 20% by
INTRODUCTION: THE SOLOMON ISLANDS PROJECT
m
Y
2
$1
z"
++ +++* +++*
m + + $ + + + N 'I-;++
-I.+
if
+
463
wet weight of their diet. In areas relatively near the coast, coconuts, with heavy concentrations of saturated fats, were traditionally an important part of the diet, primarily as "grease" for the taro and sweet potato stews and other baked concoctions. The Ontong Java population was, and still is, remarkable for its reliance on green coconuts as a liquid source, there being little water of drinking quality on that island until 1987. Ripe coconuts were most heavily consumed by the Ontong Javanese as well, and least by the highland Aita. With modernization, the major imported items that have become staples are white rice and bread, supplanting and replacing taro and sweet potatoes, and secondarily, doughnuts cooked in animal lard, sugar, salt, tinned mutton and tinned mackerel, cookies, coffee, and tea. Smoking of homegrown tobacco and, in the wealthier areas, cigarettes is very common. These considerations are especially important for the discussions of heterogeneous response among groups to modernization in serum cholesterol, apolipoproteins, glucose metabolism abnormalities, pulmonary function, blood pressure, and body weight increases to follow. None of the populations could be considered malnourished during the last two decades, although some were relatively low in protein consumption. Gardening and carrying burdens while walking are the two activities that lead to the greatest energy expenditure in all groups except the seafaring Ontong Javanese. It was assumed that there was a close correspondence with acculturation and lessened activity levels. Those groups living in the remote hills (Kwaio and Aita) walked long distances over difficult terrain to and from their garden plots, often an hour or two per gardening day. By contrast, the Ontong Javanese and Lau live on the seaside, use canoes, and walk shorter, easier distances to their gardens. Infectious disease load has generally decreased with modernization in general, although the specific nature of the traditional disease burden varied considerably from one area to the next-seaside to hills, atoll to large high island (Stephens and Blumberg, 1987; Friedlaender and Page, 1987). Besides malaria and other typical tropical disease, hepatitis B is extremely common in several of the Solomon Islands populations. As will be shown, evidence of retroviral infections is
464
J.S. FRIEDLAENDER
very apparent, as well. To generalize, prior were all significant contributors. And, of to acculturation, there was extensive heter- course, we are indebted to the hospitality ogeneity in specific disease prevalence from and cooperation of the citizens of the Soone locale to the next, superimposed on the lomon Islands and Papua New Guinea who fairly extensive pattern of genetically based have continued to participate in this series of biological variation. The general effect of surveys. modernization has been to homogenize the LITERATURE CITED patterns-the best analogy is that of separate and formerly isolated islands being Allen J, Gosden C, Jones R, and White J P (1988) Pleistocene dates for the human occupation of New Ireland, flooded by a rising tide of modernization. northern Melanesia. Nature 331:707-709. However, while certain overall effects were Dow M, Cheverud J, and Friedlaender JS (1987) Statisexpectable (e.g., weight gain and blood prestical comparisons of patterns of biological and cultursure increase), these were never uniform al-historical variation. In JS Friedlaender (ed.):The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University across groups. This heterogeneity of rePress, pp. 265-282. sponse is one of the major phenomena we Friedlaender JS (1987) with WW Howells and J G wish to explore in our series of projects. That Rhoads (eds.):The Solomon Islands Project: A Longis why we have extended the genetic and term Study of Health, Human Biology, and Culture Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. epidemiological description of the groups, included a description of genetically based Friedlaender JS (1975)Patterns of Biological Diversity: The Demography, Genetics, and Phenetics of Bougainlipid variation and glucose metabolism difville Islanders. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ferences among them, added materials on Friedlaender JS, and Page LB (1987) Epidemiology. In physiological fitness variation, and added a JS Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 89-124. fine-grained analysis of the relationships of changing fatness and blood pressure dis- Froehlich JW (1987)Fingerprints as phylogenetic markers in the Solomon Islands. In JS Friedlaender (ed.): tributions among and within groups. We The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford Univerbelieve they add new insights to the undersity Press, pp. 175-214. standing of the interplay of genetic back- Harris E, and Bailit HL (1987) Odontometric comparisons among Solomon Islanders and other oceanic peoground and the differential effects of modples. In JS Friedlaender led.): The Solomon Islands ernization. Project, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 215-264. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Our fieldwork has been supported primarily by N.S.F. grants (Anthropology Program), as well as grants from Temple University and others mentioned in specific papers. We are deeply grateful to the Health Ministries, Papua New Guinea Medical Research Unit, and Provincial and Local Government Councils of the separate survey areas who cooperated with us over the years and granted us permission to carry out our field surveys. Members of survey teams not listed as authors deserve special mention. Bettina Lesser was essential to the 1985 field season from inception to conclusion. Tobias Nagurney, Lisa Noll, Frank Richards, Rebecca Lewis, and David Byerley
Page LB, Damon A, and Moellering RC (1974)Antecedents of caridiovascular disease in 6 Solomon Island Societies. Circulation 49:1132-1146. Page LB, Rhoads JG, Friedlaender JS, Page JR, and Curtis K (1987) Diet and nutrition. In J.S. Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 65-88. Rhoads J G (1987) Anthropometry. In JS Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 155-174. Rhoads JG, and Friedlaender JS (1987) Blood polymorphism variation in the Solomon Islands. In JS Friedlaender (ed.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 125-154. Stephens R, and Blumberg BS (1987) Hepatitis B in the Solomon Islands. In JS Friedlaender led.): The Solomon Islands Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 327-350. Wickler S, and Spriggs M (1988) Pleistocene human occupation of the Solomon Islands, Melanesia. Antiquity 62:703-706.
